Jump to content

A little suggestion to esim for their commercial SB Pro PE


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That's not what I wrote. You said, out of a list of 14 items you wanted at least two so that you'd be willing to pay five times as much as we actually charge for a regular upgrade. One of the items was a Leo 2A6, which is included in the form of a Spanish Leo 2E.

Yes, but it wouldn't work out for us. In five years we made a total turnover with SB Pro PE that represents two typical development contracts with an Army, of which we usually tackle three per year.

Even if really everybody would buy a new copy of SB Pro PE like you say you would if only a playable T-72 and a BMP-3 were novelties in it, so it tripled our annual turnover with SB Pro PE, it would still amount to just a single normal Army contract where - unlike in the case of a playable T-72, we would actually get technical support from the army in the form of technical drawings, access to user manuals, acceptance tests, etc.

Without this, it's harder for us (=more work, more time investment) to create such a vehicle (although the case of the T-72 is comparatively simple), and at best we would make about as much profit as with a normal development contract. And all that under the most optimistic assumption that every existing SB Pro PE player was willing to fork over another $125.- for this. Which, I'm sorry to say, I just don't believe.

And it's for just a single new playable vehicle, and you wanted like five or six of them!

Mind you, I'm not saying that we won't do anything from that list. In fact, the situation is now better than ever. Since 2006 we have contemplated to hire additional programmers, and it took us until last October that we finally had the working conditions to allow us just that. Now that we have approximately doubled the workforce this gives us more flexibility to do fancy stuff for which armies won't pay.

But even without this fundamental change in conditions, I don't think that our track record of innovations is too shabby.

Umm I didn't say that Esim innovation has been shabby with respect to SB Pro PE :). I just think SB Pro PE is driven from and is dependent mainly on the development of SB Pro and in that respect Esim is giving SB Pro PE players the developed content originally for SB Pro. Sure now that I know there are things originally designed for SB Pro PE but I just think more and in the form of playable red tanks would be great.

I didn't ask for 5 more crewable tanks.

Since Leo 2A6 is already crewable

It means

1. The Challenger 2

2. T72(M1 and Cz)

and two of the optional which could easily be RED tanks to simplify things(T55, T62 would be easier than say T90). Challenger 2 is not completely new tank either it has been made as AI controlled tank so it's only lacking in interior detail but if this is too not possible I don't see the reason why this cannot be abandon.

The reason why I asked for T-90 and BMP-3 I didn't realize that military clients to haven't asked of them yet because by now they are quite commonplace I think.

Perhaps I've been misunderstood but I wasn't trying to ask for random tanks mainly. I was trying to mainly to get Red tanks.

Kitt (=Castout?),

you may consider the fact that SBP was released in I think March or April 2006. In the first years, patches and upgrades were free, featuring, amongst others, the CV90 IFVs, which in other, more "gamey" titles would be considered full packages in themselves. eSim said from the beginning on that from some time on they would need to charge for any further upgrades and additional content. They started to do right that - after I think half a dozen free releases and 3 or 4 years.

I don't know when you bought SBPPE, but you sound a bit as if you see it from the perspective of somebody who just bought the full sim, and short time later sees that he is being charged again for the next available upgrade. But that perspective is a bit misleading in that you need to see the timescale of the whole developement of things since 2006. You may like it or not, but that is how things are.

As I told you over at tanksim.com (assuming you are Castout), if you want MP, you probbaly will need to upgrade to meet the version sta ndard of other players online.

At tanksim.com I have explained often enough to interested people why SBPPE is in this state and offers this content, and not any different. eSim says that not even 10% of their income is produced via the game market. Their butter and bread are their military contractors. I fear you have to live with that priority. It is a very understandable priority of theirs.

Your version 2.370 already features several, many, different vehicles you can crew, several of them, MBTs and IFVs as well, being fully modelled in their 3D interiors. That makes it already several sims in one. Would you refuse to use Falcon 4 AF just because be default it offers you just one basic fighter in three lsightly different versions, but no opposing Russian models you can crew...? Hardly. If you are intersted in that sim'S genre and copmplex avioncis, then you pick F4, no matter that just the F-16 is crewable. I think this is a healthy attitude to meet with SBP, too - even more so while it offers you already so much more than just one crewable verhicle.

However, the choice is easy. Either you want to spend 25 bucks, or you won't. No pistol at your head, nobody thinks bad of you if you don't buy it - so where is the problem?

I am sure of just one thing - "blackmailing" eSim to give you what you want, else you won't buy, will not work. :D

Yes Skybird this is me Castout :)

Well for one I'm not trying to blackmail Esim and besides there's no way I can do that either and I wasn't trying to say that they suck because they are not and the obvious proof is the enjoyment I get from playing their SB Pro PE :-D.(I think it may be more proper to say that I'm trying to bribe esim into realizing those listed LOL) Really I was just saying I'd pay for more for the things I listed and I had realized before they just couldn't make any new platform playable since they really need accurate technical data on the platform themselves. But I'd love if they decided to give SB Pro PE some playable red tanks.

