Is CM dying?

[Collingwood]

BFC, quit releasing half-assed patches like the latest CMFI patch.

I don't see anything half-assed about the patch. The graphics improvements alone were kick-ass

[ASL Veteran]

As interesting as the idea of user sold content would be, there is no way for the creator to prevent one player from downloading your work for $1.00 and then giving it to everyone he or she knows for free. The only reason that scenarios specific to a module or pack can't be freely transferred is because those scenarios and maps contain content that is specific to the module or pack. So unless your work is included on the game DVD there is nothing to force anyone to buy what you make. It's logistically impossible.

[Childress]

Payware mods are not uncommon with racing and flight sims. If they meet a need that is being ignored by free modders/mod teams then that on it's own is a reason to support the concept.

[Doug Williams]

I don't see anything half-assed about the patch. The graphics improvements alone were kick-ass

It introduced several bugs, that were not present before the patch.

[Rocky Balboa]

Payware mods are not uncommon with racing and flight sims. If they meet a need that is being ignored by free modders/mod teams then that on it's own is a reason to support the concept.

Yep everyone would be on the honor system. Some sharing would take place and that's unavoidable, but if we all agree that designers who are compensated in some way for their work are likely to create more good quality work then those who choose not to pay and try to work around the systems will be the exception rather than the rule.

[sburke]

It introduced several bugs, that were not present before the patch.

And BF will fix those, however the 1.11 patch for CMFI includes so much I for one would certainly rather have it than not. We are after all the ones who keep bugging BF to release stuff NOW!

[Ithikial_AU]

While we're on the subject of your youtube channel Ithikial..

Get on the case of making more CM vids already! Schnell! Raus!

Yeah yeah yeah. Have actually been working on content but have to hold back on release until the multiplayer match is done.

Oh and ARMA 3 and XCOM have been a little distracting.

[Humbug]

ARMA? XCOM?! I care not of these strange things! I need my Combat mission fix gosh darnit and if I....oh wait, the lady in the house wants to say something to me...

Ow...

Oh ok... I'm so sorry mr... Ithikial. It would seem I get easily riled up for no reason, but it's CM vids you know and they're all so god damn beautiful and lovely and I want them so much I could smell them and... NO....err, sorry about that. Calm, so very calm.

There's a serious lack of CM vids on the tubes lately however, so, you know. Get on that asap.

Seriously though, take your time and make them full of awesome.

[Battlefront.com]

BFC, quit releasing half-assed patches like the latest CMFI patch.

It introduced several bugs, that were not present before the patch.

There are ALWAYS bugs in everything we release. To call a huge step forward a "half ass" attempt because it isn't perfect is... well... kinda unfair. The bugs that we're going to fix for CMFI v1.12 are pretty trivial, though still on a fast track to be fixed. It's not like those bugs make CMFI less playable than it was prior. Based on feedback from others, quite the opposite is true.

Wargamers are infamous for their lack of perspective. I worked at a company that deliberately abandoned hardcore gamers because of this attitude. They weren't happy about it, but they made the bed they wound up having to sleep in. Fortunately we don't take glass half empty thinking to heart. Otherwise we would have abandoned wargaming before we even started Battlefront. To paraphrase Darth Vader, pray we don't alter the arrangement further

Steve

[ASL Veteran]

To paraphrase Darth Vader, pray we don't alter the arrangement further

Steve

Message to Doug Williams from Darth Vader

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11Ee02WLxGk

[Freyberg]

I'm pretty hard-core about this game, and the little bugs don't really worry me...

[Tim1966]

Have to say I've just purchased CM2 (BN, CW and MG) after having CM1 years ago and I'm really enjoying the experience. The graphics are very immersive and I have found the gameplay realistic yet still fun. I'm in the middle of the Nijmegen campaign which is very enjoyable (I like switching between US and Brits - makes you realise the differences). Having worked in computer game development fulltime and I'm still involved in my spare time I know how much work goes into this stuff and how niche wargaming is. Its not dying for me although I was tardy buying the latest versions. I could probably find some faults/bugs/things I don't like if I looked hard enough but that's like complaining my Aston Martin DB5 has the wrong colour floormats...

[PanzerMike]

He Tim1966, welcome back. And yes, don't you just hate it when your DB5 floormats don't match. Still, my DB5 suffers from a quirky passenger ejector seat. I really hate it when that thing just goes off. Still a great car though.

