Jump to content

Has CM "ruined" the Close Combat game series for you?


Recommended Posts

For me, the answer is no. I think Combat Mission is definately the better game, but I still like the tension and anxiety that the real time game style used in Close Combat creates. What got me thinking about this was the complete "defection" of a good friend of mine over to CM. He has written off Close Combat; I'm only bummed about this because he was a reliable, challenging and sportsmanlike opponent (I've run into quite a few jerks over in the Zone).

So, what are your thoughts? Does Close Combat have anything to offer you, or are those CD's collecting dust and/or coffee stains?

p.s. Maybe I'll defect completely once the TCP/IP patch is available. smile.gif

------------------

I used to have a life, now I have CM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with the comment that CM has not ruined CC........in my estimation they are two completely different games. I do, however, enjoy CM much more than the CC Series games. Perhaps it is my inexperience, but i find the CC games to be extremely hectic and hard to play. Perhaps if i spent more time trying to master the literal "Click Fest" i would appreciate the CC games more. However, with CM available that is highly unlikely. CM is by far the best!!!!!!!!!! (opinion only)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Four Stringer, Welcome to this forum. If you are here because of CM, cool. If you like CC also, great, but I suggest that we let this topic die. If you want to see why, use the search function. You will find a lot of non productive talk, sometimes totally disintgrating into flames. CC and CM are different games, with different strenghts and weaknesses. To ask about likes is non productive as it is totally subjective.

BTS has shared their view consistently. That your friend is not playing CC as much suggests that there is substance in CM, at least for your friend. But not necessarily for you.

Your question is more proper on the CC forum. Many people here like both. Some don't, taste differ.

So if you are here as someone interested in CM again welcome, it's a great gaqme. If you are here as an apologist for CC, best to let this go and not be seen as a troll.

I am sorry if my tone causes some confusion but the CC/CM history has produced some problems, thus my suggestion to use search and you can judge. Otherwise, let's let this one go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, silly me. I forgot how wrapped up people get with games, whether its their kids soccer match or a computer game. They seem to be blind to the word game. Oh well.

My apologies if I've fanned flames or re-opened any wounds.

Being a musician, I should know better that to ask questions on subjective topics. D'OH!

------------------

I used to have a life, now I have CM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no actually cc4 did but...in all fairness

the mod people out there did a really good job with cc3 an gave it a lot of life...but cc main problem is that the map's are too small for tank vs tank action thats what killed it for me an the complete lack of any controllable off board artillery although i'll be following the release of cc5 to see how the new change's take hold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Rollstoy

CM did NOT ruin CC for me!

They are completely different, but they are both pieces of programming and graphical art.

It is a pleasure to own both of them.

Regards,

Thomm

------------------

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely ruined it for me. The beta demo did.

I've tried playing CC2 a while ago. All the time I keep fratically

trying to "zoom in". And then it's the

"NOOOO!! DONT TURN YOUR BACK! ROTATE!! ROTATE DAMMIT!! AAAUUUUGGHHH!!!" mad.gif

Maybe I'll give the CC1 a go sometime next year, it looked ugly

but worked better than CC2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like both. CC is more for a quick beer and preztel game at this point, where CM is when i have lots of time to think about every move i make. The nice thing about CC is that you can find and play human oponents pretty much whenever you desire, where with CM you have to play PbEM at this time. It is nice to do PbEM when you wish to spread it out. But some sundays i fell like spending every single moment on a game, and the pauses are somewhat distracting. I think this will be improved once the Multyplayer part of the game is implemented.

Other then that, both games are good, for what they are designed for. And lets not forget, CC has been trying to simulate small unit action for some time now, and I personaly have had many hours of fun playing time with this game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally agree with Four Strings, same here. I personally still like both, but CM has definitely made me look at CloseCombat even more critical than before, and I too know of a good friend who has totally defected from CC, not only but largely also because of CM.

I wholeheartedly agree that the zone is full of people who are full of it.

I disagree with T34 however, it isn't hectic at all, and I will beat any zone clickfester flat if they try any rush stuff (at least I did so in the past); in cc, "Rushing gets you nowhere - fast.". Camping, Ambushes and cautious moves with recon by fire etc. are the way to go, rushes only to be utilized rarely. Lack of fast-click ability on one side's part is largely compensated by each soldier's self-preservation and defense tacAI instinct.

Finally, jdmorse does have a point about best letting this issue to itself (I know my posting here is a venire contra factum proprium in the face of that).

The only thing I do not like about all the pro-cc and anti-cc fanatics is that many of them followed onto cc lately, or tried just some, usually later, versions off cc. Thus a whole lotof wrong assertions are made, such as Flipper's questionable remark about "total lack of off-board controllable artillery" (cc4 and cc5 have it, besides I don't think it is the make-or-break criteria for judging a wargame).

anyways, let's just let these two games coexist, if any of the two sides want to sound off about really bad, annoying games it should be crap like SuddenStrike, which is being advertised as an ultimate-realistic wargame...ha ha.

------------------

"Say i think u all need to chill out." (GAZ_NZ)

[This message has been edited by M Hofbauer (edited 10-03-2000).]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. CC ruined CC for me. I've always hated it. (shrug)

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by ahauschild:

CC is more for a quick beer and preztel game<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep. One of CM's strong points is that you can easily finish 6 - 12 + beers in an evening of play. =)

Kitty

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by General_Petrovsky:

I've never played any of the CC games, but I am a CM fanatic and I love wargames. Tell me, am I missing out?? Should I buy a CC game or two to try them out? Or is CM so much better that they would be a waste of time and money??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

CC2&CC3 Are good war games butt CC4 I was real Dissappointed in it!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest kking199

My $.02...

Played CC2:ABTF when first came out, I LOVED it!! CC3... well, it was disappointing for me but I know alot of Grognards really loved it. Now I liked CC4, BUT, it basically to me was more of the same, no substantial improvement from CC2. CC and CM are very different games, so to compare is unfair, BUT to answer the question I at this point do not plan on buying CC5, that probably says it all for me. I will have to read/hear alot of very positive comments to purchase CC5. But if you have not played any CC at all get that combo pack that has the first 3 in it, it would be worth $20-30 bucks easy.

BTW (Does anyone remember seeing the commercial for the original?!?!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...