It's not the 25 bucks either(it's not much here either, about the amount you'd pay for 4-6 person meal in a hawker centre or my internet monthly charge) and I'm not saying the upgrade sucks but all I'm saying that I'm not that interested in the upgrades because I'm not a professional military mainly(like playable T72 being more interesting than Centauro for example).

If Esim would give SB Pro PE premium content intended for SB Pro PE users I'd say they deserve to charge us premium price for it that's all(a hundred or more).

Link to post
Share on other sites
_--__[]KITT;190266'] The reason why I asked for T-90 and BMP-3 I didn't realize that military clients to haven't asked of them yet because by now they are quite commonplace I think.

Biggest operators of the BMP-3 are Russia (some 300), Greece (surprise to me, with over 450), and the UAE (around 400). All in all around a dozen nations operate the BMP-3, but only one "Western" nation amongst them, and no SBP-customer, with the exception of the three nations already mentioned, all others have 70 BMP-3s or less.

That makes it unlikely that any army customer will order for the BMP-3 being modelled as crewable.

The T-90 is being build slowly, Russia pperates not even 300, with 300 more being planned. India plans to build them by licence, up to over 1200, of which 200 so far have been bought and built in Russia. 5 other customers for that tank so far, some of them plan to order, some have bought around 150. No Western operator amongst them, no customer of SBP so far.

Again, I do not expect any military contractor demanding the T-90 being crewable soon.

All info quickly looked up via German Wikipedia.

Both tanks in my understanding thus are not "commonplace". BMP-2s and T-72 - these are commonplace, not to mention the Leopards (1 and 2) and the T-55 (still to be seen in the third world).

Since years players have the T-72 as a want-have on their wish list (I personally do not care for it at all).

Link to post
Share on other sites
Biggest operators of the BMP-3 are Russia (some 300), Greece (surprise to me, with over 450), and the UAE (around 400). All in all around a dozen nations operate the BMP-3, but only one "Western" nation amongst them, and no SBP-customer, with the exception of the three nations already mentioned, all others have 70 BMP-3s or less.

That makes it unlikely that any army customer will order for the BMP-3 being modelled as crewable.

The T-90 is being build slowly, Russia pperates not even 300, with 300 more being planned. India plans to build them by licence, up to over 1200, of which 200 so far have been bought and built in Russia. 5 other customers for that tank so far, some of them plan to order, some have bought around 150. No Western operator amongst them, no customer of SBP so far.

Again, I do not expect any military contractor demanding the T-90 being crewable soon.

All info quickly looked up via German Wikipedia.

Both tanks in my understanding thus are not "commonplace". BMP-2s and T-72 - these are commonplace, not to mention the Leopards (1 and 2) and the T-55 (still to be seen in the third world).

Since years players have the T-72 as a want-have on their wish list (I personally do not care for it at all).

Umm yeah BMP-3 and T90 are not that common compared to Bmp-2 or 2 but they are more common now than say 5 or more years ago. I wasn't asking for crewable Bmp-3 either just an AI controlled one. The T80 is not common either but Esim managed to bring them in game :wink2:

Well a suggestion is only a suggestion afterall. I'm still contemplating between buying SB Pro PE upgrade or ArmA 2 British Forces or Private Military Company. I tend to prefer SB Pro PE though. I might get the upgrades one of these days.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SB Pro PE is a superb simulation and well worth the $125 even if there was never another upgrade. I'd much rather have accurate models of the playable vehicles as opposed to generic systems so we can play a lot of different vehicles that all feel the same. What fun would that be? With military customers driving the development I think we have gotten a really excellent set of vehicles that we know are modeled very accurately. I can vouch for how well the M2A2 is modeled and that's a free one. That said, it would be great to have some crew-able OPFOR vehicles. However as Ssnake pointed out development of a new vehicle is very costly and when the military pays for it eSim gets formal specifications that help tremendously. I can't imagine the money we fork over for the sim pays for much more than the cost to deliver the product to us with a nominal profit for eSim. I am very thankful eSim has taken the time and effort to make such a fine simulation available to us at a reasonable cost. I would guess we will get playable OPFOR vehicles over time as eSim finds the time. Just be patient, enjoy what you have now, and know what you get in the future will be superbly modeled vehicles and not generic vehicles or "Frankentanks" to quote Ssnake.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just be patient, enjoy what you have now, and know what you get in the future will be superbly modeled vehicles and not generic vehicles or "Frankentanks" to quote Ssnake.

Indeed it's one superb simulation by far!

Amen to the not "Frankentanks" comment :)

As for patience I was hoping esim could make playable Opfor tank(2 even) sooner.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the key thing that I would suggest to Esim, is.....

Look at the markets it would open up on the military markets. Allot of nations use old russian equipment but dont have the money to train their crews in live fire exercises. India is one of the first that come to mind, granted they can afford to do huge exercises. But the Czech Republic, Slovakia, South Africa, Poland, Georgia, Cuba, and Bulgaria come to mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the key thing that I would suggest to Esim, is.....

