RE: CM:SF PREVIEW DID you see it?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: CM:SF PREVIEW DID you see it?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: CM:SF PREVIEW DID you see it?

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: CM:SF PREVIEW DID you see it? - 7/28/2007 3:27:05 PM

martxyz

Posts: 194
Joined: 1/29/2005
From: Broughton, Northants, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster
I look 10 years younger than my 36 years, am 186cm (6'1") tall and weigh 85kg with almost zero body fat.

Hi Nielster. If you're 6'1" and 85kg, then I'm afraid that your really close to a BMI of 25 which would make you technically overweight. Commonwealth Scholarships and degrees are also nothing out of the ordinary. You seem like a nice bloke. If someone attacks you they shouldn't. Simple as that.
Cheers
Martin

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 121

RE: CM:SF PREVIEW DID you see it? - 7/28/2007 3:56:06 PM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mart

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster
I look 10 years younger than my 36 years, am 186cm (6'1") tall and weigh 85kg with almost zero body fat.

Hi Nielster. If you're 6'1" and 85kg, then I'm afraid that your really close to a BMI of 25 which would make you technically overweight. Commonwealth Scholarships and degrees are also nothing out of the ordinary. You seem like a nice bloke. If someone attacks you they shouldn't. Simple as that.
Cheers
Martin

Hey mate. I'm not trying to make out I'm something special. I'm just saying I don't think I have anything to feel inferior about.

Muscle is heavy and distorts BMIs. The Air Force fitness instructors would just laugh when cut, well built blokes were supposedly overweight. Many of them had "overweight" BMIs and they were seriously fit. Paunchy mahogany-bomber pilots (desk-bound blokes who'd enjoyed too many hot-lunches in the SNCOs mess), however, had to fear a spell in "fatties club"; compulsory morning fitness sessions.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to martxyz)

Post #: 122

RE: Another PREVIEW - 7/28/2007 5:59:10 PM

Mobius

Posts: 10339
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: California
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
If I were reviewing CM:SF it wouldn't have so much to do with what Chick said as it would the hypothetical portion of it. How can it be modern warfare if there is no history? It's more like SCI-FI warfare. Totally a WHATIF game out of the box.

That's like saying a random WW2 battle generator creates sci-fi battles since they didn't actually take place. The battle may be fictional but the science is real. What-if conflicts are perfectly legitimate in comparing forces.
This is on a different scale than CM as individual men are running around under your control. It's not my cup of tea as I'm not interested in knowing how many grenades each man has. But nosing a tank slowly over a burm to get a hull down seems interesting.

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 123

RE: Another PREVIEW - 7/29/2007 11:25:58 AM

Fallschirmjager

Posts: 6793
Joined: 3/18/2002
From: Chattanooga, Tennessee
Status: offline

I got the game this afternoon and am growing to like it pretty quickly.
It is extremly rough around the edges but the core of the game is quite good and it is definitly able to live up to the CM name.
It does however feel a bit rushed and feels like they could have used an extra six months to work on the game.
I also get the distinct impression that Paradox is the reason for the rushing since they impossed a ship date on the game 3 months ago and Battlefront had to ship the game or lose their publisher
If I am correct I sincerly hope that Battlefront has a one game deal with Paradox and then promptly tells them to go to hell and goes back to publishing their own games.

I am not even going to try and argue with those who dont like the setting or think the game is somehow 'sick' (how can war be anything but sick?)
The level of ignorence displayed by some in this thread is staggering

I commend Battlefront for taking some bold moves
Wargaming desperatly needs change right now to attract new players. But on this forum and some others I visit change is usualy met with ignorance like in the first post.
Maybe as the old breed ages and dies off the genre as a whole can move forward a bit and attract some younger players

Wargamers are still among the most stuck up onery PC gamers out there
I think they somehow feel threatened by new players and take pride in the fact that only a handful of people care for their choosen genre of games
But perhaps they need to stop and think that if the genre could attract new players that would mean new dollars for developers and that will turn into better games for everyone

But to anyone who is curious I would reccomend the demo and following the forums for a while
The game is a nice change of pace. It is very rough like I said but this is a brand new engine and Battlefront has a good reputation of patching and refinement
Also the scenario editor for the new game is pretty complex and I get the feeling that the beta testers were a bit overwhelmed designing scenarios
So the in box scenarios are somewhat weak

But it is refrehsing and a good purchase that IMO will only improve

Now if you will excuse me I need to exit this thread before the ignorance and short sightedness makes my head explode

_____________________________

(in reply to Mobius)

Post #: 124

RE: Another PREVIEW - 7/30/2007 4:32:01 AM

pad152

Posts: 2871
Joined: 4/23/2000
Status: offline

Very Disapointed - Quick Battles you can't select or purchase your forces, to few maps (size and types). Deployment on some maps is a mess, enemies spawn on top or behind your forces on small maps. Units deploy on the other side on the map, stuck behind buildings and walls with town maps because the deployment area is too small. I had several QB's where there is no enemy on the map! Did Battlefront farm out some of the develop to someone who never play CM, because it's hard to believe it was done by the same people who did the early CM games. Either that or was released unfinshed!

Turn Based WEGO is completly buggered, can't que orders or even play it on-line (RT only)

I liked TOW but also said Shock Force should be alot better, it's not.

