A little disappointed with CMAK

[TeAcH]

Perhaps this is a little premature since Ive only played the demo a few times, but I do not think I will be buying this version after buying the first two (CMBO and CMBB) as soon as they were released.

Although the change in setting is nice, for me the lack of a substantial engine upgrade leaves me with a little sense of getting something new. I know there will be some new units a few new tricks with the old engine but it still feels dated. I'm sorry to say that.

I realize that a new engine is coming with the next release but to me, the new engine should have been released now. I'm not whining. I'm not trying to show any disrespect, I'm just a previous Battlefront customer who is not going to pony up. I might be in the minority, who knows.

I truly think we all want to see an engine that flexes some of the muscle of our systems and might even dabble in DX9 features. The tactical joy is still present in CMAK undoubtedly, but I can play CMBB and still get that. There is very little that makes me open the wallet again with CMAK. But that is just my opinion.

My son was playing Motorcycle Madness 2 and even though that game is a few years old now, the engine used to draw terrain and vehicles is impressive especially when compared to CMAK. I know MM2 it isnt geared to do ALL that CM is geared but to BUT no one can make the argument that there is no room for improvements in graphics in CM and that a new engine couldnt pull that off.

Some of the new terrain is neat but not worthy (to me) of buying it. I would have liked to have seen the last year or so of dev time applied fully to a new engine.

To the Battlefront crew, I'll be hanging in there for the next big engine and will snatch it up just as soon as goes up for sale.

Maybe I'm alone here.

A faithful CM'er,

TeAch

[Kwazydog]

Teach, no worries at all, each to their own

Please do note that CMAK is being sold at a discounted price over our previous titles though. What our main goal was was to give people back the 'western theatre' whilst using an engine that is *significantly* upgraded last time they saw allied troops. Although we could have skipped this and moved solely onto the rewrite straight after CMBB we felt that people would rather this than having to wait another year or two from now for us to finish up the new engine, as the truth of the matter is people love using allied troops and now you guys have the tools to create a huge range of WW2 battles!

There has been a huge amount of work put into CMAK though, dont doubt that, as resaerch on vehicles, TO&E's, vehicle models, new vehicle, terrain and house textures, etc, all take up time. The way we structured things was to all this work to continue in tandam with out other projects though, so things havnt stood still there Im happy to say.

Anyways, no worries Teach...just wanted to make sure you had noted the discounted price and understood the reasons behind the descision...hopefully many will enjoy what CMAK has to offer even if its not quite for you.

Dan

[ November 23, 2003, 09:27 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

[Guest Mike]

I agree with both of you!!

Buthen knowing there weren't going to be many engine upgrades in CMAK I wasn't expecting it to me much more than CMBB 1.1 in a slightly different setting.

People are going to do Russian mods for CMAK, and Dessert mods for CMBB..........

[Michael Dorosh]

I am starting to think that perhaps BFC would see no harm in including potentially non-Italy units such as

Cromwell

Sherman Firefly

King Tiger

M26 Pershing

etc.

that we have seen in CMBO/CMBB in order for us to upgrade ALL our fav CMBO scens?

Any chance I'm right?

[Kwazydog]

that we have seen in CMBO/CMBB in order for us to upgrade ALL our fav CMBO scens?

Any chance I'm right?

Unfortuantely no, because then we would be accused by peopel for making a non-accurate wargame on North Africa and Italy...you know they will

On top of that it is a slipperly slope for us because if we were officially support that theatre we would have to considering things like hedge cutters, different formations, etc.

Dan

[ November 23, 2003, 10:49 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by KwazyDog:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

that we have seen in CMBO/CMBB in order for us to upgrade ALL our fav CMBO scens?

Any chance I'm right?

Unfortuantely no, because then we would be accused by peopel for making a non-accurate wargame on North Africa and Italy...you know they will

On top of that it is a slipperly slope for us because if we were officially support that theatre we would have to considering things like hedge cutters, different formations, etc.

Dan </font>

[Pugilist]

Does *anyone*, ahem, know if the battle of Ortona will make it onto the disc? I would really like to see the Seaforth Highlanders in action.

[REVS]

I've got the CMAK pre-order in already, because I want to fight as Allies aganst Germans using the better CMBB mechanics (especially for MGs and artillery – but there are countless improved areas that I find attractive and, after learning to live with rapidly tiring troops – enjoyable).

