Waiting to buy CMBN

[-Coulum-]

$10 isn't that much to pay for new features. It does depend on the quality and quantity of these "upgrades" however. if you have to pay 10 bucks per and each upgrade only marginally improves the game then it isn't really worth it, especially if there are several upgrades as I assume they can stack up in price.

For me, the upgrades in CMFI are not actually worth buying Normandy now and upgrading it later. I would rather buy CMFI, enjoy the new features and then buy Normandy when it gets upgraded hopefully saving $10 (but I notice normandy is currently $10 cheaper than FI so maybe they will hike the price up again after the upgrade...).

But what some people seem to be forgetting is that BF is actually being very generous just by giving you the option to upgrade. Nobody is forcing you to pay $10 to upgrade. If you don't think its worth it don't upgrade it and pretend you never had the option to. But if you do think its worth it than BF has given you an opportunity to do so - this is something that you rarely get in other games. That in my opinion is awesome (though I do wish shockforce was included) and when I have Normandy and FI and another game comes out I will be very grateful for that option.

Also keep in mind that BF is a bussiness and its main goal is to make profit. It is quite obvious that they make fairly niche games so they will often have to hike prices up a bit.

[Vanir Ausf B]

Now on reflection it may be impossible, due to the US legal system, for BF to admit that the product was not fully developed when they launched it.

Define "fully developed". Do adjustable waypoints and armor cover arcs complete the development? What about fire? What about anti-aircraft weapons? Pershing tanks? Fallschirmjäger? SOPs? Flares? Where is the cut off between finished and unfinished?

The bottom line as always is whether or not you feel the game is fun to play. I do. You don't. Fair enough, it's not for everyone. But if you don't like it now I seriously doubt the V2 upgrade features will make much difference in your enjoyment. They just aren't that central to how the game is played. Unlike, say, QBs, the lack of which in CMSF was a game-killer for me personally and the reason why I never bought it in the first place. Instead I found something else enjoyable to do with my spare time for the next 5 years other than bitterly trolling the CMSF forum.

[dieseltaylor]

Yep I never trolled the CMSF forums and have no idea what the game was like apart from someone I know who bought it and eventually gave up given its numerous developments. Given the cycle of improvements in CMSF my expectation was CMBN would be relatively bug free.

I am happy that people buy it and like CMBN. I think you will note my feeling was I had been sold a pup for the reasons outlined previously. If any of you would specifically like to say the original armour model was a good rendition of how armour worked in WW2 please 'fess up. I was astonished that it had got past play-testing. Still water under the bridge now.

Now I could learn to play the game as is and then adjust to play when V2.00 arrives. Having only limited playing time there is not much point in my eyes in learning to master V1.00 as it currently is now when we are a month or so from V2.00.

VAB - I was hoping V2.00 with arc and moveable waypoints would make movement plotting less of a chore, and that the arc would solve some of the anomalies. : (

JonS - I am glad that there is a reward system in place. There are some devoted testers out there.

[Vanir Ausf B]

If any of you would specifically like to say the original armour model was a good rendition of how armour worked in WW2 please 'fess up. I was astonished that it had got past play-testing. Still water under the bridge now.

I'm not sure what you mean by original armor model. If you mean v 1.00 of CMBN then that is pretty much the current armor model other than a few minor tweaks. As to how accurate it is, I think it's generally a good approximation although some aspects of it vary from reality more than others. In fact I'm close to starting a new thread about one of the less accurate aspects, albeit one that hardly anyone other than me seems to care about.

VAB - I was hoping V2.00 with arc and moveable waypoints would make movement plotting less of a chore, and that the arc would solve some of the anomalies. : (

It probably will, and if the chore of plotting movement points is what is preventing you from enjoying the game then maybe this is the revolution you need. But I personally don't find such plotting to be much of a chore presently. Armored Covered Arc gives a finer grain of control but doesn't fundamentally change how the game is played. I'm looking forward to Target Briefly more so than the other 2, if they can get it to work properly. Normal Mapping is the cherry on top.

[dieseltaylor]

VAB

I look forward to your new thread : )

You mentioned previously the manual going up weeks before the launch which is true about 17th April so three weeks before launch but also five weeks after it was possible to order the limited edition. I only mention it in case you need to repeat the observation that people could read the manual before purchasing the game.

I think you observation regarding the module being the same bar a few tweaks is ingenuous. Possibly you don't remember the outrage at a Panther steaming down a road but also firing broadside and nailing two Shermans and the resulting threads on firing whilst moving and target acquisition. There was also the ability of vehicles to travel as fast and accurately backwards as forwards which can never be defended as realistic. And finally the ability of tank shells to travel through and kill 4 half tracks in line astern seems to be fantasy. So essentially on the WW2 realism scale the armour module was gobsmacking.

[Vanir Ausf B]

You mentioned previously the manual going up weeks before the launch which is true about 17th April so three weeks before launch but also five weeks after it was possible to order the limited edition. I only mention it in case you need to repeat the observation that people could read the manual before purchasing the game.

Pre-orders can be canceled. And frankly anyone who blindly pre-orders anything is deliberately rolling the dice. Did you pre-order?

I think you observation regarding the module being the same bar a few tweaks is ingenuous. Possibly you don't remember the outrage at a Panther steaming down a road but also firing broadside and nailing two Shermans and the resulting threads on firing whilst moving and target acquisition. There was also the ability of vehicles to travel as fast and accurately backwards as forwards which can never be defended as realistic. And finally the ability of tank shells to travel through and kill 4 half tracks in line astern seems to be fantasy. So essentially on the WW2 realism scale the armour module was gobsmacking.

So was CMx1 more realistic?

[dieseltaylor]

Of course I pre-ordered I wanted the pretty Steelbox : )

Sorry I was not aware that CMx1 was the benchmark for realism, though to be fair firing on the move was much better done and it did have arcs.

BF claimed CMBN was realistic and I can confirm the wallpaper looked about right but I assumed they meant the game mechanics would be true, as far as reasonable, to real life. The armour/vehicle module was not very close.

[Vanir Ausf B]

I pre-ordered too. But I also read the manual online and read the forum a little

I don't know that CMx1 did firing on the move any better. It was less accurate than in CMx2, but that may have only been because the base accuracy was lower to begin with.

If CMx1 is not the benchmark for realism then what is? Because I want to play that game.

[Rocky Balboa]

I love the accusatory you : ) Like it was a great idea for CMX1 and then I am the sole mad bastard who then gets it included in CMX2 WW2. Even BF said other players called for moveable waypoints and cover arcs.

Deisel, if you will notice my reply was not directed at you but the OP of this thread, however since you took personal exception to my comments then perhaps they were appropriate for you as well.

Movable waypoints and covered arcs are something that players have wanted even back during the CMSF days. This might shock you but when BF released CMBN, I played the demo, I saw that those features still weren't include and I was disappointed but I still bought the game. How about you, did you buy CMBN knowing those features were'nt included? How about all the problems with the armor models and ballistics which you pointed out in another post, did you play the demo and then made a decision to buy the game?

You seem to miss the point that you make a decision to spend your money the way you want and BF has the option to release their product in what they consider to be an acceptable state. This is a business decision that they make and for the most part that decision can sometimes be a gamble. This happens in the software industry all the time, developers release stuff and it fails or they release it and it's a success but that is the developers/producers decision to make not yours and not mine.

I would very likely have considered buying CMFI if I were given the patch/upgrade to CMBN but making me pay for what I consider is BF putting right what should have been in the proper release [not a marketing driven release] makes me less likely to buy any BF products.

No one is making you pay anything. It is your decision is to decide whether the product is something you want to spend your money on and if not then don't buy it. So far, it appears that BF's decision to release CMBN was the correct one for them. I will personally keep making the best decision for myself concerning how I spend my entertainment dollar and it is my suggestion that you do like wise.

Now this doesn't mean that you can't express your opinion on the mechanics of the game but lets stop all this nonsense about having to pay for bugs that should have been fixed before release because no one took your money or anyone elses, we all gave it willingly and a great many of us consider it money well spent. If you don't then you have no one to blame but yourself and if you keep paying money for something that you consider to be a of no value then your just acting foolishly.

[Squeaker]

Deisel, if you will notice my reply was not directed at you but the OP of this thread, however since you took personal exception to my comments then perhaps they were appropriate for you as well.

Really? I only wanted information to help me decide if I should wait a bit to buy the game or not.

For the record, I'm glad I bought it, and I'm not concerned about spending a little more for a major update, but perhaps I'm lucky that $5-$10 is not a lot for me.

