CM 2 Article, with Screens

[dima]

Steve,

You _are_ in loose-loose situation. It is nice that you understand that.

[Battlefront.com]

Dima,

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>You _are_ in loose-loose situation.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, then thanks for giving me a hard time just to give me a hard time. Always nice when people take time out of their day to insult and flame when there isn't any reason to do so.

Steve

[Enoch]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> We understand what and why you are giving previews in CGM, but we don't understand your attitude towards us! --Dima<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What's this we stuff white man?

I wouldn't vocalize such a generalization around so much flammable material. If that is how you feel then I am sorry. But don't try to implicate the rest of us with you.

[joeski]

Steve,

Get back to work. You can play flamewar later.

[JAK]

Don't worry Steve, we the people of the CM community (atleast me realize that you are being nice enough not to tell him to shutup and find something productive to do!

Jake

[ 05-31-2001: Message edited by: JAK ]

[Pvt. Ryan]

There is one positive thing to come out of this thread:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

the CM2 demo

Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

:cool:

[Panzer Leader]

That's what I'm talkin 'bout!

[Berlichtingen]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

Have I misunderstood what it is you are really interested in? I've been assuming it is a finished product of superior quality that you can actually play on your home computer. But perhaps what people really want is for us to spend all our time talking about something instead of actually working on it?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope, no misunderstanding Steve. We (the majority) want the superior product rather than the discussion. I would be willing to venture a guess that most of us could live with no info until the demo I personally could not be happier with BTS than I already am. Keep up the good work!

[Berlichtingen]

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

That and the whole finding a woman that loves wargaming and is willing to procreate with a computer geek really puts a damper on the whole thing... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh my God! Steve has been 'Pooled'

[Berlichtingen]

Nothin' to see here... move along

[ 05-31-2001: Message edited by: Berlichtingen ]

[Panzer Leader]

Great job Berli- Double Post!!!

[Cos]

As luck would have it I signed up for the free preview issue and just got it today. On page 60 guys(and gals), enjoy.

[bauhaus]

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

BTW here is an interesting point on this whole Copywrite thing... An painter can take photograph, reproduce the work, and then display it for the public without needing permission from anyone. Period. It's been done, has been done time and time again.

[ 05-31-2001: Message edited by: jshandorf ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok, I have to jump in here. Being a photographer and in the business for close to 20 years. My dear simple minded friend, you're dead wrong here. It's done time and again, without the photographers knowledge, that's why it's done. That doesn't make it legal. I deny reprints to artists all the time on that basis. A copywritten photo is owned by the photographer or the publication it is taken for. I'm a photo editor for a newspaper and everything that I take or any one else takes is owned by my publication. Even in my spare time. That has been supported in courts time and again. Look at the case of a Kansas City Star photographer that took a photo of Owen Hart when he died at a WWF event. It was on his own time and he sold the photo to other publications. The courts said that the art was owned by the Star and they received reembursement. But I digress.

But the point of this is, No you cannot reproduce art as you please. I don't care if it's done all the time or not. And whether it's done for profit or not, makes no difference at all either. It comes down to who owns the rights to the art. Period.

[CaSCa]

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

That and the whole finding a woman that loves wargaming and is willing to procreate with a computer geek really puts a damper on the whole thing...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks a lot...now I gotta clean beer off of my monitor!

[Michael Dorosh]

Slightly OT - did you Yanks hear about the Canadian artist who was surprised to find one of his paintings gracing the cover of a romance novel penned by Saddam Hussein? It made the news just this week.

Historical photographs lose their copyright, so I am told, after 50 years. That has nothing to do with a new magazine article; I look forward to purchasing a copy for myself. Good endeavors, like CM and decent mags, need to be supported.

How many people here have claimed to buy more than one copy of CM because "BTS deserves it"? WEll, keeping PC magazines in business helps out BTS JUST AS MUCH! See Steve's comments.

I personally heard about CM on the internet, and my friends have heard about it via word of mouth - but PC mags are indeed popular among my friends too, and they are always passing on news of other games to me.

[StellarRat]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by M Hofbauer:

FWIW - I have yet to see a computer mag that's worth the cellulose wasted to print it on. They usually consist of praise for advertiser's games, lack journalistic criticism, seem to play a game about 5 hours max. before they review it, and, especially, they wouldn't know an authenticism glitch if it had "ahistorical Bull****" written all over it. just my truckload of turkish lira, of course.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I totally disagree with this. I have yet to buy a game that CGM has given five stars to and not been completely satisfied. The main reason I subscribe to their mag is so I don't waste money on crappy games. I found CM through the CGM article! So, at least CGM is worth the money I spend on it!

