Do you all have 50Mhz 486 PC or something?

[Panzer76]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gen-x87H:

50Mhz? I wish.

486 SX 25Mhz, 8 MBs of RAM, 1 GB HD, 4MB video card. If this baby does run CM3 im going to be pissed!

Gen<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You must be kidding!??! Don't tell me you can run CM on that thing?

Panzer

[tiborhead]

Greetings.

AMD Athelon 1000 mhz

320 MB RAM

16 MB NVIDIA Vanta Graphic card

I'm sort of half and half on this one. On one

hand, while players with high-end systems should not be held back by a limited engine, on the other, players with lower-end systems should not be forsaken just because they're a little behind the times. When I ordered CM (June 2000) I had a Pentium 266 with 48 MB RAM and a stock 2 meg video card and CM ran like a one-legged, drunken hobo. I barely had enough cash to buy the game, let alone upgrade or buy a new system. I'm a little better off now and can afford the upgrades every now and then (the next thing is a new graphics card). I think the solution is a gameplay preference option. You know, a deely that CM currently has that allows you to set smoke, tree thickness, horizon detail, and so on, only extend the options. Like dynamic/ambient light on/off and so on.

This is not uncommon today, as many games have these kind of options. In this way, everyone gets to play, and everyone is happy

(well, for the most part).

[xerxes]

450 mghz g4 (via cpu upgrade, love that low-insertion replacement, it's really easy), 256 mb, 32mb vid card.

1. "Designing a game for a mac is bad marketing" - Hmm, Bungie did exactly this and seems to have made out ok. From a pure marketing perspective, designing purely for a Mac is a better idea than it sounds from a small company perspective. It's a similar startegy to that used by some successful convenience store chains that targeted towns under 30k people. The reason is less competition in a much smaller market is a solid business strategy. You just won't ever get to be a top-dog that way and you have to produce your product very cost effectively.

Total market for PC games is obviously much (wildly/enormously/etc) bigger but it has proportionally more competitors. PC-only games have an astoundly high failure rate.

2. Graphics rate way below gameplay for me, I download all the cool tricked out mods and then turn off the trees 80% of the time. (I do turn them on just to watch if I have the time).

3. Graphics/Sound are extremely important for bringing in new customers, particularly beyond the well-defined grog market segment. I'll take better chrome. I'd really like to see fire upgraded.

4. A scalable system is a "state-of-the-art" design approach with polygon count adjustments tied to CPU load. I would imagine BTS with it's small development staff (what are they now, Steve + 1?) would be strained to do this so they have to choose a middle ground.

5. When they become wildly successful and hire a platoon of developers we can be treated to the wonders of cutting edge game software technology development.

6. CM should be ported to the playstation 2 so you can get great graphix. LOL, I can't imagine the return rate for that port.

7. If BTS could go scalable, I completely agree with you Panzer.

- xerxes

[Gen-x87H]

Here is an issue, why should BTS develop for your PC at all when it is easier for BTS to develop for Jarmo's Mac? Development times are lower (per BTS) for the Mac, they have an order of magnitude less conflicts (and thus BTS spends less money supporting them) and they make up a quarter of their sales."

Well there you go. You just answered your own question. If BTS does not develop for the PC surprise surprise thier sales will be a quarter of what it used to be.

"No matter how powerful, your computer is still stuck with Direct-X and all the bugs that go with that, wondering if any graphics card will work on a it, wondering if there will be a conflct with some obscure setting in your computer."

What bugs are you referring to? And I find that rather amusing as the MacOS until OS-X did not support OpenGL. But now that OS-X supports OpenGL they dont support RAVE which CM needs to run on the MacOS. Funny!

"BTS should just shuck it all, develop on the new Mac / UNIX platform, and be done with all that hassle. Plus, they would get a superior product if they developed with the newer Quartz screen engines rather than the older PC drawing system."

That is just comical as BTS has already stated that the new OS-X does not support RAVE and therefore the current engine can not be developed for it without a major rewrite. Besides I thought OS-X was based on the FreeBSD kernal? I thought that was linux.

"The answer of course is that the set the bar to meet, at the time of the game's production, the average machine of the average person both for profit, and because they believe in what they do."

Wrong havent you ever heard of the lowest common denominator in software design? they take the lowest specs they think the users will have when the game arrives and design for that. Hence the reason games coming out now only require at least a 400Mhz P2 when 1.4ghz Athlons and 1.8Ghz P4s are running around.

"They could, comments aside, design for a much higher end Macintosh OS-X dual processor 800 (equivilant in power to a 3.2ghz Pentium IV) with 64mb of VRAM, and then just ask you to buy the computer you specify to run the game."

Sure but since OS-X wont run CM or CM:BB what is the point? As for the dual 800Mhz equals 3.2Ghz in the x86 world get off the crack pipe. Even with altivec the G4 at 600Mhz is on par with an Athlon at 750Mhz.

Without AltiVec it is more like a 650Mhz Athlon. Putting into SMP is making it worse. the Athlon has a superior bus design and will scale better than the P3,P4, and G4. G4 is not 2 times more powerful LOL!

Gen

[Mark IV]

Your point is so obvious it is really... unnecessary. The problem is that you have posted an opinion, and some people have disagreed with it. Therefore, you have repeatedly replied that they must be "missing your point" or that your point is somehow hard to get across. It isn't. We got it. We disagree with it (some of us, anyway). You are not being flamed by anyone that I can see.

Kingfish responded with very nice logic. The broader the base, the more they sell. Are you getting his point?

And it you click the thoughtfully provided links to previous discussions, you will find that BTS has ALREADY raised the standard for CM2, etc., on into the future. In other words, they too have discerned the trend of PC platforms getting faster and better over time. So this is really a non-issue. Are you understanding that?

Back to your original post:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>It seems to me that people on this message board have below average PCs at home. I for one would like to see more graphical detail in the game. The thing is I'm afraid BTS is maybe trying to hard to make the game playable for people with ancient PC<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>, etc., etc.

Some people are more put off by the tone, than the sense of what you are saying. No one has come out AGAINST more graphical detail in the game. And your fears about what you think BTS is trying to do have been shown to be groundless. Can you understand this?

My machine has the same specs, exactly, as yours. I bought it mostly because of CM, although my PII-350 ran it fine.

I trust BTS to move with the times, as they have stated they would, without alienating the gamers in the mid-range. They are not going to wait until the last grognard registers his new graphics card in their database before upgrading the engine, as they have already stated.

If you are trying to be persuasive, a good rule is to consider your words from a neutral perspective, to make sure you aren't unintentionally insulting anyone, or to adopt the condescending stance that anyone who disagrees must be incapable of understanding your logic. You know what I mean?

[Username]

I have a Athlon 1.2 geforce 64m and a PII400 with a 16m (windNT) and a 233PI. The PII400 gave a few years of service with win95 and it is now my engineering computer (NT).

In the future, I expect a PC to last a couple of years at least. Maybe when CM2 gets out, I will upgrade the athlon's video card but not much else.

Lewis

[Panzer76]

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

1. "Designing a game for a mac is bad marketing" - Hmm, Bungie did exactly this and seems to have made out ok. From a pure marketing perspective, designing purely for a Mac is a better idea than it sounds from a small company perspective. It's a similar startegy to that used by some successful convenience store chains that targeted towns under 30k people. The reason is less competition in a much smaller market is a solid business strategy. You just won't ever get to be a top-dog that way and you have to produce your product very cost effectively.

- xerxes<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I guess you are refering to my "I would rather choose the PC market than the Mac, if I had too choose" opnion? This was just to reply to Slapdragon, but I mean what I said.

You have a couple of valid points, but I disagree in this case. Combat Mission is not an FPS clone or just a rehash of old games which is so common these days, neither is BTS a big company with huge payrolls, and therefor have to sell a lot of games.

No, CM is a small revolution in wargaming, and as such syicks out of the crowd. Also, BTS have relative small expenses, and can survive even if not CM sells XX thousands of copys.

For Bungie, I thought they sold PC (and X-box, mind you) games also, I know I have a few of them

Panzer

[Gen-x87H]

For Bungie, I thought they sold PC (and X-box, mind you) games also, I know I have a few of them "

Actually Bungie was bought by Microsoft and the most funny part about all of it is the much acclaimed and waited game "Halo" which was hailed by Stevie jobs at a mac fair is now going to be for the X-Box.

Gen

[Panzer76]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gen-x87H:

Sure but since OS-X wont run CM or CM:BB what is the point? As for the dual 800Mhz equals 3.2Ghz in the x86 world get off the crack pipe. Even with altivec the G4 at 600Mhz is on par with an Athlon at 750Mhz.

Without AltiVec it is more like a 650Mhz Athlon. Putting into SMP is making it worse. the Athlon has a superior bus design and will scale better than the P3,P4, and G4. G4 is not 2 times more powerful LOL!

Gen<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

OMG, he opened the can, run, RUN I say!

BTW, I agree

Panzer

[Panzer76]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Gen-x87H:

For Bungie, I thought they sold PC (and X-box, mind you) games also, I know I have a few of them "

Actually Bungie was bought by Microsoft and the most funny part about all of it is the much acclaimed and waited game "Halo" which was hailed by Stevie jobs at a mac fair is now going to be for the X-Box.

Gen<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know, but Bungie published PC games long before Microsoft bought it.

Panzer

[Maximus]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Pvt. Ryan:

Looks like Maximus changed his handle again. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not quit.

But however in answer to the thread starter. The graphics will look better if you download some nice hi-res mods. The community HAS realized that the stock graphics sucked and we have created some really nice replacements. I'd suggest downloading everything from Marco Bergman, Gordon Molek, Shane Petersson, & Fernando J. Buil Carrera.

[Panzer76]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

Your point is so obvious it is really... unnecessary. The problem is that you have posted an opinion, and some people have disagreed with it. Therefore, you have repeatedly replied that they must be "missing your point" or that your point is somehow hard to get across. It isn't. We got it. We disagree with it (some of us, anyway). You are not being flamed by anyone that I can see.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, if I pose a question or a comment or an opinion, I expect that people who disagree with me disagree with what I'm saying, and don't twist and turn on what I've been writing. That's what I mean when I ask them if they are "missing the point". Because, they have not replyed to my opinion, rather, fabricated a new "opinion" I supposedly had.

As you can see, several others have been disagreeing with me (and my opinion), and thats not a problem.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

Kingfish responded with very nice logic. The broader the base, the more they sell. Are you getting his point?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Was that his point? For me it just seemed that he tried to twist what I wrote.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

And it you click the thoughtfully provided links to previous discussions, you will find that BTS has ALREADY raised the standard for CM2, etc., on into the future. In other words, they too have discerned the trend of PC platforms getting faster and better over time. So this is really a non-issue. Are you understanding that?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, I do thank you very much. And I have not pressed this issue any more:

"

As it has been stated several times by now, BTS supposedly hasn't even started designing the new gfx engine, so we'll just have to wait and see what they figure is the average machine when they do start designing it, hopefully not in the too distant future!

"

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mark IV:

(...)

Can you understand this?

My machine has the same specs, exactly, as yours. I bought it mostly because of CM, although my PII-350 ran it fine.

(...)

If you are trying to be persuasive, a good rule is to consider your words from a neutral perspective, to make sure you aren't unintentionally insulting anyone, or to adopt the condescending stance that anyone who disagrees must be incapable of understanding your logic. You know what I mean?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've not been, in my opinion, been condescending towards anybody who has had any constructive feedback, for those who are just trying to be a pain in the ass, frankly, I don't care. I don't think I've been rude to anybody in particular during this discussion.

