Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Michael Dorosh

So, who's disappointed?

Recommended Posts

I'll buy it when it makes the Mac,as i don't have a PC.

I think Modern will be ideal for the new game system, as borg spotting made modern far to lethal for a modern game.

I will also put it a guess that Uncle Sam will follow the austrailia army, at buy a truck load of copies for training purposes ( unfotunately so will every militant group in the middle east).

Now for the Questions, to the South there is Israel, and to the North Turkey

1) Will both or either nation be included.

2) Will they be limited to being on the good side.

Peter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I don't buy the setting in that the U.S. is leading a force to return Assad back to power as it doesn't seem plausible that this "coalition" would come together to create another democratic nation in the middle east. Especially given the current state of the UN.

Additionally, I am not sanguine on the staying power of this in terms of replayability. I would be keenly interested in seeing how the answer to practically every situation faced with organized resistance is not "plaster it with airpower".

Granted the flexibility of CMx1 is not to be expected, but they're still fully viable games several years after release. Is a speculative Syria given the seemingly "on-rails" nature of this storyline going to remain interesting anywhere near as long?

Maybe so. I am not going to leap to such a judgement though.

Much will depend on the ability to edit or create scenarios with a wide variety of units.

As for BFC's competency, this is not in question. Nor is their legacy of making excellently designed games. It is only a matter of subject matter and them making it interesting to me.

Other settings would make this title and each module a must buy. This one is a wait and see.

BDH

Edit to finish a sentence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mildly disappointed. The screenshots look promising, though.

I think the WWII game will be kick-ass, but like many others I am not inspired by the fictional backstory of CM:strike force. It seems a little too "politically correct" for my taste, as if BFC were afraid of offending anyone. The backstory has the Americans working with a multinational force including many other Middle East nations. What is the likelihood of that happening under the Bush administration, which will still be in power in 2007? For more realism, I would have preferred a unilateral American action against Iran or North Korea. Even better would have been a hypothetical Cold War scenario.

I definitely look forward to playing the demo (if my machine is capable of it!). For me, a WWII game would be a "must buy", but I will have to wait and see about CM:SF.

I don't want to seem ungrateful to BFC because the CM series has given me incredible entertainment value for my money. The new game may just not be the right one for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think many people imagined in their heads something other than this. They believed that it would be WWII, and were strongly looking forward to WWII. When game 1 wasn't WWII, they were let down. Now, regardless of what I myself might have wanted the first game to be, I am sure that this will prove to be a quality product, for a few reasons.

1st: It's BFC making it. I trust them not to do a crappy job.

2nd: I think that near future is a very cool time period to be exploring.

3rd: Remember, there will still be a scenario editor, QBs, etc that can either be US vs. Arabs or US vs. US, so if the campaign doesn't float your boat, you still have something to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Barrold:

Additionally, I am not sanguine on the staying power of this in terms of replayability. I would be keenly interested in seeing how the answer to practically every situation faced with organized resistance is not "plaster it with airpower".

Shhh! "Disposable games" is the new catchword. You're not supposed to be playing the new games for years, or even months. Only until the next module comes out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm glad that WWII will be the follow up title to take advantage of what BFC learns with the first title. They have said many times that several of the cool features we want will make it in to CMx2, but not for the first game. I see the WWII game as taking advantage of a more fully developed version of the CMx2 engine. It's really what I had hoped for all along.

While I am not a fan of modern combat, I don't think I've played a really good modern combat game on the CM scale, if one even exists. But I am sure I will like it and the Tesla Coils will kick ass!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by juan_gigante:

3rd: Remember, there will still be a scenario editor, QBs, etc that can either be US vs. Arabs or US vs. US, so if the campaign doesn't float your boat, you still have something to do.

With very limited OOB's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously we knew a lot of CMers would be disapointed that they have to wait a bit longer for another shot of WWII in the arm. However, the opposite was weighed carefully... those itching to do something other than WWII in a way that isn't FPS or cheesy RTS. So far it hasn't been done, and now we're going to fix that. We can't please all the people all the time. We certainly know of lots of you guys that didn't buy one or more of the CMx1 games due to a lack of interest, despite them being WWII based.

