Jump to content

Prince of Eckmühl

Members
  • Posts

    297
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Prince of Eckmühl

  1. One of the reasons that I never really got into CM x1 was because of the camera controls. They were way too cumbersome to use. I can't exaggerate the extent to which I prefer the new ones. PoE
  2. My crystal-ball was working mighty fine in the run-up to CMSF. It said that there was a mob of CMx1 fans a block-long that were gonna slag this game, no matter what it looked like or how it played, simply because it wasn't an expansion of the older, turn-based nonsense. You guys certainly haven't disappointed the rest of us. Like I said, this was all very, very predictable. :cool: PoE
  3. Hey, at least Gamespot reviewed CMSF. They refused to review Take Command: Bull Run. No kidding, I emailed Jason Campo half-a-dozen times and begged him to take a look at it. He never responded to me or anyone else associated with the game. He was reviewing their RTS games at the time, btw. The real focus of GS is on consoles. I don't even visit the site nowadays. It's not like their comments are gonna have any great influence on grown-ups. CMSF FOREVER, RT ONLY!!! :cool: PoE
  4. I agree whole-heartedly that it was a breakthrough as far as animated miniatures games are concerned. I was introduced to the CMBO demo by a friend who maintained an army of GHQ micro-armour and he was ecstatic. I was horrified at the state of the demo and missed those beautiful little 1/285th scale tanks. I'm not sure that I've ever forgiven BF for the loss. As far gameplay was concerned, the CMx game(s) brought a lot to the table, no pun intended, in terms of turn-based gaming. But, the turns were still there, and having been ruined by CC and Sid Meier's Gettysburg, I realized that RT play was essential to computer wargaming. Why the heck play a game on a computer if you're unable or unwilling to unleash it's power to introduce the fourth dimension into play, CONTINUOUS TIME? I'm still actively involved in boardgaming, BTW. I dearly love spending an evening pushing counters around a map and analyzing the game and its outcome with (a) friend(s). That's where the turns belong, IMO, in an environment where extended deliberation is a crucial element of the experience. I wouldn't want to play "speed-chess" on a computer any more than I'd prefer to play tennis on an Atari. The former belongs in two (or three) dimensions, the latter is clearly lacking in anything less than four. PoE
  5. Nah, this game engine's got plenty of room in it's trousers to grow, and legs long enough to do the walking. Give it time. Remember, y'all's beloved turn-based game wasn't hatched out of whole-cloth. Likewise, it's the dialectical nature of things that a pre-existing condition will generate it's opposite. The process of reconciliation will bring change. And it's the synthesis that's up for grabs. Stick around. PoE
  6. I keep reading references to CMSF's poor "tactical AI" and "pathfinding." What I find sort of mind-numbing about the comments is that they're encumbered by a fairly powerful inference that these were somehow strengths of the old games. This is so starkly at odds with my own experience that I feel compelled to comment. The truth be known, I quit playing the CMx1 games because they evidenced no tactical AI or pathfinding ability, whatsoever, NONE. Players had to do it all. They couldn't even order a unit to march down a road. We had to micro-plot dozens of moves each turn, choreographing what I've often described as what appeared to be a poorly designed play from American football. It was simplistic in the extreme, an animated, ww2 miniatures game, and nothing more. At it's core, and at it's best, a couple of weapons systems would hurl ordnance down-range at each other, tank vs tank, or whatever. But, that's all it was. And there were sets of miniatures rules that had provided gamers with the same experience for decades before its inception. As the battles grew in size, goofy stuff like the "borg" effect became more prominent factors in undermining the strength of the game, it's fidelity to modeling fighting between one weapon system and another. But, while there was some grousing about the game's eccentricities, the overwhelming sentiment was positive, "I have an unlimited amount of time to plot my moves, I can SAV before each turn is executed, and I can win. My what a great game!" Phony, phony, phony. PoE
  7. CC proved that it's possible to make an excellent small-unit, RT game. Of course, CC3 introduced extra unit slots and open purchase of armour which, IMO, seriously undermined the effectiveness of the design. There appears to be an inherent tension in the design of RT wargames, as evidenced by the handful of ones that have been successful. The necessity of limiting the scope of the fighting is always in conflict with the DEMANDS of a noisy minority for MORE OF EVERYTHING, more, more, more, bigger-better-badder. That's how CC3 ended up with all those slots open for armour. And so it is with CMSF. BF can make an excellent RT wargame, as is evidenced by the current state of the product, even in it's nascent stages. Conversely, they can ruin it by pandering to the folks who want more CMx1, only bigger-better-badder. What a relentless bore. PoE [ August 03, 2007, 08:56 AM: Message edited by: Prince of Eckmühl ]
