Graviteam
March 29, 2024, 03:27:14 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
  Print  
Author Topic: First Impressions of Steel Armour Blaze of war  (Read 32078 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
lockie
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 2348



« Reply #20 on: January 25, 2012, 03:32:04 PM »

Review Steel Armor: Blaze of War (PC).
http://zcint.co.uk/article/steel-armor-blaze-of-war-review
As my point it's quite adequate article, especially "the simulation section of the game is competent, but only for the very keen sim fan". Author made only one mistake. He decided, that he had a game, but in fact it's a simulator.
Logged

Provocative signature removed
frinik
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 3145


« Reply #21 on: January 25, 2012, 06:51:12 PM »

Wow 55% rating only???I think the reviewer was too tough.I think he found the game too complex and difficult to get into.I haven't played it yet but I think it would certainly deserve at least a 70% rating from reviews by gamers who have it..
Logged
lockie
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 2348



« Reply #22 on: January 25, 2012, 07:00:41 PM »

Wow 55% rating only???I think the reviewer was too tough.
I think reviewer is just ordinary player. He supposed to see something similar to WoT and failed. No wonder, that rank is 55%
Logged

Provocative signature removed
Tyockell18
Oberleutnant
**
Posts: 14


« Reply #23 on: January 25, 2012, 08:47:49 PM »

I think its a beautiful tank simulator, when the modders finally decided to sink their teeth into it, it will be a masterpiece.
Logged
lockie
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 2348



« Reply #24 on: January 25, 2012, 08:57:06 PM »

And another review Steel Armor: Blaze of War Review:
http://www.gamerzines.com/pc/reviews/steel-armor-review.html
Now rank is 62%
Logged

Provocative signature removed
Panzerfaust
Generalmajor
*
Posts: 324


« Reply #25 on: January 26, 2012, 02:05:58 AM »

Review Steel Armor: Blaze of War (PC).
http://zcint.co.uk/article/steel-armor-blaze-of-war-review
As my point it's quite adequate article, especially "the simulation section of the game is competent, but only for the very keen sim fan". Author made only one mistake. He decided, that he had a game, but in fact it's a simulator.

Well he kind of gave it away in the first sentence of his review:

"Having recently played World of Tanks, the historically accurate tank-based shooter-MMO blah, blah, blah"

Now I'll be busy for the next hour cleaning all the coffee I spewed all over my monitor from reading the first sentence of that review  Angry
Logged
Donken
Generalmajor
*
Posts: 460


« Reply #26 on: January 26, 2012, 02:37:03 AM »

Review Steel Armor: Blaze of War (PC).
http://zcint.co.uk/article/steel-armor-blaze-of-war-review
As my point it's quite adequate article, especially "the simulation section of the game is competent, but only for the very keen sim fan". Author made only one mistake. He decided, that he had a game, but in fact it's a simulator.

Well he kind of gave it away in the first sentence of his review:

"Having recently played World of Tanks, the historically accurate tank-based shooter-MMO blah, blah, blah"

Now I'll be busy for the next hour cleaning all the coffee I spewed all over my monitor from reading the first sentence of that review  Angry

Haha, i actually laughed at this to: "Having recently played World of Tanks, the historically accurate tank-based shooter" It is so far from historical it can be, its a pure arcade game with slightly historical like tanks, nothing more and nothing less Tongue Nothing in that game is near reality. Its bad because the game have potential to be great. I have played i few historical made matches and then it shines =)
Logged

The real heroes are those that never came back.
frinik
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 3145


« Reply #27 on: January 26, 2012, 05:39:56 AM »

WOT accurately reflects real tank warfare as Need for Speed is a realistic depiction of car racing!


That being said, Graviteam should take note of the similar negaitve comments about the poor quality of their game tutorials.It seems to be a persistent problem in their games probably the result of poor translations.
Logged
Panzerfaust
Generalmajor
*
Posts: 324


« Reply #28 on: January 26, 2012, 02:30:16 PM »

I agree frinik Graviteam sure could use a good RU to Eng translator/writter for it's tutorials. While I have seen a lot worse there's tons of room for improvement in this department. But what irk's me to no end is these writters "reviewing" something like SABoW that really just don't have a clue of what a simulator based game is. If I was the chief editor of that site I would at least try to find a writter on my staff who knows the differances between a simulator based game and an RPG/Action/Adventure based game. I could just imagine that staff meeting:
"Hey whatup playerz, anyone here got experiance playing armor simulators?"
"Yeah homie, totally owned WoT's and it's the shiznit"
"Awesome sauce! you got the gig" 
"Hellz yeah!" as he jumps on his skateboard and roll's on down the hall to his cubicle, Xbox controller in hand.

