Patch V1.02 news from CDV

[Bastables]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Yes, there is significant list of other vehicles that could have gone in in place of these. But as noted above, someone would complain. Especially about the StuG IV if history is any indication of the future

.

Yes StuG IV is in! No longer will it mock me when I see it in game "Hah I'm only a subsitute StuG IV." No only the PIV/70(A) now confounds me, to my grave!

[ February 08, 2003, 07:17 PM: Message edited by: Bastables ]

[flammenwerfer]

Panzerbüchse!?? Damn, the grogs always win.

[Becket]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

The new game engine will be a LOT easier to get stuff into it.

Steve

Does that mean even user created models/units (ala Neverwinter Nights)? I'd love to see that in the new engine, though obviously I wouldn't sacrifice very much for it.

Thanks for everything!

[Battlefront.com]

Leutnant Hortlund ,

Uh...?

I just wanted to make sure I understand you correct. No new models for CMBB? There will never be a JS-3 that looks like a JS-3 etc?

Correct. We have been saying for months now that 1.02 is the last planned patch. If, for some strange reason, some new model is added in a 1.03 patch it will certainly not be the IS-3. This thing really shouldn't even be in the game, and as long as there are vehicles that rightly are in the game which don't have correct models, such things as the IS-3 and T-44 will not be put ahead of them.

Of course, this is accademic because we are moving on to do the new engine now full bore. We could be endlessly distracted by CMBB enhancements, so time to cut the cord. We spent WAY too long futzing around with CMBO and have learned from that (it delayed CMBB by at least 6 months).

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Becket ,

Does that mean even user created models/units (ala Neverwinter Nights)? I'd love to see that in the new engine, though obviously I wouldn't sacrifice very much for it.

It is unlikely that we will spend the time to make the models importable. There really is no reason to do this for a game like CM, except for those we didn't get time to finish. The benefit of the new engine is that we should be able to do everything, even if the vehicle list is as ridiculously long as that of CMBB.

Steve

[Le Tondu]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

................Yes, there is significant list of other vehicles that could have gone in in place of these. But as noted above, someone would complain. Especially about the StuG IV if history is any indication of the future

Adding models is very tedious and requires the work of three people to get them in. Probably around 4 work days per vehicle, assuming ground up artwork or 2.5 days with significantly reused artwork. Instead of being shocked at what we didn't put in you should be stunned at how much is in the game already, not to mention added with two patches.

It is utterly impossible to allow 3rd parties to add models to the game. It is hard enough for us to get them in and we have the source code and have been sticking them in for 4 years. And even if we spent several months making an external tool it would have to be Macintosh only. We use 3DMF format and have found that files of that type derrived on Windows based machines do not work (hence the need for 3 people instead of 2).

The sad thing is that Dan (KwazyDog) made models for each and every vehicle in CMBB. Heck, he even made some models (by mistake) of vehicles models NOT present on the Eastern Front. But because of the 2.5 - 4 day time period to get each in we were only able to do so much.

The new game engine will be a LOT easier to get stuff into it.

Steve

P.S. And no, we are not planning on adding anything else to the game.

Hard work was certainly done to bring us CMBB and I am eternally grateful for it, but I respectfully want to share some thoughts...

A case in point.

I remember a time when folks asked (repeatedly) when CMBB would be released and they were told (repeatedly), "When it's done!" Often times that was told in a not so polite manner. Does anyone remember that?

I hope that in the future we never, ever see those words again. By Steve's above admission, CMBB won't ever really be completed. With missing models, it may have been decided that CMBB is "finished", but it won't really be completed until they're in.

They've made the decision and that's that. We have to live with it.

My contention is that these products (whether it's CMBO or CMBB) could be complete if there were enough folks working on them. Right now the tiny (by all standards) hard working staff that exists really is insufficient to get the complete job done.

What did Steve say? Three more people are needed to do models? Companies all over the place higher temps to help them out. Why couldn't some temporary help be hired to just do some of the models??? There are plenty of extremely talented folks that would willingly help out. I bet some may even have Macs.

The way that I see it, BTS had to grow a little after CMBO --because it was needed. I respectfully submit that BTS may have to do some more growing (at the very least temporarily) --or after the third CM product is "finished", we might all be saying, "Oh no, not again."

[ February 08, 2003, 08:00 PM: Message edited by: Le Tondu ]

[vedder]

Wow. Great work BFC, patch sounds awesome and its good to know you have your sights on the future.

[aka_tom_w]

thanks Steve !

That sounds GREAT!

-tom w

[Marco Bergman]

Originally posted by Le Tondu:

My contention is that these products (whether it's CMBO or CMBB) could be complete if there were enough folks working on them. Right now the tiny (by all standards) hard working staff that exists really is insufficient to get the complete job done.

What did Steve say? Three more people are needed to do models? Companies all over the place higher temps to help them out. Why couldn't some temporary help be hired to just do some of the models??? There are plenty of extremely talented folks that would willingly help out. I bet some may even have Macs.

Well it turns out that this was already the case. Without some of the modders' input, there would be a whole lot less to see in this game. From what I recall, Fernando did all the Uniforms ( A huge job.). Mike did lots of great field guns and I think the faces. Makjager did some vehicles. Gordon applied cammo to all the vehicles I did, plus a whole lot of alternate colourations for early, late, other nationalities, etc, plus at least one vehicle. If I missed anyone I apologise. I myself did 1 photo-based and 17 from-scratch vehicles in 3 months, plus variants. ( That's why I'm taking a break now; I was CM-overdosed.)

Here's my list for the record: (some started by Gordon, all coloured by him.)

Finnish T26 (photo-based), L6/40, BA64, BA64B, BA20, BA10, T60, T70, T38, Turan I, Turan II, Toldi I, Toldi II, Zrinyi, Nimrod, CV35, R35, TACAM R2

[Battlefront.com]

Le Tondu,

I remember a time when folks asked (repeatedly) when CMBB would be released and they were told (repeatedly), "When it's done!" Often times that was told in a not so polite manner. Does anyone remember that?

Sure. And both CMBO and CMBB were released when they were done. "Done" being a reasonable term. No game is ever really finished. By "done" we mean the game is complete and fully functional for all intents and purposes. And that is what both CMBO and CMBB are. Some window dressing (models) are missing. Guess what? We could have just hacked down the vehicle list instead. So would you guys rather 100 vehicles with complete models or something like 300 with 250 complete models?

I hope that in the future we never, ever see those words again.

You will, so get ready for it

By Steve's above admission, CMBB won't ever really be completed. With missing models, it may have been decided that CMBB is "finished", but it won't really be completed until they're in.

Bullcrap. If this is how you judge the game to be done or not, next time we will put in 1/2 as much stuff and finish early. Everybody will be happy with 1/2 as much game 99% complete? I doubt it.

They've made the decision and that's that. We have to live with it.

Correct. You do realise we could still be working on CMBO right now? All those features we added into CMBB could be considered things that should have been in CMBO. And the stuff for the next engine, again... just stuff we were too lazy to put into the first version. Of course I think such logic is nonsense. It is like saying Tolkien should never have released The Fellowship of the Ring until he had finished the follow ups, seeing as it is all one story.

My contention is that these products (whether it's CMBO or CMBB) could be complete if there were enough folks working on them.

Er... time for you to go back to school and study something called Economics 101. We do not have an endless budget to work with. I think we can argue that we have put more stuff into CMBO/CMBB for about 1/4th as much as a big company would have spent (of course, they would have also screwed it up and released it before it was "done").

Right now the tiny (by all standards) hard working staff that exists really is insufficient to get the complete job done.

