CM2: Will it live up to our high expectations?

[André]

Greetings

With all the hype surrounding CM2 I have to ask myself if it will live up to the very high expectations. CMBO is the best tactical wargame in existence right now in my mind. It has its faults, but no other game get even close in terms of realism when it comes to WW2 44-45 west front action.

I think CM2 will be much harder to get right than CMBO. There are many reasons for this, I will name some of them.

1. The timescale: 1941-1945

There will be many units to model, and big changes in the Russian army when it comes to leadership and tactics. The two sides are very different and have to be modeled seperately.

2. Urban warfare

Urban warfare played an important part in the warfare on the eastern front. Stalingrad.

3. Trench warfare

Much of the combat on the eastern front consisted of good old WW1 style trench warfare. Foxholes will not do it, we need real trenches.

We all have very high expectations for this game and I think BTS really feel the pressure. I am sure they will do their best to fulfill these expectations. Maybe this pressure is healthy for BTS. They might just produce the best wargame ever.

Just some thoughts on a tuesday morning.

Best regards,

Heinz

[ 04-17-2001: Message edited by: Heinz 25th PzReg ]

[Stacheldraht]

My main concern in this area is that CM2 will be, by all accounts, evolutionary, not revolutionary. A large amount of the attention CM received in the press was because of its revolutionary design. It's always tough to follow up on a masterpiece with a sequel. (Not to mention the "sophomore jinx.")

A related concern is graphics: we hear they'll be improved over CM, but frankly I doubt they'll compare to the best of last fall's games graphically, let alone the ones that will be out this fall. Graphics do matter, particularly in a game that thrives on its 3D battlefield and free camera. And for those who always say it's too hard to represent lots of units on screen at once, check out games like Serious Sam or Sacrifice for proof otherwise. Read up on the polys they'll be able to push with the Unreal II engine. More examples abound.

Still, I can't wait for CM2!

[Guest ckoharik]

I for one am confident that BTS will deliver us another quality product. They have proven before that they will not release the game if they don't feel it is up to snuff. And with all the feedback they've gotten from the grogs and non-grogs here there should be little to complain about.

I know that CM2 probably won't come close to utilizing my new (soon to be at least) GeForce3 card but I leave that to the FPS and 3D rendering progs.

[Jussi Köhler]

My expectations for improvement for CM2 are only and totally on the gameplay and AI front. I totally agree with Heinz 25th PzReg on his points and would like to add for myself that as for graphics, the level we have now in the newest Hi-res mod are quite adequate for me. Especially when my desktop isn´t exactly up-to-date... I just wonder how many people are today playing CM from their laptops... Hope it will still be possible with CM2...

Please, please leave the graphics as easily "moddable" and concentrate on the rest...

[Mattias]

[bad day edited]

..But, really...

What is it that makes you doubt that that BTS will be able to carry on the sucessfully design philosophy in CM:BO into CM2?

M.

[ 04-17-2001: Message edited by: Mattias ]

[ 04-17-2001: Message edited by: Mattias ]

[Gyrene]

Graphically I think that CM is fine as it is, eyecandy such as dynamic and specular lighting, better squad animation and overall higher model polygon count would be great, but still only eye candy.

If CM2 addresses even 25% of all the complaints and suggestions posted here it will be a success in my opinion.

I've played some games before that pushed the envelope of available 3D technology, but was still crap when it came to gameplay itself. (Rune, the later Tomb Raiders, Oni for example)

Gyrene

[Thomm]

I think that Combat Mission already has most of the necessary graphic elements.

I think that they should invest some processor power in smoke and dust effects, since those add more to the overall atmosphere than, for example, a higher polygon count on the models.

I can imagine, for instance, that small arms bursts could throw up a small dust cloud on impact (transparent animated billboard poly), such that the intensity of fire can be judged by this effect.

Other than that, the graphics are more than adequate considered the gameplay value of the game.

Regards,

Thomm

[aka_tom_w]

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

My main concern in this area is that CM2 will be, by all accounts, evolutionary, not revolutionary. A large amount of the attention CM received in the press was because of its revolutionary design. It's always tough to follow up on a masterpiece with a sequel. (Not to mention the "sophomore jinx.")

A related concern is graphics: we hear they'll be improved over CM, but frankly I doubt they'll compare to the best of last fall's games graphically, let alone the ones that will be out this fall. Graphics do matter, particularly in a game that thrives on its 3D battlefield and free camera. And for those who always say it's too hard to represent lots of units on screen at once, check out games like Serious Sam or Sacrifice for proof otherwise. Read up on the polys they'll be able to push with the Unreal II engine. More examples abound.

Still, I can't wait for CM2! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with this and I DON'T Think it is unfair to suggest that HIGH quality graphics and serious EYE candy of the Caliber of Flashpoint 1985 should be something we would like to see in CM2. We likely WON'T because we will be told that Flashpoint 1985 is a FPS.

BUT if Flashpoint 1985 can display that kind of detail and those kinds of framerates on today's "average" consumer computer hardware, they have set a NEW standard in what looks good in a Wargame, and all we have seen so far is the DEMO! but Oh My God does it ever look NICE!

I would like to see WAY more High quality graphics and eye candy in CM2 but never at the expense of historical accuracy, no, but indeed, to compliment it.

It will be interesting to see what CM2 looks like, I think we can safely assume it WILL be historically accurate and it will play VERY well, given BTS' record of stellar success with CMBO!

-tom w

[ 04-17-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[ 04-17-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Stuka]

Relax everyone, its gonna be great. If not, it'll fail and that'll be the end of CM.

And we all know thats not likely to happen, right?

[Dittohead]

[ 04-17-2001: Message edited by: Dittohead ]

[lcm1947]

I agree with Kohler 100% if BTS will concentrate on the game play all of us have remarked on and leave the graphics for the mod makers. It worked out very very well for CM and will for CM2 too. Mods can be changed and improved on the other things can't or at least don't get corrected. I'm not saying BTS didn't do an outstanding job of correcting and improveing CM as things were encountered but they can't do everything all at once. I believe far too many games concentrate on graphics simply because of the people that do the reviewing (critics) and they want to impress them and I understand why but after all the fanfare we the hardcore gamers are left with a very pretty game that we get bored with in 2 months. The reviewers ( critics ) go on to the next 100 games coming out. I pay about as much attention to these people as I do to movie critics - NONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Stacheldraht]

I read lots of reviews, and it seems to me that most reviewers note the graphics but certainly not at the expense of gameplay--lots of them seem a bit jaded like the rest of us about graphics alone. I don't recall reading any critic who said a game was worth getting because the graphics were great but the gameplay stunk.

As for "only eye candy," (emphasis added) there's no such thing in a game that tries to represent reality in 3D. That's like saying CM would be just as good with stick figures. The visuals are an inherent part of the game system and gameplay in this case, too: it's largely the 3D units and battlefield that set CM apart from other wargames. It's also tied into the turn system. Would anyone care about the WEGO system if you just watched little 2D counters move around hexes from a top-down view? Also, the graphics immerse you in the whole combat experience, which shouldn't be underestimated. And if graphics weren't that important, why are so many players avid mod makers and collectors?

Here's a quote from an article on GameSpy: "Anyone willing to plunk down the money for a high-end computer in order to pursue their hobby is obviously going to demand the best from a game's designer -- stunning graphics, engaging sounds, and tight and compelling gameplay" This brings up another issue: many of us who play CM are gamers, not just wargamers, and to enjoy hardcore games you need a powerful system, for hardcore flight sims for instance, or for many other genres. Sure, many CM players have older, weaker systems, but for the many of us who have powerful systems, we'd like to see the CM games take full advantage of them--that's what scalability is for.

Graphics are a part of and enhance gameplay. It's not an either/or issue.

[aka_tom_w]

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

snip..