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 125

RE: Another PREVIEW - 7/30/2007 6:26:41 AM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

The demo is a crashy, flickering mess on my new, fast computer with updated everything (including graphics drivers). The camera pans around so fast it's hard to control. I found giving orders annoying as well but perhaps I just need to practice using the new interface.

After yet another crash I gave up and played a Dec 1941 Soviet counter-offensive random battle in Barbarossa to Berlin. What a pleasure.

What's with this Paradox deal anyway? If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I hope they don't have anything to do with the new WW2 ones.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to pad152)

Post #: 126

RE: Another PREVIEW - 7/30/2007 8:45:38 PM

ASHBERY76

Posts: 2136
Joined: 10/10/2001
From: England
Status: offline

Stop blaming Paradox with no evidence.The main dev steve said the game was finished 3 months ago and was not rushed.

_____________________________

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 127

RE: Another PREVIEW - 7/31/2007 2:42:53 AM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ASHBERY76

Stop blaming Paradox with no evidence.The main dev steve said the game was finished 3 months ago and was not rushed.

Then why has it apparently got so many bugs and unfinished bits?

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to ASHBERY76)

Post #: 128

RE: Another PREVIEW - 7/31/2007 6:55:05 PM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager
I also get the distinct impression that Paradox is the reason for the rushing since they impossed a ship date on the game 3 months ago and Battlefront had to ship the game or lose their publisher
If I am correct I sincerly hope that Battlefront has a one game deal with Paradox and then promptly tells them to go to hell and goes back to publishing their own games.

It's funny, because apologists for Paradox used to blame their publisher too.

There are times when a project will go on indefinately unless an arbitrary release date is scheduled. If developers can't handle that, particularly after a lengthy period of development, then they should choose another profession.

quote:

The level of ignorence displayed by some in this thread is staggering

Indeed.

(in reply to Fallschirmjager)

Post #: 129

RE: Another PREVIEW - 7/31/2007 8:56:55 PM

Hertston

Posts: 3564
Joined: 8/17/2002
From: Cornwall, UK
Status: offline

Toying with the idea of cancelling my order, now - having gone for the cheapo-Euro option I still have a week to think about it. The Eurogamer review is alarming not so much because of the score (5/10) but because it's such a perfect mirror of much of the traffic on the BF forum. I just hope the guy is right in his last sentence.

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 130

RE: Another PREVIEW - 7/31/2007 11:17:29 PM

ravinhood

Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline

quote:

The level of ignorence displayed by some in this thread is staggering

Indeed.

Indeed Indeed

And well you should Herston. This first edition of CMx2 is crapola with a big crayon. Wait for sequels you know II's are about the best of the whole series and sometimes III's are ok. Never buy a NEW game NEW. lol But, no matter how many times I try to beat into consumers heads they go right back out and do the same thing they did the last release and then runnnnnnnnnnnn to the forums saying what a crappy game it is out of the box. lol I tell em I tell em and I tell em and it's just like talking to young kids, in one ear and out the other. lol

quote:

I just hope the guy is right in his last sentence.

Nah he's wrong, why would we want to come back to this? We're ready for WW2 modules especially of the Pacific Land base area. ;) I don't believe there is a big demand for Modern day warfare games myself. Oh there's a handful for sure, but, not like the WW2 group which is huge HUGE I tell yah. ;)

< Message edited by ravinhood -- 7/31/2007 11:29:23 PM >

(in reply to Hertston)

Post #: 131

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/1/2007 1:02:36 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Wait for sequels you know II's are about the best of the whole series and sometimes III's are ok. Never buy a NEW game NEW. lol But, no matter how many times I try to beat into consumers heads they go right back out and do the same thing they did the last release and then runnnnnnnnnnnn to the forums saying what a crappy game it is out of the box. lol I tell em I tell em and I tell em and it's just like talking to young kids, in one ear and out the other. lol

Fanny.

You just don't get it do you, ravinhood. If we "young kids" didn't run right out and buy the game you wouldn't get a sequel. You seriously need a butt plug to try and stop that ****e you spout. Either that or a massive dose of immodium.

And we don't all ".....runnnnnnnnnn to the forums saying what a crappy game it is out of the box". What we do do is evaluate the game and give advice to people. Unlike you who just rants about yourself and how great you are.

How big are the muscles in your legs to hold up that ****ing ego?

Hertson, take it from one of the kiddies that ran out and bought the game so ravinhood could have his sequel...my sensible piece of advice (unlike that ****e above) is to cancel your order. If you want to play RTS, then as far as I'm aware the game plays beter. I don't know personally because I didn't play RTS (although I may have to because WEGO is pretty broke). The game is fun, but quickly becomes frustrating. If you can cancel, I would and wait to see what they do with patches.

That's my helpful piece of advice.

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 132

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/1/2007 4:32:01 AM

ravinhood

Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline

Lol Judge is getting frustrated again. lol Know what Judge I don't give hell or high water what you say bud. You ain't anybody. Just another nobody who thinks he's somebody. If I had a quarter I'd send it to you so you could try to call someone who cares what you think about me bud. lol You go into threads and drive them all off topic attacking me. You really need to take a good look in the mirror bud. And actually this time I'm just going to GREEN DOT you as that is a worse punishment than driving you off the forums pointing out all your faults and breaking of the forum rules. I put Terminus there a long time ago. I noticed he got BANNED awhile back as well. You'll probably find yourself in that position as well soon enough. Since you can't control your temper tantrums. <looks for green dot....click....no more JD...awwww>

Herston it would do you good not to listen or pay attention to JD most of the time. But, this is one of the few times you should. No need to buy some kiddy clickfest game that's unfinished...wait for the sequels that JD will support and make sure we get. hahaha

< Message edited by ravinhood -- 8/1/2007 4:52:23 AM >

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 133

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/1/2007 5:46:51 AM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
You just don't get it do you, ravinhood. If we "young kids" didn't run right out and buy the game you wouldn't get a sequel.

I don't often agree with Ravinhood, but on this point he's correct IMHO. Anyone buying a game on release should expect an unbalanced, bug ridden, feature missing POS, and that's if you're lucky enough to get it running on your hardware. Anything better is a bonus, and having such understanding, there shouldn't be a flood of complaints to the devs/publishers.

If one is prepared to "invest" in a game by getting it early, don't play it and if you do, don't comment on it's failings.

Further, rather than bailing out disorganized teams who pretend to be software developers, perhaps a culling would send the right message and reward those companies who do deliver on release, or who get a timely patch out within days.

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 134

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/1/2007 10:13:19 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

Now ravinhood, you know you edited your post. That's not what you really wrote is it?

Why don't I show people what you really wrote?

quote:

Lol Judge is getting frustrated again. lol Know what Judge I don't give hell or high water what you say bud. You ain't anybody. Just another nobody who thinks he's somebody. If I had a quarter I'd send it to you so you could try to call someone who cares what you think about me bud. lol You go into threads and drive them all off topic attacking me. You really need to take a good look in the mirror bud. And this time I'm not backing down off off you until one Admins steps in. I'm just tired of your comments and letting them go. So, if you want a war, you got one bud. We'll see who gets the last word this time. ;)

Aw come on ravinhood.....so you want the last word and green dot me....come on...be sporting about it.

As I was saying dinsdale, that may be a very "general" comment...but as the market stands, with smaller developers, if they produce a pos and farm it out and no-one bought it, then they could be in very deep financial difficulty. So to expect a sequel from a small development studio without people buying the initial release is a bit of a strange philosophy. Of course, as I said, it's a broad statement and obviously depends on the financial integrity of the developer.

So the likes of Battlefront going under could be a very realistic outcome. Not all. Man, EA Sports put out the same crap every year and they are still going (though not all their games are crap). But smaller developers get hit hard by reduced sales.

Of course, as ravinhood points out, I'm just a kiddie who runs out and buys the latest software only to cry afterwards...it's not like I bought the game and came back here to advise people of my findings.

Still he does get one thing right...I am a nobody....but he's also wrong...I do not think I'm somebody.

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 135

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/1/2007 10:45:25 AM

ravinhood

Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline

Thank you Dinsdale for understanding my reasons behind my purchases. Many think I just want something cheap, but, the real reason I turned to bargain bin buying was for exactly the reasons you mentioned and I have mentioned for years now. I got tired of buying buggy faulty ctd problematic games out of boxes. When I took a step back and really looked at the industry they all were doing it. I related this to buying any other consumer good, how many people would buy a rotten egg or apple or car or practically any other consumer product and put up with this mess. Of course I know people are still going to rush out and buy new games, but, I'm not and I'm going to continue to try to sway them not to for the simple fact if you fight against the industry it has to change for the BETTER.

Some like JD then get up on some imaginary pedestal and say that if we don't buy this crap out of the box these business will go out of business and we won't get a sequel. lol Who the fark cares, I don't, if that's all they can do is put out buggy faulty product game after game after game I certainly don't care if they last in the industry.

As I said before when one falls another rises up to take their place. My hopes isn't for the games they make or sequels, but, in the QUALITY of the games they make. A game that has very few or minimal bugs out of the box. I can accept a few problematic issues with any game, but, I haven't played or seen a NEW game in awhile that meets my expectations. My system works well. When I do purchase a game I get a "finished game", rare is it another patch comes out after I buy one. And while having waited for the "finished game" I also get the game at a reduced price. I just don't see why more and more people don't follow this process. You're paying to be a beta tester upwards of $40 to $50 in some cases $60-$70....why? It's like buying a new book/novel only to find the last 25 pages are missing and pages inbetween have smudges you can't read or pages missing altogether. Now, do you keep that book or return it for something that's complete? I'm certainly going to return it for a complete version or get my money back. But, that's the software industries ace in the hole. They don't give you your money back, they don't allow refunds (well maybe Matrix on VERY SPECIAL occassions), you are stuck with the product once you buy it. Hardly any other product I know has this kind of no refund no return bs, hell not even food has that kind of no return policy if you find issue with it. So, when you buy a software product for the most part you are SOL buddy, you bought it, you opened it, you own it and we ain't givin you your money back because we knew it was buggy and faulty and had problems even before you bought it. lol

I look at it this way, if they can fix the game 6 months down the road and be finished, why, can't they just do that in production. I say it would increase sales. More people like me who sit on the fence and wait for a finished product would buy it brand new if there weren't anymore bugs or flaws or problems with the game. ALso, this just ain't me anymore. You guys should hang out at Gamespy and Gamespot, this is becoming a growing complaint and concern. It's just not me spouting the news anymore I'm seeing more and more popup over the years. Many people are just getting tired of buggy flawed crap out of the box and they are doing something about it by not buying at all or just waiting and sitting on the fence until it is fixed.