Yes, I know what you mean, try not to "adopt the condescending stance". Maybe I'm not the only one...

Panzer

[dalem]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzer76:

You assume a lot. First of, either I'm having a very difficult time expressing my self or you don't want to see my point.

-snip-

BTW: Just because it stands "Junior Member" next to my handle, it doesn't mean I'm new to this forum.

Panzer<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, between your subject title and

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

Im not saying that u should have a 1 GHz machine with GeForce 3, but, atleast a PIII/Celeron/AMD 400 with 8/16 MB gfx card.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I didn't get so much of a concern about the direction of CM development in general as I got a concern with your definition of what a minimum system should be. But as far as the actual issue of graphics development of the CM concept, I'm probably the worst type of person to poll: I will upgrade to whatever CMX may require, but actually wouldn't care if the graphics never got any better. I rarely go down to the really close views, and when I do, it all looks fantastic to me.

-dale

[Panzer76]

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

I didn't get so much of a concern about the direction of CM development in general as I got a concern with your definition of what a minimum system should be.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No problem.

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

But as far as the actual issue of graphics development of the CM concept, I'm probably the worst type of person to poll: I will upgrade to whatever CMX may require, -dale<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thats the spirit!

Panzer

[Panzer76]

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

The graphics will look better if you download some nice hi-res mods. The community HAS realized that the stock graphics sucked and we have created some really nice replacements. I'd suggest downloading everything from Marco Bergman, Gordon Molek, Shane Petersson, & Fernando J. Buil Carrera.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know, I have most of them and those guys really kick ass! Too bad Tiger left...

But, I was thinking about future CM's, but lets not rip up in that again, we've got as much of an answer that we possible can.

Panzer

[tiborhead]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzer76:

Ok, when reading various posts about what the 3d engine can or cannot do, it seems that often people say that this and that can't be modeled because of the hardware constraints.

It seems to me that people on this message board have below average PCs at home. I for one would like to see more graphical detail in the game. The thing is I'm afraid BTS is maybe trying to hard to make the game playable for people with ancient PC with the consequence that the game doesn't look as good as it could for the rest of us.

Do you see my point? I don't want to have to settle with worse graphics just because some people insist CM shoould be playable on an 4 year old machine. Sorry, but then its really about time to get a new machine!

This is especially a topic when BTS is gonna revamp the whole gfx engine in CM3.

Bottom line is, IF this degrades the look of the game, BTS shouldn't care if some people with old machines can play the game or not. Take advantage of what a modern PC can do instead of trying to please everybody. If ofcource the 3d engine is constructed in such a fashion that it accomedates different levels of hardware on the users machine, it's all good.

Im not saying that u should have a 1 GHz machine with GeForce 3, but, atleast a PIII/Celeron/AMD 400 with 8/16 MB gfx card.

So what kind of machine do YOU have? I myself have a 1.2 Ghz AMD with a GeForce2-MX 64MB gfx card.

Panzer<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Someone recently said your attitude was rather condescending and you stated that this was not true. Now I'm not saying you were, but if you re-read your initial post, I think you can see where the misunderstanding may have originated.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> It seems to me that people on this message board have below average PCs at home. I for one would like to see more graphical detail in the game. The thing is I'm afraid BTS is maybe trying to hard to make the game playable for people with ancient PC with the consequence that the game doesn't look as good as it could for the rest of us. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

To some, this may sound like "Well to hell with someone with a crappy system. If they can't shell out the dough, they don't deserve to play." Again, I'm not saying that this is what you meant, but this is just how some people may interpret it. This again shows the problem with message boards and other forms of written communication, as tonal and facial expressions are not available to discern the true meaning of a comment. Since you say you're not a newbie, I'd think you should have noticed how quick some people are to take offence to something they feel is a slam. Just my thoughts.

[Panzer Leader]

"Warp Factor 12 Scotty!"

"I canna give'er more power Cap'n, we'll break up!"

"I said Warp Factor 12, now!"

"I'm givin' 'er all I've got. We're breakin' up, Cap'n!"

[Marlow]

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

The community HAS realized that the stock graphics sucked and we have created some really nice replacements. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While some of the mods are nice, to say that the game as it was designed sucks is going way too far.

I remember the first time I booted it up and played the tutorial. As I watched my Shermans roll down the road, spot the Mark IV, watched the turrets rotate, and the shoot-out begin, I was in heaven. I watched my first CM kill a dozen times. I still think that original graphics are more than good enough. I do use a few of the mods, but it is definitely not a big deal to me.

One thing I have noticed is that many of the mods are not really any better than the stock graphics, just different. For example, many people like the subdued terrain, and think that it is more realistic. But have you ever seen rural France on a sunny spring day? The colors can be so vivid and bright that they are almost fluorescent.

[xerxes]

Bungie started as a Mac-only game developer. As they became succesful they branched out into Dual-platform games. They were extremely innovative in terms of FPS (Marathon-mac only) and Strategy games (myth-dual platform) which were both ground breaking for their time. Much of the "mod" development for myth was done by customers on macs.

They have been acquired by Microsoft which will probably prove unfortunate, we'll see.

- xerxes

[Panzer76]

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

To some, this may sound like "Well to hell with someone with a crappy system. If they can't shell out the dough, they don't deserve to play." Again, I'm not saying that (...)

comment. Since you say you're not a newbie, I'd think you should have noticed how quick some people are to take offence to something they feel is a slam. Just my thoughts.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, if this is why people are reacting, Im sorry. It's not my intetion to be condecendig towards people who have low end machines. Ok?

But really, this is just getting silly. As you said, yes, I've should have known, next time I post a message here I will post it in the most diplomatic way possible to avoid hurting ANYBODYS feelings.

We can all become politicans and write alot, but not really mean anything, that would be great!

Ok, so that was abit much, but the tolerance level on this BBS doesn't impress me. And with everbody saying there is such a adult audience on this BBS, it sure doesn't seem like that at times.

Panzer

[Panzer76]

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

Bungie started as a Mac-only game developer.

They have been acquired by Microsoft which will probably prove unfortunate, we'll see.

- xerxes<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I stand corrected.

Thanks for the info.

Panzer

[GenSplatton]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> To some, this may sound like "Well to hell with someone with a crappy system. If they can't shell out the dough, they don't deserve to play." Again, I'm not saying that this is what you meant, but this is just how some people may interpret it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Tibot, I agree with you for the most part. I agree 100% with your statement about lack of vocal inflection, facial expression, etc. But for someone to read THAT in to Panzer's statement, well, that's a personal problem. I find it to be a very large stretch in fact. That's the danger of reading IN to something as opposed to just reading what is there.

p.s. Damnit, slow down Panzer. You go two replies in in the time I typed the one.

[ 08-21-2001: Message edited by: GenSplatton ]

[Panzer76]

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

p.s. Damnit, slow down Panzer. You go two replies in in the time I typed the one.

[ 08-21-2001: Message edited by: GenSplatton ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know, I'm tring to go to bed (I live in Australia) but I can't, gotta answer msg.'s!!

BTW. Thanks for your support.

Panzer

[GenSplatton]

No worries mate (that's the extent of my Australian). It really isn't an attempt to defend you per se, or to pick on folks with lower end machines. There have been some excellent posts on both sides. But, it irks me at times to see someone post a topic with good intentions, only to see people nitpick and read things in to the statement that just aren't there solely for the sake of argument. I read your original post with a non-biased view (I bought the game when I had a 333 and upgraded later, so I've been on both sides) and just thought some of the attacks were totally unwarranted. So, I said so. Kind of like walking by a car wreck, I just had to stop and gawk with the rest of the crowd.

[Panzer76]

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

so. Kind of like walking by a car wreck, I just had to stop and gawk with the rest of the crowd. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

So who is the car wreck ?

Anyways, I'm not from Australia, I study here, I'm from Norway. Good on you mate!

Panzer