Cid250 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 http://www.eurogamer.net/article.php?article_id=80542 It's good when a reviewer played enough the kind of products that he is supposed to review: (aka wargames), and he has a clear idea of what is he reviewing. Between these lines you can learn how to success in the European market... where quality still is the main concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtMuhammed Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I think it is funny that one of the major themes of the complaint threads on this board has been that BFC has sold out to RT gaming. Here, however, is a player unwilling, as I am, to use RT mode because of the complexity of the command system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taki Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I always wonder why those Reviews first start to Popp-off Post-Release then Pre-Relaese. I can feel with the Writer of that Review. I think im somewhere around on Stage 3. MAybe it gets easier on Stage 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sloth Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Wow! A review, that pretty much sums up my experience with this game so far. Written for insiders who know the earlier games, and pretty much on the money IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cid250 Posted July 31, 2007 Author Share Posted July 31, 2007 The problem is that WEGO is calculated in realtime too... which brings a poor result by the limited timeframe of 60 seconds, and the sharing of the CPU with the graphical load, plus the great amount of new ballistics that CMSF includes. WEGO had a blue progress bar in earlier games... and that blue bar wasn't limited to 60 seconds... it depends of your CPU and the complexity of the tactical situation. Don't expect many improvements on the TAC-AI with real time as main game focus... the bigger the battle, the lesser that your CPU AI time will be enough to produce good results... and we now have a path finding that in the earlier versions was way simpler. The quality of this "new" wargame is worse than CMBB and CMAK. And Real Time isn't only a interface problem... it's a core problem with deep roots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kieme(ITA) Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Maybe it wasn't a great idea to move so far away from good old-fashioned combat mission path.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuckyStrike Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Would rather have the blue bar back, so the game can take the time it needs, without having to devote CPU cycles to graphics, to do proper pathing and TacAI calculations. Then, when playing the turn, graphics can suck up way more CPU and improve the low framerates we are seeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melnibone Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Interesting point Cid250. I know Combat Flight Sim 3's AI was better the more powerful your PC was. I'd not thought of the the new one minute processing for WEGO as a downside before - but I guess it could be seen as a limit to the possible AI calculations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taki Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Don't expect many improvements on the TAC-AI with real time as main game focus... the bigger the battle, the lesser that your CPU AI time will be enough to produce good results... Thats something im really afraid of. But to be fair to BFC there are some Strongpoints the Game made - The New Relative Spotting (Borg Spotting was greatest Flaw of CMX1 IMHO) - The Arty Fire Controll System The other apparently obviously Strongpoints of the New Engine dont really be Strongpoints at a Second Look. The 1:1 Representation and the Focus on RT seems to cause more Problems to me then i benefit from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cid250 Posted July 31, 2007 Author Share Posted July 31, 2007 Of course Taki... and you also can name the cool new editor as a big leap forward!. But i'm more worried than satisfied... because this tight turn in the developers, makes the wargame as overall, much worser than the CMBB & CMAK series. It's sad that the terrain editor is a much funnier game for me than the real game is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuckyStrike Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 So its being said that we are saving a lot of time by not having the blue bar. Well, since all calculations are already being done inside 1 minute, the blue bar would never take more than 1 minute anyway, and probably a lot less. And we wouldn't then be forced to watch every second of the video if nothing much is happening, we could just fast-forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PSY Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Cid250: The quality of this "new" wargame is worse than CMBB and CMAK. And Real Time isn't only a interface problem... it's a core problem with deep roots. Well it's a trade-off. There are a lot of things in CMSF I like much much better. In particular I really like the single tracking of soldiers, I think that makes a huge difference. Even though the CMBO/CMBB/CMAK armor models were gorgeous for their time the squads composed of three 9' tall giants all marching in step always broke the immersion for me. Certainly along the squad representation dimension, CMSF is both more realistic and more aesthetically pleasing. I'm willing to accept a trade-off some other features for the 1-to-1 squad representation. Given the fact that computers are only going to get faster, future CMx2 games like CM:WWII will only get stronger, and they'll be built on a more solid modeling foundation than the old CMBO/CMBB/CMAK. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steiner14 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Maybe it was a bit too much, with the new engine AND 1:1 representation down to each bullet. I already felt when i heard about it, that it must be an enourmous labour to do it realistically. And it seems, lots of development time was sucked into the 1:1 representation leaving not enough time for the "rest". I.e. allowing quickbattles with purchaseable formations when the StratAI needs scripting, was not a good decision. The complaints about QBs as they are now, IMO are worse, than killing QB entirely. Keeping the abstraction level, but with actual graphics, adding RT, and the sophisticated Arty- and Air-support would have been enough labor and IMO attractive enough for all CM-players - and more of them due to RT. But i still trust in BFC that they will be able to fix the bugs and technical problems. Because of that i have right now ordered my new computer and CMSF. Die Hoffnung stirbt zuletzt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I think the review sums things up quite nicely. Ofcos, the regulars will come and explain to us all how the reviewer didnt "get it" (seems few of them do) and we can dismiss it out of hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melnibone Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I like the writers style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 This is the best, most on-the-spot review I have ever read in my life. This guy deserves a raise Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Bull Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 A very candid, frank and honest review covering all the main areas and echoing much of my own thoughts. Originally posted by Cid250: It's sad that the terrain editor is a much funnier game for me than the real game is.LMFAO! Thats exactly what I thought! The editor is just brilliant! Great interface. Lots of options and tools. Maybe I will find myself getting into creative CMSF scenario designs than actually playing the game. [ July 31, 2007, 07:00 AM: Message edited by: Lt Bull ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzermartin Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Yeah, we can make a ladder to compete for the best scenarios creations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DesertFox Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Lt Bull: A very candid, frank and honest review covering all the main areas and echoing much of my own thoughts. Very unfortunate and irritating. From what can be read on the board and the available reviews everything looks like BTS decided to release some piece of unfinished beta-software crippled with serious hardware bugs and design flaws to the audience. Honestly I´m very dissapointed of what I can see here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackmuzzle Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by The DesertFox: Very unfortunate and irritating. From what can be read on the board and the available reviews everything looks like BTS decided to release some piece of unfinished beta-software crippled with serious hardware bugs and design flaws to the audience. Honestly I´m very dissapointed of what I can see here. DesertFox: You should definitely try the demo and form your own opinion. There's a lot of cool stuff in this program. That is exactly the reason why people are so infuriated about the issues it has, because the game has so much promise and so much going for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuckyStrike Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 That pic of the 10-12 Strykers all mashed together is priceless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DesertFox Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Blackmuzzle: Trust me I would love to make up my own mind by the 1.01 demo. Unfortunately it ain´t working on VISTA/ATI combos, so I have to count 1 and 1 together from what can be read here and elsewere. Maybe hopefully once BTS has worked their product through some extensive bugfixing they´ll release a working demo for us ATI/VISTA people and help us to make an informed buying decision. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pandur Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 nice review, i think with 1.01 the review wouldnt have been THAT much different than it is now. i just thought about cutting the 60 sekonds to 30 or 40 sekonds to keep pace with the fater vehicles and faster changing envoirement, and this would half the data uploaded in TCP-IP wego per turn. wich would result in more compftable faster turns, but also all battles would have twice as much turns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taki Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Yeah im Still one that keeps believing in BFS. If overtime they can bring a TacAI that Stands with CMX1 and some good Pathfindging it still can make its way up into the Olymp of the Gretest Games ever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackmuzzle Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by The DesertFox: Unfortunately it ain´t working on VISTA/ATI combos. That's most likely a driver issue. I dare say that because I remember debugging a crash in the game "Illumina" right into the mipmap generation inside the ATI driver a few years ago, so there's a definite chance for something similar being the case here too. Or maybe, you know, Vista. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts