Jump to content
weapon2010

Here is What I Dont Understand about BF?

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, sburke said:

Maybe, but I doubt it is a priority.  I am not sure folks realize just how difficult that is.  The QBs are the best they can do just creating scenarios.  While good they are not on the level of a user created scenario.  Campaigns are an order of magnitude harder.  The tools are there for folks to create them, expecting a random generator just isn't likely in the cards.  The game doesn't even do auto maps, the QBs are all Mark's work.

Let's not over-complicate this. A lot of things are hard to do, but get done anyway. Also by small independent game developers.

Of course nobody expect a magic campaign generator that can produce quality campaigns like KG Peiper at the push of a button, but a basic map generator would not be that hard to code, and a simple system to assign types of missions, plonk down some deployment zones and objectives could definitely be done. It's all about scoping the project right.

In the end, it depends more on priorities than on whether it's too hard to do. The reason we don't have a campaign generator right now is that Steve clearly thinks other stuff would be a better use of the time. Which is fine with me. But the idea of a random campaign generator is good. It's one of the things I would get excited about in a new release. Having pixeltroops speaking with Australian accent isn't - no offense to the Aussies :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, sburke said:

Maybe, but I doubt it is a priority.  I am not sure folks realize just how difficult that is.  The QBs are the best they can do just creating scenarios.  While good they are not on the level of a user created scenario.  Campaigns are an order of magnitude harder.  The tools are there for folks to create them, expecting a random generator just isn't likely in the cards.  The game doesn't even do auto maps, the QBs are all Mark's work.

There are two possibilities here, that would give much of the feel of campaigns - much of the enjoyment of which comes from following the same unit over progressive battles:

1) To import units from a saved game into a new QB

2) and to import a map from a saved game into a QB

(or both)

It wouldn't be as hard as a whole Quick-Campaign; it would be fun to play over slices of a Master Map; and it would allow players to follow a unit through several battles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Freyberg said:

There are two possibilities here, that would give much of the feel of campaigns - much of the enjoyment of which comes from following the same unit over progressive battles:

1) To import units from a saved game into a new QB

I have wanted that for scenarios since CMBN was released at least.  If you guys think no one is asking for it think again.  This is the #1 new feature I'd like to see.... and yet years later to my knowledge it isn't high on a list if it is even on a list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be even cooler if you could import a finished battle into the editor to add fresh forces, extend the map, whatever.....Campaigns with persistent map damage, by other means, effectively.

Edited by Sgt.Squarehead

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

It would be even cooler if you could import a finished battle into the editor to add fresh forces, extend the map, whatever.....Campaigns with persistent map damage, by other means, effectively.

+1
That would be pretty cool too...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

Yeah everything is impossible, we've been over this before 😉

Not necessarily impossible, but not one BF is willing to prioritize.  Sorry if that doesn't make folks all warm and fuzzy, but reality is sometimes freakin harsh.   It isn't impossible that I could win the lottery, but as a friend says- the lottery is a tax on the math impaired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sburke said:

Not necessarily impossible, but not one BF is willing to prioritize.  Sorry if that doesn't make folks all warm and fuzzy, but reality is sometimes freakin harsh.   It isn't impossible that I could win the lottery, but as a friend says- the lottery is a tax on the math impaired.

Not true - I was cr@p at sums at school and I don't do the lottery.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/28/2019 at 9:50 AM, MOS:96B2P said:

Welcome back @Pascucci I remember you from a thread in Fortress Italy.  Also some good news for you.  Battlefront does not charge for patches.  Patches are completely FREE!!!  Sorry if someone mislead you or maybe you just mis-remembered.  Also Battlefront has the new all in one installer now that greatly improves downloading and installing a game with multiple modules etc.  The hassle of installing multiple games and modules and packs on a new computer was a valid complaint back in the day.  But as Battlefront continues to be responsive to the community and make improvements they have taken care of that problem.  So when you buy CMFI R2V it should install very easily. :D  :lol:  

 

IMO there is some validity to this point.  I think the reason we are disappointed with late releases is because we like the games so much we can't wait to get our hands on them.  There are probably many reasons for later than anticipated releases of some games, modules & packs.  I like to think one of the main reasons is that Battlefront is trying to get the best product they can out the door.  I am also frustrated with the wait at times and think there is room for improvement here.

 

More good news for you on this front.  @BFCElvis is now assisting with communications with the community.  So this has also improved.  He also works the help desk and continues to keep BFC as one of the best product support companies in PC gaming.  In fact there is a thread around here about Elvis providing customer support on his laptop from a hospital room.  Not to mention on holidays.  So while your eating turkey on Thanksgiving Battlefront will be there to support you holiday missions................ :) 

 

I hope you didn't take my reply in anyway as being hostile because it was only meant to be friendly and informative.  And in the interest of being friendly I'll completely ignore when you told me where I should not stick my head :D :lol:.  Now that you are better informed on a few of your concerns I hope you will eagerly follow developments for CMFI R2V.  This is looking to be a really great release with new nationalities, TOE, equipment etc.  It will take the CMFI game from July 1943 to the end of the war.  Very cool game.  I look forward to playing a PBEM with you after the release, my friend.   :)

 

 +1.  Don't be annoyed my friend.  Look on it as an opportunity to point out all the positive aspects of the game.  You are always at an advantage in this regard because the positives out way the negatives by a significant amount. 

 

 +1  Hold my beer .............. :D :lol: :)

Now I have to go eat turkey while @BFCElvis handles the support desk :lol:

 

 

I can't even play the new expansion if I wanted to. I'd have to purchase the V4 quality of life update. Most companies refer to performance and quality of life updates with minor gameplay modifications as patches. I paid $60 for the game when released, for some reason I expected performance updates to be covered in that price. Again I will restate that the forums being so slow is not a good sign, in general, of a healthy community. I used to see CM referred to all of the time elsewhere as well, I rarely here it mentioned now. Overall I wouldn't take the current situation as a good sign. I fully realize this will be taken as a crap opinion by many here, but I decided to give it anyways. I literally grew up on the CM v1 games, quite liked v2 early on as well and bought both Normandy and Italy soon after they came out, but I'm really disappointed in the current direction. 

Edited by Pascucci

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Pascucci said:

I literally grew up on the CM v1 games, quite liked v2 early on as well and bought both Normandy and Italy soon after they came out, but I'm really disappointed in the current direction. 

Okay. I guess we have reached a parting of the ways. That is a fact of life and I have had more of them than I can recall, let alone count. Well, good luck on your new course, and if you ever come this way again, the door will still be open.

Michael

Edited by Michael Emrys

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pascucci said:

 

 

I can't even play the new expansion if I wanted to. I'd have to purchase the V4 quality of life update. Most companies refer to performance and quality of life updates with minor gameplay modifications as patches. I paid $60 for the game when released, for some reason I expected performance updates to be covered in that price. Again I will restate that the forums being so slow is not a good sign, in general, of a healthy community. I used to see CM referred to all of the time elsewhere as well, I rarely here it mentioned now. Overall I wouldn't take the current situation as a good sign. I fully realize this will be taken as a crap opinion by many here, but I decided to give it anyways. I literally grew up on the CM v1 games, quite liked v2 early on as well and bought both Normandy and Italy soon after they came out, but I'm really disappointed in the current direction. 

  Few companies I have seen support their games as much as Battlefront does. They have done many free patches and V4 was pretty much a game overhaul and I have not seen any other companies do that . If you have please tell. They hardly need my defense but the BF team makes quality products with a small team of people. Seems pretty amazing to me what they have been able to do. Its written in a certain book that a worker is worthy of his wages .  There is only so much you can get for free, you've got to pay to play. As for the community being slow or unhealthy, that seems to be a subjective thing and a matter of opinion.  I;ve been here occasionally putting in my 2 cents or  passively reading it for years. I bet it will be here for more years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit that I am disinclined to buy the new FI module because of the engine upgrade issue.

As an early buyer of FI who hasn't kept up to date, getting the module will cost me $50 including the engine upgrades. As I also own RT and BN, it would perhaps be more sensible to buy the upgrade 4 big bundle, so my upfront outlay to get the module would be $65. At this point I'm thinking nah.

I assume that if I were to buy the base game now it would be game engine 4, which means that only early buyers end up paying for the dev costs of the engine upgrades. I understand from other software I use that the argument for this is that you have derived value from the upgrade by using it, though this is not the case for me because I never bought it.

I guess I just find it strange that BF would put people off buying modules by not including engine upgrades in the price of the module.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Offshoot said:

...only early buyers end up paying for the dev costs of the engine upgrades.

