infohawk Posted August 31, 2000 Share Posted August 31, 2000 Combat Mission is selling well because of its graphics, but you wouldn't know that by reading certain threads. I was reading Elijah's post about full squad representation and it seems like the only thing people cared about was the realism contained in the algorithms. I dislike games like Starcraft, but I do like nice graphics. I like seeing the screen and imagining that it is real- and it's harder to do that when you've got only three men. Why doesn't anyone care about graphical realism? If BTS says it would be too hard to do, that's too bad, but they shouldn't be applauded (on this particular matter). If you look around at other games on the market (and yes, most of them are dumb), you see 3D environments where hundreds of figures that are animated and represented. (And I know that it might not be possible with CM, but that argument seems shady coming from the devs.) It seems that the hardcore grognards and BTS (at least based on the post in the Elijah squad representation thread) aren't paying enough attention to graphics. Why is Combat Mission selling so well: it's kick-ass graphics combined with behind the scenes realism. The fact that BTS wasn't ready with enough cds shows they were expecting the normal low purchases that a cruddy-graphic wargame would have. Look at Tour of Duty '44. That game's graphics blow. I would never buy that in this day and age (although I will buy The Art of War games from Talonsoft [operational games don't pretend to display details and don't need as much graphics]). My main point is BTS should keep pushing ahead with graphics because a lot of people enjoy them and because it will attract new gamers to the genre. CM Borg ...bla bla bla...hampster etc... Again, I love Combat Mission because of the graphical realism (rare in wargames) AND the lack of lasers (put another way: historical realism). Nonetheless, I'm disappointed BTS appears (again based on the post by the moderator mentioned above) they are not as concerned with graphics as they could be. Why don't we just have CM2 be a text-only game a la 1980s adventure (j/k: this last sentence not a real argument)? (P.S. If people don't like clutter, they could always toggle it off) ------------------ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamstersss Posted August 31, 2000 Share Posted August 31, 2000 Let me just say that I learned my lesson and in no way endorse this thread. Really. I mean come on, do I look THAT stupid? Guys? Hello? On a serious note, the true graphical beauty of CM comes when you witness realistic warfare, squad size regardless, it's absolutely beautiful and the beauty isn't marrred by a nagging doubt as to its consistency (In my opinion). (Irregardless is not a word. Neither is forwards, backwards, already. Neither will I ever center around something nor shall I e.g. when I mean to i.e. I'm so sorry. AND "its" is possessive, "it's" is a contraction) ------------------ You wouldn't know the dust of Thermopylae if it came up to you, handed you a business card reading "Dust of Thermopylae, 480 B.C.E.", then kicked you in the shins. -Hakko Ichiu [This message has been edited by Elijah Meeks (edited 08-30-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted August 31, 2000 Share Posted August 31, 2000 Infohawk, Steve closed the other thread for a reason. I believe it is considered bad manners to reopen the topic again. They have made their decision, and I think that has to be accepted. Steve's post sounded pretty final to me. So maybe next time try to contain the urge to beat a dead horse. ------------------ Andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted August 31, 2000 Share Posted August 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>If you look around at other games on the market (and yes, most of them are dumb), you see 3D environments where hundreds of figures that are animated and represented.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> All the soldiers in CM are composed of "polygons". Those other games with hundreds of figures, like Shogun-Total War) are composed of sprites. Even the makers of that game acknowledge that they were limited to how many sprites they could fit on the screen. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I'm disappointed BTS appears (again based on the post by the moderator mentioned above) they are not as concerned with graphics as they could be<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I'm sorry, what a load of crap. Steve and Charles have bent over backwards to try to please many and results are very good. To infer that BTS is unconcerned with "any" part of CM shows a telling lack of knowledge of the history (past and ongoing) that BTS has with this game and pleasing they're fans. Whether this is intentional or not on your part depends on your motives I guess. ~johnS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infohawk Posted August 31, 2000 Author Share Posted August 31, 2000 Elijah, I commend your writing skills! What's your point about the grammar/spelling. Is it that I'm not educated? Is it that I am stupid or that the errors render my argument irrelevant. I'm not gonna proofread my posts for a wargame bbs when you see all the hamster/smily faces out there. On to the real response: Wow, you guys seem content not asking for more. I like this game but I'll always want more. Kudos to BTS but you guys are brown-nosers(OK The brown-nose thing IS a little snotty- I admit it and I take it back. You guys are a lot cooler then other gamers. I'm just trying to be critical [in the good rigourous way]). "Bending over backwards"? It's their job. I paid for this game. They're performing a service. Again, this is the funnest game I've played in while but comon' what do most gamers care about the history of a game's developpment? Hardcore ones do but not all of us are hardcore. Finally, my point wasn't about Elijah's post. I think it's pretty new: I'm not beating a dead horse. I'm trying to discuss the fanatic, graphic-ignoring hardcore gamers that often seem to neglect important concerns (i.e. graphics). [This message has been edited by infohawk (edited 08-30-2000).] [This message has been edited by infohawk (edited 08-30-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamstersss Posted August 31, 2000 Share Posted August 31, 2000 My post was related to my numerous grammatical errors. As I corrected them, I kept a running tally. With that out of the way, perhaps you could edit your post to make it a little less inflammatory. These people are not brown-nosers, they are protective of a company that has been so good to them. (You don't see Relic checking their forums for game-altering feedback, do you?) ------------------ You wouldn't know the dust of Thermopylae if it came up to you, handed you a business card reading "Dust of Thermopylae, 480 B.C.E.", then kicked you in the shins. -Hakko Ichiu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Banshee Posted August 31, 2000 Share Posted August 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> Finally, my point wasn't about Elijah's post. I think it's pretty new: I'm not beating a dead horse. I'm trying to discuss the fanatic, graphic-ignoring hardcore gamers that often seem to neglect important concerns (i.e. graphics). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You are beating a dead horse, and the topic has been closed by BTS. This is just flame bait and I hope that BTS locks this thread up as well. If you really think this hasn't been posted to death try using the search function and you'll see the many discussions re: graphics. ------------------ Veni, vidi, panzerschrecki Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted August 31, 2000 Share Posted August 31, 2000 Welcome to the wonderful world of choices, aka Economics 101, class is in session now. Teacher: Today I will endeavour to explain to Infohawk why we can't have all things all the time. Other pupils: Boring! We know already, he just does not get it. Why do we have to suffer this again because of one who simply won't comprehend? Teacher: Now now, just because he does not get this does not mean he is retarded, be nice to him. Now, if we have one person and a day of 24 hours, of which this one person works 10, how many man-hours do we have? Etc.etc. Maybe you get the message, maybe not, I could not care less. You are annoying anyway and go around insulting people. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by infohawk: 1. They may be dumb mistakes, but at least I'm not a snot like you. You're rude. 2. Moreover, you guys are brown-nosers. What's with talk about people bending over backwards? 3. It's their job. I paid for this game. They're performing a service. 4. I'm not beating a dead horse. I'm trying to discuss the fanatic, graphic-ignoring hardcore gamers that often seem to neglect important concerns (i.e. graphics). <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> 1. See who says that... 2. You are rude, or do you think calling someone a brown-noser is not rude? 3. You bought it 'as is', if you don't get the meaning, maybe you need to improve your English. Or go back to school and have somebody explain it to you. 4. You are. And you are annoying and rude, but I already said that. ------------------ Andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infohawk Posted August 31, 2000 Author Share Posted August 31, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>With that out of the way, perhaps you could edit your post to make it a little less inflammatory. [...] (You don't see Relic checking their forums for game-altering feedback, do you?) <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That's true and I hope to be less inflammatory, but my point is not about BTS being a good team or anything. It's about the way grognards don't seem to value the importance of graphics. If wargames had better graphics, more people would buy 'em, more would be put out, and I would have more fun because of the increased number of games and better graphics. Again, BTS and CM are great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted August 31, 2000 Share Posted August 31, 2000 Aah, I've been itching to call someone a punk-ass this evening, and look what turns up! infohawk, Combat Mission has realism at its core. BTS will not cut corners on realism in order to create a more whizz-bang type game. The game could look better, yes. But everything you see is functional. There is nothing which doesn't serve a purpose. There is nothing put in just to try and impress you. The fact that you question BTS's logic on matters such as full squad representation, shows that you have not made any effort to get to grips with the issue. Instead you have dismissed BTS and many of us out of hand. Your argument sounds like it might be credible, but only to those who couldn't be bothered checking up on the facts. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 31, 2000 Share Posted August 31, 2000 Infohawk, you have totall missed the point of that thread. What Elijah was asking for is TECHNICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DO, and therefore it isn't going to happen. Even if the graphics power is there (it isn't) we would have to sacrifice programming a better game in favor of programming redundant graphics. And again, for the hard of reading, the hardware is NOT capable of doing the stuff asked of us. So it is not a matter of "not caring" or "brown nosing" but rather admitting that the world has something called reality and that it is God. We must obey it, no ifs ands of buts. So what is the point of discussing (or worse, demanding) something that CAN NOT BE DONE. Answer -> no point at all. This is a dead horse. It has been discussed to death. Do a Search. I challenge anybody to show me a 3D game, with 3D poligional figures (not SPRITES!) that has hundreds, if not thousands, of figured running around in an open landscape environment. You can't. And you know why not? Because it isn't possible. End of story. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts