News for GWTC?? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat - Gateway to Caen



Message

Af1352pasha -> News for GWTC?? (9/10/2013 2:21:06 PM)

Past several weeks from announcement.

We are still waiting for detail information, some screen shot and report of developing.

There is a big question. When this game will be release? as mentioned some where in Forum in the vicinity of 2014? or we shall wait?

Important any detail about the amount of maps, is that similar to panther in fog with about 356 maps or same as LSA with more than 60 maps?

We wish to see somethings especial for this final module.



SteveMcClaire -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/10/2013 5:37:12 PM)

We don't have an announced release date at this time. I will see what we can do about a few more bones, though.

The number of maps will be more like Panthers in the Fog.

Steve



Cathartes -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/11/2013 2:00:20 AM)

Here's a small bone, quality is not the best, did what I could with the new limitations on file size upload:


[image]local://upfiles/2187/1B109E4749B8482D899F189089C87096.jpg[/image]



Kanov -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/11/2013 2:10:03 AM)

Nice!

If you're taking requests, I would very much like to see a vehicle line up!



Tejszd -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/11/2013 6:46:30 AM)

Thanks for the preview pic Cathartes!



Conrad mana -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/19/2013 12:09:46 PM)

Hi guys,


Here's a preview of the latest effects, ofcourse there's much more and I hope to show a few more within a video capture soon.




[image]local://upfiles/43623/6242CC0E67814704A5BF39092724B6C4.jpg[/image]



Kanov -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/19/2013 4:40:28 PM)

They look cool. I like the big smoke plume.



Cathartes -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/19/2013 9:56:47 PM)

gonna do a quick reminder that all you see is a work in progress and not necessarily the end deal



Kanov -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/20/2013 5:11:31 PM)

Did you guys actually designed and made the explosion graphics? what was the process like?

Any fix or new feature that is going to be available with this game?

Thanks.



Conrad mana -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/21/2013 8:50:58 AM)

Hi kanov,

yes I created the explosions (with 3D software) and Carthartes made them work internally, I'm amazed about how much he knows about the game's internal functions. No surprise since he's been here since the beginning, it's really a pleasure to work with him!

For as far I can say there are some fixes but for now I can't be too specific about the details.


Edit: There's a topic I've created about creating complex objects, although there are no tutorials yet (published); It's my intention to add a few tutorials after the GtC project is finished. Feel free to add a few requests so I can add them to my list.

Link to topic



Kanov -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/21/2013 4:33:00 PM)

Thanks for responding, I appreciate it.

It would be cool if you could incorporate the 3D based soldier sprite you made, it was really something.



wodin -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/21/2013 4:34:23 PM)

If you up the Inf survivability upto CC2 levels I may consider buying. Inf having a major impact and being able to do things wihtout dropping like flies is what made CC stand out from all other RTS games. CC2 had superb long lasting and intense firefights.



Conrad mana -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/22/2013 8:22:25 AM)

Hi Wodin,

I agree with that wodin, we'll just have to see what the beta-testers have to say as well.


Cc2 was the first cc title I purchased (back in 1997) and I'm really inspired by the quality of the game, so I guess we're on the same page.



Tejszd -> RE: News for GWTC?? (9/22/2013 8:14:23 PM)

I'm for increasing infantry survivability but only when it makes sense. An mg on a squad without cover should very quickly eliminate/hit most of them....



jpinard -> RE: News for GWTC?? (10/29/2013 1:29:17 AM)

Is this based on the Panthers in the Fog engine? I was thinking of getting back into Close Combat but it has been a long, long time and didn't know if I should wait for this or get the PntF. If PitF looks this nice I think I'll get it while waiting.

Any possibility of doing Kursk? Or something with lots of artillery or tanks?



Tejszd -> RE: News for GWTC?? (10/29/2013 3:10:18 AM)

Yes, this release will use the. PiTF CC engine (maybe with some small code changes) is what I understand....



Perturabo -> RE: News for GWTC?? (1/2/2014 10:26:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin

If you up the Inf survivability upto CC2 levels I may consider buying. Inf having a major impact and being able to do things wihtout dropping like flies is what made CC stand out from all other RTS games. CC2 had superb long lasting and intense firefights.

Close Combat isn't a RTS game. You don't have base-building and the missions happen clearly on tactical level.



Saturnian -> RE: News for GWTC?? (1/5/2014 1:02:32 AM)

Please make it so soldiers who are shooting pistols actually are shooting pistols and so that surrendered soldiers don't walk around with guns.

also in PITF when a soldier gets shot while laying down there is no transition from live to dead, which used to exist in older games.

Really I do not understand why CC has gone so long without updating soldier animations. It seems like instead of perfecting the animations more flaws have developed and good features go missing, which really cheapens the play. Soldier animations look cruddy. Not a big deal because gameplay is what is most important, but CC has had like 15 years to be improve the otherwise most realistic soldiers in any game in history and for some reason it hasn't happened [&:]

maybe I am being a little harsh but I remember thinking they could have done better with the animations when cc2 came out!



thanks!



SteveMcClaire -> RE: News for GWTC?? (1/5/2014 2:12:32 AM)

The are two main reason the soldier animations have never been redone -- the main one is the sheer work involved. They are all done frame by frame, meaning there are several thousand frames that would have to be redone to create new animations. The second reason is the small pixel size available in the game engine. The soldiers are about 20 pixels in height, which doesn't leave a lot of room for improvement.

Steve



CGGrognard -> RE: News for GWTC?? (1/6/2014 1:23:04 AM)

Those shell craters look nice, especially the big ones. Finally a shell crater that offers some protection for infantry.



wodin -> RE: News for GWTC?? (1/9/2014 5:40:17 PM)

I owned all the old CC games from 2 upwards to know it has no base building. However it's still a real time strategy game. Or to be nit picky real time tactical game..however as that isn't known as a genre then CC falls under the RTS genre. However this is getting to pedantic and Aspergers like;).


quote:

ORIGINAL: Perturabo

quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin

If you up the Inf survivability upto CC2 levels I may consider buying. Inf having a major impact and being able to do things wihtout dropping like flies is what made CC stand out from all other RTS games. CC2 had superb long lasting and intense firefights.

Close Combat isn't a RTS game. You don't have base-building and the missions happen clearly on tactical level.




octyss -> RE: News for GWTC?? (3/6/2014 8:04:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Steve McClaire

We don't have an announced release date at this time. I will see what we can do about a few more bones, though.

The number of maps will be more like Panthers in the Fog.

Steve


Any news about the release date ?



Cathartes -> RE: News for GWTC?? (3/9/2014 4:18:41 PM)

I suspect there will be more information coming soon.



octyss -> RE: News for GWTC?? (3/10/2014 9:06:39 PM)

A small bone for march ?



octyss -> RE: News for GWTC?? (3/12/2014 9:37:40 PM)

Maybe I asked too much? Perhaps everyone is very busy, or there is a possibility that the game will be released after the deadline announced by the first quarter of this year.
So I'm going to ask something else.
I was thinking that a good idea would be that at higher difficulty levels, instead of forming teams of two soldiers would be better would if you reduce the number of platoons available for each regiment.



Af1352pasha -> RE: News for GWTC?? (3/13/2014 6:22:32 AM)

surly we shall wait after summer , there is no any news to show progress going well.



Conrad mana -> RE: News for GWTC?? (3/13/2014 7:46:11 AM)

You'll hear more news very soon



Cathartes -> RE: News for GWTC?? (3/13/2014 7:40:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: octyss

Maybe I asked too much? Perhaps everyone is very busy, or there is a possibility that the game will be released after the deadline announced by the first quarter of this year.
So I'm going to ask something else.
I was thinking that a good idea would be that at higher difficulty levels, instead of forming teams of two soldiers would be better would if you reduce the number of platoons available for each regiment.


Busy, yes. [:)] We never set a deadline, just aiming for a target. We do want to get you something that is properly tested. As Conrad mentioned, I suspect you will hear more substantive news very soon.

Regarding difficulty levels and reducing platoons: it's an interesting idea, but would require greater code changes to the engine that are not practical to pursue at this point in time.



octyss -> RE: News for GWTC?? (3/13/2014 9:57:39 PM)

Thanks for the replies, I understand what you mean.
In any case a launch close to "blody first" is not good news
Who wants a facelift instead of something new ?



Conrad mana -> RE: News for GWTC?? (3/14/2014 7:56:59 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: octyss

Thanks for the replies, I understand what you mean.
In any case a launch close to "blody first" is not good news
Who wants a facelift instead of something new ?


Good feedback Octyss. Our estimate is that some people wil prefer the new and some prefering the old style.

I beleive there is always room to celebrate and improve the old style whereas 'The Bloody First' wil shed new light on the series. Because the new unity engine fits the contemporary gaming audience.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.906006