Jump to content

Here is What I Dont Understand about BF?


Recommended Posts

17 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I actually found my life improved a lot after I started to err on the side of pessimism. I'm now more often pleasantly surprised.

There's nothing wrong with caution. But have you ever hung around a person who was truly pessimistic? They suck the life out of a room with their negativity. There's nothing attractive about someone that is filled with doom and gloom. I have an uncle like that and I used to say that you could win the lottery and he'd have you hanging yourself ten minutes after you told him.

 

Mord.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 482
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

One element that has genuinely changed for the worse is the loss of ChrisND, and his twitch streams. Those were superb content, both in terms of engaging with the player base and highlighting upcoming

Yes and no...according to MikeyD, BF apparently also incurs a lot of brain damage determining OOBs and TO&Es for formations that I doubt anyone ever uses.  I was simply suggesting that they could

I've been playing Combat Mission equally as long, and I think it's an amazing outfit with wonderful support - I never got so much escapism in my life before. CMSF2 was incredible - a huge leap forward

Posted Images

2 hours ago, Mord said:

There's nothing wrong with caution. But have you ever hung around a person who was truly pessimistic? They suck the life out of a room with their negativity. There's nothing attractive about someone that is filled with doom and gloom. I have an uncle like that and I used to say that you could win the lottery and he'd have you hanging yourself ten minutes after you told him.

I think your uncle is actually suffering from depression. A healthy dose of pessimism helps me to enjoy life. Everything in moderation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My suspicion is that BFC has a programmer heavy workload which is permanently slowing development down, and we'll never see any major increase in development speed during the lifetime of CM2. Especially given that each series is standalone rather than a DCS model where they all have one parent.

 ~6 installers, ~6 engine upgrades ~6 series of tests, ~6 patches.
CM:FI
CM:BN
CM:RT
CM:FB
CM:SF2
CM:BS

I also wouldn't be surprised if there still isn't a certain amount of code debt from the "interesting" launch of of CM:SF.

And even if BF could hire more programmers I don't think they would have an easy time of it. Working on a niche wargame probably isn't the most lucrative career choice for someone who isn't an owner/operator.

Edited by Pelican Pal
Link to post
Share on other sites

Or you all are not accounting for the fact that BF has been producing and the reason it seems like there is a slow down is that they are producing products that are not us.

With the fact that we now know they have a couple of government projects is likely a big part of why we see the amount of finished projects we now have.

BF is actively producing, we just are not the beneficiary's of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know BFC is working on at least one, if not two contract jobs, but that doesn't change my position of there being some sort of project workflow that relies more heavily on their limited programming expertise. (or possibly limited expertise with some sort of OOB generator). My guess is a lot of CM2 stuff is in-house so that opens the gates a bit to where the workflow problem is. It also makes scaling up more difficult because you 1. need to find someone who can be taught your custom **** 2. Sees that as taking them to a worthwhile place career wise.

Because doing OOB research, or animating, or even creating 3d models shouldn't be the big hold up. Ostensibly CM1 had rather complete OOBs and within the ~6 games currently released they should have a good cross section of 3d models. Think about North Africa - that should be an easy slam dunk for a few major formations in an initial release. Terrain/Buildings from CM:SF/Italy - equipment from CM:BN,FI,RT with some additions, because it is a modular system so you don't need to do the whole thing at once.  

The BFC team is undoubtedly skilled, but we've witnessed constant delays from almost the announcement of CM:SF to today. BFC shot for the moon (1:1 modern combat sim)1 and landed in a weird place that they didn't expect. I mean who would purposefully try to be actively supporting ~6 different standalone games?


1 1:1 is a big ask not to mention the C2 system -- but you are adding in all kinds of simming of modern tech. FLIR, NV, ERA, ATGM (SCLOS & MCLOS), Insurgents, various radionets,  actually having to deal with air, etc.. Which you wouldn't if CM:BN was released in '08 instead of CM:SF.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

All true, But they were also are doing something never done before, so I am sure that they did not get everything as stream lined as maybe possible. But they have likely learned a lot about what works well and what did not work well in the CMX2 engine design.

Now I figure that when the time comes for the CMX3 engine, they will be doing many thing different that will improve and hopefully help them with their production.

They are talented people and they give us something no one else seems willing to do, so I can be patient as they do what they feel best as to making a living doing what they like to do.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Pelican Pal said:

I know BFC is working on at least one, if not two contract jobs, but that doesn't change my position of there being some sort of project workflow that relies more heavily on their limited programming expertise. (or possibly limited expertise with some sort of OOB generator). My guess is a lot of CM2 stuff is in-house so that opens the gates a bit to where the workflow problem is. It also makes scaling up more difficult because you 1. need to find someone who can be taught your custom **** 2. Sees that as taking them to a worthwhile place career wise.