[warrenpeace]

I really think the BF should consider doing open beta testing on the late builds of their patches. All of errors found in 2.11 (CMBN) and 1.11 (CMFI) would have been caught before the final version was released. The open beta format seems to work well both for Command OPs and War in the East, and given the nature of most war gamers, they would be happy to help.

Just my 2 cents.

[Lethaface]

In my impression BF already awards the most (constructive) active contributors with beta tester status so I don't really see the improvement open beta's will bring for CM. Open beta can work for some platforms, less so for others.

Anyway just my cents, BF is in a better position to answer this.

[warrenpeace]

Lethaface, all of the little bugs were uncovered within three days after release of the patch. Clearly the beta test pool is too small.

[Battlefront.com]

I really think the BF should consider doing open beta testing on the late builds of their patches. All of errors found in 2.11 (CMBN) and 1.11 (CMFI) would have been caught before the final version was released. The open beta format seems to work well both for Command OPs and War in the East, and given the nature of most war gamers, they would be happy to help.

Just my 2 cents.

How would this differ from putting out a patch and having us put out another patch? Effectively it's the same, but conceptually it's a huge can of worms that we absolutely will not touch with a 10' pole.

As for our testing pool, it's actually quite large. The problem is that we tried to get this patch out to you as quickly as possible while at the same time trying to address as many problems as possible. The best way to avoid obvious mistakes is to limit how many things are trying to be fixed or extend the length of time being tested. Life's full of choices

In my impression BF already awards the most (constructive) active contributors with beta tester status so I don't really see the improvement open beta's will bring for CM. Open beta can work for some platforms, less so for others.

Exactly. And here's a concrete example.

We just released v2.20 a few weeks ago. We could have called v2.21, which you received last week, v2.21 Beta. Then next week released v2.21 Final based on feedback received from customers using v2.21 Beta.

How is this any different than getting v2.21 last week and v2.22 next week? No difference. What would be different is if we had held v2.21 up for another couple of weeks or limited what we put into it, then released v2.21 without a couple bugs that the actual one had.

Steve

[z1812]

The only thing that has definitely died is the original posters interest in the discussion they started. 15 pages and no comment from him. Interesting.

I started with CMBO in the early days. My deepest concern for the future of the game was BF's original CMx2 idea of doing away with PBEM and WEGO. Thank goodness they changed their minds. Oh, and the blue progress turn bar.............if that was not restored God only knows what the result may have been.

This game is brilliant. There is so much to enjoy. Modding, map making, scenario design, oh and of course you can actually play the game. Not counting the many ways it can be played. Online, Single Player and PBEM as we'll. I can't think of another game that provides so much variety at such a reasonable price.

If I was capable of designing a game I would have made it just like this.............but of course with a random map generator.

Yipes!!! Does the above make me a fanboy?

[A Canadian Cat]

How is this any different than getting v2.21 last week and v2.22 next week? No difference. What would be different is if we had held v2.21 up for another couple of weeks or limited what we put into it, then released v2.21 without a couple bugs that the actual one had.

Am I missing something? Or was that just a typeo. Assuming you were trying to use actual version numbers shouldn't it be 2.11 and 2.12?

[mjkerner]

Am I missing something? Or was that just a typeo. Assuming you were trying to use actual version numbers shouldn't it be 2.11 and 2.12?

You didn't get the v.2.21 and 2.22, Ian? That's funny, since all the smart, in-crowd people that BFC give special privileges too have them.

Ohhhh, ohhhhh, wait a minute...never mind, Ian, please disregard this post.

[Chek]

Getting back to the original post I was actually thinking the exact opposite.

From where I'm sitting this game appears more alive and well than it's ever been.

[warrenpeace]

How would this differ from putting out a patch and having us put out another patch? Effectively it's the same, but conceptually it's a huge can of worms that we absolutely will not touch with a 10' pole.

It is in reality the same, but by stating that it is still a beta it means you acknowledge that there may still be some errors in it. I just think it makes you guys look bad to have a half a dozen trivial bugs pop up right after you release a patch. (I think some one even compared it to Obamacare.) By putting the "beta" label on it, it entirely reverses the psychology of the end user. It makes the customers think they are part of the process and will engender a greater feeling of support that may actually result in a few more sales.

In your post, you suggest that there is a large downside. Perhaps I am missing something.