  8. That's exactly the way that I always felt about BO, BB and CMAK. The SF system is excellent. Technically speaking, it marks a huge upgrade over it's dated cousins. That's not to say that the older games didn't have some enormous strengths, foremost among these, perhaps, was their extraordiary level of content. CMSF is a little "thin" in this area, at least when compared to it's ancestors. I don't know how or when BF will address the content issue, but I fear that folks will always draw unflattering comparisons in this regard given the apparent disparity between the two families of product. PoE
  9. Would you care to expand on exactly how the friendly AI in the old games is superior to that in CMSF? In my experience, I've found two reactions to the quality of the older games AI (friendly or otherwise): 1) The enemy AI is tough (and if it were any harder, I couldn't win every time that I played it). 2) Yeah, it's lame, but the game's really meant for multi-player, so it's shortcomings in this respect don't undermine the integrity of the design. Micromanagement? Please, elaborate. We're all eyes. PoE
  10. What I'm saying is in an RT game, the time that a company commander would have to issue orders to his platoon commanders is used to issue commands to everyone, down to lone sniper teams. I find that completely out of whack with my own experiences. I don't mean game experiences either. Command is punctuated with hectic moments similar to RT, but they are generally short, and the rest of the time is much more 'laid back'. I have no need for a constant adrenaline rush... had enough of that in the Marines. Like I said before, to each their own. For me, RT has zero appeal </font>
  11. For many of us (old war gamers) the answer is "yes." </font>
  12. So, a turn-based game with micromanaged movement and other behaviors is inherently superior to one without turns? I used the term "straight-jacket" above to characterize my experience with turns as they were employed in the earlier Combat Mission titles. Well, there's another kind of limitation that appears to be in play here, and that's the dogma of so many of the older games' fans. Seriously, a lot of folks treat their devotion to the strengths of the older games like a religion, of sorts, and never give an ounce of credence to their weaknesses. Zealotry among the like-minded is no doubt a great comfort within the confines of circle of believers, but it's a tomb for folks that are more open-minded, BF/S, I suspect, among them I applaud Steve and everyone else at BF for their willingness to innovate and take us forward with a whole new engine, even if the act entails alienating a lot of old-time, Combat Mission faithful in the process. PoE
  13. This game is brilliant. It's what I always wanted Combat Mission to be. The turns in the older games were a straight-jacket for me. I knew how phony pausing every sixty-seconds to plan a move really was, and I just felt like it was all a big joke. I am having absolutely no trouble, at all, controlling my forces, limited in number as they might be. I find the interface, in particular the camera, to be infinitely superior to that of its predecessors. As is the case with so many contemporary games, the mouse wheel and buttons take care of just about everything. I can understand why folks who hate not being in control of every event on the map might be disappointed by what they perceive to be a diminished ability to "manage" affairs the way that they did in the past. Let me point out, however, that tactical warfare evidences no such deliberative characteristic or quality, none, whatsoever. Today, I was almost through playing a scenario when a thunderstorm arrived. The wind outside was howling and rain was coming down in sheets. Then, lightning struck nearby and the electricity failed. My UPS kicked in, and I should have begun shutting everything down, BUT NO! I was so excited that I played the last five minutes, or so, on battery. Great investment, huh, the game I mean? PoE
  14. This probably belongs in the tech-support forum. PoE
  15. This is an interesting statement in that you seem to be applying the term "path-finding" to a game routine that might be more aptly described as "path-directing," a function of your apparent preference for friendly movement taking place solely at the direction the human player(s), rather than the game's AI. Are you interested, at all, in handing over some of these chores to the game, or do you want to manage every last detail of these functions yourself? That's a real question, btw. PoE
  16. In any sort of personal or professional sense, me neither. My sole knowledge of Tom Chick is a function of my having read his reviews, which I've always found excellent. In my recollection, he was always very tolerant of developers going out on a limb with a product. He'd cut them a lot of slack. Conversely, he was rather less likely to embrace anything that he perceived as being a "knockoff" of a previous title, a "cash-cow." But, what I remember that he was particularly dismissive of was anything that simply didn't work, a good example being the Silent Hunter 2/Destroyer Command experiment. The first of the games, SH2 was just mediocre, particularly when juxtaposed with the original. The second game, however, DC, simply didn't work, particularly in its role as a multi-player add-on to the sub-simulation. Chick hammered Destroyer Command at Gamespot. IIRC, he gave it a "35" or something. And why not? It didn't work with SH2 for MP as advertised. Talk about fanatics? The SH/DC community eventually raised enough money in donations to "fix" the game, but Chick was spot on in his criticism of the developer and publisher. Which leads back to the quality issue. In the global sense, the guy is on to something, whether he's sold BF short, or not. For my part, I won't comment about the particulars of CMSF until I've played it. I buy everything, but that doesn't mean that my friends will. Mendacity? PoE
