hoolaman

JasonC doesn't ever have to quote sources or references. I think he has a note from his doctor.

They did have a lot of control during the localisation and requested several changes to get them to a state fit to put their name on. They were then extensively tested by BFC and still had some show-stopping bugs for a minority of people. There are/were also serious gameplay issues that may or may not have been able to be fixed. Having said that, I know its not the same thing as having BFC code from the ground up. I know a lot of what I posted is graphical, and theoretically won't effect gameplay, but I also worry about some show-stopping bugs showing up in %50 of all PCs due to some hardware combo that went untested. And of course it should be noted at all times reading this thread that my opinions are based on pure speculation!

Kind of just playing Devils advocate here, but since this game is literally weeks away from release, I thought I would throw my thoughts out there. My impressions, based on all of the small snippets released so far: * The maps seem very very small * The way the buildings are oriented and the flat terrain makes the city maps look as primitive as CMX1. * The "Sky Box" horizon looks just as bad as in CMX1. How about some textures on the ground outside the map area. * There will seemingly not be that many vehicles modelled. * No parked cars? * The draw Distance and colour saturation into the distance for the bushes and grass looks weird. * If there is only arid terrain (which is literally all we have been shown) it will be very boring, and not even capable of modelling the terrain in half of Syria. I am also concerned that BFC's last several releases did not go off without a hitch. Critical issues such as crashing and poor performance were not caught before release, as well as some serious game balance issues. (T72, ToW) Is the Beta testing regime at BFC extensive enough to test the right number of hardware combinations? Are the Beta testers taking a critical enough look at gameplay? ToW seems to have some really glaring gameplay and hardware issues that have to be fixed before the game goes from OK to Great. Anyway, I realize the game is not out and that CMX2 engine is something of a work in progress, but I just wanted to provoke some discussion because I want this game to be a success.

Yeah that thread covers the misidentification and deliberate engagement sort of friendly fire. I have heard it said that the ballistics of every bullet are tracked so heres hoping that putting guys in the path of those bullets has an effect for either side.

I don't know what the reviewer meant, but I must say overall I am fairly disappointed in the screenshots I have seen so far. The terrain is pretty boring and arid, there are apparently weird draw distance issues with grass and bushes, there are apparently no "woods" (ToW anyone), the buildings seem to rubble in weird ways, the tanks in the movies have weird suspension etc. etc. Everyone in this thread has been saying "well its only a beta" but this game is now 9 or 10 weeks away from being put in a box and sent to Joe Bloggs. I am also hoping the beta testing for this game doesn't leave the release plagued with glitches and moaning customers, considering a few recent battlefront releases have been less than perfect. I am confident that in the hands of the CM community there will be some beautiful maps and mods for the game, but I don't want the launch of BFC's flagship to be a fizzer. Remember this one actually was designed and made by BFC not just published so the buck will stop here! disclaimer: this post is meant to be constructive.

All the screenshots released so far look pretty much the same. I wonder how limited in scope CMSF is going to be, considering release is imminent (next 3-4 months?)

I like the spartan look of this site, and I don't think BFC want to spend any time messing with forum software. I like the Axis History Forum's take on it, one standard size small avatar image. No images in signatures, no animations allowed anywhere.

I don't know if you have tried this, but you have to connect to your router's setup page via your web browser and create a virtual server to forward the connection from the web to your internal IP. THIS LINK should be of some help, although it is not the exact model of your router. I would also turn off my software firewall while playing if you are having serious problems, but that is up to you. Remember your router has a hardware firewall too.

You are missing something: HERE Please take the offer and stop going on and on. We all heard you the first time.

By the looks of it, the game probably could be released in June, but whether it should is another question. I hope there's a lot more to the game than the arid screens we've seen so far.

Chazman, I believe you were offered a refund on your purchase. Did you take that offer up? If not, why not? If so, what have you got to complain about, and why are you still here posting ten identical negative comments a day? Just out of curiosity...

It did look to me that Elvis and Elmar were asked by BFC to help with the deluge of questions on release day as they were on the boards from day one doing just that. They certainly did not say only positive things about the game, but seemed to be inclined to defend the game they had invested time testing. Since they are not moderators, nor was their presence on the forum announced or made official, some new/casual members may mistakenly believe that they were planted here to heap praise upon ToW.

Yes you would, at least in my jurisdiction. If people have problems running the game above minimum specs which they were led to believe were accurate, they have a legal right to a refund. The fact that some people can play without problems is irrelevant. Those that can play the game as intended have no right to a refund even if they think it's crap. If you followed the development of the game you would know what to expect in gameplay, but you would not know the game wouldn't work on your PC. Those that bought the game and have significant issues in performance should be able to get their money back. [ April 29, 2007, 05:03 AM: Message edited by: Hoolaman ]

What are you trying to say?

The thing is, if you bought it in a store, and despite meeting the min requirements it didn't work, you would be entitled to a refund. I am talking about performance issues not gameplay.

The Wespe would have to be miles away to deliver fire in a ballistic arc. Therefore it is off-map. Combat mission had the same treatment of on-map guns: direct fire-only.

From the communications I have seen, don't buy an ATI card.

Most demos released really early by bigger publishers are not actually representative of the final version anyway. They have bugs and less features. BFC and their developers wait until the game is finished to make a demo so they can devote the time to make a really great demo that is fully featured and represents the finished product. If you were worried about this game being a good investment you should have waited till a demo was released like many (most?) people here are going to do.

Unless the hydro-phumatics change the compression in response to a tilt sensor. Its not rocket science. Even my old BMW 5 series estate has a self leveling suspension that compensates when something heavy is loaded into the back. </font>

Im pretty sure the suspension isn't meant to do that. Its like the hull is always level as it goes up a slope. In reality gravity would have to be higher at the front of the tank than the back for the suspension to compress like that.

Yay! Now for those screenshots

There is certainly spotting and concealment in the game, although how well it works in the Russian version seems debatable. I have not really seen anything resembling actual cover. No gullies or ridges, no boulders, no fallen logs. There are of course trenches and bunkers hard-coded on the maps for all to see out in the middle of a rolling field. Other than this, the only real cover appears to be the walls/fences in towns, but town fighting looks to be a bit of a farce because you can't enter buildings. Seeing infantry hiding behind a flimsy looking bush as they assault a town is comical on the level of by Monty Python. A nice spray of machine gun fire should cut them to shreds.

Can't you achieve exactly this with "Hide"?

We heard a lot about how Syria was a great setting because it had forests and temperate areas. Are any of these things going to be in CMSF? ToW is looking disappointing because it is always full of the same open rolling fields, I hope CMSF doesnt go the same way with arid/desert terrain. Imagine being limited to always playing desert battles in CMAK. It would suck.

Odd, no objections to "booyah!" being shouted when the US drops a JDAM on some Arabs? </font>