CMBO vs CMBB demo - poor scenarios

[Fishu]

I've beaten soviets with the Pak's

That 37L46 gun on Pak 36 seems to have penetration values of 50L42, at least those are *identical* to those.

Interestingly the HE seems to match perfectly 37mm.

funny..

[Andreas]

Originally posted by deanco:

But I think I'm turning grog here. Because now I want real time shadows and dynamic lighting. Yep, I want more.

What?! After we just got Charles to take them out again (Take out the dynamic lighting, or the Weasel gets it!). Splinter!

[deanco]

Andreas, LOL. Yeah I saw the other thread.

[ParaBellum]

...and the wizard said: "Look, I give you this magic hat! It will give you all the food you want if you wear it. If you sit on it, you can fly. If you look into it, you'll see images of distant countries. Shake it, and gold coins will fall out of him. Caress him and a beautiful woman will appear. Ah, and he will cure any sickness, too.

So lad, what do you think about it?"

"It's green. I don't like green hats."

[ September 09, 2002, 11:03 AM: Message edited by: ParaBellum ]

[Blackcat]

Originally posted by Andreas:

....how many threads here are griping about something, in many cases absolutely piddling nonsense, that can be modded in a flash (the interface, and the shockwaves come to mind). How many threads are actually saying - yes, I don't like all aspects of CMBB, but fundamentally this game rocks and you should be congratulated for it......

A good point, Andreas, and since I have included what could be construed as a couple of criticsms of the demo sceanrios (though one was with tongue very firmly in cheek) let me try and redress the balance.

When I first saw CMBO I was stunned - it was what I had dreamt computer wargames should be ever since I first got my first machine back in the late seventies. CMBO is by far and away the best computer game I have ever played. It is so good that in fifteen months I haven't played anything else, until I downloaded the CMBB demo.

From what I have seen so far CMBB is an order of magnitude better than CMBO. A truly brilliant game that will occupy all too much of my time for a long while to come. My thanks to all at BFC and the beta testers for putting together a game which I cannot imagine being bettered given current technology.

[SuperSulo]

Just a few points...

1.

If you think the only reason someone wants "better, more widely appealing" scenarios is because they are selfish, and not because they want the company behind it to succeed (even more than they are going to ), you just haven't BURNT for something before, imho. It IS possible to wish for others wellbeing, without selfish reasons. Even though I think the scenarios are great and well do the job, I can understand why some people wants what they think are "better" ones. Yes, I've burnt for things before.

2.

One other thing I'm been thinking about... Back in the days, I didn't know about BTS and/or CMBO. I never downloaded the demos, never played any demo scenarios. What caught my eyes was the intro movie that somehow found it's way to me. That small, unmoded, video sequence is the single reason I'm here today (ok, maybe that's a bad thing for you all... ). Sure, maybe I would have caught up with CMBO someday in a store, but anyway... Maybe BFC could put up a small video sequence of CMBB? It's much easier just downloading a avi/mpeg/mov and watch it than download a 60 MB demo that needs installing. Just a thought...

3.

Is Steve whining about whiners? (better add this so some people don't kill me...)

4.

Here's my whine: Please make the tracers scalable/flipable

[rune]

And what Fishu ignores yet again is a thread where Charles and Steve both answered this.

The formula is within 1mm of Hogg's book, and there is better then a 60% drop off in range. You are using a table, most likely from another source.

Rune

[dalem]

I posted my opinions about Scipio's topic on the first page, so why I'm bothering to open my yap again in this thread is a mystery to me, but....

Scipio, what struck me hard about this thread was not the topic necessarily, because heck, that's just an opinion, and opinions can't really hurt. And it wasn't even the pointlessness of yet another thread on said opinion, because my opinion of its pointlessness is, well, just another opinion.

It is the utter lack of humility that it conveys.

You used the phrase "poor scenarios". "poor" is a word with a lot of baggage and responsibility. And unless you are a beta tester (which you may indeed be) or an employee of BFC (which you may indeed be), you don't have any meaningful baseline to compare Yelnia or Citadel against. In fact, Yelnia and Citadel are necessarily the finest CM:BB scenarios that most of us have ever seen. For you to arbitrarily label them as "poor" in a public forum means you feel you could do better right off the blocks, and unless you are an employee of BFC, that smacks of a heaping bowl of hubris.

