Fed up

[Cpl Steiner]

Hi,

As much as I've strived to be understanding of BFC's absence on this forum I am now beginning to get a bit cheesed off. CM:SF is, after all, just a game. It is no more important than that. If BFC think ignoring their public will make their lives easier then they may well be right - in the sense that their public will desert them and go play something else.

It is time BFC made some sort of statement regarding the current state of CM:SF and patch 1.05. If they don't then I'm afraid I'm out of here.

[Pvt. Ryan]

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=003318;p=3#000049

[Huntarr]

Hang in there Steiner. Work is still being done on 1.05. The holiday weekend has not stopped work on it. Trust me.

[Cpl Steiner]

Huntarr,

OK, I will hang in there a little longer but 1.05 better be bloody marvellous when it finally comes out to justify BFC's silence. That may sound harsh but being ignored tends to do that to people!

[Thomm]

I hope that they take all the time they need to fix the bugs for good this time! Even if it takes months ...

Best regards,

Thomm

[Thomm]

[double trouble]

[Paper Tiger]

This is not the only game forum I visit regularly and I suspect that's true for you guys too. We are spoiled rotten here by the attention we get from the game developers from time to time. Hell, even Charles posts here occassionally. How often do you see this happen on other sites?

Having said that, I understand your frustration mate. I'm 'lucky' because I'm on a long holiday in the UK and have been away from my computer for a month now and won't be back for another week so it matters not if the patch doesn't come out this weekend. I probably will feel your pain too in a couple of weeks time...

[Michael Dorosh]

I posted this on an ASL forum; I think perhaps it is applicable here, especially given Paper Tiger's comments about being "spoiled".

Back when I "grew up" with ASL, it strikes me that there was very little interaction between many (most) members of the community and the actual powers that were. If we wanted to know about "Squad Leader" (as we continued to call it), we read The General every two months, and might be treated to a two row mention in the coming attractions column. When the Annual came out, we were blown away by the concentration of ASL content. Sixty-four pages once every year! Unbelievable!

If we had a comment, we sent it in via snail mail, usually to never hear back. I was thrilled to have a letter printed in the second-ever Annual, though horrified that in attempting to correct someone's spelling, I had managed to get it wrong myself. In those days, correcting my slip would have cost another 30 cents or so, and taken two weeks to get to the editor. The chances of getting any feedback on my letter was nil; being an annual publication, with only one page for letters, there would be no chance for meaningful "discussion."

Obviously,then, times have changed dramatically.

Twenty minutes ago, Bill Connor was busting my balls right here in open forum. Growing up on a diet of The General, Bill Connor was some name in a magazine in a part of a foreign country I knew I would never visit. He was spoken reverentially of whenever his name appeared in print. A few years ago, I played several PBEM of Combat Mission with Charlie Kibler, whose artwork on the scenario cards was so dramatic (better than MacGowan, I think) before they took the life out of them and started using the actual photographs that inspired the art. It dawned on me he was a regular guy who liked games and social interaction like the rest of us. I've interacted here with Mark C. Nixon of Anvil of My Eye fame. Would never have dreamed it possible as a high-school kid asking mom's permission to buy Beyond Valor with her credit card because I didn't realize I needed it to go with my new ASLRB.

We get monthly, weekly, even daily updates on upcoming projects by MMP, and a host of TPP to discuss with, debate with (and about), and a hugely interactive community where you can talk to fellows from Switzerland, Finland, Australia, Japan, or anywhere in between with a few keystrokes.

And yet - it blows me away that some still have the chutzpah to complain that MMP doesn't provide regular updates often enough or that the Journal comes out too irregularly, or that they are in the dark about VOTG. In 1989, you wouldn't have even heard about VOTG unless they needed filler space in The General, much less gotten detailed pictures of the box top, counter samples, or mapsheet!

