Agentorange Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Was playing around with the unit editor and noticed that HumberIV, StaghoundI and AEC marks I and II all appear to be exactly the same model, even down to the serial number ! Since this is a pretty major bug I've got to ask why wasn't it picked up in the playtest stage ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 It may be that BFC couldn't fit the 3D models on the CD, and is planning to release updated models with the first patch. IIRC, they did this for a few units in CMBB. Cheers, YD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agentorange Posted January 23, 2004 Author Share Posted January 23, 2004 I could go with that, it's just very frustrating ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agentorange Posted January 23, 2004 Author Share Posted January 23, 2004 Whats the word from the management on this ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 The word is it is NOT a bug, it was a choice to either exclude the AC or use an existing model due to the fact the cd was maxed in size. Also, there will NOT be new models in the patch, as work must begin on CMX2. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agentorange Posted January 23, 2004 Author Share Posted January 23, 2004 mmmm...shame, to be honest I'd rather they'd excluded some and provided proper models for the others. For the record what other units have suffered this way ? I know about the 20mm oerlikon/20mm flak and the staghound AA/ morris c9 What is the maximum megs a CD can hold then ? Very , very disappointed to be honest - at the least the game should have been sold with the warning that all that spiel about huge numbers of different vehicles wasn't all it was cracked up to be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jussi Köhler Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Originally posted by Agentorange: Very , very disappointed to be honest - at the least the game should have been sold with the warning that all that spiel about huge numbers of different vehicles wasn't all it was cracked up to be. You have the bloody vehicles!!! They just share one 3D-model, who cares!!! All vehicles have different charasteristics, isnt that a lot more important than eye-candy??? Do you honestly go zooming around in every battle looking at exploding stuff, or do you mostly check it from view 4 or 5 like the most of us I think??? I WANT TO SEE SPENT CARTIDGES ON THE FIELD OF BATTLE!!! FOOTMARKS IN THE MUD!!! G-O-R-E!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrullenhaft Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 A CD can typically hold 650-700Mb of data (even more in some cases), with anything over 650Mb pushing the definition to the point of breaking the universal compatibility of a CD. I wouldn't agree with you on removing some models just so that others can be in there. The only thing you're missing is the actual 3D wireframe and textures to accompany the model. The data on the vehicle (performance, armor, armament, etc.) is in the game; you're just missing its exact graphical representation on the screen. Admittedly it is a bit disappointing that every vehicle doesn't have its proper 3D representation. However I'd rather that they include as many vehicles as possible rather than not at all since there wasn't enough room on the CD to fit every texture. It may be a bit disconcerting to see something represented on screen with a model that's quite different, but I'll go along with it rather than not have a vehicle represented at all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jussi Köhler Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 See, Schrullenhaft said the same thing as me, he´s just more polite. Im Finnish. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agentorange Posted January 23, 2004 Author Share Posted January 23, 2004 I care, and it's not about eye candy it's about things looking like what they're actually meant to be. No I don't zoom around the battlefield looking at explosions - but I do zoom around thinking " ok infantry moving up on the flank, humbers scouting the shallow ford, AEC in the woods as back up " Why not just use Tigers for all German tanks if thats how you see it ? Answer: because a Pz III, PzIV, Panther and Tiger are all different beasts, and so are these armoured cars..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agentorange Posted January 23, 2004 Author Share Posted January 23, 2004 Originally posted by Schrullenhaft: I wouldn't agree with you on removing some models just so that others can be in there. The only thing you're missing is the actual 3D wireframe and textures to accompany the model. The data on the vehicle (performance, armor, armament, etc.) is in the game; you're just missing its exact graphical representation on the screen. So why not include them in the patch ?, I appreciate things have to move on for the next game - indeed the next engine, but if the models were made would it really cut into the production time that much to include them in the game ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Schrullenhaft Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 It's a bit ludricrous to suggest that all German tanks be represented by a Tiger. Admittedly a couple of fairly popular vehicles (in one opinion or another) don't have the proper 3D representation, but we don't have wholesale misrepresentation of vehicles here. Just a few (I don't know how many since I haven't counted, but I'd assume less than 40 or so) compared to the number that are included. This occurred with CMBB too. I don't know the exact reason why the 3D models and textures aren't being added for a patch. I do know that it is a very time consuming process to add the vehicles and that may be the primary reason. Other reasons may be related to business decisions I'm not familiar with; plus the dislike of distributing larger patches online for Europeans (since many of them have to pay for their time online, though that may be changing in some cases). Work is starting on CMx2 already. While that may not placate anyone who's annoyed with the state of CMAK, it is where BTS/BFC are starting to spend their development time. The new engine will hopefully make adding models a bit less of a chore, so with more CDs or DVDs as the distribution medium, hopefully more models can go out with the product with their correct representation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agentorange Posted January 23, 2004 Author Share Posted January 23, 2004 Originally posted by Schrullenhaft: It's a bit ludricrous to suggest that all German tanks be represented by a Tiger. Admittedly a couple of fairly popular vehicles (in one opinion or another) don't have the proper 3D representation, but we don't have wholesale misrepresentation of vehicles here. Just a few (I don't know how many since I haven't counted, but I'd assume less than 40 or so) compared to the number that are included. I wasn't really aiming this at you - but the OTT response from the other chap aroused my ire, no need for SHOUTING, swearing or snidy comments as far as I could see, ok Tigers etc are icons of the war, no way could you leave them out. But most of these armoured cars were produced in much greater numbers than say: the PSW 233 heavy A/C and that seems to be in the game. Like I said it's not about eye candy or anything of that sort, but about being able to immerse myself in the game......and sadly at the moment things like this are irritating me sufficiently that it's actually spoiling the game. At the least there should have been some disclaimer on the box or the site setting out the situation. I know it sounds petty but on some level I do kind of feel I've been led to expect one thing and actually got another. Hardly compares to famine in Ethiopia or war in Iraq in the vast scheme of things to get worried about. But it was my money that I forked out to pay for the game....... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tar Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 But would it really have changed your buying decision? Except for the pre-made scenarios, you really don't have to play with the vehicles that don't have the correct 3D models. You could just pretend that the game shipped the way you would have liked it: With the vehicles lacking proper 3D models omitted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agentorange Posted January 23, 2004 Author Share Posted January 23, 2004 A fair comment, I think on it's own it probably wouldn't have stopped me buying....but combined with the other things that have irritated me then sadly the answer is yes it would have stopped me buying 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kilroy Lurking Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 I am also a little miffed that CMBB and CMAK won't run on Mac OSX - rebooting into Mac OS9 and back again is a pain in the proverbial (esp. as CM is the only programme I use OS9 for now) However I think "Their" decision to concentrate on the new engine at the expense of continuing upgrades on the old one is probably valid. (Probably - because, who knows the new games might be with Space Marines.... ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.