Wartgamer Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 One of the rules in Sales is never to belittle the competition. It always casts you in a bad light. Never belittle the customer (they pay you money?) as it is just childish and silly (even if they are wrong/dumb/whatever you feel). A sense of humor helps frustrated people also. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 17, 2005 Author Share Posted February 17, 2005 Why should we not shine a light on those that belittle us? Don't throw stones if you don't want to be hit by one yourself. You want to accuse us of not knowing what we are doing, then don't be surprised when you are put into the hot seat. We have a VERY long history of treating people in the manner they deserve. The whiney, unreasonable, and downright abusive ones get treated like the spoiled children that they are. And we have never suffered commercially for it. In fact, we think we have done the opposite. As for the competition... we have none. I've only mentioned products that are long since dead. And I don't mean to say that they are bad, just that we felt that they weren't good enough to emulate. In other words, that we could do better. And guess what? We did. I also have a fantastic sense of humor. But when I don't see one I don't reply with one. Well, not directly. This cycle we're in has been repeated over and over and over again. I do find it funny to see the shock, and sometimes even hurt feelings, when someone like you realizes we aren't a doormat. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 17, 2005 Author Share Posted February 17, 2005 Does one need to have developed a wargame to realize that having testing done with the requirement that both testers be online at the same time is going to be a hassle?Well, if one was a wargame developer and had experience with testing one would know if it is a pain in the ass or not. Answer... it can be, sure, but to too is PBEM. Or do you think that we can afford to sit around for a couple of days to complete a single game? We did CMBO testing using only PBEM and it sucked compared to the TCP/IP testing. If I had to choose between the two testing methods, based on years of experience... I'd choose TCP/IP. Better results, faster results, more relevant results. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: Dorosh, </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />I think its a sign of insecurity to come onto your own forum and continue to trumpet your achievements;No, it is a sign of frustration when members of an ungreatful, forgetful, narrow minded, clueless group with a proven track record of being wrong and unreasonable yet still feel that they have something useful to say. I don't get it... why are you hear if we think we've done such a poor job and will likely f' things up the next time around too? Do you really have nothing better to do with your life than to go out of your way to be a pain in the arse of others? What else am I supposed to do when people are coming to our forum to smear our acheivements and pee on the stuff we haven't even done yet? This is a public forum and we have the right to challenge those that choose to challenge us. Especially when they are utterly clueless. Steve </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wartgamer Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Depends what you are testing for. If you are testing for computer crashes/lockups/major malfunctions; then play as fast as you can crank turns. But if you are playing to test for actual battlefield realities, then I would say that PBEM is better. It allows more observation of the movie feedback while the other person plans the move. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 I just wish we had Maximus back. I think he'd have a lot to contribute in this type of discussion... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 17, 2005 Author Share Posted February 17, 2005 But if you are playing to test for actual battlefield realities, then I would say that PBEM is better. It allows more observation of the movie feedback while the other person plans the move.Based on what experience do you base this claim on? My experience has taught me the opposite. In fact, solo play is the best form of game testing overall. TCP/IP is the best way to test head to head play to see how the game system handles two "equal" opponants. PBEM is the least of the three in terms of getting good results. It is slow and sometimes impossible to use. For example, when a new build (to fix bugs) often the file system changes and the current game can not be completed with the current build. Before we had TCP/IP (early CMBO) we had a lot of problems with this because we almost never were able to finish a PBEM game. Again, thanks for validating my points with concrete examples. Grogs have their purpose, it's just a shame that some don't understand their limitations. Please... just accept it... you're wrong. Not a matter of opinions being different. Not unless you're opinions involve testing alpha/beta wargames. BTW, there is nothing at all bad about being wrong. It only becomes a problem when it can't be accepted. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 17, 2005 Author Share Posted February 17, 2005 Maximus... good Lord... what are you, some sort of sadist? That reminds me... some game developers made it standard policy to ban anybody from their forums that so much as hinted that there might be a bug. Without naming names, I think many of you here know the specific company I am talking about. We, on the other hand, ban only as a last resort for abusive behavior (and some still manage to stay here...). In Maximus' case... 30 or so last resorts since that is roughly how many accounts he made. If there were such things as IP salesmen, they could have made a fortune off of that guy for all the different IPs he got to get around his ban. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 How sure is BFC that Wartgamer is not some new "instance" of other guys that have been here before him... Lewis? Maximus? and a few others... -tom w 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Excellent News! its good to see you are persistent! Thanks for all the news and updates and I would like to suggest I think, most readers here ESPECIALLY approve of your "We are NOT a Door Mat" policy in combination with the stinging and direct responses some folks get receive, moslty because they deserve that kind of direct response I guess. :cool: Keep up the good work! -tom w Originally posted by Battlefront.com: Maximus... good Lord... what are you, some sort of sadist? That reminds me... some game developers made it standard policy to ban anybody from their forums that so much as hinted that there might be a bug. Without naming names, I think many of you here know the specific company I am talking about. We, on the other hand, ban only as a last resort for abusive behavior (and some still manage to stay here...). In Maximus' case... 30 or so last resorts since that is roughly how many accounts he made. If there were such things as IP salesmen, they could have made a fortune off of that guy for all the different IPs he got to get around his ban. Steve [ February 17, 2005, 12:00 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dschugaschwili Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Ok, I doubt that this thread is going anywhere, but still: As I already said in a previous post that got swamped, we (forum members) are at a severe disadvantage at the moment. A couple of words (or even a lot of words) can't give us a real feel for CMx2, and it's perfectly understandable why BFC doesn't want to give too much away right now. But Steve, you should understand that without a deeper knowledge about your plans it's very hard to come up with something more substantial than "per weapon ammo tracking", "two e-mails per turn PBEM system" or "better arty modelling". Most of us don't have time to think about how to improve the game all day. Now, I don't intend to defend people bitching about things they don't even know yet, but it shouldn't come as a surprise to you either that every single word you write here is interpreted five times over. This just shows how high the anticipation is already now. Just imagine what will happen if you release a CMx2 Alpha AAR some time. Dschugaschwili Edit: By the way, I certainly don't think CMx1 is flawed in any way. To me, it's a great game, and that's all that matters to me. I guess for most of your customers (including me) playability is much more important than historical accuracy, so please continue making tactical wargames. [ February 17, 2005, 12:04 PM: Message edited by: Dschugaschwili ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted February 17, 2005 Author Share Posted February 17, 2005 Little Stalin Boy, Yeah, all of that is totally understood. It took a little while to get people to start thinking that CMx2 is not CMx1 4th edition, but I think it's going in that direction. The bit that tripped up discussion, unfortunately, was stiff resistance to concrete stuff I brought out for discussion. Such as 1:1 representation, graphical improvements, etc. People should not be so reactionary with such little info to go on. Cautious, guarded discussion... sure, but getting right back to pre CMBB "no hexes, no game" mindset is totally counter productive. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Originally posted by aka_tom_w: How sure is BFC that Wartgamer is not some new "instance" of other guys that have been here before him... Lewis? Maximus? and a few others... -tom w I don't know. His username is unlike any other. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andreas Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Speaking as a former beta tester for BFC's CM products, TCP/IP testing is the way to go. It beats PBEM due to the speed with which you get through turns - more turns = more of a chance to see how it works. For anything that needs serious consideration, you do solo-play anyway. There never was a problem finding another beta tester for CMBB or CMAK, ready and willing to give you a game. This whole argument clearly comes from someone who has zero clue what he is talking about. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dschugaschwili Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: The bit that tripped up discussion, unfortunately, was stiff resistance to concrete stuff I brought out for discussion. Such as 1:1 representation, graphical improvements, etc. Steve That's funny. I think that modeling of single men is a good thing, but I don't mind having only 3 men right now, especially since it's not bringing my aging computer to its knees. On the other hand, hearing "graphical improvements" rings a few warning bells with me, too. Not so much here at BFC since you don't seem to focus on graphics first (judging from past CM games). But I have a nagging feeling that game improvements in the last few years have been mostly graphics, while the depth has often gone down rather than up. I hope my trust in you to counter this trend is well justified. Dschugaschwili 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonSense Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Steve; spare us the melodrama and reasons why you feel it's an absolute must to label indivuduals into groups that you can persecute or abuse. Especialy on a semi history orientated website; be it your own or anyone elses. Interchange the word Grog you throw around with Women or Jews if you don't understand what I saying here Battlefront.com. We dont care about your judgements on the people you group into groups. Stop wasting everyones time and get to work. You're a game designer; start acting like one. Chin up. If the unwashed like your little software project than they will buy it. Simple as that. You are a better than average game designer but a piss poor salesman in my own observation. Before you put off any more potential buyers just stop posting and work on the demo. Only then will there be something worth while to discuss. The rest of you - be patient. Either you will like the new game or you will not. It's out of your hands. Steve is the programmer not you. A dead horse he like to beat but it is true. If any of you are better at making video games of this nature than Battlefront.com than shut up and go make one. Seriously; break up the monopoly. It would be good for the industry as a whole. Ill temepered history buffs; shut up. No one wants to hear from you. Your Nostradmas like negativity is not needed. This thread needed me and no one can disagree on that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Flippin 'eck! It's like the second coming in here - the banned will rise from their graves or somefink 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeffsmith Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Originally posted by Wartgamer: Snip But if you are playing to test for actual battlefield realities, then I would say that PBEM is better. It allows more observation of the movie feedback while the other person plans the move. A. Suurrre, RL Battle definitely allows you to play back the movie several times to decide your next moves B. I would love to know how many RL Battles you have been a Tactical Commander in. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Is CommonSense the LATEST new member to join the forum? UM let me see... How many other posts has commonsense made? LOOK ZERO!!!! oh that explains it, .... that was his FIRST post.... I wonder who CommonSense was before he got a NEW account just to flame the developer.... :eek: words escape me at this point... -tom w Originally posted by CommonSense: Steve; spare us the melodrama and reasons why you feel it's an absolute must to label indivuduals into groups that you can persecute or abuse. Especialy on a semi history orientated website; be it your own or anyone elses. Interchange the word Grog you throw around with Women or Jews if you don't understand what I saying here Battlefront.com. We dont care about your judgements on the people you group into groups. Stop wasting everyones time and get to work. You're a game designer; start acting like one. Chin up. If the unwashed like your little software project than they will buy it. Simple as that. You are a better than average game designer but a piss poor salesman in my own observation. Before you put off any more potential buyers just stop posting and work on the demo. Only then will there be something worth while to discuss. The rest of you - be patient. Either you will like the new game or you will not. It's out of your hands. Steve is the programmer not you. A dead horse he like to beat but it is true. If any of you are better at making video games of this nature than Battlefront.com than shut up and go make one. Seriously; break up the monopoly. It would be good for the industry as a whole. Ill temepered history buffs; shut up. No one wants to hear from you. Your Nostradmas like negativity is not needed. This thread needed me and no one can disagree on that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaggedyMan Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Frankly, and maybe I'm showing my non-Grog-ness or my just plain naievete, if Battlefront can reproduce the feeling I got when I first read the Alpha AAR and truly began to appreciate what CMx1 could model, then they'll have me at "hello" with CMx2. It's definitely a hidden blessing, based upon all the discourse I've seen on the last eight pages, that Battlefront doesn't depend on shareholders or "focus groups" to design their stuff. As a casual gamer (Certified Non-Grog (CNG)) and based upon their product to date, they've definitely earned enough of my trust to leave them to their devices in order to tackle the next step. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CommonSense Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Aka_fanboy_w - Shut up. It may someday cross your mind that not everyone that has read or occasionly reads news about the games here feels the need to sign up and post drivel like yourself. Naturaly I am optimistic about the new and improved Combat Mission. While trying to find usefull information I grew annoyed at the enormous level or wasteful language and useless thoughts that I had to sift through for a nugget of info here and there. Stop posting unless you have something worth posting about fanboy. It makes it harder for those of us who don't have unlimted time to sift through the heaping pile of worthless posts for news about an upcomming game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim crowley Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 As someone who has received a huge amount of pleasure from the CM series, warts and all, I have been looking forward to getting information about the new engine with great anticipation. Whilst Steves' posts only lifted the veil a little, there seemed much to be excited about and, given BFC's track record of delivering the goods, I have every confidence in their abilty to come up with something rather special. For the most part I am enjoying the many ideas and suggestions that are being proffered by those who seem to have something worthwhile to say. Most of these posters, whilst acknowledging that the CM's were not perfect, seem to agree that they were groundbreaking and have provided enormous fun. What I am not enjoying is the small but persistant group of whiners; some perennial, some new, whose life-mission seems to be in finding fault with almost everything Steve says. Everyone is entitled to their viewpoint but this group seem to share the common characteristic of thinking that what they have to say is so important and clever, that they have to keep on and on repeating it, ad nauseam. If you don't like what Steve is suggesting, then make your point and move on. Don't buy the game; I'm sure BFC will be less than devastated by the loss of a few hundred dollars. But, respectfully, please don't keep on stirring things up with your crass and pointless comments, the only effect of which is to deny the rest of us an intersting discussion and which will probably cause the valuable bones to dry up. And if respectfully doesn't work for you then for all our sakes, or mine at least, Foxtrot Oscar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conscript Bagger Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Never mind. I will not feed the troll. I will not feed the troll. I will not feed the troll. I will not feed the troll. I will not feed the troll. I will not feed the troll. I will not feed the troll. I will not feed the troll. I will not feed the troll. ... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melnibone Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Originally posted by jim crowley: And if respectfully doesn't work for you then for all our sakes, or mine at least, Foxtrot Oscar Nicely said .....I second that emotion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wartgamer Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Originally posted by Andreas: Speaking as a former beta tester for BFC's CM products, TCP/IP testing is the way to go. It beats PBEM due to the speed with which you get through turns - more turns = more of a chance to see how it works. For anything that needs serious consideration, you do solo-play anyway. There never was a problem finding another beta tester for CMBB or CMAK, ready and willing to give you a game. This whole argument clearly comes from someone who has zero clue what he is talking about. Could you share the methodology? Are you assigned an opponent and how do you procede? I am sincerely curious and hope you can share this. 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.