M1A1TC Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 I agree, I still like the game and dont regret buying it, it just needs some polish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KAding Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 The review makes some good points. I just hope BTS is making enough money out of CM:SF to be able to fund the serious bug fixing and additional features that this game needs to make it a winner. It has potential for sure. But at this time, it is also very frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Taki: 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 My guess is we are talking about 4 months worth of patching here, probably 5 if Charles goes on vacation. The thread title "more sorrow than anger" describes the situation most appropriately, I think. I bought the game not even knowing whether it will run on my laptop, thinking that it is the price I gladly pay for frequenting (and perusing) the forums for such a long time. This way, I did not have any disappointment in connection with the game. But it hurts me to see how CM:SF gets thrashed by reviewers ... and it has just started! The main problem with mainstream CMX1 reviews was that the games were not for the casual gamer, a compliment for those who appreciated the intellectual challenge. The games got praise from wargame reviewers. But now it seems that we are talking beta status, bugs, cumbersome interface ... all that is not really a sales generator Lets see how this develops ... Best regards, Thomm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Taki: Yeah im Still one that keeps believing in BFS. If overtime they can bring a TacAI that Stands with CMX1 That's the same CMX1 TacAI that counterattacked only wherever there was some "flag" stuck in a piece of dirt, and led the attacks with mortars and platoon HQ units in the forefront? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melnibone Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 lol...there is quite a lot of looking back at CMX1 with rose tinted spectacles going on at the moment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taki Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 @ MIchael Dorosh: I know what u want to say with it. The TacAi need some Improvment and some tweaking to Modern Assymetric Warfare and the CMX1 TacAI had its limitations. But it was practical and playable in a acceptable way. The Missing "Moral System" is just one more Puzzle Part to make this a great Game. 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: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />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. </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Look in the tech support forum, it is DEFINITELY a driver bug. Charles is seeing if he can work around it for now. Rune Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DesertFox Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by rune: Look in the tech support forum, it is DEFINITELY a driver bug. Charles is seeing if he can work around it for now. Rune I hope you are right with this assessment and can make the game work. Otherwise your risking to loose 50% of your Vista based customers to this bug. Looking forward to your patch and the patched demo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 The "detailed, story-driven, semi-dynamic campaign" turns out to be a poorly presented, poorly paced string of twenty-odd scenarios offering sod-all in the way of continuity or sense of progress. Flashing up a 'victory' or 'defeat' screen after each engagement then rushing onto the next, isn't exactly involving. Show me an updated map of the frontline, give me a sense of the wider war. Help me care, help me believe.The comment about the campaign seemed a bit off; he said he wanted to see where the lines were after every game, but every briefing in the campaign has a Strategic Map which does show the location of the friendly Task Force. The whole point of the campaign is a thunder run to the heart of Syria, so asking for the position of "lines" seems silly, given that there really are no traditional battle lines. But situation maps are included at the start of each battle. As for knowing about what was going on in the wider war - we're talking about exhaused front line soldiers in a Stryker brigade moving fast in enemy territory. Likely, ironically, they probably wouldn't know much about the wide world around them - just what gets filtered down to them in daily situation reports and battle briefings. Stay focused. The review is well written and nicely illustrated, but I think he missed the boat on his description of the campaign. I would have prefered something more meta-ish and interactive also, but it seems stupid to complain that stuff that clearly is in the campaign somehow isn't, or that stuff inappropriate to the campaign should be. I'm not sure what he means by "poorly-paced" either? It seems like he was struggling for ways to criticize it with a lot of his comments and just pulled stuff out of thin air. Does the reviewer post here? [ July 31, 2007, 08:36 AM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolf66 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Taki: Yeah im Still one that keeps believing in BFS. If overtime they can bring a TacAI that Stands with CMX1 That's the same CMX1 TacAI that counterattacked only wherever there was some "flag" stuck in a piece of dirt, and led the attacks with mortars and platoon HQ units in the forefront? </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M1A1TC Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by wolf66: ...what about the non retreating soldiers for instance - that is highly unbelievable and ruins the immersion for me. Vehicles not retreating or popping smoke when facing a serious threat ? Agreed. If TacAI in previous CM games can do this, why not in this one? Shouldnt games improve with time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kipanderson Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Hi, So far I could not be happier with CMSF, but am worried that I will soon encounter some dodgy TacAI. TacAI is the big one, the factor that made CMX1 the classic that is was. If there are problems out there, I have spent most of my time in the editor so far, I hope they are not a fundamental consequence of the RT engine. I am well aware that in CMX1 the TacAI could cope with near anything, in huge games, because it could take its time to calculate the turn. All good fun, All the best, Kip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalem Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: As for knowing about what was going on in the wider war - we're talking about exhaused front line soldiers in a Stryker brigade moving fast in enemy territory. Likely, ironically, they probably wouldn't know much about the wide world around them - just what gets filtered down to them in daily situation reports and battle briefings. Stay focused. Oh, come on, Gold 5. One of the specific points advertised and crowed about is this campaign feature. If it's a fizzle, it's a bad fizzle, not something to just dismiss with a "stay on target!" -dale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by dalem: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: As for knowing about what was going on in the wider war - we're talking about exhaused front line soldiers in a Stryker brigade moving fast in enemy territory. Likely, ironically, they probably wouldn't know much about the wide world around them - just what gets filtered down to them in daily situation reports and battle briefings. Stay focused. Oh, come on, Gold 5. One of the specific points advertised and crowed about is this campaign feature. If it's a fizzle, it's a bad fizzle, not something to just dismiss with a "stay on target!" -dale </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASHBERY76 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Reviews like this are going to kill the company. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stryker Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Has anyone played the Steel Panthers Mega campaigns? They were very well done, but you had to pay extra for each one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steiner14 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander: Agreed. If TacAI in previous CM games can do this, why not in this one? Shouldnt games improve with time? That reminds me about the post, when Steve mentioned, that in CMx2 units will have a memory and therefore i.e. tanks being capable to remember where the last deadly threat was after they have broken LOS and had retreated. The imagination alone was exciting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: It seems like he was struggling for ways to criticize it with a lot of his comments and just pulled stuff out of thin air.Right on quoue, MD is here to the rescue. What did he just pull out of thin air? And how many of them? Must be a lot, you say so yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Panzer76: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: It seems like he was struggling for ways to criticize it with a lot of his comments and just pulled stuff out of thin air.Right on quoue(sic), MD is here to the rescue. What did he just pull out of thin air? And how many of them? Must be a lot, you say so yourself. </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer76 Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Panzer76: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: It seems like he was struggling for ways to criticize it with a lot of his comments and just pulled stuff out of thin air.Right on quoue(sic), MD is here to the rescue. What did he just pull out of thin air? And how many of them? Must be a lot, you say so yourself. </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Asymmetric warfare sounded interesting on paper. In the campaign far too often it boils-down to pulverising trench-cowering Arabs with artillery, aircraft (unseen), and AFV guns.That has been my experience: spot, pulverise, move; spot, pulverise, move. Much more so than in CMx1, given modern sensors, I suppose, and the terrain itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Oh, here, I'll dumb it down for you: poorly paced - unclear what he means sod-all in the way of continuity or sense of progress - not true, each scenario has a situation map and the scenario briefing puts the mission in operational context rushing onto the next - not sure what else he expected to see between scenarios - music videos? Show me an updated map of the frontline - thunder run to an enemy city means "no frontline". Situation map included in every briefing, though, see above give me a sense of the wider war - not totally necessary I think from the context of a Stryker battalion CO. Now, is the campaign "story-driven" as advertised? Very much so. The context is provided in the manual. It shows through in each mission briefing. Could more have been done? Sure; could have written a whole novel, fake newspaper articles, a soldiers 'blog, TV news reports. Would most people even notice? Once the start button is pushed on turn 1 of each mission, seems beside the point. I think the campaign accomplishes what it set out to do and the reviewer is simply false in some of his assertions and confused in others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Panzer76: Errr.. so your comment about how the reviwer " It seems like he was struggling for ways to criticize it with a lot of his comments and just pulled stuff out of thin air. " boils down to that he did not feel immersed with how the campaign is presented. Wow, your really starting to reach new fanboi hights. Yes, you read me correctly. "it" referring to the campaign. I wasn't referring to his review of the game as a whole, just the campaign, and I made that clear with my initial post. So his entire criticism of the campaign lacks substance. You got it entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molotov_billy Posted July 31, 2007 Share Posted July 31, 2007 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The "detailed, story-driven, semi-dynamic campaign" turns out to be a poorly presented, poorly paced string of twenty-odd scenarios offering sod-all in the way of continuity or sense of progress. Flashing up a 'victory' or 'defeat' screen after each engagement then rushing onto the next, isn't exactly involving. Show me an updated map of the frontline, give me a sense of the wider war. Help me care, help me believe.The comment about the campaign seemed a bit off; he said he wanted to see where the lines were after every game, but every briefing in the campaign has a Strategic Map which does show the location of the friendly Task Force. The whole point of the campaign is a thunder run to the heart of Syria, so asking for the position of "lines" seems silly, given that there really are no traditional battle lines. But situation maps are included at the start of each battle. As for knowing about what was going on in the wider war - we're talking about exhaused front line soldiers in a Stryker brigade moving fast in enemy territory. Likely, ironically, they probably wouldn't know much about the wide world around them - just what gets filtered down to them in daily situation reports and battle briefings. Stay focused. The review is well written and nicely illustrated, but I think he missed the boat on his description of the campaign. I would have prefered something more meta-ish and interactive also, but it seems stupid to complain that stuff that clearly is in the campaign somehow isn't, or that stuff inappropriate to the campaign should be. I'm not sure what he means by "poorly-paced" either? It seems like he was struggling for ways to criticize it with a lot of his comments and just pulled stuff out of thin air. Does the reviewer post here? </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts