Graphics suck?!!?!?!

[Battlefront.com]

Issue is, once again, that you can't just magically open the AI up for users to mess with.... It requires work to do that.

Understatement

If you guys saw the original design docs and mockups for CMx2, which I did back in 2003-2005, you would be shocked to see how many good ideas are sitting there still unimplemented. It's easy to come up with good ideas, it's another thing to make them happen. Some are simply beyond the capabilities of the hardware at the time, some are simply too expensive to develop, some are prone to unintended consequences.

The old saying in game development is that good ideas are a dime a dozen. A good game designer recognizes this and tailors the design to be realistic. A good game developer (i.e. more than the designer) figures out which things to focus on and which to put off for another day. Testers (at least our testers!) are very helpful in verifying that the developer is on the right track more than not.

Many of the features for the 3.0 Upgrade were ideas that didn't make it into 2.0 Upgrade, which in turn weren't able to get into 1.0, some of which weren't able to get into Shock Force.

We aren't sort of creative energy. We aren't short on technical talent. We are short of time. Arguing with the clock is not a very productive activity.

Steve

[Wiggum15]

To make two things clear:

• I think the graphic of the CMx2 games is almost "good enough", i just dont like the low draw distance (LOD) and the overall bad performance on my system and Battlefronts attitude towards textures.
• I played a lot of ArmA and i tried to play with High-Command stuff but its not the same as playing CM, just the fact that controling the movement is a pain in the a** or that ArmA AI has some serious problems with buildings.

[A Canadian Cat]

Game developers hate thinking about this as a business. But do you know what they hate more? The consequences of NOT thinking of it as a business.

Yeah paying attention to the business side of things is actually much harder than people think. I have a lot of respect for guys that can do that well.  Frankly that's why I work for someone else for a living

 

Sounds all too familiar. I am good friends with the guy who develops & publishes the Rise of Flight and IL-2 titles. He likes to talk about how people tell him he doesn't know how to run his business, how [insert title name] will be abandonware this time next year, how the guys working for him are incompetent, etc., etc. Yet, as he likes to say, here they still are, going strong and working on new content. That doesn't happen without a rational business plan.

 

The only real test that matters in business - are you still around as a company this time next year / next decade.

 

Real time or WEGO over TCP/IP? Not my cup of tea but a valid complaint.

Indeed - some time spent on making network multi player smoother would be a good thing including some kind of investment in a lobby. Even if the investment in a lobby was just allowing someone else to create the lobby but be able to integrate with the game to make it seamless.

 

Better AI? The addition of triggers has helped a lot. If branching triggers ever make it in people will be begging for mercy. But even now the AI is a far stronger opponent than in the CMX1 games. I've actually LOST games to the AI. That never used to happen.

Agreed with the addition of triggers the work on the AI is going in the right direction to make scenarios even more challenging.

 

Personally I'd rather see efforts put into things like TacAI, UI, more detailed vehicle systems modeling, a revamped spotting model, mostly under the hood stuff.

 

Other than adding some way of supporting people that want to play mutlti player in real time I agree with that.

 

That's great! Where can I download it from and where is the best place for me to tell me all about its failings?

Yeah, I want in on that too.

[sburke]

If the Customer is always right and I disagree with you then how does BF resolve that? I say they follow my opinion as I am a customer and I am always right.

[sburke]

Yeah, because nothing motivates me more than not making money

The truth is that if I thought we could make a game 1/2 as good as Combat Mission and it would sell 10 times as much, I would do it in a heartbeat. Yeah, you heard that. Although I am passionate about the games I make, I would be even more passionate about retiring with a huge truckload of money. You should be thankful that we let our passion get in the way of our ambitions instead of being critical of it.

Any game developer that can't accept criticism will not stay developing wargames for very long. Because when your best and most loyal customers shower you with hate and disdain at every opportunity, well... it's not for ever game developer.

And now you contradict yourself, which isn't surprising since you have an illogical position.

