MarshalZhukov Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 Don't get me wrong. I love both games. But is there a rivalry? Because the fellas over at the ClubSSI forums really don't seem to like this game, or you guys (well, that's my opinion). What do you, loyal CM gamers, think about CC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Captain Foobar* Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 Well, I play both games, and post at both forums. I dont dislike myself too much, so personally I say the rivalry is moot. Modern tribalism on display Zhukov, guilty parties on both sides, but it seems to be getting better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Renaud Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 CC2 was a classic. That was the first wargame [in ages] (or computer game of any kind) that really had me excited. Playing the entire campaign from beginning to end was a fantastic experience. Internet play was fairly reliable and I played this a ton on the MS game site (whatever it was called). CC3 seemed to lose something, but there were some user mods that fixed it up pretty good. The maps, while larger, were not quite as interesting as the maps for CC2. Leading a group of troops through the campaign was fun. The scenarios in the campaign attempted to make you feel like you were part of titanic struggles, which really didn't work well with the tiny squad scale of CC. Also the multiplay was bugged for a long time...i finally gave up on it. CM is quite a different game. Much larger scale, true 3d, much more freedom to make scenarios, all around more thorough historical research and accuracy, much more hardcore than CC series. Definitely will not appeal to all. I think some folks may have given CM a bad name by going over to other forums and badmouthing/getting into arguments. Don't know why there would be bad feelings otherwise. -Ren [This message has been edited by Renaud (edited 10-01-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 If this is not flame bait I do not know what is. Take the high ground. -john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnno Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 Which CC? I have 2 of them #1 and #3 I think they are fun and good overall games. Combat Mission on the other hand is the best I've seen yet. My opinion only of course... Johnno Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wanderer Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 Originally posted by Johnno: Which CC? I have 2 of them #1 and #3 -------------------- You missed out the best one, No 2 --------------------- "I love it, God help me I do love it so" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 I think the game appeals to two different crowd extemes. While CC has gone more towards RTS, CM went the other direction. Before there was even a CM demo we had a few heated debates about which would be more realistic. After CM demo was released that largely went away, except for pro-RT people thinking that RT is inherently more realistic (it isn't) or that 2D is as good as 3D (it isn't). So now it comes down to what type of game you like more - twitch or thinking - since the realism question has largely been settled (CC IV did that all on its own). I will point out that many people like both, including myself (CC2 was a great game) so for the majority of people there is no rivalry. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ahauschild Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 The Close Combat series was very good for what it did. I enjoyed the games i played, yes, the accuracy is not as good as in Combat Mission, but it was the first semi real time WW2 squad level computer game that actuly looked kewl. I belive Combat Mission has surpassed Close Combat by far in realism, and will get even better with CM2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 Maybe we could wait till we see CM 2 before we start comparing with 4 different versions of CC -john Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mace Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 I had CC, but I couldn't get into it, and have hence avoided the additional releases. IMHO, CMBO is a lot more immersive, and a lot more enjoyable (perhaps because I began my grognard life as a miniatures gamer, and CMBO would have to be the closest thing to miniatures on the PC)! Mace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hundminen Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 I've stated my opinion several times in the past in this forum on the CC series, and I'll say it again: CM is superior to CC (yes, even CC2). Superior in all aspects, except one. Internet play. The thing I miss about CC2 was the fantastic 1 or 2 hour games on the Zone, which would often keep me up well past midnight (maybe it's just as well - I'm getting too old). Although I have completed now about 100 PBEM games of CM, PBEM is just not the same (my memory is getting bad - I can't remember what happened day the before). Once TCP/IP is patched, then I believe CM will finally ruin my sleeping habits, just as CC2 used to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 The main source of friction between CC and CM fans, on this forum at least, is when someone comes along and claims that CM is wrong for being turn-based, and CC is more realistic, and Atomic is going to do a 3D Close Combat and pull the carpet out from under BTS. Otherwise there's no reason why any rivalry should exist, beyond the aforementioned tribalism. David ------------------ ...the pilot was able to circle and make a safe belly landing. According to O'Neal, 'this guy jumped out and ran up to me, shouting, "Give me a gun, quick! I know right where that Kraut s.o.b. is and I'm gonna get him".' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Captain Foobar* Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 Sadly, the tribalism led to some boisterous CM-er posts over at clubbssi, so there have been fouls on both sides. I dunno, if a game came along that "reportedly" blew CM out of the water, and people came in scoffing at CM and the CM community, I would not react too kindly either. (But I would probably go look at the game in question immediately ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supertanker Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Hundminen: Internet play.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I agree. I also used to have a lot of fun playing an hour or two on the Zone with CC1 and CC2. I have played all of *one* PBEM game, and it got me in trouble with the wife because it took far too much hovering at the computer to get it done. It wasn't an enormous one either, only 1200 points. When I can bundle all of that up into an hour or two of TCP/IP play, I will be set, and CC will become but a pleasant memory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russellmz Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 i just spent a few minutes looking around their forums. scary. got that spooky dark green background with white lettering. some played the cm demo and DIDN'T LIKE IT. this is hell, Jon. a nightmarish freaky alternate universe where all consuming black fires rage eternally, shedding no light and emitting no heat. an atmosphere of palpaple evil, stange fantasmogrical creatures with wolf heads and spidery bodies running about, with the residents running about under the tune of their mighty master who has gone by many names through out history: Old Nick, Scratch, Old Split-Foot, and Der Teufel, Lucifer, Asmodeus, The Hooven Cloof, Pocker, The Prince of Darkness,, His Satanic Majesty, The Arch-Fiend, The Evil One, Beelsebub, Belial, The Wicked One, The Tempter, The Author of Evil, Mefistofeles, The Ancient Enemy, and the one who shall not be named. [modified from the Daily Show with Jon Stewart's newscast of the Republican convention] btw, i am joking, i played cc3 and liked it... ------------------ "They had their chance- they have not lead!" - GW Bush "They had mechanical pencils- they have not...lead?" - Jon Stewart on The Daily Show Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Captain Foobar* Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 LOL, good post russell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagdwyrm Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 whats the point of this going on and on...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagdwyrm Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 Actually what am i saying I heard about CM over at the CC forums, anything that some people were so apparently appalled and repelled by I knew was worth checking out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R-Man Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 My addiction to CM has not yet even scratched the surface of my addiction to Close Combat. But it’s coming close . The Real Red and Real Infantry mods to CC3 made it as good a game as there was available at the time. I do not agree that it was a twitch game. Spot the tank, hit 1+V, 2+V, 3+V, etc...Boom! Hotkeys compensated for the twitch factor to some extent. BTS would do well to include a campaign game with men and units that increased in experience levels as they went from battle to battle, and could upgrade their equipment. I see a combination of CC3's unit development, and TalonSoft's dynamic campaign system. The defensive AI in CM is definately up to the task. BTW, IGotMilk was the funniest poster I ever read on those forums! I went there during the first CC-CM war, and was pleased to see that the real vile characters stayed out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killmore Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 Hate started when I mentioned that Combat Mission was released on CC forum! I wrote 2 sententences only ! There were mentioning multiple 3D games and I mentioned CM. I was then flamed 10 times and CM was being TRASHED in every way. Soon CMers came to my help. Then CC forum people came to CM forum and Started to trash the game here. I loved CC3 - specially multiplayer... CC4 forced you to play repetitive battles on the same map all the time. PanzerSchreek was a super weapon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMC Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 At the risk of starting a fire.. (heh, heh, fire, fire, heh, heh) CC does do a couple of things other than internet play better than CM. Some of this is a function of scale. Infantry. Soldiers are represented individually. Weapons fire tracks bullets and not abstracted units of firepower. In the right situation you can see "who shot john." Soldiers are wounded in three levels. Soldiers have a variety of dynamic attributes like weapon skill, leadership, stamina etc. Quality of the unit is dynamic based on the soldiers in it. Battlefield psychology. Soldiers panic and rout individually as well as in groups. Soldiers become fanatic or beserk individually. To me it seems that much of the argument of CM's superior realism focuses on two things: Armor. The ballistic model is unmatched [well except for this thing with the 88L71 ]. Unit mixes, TO&Es, orders of battle. CM has many more unit types and more care has been taken to model them correctly within the limits of the CM engine. Since CM doesn't have a campaign mode it can't be dinged for things like flammhetzers making unscheduled appearances in Arnhem. Thank you for your support. I got my flame-retardant suit on..... fire, fire, heh, heh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supertanker Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 There is a preview of CC5 available at Beta Bites (this story/link shamelessly shanked from Blue's News): http://www.betabites.com/features/closecomb/closecomb2.html I didn't find the writing helpful, but the screenshots were nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KwazyDog Posted October 2, 2000 Share Posted October 2, 2000 Okay guys, I can see where this one is about to head so I think we will leave it there. Both games are different...they chose to model things in different ways and should be accepted for what they are. I enjoyed CC2 very much, but CC3 turned me away from the series unfortunately. I still remember my shock when my opponent used and 3 rocket half tracks as indirect AT weapons. What I have never understood about the debate between CM and CC is that they are aiming at different crowds, so really, there shouldnt be a debate (would you compare Rogue Spear and Unreal Tournament..). CM is aiming at the wargaming crowd out there whereas CC is aiming at a more general crowd (something I think atomic themselves would probably admit), thus both parties will probably never completely agree on the two games. Everytime I read a thread on the comparison between these two games they always end up in a flame war and they usually leave me with one thought.... Cant we all just get along? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts