CM:XX Game Extensions

[KiloIndiaAlpha]

How about BTS making some of their code available via an API into a dynamic link library. This would allow programmers amongst us to develop add-ons to perhaps integrate some of the manually driven campaign rules that people have developed. Another example could be a utility to read a zip file containing a bunch of mods and render the object in 3-D just as it would appear in CM - the user could then decide if he wanted the mod or not.

Of course creating these DLLs may not be easy, but it would allow the game to extend in much the same way as having all the bitmaps public for the modders to manipulate.

[Redwolf]

Of all wargame developers BFC is probably the least likely to support this.

Remember that such an interface to a dynamic library will expose internal data structue and some of them would have to be documented to make any use of the interface.

BFC doesn't even give us a list of BMP files for the textures. Not that this is so horrible, but it makes the point clear.

[xerxes]

Some level of programmatic access would be wonderful and would spur innovation. Having to write everything as a screen-scraping shell stinks.

[jeffsmith]

When BFC will open up its coding !!!

[zukkov]

my thoughts exactly js. they are very protective of their code and rightly so. if they did, there would be a zillion "versions" of the game, none of them compatible. they listen to their customers and make changes where necessary. many times, members have complained something was wrong. in most cases, the member was proven wrong after someone did some testing. i like things the way they are....

[Cabron66]

Just wondering. Have there been cases of games being copied into oblivion because their code was made available? Ubi Soft allows people to alter their stuff to an almost unrecognizable degree, but they have managed to maintain a pretty tight hold on their share of the market. Ghost Recon and Half Life are still going strong because of the work of the modding community.

Also, after seeing GI Combat I saw what kind of dirty crap second rate game designers can pull to ride the gravy train, as it were, but I wonder if Combat Mission is really vulnerable to this kind of thing. I wonder if its just not too hard core a game (with too hard core a following)for others to successfully mimic it.

Can you really protect your code from others that would steal it? This is a more technical question, but it seems to me that if someone wanted to copy CM they could do it without too much trouble. At least to the degree of creating something that looked similar on the surface. I'm no expert, but what are the real dangers of opening the code?

[flamingknives]

The number of different versions resulting would mean that it would not be as easy to set up online gaming.

[KiloIndiaAlpha]

I'm not asking that the code be put into the public domain - just that some hooks into the runtime are offered to allow extension and innovation from modders et al.

[sbg2112]

Yeah, I've long advocated this as well. There are ways they could allow us geeks to add to CM without making it possible to cheat or hack their models.

But I'm convinced they won't do it, and I respect that.

It's one of those things that just seems to make perfect sense: They'd get a vibrant, thriving community of people adding things they could never get around to doing themselves, and your average CM player would get even more value out of the game.

But my guess is that figuring out how they could do this is what's holding them back; they rightly want to protect the integrity of the game, and so this is something that at best winds up very far down on their list.

For what it's worth, I arrived at these positions after spending the better part of a year working on a CM utility. It worked well enough for me, but taking it to the level of making it available for everyone else was just not something I had the time for and I'd exhausted my wrists. Plus, I lost interest in CM for a whole host of other reasons, although I hope to play it again when the rewrite comes out....

Combat Mission Control

Note that I'm only mentioning this to give a sense of the kinds of things that could be added to CM that BFC could never get around to doing. I will not be releasing this.

[KiloIndiaAlpha]

Yes, I worked on a Mod Manager that uses XML to maintain a bitmap to CM object mappings. When I realised that BTS didn't have/wouldn't release a definitive list of which bitmaps map to which objects I largely lost interest. However it did get as far as a beta and I think some people did dl it.

[Redwolf]

Originally posted by Cabron66:

Just wondering. Have there been cases of games being copied into oblivion because their code was made available? Ubi Soft allows people to alter their stuff to an almost unrecognizable degree, but they have managed to maintain a pretty tight hold on their share of the market. Ghost Recon and Half Life are still going strong because of the work of the modding community.

Well, the origin of this trend is the Quake engine.

But the business model cannot be applied to wargames, and as a nice twist, *because* wargames are so deep.

The Quake engine was open to include new models, new programmed opponents (aka "AI") and new combat computation. id software was merely making a "demo" for each new engine, the Quake games. The actual payoff for the company came from other companies licensing the engine for their own games working in the framework of the Quake engine.

But this wouldn't apply to CM. It only works if you open all of combat resolution, enemy AI and 3d models. The only thing left would be the graphics engine.

But the id software business model only worked because people were always crying for a better graphics engine, for the next generation of the Quake engine, for which vendors had to fork out money again.

If CMBO was reduced to the graphics engine and was modded with better combat computation, all the 3D model we might want and people would have their own programmed AIs battle each other nobody would feel tempted to upgrade to the new engine. Not to speak of the fact that there would be fewer companies licensing a CM engine to make new games than there was for Quake-style games.

The whole thing is pretty sad, since BFC spent most of the time of developing CMBO to CMBB in code that would be done by external parties and worked out a number of half-baken mechanisms along with important combat improvements, and the graphics engine stayed almost the same.

[ September 06, 2003, 01:26 PM: Message edited by: redwolf ]

[Cabron66]

Originally posted by redwolf:

Well, the origin of this trend is the Quake engine.

I agree with this entire post except the last paragraph which I didn't really understand. I don't believe Battlefront could possibly be afraid of at least letting people take a crack at parts of the game. Rather, they are probably more concerned (if they are concerned at all) with finding a way to safely release sections of the code without compromising the basic engine.

Anyway, if they could work out a way to allow modders to add new units, new bmps, new terrain, new interface arrangements, new tools etc. imagine what could be done with the game. I like and appreciate the work so far done by the modders, but so much more is possible.

As far as online gaming. This is not a problem. Everyone plays in the latest official version put out by Battlefront. Any mods effecting online gameplay would have to be taken off before entering a battle. This has never been a problem with any other game that I am aware of.

Not to harp on this, but Ghost Recon had a mod section of their options page. You went to it, activated the mods you wanted to use, deactivated the rest and off you went. Took about ten seconds. Of course, Battlefront cannot hope to compete with the size of the team that made that game, but they would be silly not to take a page out of their book.

IMO, the fanatics that hover around this forum would love to get their mits on the code. If Battlefront ever set these guys loose you would see some incredible stuff of probably mythic proportion. I, for one, would be standing at the starting line waiting to do a D-Day mod to end all mods.

[ September 08, 2003, 12:49 AM: Message edited by: Cabron66 ]

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Cabron66:

IMO, the fanatics that hover around this forum would love to get their mits on the code. If Battlefront ever set these guys loose you would see some incredible stuff of probably mythic proportion. I, for one, would be standing at the starting line waiting to do a D-Day mod to end all mods.

How would BTS benefit from this?

[BeauCoupDinkyDau]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Cabron66:

IMO, the fanatics that hover around this forum would love to get their mits on the code. If Battlefront ever set these guys loose you would see some incredible stuff of probably mythic proportion. I, for one, would be standing at the starting line waiting to do a D-Day mod to end all mods.

How would BTS benefit from this? </font>

[Cabron66]

Fellow Canadian, eh? You're a Calgarian, no? How's the summer out there? Worst one we ever had here on the east coast. I'm thinking about heading down to Mexico to hide from the winter.

OK, fair question. I can only point to what I have seen in other games that have done a great deal to propagate modding and the general impression I receive from talking/chatting with people who are also avid gamers like myself.

If we assume that CM is a sort of cult game whose time has come (in the sense that it has not or will ever enjoy the mass success of Grand Theft Auto: Vice City or Everquest but is doing fairly well within its own market) then it simplifies the argument. Also, making the assumption that BTS will only benefit from increased sales and all other benefits are intangible we simplify things.

How does a game like CM become successful? The only answer to this question is the buzz it creates in the online community of people that play these kinds of games. I discovered it by making the mistake of buying G.I. Combat, complaining and later having CM reccomended to me.

Let's face it. This game will create no buzz with it's mind-blowing graphics or sound effects. It's strong points are it's attention to detail, authenticity, realism and interface (i.e. playability). Now, its good balance of depth and playability make it a game accessible to a broad base of players. Basically, it has something for everyone.

Now, add in the mods, campaign rules, Operation Storfang, downloadable scenarios/operations, independant web pages and everything else which I include in the term "modding community" and you have a game which also enjoys immense replayability, increased reputation and a longer lifespan on the hard drives of players. All of which equates to more people more satisfied with the game more likely to tell others they are (weird sentence).