Now in my opinion, there is nothing wrong with starting up yet another thread that talks about how you don't like the scenarios. That's what a public BBS is for, really. But the tone could have been more diplomatic. Let's say, for example, that I am PO'd because your last interview with Charles and Steve made no mention of their hat sizes. Now, I'm such a screaming sycophant that I want to buy each of them a velvet fedora with a huge peacock feather in it, because I think that each of them is "da man".

Now, your interviews haven't talked about hat sizes before. You've made no promise or claim of relating hat size information. But I still wanted it. If I were to go on your BBS and post a thread titled "Scipio's last interview with BFC - poor questions" and then type out a post claiming how many questions you should have asked and in what order and why it was a bad decision for you to not ask them, then I think I would be being rude.

Not invalid, because the truth is that I wanted hat size and I didn't get it. That's a fact. And I'm disappointed. That's also a fact. And I think my opinion on that subject has merit. That's yet another fact. But at that point, presentation of the facts can be important, yes?

Maybe instead, given the above example, I could use some tact in my posting?

-dale

[ September 09, 2002, 11:52 AM: Message edited by: dalem ]

[aka_tom_w]

Perhaps Steve and Charles and the rest of the BFC crew can take some solice in the fact that most of this thread is ONLY whinning or complaining about the "choice" or the feel or flavour of the demo scenario's themselves and not the game or game play or game mechanics in any way.

From what I can see you might say that if all we have to bitch about is that we don't like the kind of scenarios we got in the demo then the game is GREAT and you guys did a GREAT job.

(I got a good nights sleep last night! it makes all the difference in the world!)

I'm sure the presales are going extremely well and when the game ships everyone will be happy.

cheers

-tom w

AND we should applaud the remarkalble tolerance for not locking this thread. I had thought by this morning it would be locked and a thing of the past .

[Goanna]

I have to put my $.02 into this, even though I think it is unlikely that anyone from BTS is around to try and collect anything useful out of this thread. In any case, on the off chance that they are…

First, I would like to thank BTS for putting out a demo at all. It is a rare company that will let you take a good turn at the wheel prior to purchase and I really appreciate it. Second, thanks again for putting so much work into the engine (commands, performance and accuracy) as well as the appearance (sound and doodads) to heighten both the play and the feel of the game. I did buy the new game based on my run through the demo. It does showcase the modifications I would have put into CMBO and the demo scenarios fit your purpose.

Now, that being said, I also feel that there is a valid point being made by others that the demo scenarios could have done more for you on the new player front, and I feel it is a mistake not to include an attempt to expand your player base at the same time you provide a demonstration of the differences between the games. I don’t make a lot of scenarios, and I surely don’t put the time into crafting them that Andreas does, but I have produced a few that have been well received enough to feel I have a worthwhile opinion on the matter. So, I want to review the scenarios on the criteria that I use to review regular ones.

Maps. The map in Yelina does appear to be almost an autogenerated one and lacks the rich "I’m in a 3D world" feel that I get when I go back and do level 2 or 3 flyover of CE, LD or VoT in the CMBO demo. I really think you could have done better if you had put one of your high quality map designers to work on the demo scenarios for the kind of time that they did on ones for the CD. This is your showcase, and to be honest these maps look a little like they were slapped together quickly.

Second comes immersion. Here I think the scenario designs each have it done well. The briefings give the info required, but don’t give too much away and also get you into the spirit of the game by providing a bit of the historical background, Well done on all of them, even the tutorial that lays out the details that should be in a good briefing.

Force balances, I feel are also good. It was more difficult to win on offence in all three and that is the major improvement, however I am not able to confirm until I get the final product whether the forces balances are of the standard 1.5:1.0 ratio for attack and defence. If so, the other improvements are likely to turn me into an AI player occasionally. Previously, I only played the AI when I was testing my scenarios as it was too easy to beat.

The final aspect is polish. Given that these demo scenarios are your showcase to new as well as existing players, I would hope to find them polished to perfection to show how absolutely perfect you can make your own scenarios with the full game. Unfortunately, I found grammar and typographical errors in the briefings that detracted from this slightly. Call me an anal retentive if you must, but just think that they should have been polished and reviewed in the same way I would expect of any scenario designed for the game after the fact.

Honestly Steve, did you put the same time into crafting the demo scenarios as others in the full game? If not, after you have gotten your core return customers and you have time, I would recommend going back and providing new or improved demo scenarios with CMBB so that those of us who could make you converts from the twitch crowd can do so ever so much easier. I think it is possible using your engine to make demo scenarios that fulfil your stated purpose above and also draw in new customers (even some twitchers). If you want some help in designing, editing or polishing them, I would be more than happy to help for no charge if the pros you already have on board are too busy.

[aka_tom_w]

Wow! Goanna,...

nicely put!

Very diplomatic and polite too

-tom w

[Goanna]

Yeah, whoda figured from me.

[Fangorn]

Ok, my take on the demo scenarios:

I'm no wargamer, that's for sure. I do enjoy strategic games a lot. I came across Combat Mission by a link to the demo posted on the Gone Gold site (best site and forum about games I know), and then I decided to download it, not because I liked the info about it, but just to check how quickly I could get it with by brand new cable modem.

A chance encouter, one might say. A week later I was hooked and had the game preordered.

At this point I was doing whatever I could to show this fantastic game to other people who could have missed this pearl. I was already dreaming about the east front and the new game engine that will follow. To a strategic gamer like myself, CM offered hundreds and hundreds of non repetive game hours.

I, of course, download the demo of CMBB as soon as it was available, and I have preordered it in the first moment possible.

But I'm not sure I would get it after playing the demo should I have no prior experience with CMBO. I fear BTS is risking losing players like myself with the demo as it is now.

Companies are usually accused of forgetting about their current customers as they seek to grab new ones. BTS, on the other hand, delivered us the demo thinking about us and showing how the game have evolved, their current customers, which is reason enough to praise their work.

And why many people here are complaning, then?

People are whining because they care about BTS crew and CM future. Many here have pointed out the game to friends and bought more copies to gift their friends with, talking about it in game forums, etc. Better demo scenarios, or scenarios like the ones we had in CMBO would help here.

[Andreas]

Sodd it - I am in agreement with Dale. That can't be. BTS, fix or somefink!!

[SurlyBen]

I rather liked the demo scenarios. The tutorial is quite a challenge to win with the germans, and the Citadel scenario was something I hadn't really seen before (and it does have some fairly large hills.)

I would have liked to see a highly detailed map that pushed the scenario editor to its limits ala Fertile Fields? Well, yes, and that's the kind of thing I'm going to use to sell my nonCM owning friends on the game... I was one of the people who bought the original based on the hills in VOT. I can hardly wait to get my hands on the map editor and see what I can do...

However. The CMBB demo is still pretty generous as demos go. There is no time limit, no expiration date, and the scenarios aren't really crippled in any way (unless you happen to not like them, in which case I suppose you could say that they are crippled by their lack of goodness). I can think of several wargames that I paid perfectly good money for that can't say as much. The demo, is, of course, free.

[Firefly]

Originally posted by Andreas:

Sodd it - I am in agreement with Dale. That can't be. BTS, fix or somefink!!

Well even Stalin and Churchill agreed about some things, I'll leave you two to work out which is Stalin and which is Churchill .

[PeterX]

It doesn't really disturb me that the demo scenarios don't succeed as stand alone games. Based on past experience, I have faith that BFC will deliver the goods in the full version. I appreciate the way Steve and Charles participate in forum and take their lumps along with the praise. And I know the support will be non-pareil.

The demo showcases several new elements like the cover arcs, the death clock, etc. They're all good concepts.

I do have a couple of concerns.

I've already posted in a couple of other threads about my issue with Russian morale as depicted in the Yelnia scenario. It's too low to depict a true Russian Wave assault- IF that was the deigner's intention. I hope the full version will prove more flexible in this regard.

The inclusion of C&C for AVs adds a lot; vehicles must now observe platoon integrity. This is a HUGE step up from CMBO, perhaps the msot significant change. The hitch is that the game endows the Germans (and later, one presumes, Soviet) tanks with uber-radios that never breakdown, fadeout, or suffer enemy hits. This runs counter to all to the memoirs and histories of the era which attest to their unreliability and fragility. (American units had, by far, the best radios.)Thus, they- the Germans- given the lengthy comm radius suffer virtually no inhibitions; they never drop out of the net.

So, just these two things.....

[ September 09, 2002, 02:05 PM: Message edited by: PeterX ]

[Hensworth]

Originally posted by dalem:

You used the phrase "poor scenarios". "poor" is a word with a lot of baggage and responsibility.

This is perhaps a good time to point out that for many posters on this forum English is not their native language.

Many speak it so well that you can hardly tell. But it's in cases like this, when words have an acquired meaning beside what is mentioned in the dictionary, that problems may arise.

Your perception of the entire post as lacking humility is probably another example. I'm sure this was completely unintentional.

