This game aint just for grog snobs

[Cpt Kernow]

Just seen a sentence in a prior post that really pissed me off. :mad:

It was this.

"Those who are interested enough in WW II to read the stack of books necessary to really appreciate CM "

WHAT!

The CM series is a truely fantastic series but unfortunately it seems to attract a certain type I will now coin the grog snob.

I would never had considered myself a wargamer before now.Though admitedly in the past I did belong to wargaming club and even owned metal figures but on my PC's hard drive have been FPS and RTS games. CM is the first actual "wargame" I have put on my machines hard drive. I did have a bent towards buying strategy games ( Shogun etc etc )but also realy enjoyed FPS. Now such games will never find a place on my HD as all my gaming time is devoted to CM. I cant think of a greater compliment to a game than keeping it on my HD even after I have bought the sequal (BO-BB).

Also I think some grogs fundamentally mis understand the potential mass appeal of the CM series, and seem to have some kind of hysterical desire to keep its audience limited to those that have read the required number of books.

Let us look at one of the Biggest selling games on the PC. The CIV series.

Any similarities between CIV and CM seem obvious to you mr grog snob.

1. Turn based

2. Graphics not near FPS or RTS standards.

So a game that contains the above features is demonstrably not barred from mass appeal and mass sales.

What is CIV famous for, fans of this series would say its depth. Now we know that in real terms CIV is a puddle compared to the oceanic depths of CM. But still here we are getting to the nub of why the CM series could be massive.

The reason why I can ( and many like me )enjoy CM ( Without having read any WW2 books,)is because unlike every other game i have put on my HD CM does not patronize my inteligence(unlike some grog snobs) but treats me like a mature thinking human being.

The average age of the installed PC base is much higher than that of the console base, and this is why CIV has sold so well on the PC. I see no reason why CM would not appeal to a larger proprotion of this mature gaming audience who as we have demonstrated do not base game purchases on graphics or turn style considerations but are obviously attracted by other more cerebral qualities in the gaming experience. I think if CM could have been called SIM WAR its sales would perhaps even eclipse that of CIV because there is no doubt that it is a far far superior game.

To be absolutely frank I think BFC are without par or equal at creating quality product but display the attitudes of hobyists when taking their product to market.

This may be a good thing as gread corrupts allways. Perhaps once BFC had got a sniff of all the green I think they could potentialy make perhaps we would see compromises slowly sneek into the CM series of games and this no doubt would be a tragedy.

Whew its good to get a rant out of the system.

[TSword]

All great as long there are no concessions to the

average gamer in respect to complexity and historical correctness of the game.

Greets

Daniel

[Cpt Kernow]

This is perhaps the essence of my post.

I love and APPRECIATE CM and also consider myself an "average gamer" if you look at the PC installed base.

Even though I have not read any ww2 books CM has not had to compromise itself to win my appreciation.

[ October 28, 2002, 07:15 AM: Message edited by: Cpt Kernow ]

[Zarquon]

To be fair, I don't think the grogs, übergrogs and metagrogs on this forum show an elitist attitude. Quite the opposite. And without the people posting 10-page essays the thought of, say, trying a reverse slope defense would never have crossed my mind.

Not that it ever worked, though. Maybe I should read a book...

[kipanderson]

Cpt Kernow,

Fans of the CM series do not come more “grogy” than me. I read US Field Manuals for fun, subscribe to various arms industry/defense journals ….. and so on. The CM series of games are the only ones I play, due to the fact that they are such accurate simulations of ground war fare. More accurate than the software used by the worlds’ military, which I am also familiar with. However, although I may not agree with every word you wrote, I am basically on your side.

Any and all should be equally welcome to use and participate in CM. As long as they have bought the games, and enjoy them, that is all that counts. Using the CM series as a good computer game, as opposed to an accurate military simulation, is equally valid.

I just end with a comment in defence of some grogs, you hinted at this yourself. Do remember the CM is really all we have. There are no alternatives for true, unhinged grogs. This in turn leads to a great fear and apprehension that BFC will “sell out” to the mass market and decrease the realism of CM in order to appeal better to more customers. This fear drives a lot of grog comment. It makes all grogs very nervous of partnerships with “games companies”. My own view is that if BFC can make more money out of partnerships with game companies then they are more likely to continue to produce realistic simulations. But who knows, there is a real risk that BFC will be temped by the mass market.

The more realistic modelling of infantry in CMBB is hugely celebrated by grogs, but is not popular with some computer games fans. They openly complain that it makes the game too difficult if the modelling is too realistic. So in truth, on “some issues”, it is an either/or choice. You cannot “always” keep the computer games fan and the grog happy. I hope BFC continue to go with the grogs, in the small number of issues when it is a case of “either/ or”.