By nature a smart game does not appeal to wide audiences. Just like smart TV or movies don't appeal to wide audiences. It is a fact of life and denying it doesn't change anything.

Steve

Pennies are money, rubles are money cmon Steve just a little creativity and you can retire with a truckload of money now.

[kaburke61]

Most of this is just "I have never designed/coded or run a small successful game business - but I did stay at a Holiday Inn once!"

[Stagler]

No, it's a bad example because Arma3 alone had a $50,000,000 budget. Any expectations that we can match what they have developed is bound to lead to profound disappointment.

 

Absolutely! But that doesn't mean your opinion has any basis in reality. That is Pete's point and it is one I whole heartedly agree with.

Look, it's my belief that you guys should spend about $300 per CM game because that's the amount of play time you get out of it. Now, that might be my belief... but how well do you think that belief would mesh with reality if I went over to the backend system and changed the pricing to be $300? Yup, belief and reality would have a rather ugly meeting engagement.

 

You aren't alone, but having 10 people or 1000 people holding an unrealistic and unobtainable opinion doesn't make it any more valuable than 1 person having the same opinion.

 

That's great! Where can I download it from and where is the best place for me to tell me all about its failings?

 

I don't disregard your opinions. In fact, I agree with almost all of them. Except the part about them being practical to the extent you do.

Steve

 

You just said you agree with my opinions, but I fail to see how they are not based in reality? If you actually read the entire thread I have said on multiple occasions that I understand there are financial constraints to everything. People have offered many times improved distribution methods but you don't like those either.

 

I am stating the harsh reality of what people expect when they spend money on your products. If you cant live up to that well that's your problem to face in the future.

That is up to you if you adapt to what the market want and build a larger customer base, or produce game for the 100 members of this forum till you run out of steam.

 

Oh and you can get it from here http://www.rhsmods.org/, feel free to use the GIT bug tracker feature on there also, I eagerly await your myriad flaws found by you being assigned to me to fix over the weekend.

 

 

If the Customer is always right and I disagree with you then how does BF resolve that? I say they follow my opinion as I am a customer and I am always right.

 

No I am saying they acknowledge their issues, and hopefully bear them in mind, which has been done by Steve in the post quoted above.

 

Quickly put this in perspective. I have been a member here for five years. I know that many of you have been here longer. I see the games be released but no large scale engine changes or improvements on any of the points I have made (please reread my posts to be double sure you don't accuse me of wanting "arma 3 graphics"). There has been no multiplayer functionality updates since CMSF. There has been no large player base increase since CMBS came out a few weeks ago when the forum gained more members. Don't make it difficult to actually get a game underway, it is difficult to actually play a multiplayer game that isn't PBEM. I brought this up five years ago, it hasn't been looked at, addressed, thought about, anything. Nothing has changed. That is why I am passionate about seeing things change.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Stagler

[Vanir Ausf B]

That is up to you if you adapt to what the market want and build a larger customer base, or produce game for the 100 members of this forum till you run out of steam.

Every time I read something like this I can't help but remember Steve saying a few years back that the sales of CMBN were similar to the sales of CMBO. Think about that. BFC spent 3-4 years developing a new engine and used it to put out a game with much higher production values and their sales didn't increase.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Vanir Ausf B

[Battlefront.com]

You just said you agree with my opinions, but I fail to see how they are not based in reality? If you actually read the entire thread I have said on multiple occasions that I understand there are financial constraints to everything. People have offered many times improved distribution methods but you don't like those either.

Where we disagree is that you mistake "want" with "can", "want" with "should", and "want" with "success".

 

 

I am stating the harsh reality of what people expect when they spend money on your products.

And I am stating the harsh reality that people do not want to pay for what they demand.

 

If you cant live up to that well that's your problem to face in the future.

I've been hearing that since 1999. I suppose someday it might come true.

 

That is up to you if you adapt to what the market want and build a larger customer base, or produce game for the 100 members of this forum till you run out of steam.