We could release 1.03 without the vehicle data for anything without a model. By your definition the game would then be "done". Life is full of compromises. Game development is even worse.

What did Steve say? Three more people are needed to do models? Companies all over the place higher temps to help them out.

Companies all over the place generally have multi million/billion dollar companies backing them up. If they f'up a project by spending too much compared to too little sales, the company survives. Heck, generally the team that mismanaged the project surive too. For us? We would be flipping bugers.

Why couldn't some temporary help be hired to just do some of the models???

See above

There are plenty of extremely talented folks that would willingly help out. I bet some may even have Macs.

Marco already addressed this quite well. We had a small army of very tallented people helping us out. Still not enough. Plus, you apparently haven't a clue that when you have lots of indians you also need to have lots of chiefs. We had enough hardship managing the army of people (artists, sound guys, scenario guys, etc.) as it was. The alternative was not to hire more people but to scale back the scope of the game.

The way that I see it, BTS had to grow a little after CMBO --because it was needed. I respectfully submit that BTS may have to do some more growing (at the very least temporarily) --or after the third CM product is "finished", we might all be saying, "Oh no, not again."

If having a few missing 3D representations bothers you so much, kindly snap the CD in half, stick it back in the manual, and send it to us to my attention. I will see that you get your money back for this horrible disapointment of a game. I'll do one better and send you a copy of GI Combat (retail value is only $10, so what the hey) so you can be reminded what normal wargames are like. We hate to let people down, even the completely out in left field unreasonable ones.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Hi Marco,

If I missed anyone I apologise.

Send your apologies c/o DeanCo I designed most of the interface layout, he did almost all the final arwork and a few designs himself.

JuJu also did quite a number of the small arms, with Larnie (KwazyDog's significant other) helping out too.

There were also a bunch of guys who did voices for us, including some crazy Finns who shall remain nameless Then there were tons of people who helped out in lots of behind the sceenes ways, like Rune, SuperTed, and... awe crud... just look at pages 3 and 4 in your manual. There must be over a hundred names in there. We couldn't have done it without them.

We had no shortage of help. But the design goal for CMBB was frankly larger than even this huge extended family of nuts could tackle 100%. We had to make a decision to either scale back the game or find ways of delivering 100% in all the areas that counted and compromising on the other areas that could handle less than 100%. Since getting models into the game was one of the huge bottlenecks, and having an IS-3 that never saw combat with an IS-2 model was considered acceptable to us, that was the obvious 2nd thing to go. The 1st was, of course, a ton of programming features we had on the "wish list". Anybody who saw the recent PBEM bitch thread knows at least one of them

Steve

[ February 09, 2003, 12:21 AM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]

[Becket]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Becket ,

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Does that mean even user created models/units (ala Neverwinter Nights)? I'd love to see that in the new engine, though obviously I wouldn't sacrifice very much for it.

It is unlikely that we will spend the time to make the models importable. There really is no reason to do this for a game like CM, except for those we didn't get time to finish. The benefit of the new engine is that we should be able to do everything, even if the vehicle list is as ridiculously long as that of CMBB.

Steve </font>

[Kwazydog]

What confuses me is that if we didnt do the research on armour values, weapon penetrations, ground pressure, horse power, etc for those vehicles that dont have a unique model and thus we *didnt* add them into CMBB, people would consider the game finsihed. :confused:

Instead we decided to make CMBB with as much tactical scope as possible and add in vehicles that yes, dont have a 100% accurate model (shock!), but do operate as reasistically as as CM's engine can model.

I actually recommended this option before we even started modelling vehicles as I thought people would be much more interested in tactical scope than eye candy. Im not sure I could make the same recommendation again though unfortunately, as we are being told by a few that becuase we put in the extra work noted above, the game is now unfinished in some way. To be totally honest that doesnt sit well with me, and it would certainally be easy to avoid.

