Graphics Suggestions For CM2

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Guy w/gun:

That was so stupid and sarcastic I don't have the first clue how to respond to your attempt at insulting me with Don Quixote.

I will continue to bring up the very provable fact that if a jr. member says something others find odd, insensible, or not agreeable, they are more likely to pounce on him or her than a well established "member"

Now I hope that everyone will choose to disregard this and stick to the discussion.

[This message has been edited by Guy w/gun (edited 01-25-2001).]

No, I think comparisons to my favourite errant knight are entirely valid. You come to the conclusion that some have been overly harsh on Gunny Bunny’s suggestions just because he is a junior member. Nothing could be further from the truth, Gunny has been an advocate of flashy graphics since some time last year, some disagreed with him. As these things go this disagreement became filled with vitriol and even with the return of Gunny from his newsgroup haunt, the subject still raises the hackles of some who participated in the earlier topics. So I still stand by my statement that your earlier message was ‘tilting at windmills’ Gunny Bunny and his calls for graphic improvement have had a touchy history on the board, which explains some of the vehemence of his detractors, although in some ways Gunny has reaped what he sowed. The status of his membership has always been irrelevant. But if you see a princess that’s not really a princess and save her when she does not need saving, well be my guest.

[Guest AbnAirCav]

Originally posted by Robert Mayer:

Well, wargame or action game, graphics play a huge role in how we play the game ...

Given that a large part of the enjoyment of playing this game comes from the visuals--from the great mods, the terrain vistas, the "feel" of the battle that the graphics convey--it seems pretty cut and dried that improving the graphics and improving graphic performance (so more folks can use more detailed, higher-res views) is a Good Thing. ... Still, BTS would be remiss if they didn't carefully consider all of their options, including things like T&L support, DirectX 8 support, and the like.

... But they also can't afford to stagnate, and target what would be considered rather low-end specs today--doing that will result in a dated product.

IMHO, despite the fact that David Aitken appears to be on a crusade to obstruct further discussion on this matter, I am in agreement with Bob's points.

[Gremlin]

Regarding Commissar's point about upgrades, I agree wholeheartedly from personal experience. If the cost of a new rig is daunting, just do a little research and upgrade part by part as needed. That way you don't waste money on a new case, new 56k modem, new burner, power supply, cables, monitor, fans, ad nauseum that you already have and that work fine.

As for people buying new comps every three years, I realize that some just use their machine for word processing and Quicken, but I and most of my friends, acquaintances, and business associates are "computer people" (gamers, game designers, game journalists, computer artists, IT specialists, coders, computer science professors, etc.), which perhaps skews my view

------------------

When men are inhuman, take care not to feel towards them as they do towards other humans.

--Marcus Aurelius

[deanco]

The first 3 posts....they symbolize this board very well. And yes, I know gunny bunny too, and what he's done, and that he has a personal vendetta. Doesn't matter. There was no call for this whatsoever. Here I wanted to read a thread about graphic improvements, and within 3 posts I am disgusted and mad as hell. Are you trying to get rid of the new guys so you can have your sandbox all to yourself, like it was before?? You're doing a heck of a good job, y'all. Keep up the good work.

------------------

DeanCo--

CM interface mods: http://mapage.cybercable.fr/deanco/

so many games...so little time

[Jeff Heidman]

Everyone who is arguing that CM2+ should have the same system requirements as CM1 (P166!!!) is arguing for the inevitable end of the CM franchise.

Despite the rather vocal and well earned praise that CM has gotten, it is not sold and marketed in a vacuum. Its own success will ensure that other companies try to beat it at its own game. The idea of a highly realistic WW2 tactical wargame is not exactly ground breaking, and others are going to try to match and exceed what BTS has accomplished. It is likely that they will try to do so with a lot more than 4 people.