My only complaint about the game mags is that they don't do enough follow up on buggy games. Sometimes after the patches are out they are much better then the original review rated them. At this point I believe they should be re-reviewed if the original showed promise. The one that comes to mind is Falcon 4.0.

[Simon Fox]

Steve wrote: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Oh for Pete's sake. Could it possibly be that since there are only 4 of us that we are working our tails off making the game. Nah... that COULDN'T POSSIBLY be the reason. It makes too much sense.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Yes and it's completely disgusting. I take a very dim view of it. Getting a PBEM turn out of Dan is like getting blood out of a stone. Ease up on him a bit so we can finish our game before CM2 comes out!

All you poolers get back in there. Haven't you got some lawyers in there to set jeff right on the copyright issue or somefink? This thread is like that movie "dumb and dimmer" or somefink like that

[Mace]

This has been an interesting conversation, and makes being a member of this particular bulletin-board worthwhile.

I'd just like to say I'm looking forward to any information on CM2 being released. Whether it's done through the publishing media, on-line, or through other channels, that's fine.

Further, I believe Steve and Charles (Matt and Dan) will time the release when they believe the information provided will 'blow our minds'. The wait will be hence be worthwhile.

Now before I go, a question for Rob Mayer: How much is the premier edition of Strategy Plus worth now days!

Mace

[Triumvir]

Steve,

without wanting to cause offence, I'd like to point out that you're not the most thick-skinned guy on the board. I understand your pride in your work, and your being ticked off at people who jump on you but... dude, you could be way more mellow and way less personal about taking suggestions.

We're _not_ all out to get you, and at least some of us do think that you and the rest of the guys are doing a great job. But criticism -- even "yuor a l00s3r" style criticism -- doesn't mean we think that "yuo suxx0rs".

This isn't about Dima, who is obviously a dimak (if my vulgar Russian vocabulary holds me out) but just an observation in general.

[Humus B. Chittenbee]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

Is it just me, or does anybody else feel that I am in a no-win situation unless we do nothing but pander to every single whim of anybody who voices an opinion here?

Steve[/QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

NO!!!

pandering to my every whim is the least you can do after this worthless product! ok, ok, i bought a second copy ---- but it was to give to a friend (errr...enemy!!) to drive him crazy!

if you were any good, you could read my mind and figure out exactly what i want and provide it. for free! tomorrow! since it is obvious neither you nor your three cohorts have any idea what you are doing in this arena, i'll just have to wait until the sequel comes out. but, damn it!!! i'm not buying more than three copies this time around!!

{heh! bet that scared him!!}

[ 06-01-2001: Message edited by: Humus B. Chittenbee ]

[StellarRat]

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

Steve, I'd like to point out that you're not the most thick-skinned guy on the board<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This may be true, however, it would do all the critics out there some good to remember that even when BTS codes something that some of the players don't like they can at least support their decision with some logical reasons and when there have been obvious bugs they've cleaned them up and got an update out in a timely manner. Compare this to a lot of the software companies out there and BTS is head and shoulders above most of them.

Steve et al obviously put a lot of thought and time into what they're doing, so I can see where they might be a bit touchy when someone is critical of their work. There have been a lot of instances of people being critical with no facts or logic to back up their position.

[ 06-01-2001: Message edited by: StellarRat ]

[Triumvir]

Hmm... does that disagree with anything I've said? I agree that BTS does a better job than almost any other game company in incorporating player feedback (eSim and MatrixGames come to mind but let's leave them aside).

But in the majority of cases when suggestions are made -- MGs, ammo, optics, none of which I intend to comment on the validity of -- Steve tends to flare up more than I think necessary. What I think necessary need not have an impact on what Steve does; it's an observation without prescription.

[JMcGuire]

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

But in the majority of cases when suggestions are made -- MGs, ammo, optics, none of which I intend to comment on the validity of -- Steve tends to flare up more than I think necessary.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't know about the "majority" of cases. I get the impression the "flare up" comes only after the suggestion has been made roughly 22,000 times, often with firey invective suggesting that BTS is a bunch of insensitive corporate bastards who actually hate their customer base, or that CM is an intolerably useless piece of human waste because "my HMG dudez can't run -- whassup wit that?".

I've been writing software for 23 years, and the biggest pains in the asses are undoubtedly the users. There are some days that I'm glad the bulk of my current work is a behind-the-scenes corporate drone -- I don't miss the "public interaction" aspect of writing commercial software one bit, and I did that to put food in my mouth for something like 15 years. Almost EVERY time I see BTS respond to anything, I think back on my own experiences and I am always impressed. You may think he's not thick skinned, but you've probably not poured thousands of hours of your life into something, only to have a pack of The Clueless publicly excoriate you for the stupidest tiny details. It truly sucks, and I think they've done a damned fine job handling it in an evenhanded and level-headed manner.

