Jump to content

Recommended Posts

"CMFB uses the v3.0 engine of CMx2, same as Red Thunder and Black Sea. Some features that are new to the Western Front include mortars being able to fire from inside their halftracks, and tank riders."

 

Are there no new features for the CMx2 engine ?

Was there some fine tuning in the mechanics (infantry spotting/cover) or will AI improvements be added ?

Will there be any new graphic effects and features, improvements or optimizations ?

I just need some news on that otherwise i cant justify spending money on it.

BFC must have done something to improve gameplay...please tell us. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 177
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

So far from what i gathered: new Burning effects (not spreading fires, just much better looking wrecks) Stream tiles. oh and onboard mortars.... i mean thats a pretty big deal, sure black sea had them, but this is the first ww2 title to have them. well i think its a pretty big deal at least and something i've been looking forwards to for a long time.

Edited by Cobetco
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please, i just ask a legit question. Im interested in the game and its new gameplay features to justify a purchase.

Cobetco already told me things i did not know like the redone burning effects with is a huge step forward visually.

 

Edited by Wiggum15
Link to post
Share on other sites

Streams add an important terrain type, so glad they have been added.

I posted some pictures and described the in game effects of streams the Bulge basics thread. Yes they are a welcome and important addition that work very well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sincerely I also see very little new things, especially for a standalone new title of the series... maybe I am wrong and didn't see some of the new elements as it should be, but this is my personal impression so far...

-Game mechanics: there is nothing really new, flamethrowers, tank riders, mortars on vehicles, snow and snow effects - all things already seen in previous titles. Streams? Maybe this is a new kind of terrain system, but seems to be the only one.

-Graphics: I see nothing new apart few textures here and there, no new building systems, shapes or types, no new tree/vegetation types (really bad to see still two types of conifers for such a setting as the ardennes), very little to no new entries in terms of ground types. Maybe the engine will have some more "optimization" but I belive it will be the same of the last patch for the last game version using such engine.

-Sounds: I am ready to bet the engine sound of vehicles will be the same as it has been in the past years, to say one sound effect... and that says all.

-Contents:

Four new campaigns, several scenarios, this is the biggest piece of content added and it's very interesting, given the quality of maps and scenarios/campaigns of CM titles. I am worried that the QB maps will be recycled for the most part from older titles (seen this happening in combat mission black sea). The four campaigns are interesting (let's say 3+1 one is the training campaign, but it would be better to know the number of missions each to evaluate them properly, a 12 mission campaign is not like a 4 mission campaign...)

New organizational tables, they are interesting and can add to the game, but in the end we are talking about national armies all seen already in other titles, there are new organizations but the armies are the same (think of Red Thunder, and the fact it depicted the soviet army for the first time in a CM2x title, or the british module for normandy, which added the brits..).

Some new vehicles, they are there, that's for sure, but their impact is as limited as it was during the war (jagdtiger, sturmmorser tiger, to say the two), besides, the additional list of really new vehicles is very limited (but this is due to the historical reality, nothing else, there isn't anything more to be added given the timeframe and seetting). There's a big list thanks to the sum-up inherited from previous normandy title and modules, and that's the big chunk of content (minus some of the stuff left in normandy), but that's mainly thanks to Normandy and its modules rather than this very title.

 

All in all I am not very thrilled about this new game. I am of the opinion (who some Others shared in the past) that this was more of a module rather than a new game... I understand how the ardennes offensive is seen by US people, as a very iconic moment of the war and I understand why it's like that, but personally, I find it a very limited (yet interesting) setting.

 

Edited by Kieme(ITA)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sincerely I also see very little new things, especially for a standalone new title of the series... maybe I am wrong and didn't see some of the new elements as it should be, but this is my personal impression so far...

Right, to be fair @ChrisND stated up front that the title would be based on the v3 engine with no feature work to do except a small amount of setting specific work that they wanted to do. They have done that and added streams to boot. 

So, BFC will have over delivered again. Please note I understand that they did not deliver what *you* wanted but that does not change the fact that they have done more than they said they would.

- I understand how the ardennes offensive is seen by US people, as a very iconic moment of the war and I understand why it's like that, but personally, I find it a very limited (yet interesting) setting.

Sure just like the Eastern front holds little interest for me. Good thing BFC will satisfy everyone, just not all at the same time.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand your point IanL, it sure comes down to preferences, but I would like to underline that the different way I personally refer to the fronts of a WW2 setting is dictated by a large part by the difference in terms of geographical situation and involved parties.

Any easter front would be different enough from a normandy setting (soviet army and very different landscape), just like a North africa would be (italians, british, germans, americans). What I try to say is that I feel the ardennes setting as a part of a western front setting, while for example red Thunder was the first new game of a completely different and potentially vast front, the eastern one.

This is the only reason why red Thunder, fortress italy and normandy were to me very interesting titles, while this ardennes one doesn't keep up at the same level. Black sea may have the very same grographical situation of red Thunder, but it has a different enough time frame to make it stand out completely...