It is the height of hubris to think that just because you have succeeded the first time, you are assured of continued dominance. That is a short path to irrelevancy in *any* market. I do not think BTS is stupid, and I do not think that they are going to forget that.

The idea that BTS should code for the lowest common denominator in machines is as foolish, or even more foolish than the idea that they should code for the highest.

It is an inevitable FACT that this hobby (computer gaming) has an entry cost. You have to buy a computer, and at some point you have to upgrade that computer. CM players are, as a group, probably toward the lower end of that power curve compared to other gamers, but the curve is still there.

If this was not the case, CM would never exist because we would all still be running 386/33's, and CM would not be possible. Think of what the increase in processor power has made possible so far, and then think what the next steps will make available. Why would anyone wish to refuse to access that power?

Jeff Heidman

[Gremlin]

You beat me to the punch. I was thinking along similar lines: I know a number of hardcore gamers who've been put off by CM's graphics currently compared to other games (their loss, but it's understandable, since computer games have primarily always been a visual medium--text adventures excepted).

Imagine when CM2 is released in a year or so(hypothetical for the sake of argument, but reasonable) and its graphics are only slightly improved over CM. Imagine what other games competing for gamers' hard-earned dollars will look like.

And as you say, CM's lessons surely can't have been lost on the competition, though that could be good all around if it produces better wargames that also have higher production values.

------------------

When men are inhuman, take care not to feel towards them as they do towards other humans.

--Marcus Aurelius

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Gremlin:

You beat me to the punch. I was thinking along similar lines: I know a number of hardcore gamers who've been put off by CM's graphics currently compared to other games (their loss, but it's understandable, since computer games have primarily always been a visual medium--text adventures excepted).

Imagine when CM2 is released in a year or so(hypothetical for the sake of argument, but reasonable) and its graphics are only slightly improved over CM. Imagine what other games competing for gamers' hard-earned dollars will look like.

And as you say, CM's lessons surely can't have been lost on the competition, though that could be good all around if it produces better wargames that also have higher production values.

What competition would that be, exactly? Hasbro's "Squad Leader 2"? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Maybe they'll go off the deep end and call it Advanced Squad Leader instead.

Everyone else's products are so far off the mark, and continue to be, I don't think BTS has much to worry about.

I'll agree with Jeff that a P166 does seem a bit low. As I have stated, it's not unreasonable to expect people to upgrade every three years or so. In a perfect world they wouldn't have to. Consider this, though. I gave my old P200 to my parents thinking it was so generous of me; the 2 Gig hardrive barely holds the card games my mom has downloaded, and my dad is disappointed that he can't play any decent flight simulators on it. Looking back, I'm kind of sorry I couldn't do better for them.

If two 60+ seniors are disappointed with a P200 (which is slightly better than the stated minimum hardware necessary for CM), then why would any of us young gamers not be?

It's easy for me to sneer at the blockheads described here who turn their nose up at CM's graphics, but in the end the public at large will always be fickle.

The only thing we can do to help is to keep generating positive buzz about what we DO like about CM - and telling our friends about it.

[CavScout]

Originally posted by Gremlin:

Regarding Commissar's point about upgrades, I agree wholeheartedly from personal experience. If the cost of a new rig is daunting, just do a little research and upgrade part by part as needed. That way you don't waste money on a new case, new 56k modem, new burner, power supply, cables, monitor, fans, ad nauseum that you already have and that work fine.

I don't know.. upgrading is cheaper, if you are perhaps replacing one component but sometimes a new rig is the smarter way to go. For example, I am planning on "upgrading" my system soon. I currently have a PII 333 w/128MB RAM, a Voodo 3 3000, 2 HDs (8 and 4 gig), SB PCI128 sound card and the usual other components. I could go for a mother board/CPU combo for aroun $250. Bit that leaves all "legacy" stuff. I can get a whole new rig at just about $550. This includes 128 133 MB RAM, 30 gig 7200 rpm 100 UDMA HD and on. So to me, sometimes buying new is better.