 I really miss Andy Mahood. Andy if your out there buddy PLEASE come back and start writting simulator reviews  Cry 
« Last Edit: January 26, 2012, 02:33:13 PM by Panzerfaust » Logged
frinik
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 3145


« Reply #29 on: January 26, 2012, 03:26:05 PM »

Well on the SIMQH forum I think there's a guy who makes pretty good and well thought out reviews .Is it Magnum?

Let's ask Skybird - a well known Steel Beast devoted-to-the-core addict and fanof that sim to review WoT and see what's left of the game once he has finished with it.

WoT reminds me of Panzer Elite Action( not to be confused with Panzer Elite)Fields of Glory or Dunes of War just with better graphics and better designed tanks but barely....It's good for teenagers and mindless fun for those you like that style of play.
Logged
lockie
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 2348



« Reply #30 on: January 26, 2012, 03:48:34 PM »

I like SF style of play: minimum tactic, medium simulator and a BIG part of fun!
SA is too much complicate and boring, imho. And I don't like tactic/stategic and never will.
Logged

Provocative signature removed
Panzerfaust
Generalmajor
*
Posts: 324


« Reply #31 on: January 26, 2012, 04:13:02 PM »

Not to be a smart arse lockie but I don't think SFK42 would have fare to well with that same reviewer either  Grin
Logged
frinik
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 3145


« Reply #32 on: January 26, 2012, 05:11:19 PM »

Like Lockie I much prefer SF also it's a straightforward sim.I am going to buy SABoW out of curiosity and to help Graviteam but like Lockie I hope the next WWII sim by Graviteam won't be a hydrid like SABoW but a pure sim.Although I am dubious...
Logged
Panzerfaust
Generalmajor
*
Posts: 324


« Reply #33 on: January 26, 2012, 08:38:06 PM »

I agree, at first I too wished SABoW was more like a carbon copy of SFK42 (with the updated engine and improvements) then being part Actung Panzer and SFK42. But here are some things to consider, for all intensive purposes SABoW (like SFK42) is a piece of contracted software made for a publisher and as such the publisher has alot of say so as too whats in the game. As a matter of fact depending on the contracts language they may have 100% control. I was always under the impression that SFK42 and SABoW were Graviteam originated, presented to a publisher and if the publisher was interested they signed on (like Actung Panzer), but apparently that isn't the case. This had myself and other puzzled for along time why there were never no "official updates" or addons from Graviteam for SFK42 (excluding the money problems between Graviteam and Discus over SFK42) despite the good sized fan base and the opertunity it presented Graviteam with making more money with sequels and probably paided DLC. Now I fully understand as per a recent conversation I had with Vlad, Graviteam does not own the rights to either SFK42 and apparently SABoW and as such they cannot make official changes to either game without the publishers consent and a new contract to do so or Graviteam would be in violation of copyright laws which Discus and UGI own for their pespective Graviteam titles. So while Graviteam made the software, Discus (for SFK42) and UGI (for SABoW) own the copyrights. The only way for improvements/fixes or DLC to be done on these games the company that owns the copyright has to contract Graviteam to do this. So bacically if the publisher has no interest in improving the game it's pretty much dead from an offical standpoint and Graviteam is legally bound by the contract so it cannot just do stuff on their own and release it for free or even as a paid DLC. But as for SFK42 Graviteam did provide a way for the community to modify the game via the editors, so technically anyone who owns SFK42 can modify the game within the limits of the editors without being in copyright violation, even the employee's of Graviteam  Wink

Now SABoW appears to be the same way but it's quite apparent it was written differently. Besides the use of the new game engine the editors work differently then in SFK42 and SABoW is a hybrid of two game genres. Believe me I think most would have preferred if SABoW's editors were like SFK42 but I'm getting the feeling that if SABoW's editors were like SFK42 then Graviteam would have probably been in violation of the copywrite laws protecting SFK42, so they had to make them different. So I think thats why SFK42 and SABoW are so different in many aspects, if Graviteam would have made SABoW a carbon copy of SFK42 but with a new game engine and a different era of tank warfare they probably would have still been sued by Discus. Many people feel that just by making a few superficial changes to something they can skirt a copywrite but thats just not the case. I can't remember what my son told me the % was when he was in school to be a game designer but I remember the % was pretty high to aviod copywrite infringments.