I guess I just find it strange that BF would put people off buying modules by not including engine upgrades in the price of the module.

I have to agree with this; it seems quite bizarre that any necessary engine upgrades are not included with the cost of the module, or that early buyers of a game have to pay for subsequent upgrades, not not later buyers.

Also, from my experience, I can't say that any of the other games I deal with have a similar policy.  In fact, just about all of the games I've bought in the last several years provide "engine upgrades" for free.  Examples include FoG2, CMANO, the Campaign series, the Panzer Campaigns series.  The Panzer Campaign games in particular stand out, since many of them were released almost twenty years ago.  

I haven't been particularly bothered since BF's cost for engine upgrades is not very high, and I only buy the ones for CMRT, but the fact remains that this policy has been unpopular with most gamers, and has served to fragment the players among people playing the various engine versions.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 76mm said:

I have to agree with this; it seems quite bizarre that any necessary engine upgrades are not included with the cost of the module, or that early buyers of a game have to pay for subsequent upgrades, not not later buyers.

Over the last 9 or so years, I have spent around $500 on CM products, which works out at about $50 a year. I spend around that much a week on alcohol, and it gives me less escapism that this game...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If charging a small fee for the upgrades in any way helps BFC to continue making these updates i have no problems what so ever to spend my money on this...

I just wish they could produce more of them...faster ! 😁

But unfortunatelly that would cost even more money i guess..

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Freyberg said:

Over the last 9 or so years, I have spent around $500 on CM products, which works out at about $50 a year. I spend around that much a week on alcohol, and it gives me less escapism that this game...

Lightweight 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, J Bennett said:

They have done many free patches and V4 was pretty much a game overhaul and I have not seen any other companies do that

If I remember correctly Paradox is giving away free patches of which some are changing their games quite a lot. But I don't know how often that happens with other games.

Edited by BornGinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: free upgrades

Its becoming significantly more prevalent. Paradox is a prime example, but there are many others. There are series that don't, but with the prevalence of Steam, youtubers, etc... Its increasingly beneficial to sales to have long running updates done to a game. But much of it is driven by systems that BFC doesn't take advantage of so the benefit might not really be there for BFC.


Re: CM:FI 

Is it true that you have to buy-in to the Engine Upgrades to get the new module? I was under the impression that each new purchase would bundle in the newest engine.  I'm fine paying for engine upgrades if I'm going to use them, but requiring them for module purchases seems rather strict for early adopters. 

For example, I played through CM:RT before any of the more recent engine upgrades were released and have had no need for them. Yet if I were to purchase the new module I would need to buy an engine upgrade?

Ooof yea. If you were an early CM:FI adopter (7 years ago?) you'd shell out $50 for CM:RTV.

Re: QBs

QBs would be much improved if maps (well AI plans) were connected with the force purchases. There are a number of good scenario scripts that would still be effective as long as the purchases were within a certain % of the expected force type. Essentially what seems to be one of the big problems with QB design is that the designer can't know what forces are available, but that information is present and could be applied to the map choice.

 

Edited by Pelican Pal
oof

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, weapon2010 said:

omg,  what don't you guys get? to stay CURRENT and NEW has a price tag

 

To stay current I get. But, to use Red Thunder as an example, I've no need to stay current. I haven't played a PBEM in yonks and exhausted my interest in the scenario list quite some time ago. I'm essentially a lapsed customer - the last new purchase I made was in 2015. Lapsed customers seem like the people you would want to entice back. Yet lapsed customers would end up paying the most. Someone who purchased CM:FI over half a decade ago and just hears about Rome To Victory is going to get some sticker shock at the $50 price tag.

To organize my thoughts better the most active BF customers would seem likely to keep their games updated. They want to engage in MP and with newly created scenario content. While the least active (lapsed as it were) are less likely to do so. Requiring the least active (and by inference) the least committed to jump through additional hoops seems counter-intuitive. Since these folks are probably the most likely to walk away from the game.
 

Quote

I dont think BF charges enough for their products, i think they are a bargain.

You are certainly free to send them money in the mail.

Personally the engine upgrade requirements are not going to make/break my decision to make new purchases. Much like 76mm, I'm very much an Eastern Front player. But I can't shake the feeling that requiring them is a unusual move when your least committed customers are likely the ones without them.
 

Edited by Pelican Pal
East Front or bust

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...