Wow. Where the hell did THAT rant-grade passion come from? Boy did this thread ever swerve off topic, or what? Time to water the lawn.

[Stacheldraht]

Man, all I did with this thread was post a "public service announcement" and look what happened If the magazines are available where you live, just buy them. $7.00 or whatever won't hurt your wallet much. After you buy them, send a polite email to the editors saying you love their coverage of CM, bought an issue of the magazine just for that, and want to see more. Surely that would be good all around.

[M Hofbauer]

Steve:

We released a "hardcore" wargame a while ago that was knocked pretty hard (webzine, not big mag) because they got someone who was more of a RTS fan to review it.

That's just the kind of thing I was talking about.

barrold713 wrote:

My only complaint would be the perhaps too opimistic previews but that is a pervasive issue with both websites and magazines.

exactly my point. Everything's gonna be goody-goody-goody.

StellarRat:

I totally disagree with this.(...) My only complaint about the game mags...

no comment =-)

my experience is that I tend to use reviews in sort of an anti-way. If they say a game is poor because it's too complex then that's a go-ahead for me. Many of those "five star games" which you cite are really just hollow flashy products which land in the shelf after a couple of weeks max.

Steve:

Righto. Decent number are not US, but it is still a minority of our customers.

just wanted to remind you that you cannot deduct the number of american customers from the number of american addresses you deliver to, because not every american delivery address has an american customer behind it. The ways in which the avid CM fans get hold of their games are limitless, inventive and sometimes downright mysterious.

jshansdorf wrote:

BTW here is an interesting point on this whole Copywrite thing... An painter can take photograph, reproduce the work, and then display it for the public without needing permission from anyone. Period.

you're probably not a jurist, or maybe an american one =-)

if the photograph someone takes prominently or excllsively shows a person or an object of art and he does not have permission form the person / artist then he may at the very least not publicise that picture.

Steve:

2. Scanning images from a magazine is absolutely a copyright violation. You can only do this with the owner's permission.

(juristic mode on) you are the author of said works. you could have given the magazine a limited permission to show them while retaining the right to give same permission to others.(/mode off) Don't get me wrong, I acknowledge and welcome the idea of spreading the word via the mass magazines. However, your statement above could be misunderstood as an excuse of "we could not do otherwsie but give exclusive rights to CGM/CGW". I welcome that you later stated directly the real reason, which is that you are going to feed them first in a deal for coverage. I guess we are fine with that as long as we get to have a great game in the end

How many of you that play Combat Mission found out about the game because of one of these tidbits from an online or tradition print magazine?

First time I heard about it was when rumour about a SL 3D game adaptation was circulating in the computer wargamer circles. I then started to visit the good old blue-on-white message forum. I never had any contact whatsoever with any magazine in relationship with CM so far.

Why some of you have the patience of a gnat is not my problem. What is my problem is making sure the game gets done right and done as soon as possible. All other concerns are secondary. Experience has shown us that the more we talk about the game the more people demand of us to tell them something more. It is a vicious cycle that is inevitable, but when started too soon it becomes a major distraction. We simply don't have much more to say now than we have been saying for the past 6 months. In fact, the articles we have participated in so far really don't say much more than we have said on this forum, so long time fans here won't find much of interest in them anyway. And the screenshots contained will be posted very shortly, so I fail to see what the problem is.

the following is not meant as criticism but just as a note, food-fot-thought, on including the forum on the development of the game. Obviously, it would be wrong to exclude the forum during the development, only wanting the "input" (which would be more like supplementary blessing) after already presenting the result ("voilá here it is - now what do y'all think about it?"). It might be crucial to involve the people very early in the project of CM2. I am talking about difficult game design decisions pertaining but not limited to "handling of the infantry wave attacks in CM2 vs current infantry marker and machine gun point fire", "early-war modeling of russian tank doctrine/tactics in the face of lacking radio and advantages of technically sometimes inferior german tanks through radio / C&C", etc. pp.; I think it would not hurt to have input before these basic, vital decisions are carved in stone.

That is of course not to say that you did not involve "us" during the long process of creating CMBO. To the contrary, I think your past openness to suggestions, critcisim etc. during that period proved very successful and should be kept up for CM2.

yours sincerely,

M.Hofbauer

[ 06-01-2001: Message edited by: M Hofbauer ]