Online magazine posted BF's game screenshot

[Vergeltungswaffe]

Steve is about to hit 30k posts.

For all that we get on them about communicating more, it could definitely be a LOT worse. 

[A Canadian Cat]

1 hour ago, Battlefront.com said:

The thing to keep in mind is that we've been listening VERY closely to you guys for 20+ years.  The cumulative knowledge we've built up is already baked into whatever designs we come up with before we've even conceived of what to work on next. 

...

For the most part customer feedback is best when there is something to lay hands on. 

Wait, are you saying we have been having one giant conversation about the next Combat Mission product this whole time?

Mind blown.

[MikeyD]

The life of a Beta tester:
You have a 'bright idea'. You submit it. It either (A) gets implemented or (B) it doesn't. There's no going off and pouting over not being appreciated afterward because Beta testers see how the sausage gets made. If the simplest suggestion conflicts with the basic game engine code its either never going to happen or its going to cause months of agony to get it to work right. If a suggestion is doable and reasonable and historically accurate they'll do it. The majority of discussion group 'suggestions' were probably looked at half a decade ago or more and found to be unfeasible with this game engine... or a needless distraction to pursue for little reward... or simply a bad idea. Every time another poster suggests airplanes flying overhead BFC can't drop everything to respond & explain & massage the poster's bruised ego.

[Glubokii Boy]

3 hours ago, IanL said:

Personally I think on balance it would be a net positive but you have to admit there are some that would post for years about how sad it was that feature X was not done right (aka their way). So, it may depend on how much of that Steve wants to live with

That is obviously true...

But as you mentioned. It is a balacing thing...What a developer chose to 'take away' from such a discussion. Either they can apprisate and participate in the possitive/creative/helpful discussions and do their best to simply accept that there will be some repeated wyning along the way.

Or decide that they are 'feed up' with the ever present wyning  and considder it not worth the 'pain' to start such discussions.

I think the first alternative is better 

 

 

 

 

 

[Bulletpoint]

2 hours ago, MikeyD said:

The life of a Beta tester:
You have a 'bright idea'. You submit it. It either (A) gets implemented or (B) it doesn't. There's no going off and pouting over not being appreciated afterward because Beta testers see how the sausage gets made. If the simplest suggestion conflicts with the basic game engine code its either never going to happen or its going to cause months of agony to get it to work right. If a suggestion is doable and reasonable and historically accurate they'll do it. The majority of discussion group 'suggestions' were probably looked at half a decade ago or more and found to be unfeasible with this game engine... or a needless distraction to pursue for little reward... or simply a bad idea. Every time another poster suggests airplanes flying overhead BFC can't drop everything to respond & explain & massage the poster's bruised ego.

It must be hard to deal with so many unreasonable people who pester you with their 'suggestions' that were probably already discussed half a decade ago or more 

 

[Battlefront.com]

7 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

It must be hard to deal with so many unreasonable people who pester you with their 'suggestions' that were probably already discussed half a decade ago or more 

I generally don't mind unless the person doesn't want to hear that the idea isn't original, few agreed with the point the last dozen times it was brought up, is either disinterested in our perspective, or the worst... throws a tantrum.  There's probably other situations, but I'd rather not trying to remember examples of them   The point is, if someone makes a statement like "it would be great if I could replay an entire RealTime battle as a movie" there's no harm in that.  In fact, it can be instructive for us because if new CM customers continually bring up the same things over and over again, there's probably something to pay attention to in some way even if whatever we don't gain any new insights from a particular discussion.

Another angle to consider is the participation of current and future beta testers in forum activities.  Some of the less informed or positive minded posters here view our testers as "fan bois" that do nothing but rubber stamp what we do.  That's not true at all.  Because it is impossible for me, in particular, to read or participate in but a fraction of what goes on in these Forums, we rely upon our testers' experiences on the Forums to help us figure out what will/won't play well for the broader customer base.  Which effectively means our testers are your advocates behind the scenes.  Since you guys are here year after year, it should be pretty apparent our testers do a good job representing your experiences and perspectives.

Anyway, the point is we try to learn from you via this Forum.  Over time it gives us insight into what you guys want and perhaps don't want.  Whether we're directly participating in discussions here or not, it's an ongoing education we take very seriously.

Steve

[Aragorn2002]

On 8/20/2019 at 12:11 AM, Mord said:

I can get irritated with the silence sometimes but I think Elvis has been doing a good job keeping people up to speed these past few months. People are forgetting that. Communications have actually gotten better.

Mord.

That can't be denied. The truth lies usually in the middle, as with all things in life. And all that has been said in the previous posts is encouraging.

Edited August 21, 2019 by Aragorn2002

[Sgt.Squarehead]

8 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Anyway, the point is we try to learn from you via this Forum.  Over time it gives us insight into what you guys want and perhaps don't want.  Whether we're directly participating in discussions here or not, it's an ongoing education we take very seriously.

I have only one comment on this subject.....Syrian Army ZSU Technicals. 

PS - Uncon Breach Teams? 

 

[sburke]

7 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

I have only one comment on this subject.....Syrian Army ZSU Technicals. 

PS - Uncon Breach Teams? 

 

That’s 2 comments. 5. no 3 sir!

[ncc1701e]

On 8/19/2019 at 5:44 PM, IICptMillerII said:

Or a slightly larger pack that adds in a new formation, such as unconventional fighters for CMBS as an example. 

On 8/19/2019 at 11:30 PM, Mord said:

I don't have a problem with seeing more packs. I'd love to see more packs! I don't think they've been utilized near as well as they can be.