I don't consider the game buggy, incomplete or missing key features. Certainly, there are things I wish it could do, but none of them are deal breakers for me.

Be nice if it could make me a nice cup of tea though... I'd pay for that!

[Rocky Balboa]

Really? I only wanted information to help me decide if I should wait a bit to buy the game or not.

For the record, I'm glad I bought it, and I'm not concerned about spending a little more for a major update, but perhaps I'm lucky that $5-$10 is not a lot for me.

I don't consider the game buggy, incomplete or missing key features. Certainly, there are things I wish it could do, but none of them are deal breakers for me.

Be nice if it could make me a nice cup of tea though... I'd pay for that!

This of course is the correct attitude for any consumer to take with regard to purchases. Thoroughly investigate what the product does and doesn't do before making your decision to buy it. Fortunately for us consumers, BF gives us a demo that we can play to see exactly what the product does and doesn't do, so this takes out all the guess work. There should be no excuse for someone to say that they bought CMx2 and didn't know what was included or not included.

I personally love the game even though there are some things that I wish they would include or modify. I did not buy CMFI because I'm just not interested in the theater but I have played the demo to try out the new features and so buying the upgrade for CMBN will be a no brainer for me. I have to really give major kudos to BF for the way they have given the players all the information we need to make an informed purchasing decision and giving us the opportunity to keep our initial investment current by providing a low cost upgrade is just unheard of from any developer that I'm aware of....

[Redwolf]

Hi all

I really want to buy CMBN, but since I read that there will be a major update that will become the norm, but will be a paid upgrade, I'm reluctant to buy it now and then have to pay again within a couple of weeks.

I would be more concerned with what the update contains, not what it costs. Anyway...

Personally I think that paying for the upgrade shouldn't apply to those who buy the base game after the new code is already out in CMFI and an announcement has been made that it won't be a free upgrade to CMBN.

This can only lead to stalled sales.

[Paulverisor64]

The success of the upcoming patch will determine whether it gets followed up by more pay for patches. I personally hope this tactic is successful enough for Battlefront to afford an additional game programming employee. This game is great, but quite clunky. Battlefront certainly does the most with what they have. I'd love for them to have the opportunity to raise it up another notch.

Hopefully what they release does warrant the upgrade cost.

[sburke]

man we are never satisfied. 2 releases this year and possibly a 3rd on the way. Tons of new stuff in version 2 (hell does no one else appreciate the new mapping tools?). Patch for CMFI is out and still we weigh in with "darn BFC, if they would only do x they would be much better off".

No offense guys but this is the most unappreciative whiniest place short of maybe facebook or reality tv. Okay maybe it is a bit hard not to take offense at that but we are talking $5 if you wait for the patch/module combo. 5 friggin dollars. Really? I spent that much on a coffee today.

You are paying for a ton of work being done to CMBN to get it to match CMFI so they stay in step for continuing patches etc. Is it really that hard to think maybe that effort on BF's part is worth $5? Hell I'd pay $5 just to get the mapping tools in CMBN.

Burke out.

[Redwolf]

man we are never satisfied. 2 releases this year and possibly a 3rd on the way. Tons of new stuff in version 2 (hell does no one else appreciate the new mapping tools?). Patch for CMFI is out and still we weigh in with "darn BFC, if they would only do x they would be much better off".

No offense guys but this is the most unappreciative whiniest place short of maybe facebook or reality tv. Okay maybe it is a bit hard not to take offense at that but we are talking $5 if you wait for the patch/module combo. 5 friggin dollars. Really? I spent that much on a coffee today.

You are paying for a ton of work being done to CMBN to get it to match CMFI so they stay in step for continuing patches etc. Is it really that hard to think maybe that effort on BF's part is worth $5? Hell I'd pay $5 just to get the mapping tools in CMBN.

Burke out.

There might be a lot of stuff in 2.0 but it doesn't address fundamental issues that were brought up from day 1 of CMBN, if not from CMSF.

It's not OK for a small bunch of random guys to simply overrun a HMG. It's not OK for two squads to sit in touching distance one of them seeing and the other one not seeing the GIANT TANK next to them. Insert mortar issues etc etc

Plus the interface simply sucks and didn't get better in 2.0

[dieseltaylor]

sburke

I think we have a fundamental difference. I believe CMBN was released earlier than it should have been as the Matrix tactical WW2 armour game was announced in September 2010 it would be released in April 2011.

I was, until this week, unaware that the Matrix launch date was known and assumed that BF had released CMBN half-ready because of cashflow requirements. This would be fine as I have supported BF for years and would not want it to go under. However I am now more of the camp that believe the early launch was to steal/preempt Matrix's offering.

Now there is a lot of claptrap about playing the demo before purchase, the demo arrived with the full game and with the inducement by ordering two months early that you could have a rare Steelbox and a printed manual. Yes I have learned my lesson and will now no longer buy from BF without some extensive play or await for purchasers to reveal more about the game.

Now as you know I think of V2.00 to actually be what CMBN should have been. I am not talking of the scenario tools etc I am only interested in the play side. I may be wrong in my view but we are unlikely to know why BF did launch CMBN when it did with so many things downright wrong - like the porous buildings, the super armour targetting and firing module etc.

What I find interesting is the number of people who talk of "if I had bought CMSF" I would have known what to expect. I always thought things had improved because of the number of patches and modules CMSF had. This made the shock of CMBN being so weird even greater.

Fortunately my view doesn't matter on whether BF deliberately launched prematurely as it is never going to be proved. But you will understand that having forked out a substantial sum plus postage and taxes for the Steelbox edition paying more for the version that will allow me to play the majority of CMBN players will irk me.

However I hope BF continue and improve.

[Vanir Ausf B]

What I find interesting is the number of people who talk of "if I had bought CMSF" I would have known what to expect. I always thought things had improved because of the number of patches and modules CMSF had. This made the shock of CMBN being so weird even greater.

Actually things did improve. We got QBs. That is really what I expected CMBN to be: CMSF with QBs and a WW2 setting. And that's what I got, so I'm not disappointed. I knew there were no adjustable waypoints or armored covered arcs when I preordered and I knew that without ever playing CMSF.

[A Canadian Cat]

man we are never satisfied.

Nope, never

2 releases this year and possibly a 3rd on the way. Tons of new stuff in version 2 (hell does no one else appreciate the new mapping tools?).

Oh, those mapping enhancements are awesome. I will play the $10 for that alone in CMBN. Now if I could tear myself away from *playing* I might finish my scenario

[Rocky Balboa]

However I am now more of the camp that believe the early launch was to steal/preempt Matrix's offering.

Must be a pretty lonely camp because you are the first I have heard to express this theory. If the "matrix offering" was such a threat to CMBN then why are we all here playing CMBN and not the "matrix offering" surely it must have been released by now?

Now as you know I think of V2.00 to actually be what CMBN should have been. I am not talking of the scenario tools etc I am only interested in the play side.

Being only interested in the "play side" is very short sided of you. BF doesn't have the time or the resources to put into making a large amount of good quality content. The scenario tools are of great value to those in the community that enjoy making that content and dare I say that others enjoy consuming

What I find interesting is the number of people who talk of "if I had bought CMSF" I would have known what to expect. I always thought things had improved because of the number of patches and modules CMSF had. This made the shock of CMBN being so weird even greater.

If you honestly feel like you were sold a bill of goods and were unfairly taken advantage of, then absolutely you should not buy another version of CMx2 until it has everything in it exactly as you feel it should and to do otherwise would be foolish

But you will understand that having forked out a substantial sum plus postage and taxes for the Steelbox edition paying more for the version that will allow me to play the majority of CMBN players will irk me.

You see here is why myself and others have a problem with your complaints. On the one hand you claim that CMBN is so fundamentally flawed that it should never have seen the light of day yet numbers of players are playing the game and enjoying it so much so that you feel forced to upgrade so that you can continue to play the game with them. If the game is not worth the "substantial sum plus postage and taxes" then why are many people playing it and why do you feel forced to upgrade?

However I hope BF continue and improve.

I have confidence that BF will continue to improve because I was one of those who purchased CMSF back in 07 and I have seen how BF has worked hard to listen to its customers and have been willing to make changes to improve the game.

[Vanir Ausf B]

After reading that post I can't get "The Eye of the Tiger" out of my head.

[Rocky Balboa]

Plus the interface simply sucks and didn't get better in 2.0

BF said that CMx2 v3.0 is slated for some additional UI changes. If the UI is a big brick wall which prevents you from enjoying the game then hopefully V3.0 will correct that issue for you. However, I can assure you that if you consider V3.0's interface to be absolutely perfect there will be others that will say that it sucks. No UI is perfect and so when you please one person you normally tick someone else off. This is why the big budget game company's invest in UI's that are customizable or modable by the community. BF might be able to go this route but I don't expect that to happen.

I would be interested to know if you think these UI changes should be considered bug fixes given for free or is it something you think users should pay for?

[Rocky Balboa]

After reading that post I can't get "The Eye of the Tiger" out of my head.

You probably would not be surprised to discover that I have it on my rotation.

[dieseltaylor]

RB

Released May 12 2011

Updated 12 July 2012

I don't frequent the Matrix site so I have no idea how it plays. Perhaps a sense of loyalty keeps us here?

you claim that CMBN is so fundamentally flawed that it should never have seen the light of day

I am always saddened when people misunderstand what has been explicitly not been said. I maintained it was released too early for the reasons outlined.

I very appreciate how much BF is reliant on tens of unpaid enthusiasts who run clubs, make scenarios, run tournaments, and spread the word. I have playtested many scenarios, been involved in many tournaments, nagged GAJ about inventing a PBEMHelper for CMBN, paid to support BF relevant sites,and was a very early adopter of the site in the sig, so I think I have done a fair bit for the player community. Now BF tell us repeatedly that the main players are the solitary guys and for them I have done nothing.

Actually I suppose running tests and digging up information on things that do not seem right probably does help BF get it right for the benefit of all players. I now people laugh at me being upset about reversing speed but hells teeth how fundamental part of a realistic wargame is correct speeds for vehicles? My research on brick and stone structures and penetration took many many hours. You know it gets to the point when you wonder why do it. After all there seem to be many players who don't care if there tank goes backwards at 25mph , 10 times real speed, and has no problem steering.

You have been here over a decade RB but you with 500+ posts I almost feel I may have invested more in BF then you have. Perhaps that is why I feel more let down.

[Rocky Balboa]

I am always saddened when people misunderstand what has been explicitly not been said. I maintained it was released too early for the reasons outlined.

And if BF had waited to add all the things that you and others think should be included then we would still be waiting on CMSF to be release and BF would never have released CMBN because they would no longer be in the game making business.

I very appreciate how much BF is reliant on tens of unpaid enthusiasts who run clubs, make scenarios, run tournaments, and spread the word.

I’m not sure how reliant they are on these unpaid enthusiasts, I’m quite sure that they are reliant on their fans who would not be buying their games, making content to enhance the play if they weren't enjoying and find value in what they have purchased.

I have playtested many scenarios, been involved in many tournaments, nagged GAJ about inventing a PBEMHelper for CMBN, paid to support BF relevant sites,and was a very early adopter of the site in the sig, so I think I have done a fair bit for the player community. Actually I suppose running tests and digging up information on things that do not seem right probably does help BF get it right for the benefit of all players. I now people laugh at me being upset about reversing speed but hells teeth how fundamental part of a realistic wargame is correct speeds for vehicles?

My research on brick and stone structures and penetration took many many hours. You know it gets to the point when you wonder why do it. After all there seem to be many players who don't care if there tank goes backwards at 25mph , 10 times real speed, and has no problem steering.

You have been here over a decade RB but you with 500+ posts I almost feel I may have invested more in BF then you have. Perhaps that is why I feel more let down.

DT, I know you feel like you have a vested interest in CMBN but I can assure you that no one has more invested in this game than BF does. For you and I this is really just a hobby but for BF this is their job and its how they feed their families, please never lose site of this.

If all your predictions of calamity and doom are correct then you have lost relatively little compared to BF so have some faith that they are aware of what the major issues are. Yes, do your testing if you feel so inclined and post the results or don't, but stop this complaining about how much the game costs and why everything should be given for free because these are bugs and should have been fixed before release. If you bought it and continue to buy it then you have no one to blame but yourself and If you honestly want to see the game improve then make constructive critical and non-critical posts and then let it go you’ll be much happier that way.

[sburke]

Plus the interface simply sucks and didn't get better in 2.0

In your opinion anyway, which is absolutely valid for you. Personally I have no issues whatsoever with the interface. So now we are down to a matter of opinion. The interface isn't broke, it just isn't the way you would prefer it.

Those other issues you point out will NEVER go away. When they address the ones that actually deserve to be addressed we will simply find more for them to look at. It is a process and if you feel that the game has to be perfect before you feel you have your money's worth perhaps it is time to not purchase any games.