My review: CM:SF is the best wargame out there

[We Build We Fight]

CM:SF was never going to be popular with the CM1 crowds for many of the reasons stated by Steve. Subject matter is totally different and of little interest to those gamers as a whole.

What was hoped was a new better model, not one with stripped away features. Not one released over a year before it's time. If you wanted to break away from the CM platform it should have had a totally different name. No, we were looking forward to CM2WW2 someday, a much more powerful, visually enhanced game, with even more features and innovative controls than CM1.

We weren't expecting to be ridiculed when we told you of our disappointment. Sure some folks get downright over the top but you don't have to take the bait. We don't need to know everything you're thinking! Ignore the crap, stop with the insults, fix the game, tell us the truth of where you're taking it and keep moving.

I too bought the game out of the chute from Paradox through Amazon. Certainly glad I saved some money compared to Nemesis! I'll play this game for a diversion once you fix it. Hopefully I'll be able to play some PBEM with the few folks who could enjoy this period. If you never make a decent WEGO WW2 game from the engine, someone will and those of us caught waiting for you will welcome them with open arms and wallets.

No worries..........go have a beer!

[Battlefront.com]

Dorosh,

The point is that battlefront.com has done nothing to actively foster a healthy community in which fans of its currently supported games can share files (hosting skins, .wavs or scenarios), play competitively (hosting ladders or even tournaments), find opponents in real time (chat feature) or increase their enjoyment of the product by increased contacts of a material nature (all of the above, add in other stuff like scenario design contests, tactics contests or other promotions).

We weren't all that active in doing any of these things for CMx1, yet they happened anyway for a variety of reasons. My previous post in this thread explained some reasons it is different this time around.

That is the point. I apologize if I was somehow unclear. In other words, the lack of community is not entirely the fault of the "WW II cult" as you insultingly put it, nor the "psychotic attacks" of people who did not like the game, but perhaps in a small part by a lack of direct tangible support by you, the developer and publisher of the game.

Do you disagree that the latter might be a small factor?

Sure, because I said clearly these are the three major reasons:

1. The subject matter is not nearly as popular.

2. The more focused scope of the game.

3. Scenarios are more technical and complex to make.

All the support in the world from us won't make much difference in the face of these issues. Though that doesn't mean we aren't going to do anything at all. Don't be surprised if a CMHQ like site is started up by us based on work done before this thread was started

Steve

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by We Build We Fight:

We weren't expecting to be ridiculed when we told you of our disappointment.

Or told that we're somehow part of a "cult", implying that we pursue our hobbies not out of genuine interest or conviction but because we are stupid, misguided and ignorant...

I've never understood the need to polarize the two "camps"; there are plenty of names in the CM:SF beta forum that contributed in a meaningful way to CMX1, officially and unofficially, who have more than a passing interest in, and knowledge of, both Second World War military history as well as current military topics. Setting the two groups against each other seems self-defeating, especially since CMX2 will be revisiting Normandy in its next major Title. *shrug*

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Me: Neither (GJK of the Scenario Depot II/The Proving Grounds nor CMMODS) has gotten as much as a kind word or a hyperlink from battlefront.

Steve: Again, we don't play favorites amongst the modding community. </font>

[Battlefront.com]

We Build To Fight,

What was hoped was a new better model, not one with stripped away features. Not one released over a year before it's time. If you wanted to break away from the CM platform it should have had a totally different name. No, we were looking forward to CM2WW2 someday, a much more powerful, visually enhanced game, with even more features and innovative controls than CM1.

CM:SF already has that in many ways, but obviously some people strongly disagree with this for one or more reasons. I have never, and will never, have a problem with someone expressing an opinion (negative or otherwise) as long as they understand that is all it is. The problem comes when people try to argue their point as fact and then get pissed at me for disagreeing with them.

We weren't expecting to be ridiculed when we told you of our disappointment. Sure some folks get downright over the top but you don't have to take the bait.

The "over the top" people you refer to make it impossible for me to ignore. I will remind you that since the beginning of this Forum's history (10+ years now) I have always said that we will not ban people for being jerks, but they will not be shielded from being challenged for their behavior. I suppose I could have just banned every person that was out of line, but then you'd probably be here complaining about my censorship.

