Can you believe this?

[Panther G]

I was looking around gamespot.com and went to CM:BO to see what they said. When I was looking at the reader reviews, I saw what this one guy said.

"You're joking, right? One of Gamespot's highest-rated games is utterly amateur: silly graphics, incomprehensible user interface (just try to figure out how to exit the demo... I used Ctrl-Alt-Delete), and no polish at all. Key assignments are unusual, and scrolling around the map with the mouse is painfully tedious. The game is extremely complicated, and the help is contained in an HTML file, inaccessible from within the game. This game may be a barrel of laughs for the diehards who slog through the steep learning curve, but this game needs some serious polish before I'm willing to commit. It'll never hold muster against a professional product, and shame on Gamespot for not holding it up to that bar."

1. It does NOT have silly graphics!

2. Scrolling around the map is tedious? Whats your favorite game, Oni?

3. Diehards who slog through the steep learning curve? I had the game down in about 3-4 hours.

4. It's not shame on Gamespot, it's shame on YOU for not recognizing the best Computer Game ever!!!

Panther G

 

[Guest Babra]

I guess ya can't please everyone. Some folks just don't "get it".

[PipBoy]

It is possible for someone to not like this game, you know It's certainly not for everyone.

I really like CM myself but there are some funky things about the interface. Inability to remap hotkeys is one, most games have this feature (even if you have to manually edit a text file).

Map movement is somewhat cumbersome. It scrolls smoothly, albeit a little slowly, when using the onscreen icons. Moving via the numpad is choppy. It would be nice if there were more mouse functionality with respect to rotating and moving the map.

The only other thing I want to add is that I wish the compass were displayed on the interface itself, and not as an actual object on the map. If I have to rotate around for 2 seconds to confirm which way is north, that's 2 seconds taken away from the game.

These are small things, but they do get in the way.

[Mr. Johnson--]

Maybe the reviewer only had a mouse with one button, and he could not use the Shift+right click jump that we all figured out early on.

[Subvet]

Here is the latest review:

"Come on. It is time to face reality. Yes, the AI of this game is superb--perhaps the best ever made--but the graphics look like they were done by a 6 year old, and adding mods doesn't improve them much. Because of the slow 3D engine and the turn taking play system, game play is horrible. When will people realize that 3D does not work well with strategy games? To make matters worse moving the camera is not near as fast and smooth as it is in Shogun, for example. My advice is, abandon the 3D view, hire a real graphic designer and switch for real time play. If this is done, I'll buy it. Until then, I'll just stick to Close Combat 4 and 5--they may be dated, but still rule the landscape."

Some people just have their head up their ass. I have no problem with someone who doesn't like the game. Hey, different strokes for different folks. But saying the game is bad for the above reasons makes me think this guy is an idiot.

I have my review posted there already. It got a 9.6 from me. I would suggest that everyone go put up a review on the site. Give it what you think it deserves; I'm not suggesting that people go flood it with 10's. Just give the game a fair review.

[Michael Dorosh]

Done...spelling errors and all. Oy, I have to stop using my real name...

[Schwarze]

i pity that Ever Quest fan...

[Chupacabra]

Everyone has their own opinion. You can't force yours upon everyone else. CM isn't for everyone. Fair enough.

[Schwarze]

true...

[gunnergoz]

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

Everyone has their own opinion. You can't force yours upon everyone else. CM isn't for everyone. Fair enough.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

No! They must submit...Borg rules ALL! CM is GOD. We are not worthy...

[TP_Bomber]

I cant understand why people think the graphics in CM are so bad. For anyone who has played steel panthers the 3d graphics in CM are a real treat. Seems to be too many people who expect QuakeIII type graphics in a wargame.

[Guest Babra]

I suspect most don't even know what a wargame is. Horror of horrors, there's a whole generation with computers now who never even heard of Avalon Hill, SPI, or even boardgames. Maybe that's why the average age here is so high.

