Wiggum15
-
Posts
537 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by Wiggum15
-
-
Maybe these are "unsupported proclamation"...as "unsupported" as your assumption that it was tons of work to include these "features".
Actually i like the game, but dont like the lack of progress and BFC's business model...ever considered that ?!
For you, everyone who does not love the game and says "WOW, GREAT" to everything BFC does and releases is a sad troll who does have no clue how much hard work (should we all pity BFC...) they put into these games.
Someone who loves a company and cheers everything they do is usually called a fanboy, now i dont say you are one but many here at the forum are very very close...
I most likely will buy the Bulge game anyway...why you ask ?
Because i dont have to care about 55$, simple as that.
If they would release a massive improved CMx3 engine i would pay 150$ for it !
I want BFC to move forward, you want them to sit in a corner selling the same game with a new varnishing forever.
Iam ranting about CMx2 since 2007 and i will carry on because to improve they need guys like me who DONT cheer them like 14 year old cheerleaders.
Oh, and i know they dont care about the forum "troll" with his "rants"...but they are ignoring their cheerleaders too so i can live with that.
-
...no.
The discussion about the lack of progress, the recycling and pricing began when someone pointed out that:
"[...]all T-64/72/90 hulls come from the original T-72s from Shock Force"
-
BF is not a graphics intensive game, it is a CPU intensive game. A critical point in understanding first of all what is possible and second of all impact.
Reducing the action squares is a geometric increase on CPU computing load. Your vaunted computer would fry or more likely just simply hang.
AI again is an intensive CPU load.
Yeah, with the current badly optimized engine my "vaunted computer would fry or more likely just simply hang".
Stop telling everybody about those "magic" AI process thats soooooo demanding on your CPU and all those bullets pew...luckely i can play ArmA3 with high setting with 40 FPS...
If i shoot mortar rounds at a enemy APC it will just sit there as long as it is not hit...although there are impacts in 25m distance...
Vehicles are to stupid to use roads and pathfinding is horrible...is that also part of the "magic" AI process thats so demanding ?
trenches before were visible. thats why they changed. you could see trenches immediately no fog of war. i can add many improvements.
I know and i was one of those guys who screamed for FOW trenches. But what we got is way worse...the current representation of trenches and foxholes as ugly "units" is awful.
A workaround due to engine limitations...nothing more.
mgs fire random numbers of bullets now. drones. precision artillery. anti air craft fire. editor improvements. mg fire being more effective in general but most speficially against infantry.
In door firing of rocket weapons. flame weapons. theres more too. i just dont vare to add because wiggum isnt gonna change his mind he.s been on this lonely rant about how bfc is swindling us all for months now. though i dont know why after being told repeatedly by 97% of everyone they dont agree and thats fine its his opinion and ok got it wiggum he posts the same **** over and over and over. its almost maddening tbh.
- drones
Invisible, maybe just a F16 with another sound file, i cant be to much work if you have aircraft fire already modeled ingame
- mgs fire random numbers of bullets now
Believe it or not, for me thats just a minor change, something a coder does in one or two hours.
- precision artillery
is just a shell without to much dispersion, i doubt that this was much work...
- anti air craft fire
Its just something firing into the air, planes are invisible so it could be as simple as a randomly generated number. If that number is >x then the plane was hit...minor change
- editor improvements
Using the editor is still a pain in the a**. But yeah at least they tried to improve it a bit. But still its not user friendly or straightforward.
- mg fire being more effective in general but most speficially against infantry.
Again, just change a few variables, do some testing and you have it...a minor improvement that is a basic thing to include into a patch
- In door firing of rocket weapons
Again, most likely just a small code change and some testing, minor change
Like:
If _weapon == "RPG" then {allowfirefrominsidebuilding = false} else {allowfirefrominsidebuilding = true}
- flame weapons
Only avaiable in RT, this was already present in CMx1
The Bulge game will use the same germans (+ a few new tanks and textures) like we already have in CMBN and CMRT.
The Bulge game will use the "flat" snow tile and weather "graphic effects" from CMFI
The Bulge game will use the US forces we already have in CMBN and its addons (+ a few new tanks and textures)
The Bulge game will have the flame weapons and tank riders from RT
The Bulge game will have mostly the same TO&E as CMBN with some additions and changes
The Bulge game will have new scenarios
Please tell me, from your perspective, what the big "new" feature of the next full price CMx2 game ?
-
Yes, they tend to be. Over time they add up and have made lots of progress. As long as they are improving things that's good.
If you would ask me about the improvements since SF (2007) the only thing i can think of is the "Target Armor Arc".
Other then that...puh i would need some time to come up with another one...oh wait "AI triggers" !
So i can think of 2 improvements since SF...and some things have even gone worse like the foxholes and trenches !
-
and I want to s**t gold. Not likely to happen anytime soon. Do you even realize if Battlefront could somehow go on another no income hiatus and do what you have suggested, your PC would not be able to run the game? Oh yeah small little item there it seems you didn't account for eh?
Ha !
Why should my PC not be able to run the game ?
My PC plays GTAV, GTOS, SABOW and Ryse in high to max setting...and my PC is more then 2 years old and i paid less then 600$ !
Do you try to suggest that BFC cant code a good performance (or even average) engine ?
That you consider all that "minor fixes" just exposes your ignorance. I am sure if you can finance the effort BF might consider your proposals.
??
I consider the changes in your link "mostly minor fixes, nothing really game changing like [...]" !
Do you understand what i say ?
I should finance BFC ?
Why ?
I always thought BFC was a commercial company selling games for $$ and not some kind of free-time modding team ?!
Now do you understand why many here feel you are a completely unproductive part of the discussion?
