Any modules coming?

[Reiter]

As title says, any modules coming? Or is Red Thunder forgotten and work is focused in Black Sea?

[Vanir Ausf B]

I asked Steve the same question the other day. His response was "Red what? Oh, that. Let me think about it."

 

 

Of course there will be at least one module. But BFC has strongly hinted that a Western front title is up next after Black Sea.

[Denis1973]

I'm suspect that the sales of CMRT are not so big that you and I want to be. There are no clear figures (commercial secret, of cause) but the quantity of mods and maps in BF Repository can give as information for a rough estimation. 

So in this situation it is a adequate decision to release new game and not a new module. Sadly...

[womble]

Lots more Westerners play the game than Russians, and the vocal and not-insubstantial contingent of OstFront-o-philes in that constituency doesn't counter the number who are mostly interested in the ETO. CMBB was the best-selling game of the CMx1 series, though; perhaps Barbarossa, Stalingrad and Kursk were bigger draws for that title.

[Vanir Ausf B]

CMBB was the best-selling game of the CMx1 series

CMBO holds that distinction.

[Myles Keogh]

CMBO holds that distinction.

 

Yep.  Apparently, CMBB didn't even get within sniffing distance of CMBO's sales.  Steve has repeatedly informed us that while the OstFront is popular among wargamers it's NOT popular among casual gamers.  It was casual gamers that turned CMBO into CMx1's biggest seller.  And American and British casual gamers couldn't give a fig about Commies fighting Nazis. 

 

Steve has also described CMBB as a well-intentioned "mistake."   The amount of content and work BF put into CMBB was not rewarded in the sales figures despite it being a better and expansive game than CMBO. 

 

BF has mentioned that they'd like to do the entire Ostfront, but they've never outright mentioned that those plans are set in stone.  And I wouldn't hold my breath waiting.  When you think about BF's plans for CMRT, CMFI, CMBS, and the new Bulge game then you're looking at maybe 3-5 years before they can turn their attention to a WW2 title that isn't set in 1944-1945.  Three-to-five years is a long time in the PC gaming industry even for a niche game like CMx2.

 

What killed CMx1 was the engine's limited ability to be upgraded and diminishing sales returns.  CMBB sold less than CMBO and CMAK sold less than CMBB.  One has to wonder about CMx2.  This is not a young gaming system.  The base engine is almost ten years old.  The first game of the WW2 versions is approaching its fourth anniversary.   The last word we got as to work being done on a WW2 game was on the Bugle base game.  I've always suspected that BF held-off on doing the Bulge as a way to inject new life and sales into an aged engine.  The Bulge sells.  It always has.  Casual gamers are much more likely to take a chance on a Bulge title than they would Stalingrad, Kursk, El Alamein, and Casino.  It's always been a bread-and-butter title in the wargame industry because it always attracts some non-wargamer buyers.  If the Bulge is a success then hopefully we'll see additional East Front content, but if it isn't....? 

[DLaurier]

Lots more Westerners play the game than Russians, and the vocal and not-insubstantial contingent of OstFront-o-philes in that constituency doesn't counter the number who are mostly interested in the ETO. CMBB was the best-selling game of the CMx1 series, though; perhaps Barbarossa, Stalingrad and Kursk were bigger draws for that title.

Stalingrad has been the subject of an english language, hollywood movie. Bagration not so much.

 

[PanzerMike]

I'm suspect that the sales of CMRT are not so big that you and I want to be. There are no clear figures (commercial secret, of cause) but the quantity of mods and maps in BF Repository can give as information for a rough estimation. 

So in this situation it is a adequate decision to release new game and not a new module. Sadly...

Fewer mods probably because the quality of the stock graphics are already pretty good. Maps? The ingame QB maps are great, bot quality and quantity. 

 

I made 5 extra missions for CMRT just after it was released (in addition to the one that was included in the release). Yes, compared to the number of missions that was released for CMx1 titles, the harvest is somewhat modest. But making a good scenario takes considerable more effort with the CMx2 engine. Not everybody is able or willing to make that effort. The end result (if a mission is done properly) is superior to what was made for CMx1 IMHO. But yes, fewer in numbers.

 

And new module(s) will surely come in due time. But Bulge is most probably next in line if Steve is to be believed according to his bone that Vanir linked to. And Steve is the boss man, he he he.

[Reiter]

Bulge. So it is module for cmbn? 

 

Infomative comments there, thanks!

[AttorneyAtWar]

Bulge. So it is module for cmbn? 

 

Infomative comments there, thanks!

 

No, Bulge is a new game family, CMBN won't be receiving any more modules.