[aka_tom_w]

OK.....

I'm 40 (Hell it pains me to say that!)

I did play Board games from Avalon Hill and SPI, I still have my copy of Trobuk sitting on my bookcase right in front of me.And yes perhaps compared to other wargames these are good (sure even superior) graphics, but compared to video games in general (Flashpoint 1985 for instance) these graphics or NOT leading edge or state of the art by any means.

LOOK, Age of Empires is and RTS and if you have 3-4 players playing that game there can be as many units on the map as any a large CM battle, BUT those little sodliers and bowmen and horse and cavalry LOOK GREAT!

if it was not for the GREAT work of the mod artists I would say the graphics in this game would be sub par for sure.

BUT, and it is a HUGE but, here thanks to the WISDOM of Steve and Charles, user modifiable graphics skins were coded into the game to let others make it look better than it did when it was released. This was a stroke of genius.

Sure I still hope the graphics will look better in CM2, I still hope to see WAY More eye candy and a better interface.

BUT this game plays great and it is EVERYTHING (even with its limitations in the FOW and absolute spotting, and shooting straight through live vehicles, "issues") that I could have ever dreamed of in a WWII post D-Day small unit combat sim.

Those folks who complain about the graphics have a valid beef if you look at "video games" and video game eye candy in general and compare it to CMBO, most here think it is an unfair comparision. I do not think the comparision is that unfair actually.

I'm sure CM2 will look better and PLAY better

I can't wait!

-tom w

[Stalin's Organ]

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

OK.....

I'm 40 (Hell it pains me to say that!)

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hi Tom - there'd better be a turn waiting when I get home or you're in deep trouble for wasting time posting here instead of playing CM!!

Stalin - 2 years your senior

[Slapdragon]

It basically takes all types. I remember being on this CM wannabe beta list for a new game concept (except it was going to be more squad and platoon level action).

I suggested that the math might not be too hard to create a physics model for individual gunfire by squad members, possible in a small scale game. It went over like a lead zeppelin, and was followed up by adding special weapons people could "pick up" on the battlefield, like +2 submachineguns, and advanced ballistic armor, and sniper rifles that always made head shots if they hit....

The fact is, wargaming is different than the FPS twicth a shoot games. You can love them both, but when some adreniline zombie picks up a copy of CM, and is used to a gameboy controller as being the ultimate UI, and who thinks strategy is using the cheat keys at the right time, CM is going to baffel and confuse them. Thus the low rating.

[aka_tom_w]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stalin's Organ:

Hi Tom - there'd better be a turn waiting when I get home or you're in deep trouble for wasting time posting here instead of playing CM!!

Stalin - 2 years your senior <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

yeah yeah

there's been one waiting for you for the past 6hrs.

where are you?

at Work

it must be Monday there already?

-tom w

[Stalin's Organ]

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

there's been one waiting for you for the past 6hrs.

where are you?

at Work

it must be Monday there already?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sure is - and a cold and miserable day it is too!!

The down side of being a day ahead of you guys is that Monday-itis strikes 16 hours earlier!!

[Guest Babra]

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

LOOK, Age of Empires is and RTS and if you have 3-4 players playing that game there can be as many units on the map as any a large CM battle, BUT those little sodliers and bowmen and horse and cavalry LOOK GREAT!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I too was dumbfounded by how nice the figures look in Age of Empires and some of those other games. But (apart from being a different sort of game entirely) that's a hit-point game. The computer doesn't have to do an angle/velocity/penetration calculation every time something hits. Take away all that processing and I'm sure graphics can be spruced up. Just stands to reason.

Sure, I have my complaints with some CM graphics, though maybe complaints isn't the right word. Wishes maybe. Frankly I'm amazed it looks as good it does and still purports to be a sim.

I think some things could look better. Rotating wheels for instance -- or less octagonal-looking ones. But it's still a damn fine piece of wargaming. I've shelved it temporarily on account of having overplayed it, but it's still the best computer gaming investment I've ever made, and one of the most enjoyable games I've ever played period.