...eh, no.
-
If you ask me, these are mostly minor fixes, nothing really game changing like a new infantry movement system, SOPs, UI overhaul, a better editor, smaller action spots a reworked building and cover system, waypoints and more triggers for the AI, MOUT commands, better target arcs, more self preservation for the AI, overhauled tax Ai...
-
Are I able to discuss all these things (pathfinding for example) without the "I don't see a issue here" and "BFC has other things to do" people... No.
With the insane lack of critics here on the forums and the huge number of Hardcore BFC fans you need guys like me.
-
So You agree worth me that many things did not change since SF ?
You agree with me that there are tons of things that should be addressed since 2007 like graphic issues, the infantry movement, vehicle pathfinding ?
Will you spent another 55$ on the next texture and TO&E pack with the same old basic issues ?
-
... And that's my whole point.
You talk about how CM is "continuing to develop" but I and many others don't see that.
CM is in a standstill since 2007.
They fixed bugs and added minor features but the big issues and shortcomings are still there...just look at the infantry movement !
Or the awful "floating in nirvana" map.
8 years and still, CMBS feels like the 2007 SF just with a 55$ texture mod.
-
The "just don't buy it" argument is just bad. That's no valid point.
-
Reusing old models is ok.
But what BFC does is just "cheap".
Just look at the terrain, its the same for CMBN, CMRT and CMBS.
The infantry movement is the same since 2007 and never got improved.
They recycled the Germans from CMBN in RT (1944 again) and will do it in the bulge game (1944 again).
The winter terrain will be the same as in CMFI...
And don't get me started about the lack of new features or engine improvements since 2007.
BFC sells texture and scenario packs as full price games, some think that's acceptable some don't.
-
I would Say that 90% of CMBS comes from SF and 90% of all other WW2 titles comes from CMBN...I have the sensation that all T-64/72/90 hulls come from the original T-72s from Shock Force.
It's called recycling old stuff for a new full price game.
-
As for other games bringing me that. No, games like ARMA do not, the reason is, first person shooters do not feel or act realistic at all. the players are all doing their own thing and there is no concept of death being bad, so constant stupid moves are made because there is no fear of dying. The whole environment really has no feeling as to it being something you would see in real life.
So, maybe better graphics, and better looking small events. But the feel of the whole battle has nothing to do with reality in most games. CM is about the only thing that trys for that, and in truth it lacks many things also. But for me it is close enough that I get the feeling of a actual fight taking place.
No fear of dying in ARMA ?
You clearly never played ARMA...
CMx2 is a great game but has not moved on since 2007.
Things BFC sells as "engine updates" would be just small free updates for other devs.
Things BFC sells as a "new" full price game would be a 20$ DLC for other devs.
BFC got stuck in their own niche and cant move forward.
And as long as they make enough money with CMx2 there is no reason for them to move a inch.
-
I know BFC hates it if you mention other wargames on their forums, i just hope they dont overreact.
And to my defense, i was not the one who brought APOS to the discussion.
-
You have heard of APOS Operation Hooper right? If not it might be up your alley. Still, CM would do it better I bet.
I would doubt that.
I did not want to mention APOS (GTOS) but if you ask me it does several things better then CM, it has better graphics, is cheaper, more comprehensive and has better support in terms of feature updates.
-
Only on the BFC forums can a totally legitimate post about lack of progress since 2007 turn into a discussion about Space Lobsters...
-
Wow, looks great, is it ready for download ?
-
If you talk about the TacAI then its still bad and not really any better then in Shock Force.
-
Also, kinda worrying the lack of involvement, at least in a substantial way, by Israel. A country which has always been crying wolf at the smallest suspicious event in near arab countries, a country that has bombed nuclear plants hundreds of miles away from it's borders, and that would find itself ISIS at its border if Assad falls, seems extraordinarily silent to me on the subject.
Why should they ?
They already have to fight the Palestinian surplus male population and could not care less if the surplus male population of the whole Arab world decimates each other in Syria and Iraq.
(and yes i know its not PC to say something like this...)
-
The battles of antiquity are not a good model for modern fighting.
Given the separatist line about the outcome of the battle, they lack the POWs to support a flaming cauldron of doom, but an inflated kill count supports that to a large degree. Either way that sort of losses is something that the Ukraine couldn't keep under wraps, simply in terms of human mortality. That's something like 5% of total Ukrainian ground forces KIA/WIA, and 2.5ish Brigades down. There's reason to have some pretty serious doubts.
Excellent point, the aging Ukrainian population just has not enough man in fighting age to stand such casualties, especially the KIA !
The moral of the population would go downwards really really quick and peace talks would start. The same could be applied in a similar way to the russian side.
-
Is the black texture on the BTR 70 wheels (LOD bug) also fixed ?
If not then why ?
It's so annoying...
-
Would be nice to hear something official from BFC about this...
-
I dont think loading times will improve.
-
There are games that make good use of SSD's...funny that i can launch ArmA3, load Altis and have a quick firefight with the AI in the time it takes me to just load a medium sized CMx2 scenario (both games are on a SSD).
Is it me?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by Wiggum15
I know CMx2 uses only one CPU core.
Thats entirely BFC's fault and if a upgrade to multi core support is not possible for CMx2 at least for Cmx3 its a must have.
Anyway, even on a single core i think BFC could optimize the code/engine to run smoother even with added features.
CMx2 as a engine is long past its date of expiry. BFC should already be in development of a new engine but i doubt they are.
If they cant afford working on a new engine...what about kickstarter or Steam early Access...so many possibilitys...
But it looks like they use all avaiable manpower for "new" after "new" CMx2 games.