[Toblakai]

No, Bulge is a new game family, CMBN won't be receiving any more modules.

 

But the new content of “The Bulge” will be more like a new module or vehicle pack (e.g. some new vehicles and graphics, the game system won’t change)? And does it mean that you have to pay for a later v4 engine 4 or 5 times (CMBN, CMFI, CMRT, CMBS, CMTB)?

[womble]

But the new content of “The Bulge” will be more like a new module or vehicle pack (e.g. some new vehicles and graphics, the game system won’t change)? And does it mean that you have to pay for a later v4 engine 4 or 5 times (CMBN, CMFI, CMRT, CMBS, CMTB)?

It will be a family base game because the work involved is of that magnitude. New TO&Es. New generations of equipment. New terrain items. For all the nations involved. They're going to add the tank rider spots to all the vehicles that should have them, which is a serious task, in itself. More maps, more scenarios, and if the previous families are anything to go by, a new version of the engine, maybe.

And yes you'll have to buy the v4 upgrade for any other games you want to upgrade. The alternative is for those games never to get upgraded. While getting the engine basics sorted out is common to all the titles, there are enough differences between the families that checking that the new engine doesn't break them is a non-trivial task. If the v4 increment is slight enough that nobody cares to pay ten bucks for the upgrade, then nobody will have to upgrade to remain compatible with potential opponents, either. So there's an incentive to make the new engine have significant improvements so we all shell out for all our titles.

Just don't go there. The "why should we pay for upgrades" horse is dead, so flogging it isn't going to get up and make it run. Not that it has any legs left attched any more, the corpse has been flogged so much. Even a zombie has difficulty moving when it's been disarticulated.

[A Canadian Cat]

But the new content of “The Bulge” will be more like a new module or vehicle pack (e.g. some new vehicles and graphics, the game system won’t change)?

In some sense the boundaries between games and modules are arbitrary. If I recall correctly from what Steve has said here in the past it has as much to do with making a manageable sized project for testing and user experience as anything else. The plan to have a game family for each year of the Eastern is a case in point.

 

And does it mean that you have to pay for a later v4 engine 4 or 5 times (CMBN, CMFI, CMRT, CMBS, CMTB)?

 

Sure seems like it. Keeping up all the older games up to date had one downside lots of back porting and support for BFC and an opportunity to spend $ for us.  But it is pretty cool that our old games do keep getting better instead of just staying the same.  I guess at some point the small $ times n game is not small any more.  Interesting problem to have.

[Denis1973]

Fewer mods probably because the quality of the stock graphics are already pretty good. Maps? The ingame QB maps are great, bot quality and quantity. 

I've compared the quantity of mods for CMBN, CMRT and CMFI. There are no difference in stock graphics between them. So the difference in quantity take it weight...

And can't agreed about QB maps, not telling about so little stock missions.

[MikeyD]

BFC definitely has its 'to-do' list that its following. I can't say, though, what items on the to-do-list is going to be done in what order.

 

About the Bulge title-or-module debate. Lets think of those people who had no interests in Normandy hedgerow fighting and didn't buy CMBN but want to get into the later stuff. Doing Bugle as an enormous 'module' would mean they'd first have to buy the Normandy game, ostensibly doubling the cost. And there would be little-to-no savings for CMBN players because BFC still needs to charge enough to recoup their costs. So dividing the western front into standalone titles makes sense. Plus a standalone title give you 'elbow room' to try out new stuff, you're not tied down to what's gone before.

[Michael Emrys]

Stalingrad has been the subject of an english language, hollywood movie. Bagration not so much.

 

 

You put your finger on something there. Wargamers tend to buy games that depict some area of warfare that they are interested in. They probably already know something about it and want to learn and experience more. Nearly all wargamers have at least heard of Barbarossa and even some fraction of casual gamers have. But much smaller numbers have even heard of Bagration. As BFC have explained it, it made good sense to begin with 1944 for reasons of ease of production, but it also may have cut into sales to do so.

 

Michael

[Rosseau]

I would be much more encouraged by a standalone that performs like CMBS. Maybe because it's the modern era, but it's like engine 4 compared to say RT's engine 3.x.

 

And I'm running a pretty weak rig.

[Toblakai]

It will be a family base game because the work involved is of that magnitude. New TO&Es. New generations of equipment. New terrain items. For all the nations involved. They're going to add the tank rider spots to all the vehicles that should have them, which is a serious task, in itself. More maps, more scenarios, and if the previous families are anything to go by, a new version of the engine, maybe.