Here's a quote from an article on GameSpy: "Anyone willing to plunk down the money for a high-end computer in order to pursue their hobby is obviously going to demand the best from a game's designer -- stunning graphics, engaging sounds, and tight and compelling gameplay" This brings up another issue: many of us who play CM are gamers, not just wargamers, and to enjoy hardcore games you need a powerful system, for hardcore flight sims for instance, or for many other genres. Sure, many CM players have older, weaker systems, but for the many of us who have powerful systems, we'd like to see the CM games take full advantage of them--that's what scalability is for.

Graphics are a part of and enhance gameplay. It's not an either/or issue.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree completely with this statment:

"Anyone willing to plunk down the money for a high-end computer in order to pursue their hobby is obviously going to demand the best from a game's designer -- stunning graphics, engaging sounds, and tight and compelling gameplay".

OK so we are demanding.

Many here have upgraded their systems since getting CMBO.

High Quality 3D graphics should be expected and requested in CM2.

I would like to say that when I say "eye candy" and great graphics I mean MORE 3D models of MORE buildings. We KNOW that the textures will all be modded after the game is released anyway and MANY of the modified textures will be MUCM nicer than the orinignals that came with the game, that is a GIVEN.

But What I am requesting is MORE attention to wider vareity of 3D models that we can mod textures for later. More things like Houses, buildings, industrial complexes, storage depots, factories, airports, sea ports and say 5-7 different kinds of house and another 5-7 different kinds of 4 story buildings, at least two different styles of church perhaps.how about buildings that show 3-4 stages of damage and destruction as they turn to rubble. lets not forget a request for WAY better 3D rubble to be modeled. Different kinds of fences, high ones and low wire ones.

I mean things like L shape buildings, and more fine detail on the 3D models. How about things like tanks leaving tracks in the snow? (It happens now in Flashpoint 1985)

I would like to praise and congradulate ALL the modders for the fine work in CMBO. I look forward to new mods for CM2, what I think we should be lobbying for is more 3D models to mod up after the game is released, AND maybe even ONE terrain tile that we can code and program and mod into a special terrain tile. If such a "magical" terrain tile was available for CMBO it could have been modded and coded up for a beach tile, (as it is now most folks are using Wheat to similate beach tiles )

I think it we can assume that the community of modders here will make the game look great with new textures AFTER it is release, what we need are more 3D "things" in the game to mod IMHO.

-tom w

[ 04-17-2001: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Guest ckoharik]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jussi Köhler:

I just wonder how many people are today playing CM from their laptops...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I for one do play CM on laptops. Both one with an 8MB ATI card and the other with a 16MB. While the 8MB system is playable it is completely unmoddable and I must keep the res down at 800x600 to be usable. The 16MB is definitely much better being able to handle the extra textures from the likes of Tiger as well as running at 1280x1024. Now, if CM2 were to push that minimum up to a level that is comparable to the "average" desktop's capability then I would be SOL. Or, I'd have to plunk down around $2,000 for another laptop with the new GeForce2 GO system (I wish!!!). So my point (I guess) is that I have no problem with the graphics system capabilities being drastically improved I would hate for the minimum requirements to bumped to a level exceeding alot of players systems.

[aka_tom_w]

I play CMBO on a G3 Mac laptop ALL the time with FULL Hi res mods at 1024x768

I think it uses 8 megs of build in VRAM and there is an ATI Rage video card in it.

It looks GREAT and runs FAST and smooth with full besutiful smoke graphics and fog.

The Laptop is 400 mHz and has 192 megs of ram, and CMBO 1.12 runs with every mod I can get my hands on NO problem.

-tom w

[Mord]

I agree with Tom and many of you and I have a feeling things will be a little different this time around.

It's hard to get everything perfect in a first game and BTS came damn close to doing this with a gaming style that had never been seen before. With technology moving along and all the experience they have mined from their first run and all the Suggetions/Bitching from the Grogs and Pseudo

Grogs CM2 will be that much richer for it. And so on down the line of the Product.

It's terribly easy to second guess CM with dream features and the like,now that it is released, but before hand it was ungodly compared to any hex based, counter, 2D war game out there, or even something like the Soldiers At War Engine. Now that it's limitations are documented they can hopefully be over come. But they weren't limitations before the game was released they were Features.