  17. The "journalistic" end of the "bidness" is a mess. Perhaps it's always been that way. I dunno. What I do know, however, is that a review from a lot of these publications, the wargamer and armchair general included, isn't worth the paper that the marketing agreement of the interested parties is written on, PERIOD. If someone wants to go indie on the industry, then I say, let 'em speak. PoE
  18. I don't disagree with you as to the particulars relating to Battlefront. In a philosophical sense (with considerable practical import), however, I do reject the notion that developers owe those who purchase their games essentially nothing when the formers game is shipped to the public. One of the WORST games that I ever purchased was Red Baron 2. I tried to play it through a series of patches, only to be disappointed as each one crashed my computer(s). Then, Sierra issued a "super-patch" for the game which instantly transformed it into one of the BEST games that I've ever played (RB3D). So, there's hope, right? Probably not, at least not in the long wrong run. BFC will, no doubt, do right by it's customers, but don't count on the rest of the industry to do so. And Tom Chick knows that. He knows "the industry" of which he speaks and appears to have left the reservation. More power to him. PoE
  19. You know, if we set the bar on this any lower, I suspect that there will be no mass-market for these games, whatsoever. Who's gonna pay for them? I can't pitch a game to a friend, at any price, with so shabby a proviso, "just buy this, and someday the developer will finish it. Trust me, they're goodfellas." PoE
  20. I understand that the computers are an improved model of those deployed on the international space station. PoE
  21. Curiously enough, neither do I, regret the work that is. No, but it's a helluva a deal when a developer and their web of supporters succeeds, and, having failed so utterly, steadfastly refuses to accept credit for the debacle. And please understand that there is nuance in all of this, degrees of competence and commitment among the particulars. It's not all black and white, but the shades between, the gray, are so dominant as to often be the central characteristic of the entire effort. It's fitting that I posted in response to BF/S, in that he runs a clean outfit. The quality of the game development over which he presides speaks for itself. There are other developers that I believe are just as committed to this end, and I applaud them when they are successful. At the other extreme, I'd cite examples of folks who are unable and/or unwilling to do what it takes to make a solid piece of gameware, but it'd be off topic, here on the BFC/CM:SF forum. Beer and pizza? Seriously, though, this is a hard scrabble business. There's not enough money or talent to go around. What's left, personnel wise, are too often hangers-on from the "glory days" whose survival depends on successfully attaching themselves to what money and talent is still in play. The whole phenomena is vaguely reminiscent of a cross-dressing male attempting to land himself a ride in one of the Titanic's lifeboats, the "lady" being rather more focused on her needs, than those of the others onboard. AND THEN THERE'S YOU TO DEAL WITH, MICHAEL, YOU HUN, YOU MINION, YOU LOW CEORL!!! HOW WILL I EVER SURMOUNT YOUR 20,000+ POSTS, IF I"M CONSTANTLY EMBROILED IN KISS AND TELL CONTROVERSIES!!! PoE </font>
  22. Curiously enough, neither do I, regret the work that is. No, but it's a helluva a deal when a developer and their web of supporters succeeds, and, having failed so utterly, steadfastly refuses to accept credit for the debacle. And please understand that there is nuance in all of this, degrees of competence and commitment among the particulars. It's not all black and white, but the shades between, the gray, are so dominant as to often be the central characteristic of the entire effort. It's fitting that I posted in response to BF/S, in that he runs a clean outfit. The quality of the game development over which he presides speaks for itself. There are other developers that I believe are just as committed to this end, and I applaud them when they are successful. At the other extreme, I'd cite examples of folks who are unable and/or unwilling to do what it takes to make a solid piece of gameware, but it'd be off topic, here on the BFC/CM:SF forum. Beer and pizza? Seriously, though, this is a hard scrabble business. There's not enough money or talent to go around. What's left, personnel wise, are too often hangers-on from the "glory days" whose survival depends on successfully attaching themselves to what money and talent is still in play. The whole phenomena is vaguely reminiscent of a cross-dressing male attempting to land himself a ride in one of the Titanic's lifeboats, the "lady" being rather more focused on her needs, than those of the others onboard. AND THEN THERE'S YOU TO DEAL WITH, MICHAEL, YOU HUN, YOU MINION, YOU LOW CEORL!!! HOW WILL I EVER SURMOUNT YOUR 20,000+ POSTS, IF I"M CONSTANTLY EMBROILED IN KISS AND TELL CONTROVERSIES!!! PoE
×
×
  • Create New...