You apparently missed my quick math. If we spent $100,000 to attract 1000 new customers, we lose money. The things some of you are demanding would cost us many times that and we don't believe we'll see thousands of customers as a result. Losing money is not a sustainable practice, so we stay away from it.

 

Oh and you can get it from here http://www.rhsmods.org/, feel free to use the GIT bug tracker feature on there also, I eagerly await your myriad flaws found by you being assigned to me to fix over the weekend.

Ah, a mod to a massive game with a massive fan base because of a massive budget. Well, I wish you the best of luck with it, but it's not in the same league as making a game. So many variables, the ones that usually determine success or failure, have already been worked out for you. Not to belittle your efforts, but you are simply riding on someone else's coattails and hard work, risk taking, and expertise. It's not to say what you do isn't risky or without value, but it's not the same either.

I don't play Arma3 so I won't be able to critique your work.

 

 

Quickly put this in perspective. I have been a member here for five years. I know that many of you have been here longer. I see the games be released but no large scale engine changes or improvements on any of the points I have made (please reread my posts to be double sure you don't accuse me of wanting "arma 3 graphics").

Then you haven't been paying attention. For example:

 

There has been no multiplayer functionality updates since CMSF.

We added WeGo TCP/IP, which was not a small feat of engineering.

 

There has been no large player base increase since CMBS came out a few weeks ago when the forum gained more members.

Funny, the sales database that I maintain disagrees with this. But hey, that's just me injecting more reality into a rant. Sorry about that. Please, continue!

 

Don't make it difficult to actually get a game underway, it is difficult to actually play a multiplayer game that isn't PBEM. I brought this up five years ago, it hasn't been looked at, addressed, thought about, anything.

Damn, now you are saying you are a mind reader and you have seen all the threads posted here in 5 years! Wow. I think we should hire you because we could use your skills to help win the lottery, which would then give us enough money to do the things you demand of us without worrying about going out of business.

 

Nothing has changed. That is why I am passionate about seeing things change.

I don't know if anybody told you, but being condescending and belittling on top of belligerent isn't the best way to go about things with us. Just saying.

Steve

[Sgt Joch]

I remember in 2005 when BFC announced they were revamping the engine and that (heresy) the first game would be modern. Dozens of threads popped up predicting the end of BFC, yet here we are 10 years later and 5 new games have come out, 2 just in the past 12 months.

I think Steve and the gang know what they are doing.

[Battlefront.com]

Every time I read something like this I can't help but remember Steve saying a few years back that the sales of CMBN were similar to the sales of CMBO. Think about that. BFC spent 3-4 years developing a new engine and used it to put out a game with much higher production values and their sales didn't increase.

The corollary to that is if we did nothing we would have nothing people would be interested in buying. Which is why we told the reactionary CMx1 fanatics that they were part of the past and we had to move onto the future. At some point CMx2 will need to be replaced with CMx3 or we will have to move onto something totally different. It's inevitable.

Where things run into problems is that there is a fundamental disconnect between what people want and what they are willing to pay for. When I point this out the inevitable arguments come back that basically amount to us not knowing how to run a business. You can see plenty of it here in this thread. This is the standard response and we've seen it plenty of times.

In fact, when CMBB was released the sales were less than CMBO and our development costs about the same. We expected this to some extent because we know the Eastern Front has less appeal than the Western Front. In conversations where I pointed this out the Eastern Front fanatics went crazy! It wasn't true, they said. It has to be our marketing because EVERYBODY wants to play on the Eastern Front. Even though players kept coming into the discussions and saying "I hate the Eastern Front". The fanatics brushed them aside as being a part of the problem instead of recognizing that their personal beliefs could not be forced onto the rest of the world.

It's the same thing.

Look, we all would love to see Arma3 like graphics, multiplayer, AI modding, and other features. It would be gosh-golly-gee-swell to have all that. But it isn't financially feasible because there is no market for a Combat Mission like game with all those features EVEN IF we could triple or quadruple our current budget. The other alternative, which is to have our current customer base pay 4x as much for each game is also out of the question. So we're left with a huge list of expectations and a shorter list of viable features.