It only struck me today as I was folding laundry that when dad was telling me how when he wanted to play "guns", "cowboys & Indians", or "war" and had to use a hammer (instead of an elegantly crafted replica Thompson SMG by Mattel in high-impact styrene complete with spark-action Cutts compensator and ratatatatat sound effects with every pull of the trigger), I don't think he was wishing for me to have "suffered" without glitzy toys the way he did. I think he just wanted me to be able to appreciate more what it is I had, since I clearly didn't know what it was like to go without. He didn't suffer - he made his own fun and experienced something I didn't. I think he is richer for it. He certainly thinks so.

So too, I think, will it be with ASL as the years go on. Need an overlay? Download the .pdf and print it out 10 seconds later. Want to ask the scenario designer about some errata? Log on to a forum and engage him directly.

But to those of us who came up with it in the 80s, when interaction with "the community" meant sending a letter to Rex Martin and wondering if he would publish it, when getting inside scoop on a game meant reading a passing reference in The General - which you paid the princely sum of 4 dollars to buy sight unseen in hopes that there would be a snippet of ASL in it - I think we're richer somehow, too, for knowing what it used to be like.

In the bad old days, if you wanted your own variant article or scenario card, you did it by hand, or at best on a dot-matrix printer (or typewriter - I have one of those in my collection), then photocopied it - if you could find a photocopier. They were interesting times.

I never did get into the electronic bulletin board scene, and was a latecomer to the internet (hell, I was convinced the computer mouse was just a "fad" until I broke down and bought one). I don't wish to go back to the dark old days, but I am glad to have experienced them.

Some part of me, like dad and grand-dad, wishes that everyone could experience them. I wonder what this forum would be like if everyone did? I expect that much of the friction - such as it is - may simply be experiential in genesis - that those who came up used to being in the dark really don't have the same level of concern as some of the newcomers to the hobby. That is only a guess, I am sure much of it is personality driven also. But perhaps there is something there.

As "bad" as it was for board games, computer games were "worse". I knew of no "community" in the 1990s for those interested in historical wargames. When M1 Tank Platoon came out by Microprose, I was tickled pink. Oh, sure, you could read a review in Wargamer Magazine, but usually weeks after the game came out. There was no advance "buzz", no one to talk to unless your jackass friends saw the game in the store. Gaming was done solo (Knights of the Sky, Red Baron, Silent Service, M4, Under Fire, Close Combat), at least for me, and the only word I got of new games was when I saw them in the store.

I'm glad for what we have now - interaction with designers directly is good - but part of me would like for everyone to have experienced those "bad old days".

[ November 26, 2007, 05:38 AM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[ParaBellum]

Very nice post Michael, I agree 100%.

[Nicdain]

Totally agree, too. I remember those times!

I would add to Mr.Dorosh considerations that the need and claim of immediate results or feedback that is "en vogue" nowadays (typical is the request at work: "I want it for yesterday") is unfortunately a general bad habit born from the global connection (internet, mobile phones, etc.). Probably, in the SL/ASL times people focused themselves more on the game than on sharing comments, impressions and experiences, because the means for sharing were not like today. Now, is the trend reversed?

Anyway, I am not so much concerned about BF.C silences. I consider them a good sign, instead: it means people is hard at work.

In the meantime, I still enjoy CM:SF even if it is not perfect.

My 0,02 euros.

[Dirtweasle]

Originally posted by Huntarr:

Trust me.

Who the heck are you?

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Thomm]

Originally posted by Adam1:

... That way they'd never meet all the people they ripped off.

Could it be that their absence can be explained by them being peed off by posts like this?

Best regards,

Thomm

[Abbott]

Originally posted by Dirtweasle:

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

Trust me.

Who the heck are you? </font>

[Abbott]

Originally posted by Adam1:

Maybe they should shut the forum and the website down. That way they'd never meet all the people they ripped off.

Good morning Adam,

At this point I think those that purchased Shock Force will also be expected to purchase the Marine module to get all the gameplay they were expecting with their first purchase. That may be the part "we just don't get". The module system at work.

