Does each vehicle have different armor value in Combat Mission Black Sea?

[simon21]

 

A horror of modding - just look at all those pink abrams reskins in CM to date

You still have vanilla servers and also modded ones as an option if you want to try something new. That wouldn't be an issue in CM especially where you still to have to look for your opponent "manually".

We got an answer.  They've got a strange business model.  Hopefully, in a few years they'll be trying to forget these debates ever happened.

Red Baron, European Air War

There, I gave you double what you asked for.  

I have heard of issues with that game.  I have not played it.  Was it supported by the developers much after launch ? I'm reading Microprose, which sends up a lot of red flags given that company got passed around.

The online IL-2 community went through major ructions when the code was cracked and competing Mod Packs came out. You could only fly on the servers that were running the Mod you had installed.

I think it might have shaken out into a single globally acceptable package eventually, but a lot of people had lost interest by then ( and the fact that there "could only be one" before everyone could fly against everyone else again, kinda plays against your point. )

Mods killed IL-2 ?  From what I recall it wasn't shipped in great condition.  I only played near launch.  It was a lovely game.  

-----

I'm not suggesting that the developer quit and the mod crews take over.  That rarely works out well.  Especially, if the game was released before it was done.  You have to differentiate between the mod destroying the community or the mod extending the life of an already poorly optimized game, and never fully resolving its existing problems.  Let's just say I would hate to be someone involved in modding Batman Arkham Knight or AC : Unity.

Edited January 28, 2016 by simon21

[LukeFF]

I have heard of issues with that game.  I have not played it.  Was it supported by the developers much after launch ? I'm reading Microprose, which sends up a lot of red flags given that company got passed around.

Both games were supported after launch, yes, but the end result is both games ended up with fractured communities due to the bickering over which mods had the most correct flight models.

Mods killed IL-2 ?  From what I recall it wasn't shipped in great condition.  I only played near launch.  It was a lovely game.  

IL2 was shipped in very good condition. In fact, it was praised at the time by the community as a game that wasn't a bug-ridden mess and didn't crash all the time. But yes, once the source code was opened up, it became a very big chaotic mess of competing mods. That's about the time I lost interest in it.

[Battlefront.com]

We got an answer.  They've got a strange business model.

Yup, and that "strange business model" is why we're still in business

Hopefully, in a few years they'll be trying to forget these debates ever happened.

We've had these debates since 1998 without anything new coming into the equation.  I expect the same to be true in 2018 and beyond.  People who want open modding don't care one iota why it isn't viable for CM and we don't care one iota that they just don't get it.  The day we let a vocal minority of our customers, regardless of issue, set the agenda for us is the day we go under.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

 

IL2 was shipped in very good condition. In fact, it was praised at the time by the community as a game that wasn't a bug-ridden mess and didn't crash all the time. But yes, once the source code was opened up, it became a very big chaotic mess of competing mods. That's about the time I lost interest in it.

Oh, you understate this big time   Not only was IL-2 was considered the best flight sim of all time by many, it also came out at a time when the industry had written off flight sims as viable game genre.  IL-2 was so successful that position was reevaluated.  Oleg was considered a god.

Here is a four part interview with Oleg done a few years ago about the early days of IL-2.  I've had no time to read it, but I'm sure it's interesting enough for me to make time for it:

http://www.simhq.com/air-combat/il-2-sturmovik-part1.html

Steve

[simon21]

I'm still not agreeing with this idea that the mods 'destroyed' the community.  It's very hard to say the mods were to blame.  There are some very interesting articles I'm reading.  I'm doing more reading on IL-2 though.  There is some evidence that game breaking mods, what we might call 'cheating mods' or 'trainers', may have become common.  That I can certainly understand as being horrific to the community.  

At the same time CM is mostly 1v1 with a known opponent.  

Edited January 28, 2016 by simon21

[LukeFF]

Oh, you understate this big time   Not only was IL-2 was considered the best flight sim of all time by many, it also came out at a time when the industry had written off flight sims as viable game genre.  IL-2 was so successful that position was reevaluated.  Oleg was considered a god.

For sure.  The 90s were a time when many tried to make their name in the flight sim business, and most ended up failing. Then along comes this guy (Oleg) from Russia showing that not only were realistic flight sims still viable but also that people would buy into a game set on the Eastern Front. I remember those days well. It's just a shame he bit off more than he could chew with Cliffs of Dover (hoo boy, aint that one big drama...). 

[Battlefront.com]

I'm still not agreeing with this idea that the mods 'destroyed' the community. 

You can not agree all you want, but there's far more than just me saying that communities fracture and can even be destroyed when a game engine is opened up (with or without the permission of the developer).  In fact, you seem to be the only person who doesn't see it that way.  You don't even seem to acknowledge that it is a risk, not to mention a fact to many of us. 

For there to be any change in our philosophy and development plans you need to convince us that we've got it all wrong.  We're very reasonable people and we do change our minds about things over time.  Many of the core design philosophies in CMx2 were the result of CMx1 customers telling us we needed a new approach.  CMx3 is definitely going to be different than either CMx1 and CMx2 based on the continued feedback of our customers.  Yet we're still going to keep it a closed system.  Why?  Because in all the years we've been discussing this nobody has made a sensible case for it to be otherwise.  Which is why I keep saying you and those like you (for sure you are not alone) need to come up with a better argument than "you're wrong".

Steve

[AttorneyAtWar]

For sure.  The 90s were a time when many tried to make their name in the flight sim business, and most ended up failing. Then along comes this guy (Oleg) from Russia showing that not only were realistic flight sims still viable but also that people would buy into a game set on the Eastern Front. I remember those days well. It's just a shame he bit off more than he could chew with Cliffs of Dover (hoo boy, aint that one big drama...). 

Team Fusion's updates really breathed life into COD which badly needed it. There is nothing like dog fighting in a 109 over Britain with 100 players, a great experience if you haven't tried it yet.

[Wodin]

Only Graviteam Tactics comes as close. CMx2 and GTOS are by far my go to tactical wargames. All others like MoW, CoH, Wargame Air Land Battle and Theater of War are arcade games not battlefield sims.

[simon21]

 

You can not agree all you want, but there's far more than just me saying that communities fracture and can even be destroyed when a game engine is opened up (with or without the permission of the developer).  In fact, you seem to be the only person who doesn't see it that way.  You don't even seem to acknowledge that it is a risk, not to mention a fact to many of us. 

 

The argument I'm trying to make, and I did a lot of thinking about this one the way home and more research, is that you're looking at the community that came out of the players that lasted well beyond the launch window.  The hardcore crew.  Obviously, if you could see your players hour counts there is always a spike at launch.  After that, the game will have 'steady' declining sales unless it gets pulled out of obscurity by some fad or completely eclipsed by another game.

Now onto the fractures.  The people that cause these were generally early adopters who figured out the system and started having 'bright ideas'.  A few of them got together an made a mod.  That mod became incompatible with the base game.  People on forums then started bemoaning that there was a new learning curve associated with high level play.  

Did the mod crews wreak the community or extend the life of the product ? 

Did the 'filthy' casuals come back because of the the level of play established by the mod groups, or did they come back because they wanted to play the same game they purchased and only play infrequently ?  

Could the 'filthy' casuals really expect that the community was big enough and game compelling enough in its base state for a bunch of casuals like them to still find games after the launch window ? 

Would the neutered mod crews sustain the community just as people playing the base game ages after launch, or is that drive to create, expand, improve, and test that is their motivator to keep servers running ? 

 There are a lot of interesting ideas here and ideas that the big companies are investing a lot of money in trying to solve.  Obviously, you guys don't have to worry about GameStop at least.   

 

Only Graviteam Tactics comes as close. CMx2 and GTOS are by far my go to tactical wargames. All others like MoW, CoH, Wargame Air Land Battle and Theater of War are arcade games not battlefield sims.

I actually downloaded the demo of GT:OS a few days ago.  It isn't bad.  Definitely some good ideas there.  I'll keep fooling around.

You should add World in Conflict to that list of arcade games.  It's a lot of fun and cheap as balls right now.  It was the progenitor to Wargame ALB.

I'd also throw in VtM Bloodlines and SW:KOTOR 2 as games that have been saved by the modding communities similar to CoD.  

Edited January 29, 2016 by simon21

[Baneman]

Team Fusion's updates really breathed life into COD which badly needed it. There is nothing like dog fighting in a 109 over Britain with 100 players, a great experience if you haven't tried it yet.

Yes, Team Fusion have made unbelievable strides in eliminating the bugs that came with Cliffs of Dover and making it into a great game (credit to Oleg again that the underlying game is very good - he just ran out of time/money to sort it out himself ) - the difference to the modding that simon21 is advocating is :

a - it was abandonware when they started working on it.
AND ( crucially )
b - they aint opening up the engine to just anybody any more than the devs would ( the lessons of the IL2 cracking no doubt in the forefront of their minds )

Edited January 29, 2016 by Baneman

[Doc844]

An argument.like this can go round and y round til everyone's head is spinning.  The simple truth is that the BF devs/owners created CM many years ago and they have progressively improved, added and released more standalone games and.modules.  Now I would imagine that was a lot of hard work.  So with a game series that is still evolving, improving and has many battlefield still yet unexplored why would they hand over the keys to modders, FOR.FREE.  I could understand if the game was abandonware and the original owners were just digging their heals in and saying no, like Eugene games with Red Dragon, there's a game that seriously needs modded.  This game series is very much alive and well and 8n my opinion in  very capable hands.  You have to bear in mind that this isn't just a game sees to the devs here, yes it pays bills and stuff but it's also a passion.  You don't see many games forums where the devs come in and answer within a day or two or even a few hours.  Now do you understand why they won't open the game up to modders.  To them it's not just a game with dollars.signs attached "cough" 'Rome 2'.  (I never said that).  

[Battlefront.com]

 

The argument I'm trying to make, and I did a lot of thinking about this one the way home and more research, is that you're looking at the community that came out of the players that lasted well beyond the launch window.  The hardcore crew.  Obviously, if you could see your players hour counts there is always a spike at launch.  After that, the game will have 'steady' declining sales unless it gets pulled out of obscurity by some fad or completely eclipsed by another game.

This is true for a game that is "abandoned" by it's developer.  I already covered this several posts ago.  CMx2 games, on the other hand, have not been abandoned in any way, shape, or form.  Therefore, any fracturing of the community happens concurrent with ongoing sales and support.  And that means your argument is not applicable.

Now onto the fractures.  The people that cause these were generally early adopters who figured out the system and started having 'bright ideas'.  A few of them got together an made a mod.  That mod became incompatible with the base game.  People on forums then started bemoaning that there was a new learning curve associated with high level play.  

Did the mod crews wreak the community or extend the life of the product ? 

It extends the life of a dead product, no doubt about it.  I think it's great, in fact, that people can do so much with something that's not actively supported by the developer.  But this is not applicable to our situation because CMx2 is not dead.

 

Did the 'filthy' casuals come back because of the the level of play established by the mod groups, or did they come back because they wanted to play the same game they purchased and only play infrequently ?  

Could the 'filthy' casuals really expect that the community was big enough and game compelling enough in its base state for a bunch of casuals like them to still find games after the launch window ? 

Would the neutered mod crews sustain the community just as people playing the base game ages after launch, or is that drive to create, expand, improve, and test that is their motivator to keep servers running ? 

All irrelevant to the CMx2 context because the game is neither dead nor does it, or will it ever, have a huge mass of customers to draw from to make the sorts of things you envision viable.