Life is so unfair, but it is at least better than the alternative.

Steve

[Stagler]

Where we disagree is that you mistake "want" with "can", "want" with "should", and "want" with "success".

 

 

And I am stating the harsh reality that people do not want to pay for what they demand.

 

I've been hearing that since 1999. I suppose someday it might come true.

 

You apparently missed my quick math. If we spent $100,000 to attract 1000 new customers, we lose money. The things some of you are demanding would cost us many times that and we don't believe we'll see thousands of customers as a result. Losing money is not a sustainable practice, so we stay away from it.

 

Ah, a mod to a massive game with a massive fan base because of a massive budget. Well, I wish you the best of luck with it, but it's not in the same league as making a game. So many variables, the ones that usually determine success or failure, have already been worked out for you. Not to belittle your efforts, but you are simply riding on someone else's coattails and hard work, risk taking, and expertise. It's not to say what you do isn't risky or without value, but it's not the same either.

I don't play Arma3 so I won't be able to critique your work.

 

 

Then you haven't been paying attention. For example:

 

We added WeGo TCP/IP, which was not a small feat of engineering.

 

Funny, the sales database that I maintain disagrees with this. But hey, that's just me injecting more reality into a rant. Sorry about that. Please, continue!

 

Damn, now you are saying you are a mind reader and you have seen all the threads posted here in 5 years! Wow. I think we should hire you because we could use your skills to help win the lottery, which would then give us enough money to do the things you demand of us without worrying about going out of business.

 

I don't know if anybody told you, but being condescending and belittling on top of belligerent isn't the best way to go about things with us. Just saying.

Steve

 

 

If you cant look at it to critique it then don't criticise it. I can make these judgements because I have your products and have used them. Making a mod is not in the same league as making a game, I have been in that business for years son. Creating the content for an entire game from scratch but using and modifying an existing engine is however. You would know if you did more than a cursory glance at the website.

 

Joch. Yes, also I do know what they are doing, they are letting their game be half the game it could be.

 

"we don't believe we'll see thousands of customers as a result. Losing money is not a sustainable practice, so we stay away from it."

 

This is where the problem lies. That belief right there. Same belief cropped up in the steam thread as well. Same belief crops up here. I did say to the OP on page 2 that this thread wouldn't get anywhere.

 

One thing I appreciate in a humorous way is the boss coming on here and battling with the customers. Its certainly unique to these forums I can say at least. I know what im doing blah blah blah, believe it or not, many people actually know what they are doing, not just you, and not just me either. All we can do is give our opinions to each other at the end of the day, which is what I am doing. You just don't seem to like it, or label it as fantasy madness.

 

Lock this thread its not going anywhere.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Stagler

[slysniper]

They are also picking up many new customers.

Maybe they are not showing up in this forum but there is actually many signing in.

Just go look at all the new members (which you can do very easy now with the new forum program)

[lordhedgwich]

Wow this post seems to have totally derailed from my original post! lol

[kaburke61]

Stagler,

 

What in the heck is so hard to understand? The developers like their business model, they are making money (for many years more or less I assume), they ENJOY developing the product, and they

have enough customers to support that model. If you don't like that....then DON'T buy it. Just quit acting like you know better. As was stated earlier, when you ACTUALLY develop/support/maintain a game platform, and are SUCCESSFUL at it, then maybe your "opinion" would have some merit.

 

This is so like all the "experts" that said Command: Modern Naval Air Operations..... would die because it's just too expensive at $79...It' one of the best bargains in the industry.

[Battlefront.com]

If you cant look at it to critique it then don't criticise it. I can make these judgements because I have your products and have used them. Making a mod is not in the same league as making a game, I have been in that business for years son. Creating the content for an entire game from scratch but using and modifying an existing engine is however. You would know if you did more than a cursory glance at the website.

I've been in the business for nearly 20 years, so calling me "son" just shows that you have a SERIOUS attitude problem as well as an ego problem.

I say it again... riding on the coattails of a $50,000,000 product has NOTHING IN COMMON with making a $50,000,000 product. Or even a $1,000,000 product. If you have the game industry experience you claim you do, you'd known that and not try to argue with me about it.

 

Joch. Yes, also I do know what they are doing, they are letting their game be half the game it could be.

Then switch from making Mods to making games. Then you will have control over all the variables and get the product you want. We're obviously not going to do it, nobody else is apparently interested in doing it, so it's about your only other option.

 

This is where the problem lies. That belief right there. Same belief cropped up in the steam thread as well. Same belief crops up here. I did say to the OP on page 2 that this thread wouldn't get anywhere.

Of course not, because people pulling a flawed position out of their backsides and trying to ram it down our throats doesn't tend to produce a different result than the last time it happened. We're kinda funny that way.

 

One thing I appreciate in a humorous way is the boss coming on here and battling with the customers. Its certainly unique to these forums I can say at least. I know what im doing blah blah blah, believe it or not, many people actually know what they are doing, not just you, and not just me either. All we can do is give our opinions to each other at the end of the day, which is what I am doing. You just don't seem to like it, or label it as fantasy madness.

Not once have you entertained the possibility that you're wrong, yet you haven't walked any time in our shoes. So perhaps you should look in a mirror sometime.

 

Lock this thread its not going anywhere.

On the contrary, it is going places. Just the same places it always goes.

Steve

[Vein]

Son? Isn't stagler like... 24 or something? Pretty sure that's what it used to say in his profile. Steve is somewhere in his mid to late oh-dear-gods.

[A Canadian Cat]

I am stating the harsh reality of what people expect when they spend money on your products. If you cant live up to that well that's your problem to face in the future.

 

You have things backwards. You bought the game with a known set of features - play it - that's what you bought. You did not buy some special right to dictate future development - that costs way, way more than $50. Sure you are entitled to voice your opinion on what features you would like to see next but so do I. My requests are in my sig - I hope to get them one day but I bought what the game can do now nothing more nothing less. Same as you.

 

What in the heck is so hard to understand? The developers like their business model, they are making money (for many years more or less I assume), they ENJOY developing the product, and they have enough customers to support that model. If you don't like that....then DON'T buy it. Just quit acting like you know better.

Well said.

[Battlefront.com]

What in the heck is so hard to understand? The developers like their business model, they are making money (for many years more or less I assume), they ENJOY developing the product, and they

have enough customers to support that model. If you don't like that....then DON'T buy it. Just quit acting like you know better. As was stated earlier, when you ACTUALLY develop/support/maintain a game platform, and are SUCCESSFUL at it, then maybe your "opinion" would have some merit.

If you follow Stagler's thinking...

I think it would be awesome if I could fly. Everybody tells me that without some sort of aircraft that just isn't possible. But that's just the problem. Who are those people and why is it they think they know everything? So I'm going to prove them wrong. I'm going to strap some cardboard wings to my arms and flap like crazy until I get airborne. And if that doesn't work, it can't possibly be that my thinking is flawed or that the other people are right... I probably just need to climb out onto my 3rd story roof and take a leap of faith (literally) that because I want something to happen that I can make it happen.

This is absolutely what Stagler (and others) argue when they tell us we don't know what we're doing. They are telling us that we should risk everything pursuing something that we, through decades of experience, feel to be highly flawed. The answer back to this is we're unimaginative, afraid, or downright stupid because it can't possibly be that we know what we're talking about. And the cycle continues from there since the basic premise has always been:

"If you don't do what I say, you're stupid".

It's a time honored tradition to have at least one person proclaiming we're dumb and headed to disaster because we're not listening to him. I guess Stagler is the man of the hour.

Steve

[Pablius]

Hot topic graphics it seems...

 

I´v been playing war-games since I started playing video games at 11 in 1986...Starting with Crusade in Europe and the like...

 

I don´t know if "grateful" is the word to describe my attitude towards BF since, well, they are not giving away their games as christmas presents   but I´m sure am happy they exits to give me something that I have enjoyed for so many years that runs on current hardware/OSs

 

When I look at other genres I have enjoyed through the years, it looks like a wasteland sometimes

 

So, as much as I would like a ton of things out of their games that are no there, I defer to their business decisions to keep them going, since I´ve seen giants of wargaming, simulation and RPGs go to hell more often than not

 

Ours is minority culture, and that`s that

[Vanir Ausf B]

To be fair to Stagler, he hasn't really said much about graphics. Others have, and in a huge thread like this it's hard to keep track of who said what exactly. His gripes are really in two areas: support for real time multiplayer and AI. I have already said that I think the first is a legit complaint. I have my doubts about how much a fully functional real time lobby/server feature would grow the customer base, but it's not a crazy idea. As for AI, I agree it would be nice to have the AI modable. Every single war or strategy game I have played with a truly good dynamic AI has got it through modding, in most cases years of modding. But while that would make existing customers happy I think it would do jack squat for growing the customer base. Games that have great AI as their selling point are few and tend to be very niche.

Edited February 20, 2015 by Vanir Ausf B

[Battlefront.com]

To be fair to Stagler, he hasn't really said much about graphics. Others have, and in a huge thread like this it's hard to keep track of who said what exactly. His gripes are really in two areas: support for real time multiplayer and AI. I have already said that I think the first is a legit complaint. I have my doubts about how much a fully functional real time lobby/server feature would grow the customer base, but it's not a crazy idea. As for AI, I agree it would be nice to have the AI modable. Every single war or strategy game I have played with a truly good dynamic AI has got it through modding, in most cases years of modding. But while that would make existing customers happy I think it would do jack squat for growing the customer base. Games that have great AI as their selling point are few and tend to be very niche.

Exactly this.

If I could snap my fingers we would have:

1. Better graphics and performance

2. Massive multiplayer (i.e. two dozen per side)

3. Big online playing presence

4. AI that would make MIT think we should be hired to do coursework for them

But I can't snap my fingers (no, really I suck at it!), so these things are only dreams to be inched towards as we can. So not bad ideas at all, just not consistent with the constraints we have as developers.

Steve

[alwaysfish]

I am sorry to say this, but from last Steve's posts my opinion about BFC has changed. They do create good games, but, man, the way they treat customers/community members... simply not good. Maybe i am wrong, since i am new here. Only time will show.

[TheDudeAbides421]

Hey Stag,

 

How can you say you are getting a contract for a game you are building in your spare time and then link RHS? According to their documentation you are a core member of the dev group but so is Ardy and all he did was create the OpsCore and ACH helmets. 

http://doc.rhsmods.org/index.php/Credits

 

I don't see how a huge MP lobby would benefit the game that much, while there are those that prefer Real Time H2H without needing to forward ports and search IPs, the majority of players I have been around prefer PBEM. It is almost like how old men played chess with the newspaper back in the day. Play at your own pace, and I think this has a huge appeal to many of the people that enjoy this series.  

As for the AI, a system comparable to Steel Beasts Pro PE would fit the CM style very well. Conditions and Event based actions and reactions with triggers to spice things up. They have a very easy to use UI to make this an easy process and you can build them into every waypoint and route. I know that Steel Beasts has some military contracts so they might of had a larger budget for AI development, but it is a remarkable system that would seem to fit in with the CM engine. Everyone talks about ArmA's graphics but it is a pain in the *** to get the level of editing power achieved through an easy to use UI in Steel Beasts. 

[Imperial Grunt]

Exactly this.

If I could snap my fingers we would have:

1. Better graphics and performance

2. Massive multiplayer (i.e. two dozen per side)

3. Big online playing presence

4. AI that would make MIT think we should be hired to do coursework for them

But I can't snap my fingers (no, really I suck at it!), so these things are only dreams to be inched towards as we can. So not bad ideas at all, just not consistent with the constraints we have as developers.

Steve

 

 

Oh, I like that list. Can they happen if I snap your fingers for you?