As for Syria being a fantasy setting... in the sense that it is set in the future, I'd agree. However, when we look around and see the potential flashpoints in the next 10 years Syria and Iran are foremost (anybody who caught Bush's speech this week would know that). Even North Korea ranks lower, and Taiwan even lower. I'd probably put "generic small operation" ahead of Syria, but that isn't enough to make a game of CM's scope.

In fact if you are going to simulate this kind of warfare, why not do away with the fictional story and just set the game in present day Iraq or would that be too politically and morally challenging for the audience?
There were several reasons for not doing OIF. First, it is controverisal in a very negative way. Most of the world sees it as act American (not even Anglo-American!) aggression. Right or wrong, that is the way it is. And now with 60% of the American public being against the war and only 30% or so thinking the Bush admin is effectively managing the war, domestic support is quite low too. So controversy is one reason. The other reason is that it is too recent. We don't have a lot of source materials to draw from to do historically correct battles the way we would like. Hard enough to do WWII battles with literally tens of thousands of books in print, but something that only started 2 years ago? Think about it :D Lastly, we wanted to explore the use of the Stryker Brigade as it was originally intended to be used. The SBCTs that have seen action in Iraq all came after the initial conventional warfare phase, which mens no Strykers vs. T-72s and other such challenges. Lastly (no, really...), by making a scenario in the near future we can predict, fairly accurately, what the forces will look like and the doctrine they will follow. Plucking some completely unbelievable scenario set even further away means a lot more speculating about weapons systems in use, their capabilities, and their likely means of use. We don't want to do that. That's why you'll see us skip on the timeline from near future modern combat to Space Lobsters (when we get around to it). If we're going to be making stuff up, we might as well go whole hog!

Oh yeah, and anybody thinks there is no chance of another conflict in the world, or the ME, until Iraq is nicely tied up in a bow... whatever you're smoking it has the kind of nice, calming, and detached from reality effect that people go to jail for possessing :D While I agree that a preemptive Iraq type scenario is unlikely, a reactive Afghanistan scenario is very much an "any time, any place" possibility.

Steve

[ October 08, 2005, 01:16 PM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well we WW2 fanatics can wait awhile. In the mean time I'm waiting for the demo to come out. Steve's comments caught my interest!

The screenshots were breathtaking! Just hope my computer will be able to handle all this stuff.

Anyway, back to CMAK and CMBB smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by juan_gigante:

3rd: Remember, there will still be a scenario editor, QBs, etc that can either be US vs. Arabs or US vs. US, so if the campaign doesn't float your boat, you still have something to do.

With very limited OOB's. </font>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BFC has made clear that OOBs will be far more limited in the CMx2 games regardless of setting.

I do hope some non-US NATO forces are put in at some point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Pirx:

The backstory has the Americans working with a multinational force including many other Middle East nations. What is the likelihood of that happening under the Bush administration,

hehee, that made me laugh.

I agree though, I would have preferred a US attacks Iran scenario too. But then again, how hard would it be to change that setting? All you'd have to do is edit the victory flags...the rest is pretty much the same.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Barrold:

Additionally, I am not sanguine on the staying power of this in terms of replayability. I would be keenly interested in seeing how the answer to practically every situation faced with organized resistance is not "plaster it with airpower".

Im pretty sure BFC has no interest in modeling that kind of scenario. Wouldn't be fun.

Instead, they are likely to focus on the kinds of scenarios that make the papers, where U.S. forces get shot and suffer casualties, despite technological superiority.

Hmm...do the Syrians have any sort of dedicated AA weapons systems that actually work?

I'm betting probably so.

Maybe I'm totally wrong in thinking this, but I'm sure there are plenty of times where the first elements of a combat formation don't have access to immediate air support en masse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Pvt. Ryan:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by juan_gigante:

3rd: Remember, there will still be a scenario editor, QBs, etc that can either be US vs. Arabs or US vs. US, so if the campaign doesn't float your boat, you still have something to do.

With very limited OOB's. </font>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wasn't expecting WWII and yet I am very disappointed.I actually had hoped for Korea or something,not some futuristic crap(wasn't that what drop team was for).I am still reserved about my opinions until the demo comes out,but all along I felt that they were trying to sell us a car with a engine but very little else.Then they want to turn around and sell us the transmission,drive shaft,front/rear ends seperately and for extra.Good thing I don't have the money to upgrade my pc and/or buy the game,yet.

edit toadd:

Also,trust is something that CONSTANTLY has to be earned and renewed.Just because they did a really good job with CMX1 doesn't mean that they can't take the game and company in the wrong direction;it happens all the time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At least as good a choice as Harriet Miers for U.S. Supreme Court.

Yes it's all about you and not your customer base. And of course the game engine will be so good we'll forget we don't care in the least about the subject matter.

I think you may have taken your finger off the pulse of the people who pay you. I'll try the demo. I am very skeptical. Hope you sell enough to get to game #2. I doubt I'll be one of them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is not

Originally posted by no_one

some futuristic crap

This is a reasonably realistic scenario worthy of exploration. A comparison with Drop Team is wholly unwarranted.

And about the trust thing. Maybe I'm a naive optimist, but unless I've been proved wrong, I try to believe that people will do things right. Certainly BFC has given us reason to believe that they are capable of producing a quality wargame, and I have seen no evidence - none - that they will screw this up ala Master of Orion 3.

And Shep, BFC while BFC doesn't state their sales figures, they have let us know (when we start to whine about they abandoning us, the forum) that most of their sales have been to non-forum members, IIRC. And the fact that they are trying to market to a wider audience should be aplauded. Hell, I bet that if no one on the forums bought CM:SF, they would probably still sell more than any of the CMx1 titles. The fact that they enjoy making money for their work is no crime.

(edited because me spell good)

(edited again to respond to Shep)

[ October 08, 2005, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: juan_gigante ]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Leutnant Hortlund:

Put me in the "I would have preferred ww2, but will buy it anyway"-column.

I'll get in this line. Although i'll be sure to play the hell outta the demo before i buy. Also check out some reviews as well and the feedback from here.

Guess CMAK and CMBB will probably be getting much more playtime. Oh well, can't win them all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe so, but where would there be the sense of urgency to dispose of someone who ousted the Assad dictatorship?

If it were a revolutionary Islamic coup throwing out a relatively secular but run of the mill thugocracy, would there really be a coalition of M.E. states lining up to help? Would the U.S care unless the new dicks started to export their thuggery outside of their borders.

If not, pounding the crap out of them a la Serbia sounds like a perfectly reasonable if expensive route.

I could perfectly accept the U.S. getting tired of Syria's crap and giving the boot to the current dictatorship. I wouldn't expect any sort of assistance as envisioned in the BFC scenario though.

But hey, if it's the greatest game ever made, I might just push the "I Believe" button and return to my normal state fanboy state.

On the other hand, I have to be the first to play the race card as their are no people of color in that group of rifleman and we all know that the Army is entirely composed of economically conscripted poor minorities who are fighting for oil companies owned by The Man.

BDH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what BF has said the force selection will be more flexible and customizable than CM1. The replay value came from the QB system, which I expect to be improved after 9 years of development.

as far as what will keep it from being an air to ground turkey shoot, well syria has some of the best weapons money can buy for a non-us ally. For purposes of deterring tactical air assaults I imagine that 1) counting plane kills along with other casualties and 2) Syrian forces having modern russian or even somewhat dated russian man portatable anti air missiles available would initiate the proper balance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It amazes me how sheltered some people's perception of the world is. If it helps you guys visualize things any better, think of Afghanistan. Looking at the criticism in this thread of our Syria setting one would conclude that nobody knows anything about recent history.

As for the "race" issue... expect more than a single clone representing your troops. CMx2 supports as many unique faces and skintones as we want. Realistically we'll only include a limited number, but for sure they won't all look like they are fresh off the farm from Kansas :D

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

It amazes me how sheltered some people's perception of the world is. If it helps you guys visualize things any better, think of Afghanistan. Looking at the criticism in this thread of our Syria setting one would conclude that nobody knows anything about recent history.

As for the "race" issue... expect more than a single clone representing your troops. CMx2 supports as many unique faces and skintones as we want. Realistically we'll only include a limited number, but for sure they won't all look like they are fresh off the farm from Kansas :D

Steve

So the player will have the option of adding "face" skins to all him men? Will we be able to mate specific names with specific faces?

Maybe I'm thinking of NHL 2004 or somefink but that would be cool.

And matching nametags on the body armour. :D

but of course, the gameplay is the thing, not the eyecandy.... redface.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, this thread got political really fast...Let's try to give it the benefit of the doubt. BFC poured their lives into 3 WW2 games. I'd be a bit burned-out, too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...