...

I am much more interested in vehicles, weapon, formation packs than anything else and have been looking forward to seeing some more. I thought BN's had a good amount of content for its price. And I'd be happy to see them for all game titles.

For modern titles such as CMSF2 and CMBS, I think that this will be a good policy to just introduce new countries / formations / vehicles (with packs) and create a kind of sandbox for the community to play with. You should truss the community to create brilliant scenario (it is already) with the new toys you will give them.

My two cents...

[A Canadian Cat]

32 minutes ago, ncc1701e said:

For modern titles such as CMSF2 and CMBS, I think that this will be a good policy to just introduce new countries / formations / vehicles (with packs) and create a kind of sandbox for the community to play with

I am not totally convinced about this. I get that people see it as a way to get cool stuff faster. I get that Steve knows it would be appreciated. None of that is wrong - that's not what I am concerned about.

I worry about there not being enough scenarios for it. I can practically see the posts in my minds eye already "packs are nice but what good are they with no scenarios or enough scenarios". Queue the usual discussion about making your own and the understandable frustration with that.

In a nut shell I worry that we will replace the common complaint "why is BFC's suff always so late" with "why is there not enough value in the new stuff that BFC puts out". Different people will be happy and sad but we'll still have both kinds of people.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

3 hours ago, sburke said:

That’s 2 comments. 5. no 3 sir!

Nah.....One comment and a hopeful suggestion. 

[37mm]

20 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I generally don't mind unless the person doesn't want to hear that the idea isn't original, few agreed with the point the last dozen times it was brought up, is either disinterested in our perspective, or the worst... throws a tantrum.  There's probably other situations, but I'd rather not trying to remember examples of them.

This is about BFC's piss-poor constellations, sub-standard starscape & non-existent (!) planets again... isn't it Steve?

You mock the astrologically inclined wargaming community at your peril...

... for shame, for shame.

Edited August 21, 2019 by 37mm

[BFCElvis]

1 hour ago, 37mm said:

This is about BFC's piss-poor constellations, sub-standard starscape & non-existent (!) planets again... isn't it Steve?

You mock the astrologically inclined wargaming community at your peril...

... for shame, for shame.

The Space Lobster game was meant as a surprise. How dare you!!!

[Michael Emrys]

1 hour ago, BFCElvis said:

The Space Lobster game was meant as a surprise. How dare you!!!

I don't believe that space lobsters figure in astrology. Perhaps you confuse them with scorpions...?

Michael

[Sequoia]

Not to mention crabs, lion, bulls, rams, fish, virgins and the mysterious seagoats.

[ncc1701e]

11 hours ago, IanL said:

I am not totally convinced about this. I get that people see it as a way to get cool stuff faster. I get that Steve knows it would be appreciated. None of that is wrong - that's not what I am concerned about.

I worry about there not being enough scenarios for it. I can practically see the posts in my minds eye already "packs are nice but what good are they with no scenarios or enough scenarios". Queue the usual discussion about making your own and the understandable frustration with that.

In a nut shell I worry that we will replace the common complaint "why is BFC's suff always so late" with "why is there not enough value in the new stuff that BFC puts out". Different people will be happy and sad but we'll still have both kinds of people.

Yes, you are probably right. Thus, that would need to be a mix between Battle Packs and Vehicle/Formation Packs, the former using the units of the latter.

[Hister]

Yes, indeed - new vehicles/units should come out with deisgnated scenarios and one campaign tailored for them. Seems the most reasonable packaging to me. 

 

[A Canadian Cat]

2 hours ago, Hister said:

Yes, indeed - new vehicles/units should come out with deisgnated scenarios and one campaign tailored for them. Seems the most reasonable packaging to me.

So in other words a module

I know I'm exaggerating but I think the reaction to my post supports my point that not everyone would be happy no mater what change was made.

[Hister]

Yeah, it is like when my wife is feisty - no matter what I do it often ends as a wrong move.  

[Badger73]

42 minutes ago, Hister said:

<snipped>  - no matter what I do it often ends as a wrong move.  

Quite right!  And you should have known better before doing it!!

(We appear to share the same experiences . . . )

So, Battlefront, please continue developing your games as you see best.  They don't call your customers "Grognards" without reason . . .

[Aragorn2002]

1 hour ago, IanL said:

So in other words a module

I know I'm exaggerating but I think the reaction to my post supports my point that not everyone would be happy no mater what change was made.

I agree  that there''s not really an alternative for a module. First of all a module/pack needs to contain new units, let's say the Finnish army of 1939/1940 or 1944. Just an example. Secondly we need new buildings, trees and stuff to create the battlefield they fought on. And thirdly a couple of master maps, although that's not an absolute must. In short, yeah, practically a module. And without new scenarios and a campaign only the grognards will buy it and the pack will basically be an editor, not a game. That's the reality. Catch 22. The only solution for more products is to concentrate on one product at a time. I don't mind waiting for a couple of years for a new module, but five years is simply too much for me. But yeah, it's impossible to please everyone, no matter what you do. That will never change. But it's up to BF to find a solution and after reading all the posts I'm sure that they've learned their lessons already.

Edited August 22, 2019 by Aragorn2002

[Warts 'n' all]

4 hours ago, Hister said:

Yeah, it is like when my wife is feisty - no matter what I do it often ends as a wrong move.  

Well go back to single-player, and stop keep playing H2H with her.

[Aragorn2002]

14 minutes ago, Warts 'n' all said:

Well go back to single-player, and stop keep playing H2H with her.

[Sequoia]

Sorry, single player just isn't near as much fun in this case.