Let's use this anaolgy: I can enjoy a 14th century medieval game set in england, just to say; I will be thrilled by a same game but set in anatholia, I will be thrilled by a game with the very same setting of england but set in 17th century, I will be thrilled by a game with the same setting and time frame, but if the game will bring a lot of new mechanics from the previous one.

To make a distinction, let's evaluate the upcoming module for CMRT... it will be something very similar to this one, not many new vehicles from both sides, snow setting, a Whole lot of new missions/campaigns, some new organizational tables etc. but, that's a module, not a new game of the series, and even though I am not super-excited for such a module (because it won't bring a lot of new things) at least it will be a module indeed.

Edited by Kieme(ITA)
Link to post
Share on other sites

Forum posters have demanded a Bulge game for years. Well, you're getting a Bulge game and you're already complaining without having even touched it? You're arguing over the game in a vacuum.

 I'm confused about this fixation on 'new features', too. When the game engine got AA targeting aircraft (a BIG new feature) the 'new features' grogs simply yawned. When CMBS got amphibious vehicles the 'new features' grogs hardly blinked. Hit decals, seasonal weather, new terrain types, bump map shading, improved animations, new vehicle types, flamethrowers, mine clearing tanks, AT bunkers. The 'new features ' grogs were unimpressed. What in heaven's name do you want to see? It seems the answer is a generic 'something else'. Because no matter what you get will always want 'something else'.

Edited by MikeyD
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Not quite getting why ppl have a hard time understanding the concept of same game different setting. Like its a new thing or something. I played Warhammer to death, and then the same developers came out with Company of Heroes. It was the exact same game, same engine, just the hover tanks were now Shermans, the space marines were modelled as WW2 GI's. Nobody complained. Those who liked the engine stayed with it . It was what it was. Sorry to bring up another game title, but I'm just trying to point out if you like CMRT like me, then you'll probably like CMFB. Same game, different setting, different time, different place... This is pretty typical in computer gaming land.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Even the jump up from version 2 to version 3 wasn't that long ago, right? A little over a year? BFC has done engine upgrades and tweaking outside of major game releases, and then applied those upgrades back to games that had been released several years prior. So, maybe a little unfair to knock them for not doing enough?

What new nationality would people expect them to include in a new base game? The Romanians? The French? (A new game called "Battle of France, 1940" doesn't seem like it'd be that appealing....)

As to sound, I'm pretty sure there are tons of sound mods floating around out there? I, personally, wouldn't expect those to be revised until the next generation of games.

I'm certainly not bashing the OP or anyone else here. They're just giving their opinions, I know, which is fair enough. So I'm simply offering one more.

I don't mean this in a sarcastic way, at all, but maybe the thing for people to do is vote with their wallets?

Link to post
Share on other sites

... f you like CMRT like me, then you'll probably like CMFB. Same game, different setting, different time, different place... This is pretty typical in computer gaming land.

Exactly.

Also, the fact that it's "typical in computer gaming land" does not mean that the customer is somehow victim to a bunch of greedy developers just trying to make a fast buck. I have no doubt that, no matter how much we want this game to improve, the guys behind these titles want that even more. I can't imagine that software developers would even come together to produce such a niche game unless their hearts were truly in it.

I used to develop commercial software, and am now remembering why I had to quit doing that. :lol: Seemed like it was never enough for the customers, no matter what we did. So incredibly deflating. Especially when the criticisms were right before release, after we'd just spent months working our asses off. I guess that many people just don't realize how much work goes into software improvements that many customers may only view as "little things."

Edited by sttp
Link to post
Share on other sites

Like it or not, Battlefront's method of operation is to limit the amount of new features in a new release. Engine improvements (e.g 3.0 etc) are released separately. I can only assume this helps get the product out faster and helps cash flow but I cannot say so for certain as I do not work for them. I think everyone including the Battlefront team would like to see things move faster. I work in software development myself and we have a running joke that one takes the estimated time to develop something and multiply it by 2.5 and one gets the true time till release. This has turned out to be pretty accurate :) . I don't think BFC is soaking us for cash by this method. We are getting new material at a faster rate than ever before in what's really a niche product. I'm grateful they haven't turned to other, probably more lucrative, designs,

Link to post
Share on other sites

To make a distinction, let's evaluate the upcoming module for CMRT... it will be something very similar to this one, not many new vehicles from both sides, snow setting, a Whole lot of new missions/campaigns, some new organizational tables etc. but, that's a module, not a new game of the series, and even though I am not super-excited for such a module (because it won't bring a lot of new things) at least it will be a module indeed.

Couldn't have said it better. Bulge should be a module if evaluated on content levels, but its going to be a game and frustratingly we will have to purchase a Commonwealth module again. Every other WWII CM2 game title to date will have been released with more new content than Bulge will receive. I know a lot of members on here don't like to hear negative feedback, but I think a significant proportion of longterm CM payers feel similarly deflated.

But all that said I love CM, so Battlefront will be getting my money - just not with the same levels of goodwill this time round.

PS @Wiggum15 despite what many on this forum tell/shout at you, your opinion is valid. If everyone just gave positive feedback, there would be no motivation to improve the title. 

 

Edited by Odin
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...