Look at the markets it would open up on the military markets. Allot of nations use old russian equipment but dont have the money to train their crews in live fire exercises. India is one of the first that come to mind, granted they can afford to do huge exercises. But the Czech Republic, Slovakia, South Africa, Poland, Georgia, Cuba, and Bulgaria come to mind.

Do you seriously think they do not already take care of marketing and advertising the possibilities of their product to potential customers that they consider as politically acceptable? ;)

I doubt they don't do that. It would be against their own self-interest to fail in here.

Also it is their customer who may give them the access and details on the specific vehicle they simulate. That customer also has to give his Go on the way they have modelled it, finally. I seem to recall that it was said that with the Spanish vehicles there was a delay due to the Spanish ministry wanting changes.

And finally I imagine it to be a needed prioritizing of resources. It maybe is beyond their potential to just model all and every vehicle without payment and then just hoping that some military customer would show up and buy it - the expensive professional license, mind you.

Just my 2 cents.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Certain countries would be outright illegal to sell to because it would be in violation of US export controls and eSim is a US registered company- Cuba is certainly one of those, there's an economic blockade around Cuba. And while other nations aren't outright embargoed, certain technologies - computer software, products with military applications among others, are regulated and typically require licensing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
_--__[]KITT;190195']After missing the two upgrades I came into realization that even with the upgrades SB Pro PE is still below my expectation.

Well your majesty, it's presumption on anyone's part to have expectations- and uninformed expectations if you don't even have the upgrades in order to see what it is that falls below your expectations.

You should consider yourself so lucky that there even is an extant product supported by the developers with a road map to future upgrades. It's not like there's anything in a consumer price range out there you can go to for an alternative.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Certain countries would be outright illegal to sell to because it would be in violation of US export controls and eSim is a US registered company- Cuba is certainly one of those, there's an economic blockade around Cuba. And while other nations aren't outright embargoed, certain technologies - computer software, products with military applications among others, are regulated and typically require licensing.

Easy there Captain Embargo.

Truth is I put that list up without bothering to look at lists of embargoes. But if I were to refine that list, POLAND is NUMBER 1 on that list of possible clients. Why because they have been attempting to join in the NATO organization in the past, they have been attempting to improve their relations with the west, and are a HUGE user of the T-72 series tank. I think they have the PT-91, which is based on the T72. Then there is Malaysia which uses the export model of the PT-91.

There are more users of old Russian equipment than there are western equipped nations in the world.

Even Kuwait, a ally of the USofA use M-84s, which are T-72 variants.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not a testy point, I'm merely stating a fact. It's up the companies themselves to determine at their own peril where they ought to comply with export laws or how they fall under them. Some just trip alarms immediately, Cuba being an example you provided. It's not a matter of what countries you determine are friendly or politically aligned- the laws don't really make that distinction, otherwise nations would let allies spy on them to their heart's content or simply give the technology away. Generally It's a matter of setting controls down what gets out, regardless.

Did I think you intended Cuba as a preeminent example? No- I'm only stating generally what is the case, so relax.

Edited by Captain_Colossus
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well your majesty, it's presumption on anyone's part to have expectations- and uninformed expectations if you don't even have the upgrades in order to see what it is that falls below your expectations.

You should consider yourself so lucky that there even is an extant product supported by the developers with a road map to future upgrades. It's not like there's anything in a consumer price range out there you can go to for an alternative.

Don't be upset I just thought Esim was making the Challenger 2 playable after watching the video then I realized it is not the case.

After all it's not worth getting upset over people's respectful 2 cents Your majesty :biggrin:.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say exactly that your opening remark is respecful- it's somewhat obnoxious though.

I'll say it again, given that there is no real alternative you're lucky to have such a product all. Contemplate that for a bit.

On a side note, what's interesting to me is that people still get excited just to get M1TP2 to work with crashes after each mission, an action shooter game on tracks and a dead product line which in no way has any advantage over SB Pro where they have anything in common. Yet I wouldn't expect to hear someone say that it fails to live up to their expectations in its current and final state.

You said you don't even have the upgrades but dismiss them anyway. Just so you know, I haven't even found the time yet to play with most of the new things over the last two upgrades at least- believe me, if suddenly Steel Beasts suddenly had every feature you ever wanted in one single upgrade, you probably wouldn't even be playing with it all in short time, you'd have to wait for new scenarios and maps uploaded to the site if you don't take the time to create them yourself.

In sum, Steel Beasts is the best at what it does, and the best part is that it's still around with possible upgrade paths.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing wrong with different expectations. Everybody has the right to voice his opinion about what he'd like to see, and at least we at eSim Games doesn't expect gratitude from our customers just for still being around. We may not always agree, and eSim Games may not always be able to deliver what some of you expect, and yeah, style and tone of messages are diverse. At least I can handle it - usually.

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has eSim Games considered turning over some parts of development of new content to the player community? There are some very talented people here.

I imagine it's a far more complicated process than I'll ever know, but things like the exterior models and skins might be doable by members of this community and then integrated into the game by eSim.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...