Dan

[ February 09, 2003, 02:48 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by KwazyDog:

What amazes me is that if we didnt do the research on armour values, weapon penetrations, ground pressure, horse power, etc for those vehicles that dont have a unique model and thus we *didnt* add them into CMBB, people would consider the game finsihed. :confused:

Instead we dicided to make CMBB with as much tactical scope as possible and add in vehicles that yes, dont have a 100% accurate model (shock!), but do operate as reasistically as as CM's engine can model.

I actually recommended this option before we even started modelling vehicles as I thought people would be much more interested in tactical scope than eye candy. Im not sure I could make the same recommendation again though unfortunately, as we are being told by a noisey few that becuase we put in the extra work noted above, the game is now unfinished in some way. To be totally honest that doesnt sit well with me, and it would certainally be easy to avoid.

Dan

Don't listen to the whiners. One wonders - if they are at view 1 and really noticing the minor differences in these models, are they really doing well in the tactical realm? And wasn't that the whole point of the game?

Yes, the beauty of CM is that there are a lot of aspects to enjoy, including the graphics - but let's have some perspecive - as Steve pointed out, the models of extremely rare vehicles probalby ain't a huge deal...

[Kwazydog]

Thanks Micahel

I do realise many do appreciate our descision, and thats great. It is also importatnt to note that the new ening should make it a quicker to add in new models, too, so time shouldnt be such a constraint in the future.

Dan

[ February 09, 2003, 01:45 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

[dalem]

I'll be honest, my first reaction reading this thread (I haven't been following patch progress) was "waaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" Baby wanted his bottle full of 3D models and accurate iconic pictures for the menu bar.

Then I read Steve & Dan's responses (thanks for still reading guys!) and matured a little bit. The game works great, the toys I push around the screen act like the toys they are no matter which rivet is where, and I want the new engine to happen ASAP. If BFC says "this is the way it is" then we need to trust that they know what the heck they're talking about, just like we did the whole last four years. I have a feeling it will work out juuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuust fine.

-dale

[Cpl Carrot]

Well if I may add my two cents, I think people are expecting too much. We already have a simulation well above expectations (for me anyway), yet some people complain that some rare thing has the wrong model. For me, I don't really give a two hoots whether a IS 3 looks like a IS 2. The underlying data is correct, so what does it matter what the graphic representation looks like. Some people seem to have been spoiled and need to take a reality check

All that being said, I will be downloading the patch

Cpl Carrot

[uhu]

Very big thanks for the patch, Steve!

It's also good, that you wrote the day, when the patch will be released, so I musn't to see the page twice a day. (at last

I don't understand the people, who are complaining about not to have enough new (or cerrected) 3D modells. JS-3 saw never combat in the war, so.. Otherway, there is SO MANY units in the game, which I didn't see in any other ww2 game, so there could be always several modells which are not correct reperesented. If these units wouldn't be in the game, would be no incorrectness, but would it be better?

I'm waiting for the wednesday.

bye,

Uhu

[Nolloff]

Originally posted by Cpl Carrot:

Well if I may add my two cents, I think people are expecting too much. We already have a simulation well above expectations (for me anyway), yet some people complain that some rare thing has the wrong model. For me, I don't really give a two hoots whether a IS 3 looks like a IS 2. The underlying data is correct, so what does it matter what the graphic representation looks like.....

Seems CM got some people addicted to eye-candy. And I thought that´s the opposite of realism for the grogs. The times, they are changing ...

Nolloff

[Hortlund]

It seems rather pointless to argue over this since BFC has made up their mind. And they have plenty of fanbois around here to support their view too.

But personally I think it is better to finish one project before starting a new one. The difference for CM2 is pretty irrellevant IMO, I mean if CM2 arrives Q3 2004 or Q4 2004 doesnt really matter that much, it would have been better if BFC had decided to get CMBB "done" before moving on.

