CMBB Fans who plan to play CMSF?

[Capt. Toleran]

Hi,

Haven't posted on this forum in a while (and I rarely do). Was just curious how many of you guys plan to get CMSF when it comes out?

Also, of those of you that answered affirmative to the above, anyone else really irked that the CMSF forum is dead (aside from the usual Peng stuff) due to no news about product release, or even screen shots? Why don't any of you post there?

On one hand, wonderful information is available here at this thread, and I feel bad now for posting with questions that were already addressed there: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=000124

If the developers had honored any of the proposed timelines laid out there, I don't think that forum would be dead, and might be as alive as this one. I know they are in a damned-if-you-do situation in even putting those timelines there, but with no bones, little feedback, and little coummunity involvement, there's not much to talk about on the forum.

This is in contrast to CMBO, CMBB, and CMAK, which all had bones, debates over rules and movement, unit request, etc. Heck, look at this forum today! Multiple threads just today on a game that is what, 5 years old now? I would think CMx2, which everyone has been talking about since CMBB came out, would attract some kind of response, but either the lack of interest from the WWII crowd or the lack of bones has just caused the CMSF forum to dry up on the vine.

Ok, just wanted to gripe (and ask those questions above). I have the feeling I am starting to make a pain out of myself here on the Battlefront forums on this topic, but I am frustrated about little to no news about the product release (seems like the same thing is happening with CMC, which also sucks).

2007 seems like a really long time to wait for something that has been in the works for so long already, and I feel similarly about CMC.

These two games are the only ones I have penciled in for my gaming budget, but it looks like we all will be waiting a long, long time.

[ June 01, 2006, 11:08 AM: Message edited by: Capt. Toleran ]

[ParaBellum]

CM:SF will be the first game in the CM series that I won't automatically buy on the release day. I'm just not interested in the "US vs Syria" scenario. If they really have to do a modern war game I'd have preferred a israeli/arab war or Fulda Gap scenario by far. I'll wait for the demo and then decide if I buy it. I just don't really see how they will come around various balancing issues with such vastly different forces. Sure, chances are good I'll buy it eventually, but without the enthusiasm I had for CMBO/BB and AK. The lack of information on the CMSF forum is another disappointment to me.

[Nelson 1812]

Don,t post often, but like many.. additive to the CM 1st series.

Wanted a CM pack on the invasion of the West 1939-1941 period. Disappointed this was not tobe.

Cannot get excited about CM2 as the subject matter is I surpose not histroic enough. That and the press and media reports concerning modern conflict, and the lack of a conclusion to the Iraq war, really makes this period sad...

In addition although I sure there are many heros out there, this period will be remembered more for the suicide bomber and the stone throwers..

not for the hardware.

[Capt. Toleran]

For me, the subject matter doesn't bother me (and is even a plus), since I've gotten my fill of WWII pretty much at this point (though I have jumped back into CMBB again lately), considering all of the games that jumped on the WWII bandwagon after Battlefront paved/pioneered the way. There were some tough battles in this last war (Battle for Fallujah, for instance) and factoring in civilian casualties and other concerns will make it more challenging and realistic. It will also be nice to see what Battlefront does with modern tanks and associated weapon systems. I also would like to see other wars, such as Korea, Vietnam, etc. I'm not too into the Civil War, but if Battlefront made a CMCW game, I would buy it.

What does bother me is the lack of communication, and the fact that we are so off of the time frames mentioned in that FAQ. I mean, at this point, CMSF should have been out, and they should have been working on modules to supplement it. Really, I don't even know why they bothered to open the CMSF forum, because they don't want to actually use it as a community building tool by giving us updates on game progress, and it just gives us false hope that a game is around the corner. Managing expectations is a big part of client relationship.

[Vergeltungswaffe]

What Parabellum said.

CMx2 WWII, I'll be all over like a cheap suit, but SF is going to have to grow on me, before I take the plunge.

[tankibanki]

I'm sure I won't be a big fan on CM:SF, but I will definitely buy it anyway.

It's not that I'm not interested in modern battles, just the opposite, I never really liked WW2 games apart from flight simes. It's just that I can't imagine liking asymmetric conflicts.

My dream would have been a NATO vs WP or even US vs USSR 1980s or later game. Too bad that it's not gonna happen.

[37mm]

All I will say is read books like ‘No true Glory’ (which I believe Steve mentioned himself) & THEN tell me CMSF will be dull.

[gautrek]

Originally posted by Sir 37mm:

All I will say is read books like ‘No true Glory’ (which I believe Steve mentioned himself) & THEN tell me CMSF will be dull.

Thats not the point.

The subject matter is the problem.

Yanks verses Arabs.(YAWN).

Whats wrong with Nato verses the Warsaw pact set in the 70's/80's.That would have been the dogs bollocks.

But CMSF just leaves me cold.

No interest what so ever.

[37mm]

Originally posted by gautrek:

Thats not the point.

The subject matter is the problem.

Yanks verses Arabs.(YAWN).

Whats wrong with Nato verses the Warsaw pact set in the 70's/80's.That would have been the dogs bollocks.

But CMSF just leaves me cold.

No interest what so ever.

Well that’s not the point either… I’d prefer to play a game of ‘space lemmings from mars’ versus the ‘laser lesbians of Las Vegas’... but BFC ain't gonna make that.

They ARE however gonna make CMSF and it will probably be top dorito.

[Nelson 1812]

I thought the "space lemmings were from Las Vegas".. and the "laser lesbians screwed mars"

Thats certainly not dull.. but will not appeal much to the masses.

I sure BFC will not produce a dull game either... but it content may still not appeal to the masses, I like many will await the demo.

More interested in the Napoleonic game ... now that is getting me excited, and I will pre-order.

[JasonC]

Not remotely interested at this point. I'll be playing CMBB, and if/when it appears, the campaign version. When they get to WW II with a CMx2 engine, I'll look. I haven't liked all the proposed major changes. Frankly, the echelon level I'd love to see done right is up 2 from CM, not down 1. Right now that means CM campaigns is the closest to what I am looking for.

[Tagwyn]

BFC jumped the gun on this game system and the subject matter. They have to develop: Drop team, T-72, the Napoleon game, ad nauseum. They should have kept quiet about CM:SF etc. until they knew there would be progress that was appreciable withing a reasonable time frame. They messed in their nest. Moon: Why dont you just admit it and send out some more promos about SC2! A game for Tero and Rambler to play. I just dont understand. Tag

[LongLeftFlank]

Due to a combination of RL and personal preference, I've tended to favour single sitting tiny/small <500 pt paradrop, patrol and partisan QBs vs the AI, where victory rides on good use of infantry tactics, recce and terrain, not on armour and artillery. I favour night/low viz and iron man rules, plus a chess clock to keep the games short and tense. Pacific WWII or 'Nam would be the dream evolution for me, personally.

I'm looking forward to seeing how CMSF refines the fine details of infantry combat, as well as how much smarter the AI gets. I'll probably still play small QBs where Marines are forced to leave most of their heavy stuff behind and go in squad on squad.

[Holman]

First day purchase here. The US vs. Syria would not be my first choice, but when has BTS ever let us down relative to the competition? I'm confident that CMSF will re-establish the state of the art in computer wargaming.

[Vixen]

The subject holds no interest for me. I won't be buying it.

[Ted]

I'll check out the demo, if anything to practice using the interface for when the real CM2 come out, CM2 Normandy.

[Hermitage]

For me, the biggest issue will be "will it run on my Mac?" Perhaps it will be the excuse I need to splurge on a new Intel Mac with Windows installed on a nice large partition. I must admit that there are quite a few PC games that I would like to be playing . . .

I plan to purchase CMSF and I hope it will be a big success. Like many of you have already said, the chosen timeframe holds little interest for me. However, I am eager to see the capabilities of the new game and I see it as a springboard to battles that I am keen to play. With CMSF a big hit, hopefully I could expect to see battlepacks for Arras, 1940! Cambrai, 1917! Do I dare hope for Phillipines, 1942? If enough interest is generated, anything is possible.

I would very much like to see a new progress report and a release date in the near future! Still, BFC isn't a corporation with the resources of, say, SONY. I'm already having to wait months for the Playstation 3 to be finalized, so I guess I can cut BFC a little slack. Considering the astonishing amount of enjoyment I have gotten from the first three iterations of CM, I'm willing to let BFC work things out however they need to.

Besides, maybe BFC had to back up and figure out a way to include IEDs in CMSF. And then figure out a way to deal with the complaints about how the IEDs are way overmodelled . . .

[John Kettler]

Capt. Toleran,

I plan to buy and play it, but I strongly suspect my 800 MHz lampshade iMac's not going to cut it, so a suitable powerful computer is the driver, thus a money issue on my end. The topic, while interesting to me in terms of the forces involved, is not my first choice. Am trying to take the long view, though, and see this first of the new engine games as being a kind of OpEval for the game engine, an opportunity to really wring out the system in the real world before branching into more appealing areas.

Like many, I'd be very interested in a Cold War clash, having spent over 11 years working as a professional threat analyst. There's information available now in open source which would've turned a lot of the then classified threat estimates squarely on their heads. And it goes without saying that the possibilities for WW II gaming with a radical new engine have me practically slavering in anticipation.

Hermitage,

IEDS, their detection and attempted neutralization/neutralization definitely fall under the rubric of "nontrivial problem." This is especially true considering that an IED can be anything from a hand grenade up through a 250 lb. bomb, and it gets even hairier if we add in vehicles, where the charge could be even larger.

Throw in sniffer dogs, EOD robots and a slew of countermeasures thereto, and it's easy to see why they may have to add coolant to Charles's brain jar, lest it boil over!

Regards,

John Kettler

[Ant]

I won't be buying CMSF. It was a huge disappointment for me when the details of the game's setting were finally made known. Not that I don't like modern day combat, I do, but US V Syria

If they were going to delve into the realms of the hypothetical then they could have come up with something far more interesting than this.

The only reason I can think for the choice made is that BFC are hoping to sell it to the US army as a tactical simulator. If that happens and they make big money out of it then good for them, maybe they can then make a game with more appeal, or bring out the promised add-on modules to expand it into something more interesting.

[jtcm]

CMSF: talk about jumping the shark...

[MikeyD]

C'mon guys, I'm reminded of aaaall the postings by people who were gravely disappointed that BFC had decided on an Eastern Front game (no English speaking troops for Anglophiles!) when CMBB was still in development. A lot of Western-Front-aholics turned up their noses at CMBB as though it were bad cheese and missed a great game in the process. I ask you, how many game titles can a guy stand to buy that invloves Shermans getting repeatedly blown up by Tigers in mid-1944? Me, I'm looking forward to the game.

That being said, I gotta admit the utter lack of news has really stunted the growth of the CMSF board. The board would be bustling along if they had fifty screenshots of the quality of Grognards and Drop Team for the guys to drool over! Since the CMSF board opened BFS has released several other major games and has lots more in development. Maybe a decision had to be made about priorities. First get some revenue generators out there, work out the bugs in the online play servers and game download engine, THEN concentrate on CMSF.

But hey, its all speculation. Even the guys who promise the're going to hate the game are just speculating!

[ June 06, 2006, 09:34 AM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

[Bewildered]

I have no idea if the game will be technically any good. I won't be buying it because I find the subject matter of the game to be tasteless, at best, and many may consider it offensive. I think historical settings from WWII, and earlier, are not divisive.

[MikeyD]

That's another problem the CMSF board is having. The subject's so painfully close to 'real world' that an innocent theoretical thread can soon result in hard feelings. Over time the board's slowly learning to tread softly through that minefield. I'm frankly happy that for this title BFC has ignored my earlier request and left civilians out of the game! Almost as dangerous as fielding a Vietnam wargame in 1969.

I wonder if there's a touchy chat group for that FPS game I saw recently that has the U.S. invading Venezuela!

[John Kettler]

MikeyD,

You've touched upon an emerging and growing concern of mine: the fractionation of the CM gaming community as more and more games are released and/or published by BFC. Time, energy, and money to buy games are all finite resources for most of us, but the gaming choices are multiplying like lemmings, with each game pulling more and more players out of the macro CM community, if you will, and into a BFC micro community.

From a CM standpoint, we all used to play CMBO, and the CMBO Forum was huge and dynamic in consequence. Then we got CMBB, whereupon there was a mass exodus there, but a bunch of people who hated/had no real interest in the Eastern Front carried on with CMBO. Then came CMAK, and great was the grousing about it, but it did give some hope to the feeling neglected CMBO fans, since many battles could be fought in Europe using CMAK.

Consequently, CMBO has all but withered on the vine, while lots of WW II buffs are feeling outraged and violated that the first game with the new engine will be CM:SF. Worse, most of the modern warfare types aren't thrilled, either.

Rather than one united community, we seem to be rapidly becoming becoming a collection of fractious city states, and I fully expect things to get worse, not better, when HistWar:Les Grognards is released and DropTeam gets out of Beta Test. CMC may help on the unity front, but only for those who already like the Eastern Front, though I can imagine that it could, in theory, be redone to cover the war in the West. As noted by several of us here, though, unless steps are taken and soon, CMC will merely institutionalize a series of known problems resulting from its being based on CMBB.

Regards,

John Kettler

[phil stanbridge]

I will wait for the demo before I splash the cash - the first time I have done this with a BFC product.

Like many others above, I am not particularly interested in the theatre; it's too current for my liking and I cant imagine the scope of it will be anytthing like what we're used to.

There's no denying I am interested in seeing how it pans out, but I really wish they had recreated CMBO or something along those lines prior to developing the modern war theatre.