And yes you'll have to buy the v4 upgrade for any other games you want to upgrade. The alternative is for those games never to get upgraded. While getting the engine basics sorted out is common to all the titles, there are enough differences between the families that checking that the new engine doesn't break them is a non-trivial task. If the v4 increment is slight enough that nobody cares to pay ten bucks for the upgrade, then nobody will have to upgrade to remain compatible with potential opponents, either. So there's an incentive to make the new engine have significant improvements so we all shell out for all our titles.

Just don't go there. The "why should we pay for upgrades" horse is dead, so flogging it isn't going to get up and make it run. Not that it has any legs left attched any more, the corpse has been flogged so much. Even a zombie has difficulty moving when it's been disarticulated.

 

I think it's okay to post my opinion to BFC's development strategy. Doesn't matter how many Zombies I have to defeat on this way

 

BFC is a company and of course they need to make money. For that target you need customers. So it's always good to hear their opinions. What they are doing with these opinions is another question, because only BFC (and the finance office   ) knows the sales volume.

 

The price is not so important for me, but the value for money. A new main game with this content is very unattractive to me. Yes, I know: I don’t need to buy

 

I play only PBEM and maybe that's the reason I have another view than other members of this forum. For me are graphic (effects) and some new rare vehicles are not so important than the gameplay system. A good example is the game Dwarf Fortress. The most people will run away after seeing the graphic, but I love the gameplay system.

 

I would have liked that BFC would have other priorities and changing the game system (e.g. no breaking FOW, a better spotting system, usefully ATGs, the possibility of an ambush).

 

[EDIT] Of course with "Zombies" I don’t designate any person in this forum. It is just a metaphor  

Edited March 3, 2015 by Toblakai

[7thGalaxy]

The only thing that I can think of as a downside for the multiple base games thing is the sheer number of executables and patches you'll have to maintain.  Hopefully the new launcher will help with this - keeping all of the fronts grouped together would be useful.

[Zveroboy1]

The East Front is in dire need of some loving. Unfortunately it is the red headed stepchild of the CM2 family it seems. The engine has been out for what, 7 or 8 years? And we'll have 3 West front games soon with the Bulge, 2 games in a modern setting and a single East Front game. The American market is the biggest one and where the bulk of the sales come from I imagine, so games without GI's don't sell as well. Personally I doubt we'll ever see Barbarossa at this rate which makes me a bit disappointed. I hope we get a Berlin module next.

Edited March 3, 2015 by Zveroboy1

[Reiter]

^Sadly true. No murica involved - no sales. 

[umlaut]

but the quantity of mods and maps in BF Repository can give as information for a rough estimation.

No, I really dont think you can estimate based on the number of mods in the repository. Because the usefulness of the repository (search function and such) is so poor that many of major modders (most notably Aris, but also myself) have stopped using it - and switched to cmmods - long before CMRT was released. So most of the released RT mods aren't in the repository, whereas everybody was still using the repository when the majority of the CMBN and CMFI mods were made.

Edited March 3, 2015 by umlaut

[Denis1973]

Okay, what we get from cmmods statistics? CMRT: 183, CMBN: 429. With adding this:

So most of the released RT mods aren't in the repository, whereas everybody was still using the repository when the majority of the CMBN and CMFI mods were made.

my point became stronger 

 

UPD. My estimation that sales of CMRT is about 50% (pessimistic) to 70%(optimistic) of CMBN sales.

 

UPD2. Of course as Russian I want that figures will be 150% or even 300% 

Edited March 3, 2015 by Denis1973

[umlaut]

Okay, what we get from cmmods statistics? CMRT: 183, CMBN: 429. With adding this:

my point became stronger 

 

You seem to forget the time factor here. CMBN has been on the market at lot longer than CMRT, so of course there are more CMBN mods.

 

CMBN was released may 17th 2011 - 1387 days ago.

 

CMRT was released april 4th 2014 - 334 days ago

 

CMBN

429/1387 = 0,3 mods a day

 

CMRT

183/334 = 0,54 mods a day

 

Ergo: The number of mods released on cmmods for CMRT is nearly double the amount of the mods for CMBN when time is taken into account.

 

You point just became weaker.

 

Edited March 3, 2015 by umlaut

[Denis1973]

Your calculation is not correct. Just as you say:

 

whereas everybody was still using the repository when the majority of the CMBN and CMFI mods

So not correct to compare mods from cmmods only.

Alternative calculations with BF repository give us:

110/334=0,33 mods per day

737/1387=0,53 mods per day

(absolutely mirrored your results  ) 

Adding that BF isn't very active on even talking on releasing the module, my point is hard as a rock.