[CavScout]

Originally posted by Jeff Heidman:

Everyone who is arguing that CM2+ should have the same system requirements as CM1 (P166!!!) is arguing for the inevitable end of the CM franchise.

True but CM2 should not require the "latest and greatest" to run either. Both sides have their extremes. We need to avoid them.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by CavScout:

So to me, sometimes buying new is better.

Personally, I couldn't bear the thought of being without my computer for a week while the upgrades were being done!

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

What competition would that be, exactly? Hasbro's "Squad Leader 2"? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! .

OK!

I must step in here

Some of you need to get your heads out of the sand. Some of us here have pointed out to BTS on the forum what other up coming games will look like.

and they look Good!!

Stunning actually!!!

These game designers that are producing games RIGHT now in developement are NOT complaining about hardware limitations.

NO! they are posting sreen shots of what the the NEXT BIG thing will look like when it is released

And it looks like this:

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/015515.html

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/013878.html

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/015525.html

Check out these links

BattleField 1942 is one of them

Allied Assualt has STUNNGING graphics that looks like they employed ex-Disney background artists

and what about Operation Flash Point!?

if you have not viewed the QT movie at this site:

http://www.flashpoint1985.com/

you should not be posting about the future of CM graphics in this thread.

Check out the links and those other threads, those are screen shot of what is in production and what looks like the future of CM competition.

I highly encourage BTS to look at what their competition is planning with there upcoming graphics and eye candy.

And as wrong as this may sound to some of you, I strongle believe that on top of GREAT historical accuracy and the tradition of BTS attention to historical detail, GREAT graphics and LOADS of NEW eyecandy will lead to higher sales and MORE profits because there are more gamey "video game" gamers out there with more money than all the grogs and "strictly" wargame fans put together. So the next CM2 should look GREAT as well as be historically accurate like CMBO!

Just encouraging more eye candy, BUT never at the expense of historical accuracy, but indeed to compliment it!!

-tom w

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-26-2001).]

[This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-26-2001).]

[Ben Galanti]

Err, it looks to me that all of those games are first person type games. That's a completely different perspective. I don't think it's particularly CM's competition, even if they are WW2 era games.It all comes down to where you want to spend your polygons....

BTS has decided to give basically an unlimited field of view (which I think is good for a tactical game). That's going to eat up a lot more polygons then a first person game.

Now, I don't disagree that the graphics should be updated every release, and BTS has stated the same thing. But to expect CM to look like a first person shooter on a completely tripped out rig seems to be apples and oranges... (though, obviously, I'd love CM to look like <a href=http://www.zdnet.com/gamespot/images/screenshots/gs/feature_previews/medalofhonor/medalofhonor_screen007.jpg>this</a> I just don't think it's a fair or reasonable expectation)

Ben

[This message has been edited by Ben Galanti (edited 01-26-2001).]

[Guest wwb_99]

1) I have no doubt that BTS will make significant graphical improvements for CM2. Their dedication to quality is clear, and I have no fears about their desire to improve their product as much as possible.

2) I highly doubt that these improvements will make CM require much more hardware power or the latest and greatest graphics card. There are very few differences between a PII/200 and a PIII/700 aside from processor speed. If anything, it may be a bit more RAM intensive. And a PII 200 with 128mb+ of RAM is a perfectly servicable machine. Possibly more likely is more graphics options (i.e. multiple paint schemes), which would require more disk space but not necessarily more CPU cycles.

3) Rewriting the graphics engine to use hardware T & L, etc is a major, major undertaking and I would guess is very unlikely until CM II.

4) Given the style of BTS' programming so far, I would suspect that graphical improvements will be similar to the effects now: the can be turned on or off to make room for slower machines, as it stands now.

WWB

------------------

Before battle, my digital soldiers turn to me and say,

Ave, Caesar! Morituri te salutamus.