Now, with Matrixgames it's not so much of the problems out of the box, though just like the rest they release a LOT of problematic games, but, they just don't publish many games I'm interested in. I'm glad they are around and are publishing though. Plus you haven't heard me really knock Matrixgames for their published games (like I do Paradox) except for CC/HTTR/COTA which are real time games and I just don't like real time only games. But, they've had some real winners like Tin Soldiers:Caesar, Panzer Strike:Operation Winter Storm. I don't really like to include Spartan/Troy because those games were published BEFORE Matrixgames picked them up, but, vertheless those are excellent games that you can get thru Matrixgames now. ;) Also to include Forge of Freedom which underwent some heavy patching and really adding a new game to it for those grogs that didn't feel it was historically accurate enough. Matrixgames and family put that added umph into the games they do release and you don't see comments like this below out of them:

This another from STEVE at Battlefront:

quote:

What I (and others like me) are concerned with are the design decisions, or what appear to be so from our POV. No random maps, no QB purchases, are things I now know of from reading the forum and are certain of and VERY concerned about.

There are reasons why we abandoned them and it doesn't matter if the reasons make sense to you because they make sense to us. Since we're the designers, and did these decisions KNOWING that we'd see pitchforks and torches, that should get SOME of those gray cells wondering if perhaps we might have a good reason. We've explained ourselves a dozen different ways, but it just won't sink in to some because they don't want it to

Then later he goes on to spout this:

quote:

quote:

p.s. My fingers are crossed for the "modularity" which you touted to save the day for the WWII version.

With your crappy attitude, I doubt it. We're not rolling the clock back.

Steve

With an attitude like that he loses all respect from me. Reminds me of JD a lot with his little temper tantrums. The last thing you do is lash out at your customer base(in fact it shouldn't even be the last thing you do, you should never do it). These guys were merely giving feedback and Steve just cut them to the core. Steve's always been that way though he has no diplomatic etiquette.

Now I admit I'm pretty negative all the time, but, I have reason to be. I've lived in this computer age since 1982 and I've seen quite a lot in my day. I've seen great games made in 2mb and 5mb formats. Great AI's of the 80's, a lot of great developers creating something NEW and INNOVATING, not this rince and repeat sequel after sequel of the same damn game over an over every two years. So, with my credentials I have a pretty good knowledge of what's going on. It's Donkey Milking at it's finest for a lot of the industry nowadays. It's no longer creative thinking and building, it's rince, repeat and pocket the fools money once again. That's something else I got tired of and another reason for bargain bin buying nowadays as well.
Not saying Matrixgames does this, but, a whole hell of a lot of the rest of the industry does.

Matrix have bought up some old titles and republished them, the only issues I have with this is they didn't really do anything or add anything or fix anything substantial. Many of us that have these old games already wanted to see some FIXING of the AI, but, that was not to be done. I don't need more and new scenarios I just needed them to work on XP (and the ones I have do anyways) with improvements to the AI and perhaps some interface updates. Merely white-washing a fence doesn't make it a new fence. ;)

Perhaps in our great grandchildrens age there will be some government regulations on the sales of software and return policies. This once you buy it you can't return it or get a refund is pretty rediculous. Until there is some law around it the software industry will continue to do what they have been doing for over 10 years now. Just shipping what they have by a specific date and letting the consumers sort it out for better or worse. Until there is a consumer stance against this though you'll continue to see the crappy, flawed, CTD games continue to flood the industry.

I'm happy for those that CM:SF works for and if you like it great. But, I'm also on the side of those that find issues with it and sorry you can't get a refund or return it. You have now entered the gaming twilight zone and will just have to wait and see if the game is fixed in the future episodes. Let this be a lesson to learn patience. Wait till the game is finished before you buy it next time. ;)

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 136

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/2/2007 7:55:24 AM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd
As I was saying dinsdale, that may be a very "general" comment...but as the market stands, with smaller developers, if they produce a pos and farm it out and no-one bought it, then they could be in very deep financial difficulty.

You would expect so, but there seem to be enough companies who appear small and continue to release garbage quality and survive.

For those that don't, I really have no sympathy. Troika went bust after three consecutive poor releases, all seemingly better financed than Matrix, and all seemingly selling well. Does it really matter? Either someone else will produce a good RPG or won't, in the end, it's no different from Troika being in business and releasing crap every two or three years.

quote:

So the likes of Battlefront going under could be a very realistic outcome.

Again, is that such a terrible thing? I can't comment on the latest release, but if it was truly awful, what's the difference between no Battlefront, and a Battlefron releasing trash?

quote:

Not all. Man, EA Sports put out the same crap every year and they are still going (though not all their games are crap). But smaller developers get hit hard by reduced sales.

Which is why I used the word "invest." I bought AACW immediately, regardless of whether it was going to be good or bad, simply because I believe AGEOD is capable of genius. Turned out to be brilliant anyway, and if it wasn't I'd have just waited for patches. But to buy something on release and then complain about it just strikes me as pointless. It's been years since competence disappeared from PC games, so games not working are the expected norm. One either chooses to buy and be patient, or wait and get it later.

----------

quote:

ORIGINALLY RAVINHOOD
how many people would buy a rotten egg or apple or car or practically any other consumer product and put up with this mess.

Anyone buying Ipods and Iphones

quote:

if you fight against the industry it has to change for the BETTER.

You'd hope so. Unfortunately, like teen pop boy bands, it seems there will enough people who will continue to buy rubbish.

quote:

This another from STEVE at Battlefront: ....With an attitude like that he loses all respect from me.

:) There's a reason why real companies have PR departments and never let product developers near the public. But again, only in the PC world can you have someone insult the customers and be adored.

It's quite frightening, grown men with crushes on developers :)

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 137

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/2/2007 10:09:23 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dinsdale

quote:

So the likes of Battlefront going under could be a very realistic outcome.

Again, is that such a terrible thing? I can't comment on the latest release, but if it was truly awful, what's the difference between no Battlefront, and a Battlefron releasing trash?

Well it's a shame you feel that way.

There is no difference per se between no Battlefront and Battlefront releasing trash, except that they generally do not release trash. They have got a very good record in the market they aim at.

Battlefront have given many great games (I only have 3 by the way, but I hear great things about their others - developed in house or published). They've released very few donkeys that I know of.

They've had 2 dud releases one after the other. I don't know who was to blame for ToW - years in the making - several developers - publishers pulling the rug and saying enough is enough. Who knows.

Shock Force is very retrievable. With Shock Force, they've tried a different implementation. People don't like change and especially when the old works. In fact ravinhood only said in one of the posts about SF if it aint broken don't fix it. I mean, they have dropped the ball on Shock Force. There's an awful lot that needs fixing, but the core game is great...my particular gripes are with the UI.

I wonder where we'd be if other people took the view "That Wright brothers plane.....it's working. Why change it?". Seems to me (and certainly in my case) they could've kept the same system but updated the graphics and a change of theatre. I'd have been happy with that. Most CM players would've been happy with that.

The Combat Mission games, in sheer content and ease of use, are magnificent examples of superior games. Some people don't think so and they're entitled their opinion.

I personally think the strategy gaming world would be an emptier place without Battlefront. Then again, if their new strategy is to release crap after crap and that's the way it's going to continue, then bye. But I don't think that's the case. I think they did drop the ball, and I hope they pick it up and have another go.

I want to see this engine developed (couldn't care less for the RTS portion myself). I hope they fix this and I hope they get a sequel out...in that order.

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 138

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/2/2007 10:31:46 AM

Zap

Posts: 3639
Joined: 12/6/2004
From: LAS VEGAS TAKE A CHANCE
Status: offline

I believe I'm of similar opinion to you Judge. Can't see how the fall a some good companies will help Wargame development. Have to disagree with those who hold the opinion "so what if the company falls- another will take its place. My contention is this industry (Wargaming development) needs to have stability today. Just my opinion.

< Message edited by Zap -- 8/2/2007 10:33:34 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 139

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/2/2007 11:34:20 AM

ravinhood

Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline

Mainly Zap because it's been happening since as far back as I can remember with companies like Avalon Hill and SPI. Did you see the fall and disappearance of board wargames because they went out of business? No hell no as I said there is always someone else to pick up the torch and do the job.

SSI, Microprose, Broderbund, 3DO just to name a few are gone is the computer gaming industry dead because they went out of business? lol hell no. You might as well buy a dozen rotten eggs if you think you should support some wargame developer just because the market is small. Support that grocery store and buy them rotten eggs. lol

Hate to break it to yah, but, the saying goes: All things will come to an end someday and nothing lasts forever. The stability will be what it is as it is when it is, there's no need for the consumers to keep it afloat or keep throwing money to the wind because they have fears it's the last train to georgia.

We lived many years without this or without that. We come into years where there's games we like by developers and then they sell us short with new crappy engines we don't like. The Total War series after MTW, and now Battlefronts move with TOW and now this poc game CM:SF.

Steve talks about the designers knew this would happen and he talks like they know what they are doing, that's fine and well, but, what he doesn't know is what he/they are doing could be the end of what they are doing. They could have stuck with the very same engine and beefed up the graphics gone into other areas of combat using that system (hell look at Paradox they've been using the same engine for years now and most people like it, no changes, just different areas of war to play it with).

It's happened to others and it will continue to happen, developers will develop themselves right out of business because most people don't like change that much. We like NEW, but, not really change of how to play those NEW games. Meaning I like the interface to remain the same, I just want the areas of battle to change. I could play CMx1 in any era with the same engine until I died, but, they chose to screw with the engine and just like RTW it's crap out of the box and will be until they put back the core elements that made CMx1 great. Namely random battle maps, buy point system and better control over the units.

CMx2 is just not what we/I wanted. We/I wanted CMx2 to be an upgrade to Cmx1 not completely different and with less than before. We have these guys trying to enforce real time into a grognards world of hex based and turn based. Those games like CC/HTTR/COTA and now CM:SF yeah they may appeal to the younger generation, but they don't appeal to me and I'm pretty certain many more my age.