I was a little suprised to see the problem with the tactics that some have with SABoW, especially the mission designers for SFK42 since isn't tactics considered when you design a mission? One big difference between SFK42 and SABoW is instead of the individual SFK42 mission designer deciding the tactics they want the player to use in winning the mission (with some small variations allowed), SABoW allows the player to totally decide his/her own tactics for winning. Also while I love SFK42 to death and will never stop playing it but unlike SFK42 I am not limited to the tactical choices the mission author designed in the mission as in how to win, with SABoW there is limitless outcomes depending on what tactics I choose to use and what tactics the AI chooses to counter with. Definately SABoW gives you much more user control over the assets you command compared to SFK42 but you really don't have to do all this to play SABoW. How much control you want is really up to you. I personally have played most of the Iran/Iraq campaign and have really only used the 4 tanks in my platoon to take objectives (sometimes one at a time) and it works okay for me since I am currently winning the campaign. Now if I choose to learn SABoW more in depth it will add a new layer's to the game depending on how far I wish to delve into it, but if I choose not to thats okay too as SABoW plays just fine no matter what level of command you wish to control, from indivdual tank to platoon to the whole army. These differing levels (if I choose to learn them) will keep SABoW pretty high on the replayability factor for a long time.  Now guys I'm not trying to say SABoW is better then SFK42, far from it in certain aspects, but I wouldn't be so quick to diss this new game format out of hand either. I know most wanted WW2 and what was presented in SABoW is very niche indeed and not a lot of people mia cuppa, but when the next WW2 tank sim comes from Graviteam I think many will be suprised as to just how much better this new game format probably is compared to SFK42.
Cheers
Logged
hemisent
Oberst
******
Posts: 293


« Reply #34 on: January 26, 2012, 10:03:35 PM »

Panzerfaust
 Yours was a great review of the various Sabow playing styles and Graviteam's limitations on why they can or cannot release any updates for various games. I recently purchased APOS (still haven't tried it) and I think I'll pick up Sabow also to support Graviteam if nothing else.

Cheers
H
Logged
whukid
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1016



« Reply #35 on: January 26, 2012, 10:31:51 PM »

Panzerfaust
 Yours was a great review of the various Sabow playing styles and Graviteam's limitations on why they can or cannot release any updates for various games. I recently purchased APOS (still haven't tried it) and I think I'll pick up Sabow also to support Graviteam if nothing else.

Cheers
H

Where I come from, APOS stands for "A Piece of Shit"

Just thought I'd throw that in there Wink
Logged

frinik
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 3145


« Reply #36 on: January 27, 2012, 03:05:17 AM »

Whukid I can guess what SF stands for.where you come from.... Wink
Logged
Panzerfaust
Generalmajor
*
Posts: 324


« Reply #37 on: January 27, 2012, 03:06:48 AM »

 Cheesy well maybe whukid, but if you look at the traffic at the english APOS forums compared to the english APK43 forums there is about 3x more postings and topics in APOS then APK43 (about the same at SimHq). Providing most are not bugs or gripes (don't know as I hardly play either game or partisipate in those forums) those probably are not bad numbers for this type of game just released here in the west last November. Also as much as I hate to admit this the number of forum postings/topics for APOS right now far exceeds the number of forum postings/topics that SFK42 had with the western release in the same timeframe. Granted some of that had to do with many peoples early misconception that somehow Lighthouse was the developer of SFK42 but even after the word was spread that Graviteam was the developer and was very much in business, still it was a real ghost town here in the early days, much more nicer and populated now  Wink But there is no denying many people are enjoying and playing the AP series and I'm happy for Graviteam that the series appears to be successful for them, even if I personally have a very lukewarm enthusium about them. The lengthy post I made earlier was just to try and explain some new information that has been revealed and kinda to let people know that the new game format we are seeing in SABoW will probably carry over to the next Graviteam simulator (as eluded to earlier by frinik). Change is hard and most people don't like leaving their comfort zone, but if a game format has been made into a dead end due to copywite then for Graviteam to survive as a company and keep producing simulators they has to find an alternate route. While I cannot say exactly the terms Graviteam signed for SFK42, I do know that by the time the copywrite runs out on SFK42 most of us will have died from old age by then (no kidding).
Cheers
Logged
lockie
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 2348



« Reply #38 on: January 27, 2012, 07:05:21 AM »

if you look at the traffic at the english APOS forums compared to the english APK43 forums there is about 3x more postings and topics in APOS then APK43
And if we compare APOS vs SF there will be ~9x more postings in use of SF Wink
Logged

Provocative signature removed
frinik
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 3145


« Reply #39 on: January 27, 2012, 02:24:46 PM »

It's true on the SIMHQ forum practically 95% of the posts are either for APOS/Kharkov 1943 or SABoW.SF seems to have been relegated in second plan which is Ok since the main forum for that game is here anyway.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!