CMBB and GI Combat

[OG_Gleep]

If you look at GI Combat, you can't help but think of CMBO(Ok maybe you can, but I can't). The game mags/sites have been comparing the two as well.

Since CMBO has been released for some time, it is safe to assume that the developers (Freedom Games, I think) have played CMBO and have borrowed some elements from it. If they haven't, they are idiots.

What I am wondering, is if anything is borrowed from GI Combat for CMBB? Was anything canned/changed/added or influenced in any way (direct, indirect) by GI Combat? Was GI Combat even brought up at all?

[Chad Harrison]

OG_Gleep, if you havnt seen before, there is not a lot of love between BFC and GI Combat. I can tell you though, that BFC would rather roll over dead and play with barbies than take ideas from GI Combat.

For some reason there has been a lot of hype about GI Combat. Sure it might look good on the screen, but I dont think it is going to live up to its hype when it comes out. CMBO itself will be a much better game than GI, and it would be sacreligious to even compare GI to a much superior game, CMBB.

Chad Harrison

[Scipio]

I wonder how CM shall be influenced by GIC, the game isn't out yet, there isn't even a demo available yet (or have I missed something?).

As I understand it is GIC more based on the Close Combat series. I will surely take a look on it when it is out. At least the screenshots look good.

But beside that, CM and GIC play in different leagues, CM is a turn based we-go system game on battalions level, while GIC is a real time game on company level.

[Chupacabra]

Originally posted by Chad Harrison:

For some reason there has been a lot of hype about GI Combat. Sure it might look good on the screen, but I dont think it is going to live up to its hype when it comes out. CMBO itself will be a much better game than GI, and it would be sacreligious to even compare GI to a much superior game, CMBB.

Unless you've played GI Combat, how exactly do you know if it's going to be good or bad?

Little story: when I first heard about CM, I thought, 'no way they're going to pull that off, it's too ambitious.' A couple of years later...

Fanboyism is intellectually lazy. Until you've played the game, reserve your judgement.

[BFCElvis]

Chad, unless I've missed something, there is no bad blood between the two camps. As a matter of fact I think they help each other because the more successful games of this type that are out there the more likely it will be that people continue to make them. Eric who moderates the GIC forum posts here at Battlefront from time to time. My feeling from him has been that he likes CM:BO very much and is looking forward to seeing CM:BB. He, of course, thinks his game is better but I would hope if I was in the same position I would think that I had helped create a better game. Either way it isn't really a competitive event because people can own both games...everyone wins!

Their forum does have some Close Combat folks that will never like a turn based game. They are much more used to a "continuous time" game and will probably not be swayed. But the largest part of their forum are people who see advantages to both and/or are CM players.

From what I understand about GIC it is on a much different scale than CM. It will be company level battles whearas CM can handle several battalions (if you PC can handle it).

[Madmatt]

US vs. Them discussions are not really kosher here. In due time our demo will be out and sometime in the future, although no one seems to be sure WHEN, so will theirs and then you guys can compare and contrast all you want, just not here. The thing to remember is that they are very different games that handle the same basic aspect, tactical World War II combat, in very different ways and from very different perspectives.

Oh, and one more thing... our game will beat the living snot outa theirs.

Madmatt

[ August 24, 2002, 12:03 PM: Message edited by: Madmatt ]