Darren J Pierson

No problem. I thought I might have missed something obvious. It was a nice positive plug for the game. Not earthshattering but it was good.

After reading the whole article, I think he was simply saying that he could play CM:SF just for fun and not have to dwell on teenage suicide, etc. I don't think escapism is a code word for anything negative in the article. He wants to play games to get away from real world issues. What exactly is so evil about that? Or was it just that it was Tom Chick saying it?

That's quite probably true. I for one always loved Grant/Lees and Matildas so CMAK was a natural for me. I've even bought multiple copies of it for my desktop and laptop. But I imagine I am rare in that regard.

Hmm. My first attempt seems to have disappeard. Steve, Yup, you are right, I misunderstood and my apologies for being a jerk about it. It has just been a pretty crappy day and I let it get out. Thanks for clearing that up. Darren

Fair enough - I should have made clear that "or somewhere in between" was certainly possible.

I did see, if I'm not mistaken, that Tom Chick authored one of the glowing reviews at GameSpot for one of the CMx1 titles.

Steve, I shared an elevator with a marketing guy once and because of that I can tell you that you are doomed to fail unless you follow my plan. CMx3 = Bulldozer Mission: Dirt Pile. "You can drive it, but can you survive it?" CMx4 = Grog Mission: Beyond the Forum. "Shatter gap? I'll give you shatter gap!" Solid gold, baby. -dale </font>

Yet some folks like that and buy up Matrix's games. Their model isn't a complete failure it would appear. Not that I disagree with you in this particular case.

I have no doubt that the best thing for BFC is CM:SF and whatever they decide to do with the new engine. That is just my opinion, but the BFC folks seem to be passionate about what they do and they are still in business. Just because SOME of the older customers disagree doesn't make those opinions correct. If hardcore wargamers were really a truly profitiable demographic, we wouldn't face a monopolistic market situation. BFC provides us with all that we are going to get in 3d tactical gaming. Customers can either buy the product, which signals that we are happy with the direction of the market or not buy it which signal displeasure. If we buy the games simply because they are all that are out there then we reward folks for not giving us what we want. If we don't buy then the market is considered too much of a niche and no more games will be made and we are out of luck. (Note, I am not saying CM:SF fits into any of these categories myself - it is clear that there are lots of opinions on the game including it is fantastic and on target - all puns intended). As a long time adventure gamer I have seen the near demise of that part of the hobby. When main stream publishers make an action-adventure hybrid and it fails, they complain about the non-existant adventure customers. They fail to realize that they didn't really make an action game nor an adventure game and lost both groups. Many adventure gamers are told to suck it up and buy them anyway or we won't get anything. We have to decide, is half-baked crap better than nothing? The only real hope for customers is to actually have a comptetive marketplace where we can vote with our dollars, pounds, yen, etc. And the products have to be different enough to clearly show what we are actually voting for with our money. We can talk about what would have been better with CMx1 forever but I don't think it will help anyone very much. As an academic exercise there is nothing wrong with it but I hope people don't think that they are going to resurrect the old beast. I don't think BFC will ever produce a product that they feel is in any way shape or form inferior or a rip off. Whether folks will like it or not is different, but we shouldn't take it personally if a game isn't our cup of tea.

Steve, Saying that those of us who bought and loved CMAK are those whose marketing opinions don't matter to you does seem like a bit of a cold comment. I'm assuming you mean that those who loved CMAK are not the targets of marketing because we will buy your product anyway and the marketing needs to target the undecided? Or are you just channeling Derek Smart here? Are you trying to piss off the old guard? You are doing well. Why am I writing this? Just need to realize that this was only ever a business relationship anyway. [ August 16, 2007, 04:50 PM: Message edited by: Darren J Pierson ]

When I was a little kid I rode in a M113 at an army demonstration in Calgary. I got a certificate saying that I am officially a Junior Patricia, although they spelled my name wrong. I'm not sure how that affects my current reserve status. (civilian) Thanks to all who served.

As has been said before, if you don't like orders while paused, don't pause.

As has been said before, if you don't like orders while paused, don't pause.

As has been said before, if you don't like orders while paused, don't pause.

Indeed your opinion matters to me Darren. Point well taken here. I just don't have time to write right now, so I will e-mail you later if you don't mind. Gotta go! </font>

I wholeheartedly agree that present-paper-covered crap is still crap and hard to say five times fast as well. And yes, you have have the right to share your thoughts but I think the point was in the thread that there was too much venting and not enough discussion. However, once again that is a matter of interpretation. And you are certainly not the most aggregious poster by a long shot - if that opinion matters.