[Sirocco]

The Internet is a double edged sword, though; more interaction but on the other hand games that are released prematurely and repeatedly patched.

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Adam1:

the people they ripped off.

I don't think anyone was ripped off. Without question many people are disappointed with the game to varying degrees. Putting aside issues like the interface or QB's CMSF is comparable to CMx1 in terms of imperfections. IMHO, more time spent, more polish, and the grumbling would be more along the lines of modern isn't my cup of tea.

[Philistine]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

{snip}As "bad" as it was for board games, computer games were "worse". I knew of no "community" in the 1990s for those interested in historical wargames.

{snip}

There was usenet in the mid to late '90's. A pretty decent place to get info up until the web-based forums really took off. Even now there is some discussion still going on.

Not that I disagree with the bulk of your post. It is pretty amazing the real-time back and forth that goes on with developers--with BFC being historically among the best.

Of course, the downside of being so visible and present is that when you suddenly "go dark" in an unprecedented way for unexplained reasons, it's bound to result in speculation.

--Philistine

[Dirtweasle]

Comparison to AH or whomever back in the day is a little unfair, rather a comparison to the BFC / BTS mission statement and usual SOP is more appropriate.

[Scipio]

Originally posted by Pvt. Ryan:

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=003318;p=3#000049

News are like fresh fish in the sun. This 'news' are from Nov 13th. Smells worse than my shoes after work...

[Abbott]

Originally posted by Sirocco:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Adam1:

the people they ripped off.

I don't think anyone was ripped off. Without question many people are disappointed with the game to varying degrees. Putting aside issues like the interface or QB's CMSF is comparable to CMx1 in terms of imperfections. IMHO, more time spent, more polish, and the grumbling would be more along the lines of modern isn't my cup of tea. </font>

[Sirocco]

CMx1 had a lot of peculiarities; a lot of that was mitigated with the level of abstraction, but that could still be problematic. In my experience the game flaws in CMSF were a pain, and certainly aggrevated by the premature release, but on the CMBO patch scale not of a hugely greater order of magnitude.

[Panzer76]

Originally posted by Sirocco:

In my experience the game flaws in CMSF were a pain, and certainly aggrevated by the premature release, but on the CMBO patch scale not of a hugely greater order of magnitude.

I would have to disagree, strongly. CMBO played just fine right out of the box, and just kept on getting better. There were no game breakers.

CMSF OTOH... paints all its flaws out to us, everytime we play it in all its 1:1 glory.

Really, I think its kinda sad that not only the CM series, but the image I had of this company, has been crushed.

[MiB]

No, I think its very accurate to say everyone who purchase CMSF early got completely ripped off.

When I pay for a game, the implicit assumption is that it will actually work well, and not be nigh-unplayable due to bugs and missing features. To get otherwise is to be defrauded. What actually happened was a massive case of fraud.

I am, I suppose, a "supporter" of the guys here, in that I am patiently awaiting additional fixes, and think the game has improved to the point that its quite good fun (insurgent on insurgent is especially great, actually.)

But lets not pretend something happened than what did. What happened was I was defrauded out of $50. Battlefront fixed it, and thank you for it, I suppose - but I'd have rather just not been defrauded in the first place.

Again, no real will to go and get my money back, since the damage has been repaired. But all in all I'd have just rather not been stuck with a $50 hole in my account and no game to play.

[Sirocco]

Originally posted by Panzer76:

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

In my experience the game flaws in CMSF were a pain, and certainly aggrevated by the premature release, but on the CMBO patch scale not of a hugely greater order of magnitude.

I would have to disagree, strongly. CMBO played just fine right out of the box, and just kept on getting better. There were no game breakers.

CMSF OTOH... paints all its flaws out to us, everytime we play it in all its 1:1 glory.

Really, I think its kinda sad that not only the CM series, but the image I had of this company, has been crushed. </font>