Vanir Ausf B Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Not as such. 'Modules' are thematic entities, eg. Commonwealth forces. 'Packs' are more like collections of additional bits and pieces that are not necessarily related in any way, just new vehicles, formations, kitchen sink etc. In CMBN terms this could mean for example French tanks for Germans and Ranger battalion for the US. Thematic differences aside, it's still a DLC business model. I don't mind BFC making money but the potential for further fragmentation of the multiplayer/PBEM community bothers me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Then what makes it different to thematic modules? You'll still have to buy the Commonwealth Module to have Luftwaffe land forces or Luchs in CMBN. Or USMC module to have T-90 in CMSF. You could say that this fragments the multiplayer community. You could also say that BFC making new games at all fragments the community, as not everyone who bought CMBN will want to buy CMFI. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 When choosing scenario to play, I hope the packs used in each scenario will be listed just like used modules are now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Then what makes it different to thematic modules? You'll still have to buy the Commonwealth Module to have Luftwaffe land forces or Luchs in CMBN. Or USMC module to have T-90 in CMSF. You could say that this fragments the multiplayer community. You could also say that BFC making new games at all fragments the community, as not everyone who bought CMBN will want to buy CMFI. The difference is in the number of different permutations of modules and packs. The more there are the more likely it is that any given opponent will have a different combination. You can still play him, but only with common components. I would also expect that the more limited in scope any particular DLC is the fewer people would buy it. As you noted, Packs appear to be mini-modules so it's the same content just chopped up into smaller pieces. If I were only going to play against the AI that would be fine, but if I'm going to be PBEMing each of these modules and packs needs to achieve a critical mass in the multiplayer community to make it worth buying. It may well turn out that most people will buy all of them anyway, but my point is that the more of them there are the less likely that outcome becomes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 It's a bit like some games that allow mods. Some online server demands these mods, some other server something else. For a player it gets much more difficult to have everything required installed if you want to play online. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Childress Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 The difference is in the number of different permutations of modules and packs. The more there are the more likely it is that any given opponent will have a different combination. You can still play him, but only with common components. I would also expect that the more limited in scope any particular DLC is the fewer people would buy it. As you noted, Packs appear to be mini-modules so it's the same content just chopped up into smaller pieces. If I were only going to play against the AI that would be fine, but if I'm going to be PBEMing each of these modules and packs needs to achieve a critical mass in the multiplayer community to make it worth buying. It may well turn out that most people will buy all of them anyway, but my point is that the more of them there are the less likely that outcome becomes. My thoughts exactly. BF needs to think really hard on the Pack concept, it's starting to look like wargaming spam. That and the anticipated deluge of titles risks turning the MP community into a a Swiss confederation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Perhaps some perspective would help? Take CMBN. Currently there is CMBN and CMBN:CW. In a few(?) months there will also be CMBN:Arnhem. Some months after that the catchall module, and sometime after that maybe a pack. How much variation is that, really? I can do the maths easily enough (assuming there are no interdependencies that'd be 16 permutations, less with interdependencies) But how many actual variations are we likey to be talking about among active players? My guess is two. Maybe three. And even between those two or three variations there is going to be a heck of a lot more overlap than there are differences - someone who only has the base game is still going to be able to play someone who's got everything. There is also CMFI now, and by the time the last bit of CMBN is released there'll probably also be CMBulge and CMEF. But if you're looking for a game of CMBN all of that is irrelevant, because they have absolutely no impact on your ability to play or not play any given battle in CMBN. (Vanir's point about permutations/combinations below noted ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I just realized I said permutations but the correct term is combinations. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Take CMBN. Currently there is CMBN and CMBN:CW. In a few(?) months there will also be CMBN:Arnhem. Some months after that the catchall module, and sometime after that maybe a pack. A pack? Or two, or three? If it is just one then probably no worries, but I seem to recall Steve mentioning the possibility of multiple packs per title (I get the impression that for BFC, Packs are more of an idea than a concrete plan at this point). I don't know what the magic number is but I will reiterate my earlier point that the more limited in scope any product is the less appeal it will have. Modules with their large amount of content are more likely to have something to appeal to a potential buyer. Maybe you couldn't care less about the Commonwealth, but you still get the SS. To take the example to an extreme, imagine BFC did their own version of the infamous horse armor DLC from Oblivion by offering individual vehicles for download at $1 a piece. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I think the plan is to let players buy hats for their Pixeltruppen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenAsJade Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Is there a table, yet, showing what is available with what? Clearly this will be needed, soon. I've already lost track (through not trying very hard). GaJ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 I think the plan is to let players buy hats for their Pixeltruppen. And monocles for the German officers! (only $10!!) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 A pack? Or two, or three? If it is just one then probably no worries, but I seem to recall Steve mentioning the possibility of multiple packs per title. How does that change the central point? Amongst active players, there'll only be a fairly small number of combinations in use for any given game. Amongst those practical combinations the amount of overlap is going to vastly exceed the differences. And even if you have everything while I only have the base game (or any other non-complete set of modules and packs), we can still play a game against each other. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 How does that change the central point? Amongst active players, there'll only be a fairly small number of combinations in use for any given game. Amongst those practical combinations the amount of overlap is going to vastly exceed the differences. And even if you have everything while I only have the base game (or any other non-complete set of modules and packs), we can still play a game against each other. Yes we can still play each other, but for the purposes of our game it is as if I had not purchased the content we don't have in common (and same for my opponent). If that happens often enough it calls into question how valuable that content is, which goes back to my previous point about critical mass. The fairly small number of actual variations you are predicting is -- as you pointed out in your previous post -- a guess, not a given. And it may well turn out to be a correct guess, especially with so much still unknown. But my central point is that as the number of content packages increases and the size of some of them decreases the likely number of actual variations goes up. This should not be a controversial assertion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 Yes, it is trivially true that as the number of 'things' that can be added to the base game increases then the mathematical number of possible combinations of those things increases. That isn't controversial in the least. Why would it be, and I explicitly brought it up in my earlier post. However, I predict that the practical impact of that mathematical possibility is substantially less. Will there be specific scenarios that two players will find they can't play due to one of them not having one or more of the things? Of course there will. Will that be a major issue, especially since they can still play one another? I doubt it. I'm not quite sure why you're trying to spin more options and choices as a bad thing? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjkerner Posted August 1, 2012 Share Posted August 1, 2012 If less is more, then just think how much more more will be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 I'm not quite sure why you're trying to spin more options and choices as a bad thing? Actually, I'm not. It's how the content is packaged that I have concerns about, not the fact of the content's existence. And I am more concerned about units than scenarios. As I said earlier, if there is one Pack per title that's fine. But if there are two or three per title I would prefer they be bundled into a single full-priced module, or at least one larger Pack rather than several smaller Packs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenAsJade Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 I'm not quite sure why you're trying to spin more options and choices as a bad thing? Because it may become a complete pain finding a game with someone. We (at WeBoB) already have extensive threads about how to manage game versions in tourneys, and CMFI is barely out! Imagine these threads when there are patches and packs... And it may become a complete pain _playing_ games with different people who are on different patch levels. "Hang on a minute, do I or do I not have covered arc in this game? Is this the variant where Sherms hit every time, or the version where Panzers hit every time?" etc. I agree that we haven't seen anything conclusive to indicate this will be a real problem, but we are certainly heading in the direction of it, and already feeling the effect of it. ... and this is probably because the game is mostly sold to single-players, I presume. In the "I bought this to play against the computer" scenario, all these considerations are completely moot and a range of choices makes complete sense. So it's a complete waste of time to lament about whether or not this will adversely affect H2H players: we are a secondary concern: if the decision makes sense for vs AI, then that's how it will be. GaJ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJFHutch Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 The reason I prefer the larger expansions or modules is that as said, they tend to be more universal and reasonably easy to figure out. Purely hypothetical and just to illustrate the point, can you imagine trying to organize a game with someone and you said "oh I have the base game, DLC 1, 3, 7, 9 and modules 3 and 1" and your opponent said "I have base game, DLC 1, 2, 5 and 6 and only module 3". I remember considering buying the Bad Company 2 Vietnam expansion as it looked like a good chunk of content at only $15, that was until I played it on a friend's computer and found out how difficult it was to find populated servers, and even they dropped off fairly rapidly after launch it seemed. Choosing a mission without resorting to "lets only play base" would be more tactically challenging than any mission you could pick 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenAsJade Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Snap. GaJ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 "temperate setting for NATO and Russian forces" Where would that be, what time period? I thought Battlefront had zero interest in doing Cold War stuff. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 "temperate setting for NATO and Russian forces" Where would that be, what time period? I thought Battlefront had zero interest in doing Cold War stuff. It says temperate setting so it can't be cold war. DOH!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Ukraine. Presumably set in the same year the game is released (2013) or very close to it since that's what they did for CMSF. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Purely hypothetical and just to illustrate the point, can you imagine ... Sure, and I just came up with a purely hypothetical illustrative absolute nightmare where they release 437 modules and 256 packs! Oh noes! How will I ever find a game!?one!!11!?!@ I think you guys are jumping at shadows, and attempting to outdo each other with increasingly catastrophic imaginary scenarios. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted August 2, 2012 Share Posted August 2, 2012 Ukraine. Presumably set in the same year the game is released (2013) or very close to it since that's what they did for CMSF. It's to coincide with a coming war movie of the same name, directed by Uwe Boll. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.