But that'll do me for the meantime. As a Mac user I have a fairly new G4 Mac that boots into OS9 as well as OSX, and I've lived most of my working/playing hours in OS9. But now my cable connection only works reliably in OSX, my network connection to the office only works in OSX, and I can see more and more of my life being spent in OSX. So whenever I need to check the latest PBEM turn, it's reboot to 9, play for a few minutes, then reboot into OSX, send file. Boring!

So, I'll be hanging out mightily for the next 2 years while engine nouveau is polished and tuned. As for buying more headache-inducing old technology games from the excellent folk at CM, no way.

But in the meantime, thanks for CMAK. It looks a good-un to me that continues your high standards

BUT PLEASE

Come on lads, get a hurry on!

[MAsta_KFC]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

Cromwell

Sherman Firefly

King Tiger

M26 Pershing

etc.

I'm not terribly knowledgeable with the African front, but does that mean that these unit WON'T be in CMAK?? *sobs* The King Tiger is my fav unit.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by MAsta_KFC:

...does that mean that these unit WON'T be in CMAK?? *sobs* The King Tiger is my fav unit.

High time you broke that übertank dependency, my lad! Now buck up and here's a piece of rawhide you can hold between your teeth until the pain passes.

Michael

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Mike:

Dessert mods for CMBB..........

Now THAT I'd like to see. The current Russian desserts aren't really for my taste.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Konstantine:

Does *anyone*, ahem, know if the battle of Ortona will make it onto the disc? I would really like to see the Seaforth Highlanders in action.

If it doesn't it will be available at the scenario depot not long after the orders make it out...

...though I do remember discussing Ortona with other members of the Commonwealth Mafia - can't remember if they were on the design team or not...

[ November 24, 2003, 02:35 AM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[klapton]

I'm a bit disappointed with the CMAK demo. The scenarios seem great, and dust clouds are cool etc etc, but:

-. Voice acting (at least American voices) is awful. It was better in cmbo.

-. After firing my tanks lose LOS to their targets for a few seconds, then recover it. It's a bit annoying. Is it because dust clouds?

-. The M3 data screen is confusing. Which gun do the penetration figures refer to? I would also like to know the length of the M3 guns.

[Kingfish]

Originally posted by klapton:

The M3 data screen is confusing. Which gun do the penetration figures refer to?

The 'A7' listing is for the hull mounted 75mm gun firing AP rounds. 'H7' is for the same gun firing HE shells.

The other listing is for the turret mounted 37mm gun firing AP rounds.

[kingjames]

I never purchased cmbb due to the lack of me favorite allies. I have anxiously awaited cmak, and I am very pleased with the demo so far. But after all this I still don't think I could give up cmbo. You all just keep up the good work.

[Lou2000]

Originally posted by Konstantine:

Does *anyone*, ahem, know if the battle of Ortona will make it onto the disc? I would really like to see the Seaforth Highlanders in action.

I'm not sure, but I have a feeling it may be included .... a while ago I sent Andreas a link to a website about that particular battle as he was looking for some info on it ......

......... I wonder why !!

[Jaws]

Originally posted by klapton:

-. After firing my tanks lose LOS to their targets for a few seconds, then recover it. It's a bit annoying. Is it because dust clouds?

I agree but this is the truth and nothing than the truth. In real live we drive a little forward with our tanks to avoid LOS block even with terminal sight on.

Yes I was also a little disappointed about CMAK but the explanation of Kwazydog is exactly the reason why I’ve ordered already

[ November 24, 2003, 07:24 AM: Message edited by: Jaws ]

[flamingknives]

I am starting to think that perhaps BFC would see no harm in including potentially non-Italy units such as...

...Sherman Firefly...

Wha? Surely there were Sherman Fireflies in Italy.

The Challenger wasn't, as that was sort of a Cromwell Firefly, but I can't imagine why the British Army would say:

"No 17pdr armed tanks for you, you D-Day shirkers! You don't need them, sitting back, eating pasta and drinking wine. Pah!"

[kmead]

I preordered as well, I have always wanted to fight the western desert and it allows primary creation of the majority of fighting across France and Germany. I've never much cared for the King Tiger and Pershing in any case, though the Cromwell will be missed.

I too lament the OS9 issue. and am looking at buying a older G4 tower to live in OS9 (and to run all my older kids software that my 2 year old can benefit from, or at least thats what I tell the wife ) In the meantime, I use an older Powerbook that is marginal, but its running the demo fine (aside from the swamp edge graphic issue.