[Gremlin]

Michael, you wouldn't be without your comp while upgrading. I meant upgrading it yourself. It's pretty easy, actually.

As for competition, I'm talking about other indy wargame publishers that can surely see which way the wind is blowing--certainly not Hasbro and their SL disaster.

Btw, why on earth is someone a "blockhead" because they dislike CM's graphics or at least feel they can be improved? (I fall in the latter camp.) Computer games are largely a visual medium, and that applies to CM, with its 3D battlefield and units, which are integral to its gameplay and vital to its emotional appeal.

Computer gamers, developers, and publishers have for the most part been very interested in graphics (for different reasons) since the very beginning of the hobby (yes, I've been involved in it that long and know what I'm talking about ). Graphics alone don't make a great game, but they can sure make one better. Still, I'm very much aware that graphics are used push junk on gamers.

PS I hope, btw, I don't sound like I'm grumbling about CM, because I'm not. It's one of my all-time faves, and I've been very active in exposing many people to it. Since I love it, I want its successors to be even better.

------------------

When men are inhuman, take care not to feel towards them as they do towards other humans.

--Marcus Aurelius

[Edited for clarification and shameful typos ]

[This message has been edited by Gremlin (edited 01-26-2001).]

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

OK!

I must step in here

Some of you need to get your heads out of the sand. Some of us here have pointed out to BTS on the forum what other up coming games will look like.

and they look Good!!

Stunning actually!!!

These game designers that are producing games RIGHT now in developement are NOT complaining about hardware limitations.

NO! they are posting sreen shots of what the the NEXT BIG thing will look like when it is released

And it looks like this:

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/015515.html

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/013878.html

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/015525.html

Check 001).]

OH PLEASE!!!!!!!!!!! Great screenshots, but do they even say what the game is about (Battleifield 1942 I mean) or even what kind of game it is? They are selling sizzle, not steak!

B-17 II had great screenshots, but from what I can tell from the word on the net, the game itself sucks crap through a straw!

I will no longer be hoodwinked by flashy graphics, TYVM, and I hope the game-playing majority will soon be as hardened. I know many who are.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Gremlin:

Michael, you wouldn't be without your comp while upgrading. I meant upgrading it yourself. It's pretty easy, actually.

As for competition, I'm talking about other indy wargame publishers that can surely see which way the wind is blowing--certainly not Hasbro and their SL disaster.

Btw, why on earth is someone a "blockhead" because they dislike CM's graphics or at least feel they can be improved? (I fal in the latter camp.) Computer games are largely a visual medium, and that applies to CM, with its 3D battlefield and units, which are integral to its gameplay and vital to its emotional appeal.

Computer gamers, developers, and publishers have for the most part been very interested in graphics (for different reasons) since the very beginning of the hobby (yes, I've been involved in it that long and know what I'm talking about ). Graphics alone don't make a great game, but they can sure make one better.

I'm at work and don't have time to backpedal here - will do so if I get time later, or once I'm at home. I obviously mis-spoke - didn't mean to throw the "blockhead" net so wide. Will attempt a half-assed explanation later!

As for upgrades - that is something I obviously don't know much about. I considered it last time out, and will definitely have to learn more in future - like when my current lease is up. Thanks for the feedback. Feel free to crawl out from under my "blockhead" net.

[Gremlin]

/me doesn't crawl

Here are some excellent sites to keep up with the hardware scene:

http://www.anandtech.com

http://www.maximumpc.com (and the magazine of the same name)

http://www.sharkyextreme.com

http://www.tomshardware.com

http://www.arstechnica.com

http://www.firingsquad.com

------------------

When men are inhuman, take care not to feel towards them as they do towards other humans.

--Marcus Aurelius

[Hamstersss]

What, are you people insane?!?! Haven't you heard of the word, "Optional"? Optional, optional, optional! Don't like T&L? Can't use it? Turn it off. Resolution too high? Too many polygons? Scale them down. All BTS has to do is make all the whiz-bang graphics improvements optional and everything's fine.

Now some of you will say that BTS shouldn't waste their time on graphics, to which I say, tough luck, buddy. BTS isn't just catering to the hardcore grog (Otherwise we'd all be in the TacOps forum), they're also catering to the Patton-watching, eye-candy loving, semi-grog like me.

You're being selfish when you say that BTS should only spend time on what you think is important to the improvement of CM. I'll think CM2 or CMII or whatever it's called will be great with dust, dynamic lighting, high-poly models, et cetera. You'll think it's great when you turn off all that extraneous crap and see the realisticly modeled physics, armor penetration, TO&E, et cetera.

Of course, that's a gross mischaracterization itself. In reality most of us will love the graphics AND love the realism and we'll leave the harping to the graphics junkies and the hardcore grogs.

JUST MAKE IT OPTIONAL!

------------------

"The hands of the Clock of Doom have moved again. Only a few more swings of the pendulum, and, from Moscow to Chicago, atomic explosions will strike midnight for Western civilization."

-Eugene Rabinowitch

[This message has been edited by Elijah Meeks (edited 01-26-2001).]

[CavScout]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Personally, I couldn't bear the thought of being without my computer for a week while the upgrades were being done!

That's why you do it yourself!

[Guest Germanboy]

Originally posted by Guy w/gun:

True, true.

Now for the benefit of those taken in by Jeff's little strawman about the P166:

BTS have stated that CM2 will be 16MB VRAM minimum, and 32 recommended (which means that my iMac with 8MB VRAM will still run it comfortably). Nobody is arguing for sticking with P166 - Jeff, can you please explain why you state that?

At the same time, I have no interest to shell out lots of money (those statesiders, please remember that hardware is more expensive in Europe) just to play CM2. I think going for 16, or maybe even 32 minimum should be fine, depending on when it comes.

------------------

Andreas

Der Kessel

Home of „Die Sturmgruppe“; Scenario Design Group for Combat Mission.

[Terence]

Originally posted by The Commissar:

Why buy new computers at all?

Do what I do and upgrade in parts! It costs much less the buying a brand new machine, and you can buy specifically what you need (ie: a faster processor)

You have a hard time upgrading my horrible little sh#tbox compaq presario and then getting it to work.

[The Commissar]

The beautiful part about BTS and their wonderful game is that although it started out looking none too impressive (visually, compared to other games), thanks to the fans, the game now looks as good as some of the better visually-stunning games on the market.

I think that BTS has found a virtual well of talent by making this forum and getting so many people interested. They have a collection of very creative people here! Just look at the employes they recently hired - both fans!

What if BTS concentrated on upgrading the engine (with scalable levels of visuals, as Elijah suggested) and let the fans do the "skins"? No offense to BTS - but some of the stuff Marko Bergman and BIG DD do look much better then the BTS originals.

I think BTS should open up to the fans more. Find a few people willing to help out from these very forums. Are the two artists I have mentioned being paid? No! Are they still making great looking stuff? Heck yes!

I dont think that volunteering full time would suit anyone, but if BTS needed help with some skin work for future games, Im pretty sure some would be willing to get their hands on the models.

Of course, not being a modder myself, I cant speak for others. I just have a feeling that people like them would jump at the opportunity to contribute to a game we will all enjoy immensely thanks to their efforts.

Cheers!

------------------

"...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..."

- Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back"

[This message has been edited by The Commissar (edited 01-26-2001).]

[JoePrivate]

Jeff Heidman wrote:

Despite the rather vocal and well earned praise that CM has gotten, it is not sold and marketed in a vacuum. Its own success will ensure that other companies try to beat it at its own game. The idea of a highly realistic WW2 tactical wargame is not exactly ground breaking, and others are going to try to match and exceed what BTS has accomplished. It is likely that they will try to do so with a lot more than 4 people.