I've still got a few years left in me and the money in my pocket to buy any game I want, thing is they aren't making the games I want, which also means they aren't making the games some others want either. How much do you lose by trying to gain another group or type of players into the genre? And since they get into the attitude they only care about the bottom dollar why the hell should I care about them? That's just saying they don't give a damn about me the individual when they sell out and start making a completely different game from what most of us are accustom to. So, I say to hell with them if they don't service me, that's my way of thinking and always will be, the customer comes first, if you don't satisfy a/the customer(s) you aren't going to make very much money.

< Message edited by ravinhood -- 8/2/2007 11:37:55 AM >

(in reply to Zap)

Post #: 140

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/4/2007 2:30:22 AM

helm123456789

Posts: 83
Joined: 8/31/2006
Status: offline

Made the right decision this time and waited for the demo after the mess called TOW(Still have shrink wrapped copy if anyones interested).� They have completely moved from a wargame to a RT mess.� In the two missions/scenarios in the demo it becomes pretty obvious that there really is no AI to speak of.�

First Mission/Scenario (Training) you have a trench full of Syrian's facing off against four strykers and there infantry.� Well if you select to play the Syrians the game informs you that they weren't meant to be played.� That gave me a bad feeling to begin with.� When the scenario starts off the strykers just sit some distance away and never move.� I guess they had no scripted moves to perform.� I then restarted this same scenario, but this time took the other side.� I moved my strykers across the open ground and just gunned the fools in the trenches to pieces.� Never even had the infantry dismount.

Second Mission/Scenario you have a mixed bag of Syrian infantry and armour assets facing off against 4 M1A1's and 4 strykers with their infantry.� I decided to see if the scripted pathing could be used against itself.� I took the side of the Syrians and told everyone to hide in the buildings in the little town and positioned my 4 T-80's on the reverse shide of a hill over looking these buildings.� I shortly recieved even more T-80's as reinforcements.� As soon as the battle started pre scripted artillery fell in open ground were some of my men started the mission, but I had moved them in the setup.� Next just as I believed the scripted paths of the strykers and the M1's brought them into full view of my 10-12 T-80's on the hill.� What followed wasn't pretty. The computer just sat there taking a pounding until they were completely eliminated.� No poping of�smoke and reverse out of the killing zone heck no reversing out at all.� If it hadn't been for the thick hides of the M1's I would have destroyed the whole force without a single loss.� It was pretty amazing to watch the 4 M1's fight for their life against obsolete Syrian armour.

It's just so obvious that there is really no AI per say.� This may be fine for two RT fans playing H2H with no intention of ever playing against the AI, but I expected more from�what was being called CMX2.� In my opinion it's more like CMX.5

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 141

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/5/2007 1:18:56 AM

Chad Harrison

Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline

Its funny to hear people complain about the AI in CM:SF. Did you all not noitce the AI in the CMx1 games?

With all the CMx1 games, as a rule, I never played against the AI if they had to move. So, I would only play against the AI if they were defending. Every once and awhile, I would feel like messing around and play an assault or probe QB with me defending. I would buy a bunch of random stuff and just wait. Every single time the AI would march all of his units in a big massive glob of men. They would all take the exact same path, MG's and mortar's would be hiking with everyone else. I would let them get really close and then have all my units shoot into this collective AI mass. Im sure you can imagine the results.

The only way to get the AI to work w/ CMx1 games was a very carefull placement of objective flags. You could then sometimes coax them into going a certain direction.

So its really funny to listen to people whine (

) . . . I mean, comment on the AI in CM:SF like it took a big step backwards. And they sound surprised when the AI does not hold up against an experienced player.

With CMx1 games, and now with CM:SF, I still stand that they are only fully enjoyed when played against a human opponent. The AI in all CM games does not make for fun playing after your first few games IMHO.

Anways, back to playing and enjoying immensely CM:SF. Different strokes for different folks I suppose.

Chad

(in reply to helm123456789)

Post #: 142

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/5/2007 5:06:47 AM

Prince of Eckm�hl

Posts: 2459
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chad Harrison

Its funny to hear people complain about the AI in CM:SF. Did you all not noitce the AI in the CMx1 games?

With all the CMx1 games, as a rule, I never played against the AI if they had to move. So, I would only play against the AI if they were defending. Every once and awhile, I would feel like messing around and play an assault or probe QB with me defending. I would buy a bunch of random stuff and just wait. Every single time the AI would march all of his units in a big massive glob of men. They would all take the exact same path, MG's and mortar's would be hiking with everyone else. I would let them get really close and then have all my units shoot into this collective AI mass. Im sure you can imagine the results.

The only way to get the AI to work w/ CMx1 games was a very carefull placement of objective flags. You could then sometimes coax them into going a certain direction.

So its really funny to listen to people whine () . . . I mean, comment on the AI in CM:SF like it took a big step backwards. And they sound surprised when the AI does not hold up against an experienced player.

With CMx1 games, and now with CM:SF, I still stand that they are only fully enjoyed when played against a human opponent. The AI in all CM games does not make for fun playing after your first few games IMHO.

Anways, back to playing and enjoying immensely CM:SF. Different strokes for different folks I suppose.

Chad

Among CMx1 fans, there are two clearly discernible schools of thought regarding the game's AI:

1) I can beat it pretty consistently, so it must be great!

2) The game is really meant to be played MP, so the attributes of the AI are largely irrelevant.

The AI in the game(s) is a TOTAL joke, particularly on the offense. Were it not so, I wouldn't be able to sit down in front of the monitor and stomp the living **** out of it with such ease.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 143

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/5/2007 6:04:32 AM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chad Harrison

Its funny to hear people complain about the AI in CM:SF. Did you all not noitce the AI in the CMx1 games?

Maybe because as well as the graphics, people expect the AI to be better than the original?

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 144

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/5/2007 11:33:54 AM

ravinhood

Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chad Harrison

Its funny to hear people complain about the AI in CM:SF. Did you all not noitce the AI in the CMx1 games?

With all the CMx1 games, as a rule, I never played against the AI if they had to move. So, I would only play against the AI if they were defending. Every once and awhile, I would feel like messing around and play an assault or probe QB with me defending. I would buy a bunch of random stuff and just wait. Every single time the AI would march all of his units in a big massive glob of men. They would all take the exact same path, MG's and mortar's would be hiking with everyone else. I would let them get really close and then have all my units shoot into this collective AI mass. Im sure you can imagine the results.

The only way to get the AI to work w/ CMx1 games was a very carefull placement of objective flags. You could then sometimes coax them into going a certain direction.

So its really funny to listen to people whine () . . . I mean, comment on the AI in CM:SF like it took a big step backwards. And they sound surprised when the AI does not hold up against an experienced player.

With CMx1 games, and now with CM:SF, I still stand that they are only fully enjoyed when played against a human opponent. The AI in all CM games does not make for fun playing after your first few games IMHO.

Anways, back to playing and enjoying immensely CM:SF. Different strokes for different folks I suppose.

Chad

Well that's not true Chad and you obviously didn't play 100's of games vs the AI as I did in all types of setups and amounts. The AI can and does play a good moving game, just not EVERY game. It always depends on the objectives and where they are placed and how spread out they are. I found in games that had 5 plus objective flags that the games were quite fun and challenging, but, with 4 or less and the AI did as you said and conglomerated to one or two flags in order. So, what I did was just not play the 4 or less flag quick battles and just reloaded until I got 5 flags or better. Great games, great fun against the AI and setting up 25 to 30 turns max turned into some nail biting missions vs the ai in meeting and even ai assault battles. You can't just play 1 or 2 games or even 10 and call the ai lame. I find most people do this with all games. Some games yes you can determine if the ai is lame in just a few games or battles (RTW comes to mind), but, with CMx1 series you really had to play literally at least 100 battles and you could see the ai did play some good battles while it was moving. Give it a try, setup a 5000pt quick battle give the AI a +2 handicap and +10% more units and veteran units to your medium quality units and you'll see what I'm talking about. ;) Setup a Meeting Engagement or AI Assault and watch how it will pulverize you. hehe Yeah Yeah I know you're gonna whine about handicapping the ai, but, that's why those are included in the setup, to create an AI that is challenging. No one is going to make a smart AI, so, it's always been handicaps and advantages in the numbers and it's not cheating, lookup cheating, the AI can't cheat because it doesn't know how to cheat or what cheating is. It meraly just uses numerical values YOU give to it to play against you with, so, how can that be cheating? ;)

CMx1's AI isn't the smartest, but, it can be made to be challenging and fun to play against, even moreso than many human pbem players I've played against. So, to say a human is BETTER than a computer AI is wrong and incorrect. Only someone who is an exerienced veteran is better, not everyone that plays CM series. Plus when you play against the AI you know what handicaps and advantages it is getting, when you play a human opponent you can't be sure what he's doing during his/her turn to give themselves an advantage and handicap you don't even know about. Humans cheat behind your back, at least you always know what the computer AI is doing. ;)

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 145

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/5/2007 12:37:31 PM

Hertston

Posts: 3564
Joined: 8/17/2002
From: Cornwall, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Chad Harrison

With CMx1 games, and now with CM:SF, I still stand that they are only fully enjoyed when played against a human opponent.

Which would be a reasonable argument if BF hadn't seemingly gone out of its way to stop people doing just that. Except as what Ravinhood would call a "kiddie click fest", anyway. No TCP/IP WEGO and PBEM swap files so big that a great many people's mail servers won't handle them (haven't tried yet, but the 14 meg figures I've seen floating about are way too big for mine). Having finally taken the plunge (I ended up getting it from BF for the 'proper manual') it's obvious that WEGO is dying, if not dead. I'm surprised you are playing it against the AI; with pausable real-time it is totally pointless, except for nostalgia value.

As to the game, the potential of the system is truly awesome, and may well be the (long-term) future IMHO. For everything 'wrong' and poorly implemented (of which there is much - this is beta code even post 1.01) there is stuff that just leaves you watching gob-smacked. The way urban combat is handled is absolutely superb.. I'd pre-order 'Stalingrad' with this engine if they announced it tomorrow. In pausible real time (the only way to play) against the AI it's a very enjoyable and exciting game now, and maybe I'm just crap at it but the AI seems to rather better than many reports on it suggest. The editor is superb, which, considering quick battles are totally broken, is just as well.