Currently, the CM games are not just games, but real works of military history.

All the best,

Kip.

[Bruno Weiss]

Well I for one still miss the power-up potions.

[Dave H]

Originally posted by Bruno Weiss:

Well I for one still miss the power-up potions.

I agree. I also think my tanks should get extra lives for killing enemy units. That's how it worked in the old arcade games. BFC, please fix.

[Sgt. Schultz]

Yeah, I am still looking for the easter egg that allows Mk XXXIII Bolos with the 200cm Hellbore cannons with 20cm Hellbore secondaries.

[Engel]

Originally posted by kipanderson:

They openly complain that it makes the game too difficult if the modelling is too realistic.

With computer games, more game realism does not always cause more realistic approaches, given the limitations of the medium, so in many cases realism must make way to gameplay.

One example that pops to mind is FPS games, where most of them use somewhat non-realistic approaches to get around the limitations of the player not being able to perceive the environment or interact with it as they would in real life. Some of the more realistic FPS games suffer from this a great deal, as the character(s) keep suddenly dying from events that would've been obvious to a person who was at the scene and capable of observing the environment naturally (having a real spatial perception of sound, for example).

In CM terms, one of the limits is that the troops do not have any persistent idea of the environment they act in. For example, if I order troops to assault an MG bunker, in real life, if support is available, the troops would rather wait for it and not be too excited about the attack and would probably break more easily than now. But if the troops would know that there will be no support and that the bunker must be taken, they would most likely to be less likely to break than now, and would press forward with the attack (unless it's a clearly impossible situation).

[Lumbergh]

Originally posted by Engel:

In CM terms, one of the limits is that the troops do not have any persistent idea of the environment they act in. For example, if I order troops to assault an MG bunker, in real life, if support is available, the troops would rather wait for it and not be too excited about the attack and would probably break more easily than now. But if the troops would know that there will be no support and that the bunker must be taken, they would most likely to be less likely to break than now, and would press forward with the attack (unless it's a clearly impossible situation).

CM models this...you're just a LT with a crappy leadership value in the game!

[Engel]

Originally posted by Lumbergh:

CM models this...you're just a LT with a crappy leadership value in the game!

Everyone knows it's the Sgt. 1st class that really commands the troops.

[ October 28, 2002, 08:56 AM: Message edited by: Engel ]

[Bruno Weiss]

Let's remember it was the corporals who started the bloodiest wars in history...

[xerxes]

I think their are too many fanatics involved in making CMxx for them to sell out. I also think they've figured out a way to make some serious coin by NOT following the mainstream model of game development/distribution.

Most game developers go belly-up sooner or later. The CM development and distribution model is in many ways more forward thinking then the traditional and hidebound game industry that cranks out SplatterHead 8.01.

[Cpt Kernow]

This is a bump.

Some grogs need to learn a few ugly facts not about war but about themsleves.

[Andreas]

Originally posted by Cpt Kernow:

This is a bump.

Some grogs need to learn a few ugly facts not about war but about themsleves.

Yeah, but the same goes for some 'average gamers'.

Now for Kip, he is just a 'Grog Lite'™ - Janes is really not that up to snuff when it comes to WW2, and reading a poor translation of Wehrtechnik just does not cut it at all...

[MikeyD]

Me, I'll admit to being a bit of an armor grog but I'm no board wargame grog, and I'm DEFINITELY no Nazi uniform grog!

One type of grog thinks the game is ruined if the mid-production PzIII has the wrong lower hull armor specs. Another type of grog thinks the game is ruined if a certain Russian unit pict shows the wrong shoulder boards!

In a perverse way if CM were significantly worse there would be significantly less complaining. The good (and bad?) thing about CM is it gives each grog the hope that 'perfection' in his particular sub-genre is achievable.

[PeterX]

Bruno Weiss posted:

Let's remember it was the corporals who started the bloodiest wars in history...

OK, Bruno, I'll bite. Hitler and who else? Napoleon was an artillery captain at the siege of Toulon where he first won attention.

[Andrew H.]

Originally posted by Cpt Kernow:

This is a bump.

Some grogs need to learn a few ugly facts not about war but about themsleves.

Bah...one poster wrote something that annoyed you and suddenly there is a "grog" problem. If you're not happy with what that poster wrote, take it up with him; don't assume that he represents all grogs. In my experience, most grog posts are directed at other grogs, not at civilian gamers who just happen to be strolling by.

[Broken]

MickeyD posted:

In a perverse way if CM were significantly worse there would be significantly less complaining. The good (and bad?) thing about CM is it gives each grog the hope that 'perfection' in his particular sub-genre is achievable.

How true. I certainly wouldn't nitpick CM as often if it wasn't a great simulation.

[Cpt Kernow]

Andrew

I have no problem with "grogs" makeing grog comments to other grogs such as arguing about the rarity of certain units and the like.

There is a strain of grog that thinks that grogness is a prerequisite to partaking in the CM experience. I outline one post in the begining of this thread but this post was merely the straw that broke the camels back.

There are grogs, good they add to the richness of this forum.

There are also however GROG SNOBS and they only detract from it.

[Bruno Weiss]

Your right PeterX, promoted to Captain in 1792 to be exact. By 1796, Austria had become France’s chief enemy. Napoleon started his attack on Austria, his first big campaign. Napoleon defeated four armies larger than his own. After that, his troops gave him the name "Petit Caporal" or "Little Corporal."

[OddjobXL]

Originally posted by Broken!:

How true. I certainly wouldn't nitpick CM as often if it wasn't a great simulation.

I think, in a way, grogs and mainstream gamers attracted to Combat Mission have this in common. We like CM because it's realistic. We hang out in the CM forums to argue our positions, ask our questions, and make our suggestions because Combat Mission is what it is and I doubt anyone wants to fundamentally alter those attributes. Folks who want more gamey games have plenty to chose from already and I don't see Battlefront gaining anything, even from mainstream gamers, by dumbing down CM (which seems to be the great fear).

[Priest]

Originally posted by Cpt Kernow:

[QB]

"Those who are interested enough in WW II to read the stack of books necessary to really appreciate CM "

[QB]

Uhm I am not sure what the issue is here. Now I do not support an elitist attitude (not even sure I can spell it) but let me use an analogy.

Most people on this board drink wine. Few on this board can appreciate it though as much as someone say like WineScape. He would notice subtle things and nuances that most would not and probably not care about.

Another way to look at it is that if you take out say a Tiger with T-34, you would say "wow nice shot. Man didn't think I was going to make it". Then a guy like Rexford comes along and says the same thing but continues "wow BFC sure modeled the angles properly reflecting the height in which i was with the consistancy of the Tiger plate given the time of the engagement versus the shell type and constuction given that same period."

One way is not better than the other, but the way in which Rexford (or WineScape in the analogy) perceived the situation does have a deeper look into the guts of CM. Thus those with the knowledge can only truly appreciate the entire spectrum of what CM and wine has to offer.

Does that mean you should stop drinking wine or playing CM? Heck no. It means that the next time you wonder why the Tiger resisted the T-34's round or what wine to serve with a nice romantic dinner you have resources to tap.

Just my thoughts but personally I agree with the poster you quoted if meant in the auspices outlined above.

[Michael Emrys]

Kernow, since I was the author of the sentence that pissed you off, maybe you ought to hear what I have to say about it.

First of all, it really pisses me off when people quote me out of context in order to have a target for their own perverted delusions and fantasies. I nowhere said that non-grog gamers were not welcome to buy and enjoy CM in whatever way pleases them. In fact, I have posted to the effect that they should on many more than one occasion over the years.

The point I was trying to make in the thread that post appeared in was that, contrary to the wishes expressed by the person who started that thread, it is my firm conviction that CM will only be injured if compromises are taken just to attract a "wider" audience, an audience that has basically no particular interest in historical wargaming nor ever will have.

People who are just interested in moving colored phosphors around on a screen already have lots of games directed specifically at their market niche and always will have. They are not under-supplied, and there is no point in turning CM into one more of that horde.

CM's value partly lies in its uniqueness and its dedication to quality. To compromise that unique dedication to quality would undermine its value to whomever chooses to play it, whether he calls himself a grog or a gorg.

Virtually everybody who posts on this board is a self-appointed critic. Some are knowledgable and thoughtful. Some are out and out nut cases. Sometimes the grogs are wrong and sometimes the nuts are right. But on balance the averages seem to fall in the other direction. That is to say, it is the grogs more than anyone who have made CM the excellent product that it is. And why is that? simple: The entire staff of BFC/BTS are grogs.

Now why don't you just calm down and come back when you have something sensible to say.

Michael

[ October 28, 2002, 09:55 PM: Message edited by: Michael emrys ]

[OddjobXL]

And sometimes the grogs are the nutcases. I say this as someone who respects more than a few grognards.