Stephen Smith Posted June 30, 2000 Share Posted June 30, 2000 Well, maybe not literally 'no more patches.' But I think you need to be careful about patching-the more patches you create, the more versions of the game that will exist, the more compatibility problems that will arise, the more play balance issues that will arise etc etc. When TOAW came out, patches soon followed, with nauseating regularity, so that eventually user made scenarios were literally unplayable. As I recall, there were something like 16 versions of TOAW, not including purchasable upgrades. I found it difficult to download and run scenarios off the net, it would have been difficult to play against other people because it wasn't clear which version they had, scenarios became unbalanced because of new supply rules, etc etc. Improvement is a good thing; but I suggest you improve only occasionally (as a rule, perhaps one patch every six months?). The game has been out all of three weeks now, and there are already two patches out-I consider this a disturbing sign... Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KwazyDog Posted June 30, 2000 Share Posted June 30, 2000 I understand your point of view Stephen, but personally Id like to see just the opposite and Im not talking about CM here, Im talking about the whole gaming industry. Anyone whom got burnt by buying Falcon 4 when it first came out will understand where I am coming from. Of course it would be great to have a game that the developers didnt feel the need to bug fix or the will to enhance, but in reality we are far off from that being possable. Im happy to take the time to download the latest patch and make sure Im up to date when it comes to multiplay games. I much prefer to have new features and bug fixes at the expense of this extra effort. Each to their own of course Stephen, I understand your side of the story too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ntg84 Posted June 30, 2000 Share Posted June 30, 2000 DLing patches isn't a big deal. When you spend 40-50 dollars on a game you want it to work the best it can for you. Hidden and Dangerous neede a patch every other day, so I was happy to get those. Now a game like Counter-strike where a new beta version comes out every day to fix a not broken game is annoying. Plus I can see down loading an annoyance to people without a cable modem, becasue it takes some time to get that patch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Madmatt Posted June 30, 2000 Share Posted June 30, 2000 This is one of the advantages to a direct sale Internet Only Purchased game actually. One of the downsides to rapid patch releases in more mainstream games is lack of information to the consumer that the patches even exist. I know of many games that I own that I literally stummbled upon a patch months after I shelved it do to some problem that was fixed later on! Anyone that has purchased Combat Mission will know about this webpage and it's very easy for BTS to send a notification email to all the existing owners indicating that a new patch has been posted. Other notification systems are in place with the CM WebRing sites and gaming sites which routinely carry patches. The compatability issues you speak of are just an offshot of the type of fixes that are going into the patch. The number of PBEM games going on now is exponentially greater than it was during the test cycle so it's obvious that some new issues will appear. Better to get them fixed now in the begining than to let them languish for months and months and cause people problems. I see post release patches as a sign that the devolopers are willing to listen to their customer base and continue to support the product. If BTS were to adopt a 'patch every 6 months approach' you wouldn't get the second patch until CM2 would be in devolopment. No, it seems a much wiser course of action is to patch now while the installed user base is still comparatively small then to wait months and months and possibly cause delays to future projects. And there hasn't been two patches, there has been one. An updated demo is not a patch. As I understand it the next public released patch for the full game will in fact be 1.03, but I have no hard ETA on when that will arrive. Madmatt ------------------ If it's in Combat Mission, it's on Combat Mission HQ! CMHQ-Annex, The Alternative side of Combat Mission Combat Mission HQ CMHQ-Annex Proud members of the Combat Mission WebRing [This message has been edited by Madmatt (edited 06-30-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leclerc Posted June 30, 2000 Share Posted June 30, 2000 There are 2 differences with TOAW: - AS CM is sold only at Battlefront site, we can expect almost all players will come back to the site and so be aware of the patch avaibility. - i'm sure Big Time Software will not make some of the patchs a " new" game to be sold. As much I understand that for TOAW WOTY because the TOAW2 engine gave a real enhancment, as much I'm disgusted by the ACOW release.How to kill an excellent game by a short-minded marketing policy... Moreover, What I prefer in CM is... status of battlefront. Within the time-development limits of big companies, revolutionary projects can't simply give all their results because time needed to polish them doesn't exist. The scope of TOAW needs a development time certainly as long than CM ( ie roughly 3 years). As Norm said the last month, the "tinker" list for TOAW could be made by one more year of work. But he simply can't because of economical constraints. Too bad... even if TOAW ACOW is IMHO a really good one. [This message has been edited by Leclerc (edited 06-30-2000).] [This message has been edited by Leclerc (edited 06-30-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts