Lets take a look at the negative reviews for BeamNG.drive

Making my way down the steam store page and notice reviews. I click on all negative reviews for curiosity and some people were furious over car handling.

Lets take the time to address these bad reviews.


Wait, I realized how stupid this thread sounded. Oh well.

 

Like most decent games, a lot of negative reviews come from unintelligent little kids who have no idea what they are doing.

99% of bad reviews for beamng can be boiled down to two things:

My mac/other crummy pc cant run the game well. I'm giving it a bad review and getting a refund because I can't read the recommended system requirements.

The cars in the game handle terribly. I wanted to be able to drive like I do in GTA/Forza/other game with minimal realism, but crash like beamng. I'm leaving a bad review and getting a refund because I'm afraid this game will show me just how bad of a driver I really am.

 

This pretty much sums it up in a nutshell. You could argue with these reviewers as to the technical physics based work going into BeamNG and be
immediately be rewarded with a barrage of pure, unadulterated, one dimensional ignorance.

 

Or kids going "GTA 5 runs on max settings 60fps and beam doesn't! Why!!!1!!!"

 

Think about this.

I heard about BeamNG less than two weeks ago, it had slipped under my radar completely, so when I heard about it first time, I did go and see around, one place I saw reviews was steam reviews, it read something like "can't drive at all as hitting anything 10mph destroys the car", also that comment quoted in first post, that reads to me "there is level of realism in how cars handle", I got immediately interested, so downloaded tech demo to see if it would finally be true that someone has pulled together a game that finally has all the parts I always have tried to achieve by modifying other simulations.

Every bit like real automatic transmissions, harsh and cruel damage, you can't drive over ditch at 100mph and think you will be ok, simulation of mechanical damage, parts etc. absolutely felled in love and I must say that without those negative reviews I would of probably not got so interested as I pretty much gave up with any gaming after frustrating to unrealistic damage and some other aspects in other sims.

So I think that developers should be very thankful from those negative reviews, BeamNG is different, that is what those reviews tell and yes, they are unjustified, but also they do make sales, at least in my case they did.

I have disappointed so many times with hype and claims about realism and how things will progress, that I think at this point I read only negative reviews, those are only one that offer some real value, if you know how to interpret them.

 

The only problem is the tech demo has been stupendously outdated for like 2 years now. So much so I'm pretty sure it's in Cryengine, whereas the full game is in Torque. That doesn't even account for the literally thousands of physics tweaks, additions, improvements... it's nuts. I've talked to the guys about updating it, but they don't seem too interested. It put me off for nearly 2 years.

 

Nope, Tech demo is in Torque3D.

 

they havent updated the tech demo since the old days of non-steam beamng? i just recently launched my old copy of beam, and it was a buggy, physically inaccurate peice of junk compaired to what we have today...

 

I vote the 96 Pessima as the only car.

 

Not polished enough... either the same stock D-series truck or a Covet since it has the updated sounds. Both have a great jbeam since they've been out since... just about the beginning.

 

Or maybe the Grand Marshal.

Would the next tech demo have basic scenarios? I think its a good idea to give people the ability to test scenarios and see if their computer can handle them.

 

Yeah, with how much the game has expanded I think it'd be good to expand the demo a little as well. Maybe like 5 of the scenarios from Grid Map just set to use the vehicle included in the demo. The off-road D-series has no problems with Big Air Vanster or Suspension Race and is already default for Off-Road Short Course, and you could do Intersection 2 with two pickup trucks instead. It also showcases the new drivetrain options. There are definitely other cars that could be the one car feature of the demo now, but I prefer something with decent off-roading abilities for the style of Grid Map. I didn't like the Covet demo as much (even with improved physics and sky curve tracks) because you were limited from certain areas by the fragility and low clearance of the car and weren't given any customization options.

 

Most of these reviews are exagerated. A base model covet can go around a relatively tight turn (such as an intersection on jungle rock island) at a decent speed such as 15mph, with no problems. What happens is the game doesn't give you the same sense of speed as being in a real car does. Arcade games such as NFS, Forza etc. compensate this by making cars faster and unreallistic in terms of handling. BeamNG however doesn't, which gives you the impression of going slower. I've often found myself at 200kmh thinking I was doing 100, and I can understand how it can be frustrating when you make the switch from arcade games to BeamNG.
Also, most people play this with a keyboard (and assists turned off), which gives you very poor control of any car, so people often think they are using a good steering angle and appropriate throttle, when in fact they are flooring it and swinging the steering wheel violently around.

 

Well,i searched in the dephts and i found this.(Atomix would understand it.)
Toto je výtvor ze, kterého se mi dělá špatně.
1. grafika jak gta iv možná i horší
2. ovládání vozidel je težké jak porazit jednoho bosse v Dark souls
3. za 22 euro mi naservírujete takovýhle malý výčet aut,které vypadají jak kdeby je programoval nějaký kluk v devět večer místo ůkolů.
4. tahle sr.... má být free to play
i hra ferda mravenec z roku 2001 je lepší tahle předražená věc
Translation:
This product made me feel sick.
1.The graphics look like GTA 4,maybe worse.
Me:Well,it´s the Torque engine,and if you don´t like it,then you shouldn´t play the game,you Cryengine addict or whateverare you addicted to.
2.The vehicles are hard to drive as beating one boss in Dark Souls.
Me:Well,buy a Xbox 360 controller or a steering wheel and the problem is solved.
3.for 22 euros,you gave me this small amount of cars that look like they were programmed by a kid in 11 pm instead of doing homework.
Me:Well,your computer is sh*t then...
4.this piece of cr..has to be free,even ferda mravenec(a really popular cartoon character in Cz) from 2001 is better than this overpriced thing
Me:I have no comment for this.Make your opinion.
And Nadeox replied calmly like a sir.(I don´t complain about this)

 

Oh I beg you! My computer is total junk, so I can only run the techdemo. An update would be awesome!

 

I like how calmly Nadeox replied. Good way to handle the situation.

 

Could again be wrong, but believe the games been quite optimized since the demo as well.

All things considered, any complaints with Beams graphics I find are valid, but are also limitations of the engine being used. Given the graphics, being that people don't know how intensive the physics calculations are, they'd also say it runs like crap. No need to jump on people for being misinformed, that makes you like the other "sim" fanboys on their own games.
I still have a love/hate relationship with how all the PC guys smear Forza, when it's actually the best all around package, but whatever.

 

This is a common complaint. When I'm hammering laps down everything feels slow. My favorite car is a stripped out covet with the stock 106hp engine and a close ratio 6 speed with a gearset just barley Long enough to hit 110 mph. I bet Gen 2 VR will fix that.

 

BeamNG looks really... uh... not very pretty. I think they should revert back to the old graphics that they had before they "improved" it and added dynamic reflections and stuff.