[Guy w/gun]

When somebody says CMBO is hard to learn, I REALLY have to wonder about them . I was aided by my previous expiriences with Close Combat, but even without it I would have done find. I found this game unbelievably easy next to my first forray into War Games, Operational Art of War.

Since I've gotten into this game, several other aquaintences of mine have. And for the life of them, they can't get past the abstraction. They wonder why the "little men don't die" when they shoot at each other". C'mon, is it really that hard to grasp?

Oh, yeah, and I guess I'm back for the moment .

[Dunnee]

I'll put it bluntly and succinctly. I'm young, and always liked any game associated with men, guns, and moving them closer to fight. Real time to me, SUCKS. Real time is a bane to careful planning and execution, real time is little more than a controlled Royal Rumble, if I wanna see that, I'll order the pay-per view. I looked a long time for a game that would allow me to play the way I wanna play, and I found it. CM, is undoubtedly the best video wargame I've ever played, period. You don't like it, fine, stick to some ****ty realtime like Starcraft, which I bought by the way, before I even heard of CM, now that I have CM, I can't even look at my starcraft box without breaking into laughter and pondering asking for a refund. Starcraft and its ilk certainly look a lot better, but they are still ****ty. Don't be a jerk, buy CM, it's hella worth it.

(edited cause I'm a jackass.)

[ 06-18-2001: Message edited by: Dunnee ]

[chasd]

5. Click on the part of the screen that sais 'Hotkeys' ya MORON!

[von Lucke]

...This game may be a barrel of laughs for the diehards who slog through the steep learning curve, but this game needs some serious polish before I'm willing to commit. It'll never hold muster against a professional product...

Ah, the Ritalin Generation has spoken!

[mensch]

Some people just lkie 3D first person shooters, some just board games, some want "holywood" effects, some want challanging play, etc... If I showed this to a buddy of mine who only plays first person shooters he would scorn and laugh, much as I would to him on his narrow minded thinking but whats the point? each has thier own tastes, for me CMBO is prob. the only game I play now the rest sit and collect dust, for roleplaying I love Fallout/Fallout II/and FOT... for strategy, CMBO will always be first.. funny no seconds. hmmm. as for first person shooters, they have thier momments but again after a while the collect dust.

[Stacheldraht]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I cant understand why people think the graphics in CM are so bad. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just take a look at most games in most genres, and you'll see the difference immediately. The graphics in CM are great for a wargame, but not for a game in general. (Especially true if you have no mods installed.) Sadly, even with the improved graphics, the difference between CM2's visuals and other games released around the same time will probably be even greater than the difference between CM and today's games, leading to more snap judgements.

CM has a weakness, big deal--it's still an amazing game

[Slapdragon]

Except, and this is what the computer ignorant shoot and twitch FPS player can fail to realize, by its nature a game like CM cannot be a beuatiful as Oni or Quake 3 or any of those games because of the limitations of horizon. To limit polygons, FPS games run you through "rooms". Even when you are outside, they run you through a room that is limited in size by using walls and other features to limit how many figures and polygons are redrawn. In fact, the standard of having one ubermonster at the end of every level is partly because of redraw problems: you spend all that deal and puch all those polygons with one Ubermonster, you give up having a lot run around.

In CM, you need an engine that can have dozens of tanks and a hundred or more infantry figures scampering around at the same, while allowing any view in 3D space and maps of hundreds or possibly thousands of tiles. Add the animations going on with turning heads and treads, falling rain and snow, an basic atmosphere model, and you are pushing a lot of polygons. Even something simple like increasing the number of polygons and bitmaps per tank or infantry crew could double processor requirments, and all of a sudden the game is only playable on a machine with a 64mb video card and a dual or quad processor box.

Games which tried to do the same, such as Myth, took a self limiting role by limiting the size of battle to a few dozen figures on each size for exactly the same reason.