I too am hoping that there will be slots for special buildings in the game, and many extra terrain features. And seeing that I am a known Mod Slut look forward to newer and better graphics. They haven't let us down yet and I doubt they will this time around.

Mord.

[Claymore]

My opinion has been posted previously and lifted verbatim by Stacheldraht: "evolutionary not revolutionary"

My expectations however are that CM2 will occupy my CD drive continuously after its receipt (just as CMBO has).

Predictions? Hmmm....IMO

1. Obviously there will be a whole host of new units to choose from, the whole Pz catalog for starters.

2. Minor tweaks to the TacAI. Examples: simulating Russian C3 structures or enhanced weather effects

3. Minor tweaks to some individual weapon's systems. Example: kludging together a more representative MG firing structure.

4. A little more eye candy, in response to what appears to be almost half of the people who post. Example: dust etc...

After this the crystal ball becomes a little murky...

Suffice it to say though that CM2 will not generate the same enthusiasm as the arrival of CMBO did. It will however do this when (or if) the CM engine is recoded as per my previous postings.

Cheers

Murray

[Stacheldraht]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>My opinion has been posted previously and lifted verbatim by Stacheldraht: "evolutionary not revolutionary"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Actually, I didn't get it from you, as I never read your opinion on the issue It's a common phrase in criticism that I've read many times.

[JunoReactor]

Graphics do add to the game. First time I booted up combat mission, not knowing exactly what to expect, I was blown away by the feeling of authenticity that was conveyed by the 3D world.

That feeling soon dissapeared when I figured out that the 3D visuals were only a representation of what was really going on. Personally, I would like to see a CM2 where graphics are less of an abstraction of what really goes on within the game.

[Stacheldraht]

In a sense, graphics are always a visual representation of the underlying math and code in a game.

[ 04-17-2001: Message edited by: Stacheldraht ]

[DekeFentle]

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

SNIP

But What I am requesting is MORE attention to wider vareity of 3D models that we can mod textures for later. More things like Houses, buildings, industrial complexes, storage depots, factories, airports, sea ports and say 5-7 different kinds of house and another 5-7 different kinds of 4 story buildings, at least two different styles of church perhaps.how about buildings that show 3-4 stages of damage and destruction as they turn to rubble. lets not forget a request for WAY better 3D rubble to be modeled. Different kinds of fences, high ones and low wire ones.

I mean things like L shape buildings, and more fine detail on the 3D models. How about things like tanks leaving tracks in the snow? (It happens now in Flashpoint 1985)

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Here Here! I agree whole heartedly! Feature like this and enhancements to the scenario editor would in of themselves provide me with everything I could expect from a follow up product.

[Ron]

Oh No! The Great Graphics Debate, err Manifesto, Part XXX! Encapsulated into ... We the Gamers, being of sound mind and sound body, demand the whole cake and nothing but the cake, along with the icing; to be eaten whenever we want, as often as we want. In addition, we reject anything leading to the loss of our svelte shapes. Our creed will be 'Tastes great and less filling!'.

Firmly TIC...

Ron

[Stacheldraht]

Well, when you're spoiled by the best (aka CM), you can't help but want more

[Mattias]

Well, on the other hand...

Great expectations in the graphics department is hardly a trademark of wargames, if you have been around to see what came before CM that is.

M.

[Guest ckoharik]

Mattias,

Well spoken. I remember the days of wargaming on my old Commodore 64. The graphics were great for the time but it was the gameplay that made it interesting. Yes, I would love to see CM2 support the features of my forthcoming GeForce3 card but I honestly would be happy with the new variety of units and modifications to the game engine. I totally love playing CMBO all the time, even against the AI and I am sure I will continue this feeling when the new game is release. Thank you BTS, for giving us wargamers something to cherish as well as a game that destroys the mystique of wargames as being a representation of a little cardboard counter roaming around a hex map.

Slightly drunk in Italy and luving it.