Because doing OOB research, or animating, or even creating 3d models shouldn't be the big hold up. Ostensibly CM1 had rather complete OOBs and within the ~6 games currently released they should have a good cross section of 3d models. Think about North Africa - that should be an easy slam dunk for a few major formations in an initial release. Terrain/Buildings from CM:SF/Italy - equipment from CM:BN,FI,RT with some additions, because it is a modular system so you don't need to do the whole thing at once.  

The BFC team is undoubtedly skilled, but we've witnessed constant delays from almost the announcement of CM:SF to today. BFC shot for the moon (1:1 modern combat sim)1 and landed in a weird place that they didn't expect. I mean who would purposefully try to be actively supporting ~6 different standalone games?


1 1:1 is a big ask not to mention the C2 system -- but you are adding in all kinds of simming of modern tech. FLIR, NV, ERA, ATGM (SCLOS & MCLOS), Insurgents, various radionets,  actually having to deal with air, etc.. Which you wouldn't if CM:BN was released in '08 instead of CM:SF.
 

(Software) product development isn't like an assembly line. Of course, we all try to create assembly line teams with agile, scrum, kanban, scrum kanban, devops, :D
They can quite work good too.

Instead, imo, product development is more like inventing something. It's difficult to know the 'moment supreme' beforehand. It's conceptually like designing a scenario. How long does it take? Well, that depends. Probably your estimation beforehand will be quite different from the actual total elapsed time when it is ready and available on scenario depot. 
Doing things like that professionally doesn't magically change that process, so that you now do know beforehand exactly how long it will take. 
Of course, your estimations will get better with experience. But it will always remain a ballpark figure, and at times just plain wrong. 

So, if those communicated 'dates' aren't met, that doesn't necessarily mean that it is a wise thing to actually focus on 'accelerating' the development process. Maybe that's just not a feasible thing, in the specific context (because of costs, complexity, whatever). It might also be possible that acceleration just takes a very long time before benefits can be seen. It all depends on the product, the team, the initial investment behind it, etc etc.
I too would like to see more content quicker. Patch 4 took a long time. But most important is that they are still delivering and from what I can tell, will keep delivering in the future. That's the most important. 'Accelerating'?, well I guess i've said enough. 😜 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/5/2019 at 3:51 PM, slysniper said:

Person likes the game

yep , thats me

 

On 9/5/2019 at 3:51 PM, slysniper said:

Thus there must be a problem and that problem must be from the source of who makes the game. They need and must do it faster.

I dont think that. I simply stated I dont understand and asked why they dont do x?, i never said i had the answers

 

On 9/5/2019 at 3:51 PM, slysniper said:

They need and must do it faster.

i would like stuff a little faster, its not a must

On 9/5/2019 at 3:51 PM, slysniper said:

They have no respect for the efforts of others if it does not meet their perceived needs.

not me

 

On 9/5/2019 at 3:51 PM, slysniper said:

I am sure their frustration  with life is constant.

nope,lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, weapon2010 said:

I simply stated I dont understand and asked why they dont do x?, i never said i had the answers

Yeah but you did not ask an open question about how BFC could do x, you asked why they don't follow your prescription of what they should do. Which by definition means you started from the answer and asked why they are not wise enough to see that you are right. 

Stated with a little exaggeration and some flair. ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, IanL said:

your prescription

 Its really not my prescription, its kind of a standard business model for growth, I have zero knowledge about the delicate nature of an internet business selling gaming software, my thread topic was born  out of little frustration and imapatience I guess.I would think BF might be in agreement that they are not getting products out as quickly as they had once anticipated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/5/2019 at 6:46 PM, RepsolCBR said:

But i am geniually concerned about the releaserate we have been seeing during the last couple of years and is not totally convinced that something like this can be maintained for much longer without more and more people getting seriously dissapointed with the productivity of BFC and decide to move on to play other things...

Yes, I'm afraid I'm pretty much there.  After waiting what, six years, for the first CMRT module I have pretty much lost interest.  Even when it comes out, most of the content will just be recycled materials from other games (German units, Lend-Lease equipment, etc.), and apparently won't include East Front flavor such as partisans.  I will probably buy it, but without much enthusiasm, and I doubt that I'll ever see the promised Kursk and earlier games. 

I've decided to focus my tactical gaming on games that provide more coverage of the Russian Front, which right now means Steel Panthers and even *gasp* ASL.  I've looked at going back to CMBB but can't really do it.  Sad...

Edited by 76mm
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, sburke said:

It was 3 years between CMAK and CMSF.  You guys really need to maintain some perspective on real history on BF release rates rather than what you might desire the rate to be. 

Of course that was a transition to a whole new engine (which by the way, was supposed to allow vastly accelerated release of modules and games with the new engine). 

In any event, for me personally six years between the release of a base game and the first module for it is simply not enough to maintain my interest, especially when most of that module's content will consist of re-hashed material from other games.  Disappointing.

YMMV.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 76mm said:

In any event, for me personally six years between the release of a base game and the first module for it is simply not enough to maintain my interest, especially when most of that module's content will consist of re-hashed material from other games.  Disappointing.

In a way I can understand your pain. I don't feel it though but feel sorry that you do.

2 hours ago, 76mm said:

YMMV.

That is for sure. There is so much stuff in all the WW2 and modern games if they never released anything new I still would probably play the games every single day for the rest of my life and still have stuff to do. So, years between modules for one game just isn't a factor. I am not alone - I checked :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, 76mm said:

Of course that was a transition to a whole new engine (which by the way, was supposed to allow vastly accelerated release of modules and games with the new engine). 

That is irrelevant for the doomsayers who think just because BF is taking a little longer to release a module that suddenly they are in danger of going out of business. And the fact is that prior to the new engine they only released 3 games so I'd said they actually are correct.   As to your comment on the module, you weigh BFs business only on the modules of the Family you are interested in.  That's fine, but for folks like me the release of CMSF2 upgraded to Engine 2 far outweighs that.  It's all subjective.  Problem is everyone assumes their subjective view is the reality for BF's business.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been lurking as usual. I notice that alot of the forum goers here, and probably by extension much if the clientele, is old enough to be my father at least, and probably my grandfather (I'm 90s kid) 

 

I'm a little concerned about both the development cycle time as well as the slow whittling away of the core consumers by the ravages of old age :(

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, sburke said:

That is irrelevant for the doomsayers who think just because BF is taking a little longer to release a module that suddenly they are in danger of going out of business... As to your comment on the module, you weigh BFs business only on the modules of the Family you are interested in.  That's fine, but for folks like me the release of CMSF2 upgraded to Engine 2 far outweighs that.  It's all subjective.  Problem is everyone assumes their subjective view is the reality for BF's business.

I made no such assumption, have never claimed or conjectured that BF is in danger of going out of business, and never "weighed BF's business" on the modules that I'm interested in.  BF can do what they want, and long as they continue to do so, I don't see them going out of business.  

What I have said, and I'll repeat for good measure, is that as an East Front aficionado, I've lost interest in this franchise because BF doesn't provide me with what I want.  I don't know how I can be any more clear?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 76mm said:

What I have said, and I'll repeat for good measure, is that as an East Front aficionado, I've lost interest in this franchise because BF doesn't provide me with what I want.  I don't know how I can be any more clear?

you were clear.  You are also participating in a thread of discussion that is some of the same litany about BF's pace of release.  In your particular instance as I noted it was the pace of release only of one particular family.  I get that is the only family you care about but as part of this discussion I thought it noteworthy that yes you have waited a while for a CMRT module, however that has no real bearing on BF's overall release rate.  Doesn't help you much as those other releases aren't of interest and yeah that would suck.  Hopefully the CMRT module isn't very far off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Geez there's a lot of whingeing on this forum - perhaps due to a preponderance of Brits among the heavy posters.

As for me, I play all the BF games and my favourite is whatever I happen to be playing the most of at the time (this month, CMRT). I'm eager for all the  new releases, but in all these years I have never been at a loss for new content to play with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

my  main concern is that BFC likely attempts achieving too much with this ageing sim engine. Quite in particular the RT mode to me looks like a major obstacle for getting more out of that classic and undisputed WEGO wargame. More time consuming computations (AI, pathing i.e) can be better buried in WEGO than RT, where good frame rate at high resolutions is of more major importance IMO. So if RT is required for more sells, then better make it two seperate games and let each one exploit modes (RT & WEGO) to their individual capabilities. But at last it´s their game and vision of it and altogether I´m fine with it, however long it takes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds like a terrible idea. Splitting it into two versions, one RT and one WEGO, would not reduce the work. It would make more. 

I would hazard a guess, given the impression I have of the way the games are played, a viable method to reduce work would be to drop WEGO and focus on RT which is where the sales are.

Just to be clear I would hate dropping WEGO because that would be the end of my playing of any new titles so I don't like that idea either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...