The year to come - 2024 (Part 1)

[CarlXII]

17 minutes ago, DesertFox said:

Well the market is shrinking for them with this 10 year old engine. Their call.

yes...

I would rather see a CM3 upgrade compared to some more eastern front...

But if we are not getting any CM3 game...A one year/game release for the eastern front will be  quite limited i fear...Better then nothing for sure...but to maintain the quality of previous releases i belive it will require multiple modules/ year to do the eastern front justice...

 

[A Canadian Cat]

17 hours ago, Andrew Kulin said:

CM2 is a 17 year old game engine and could use a major overhaul to take advantage of advances in personal computing over the past two decades.  No idea what they are up to regarding Game Engine 5 but I'd like to think putting in multi-core usability and maybe changing graphics from Open-GL (I think that is what is used) to something modern (and usable on AMD cards) could be high on their to-do list.

No. Steve has said that the engine 5 update will not be an overhaul or replacement of Open-GL. He has said it will be looking for optimizations to make things better but *not* a rewrite.

 

17 hours ago, Andrew Kulin said:

why invest their limited time on adding games for additional time frames using the 17-year old CMX2 game engine?

To make our gaming live better. I think that would not be a waste of time at all.

[Andrew Kulin]

41 minutes ago, A Canadian Cat - was IanL said:

To make our gaming live better. I think that would not be a waste of time at all.

I agree.  If CMX3 is not a thing in their pipeline then continue to expand with CMX2 modules.  But if CMX3 is something they are going to work on "soon" then I would think they would put efforts going forward from that time into CMX3 titles.

[Centurian52]

It only took one module, in addition to the base game (total of two installments), to cover one year on the eastern front (CMRT + Fire and Rubble), from mid '44 to mid '45. Five installments (CMBN, Commonwealth Forces, Market Garden, CMFB, Downfall) to cover the same timeframe on the western front, though one of those only added new forces rather than expanding the timeline. And three installments (CMFI, Gustav Line, Rome to Victory) to cover two years (mid '43 to mid '45) in the Mediterranean.

So the number of games/modules it takes to cover one year for one front is not consistent (probably highly dependent on how much happened and how much changed on that front in the given time span). But it's more than one. If we assume two modules per year for the eastern front, then we'd need six more modules to fully wrap up the eastern front. Optimistically that might take around 18 years (assuming 3 years between each module). It might end up taking considerably less time than that, as there should be less and less new equipment to create as they go. And large spans of time might be handled with Battle Packs rather than modules.

It should be possible to do North Africa in considerably fewer modules. Most of the fighting in 1941 and 1942 was going back and forth over the same ground, so it might be possible to capture both of those years in as little as one module each. Operation Torch and the fighting in Tunisia will be quite different from the Western Desert Campaign. I assume Tunisia will be the base game. The Vichy French forces opposing Torch folded pretty quickly, so it might not warrant a full module. Maybe Torch will get a Battle Pack later. An El Alamein module can probably cover most of 1942. One more module to get most of the equipment needed to represent the fighting in 1941, with plenty of room for Battle Packs to cover individual operations.

Then a base game for The Battle of France, and that's the western front covered. I shouldn't think that there would be much left to do for France '40. Most the German and British equipment will already be in from North Africa. There may be a few British vehicles that were in France, and not Africa. But there shouldn't be any German equipment in France that wasn't later used in either Africa or the Soviet Union. Most of the French equipment will have already been generated for Vichy and Free French forces in North Africa. There may still be some new French tanks that will be needed. The game already has western European terrain.

It would be nice to cover the fighting in Greece in 1940 and 1941, but there might not be enough interest to make it profitable. Poland '39 needs to be covered of course. That might be covered in one base game with no modules, or there might be a module adding Soviet forces and covering what fighting there was in the east from 17 September on.

If CM3 comes along and presses the reset button before they can wrap up the beginning of the war in CM2, then hopefully they'll at least have generated enough early-war content in CM2 that can be leveraged to make starting at the beginning of the war in CM3 a bit less daunting (it would suck to have to start all over again at Normandy).

[Erwin]

Last I heard, BFC was not going to go back to Early War as (presumably) they thought Early War to be less marketable.  That was a huge disappointment to many of us.  Has there been another BFC statement that they are now considering Early War?

[Centurian52]

20 minutes ago, Erwin said:

Last I heard, BFC was not going to go back to Early War as (presumably) they thought Early War to be less marketable.  That was a huge disappointment to many of us.  Has there been another BFC statement that they are now considering Early War?

What I heard is that they can't go straight back to the early war in one go. It wouldn't be profitable enough to offset the time and cost of creating nearly 100% new equipment. So the only realistic way to do it would be to move back incrementally.

Getting all the way back to the beginning of the war would take long enough that there's no sense making any promises. But I don't recall Steve ever saying that they have no intention of ever doing the early war. I recall him saying that they felt it was more profitable to do the late war first. Now they have done the late war. I'm confident they'll start inching the clock back with the next set of projects.

Edited January 31 by Centurian52

[Centurian52]

@Erwin The latest on the prospect for the early war are from this very thread.

When FredLW brought up the idea of going straight back to 1939/1940 Steve replied with:

On 1/6/2024 at 11:34 AM, Battlefront.com said:

Yes, we think that would be a good game to do!  Unfortunately, it means almost 100% new vehicle models for both sides, 100% new TO&E, and probably 50% new weapons.   That's a huge amount of work and that means we won't be able to do anything else for a couple of years.  We don't think that's the best use of our time.

And in the same post in which he shot down our hopes for a CM: Korea he said:

On 1/6/2024 at 8:37 AM, Battlefront.com said:

1943/44 Eastern Front would be easier to do and more popular (which also means more sales), for example.

So I think our prospects for seeing earlier war content are very strong. The sheer amount of time and number of releases it will take to work their way back to the beginning of the war is large enough to introduce a fair amount of uncertainty as to whether they will actually get there (it took a bit over a decade to reach the end of the war, and it will presumably take just as long to reach the beginning of the war). Enough that it would be very risky for Steve to announce a formal intention to work their way all the way back to the beginning of the war. But even if it's never announced, I think that's the natural direction they're likely to be progressing in from here on.

[Erwin]

3 hours ago, Centurian52 said:

I don't recall Steve ever saying that they have no intention of ever doing the early war. I recall him saying that they felt it was more profitable to do the late war first.

I very much hope you are right.  I always had the impression from when CMBN came out that BF had no intention to do (say) a N Africa game - ie: a CM2 version of CMAK, nor a CM2 version of CMBB enabling us to fight from Barbarossa onwards.  But, if the have changed their minds...  that would be great.  Certainly N Africa '40-'42 was a favorite of cardboard wargames, but it was dismaying that BF said that CMAK did not sell well.

[markus544]

Please forgive me in advance for my extreme lack of knowledge on what to me seems to be and inordinate amount of time crank out these CM games. Steve mentioned 10 years ago that it took to complete CMBN, Yeah, that's right. I retired 13 years ago, and I was playing it before then. The business model involved in the development and all the computer work required and all the research that goes into these titles to me seems somewhat staggering. I was in Law Enforcement for almost thirty years, and I spent a lot of time investigating traffic accidents and other criminal activity. While I am in no way making a comparison to my prior work than what the Battlefront folks are doing is to say this. The dedication and hard work that is put into these "games" that we all love so much, certainly for me and I'm sure for everyone else out there in "Battlefront" land is greatly appreciated. Whatever Steve and his coworkers decide to work on is fine with me. I own every title put out. I will conclude my remarks with this. I am 63 years old, and I hope to the Lord above I am around to see and "play" the next full installment of whatever it might be.

[Erwin]

5 hours ago, markus544 said:

I am 63 years old

So... you are youngster newcomer to the game.  Welcome. 

 

 

[Centurian52]

4 hours ago, markus544 said:

Please forgive me in advance for my extreme lack of knowledge on what to me seems to be and inordinate amount of time crank out these CM games. Steve mentioned 10 years ago that it took to complete CMBN, Yeah, that's right. I retired 13 years ago, and I was playing it before then. The business model involved in the development and all the computer work required and all the research that goes into these titles to me seems somewhat staggering. I was in Law Enforcement for almost thirty years, and I spent a lot of time investigating traffic accidents and other criminal activity. While I am in no way making a comparison to my prior work than what the Battlefront folks are doing is to say this. The dedication and hard work that is put into these "games" that we all love so much, certainly for me and I'm sure for everyone else out there in "Battlefront" land is greatly appreciated. Whatever Steve and his coworkers decide to work on is fine with me. I own every title put out. I will conclude my remarks with this. I am 63 years old, and I hope to the Lord above I am around to see and "play" the next full installment of whatever it might be.

So I have guessed that it probably takes them around two to three years to make a new game or module. Game development is normally measured in years, not months, so two to three years is most definitely not an inordinate amount of time. If it took them five years, that would be pretty concerning. If it took them ten+ years, then we'd be looking at Duke Nukem levels of procrastination. But two to three years is pretty bog standard.

As to the research. You know how difficult criminal investigation is. I don't. But I suspect that historical research is probably harder. I assume that you run into a lot of the same difficulties in criminal investigation that can cause so much trouble in historical research (unreliable witnesses, contradictory sources, etc...). But think about how difficult criminal investigation was for you, and now imagine that most of your witnesses have died of old age, and most of your evidence has been degraded or destroyed by the ravages of time. I'm impressed that Battlefront is able to conduct such incredibly detailed research with time to spare to finish full games and modules at what is honestly a pretty reasonable pace.

[Mik093]

Although I've known about the Combat Mission license for a long time (I bought Shock Force in 2007), I acquired all the WW2 Combat Missions on Steam over the holiday season (and Final Blitzkrieg last week ). Better late than never...

For the moment I have a lot to do with four games, the campaigns, the scenarios, the content created by the community but I will buy the other modules to come without hesitation.

Good job at Battlefront, keep it up!

[Battlefront.com]

On 1/29/2024 at 1:42 PM, Sequoia said:

I have a hunch it will be more than a few days until we get update part two (unless I missed something Steve said).

I just wanted to let you know I've been following the discussion, but a bit busier than usual recently.  Which is one reason I haven't posted the promised Part 2 of what lies ahead yet.  I didn't want to get a conversation started that I couldn't reliably be around for.  I still need a little more time   Just a little, though.

You'll soon see a new thread to keep this conversation going.  Until then, carry on

Steve

P.S.  Welcome to the WW2 world, Mik093

 

[Battlefront.com]

On 1/29/2024 at 3:19 PM, Erwin said:

That is amazing.  I don't know if people are old enuff to remember wargaming up to the later 1990's - one had practically PAY people to play the WAllies.  EVERYONE wanted to play the Germans on the East front, with DAK (North Africa) being second.

Yup.  And for the last 25 years whenever I've said Normandy is the #1 seller for us I hear the old board gamers say "wait, what did he say?  I think I need new batteries for my hearing aids because I could have sworn he said Western Front instead of Eastern!".

The list of popularity of WW2 games is for sure late Western Front ahead of all other WW2 topics.  Modern is a solid second, then Eastern Front, and then Southern Front.

Steve

[Vacillator]

14 minutes ago, Battlefront.com said:

late Western Front ahead of all other WW2 topics.  Modern is a solid second, then Eastern Front, and then Southern Front.

I hear that, apart from the modern bit . 

A lot of chit-chat has been saying the 'obvious progression' is to move earlier on the East Front (i.e. Kursk and then maybe earlier).  Does that stack up for BFC?  Perhaps I'm jumping the gun either way...

[Commanderski]

I think that there is more that can be done on the Eastern Front. Just the size of the front, diversity of forces and terrain/weather provides near limitless historical and ahistorical scenarios.

[Thewood1]

I wouldn't mind if they just filled early war out with vehicle packs, scenario packs, or even map packs.  Could also give us a steadier stream stuff for the east front for example.

[Erwin]

15 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

I need new batteries for my hearing aids because I could have sworn he said Western Front instead of Eastern!"  ...Modern is a solid second, then Eastern Front, and then Southern Front.

So what I'm hearing is that means that North Africa is in the pipeline...!!!  Yay!!   

 

[Mik093]

15 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

P.S.  Welcome to the WW2 world, Mik093

 

Thanks !

[Vacillator]

1 hour ago, Erwin said:

So what I'm hearing is that means that North Africa is in the pipeline...!!!  Yay!!   

I've put some new batteries in the post .

[Bannon]

It seems like most posts in this thread are from people hoping for WWII expansions which I'm sure many of Battlefront's existing customers would enjoy. However, I wonder if those would expand battlefront's existing user base or if they would be better served by creating games that focus on other rea or fictional conflicts.

Thoughts?

[Vacillator]

13 minutes ago, Bannon said:

Thoughts?

Which real or fictional conflicts are you thinking of?  I ask because some (like Ukraine) have been ruled out while the conflict goes on.  I agree with this, others don't.  Likewise I wouldn't fancy an Israel-Gaza game, and I'll stop there on that one.  Anyway, there is discussion of both of these elsewhere.

I'm a WW2 player so I do hope for more WW2 expansions (particularly Kursk, Barbarossa etc) but if Steve can make more money on the US storming of Grenada () then I wouldn't blame him for making it.

 

[sttp]

There's a lot of wishful thinking taking place in this thread from the small minority who want to see early WW2 content. How many times and ways do we need to hear BFC say that early war just isn't a wise use of their time and resources?

Would it be profitable? Probably. Would it be less profitable than other things they could be doing? Definitely.

The CMx2 engine is FOURTEEN YEARS OLD. At this point all new CM2 content feels like watching the same old play but with slightly different costumes and some upgraded props. It's a good and classic play, and I'll watch it as long as I must, but... it is the same old play.

Every minute that core BFC staff spend on CMx2 is a minute they could have been using to develop CMx3.

[Vacillator]

2 minutes ago, sttp said:

Every minute that core BFC staff spend on CMx2 is a minute they could have been using to develop CMx3.

Yep, you make a very valid point, CM3 may well be a better use of time. 

And what better way to launch it than with CM3 Kursk ?

[CarlXII]

41 minutes ago, Vacillator said:

And what better way to launch it than with CM3 Kursk ?

CM3 Barbarossa