[kensal]

You didn't get the v.2.21 and 2.22, Ian? That's funny, since all the smart, in-crowd people that BFC give special privileges too have them.

Ohhhh, ohhhhh, wait a minute...never mind, Ian, please disregard this post.

*Face palm* jeez can no one keep a secret round here

[Doug Williams]

There are ALWAYS bugs in everything we release. To call a huge step forward a "half ass" attempt because it isn't perfect is... well... kinda unfair. The bugs that we're going to fix for CMFI v1.12 are pretty trivial, though still on a fast track to be fixed. It's not like those bugs make CMFI less playable than it was prior. Based on feedback from others, quite the opposite is true.

Wargamers are infamous for their lack of perspective. I worked at a company that deliberately abandoned hardcore gamers because of this attitude. They weren't happy about it, but they made the bed they wound up having to sleep in. Fortunately we don't take glass half empty thinking to heart. Otherwise we would have abandoned wargaming before we even started Battlefront. To paraphrase Darth Vader, pray we don't alter the arrangement further

Steve

"Half Assed" was a poor choice of words.

"Insufficiently Tested" would have been better.

My apologies for any offense.

I've been a staunch supporter of Combat Mission and BTS/BFC since CMBO was a new release, and I have several times defended the company on these forums against people with (IMO) unreasonable demands.

You lost me when you released Shock Force, but got me back with CMBN.

Keep putting out good WW2 product for us "grogs" and I will keep buying.

[Battlefront.com]

Am I missing something? Or was that just a typeo. Assuming you were trying to use actual version numbers shouldn't it be 2.11 and 2.12?

My bad! Typed in haste without sufficient sleep

It is in reality the same, but by stating that it is still a beta it means you acknowledge that there may still be some errors in it.

ANYTHING we release comes with an implicit acknowledgement that there may still be some errors in it. Even the fix to the fix to a fix for a fix. It's just the way software works. Anybody who thinks it can ever be anything other than that is delusional.

I just think it makes you guys look bad to have a half a dozen trivial bugs pop up right after you release a patch.

Having someone complain about 2 or 3 rather trivial bugs being far more important than the dozens of solid fixes and massive performance increase makes them look bad in my eyes. Now, if the patch caused the game to be unstable or something significant like that... yeah, our heads should be duly slapped about. But over trivial stuff, which is present in EVERYTHING we release, I think it's just plain tempest in a teapot.

(I think some one even compared it to Obamacare.)

Someone who says that is voicing an opinion that is so totally divorced from reality that it has no meaning to us.

By putting the "beta" label on it, it entirely reverses the psychology of the end user. It makes the customers think they are part of the process and will engender a greater feeling of support that may actually result in a few more sales.

You have a naive understanding of how customers think, we don't. Putting "beta" on it actually gums up the works because everybody feels they are now entitled to speak as BOTH a customer and a tester.

No, what customers respect is things getting fixed in a timely fashion. They respect new features getting added that enhance their gaming experience. Provided the good outweighs the bad then all is fine and dandy.

In your post, you suggest that there is a large downside. Perhaps I am missing something.

There is no upside. No practical one, not even the theoretical one you posited. There is no practical downside either, because in effect it's exactly the same way we're doing things now. But in terms of attitude, I'd rather have a tiny number of people being unreasonably and even immaturely critical than having all of our customers think that they are beta testers. If you developed software you'd better understand why that is a downside.

"Half Assed" was a poor choice of words.

"Insufficiently Tested" would have been better.

My apologies for any offense.

No probs.

The problem with Combat Mission is that it's so huge and multifaceted that the cost (to you and to us) of "sufficiently testing" is not one that either of us want to pay. It's very, very, very easy to identify the bugs after they have slipped through. It's a totally different thing to preemptively double check thousands of things on the off chance there might be something wrong with any random one of them.

It's all a balancing act. If you guys want us to wait another month extra to release a patch that might have been just as good released the month before... theoretically we could do that. However, if I put this to a vote right now, what do you think the answer would be:

"Would you rather wait 4 more weeks for a patch to make sure that the top cover of the MG34 isn't floating in the air or the M15A1 isn't using the wrong models for non LODs, or would you rather a patch now that dramatically speeds up your gameplay and adds 2 dozen fixes, many of which directly affect gameplay?"

I'm pretty confident that put that way people would rather risk a floating MG34 top cover than having to play for 4 weeks without the speed improvements and everything else.

Steve