BF's biggest mistake was calling Strike Force "Combat Mission" at all.. they should have bitten the bullet two years ago and just announced a new series as 'the future' and dumped WEGO completely. I very much doubt it will be in the next title. The programming effort should have gone on stuff that would have made what CMSF actually is , rather than many existing CM fans wanted it to be, a truly exceptional product. First on my list would have been the way I'm sure this series will end up being played the most after the next release - co-operative multiplayer. One player a side, without the ability to pause it's a click-fest, but with several a side with force sizes that are easily managable you would have one hell of an MP wargame. Throw in a decent command set-up, preferably with a seperate command role and the usual voice comms (available only when they should be) and many would play nothing else.

In short, a ground-breaking pausable RT game. Or will be once it's anywhere near finished. WEGO lives - but in the Panzer Command series, not CM.

< Message edited by Hertston -- 8/5/2007 9:19:06 PM >

(in reply to Chad Harrison)

Post #: 146

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/5/2007 1:21:17 PM

ravinhood

Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline

I have to laugh sometimes as I see developers lose their minds and go in completely different directions from games that were successes. We can start with the Total War series its first two games. STW/MTW then to the kiddy clickfest game of RTW with no ai at all really, to somewhat better M2TW still very close to kiddy clickfest, but, improved from the last. Then Triumph studios who did AOW, then AOWII and AOW:SM only to jump tracks and do something totally silly called OVERLORDS or something like that which is a kiddy clickfest action rpg game and not a strategy fantasy wargame. Now BF who first introduced it's changes with that awful game TOW, and now it's sister game CM:SF which was suppose to be better and improved CMX series and yet, it totally off the beaten path and totally a let down for many of the series fans. All 3 developers attempted to get on the RTS train and only 1 I think made it mainly due to it's graphics draw and the period more than any of the others. RTW/M2TW series. MOO III was a failure and those developers went under and got the "get a new job" cut scene. HOMM IV was a failure and 3DO is no mo joe. I just don't understand getting off track with what has worked and sold well. CMBO/CMBB/CMAK did sell well didn't they? Or did they? Were they failure under our own loving eyes? I don't think so, I think the developers and publisher BF got "greedy" just like all the rest of them do. Who knows what lies down the path of change, but, welp, too much change in another direction is just going to leave bad tastes in many of the previous fans mouths. But, STEVE at BF has that "I don't giveadamn" attitude when it comes to fans as you can see from his posts. They are going to do what STEVE wants, (like some temper tantrum crybaby) and not giveasquat about what the fans think, do or say. Maybe when he has to stand in the bread and cheese line at some salvation army's facilty he'll think differently. Time will tell, but, I'm not buying anymore BF products, at least not until waaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyy down the process, patching line of things. It's just silly stupid and moronic to buy these games upon release when we all know 100% certain now that they are all going to be buggy, have flaws, cause CTDS and are basically unfinished and just want to use US as the beta testers and charge us for it. It's time to take a stand...who's with me? :)

(in reply to Hertston)

Post #: 147

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/5/2007 1:43:57 PM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

I didn't know it was pausible. Being as WEGO simply doesn't work without wasting valuable time due to having to give one order at a time, I might give pausible RTS a go.

Hertston...I agree. They should've left the Combat Mission tag off. They probably wanted to have the link to help sell it...as it was, it had (imo) a big ask to meet and the fact it didn't do so makes itall the more gauling for true fans of the games series

Edited to remove my little dig at rh.

< Message edited by JudgeDredd -- 8/6/2007 12:49:42 AM >

_____________________________

Alba gu' brath

(in reply to ravinhood)

Post #: 148

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/5/2007 8:37:03 PM

Chad Harrison

Posts: 1395
Joined: 4/2/2003
From: Boise, ID - USA
Status: offline

In my limited time on forums, I have had a general rule of thumb: dont post in the general discussion forums

I thought I would make an exception with these forums, and I have once again learned my lesson. I had been putting together responses to the above posts and came to the realization that it was a waste of my time to do so. They are obviously some very strong, very negative opinions of CM:SF, and thats just fine. I am not going to spend more time trying to understand those very stong, very negative opinions.

I did as I promised. I played CM:SF and posted my views on it, warts and all. There are plenty of rough edges to the game, thers no doubt about that. Pathfinding, graphical glitches, odd LOS issues, playblance issues, and QB's need some additional work, among other things. The same way the CM:BO demo was all those years ago.

However, I am still having a blast playing it. All the old timer CM players that I keep in touch with all are having a blast playing it. Even with the large PBEM file sizes (which they warned us about), my game time for months and years to come with revolve around my WitP and CMx2 PBEM games.

A final thought and a funny comparision, there are about 16 or so unique people on the CM dev team, not including a handfull of beta testers and a few translators. The fact that so few people can put out a game this good is why BF remains to this day, my most trusted dev team.

Anyone who wants to give PBEM a whirl, drop me an email or IM.

Chad

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 149

RE: Another PREVIEW - 8/5/2007 9:22:08 PM

Hertston

Posts: 3564
Joined: 8/17/2002
From: Cornwall, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

I didn't know it was pausible.

Except, currently, in 'elite' mode... the next patch will supposedly allow it there as well. I find it unplayable without pausing except for the scenarios with very small force sizes. 'Too old, too slow', I guess.

< Message edited by Hertston -- 8/5/2007 9:24:33 PM >

(in reply to JudgeDredd)

Post #: 150