It is the height of hubris to think that just because you have succeeded the first time, you are assured of continued dominance. That is a short path to irrelevancy in *any* market. I do not think BTS is stupid, and I do not think that they are going to forget that.

Interesting but I wonder about that. Matrix Games is working on a title called 'Combat Leader'. Early on a few wondered why it wouldn't be 3D like CM, one of the spokespersons there said they couldn't justify the development(cost) of a 3D engine for a niche market, going on to say once gamers were committed to the game then perhaps.

Look at the RTS genre, a few like Battlezone, Uprising, Ground Control, Dark Reign2 went 3D but still couldn't touch the likes of AOE II or StarCraft in sales, both 2D and both with a loyal following.

No doubt BTS is aware of the dangers of 'standing still' but doing it right the first time and being recognized as such by a large audience will ensure future success, IMO. It's a combination that will be hard to beat unless BTS drops the ball, something I think future developers would be conscious of as well.

[Guy w/gun]

Ok then Bastables, I'll retract that. I had no Idea about the background info you just informed me of-so I apologize.

But what I said about jr's, I still believe is true.

[David Aitken]

Freak wrote:

> It would seem that david has a chip on his shoulder regarding any talk about improved graphics.

Michael Dorosh wrote:

> The big deal is the old timers who whine when something has been discussed somewhere back in the 5 million different threads. Just ignore them when they jump up and down and demand that you search and you will be fine. That's what I do.

AbnAirCav wrote:

> despite the fact that David Aitken appears to be on a crusade to obstruct further discussion on this matter

The only thing I have a chip on my shoulder about is people arrogantly refusing to use the search function.

Michael, yes, there are a lot of posts on this forum. Thousands of topics have been discussed, meaning that if you have any Combat Mission-related concerns, there's a fair chance they have already been addressed. This is what the search function is for. I can't understand why you use the volume of posts as an argument against searching.

Freak and AbnAirCav, that's a silly attitude. I have offered my views on this issue. What I was really doing was summing up what has been said before on the matter. What I should have done is simply provided the link which I later did. I don't give a flying monkey whether you discuss this topic until you're blue in the face. However I don't like to see the same discussions reoccuring again and again. This is not just a personal issue, there are good reasons for it.

I never tell anyone to do a search. I usually do the search myself, and provide a link to relevant discussions. But I do object when people turn their nose up at the search function. Many minds have spent much time considering and discussing many topics on this board. Discussions are very often exhaustive, and when the subject is brought up again, the discussions usually follow the same path and reach the same conclusion. At best this is a waste of time.

However, more likely, new discussions lack the participation of the board veterans who are either absent or do not wish to go through the whole thing again. As such the conclusions will be poorer than those previously reached. Granted, new minds might compensate for this, but those who abstain are usually much more experienced. Their wisdom is available for those who are reasonable enough to appreciate that 10 minutes' searching is more efficient than starting up a whole new discussion, waiting for responses, and taking the whole thing to a conclusion, which could take days.

As you well know, you are completely free to ignore my advice. But consider why I bother offering it. I don't care whether you resurrect a discussion that has been rerun from A to Z a hundred times, that's up to you. It's not my board, it doesn't affect me in the slightest, I've got better things to worry about. But when I either observe or engage in an extensive discussion involving a lot of wisdom and insight from a lot of knowledgeable people, and I appreciate the way the issues are dealt with and what conclusions are reached, I think "heck, everyone should be in on this". So when I later see someone bringing up the same issue, I want them to see the previous discussion, because it's very worthwhile.

This is why I provide links myself instead of insisting that you do a search – because I'm keen that people should see the relevant discussions that I'm aware of. I don't do it for my own amusement, I do it because I appreciate what has gone into those discussions, and I think you would benefit from seeing them yourselves. If you want to ignore that, see if I care. But if you're going to criticise me for it, I care all right.

David