 There are a lot of interesting ideas here and ideas that the big companies are investing a lot of money in trying to solve.  Obviously, you guys don't have to worry about GameStop at least.   

The big companies have big costs and big competition, so of course they have to keep innovating any way they can.  Many of those companies are not going to survive, just as the road behind them is littered with wrecks of those who failed.  Some of those wrecks are measured in hundreds of millions of Dollars.

We are in a niche that has a very limited pool of customers to get revenue from.  Everything is relative.  Trying to use the mass market model you are pushing in a niche is not going to work.  Trying to use our niche model in the mass market wouldn't work either.  I am sure you have heard the expression "right tool for the right job", have you not?  You love hammers so you think we should use a hammer even though what we need is a screwdriver.  This is very obvious to us because we are carpenters, not obvious to you because you just like to pound things

GameStop is a perfect example of failure and a desperate attempt to stave off total defeat (too soon to say if it will work or not).  We got out of the retail marketplace 16 years ago because we saw where it was headed.  The small amount of retail activity we did was done on our terms and when the terms became unacceptable we stopped even that.  Which is why we are still here and others are not.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

An argument.like this can go round and y round til everyone's head is spinning.  

Yup, but it's still a fun ride for a while.  Then motion sickness sets in and it's party over :)

The simple truth is that the BF devs/owners created CM many years ago and they have progressively improved, added and released more standalone games and.modules.  Now I would imagine that was a lot of hard work.  So with a game series that is still evolving, improving and has many battlefield still yet unexplored why would they hand over the keys to modders, FOR.FREE.  I could understand if the game was abandonware and the original owners were just digging their heals in and saying no,..

Very, very well put.  Definitely the key difference is extending the life of something that would otherwise be dead is probably a good thing for both the customer base (fragmented or not) and the developer PROVIDED the developer is still getting revenues from new copies sold.  This is often not the case and therefore it's more case specific.

Certainly a company like Bohemia benefits from this activity.  Their products have planned obsolescence and are huge enough to maintain their products in the market place longer than they otherwise would.  The audience is huge and therefore factions don't matter since there's enough people in each to make them a sustainable "ecosystem" (in current marketing geek speak).  Even better, brand loyalty is developed so that when the next version of the game comes out there's an active base of support waiting for it.  Because the new release is totally incompatible and (so far anyway) superior to the previous version, they do not have to worry about too many people sticking with the old instead of going with the new.  This gives Bohemia an incentive to invest in the modding community because not only does it give them tangible benefits, it also keeps them from drifting to somewhere else.

It's a great model for those types of games made by those types of companies.  I fully and totally endorse it as both a player and as a game developer.  But it's not right for Battlefront nor its customers.  Not because we lack vision, intelligence, boldness... rather because we don't.

Steve

[MikeyD]

Oh, that last sentence - a double negative. We don't lack. That's a good thing, not lacking. 

[Rokko]

Have you considered making CMx1 type games moddable or releasing the source code?  I doubt there are many copies sold these days and maybe some brave soul could find a way making this work under the newer OS for nostalgia reasons.

[Battlefront.com]

Oh, that last sentence - a double negative. We don't lack. That's a good thing, not lacking. 

I never don't love double negatives :)

Have you considered making CMx1 type games moddable or releasing the source code?  I doubt there are many copies sold these days and maybe some brave soul could find a way making this work under the newer OS for nostalgia reasons.

It's been suggested many times and we rather keep it as a product line.  Correct that sales aren't high, but it's more than zero.  When you're a small company a source of revenue that can buy a new laptop is meaningful.

Steve

[AttorneyAtWar]

Have you considered making CMx1 type games moddable or releasing the source code?  I doubt there are many copies sold these days and maybe some brave soul could find a way making this work under the newer OS for nostalgia reasons.

Yeah I would like to see Shock Force released on Steam at least in the future.

[simon21]

Don't rehash the steam threads, man.  That was one issue even I knew there was no traction on.  I've seen where all those threads ended.