I have no problem buying half finished games as long as I know that they will be finished eventually through patches. To see the "you should be glad we included the data at all in the game and stop complaining about the 3d models"- attitude was frankly not something I was expecting to see from the makers of the game.

[Tarquelne]

Originally posted by KwazyDog:

[QB] Thanks Micahel

I do realise many do appreciate our descision, and thats great.

That's a testable hypothesis, you know. Start a thread stating that you'll be doing things differently next time, and see what happens.

I think it comes down to positive attitude vrs. negative attitude:

Positive: Yea! Even if we don't have the models we get even MORE units!

Negative: Boo! We don't have the models for all of the units!

And the key to having a positive attitude is having a resonable sense of perspective: This is going to get technical.... The game already has LOTS of AFVs. Not "a few", not "some", but "LOTS". I counted, and it was LOTS. "LOTS - a few models = a great game", not an incomplete game.

I think, btw, that "Whaaa! My fav. unit doesn't have a model!" is a resonable position.... but not "Whaaa! My fav. unit doesn't have a model! This is a notworthy, even serious, probelm!"

[Nolloff]

Originally posted by Leutnant Hortlund:

..

But personally I think it is better to finish one project before starting a new one. The difference for CM2 is pretty irrellevant IMO, I mean if CM2 arrives Q3 2004 or Q4 2004 doesnt really matter that much, it would have been better if BFC had decided to get CMBB "done" before moving on.

.

LH,

you can´t really be serious that the game is unfinished just because some models are not there can´t you? If there´s a gap between your personal design specifications for CMBB and the game as it is now or after the patch that´s rather your personal problem. "Unfinished" can only relate to what the company, the adds, the box, the manual, the official promises stated to be included in the game and the status as it is now. I see no unfinished business there.

And, sure, Q3 or Q4 2004 doesn´t matter at all. This is not business, cashflow doesn´t really matter, who cares about revenue coming jus a quarter later as long as the models keep coming.

Swinging the fanboi mace doesn´t really improve your point. Fanboy seems to include everybody who does not share your oh so humble opinion.

Nolloff

[ February 09, 2003, 08:51 AM: Message edited by: Nolloff ]

[aka_tom_w]

Patch or no patch

Here is a Question:

When you bought CMBO did you get your money's worth for US $ 45.00?? :eek:

Seriously....

how about CMBB?

Anybody here NOT get their money's worth for US $ 45.00?

We got a whole bunch of FREE patches for the first one and TWO solid patches for CMBB (assuming of course v1.02 is the patch to end all patches )

I cannot believe the whinning and the drivel in this thread!

I am THRILLED to hear BFC is now full steam ahead on the next BIG thing. Maybe by the spring or summer of 2005 we will have another MASTER PIECE of wargaming, a real new inovative, ground breaking, combat simulation to play.

(on a MAC no less!)

Lets encourage them on their next project

Good luck Gentlemen

-tom w

[ February 09, 2003, 09:58 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[-Havermeyer-]

The patch on Wednesday!!!!! But I want it now!!!!

Shuddup ya whiners. Since I started playing games in this series my attention has not been diverted to ANY other games (other than MS Train Sim for my train nut kid!). And will not be until the ENGINE RE-WRITE IS DONE!!!! My desire for it is transcended (in the short term) by my desire for the EXTENDED VERSION OF THE TWO TOWERS!!!

To each his own, but my original CDs sit with my marriage license, bonds, and other junk in the fire resistant case.

(Actually, my CMBO CD was a backup from BTS because the aforementioned train nut kid took the CMBO CD and it has been nary seen since!!!! And BTS sent that backup on THEIR DIME!!!!)

[Becket]

Let me add my 2 cents to say that I too am glad that things like the IS-3 or the T-44 are in there at all, because the easy (and easily, easily justified given real WWII history) option would have been to leave them out.

I hope negative comments on the message board don't result in adverse decisions for CM2.

[ February 09, 2003, 10:13 AM: Message edited by: Becket ]