Now, IMO, let modders at sections of the code, especially at this stage of CM's life, and you can count on a host of great ideas (and bad ones) popping up all over the net. After natural selection has done its work you are left with a whole host of things which BTS never had time for or never even considered. All of which create buzz. BTS picks and chooses what they like, throws in a few of their own ideas and whammo, CMAK or later games improve by leaps and bounds instead of simple steps. The benefits are not confined to increased sales, but are also felt in the quality of the game.

Buzz also attracts the talented members of the online community that are inclined to appear whenever they see the chance to make their mark. These guys wander the net looking for game engines that give them the freedom to create their own projects (most of them imagining the success of those who created Counter Strike). Who will argue that Valve and Sierra did not benefit by having every kid in the world install Half Life or some derivitive of it on their hard drives? Now they stand ready to release Half Life 2 (which they designed to be playable on even the lowest of low end machines with the intention of hitting markets like China, India and Latin America) and just watch how much buzz it creates.

[ September 08, 2003, 02:06 AM: Message edited by: Cabron66 ]

[KiloIndiaAlpha]

Some interesting comments here. I'm not suggesting that the combat resolution engine is made public - doing that would result in a set of orthogonal CM derivatives and 'fair play' could be lost. What I am suggesting is, for example, the graphics API be made public.

[markl]

I find the point above about not even giving the list of BMP files out as very odd indeed. I would say without a doubt that with out the modders they would sell a lot less copies. I for one only purchased the game after I modded the demo a bit a saw what was possible.

I think the game makers owe the modders more than they realise.

They should at least give the sound and texture file names out.

I would say if the game is to progress beyond a certain point, some info must be given out or one day it may be history like WWII.

Just my thoughts.

[KiloIndiaAlpha]

Yes, the bitmap to object mappings have been determined through trial and error by the modders and are, I think, not yet fully comprehensive.

[Redwolf]

Just to be sure this is understood:

I do not argue that BFC could make enough money by providing a graphical engine.

For a wargame that is just not realistic, you could not generate enough interested to feed BFC and their licensees, and people would not be as eager to upgrade to a new engine as the Quake folks are.

[KiloIndiaAlpha]

Originally posted by redwolf:

Just to be sure this is understood:

I do not argue that BFC could make enough money by providing a graphical engine.

For a wargame that is just not realistic, you could not generate enough interested to feed BFC and their licensees, and people would not be as eager to upgrade to a new engine as the Quake folks are.

????

[Cabron66]

Just to be clear, Micheal. I'm sure you've heard the "increased sales" argument before so you can probably quickly skim it and lose nothing, but I also argue that the quality of the game improves. That is the part that is more open to debate, but is an assertion I make based on the amount of modder input being included in several good games on the market. Smaller companies simply do not have the time, resources or brainpower to compete with a fair-sized modding community. Only in this case no one is competing because standardly everything is done to contribute to the game.

You know there's a guy who is still making very good campaigns for Panzer General II? You should see what he's done with the game over the years since everyone else lost interest.

[KiloIndiaAlpha]

[pakfront_37]

I can understand Battlefront's reluctance to open up the program itself. Look and Quake et al. and the extent thay have to go to to prevent cheating with PunkBuster. It sucks.

That being said, I can see a few places where the ability to read and write OOBs in simple text format would be super useful. Tab delimited text would be sufficent.

Most useful for campaigns and meta-campaigns:

-Read OOBs into the Scenario Editor.

-Write out YOUR OWN OOBs during your turn and at end game.

Both of these would be an immense boon for projects like CMMC, or for players trying to track what happened in a game.

Maps could be written and read using a text or binary format.

-In the map editor, read in Elevation, setup zones, Terrain data from an open map format.

Write out would be nice too, but not as vital.

This could be minimally supported, just a simple documentation of the format. No fancy API.

[WWB]

I would vote for XML rather than a simple text format. And such a thing would be pretty cool. The problem that was ran into was in coming up with said format, no one has ever done a satisfactory one. Now, if someone were to write a nice DTD that might get thier attention.

WWB

[pakfront_37]

What would XML do that plain text couldn't? Can XML be read by most spreadsheet programs?