However, as Dan pointed out, this will sate the appetite while we wait for the engine upgrade and keep some cash flow to underwrite the "down time" while its being written.

It all looks great, by the way, but you should see the downsampling a 6mb video card gives you Thanks for another great product (I was expecting to pay more, many thanks!).

[Holien]

TeAcH I think you might be in a minority.

I understand what you say but I think it is well worth the time to give us something to keep us happy until the new engine.

While we won't be able to accurately re-create Normandy battles I think people will get pretty close.

Also I think it will be good to have access to some of the lighter early war vehicles. I can't wait to play with the Vickers Armoured Car which is so cool looking if rather naff.

The price helps and I will be playing both CMBB and CMAK.

There are plenty of well made scenarios out there which I have not yet had the chance to play and all CMAK does is expand the choice for a small cost.

H

[Panzertruppe]

Lets see.....hundreds of hours of wargaming goodness with CMBO and CMBB...do I want CMAK although the graphics are outdated? GUESS?

Because of the great gameplay I don't even put a price of what I think CMAK should cost. Because Dan and the boys are giving us a lower price for CMAK is just "icing on the cake" for me and most other CM players.

Thanks guys!

[PeterX]

Perhaps this is a little premature since Ive only played the demo a few times, but I do not think I will be buying this version after buying the first two (CMBO and CMBB) as soon as they were released

C'mon, Teach, open up the wallet and plunk down that credit card. The desert awaits! Whats 35 bucks? Dinner for two at Chi-Chi's with two margheritas minus the shooters? Loosen up, you can't take it with you!

[MikeyD]

Mr. Dorosh thinks there won't be Fireflies in Italy? ...But there WERE Fireflies fighting in Italy! And I'd bet that the CMAK Firefly specs are up-to-the-minute accurate when compared to the ancient CMBO model.

CMAK may not have Cromwells but judging by the sea of screenshots that have been shown to date the game will have a PILE of new AFV types CMBO should'a had but didn't. Staghounds? Dingos? M3 halftrack 75mm gun motor carriages? M14 AA halftracks? Different types of Marder SP guns? And that's just what they've been willing to preview! And I haven't even mentioned all the early desert war stuff.

When work got started on CMAK I recall BFC stating the 'scope' of CMAK would not necessarily match the Eastern front, but it looks as though this game may have exceeded their own expectations.

[ November 24, 2003, 09:57 AM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

[EZPickens]

Bought 'em all.

Haven't played any of them...until now.

North Africa is my favorite theatre of land combat.

I truly wish that the series had started there.

The desert is the perfect setting for what is really a tanker's game.

My only lament about CMAK is that the demo strays from Afrika Korps/8th Army Operations.

EZ

[ November 24, 2003, 10:21 AM: Message edited by: EZPickens ]

[Seanachai]

Frankly, I've never understood this complaint about the 'graphics'. To each their own, I guess, but I have absolutely no problem with the quality of the graphics in the CM series, and I don't even bother with all the excellent Mods out there!

I guess it's this bizarre bleed-over from FPS and such. When I play CM, I'm very much playing a game, not immersing myself in a movie. I watch DVDs for that. I love the fact that CM gives me amazingly intricate, detailed and good-looing game pieces to move about, without somehow trying for the false illusion that I am watching Real World combat.

I've seen some of the graphics for many of the combat games out there that people are always on about, citing how 'detailed and realistic' they look. They are very pretty. It's like being inside a Hollywood movie with a makeover by the Swiss: everything sort of glows, is unspeakably clean (even dirt, soot and battle damage look like they were applied by make-up artists), and, while it might add levels of detail that are important in an FPS, contribute little to a game of CM's scope: that of modeling small unit tactical combat.

Mind, I'm sure that time and the new engine will give us ever greater visual detail, some of which will prove to be important (I've seen discussions of things like dynamic lighting that would help with reading terrain, for example). But for now, and especially within the context of what CM in fact is, I think the graphics are far beyond 'simply adequate'.

I think that those who want FPS style graphics are asking CM to be a different game than what it is, just as those who endlessly go on about 'campaign' games and the ability to maneuver larger units are also trying to bend and distort the game outside its purpose and focus.

The things they want are cool and impressive. But they are not what CM is about. There are games out there for that. Attempting to make CM into both a floor wax and a dessert topping will not improve it, it will simply break it, and end up satisfying no one.

To paraphrase Pierre Bosquet: C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas Combat Mission.