WTF?!? -dale </font>

You are telling me!!! Try have it happen in real life... </font>

You are telling me!!! Try have it happen in real life... </font>

Steve, A lot of the stuff here lately does remind me of a big family brawl. I guess one could say that the passion comes from a good place - but it isn't always expressed well and certainly sometimes with vitriol. And yes, perception rules the day. Some readers see the boards overwhelmingly occupied by complainers and others by sycophants. Not too mention what makes a whiner/sycophant is also in play. Luckily the boards do have some truly thoughtful folks and writers who can express themselves constructively. As we have all been pointing out, everything is our opinion - mine is just that there are some very offensive supporters who don't ever seem to be reigned in while some moderate complainers got too much attention. But that's just me and how I see those things. It is hard to deal with emotional backlash from disappointed fans. Fans usually don't have perspective and lash out because they think a deep personal bond has been violated. Often one would think those bonds would get people more slack, but it often works the other way. In six months I think we will all have a much better idea of the strengths and weakenesses of the product without all of the emotional baggage in either direction. Then we can generate new emotional attachments to the new engine. My personal interests don't sync with yours completly, I think, in many possible theatres, so I hope that the engine gets refined, tweaked, etc to the point where you can profitably license the engine to others. I might get some of my Cold War/WWIII scenarios, etc and still have the things that you will provide. Of course, and this might seem out of place in this thread, I assume that any licensing will keep quality control in mind. Anyway, I wanted to point out that some of the problems are coming from supporters as well as detractors. (Edit: See the post above mine for an example of the moronic flaming.) Some of the comments have been awfully harsh towards y'all and many folks have crossed the line. I look forward to when the nasty fights center on the possible flaw in angles of attack of Toyota mounted ATGMs in the North African deserts.

I also get the impression that the military is more the audience for this game than the old CMx1 crowd. I think for small tactical games 1:1 is the future, but if we are going to suggest that we are removing the abstractions, then the physics engine (correct term?) and the graphics are going to have to sync perfectly. I don't think our pcs are there yet.

Anytime that beta testers are supposed to have had some problems with the interface but got used to (or even embraced) the new one after using it for extended periods of time then one can pretty much assume that reviewers are not going to like it. For many of us customers, the game is supposed to deliver entertainment, not frustration. Well, not the frustration that comes from not figuring out how to do what we want to do via the interface. Figuring out how to overcome the frustration of the enemy messing up our plans is a good kind of frustration. One of the key words in reviews is intuitive - and it is considered to be a good thing. I'm not reading a lot of people using intuitive about this game's UI. (Ignoring the childish sycophants who insult anyone who doesn't agree that this game is perfect). My personal feeling is that customers who get BFC's vision for the game and embrace it are going to love the program "because they do get it." However, the attitude that seems to come out here from time to time is that people who don't get it do so because they aren't capable of getting it. It's just insulting. I don't know if it drives away any potential customers or not, but I would be surprised if it didn't. For having been in sales for years I know that sometimes you have to sell a product - get the potential customer to see the good points and how it will satisfy their perceived wants. If the customer thinks it stinks from square one, no sale. I've seen sales people use the tactic of "discriminating buyers understand why we are the best and if you don't understand that, you aren't our kind of customer." It was amusing to watch a few fools fall for it and even more amusing to watch the sales person fall flat on their face with the people with the cash in hand turned and walked out the door. That's kind of the tone I'm getting here. Don't think it is intentional, and it comes more from forum members than BFC staff, but it is still present. I don't have to be coddled but I resent patronization. (And yes, the childish wailing of some flamers is just as annoying). If the game has a lot going for it that the reviewers aren't getting - then sell those points to us. It isn't the customer's (potential or realized) job to search for the jewels in the system - they are supposed to be out there to dazzle us from the beginning. And if people want to simply say that people who don't see the gems never will, then fine, but thats incompetent sales tactics. As is letting the Sycophant Sod Squad insult people who are on the fence. Hell, if dalem ever says buy this game I will spread the news far and wide. His rational comments have been more significant to me than the petulance of the mindless defenders or whiners. BFC, nor any other business, will never satisfy all the potential customers. BFC will support this game long past the time the cows come home and I tell anyone I talk to that fact. But despite your telling us how sad you are to see some of the CMx1 faithful leave, Steve, you sure don't come off that way. You are completely correct though, people have to accept the changes that have been made. Like you said, they don't have to like it either but they do have to accept it. My opinion is to listen hard to people, customers and reviewers, who loved your product in the past and are now walking away. Y'all are bright at BFC - you can separate the wheat from the chaff - but don't get too defensive. It never helps - at least not publicly. As marketing 101 says: perception is reality. Gotta get those perceptions a bit more positive in the gaming press. I want the game engine to succeed. And yes, my grammar helps me look like an idiot. [ August 11, 2007, 02:02 PM: Message edited by: Darren J Pierson ]

GameSpot was quite fond of CMx1 although they had a different reviewer for each of the first 3 games. This review is not going to help CM:SF any. He at least stressed the potential of the game.

How would players who like the current Elite-RT level be penalized by the addition of a pause option? --Philistine </font>

Am I the only one that actually has to deal with things like telephone calls, people at the door, etc. You know, those real life things that pop up and are the ultimate in realism?