[ September 09, 2002, 01:03 PM: Message edited by: Sgt_Kelly ]

[Chad Harrison]

When the full version comes out, perhaps we can either suggest some better scenarios, or create ones ourselves. I doubt that BFC/BTS would change anything unless a better suggestion was given and agreed on by the majority of players.

Chad

[dalem]

Originally posted by Andreas:

Sodd it - I am in agreement with Dale. That can't be. BTS, fix or somefink!!

[dalem]

Originally posted by Sgt_Kelly:

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

You used the phrase "poor scenarios". "poor" is a word with a lot of baggage and responsibility.

This is perhaps a good time to point out that for many posters on this forum English is not their native language.

Many speak it so well that you can hardly tell. But it's in cases like this, when words have an acquired meaning beside what is mentioned in the dictionary, that problems may arise.

Your perception of the entire post as lacking humility is probably another example. I'm sure this was completely unintentional.</font>

[gunnergoz]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

OK,

(snip)....

1. The primary purpose of the demo scenarios was to highlight the differences between CMBO and CMBB. (snip)... Our sales are driven not by faceless gamers who have never bought from us before, but from those who have plunked down their money and evangelism in the past. (snip)

2. The secondary purpose of the demo was to NOT pander to the typical stereotypes of the Eastern Front. (snip) Instead we wanted people to experience how fresh and rich a CORRECT portrayal of the Eastern Front can be. (rest snipped)

Steve

OK Steve, I have a lot of respect for your acumen and intelligent reasoning capacity, so I don't pretend to know more than you about your business goals.

Speaking only as an enthusiastic groupie of your brainchild(ren), I'd like to suggest that there is still room for another scenario to be bundled with the demo in the future...specifically a scenario that entices the new, novice war gamer by highlighting how CMBB will be FUN to play, even for a novice.

I think that the goals you have listed have been met. I am suggesting that the goals could be broadened some if you wish to see your consumer base grow with this product, rather than primarily addressing the need to ensure sales to the existing base of CM owners and wargame grogs.

Now that the bulk of work is behind you (until serious work begins on the new engine), perhaps some thought could be given to how a scenario could be devised to entice newbies into the genre (and brand) with this new title.

Then again, it could be that you all are entirely content to sell product to the same crowd as before, more or less. Nothing wrong with that at all, as long as it satisfies your needs and keeps you truckin' forward towards future similar products.

Oh, yeah, I hope it lets you buy your tank, too! That's one of my pipe dreams as well, but I suspect you may be better placed to bring your dream to fruition some day.

I'd just love to see you guys be so successful that you could afford a whole damn shedful of tanks; hence my interest in seeing the consumer base grow by means of a tailored scenario.

Just my 2 bits worth, as usual...

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by gunnergoz:

In all honesty I suspect most of the folks who have posted here and lobbied for a third (a little more FUN) scenario in this thread feel exactly the same way .

We all hope you MAKE LOTS MORE MONEY and BUY MORE tanks!

Honest

-tom w

[Pak_43]

Hey here's a revolutionary thought....

How about the fact that Steve and Charles are now MORE than aware that a proportion of people think the demos' are "less than optimal"...

How about the fact that the board has expressed it's opinion on this subject enough, it's clearly been heard, they taken our input on board, examined it, filtered it and come to a decision...

Now I know a LEETLE bit about running a software company... and frankly I'll run my company the way I think best, I'm sure Steve and Charles feel the same way.

Their business model and acumen has stood up very well so far, they've proved there is a market for their product, they've proved they can develop and produce a product to fill that market, they've proved they can sell and support that product.

Why don't we give them some credit for being able to judge what is best for their company? OK it's not what some of the members of the board would do... point made, let's move on...

If Steve and Charles find that sales are not what they expected after the sure-fire sales are in then it's hardly the work of a nuclear physicist to say "hmm better re-vamp the demo and put it out there again..." So if it's sub-optimal now and the doomsayers are proved correct it's not impossible to fix after the release, when they have more time, it's just a new marketing campaign... happens all the time...

oh and prediction... postings about the demo will be almost zero after Sept 20th...

[ September 09, 2002, 04:32 PM: Message edited by: Pak_43 ]

[gunnergoz]

Originally posted by Pak_43:

Hey here's a revolutionary thought....

(snip)...oh and prediction... postings about the demo will be almost zero after Sept 20th...

Yeah, but until then, what yukks we can milk out of this pissing contest, eh?