We don't need to know everything you're thinking! Ignore the crap, stop with the insults, fix the game, tell us the truth of where you're taking it and keep moving.

That's what I did for the last three years. The problem is that some people didn't grasp what I said. That's understandable because many people didn't grasp what each CMx1 game would bring to the table. I will remind you of the amount of abuse we took for changing the way movement and suppressive fire worked for CMBB. People knew it was coming, but the "SMG rush" guys didn't grasp the significance. So when the game came out they were pissed that their pet tactic didn't work very well any more.

As we move forward from this point I will continue, as always, to tell people about things as they become appropriate to discuss. I've already outlined some of the changes planned for CM:WW2, such as improved QBs. It's too early to give details yet. We do this for your own protection since until we start coding something we're never exactly sure how it will turn out.

I too bought the game out of the chute from Paradox through Amazon. Certainly glad I saved some money compared to Nemesis! I'll play this game for a diversion once you fix it. Hopefully I'll be able to play some PBEM with the few folks who could enjoy this period. If you never make a decent WEGO WW2 game from the engine, someone will and those of us caught waiting for you will welcome them with open arms and wallets.

Well, depending on your definition of "decent" we may or may not deliver. Again, it all comes down to personal opinion.

As for someone else filling some void we've left open, I wouldn't count on it. It could happen, of course, but for 10 years people pissed at us for various things "broken" and "wrong" with CMx1 (contrary to myth, we have had MANY people claim CMx1 was f'd up beyond all recall and then go away in a huff) have said we would be put out of business by someone making a better game. It hasn't happened yet, though of course anything is possible. But with the market share to development resources ratio being so horribly out of balance, I wouldn't block out any time for said possible product.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

Dorosh,

Or told that we're somehow part of a "cult", implying that we pursue our hobbies not out of genuine interest or conviction but because we are stupid, misguided and ignorant...

Thanks for once again proving that I can't write anything without someone going off the logic deepend and taking personal offense! Sheeesshhh.

What I said is true that there is a "cult" like atmosphere built around WWII. Just remove the religion part of the definition, look at the context in which I used the term, and tell me specifically what has your knickers in a twist:

"A system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object.

A relatively small group of people having religious beliefs or practices regarded by others as strange or sinister.

A misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing.

A person or thing that is popular or fashionable, especially among a particular section of society"

The part of the definition I was thinking of was the last one. Look at the attacks on this Forum from the WWII guys when we told them the first release of CM:SF was not going to be WWII and you might find some people that fit the other definitions better

There is a dedicated "society", if you prefer that word, built up around WWII and there is not around modern warfare. Therefore, it is logical and rational to find more customer support ready and willing to dedicate lots of free time towards WWII than towards modern warfare. IMHO it is illogical to argue that this situation doesn't exist.

I've never understood the need to polarize the two "camps"; there are plenty of names in the CM:SF beta forum that contributed in a meaningful way to CMX1, officially and unofficially, who have more than a passing interest in, and knowledge of, both Second World War military history as well as current military topics. Setting the two groups against each other seems self-defeating, especially since CMX2 will be revisiting Normandy in its next major Title. *shrug*

I don't understand the polarization either, which is why I didn't say anything even remotely confrontational. I simply said that the amount of community support for CM:SF is going to be proportionally lower because the subject matter is not as popular as WWII. What's wrong with that statement?

So your position is that it is okay to polarize the community in open forum by making insulting comments about cult worshippers (as opposed to the "normal" people like Lee, I suppose, who just like to post pictures of guns to the CM:SF forum - this furthers the CM:SF community how, exactly?), but when it comes to showing active support via as little as a kind word, official nod, or a hyperlink in a forum header to those that supported CMX1 and showed every intent of supporting CMX2, you are vastly opposed to such polarization.

If you want to take things out of context, then further blow it out of proportion... yes, that's exactly what I am saying. But that isn't what I actually said.

If someone's work is worth something to you, and you show them that you value it, I would hardly call it "playing favourites", but even if you want to brand it that, emm..."so what?" comes to mind. What exactly would the harm be in "playing favourites"?

It's a philosophical position that we have. You can disagree with it, but keep in mind that there is more than one way to do something like this.

If you're not willing to provide an interactive online community providing material support to players yourself, and are further unwilling to support those third parties doing it for you, why complain bitterly then that no such community exists? And worse, why blame other people for that missing sense of community simply because they have other interests?

Again, this is all in your head Dorosh. I did not say we are unwilling to do anything for CM:SF players, I did not say that we are unwilling to support third parties, and I did not complain bitterly (or even complain at all, come to think of it) that no such community exists. You simply read what you wanted to read and went off on a tangent that is unsupportable IMHO. I also did not BLAME anybody for the lack of support, as you call it, I just explained it. There is a difference you know.

I invite you to calm down, reread what I said in the context it was written, and then look at what I just wrote. You're off in another thread as far as I can tell.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

BTW, I've spent 7 of the last 10 years making WWII wargames. I will spend the next 2 on WWII. I spent most of my personal gaming time on WWII games. All the hundreds of models I built as a kid were WWII stuff. My library consists of about 90% WWII related books. I spent my education studying, primarily, WWII. All my "must own before I die" firearms are from WWII.

The logical conclusion from all of this? Why, it's obvious...

I hate WWII and despise the people who like it. Simple as that

Steve

[Melnibone]

Will somebody let me know the secret handshake.

[Moon]

One of the reasons why there is no official mod repository for CMSF is because we are in transition between servers/websites. Actually we do have plans to open an official mod/scenario repository once the new website and servers are fully functional and up to the task. The preparations for this have already begun in fact.

There will be many new features that the new website will offer, including an all new forum. Personally, I am looking forward A LOT to some of those new features. For example, the forum has an "ignore" setting for other users. Their posts are then automatically blanked out. That will be cool.

Martin

[ January 11, 2008, 09:05 AM: Message edited by: Moon ]

[Paper Tiger]

In that very same post, GreenAsJade continues:

"So there's no point in being shirty about BTS's sad attitude... they make a good game, and that's their job. If you like making stuff for the community then get pleasure from there by all means, but don't expect thanks from BTS. BTS will come down on you for making silly whinges whether you are CoG, GJK, Dorosh or Seanachai."

[Melnibone]

Originally posted by Moon:

For example, the forum has an "ignore" setting for other users. Their posts are then automatically blanked out. That will be cool.

Hallelujah! I love you guys.

[c3k]

Steve,

So NOW we know!! This explains everything: "I hate WWII and despise the people who like it."

Why, this quote needs to go out over the internet! Context be damned!

Thin-skinned people or those with delicate egos will always search for reasons to take umbrage.

Thanks for keeping us in the loop - even if we don't like the shape, size, curvature, or orientation of the loop.

Regards,

Ken

[gautrek]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

From our perspective we figured the community invo

1. The subject matter. There is a cult like worshiping of WWII vehicles, uniforms, and just about everything else. The ones who "worshiped" WWII the most are likely to be the most active doing things like mods and scenarios. They are also the ones least likely to have an interest in playing CM:SF. Modern combat doesn't have "cult status" and therefore fewer people are inherently interested in spending all their free time on one game.

Steve

Thats why Call of Duty 4 is doing so piss poor at the moment.Is it?

Oh no wait a minute its selling millions of units world wide.

I got this for my lad on his new X box and am thinking of buying it for my PC.Yet i'm one who you say worships WWII stuff.

[Sivodsi]

its selling millions of units world wide

Apples and oranges: you can't compare FPSs with strategy/tactical thinking games. FPSs appeal to different audiences altogether for different reasons.

[Durruti]

Interesting how the debate has brought out the "WW2 vs modern" thing again.

Having little personal interest in games based on the modern middle-east conflict (real or hypothetical) I haven't bought CM:SF and have also refrained from commenting so far (apart from maybe one post stating this position a while back) simply because it's up to Battlefront to decide what subjects they want to cover (and presumably will have a market for).

There are certainly plenty of WW2 games of all genres out there (FPS, arcade/RTS, wargames, sims etc.) but I do find it odd that Steve's "point 1" seems to suggest modern combat (especially in the middle east) doesn't have a huge following. Perhaps it's just a biased mis-perception on my part but the game-store shelves seem to heaving with "modern warfare" titles - BF2, COD4: Modern Warfare, Armed Assault, Delta Force, War On Terror, Joint Task Force, CC: The Road to Baghdad, CC: Modern Tactics, Joint Operations etc... Then there are mods like Insurgency for HL2.

I could say I don't like "middle east" game scenarios because it's all a bit too "close to the bone" with current events and can come across as xenophobic propaganda. Then again there are some people who say all historical wargaming is "bad taste" so that might be hypocritical of me.

Anyway it seems to me both WW2 and "modern" are saturated markets. So just when is "Combat Mission: Spanish Civil War" coming out??

[Chelco]

Originally posted by gautrek:

Thats why Call of Duty 4 is doing so piss poor at the moment.Is it?

Oh no wait a minute its selling millions of units world wide.

I got this for my lad on his new X box and am thinking of buying it for my PC.Yet i'm one who you say worships WWII stuff. [/QB]

Previous versions of CoD (the WWII ones) outsold CMx1 by millions too.

[Omenowl]

I think I remember Steve saying he got burned out on WW2 and was looking forward to CMSF for a change of pace. I don't blame him at all. Personally, CMSF in principle is exactly what I wanted. The bugs and a few things such as weird quick battles and lack of RT multiplayer are things I hope are resolved, but I figure later patches will improve on this.

The fact is I have not found a single tactical game that matches realism at the level CMSF does. It is not perfect, but if I want perfection I would never have a game to play. There are plenty of modern FPS Ghost recon, Call of Duty, etc. However, I have not found any realistic tactical levels games.

I was disappointed when the game came out, but I viewed it more as a game released too early rather than inherently flawed. The things that bug me the most are refresh rates and menus (bailout is keyed with hunt...). I can fix the menus and I hope the refresh rates will be addressed.

[GSX]

Originally posted by gautrek:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

From our perspective we figured the community invo

1. The subject matter. There is a cult like worshiping of WWII vehicles, uniforms, and just about everything else. The ones who "worshiped" WWII the most are likely to be the most active doing things like mods and scenarios. They are also the ones least likely to have an interest in playing CM:SF. Modern combat doesn't have "cult status" and therefore fewer people are inherently interested in spending all their free time on one game.

Steve

Thats why Call of Duty 4 is doing so piss poor at the moment.Is it?

Oh no wait a minute its selling millions of units world wide.

I got this for my lad on his new X box and am thinking of buying it for my PC.Yet i'm one who you say worships WWII stuff. </font>

[Zulu]

"I will spend the next 2 on WWII"

Woohoo. Steve said CM2WWII is underway and we will have it within 2 years.

When can I put in my pre-order?

[Battlefront.com]

Durruti,

There are certainly plenty of WW2 games of all genres out there (FPS, arcade/RTS, wargames, sims etc.) but I do find it odd that Steve's "point 1" seems to suggest modern combat (especially in the middle east) doesn't have a huge following. Perhaps it's just a biased mis-perception on my part but the game-store shelves seem to heaving with "modern warfare" titles - BF2, COD4: Modern Warfare, Armed Assault, Delta Force, War On Terror, Joint Task Force, CC: The Road to Baghdad, CC: Modern Tactics, Joint Operations etc... Then there are mods like Insurgency for HL2.

FPS games are in a league of their own. Those games are about killing each other, the setting is almost irrelevant. All that is needed is a lot of cool graphics, variety of weapons, interesting tweaks to the well worn genre, etc. and the game will sell like hotcakes. Oh, and having millions of Dollars in advertising and marketing muscle doesn't hurt either So I'd say those games are popular simply because they are good FPS games, not because of the subject matter EXCEPT!!!

The one exception is for the over-reactive guys that want to "kill those flipp'n terrorists!". They're likely to get their jollies in an FPS game, not in something that requires thought and patience, as well as an entirely different skill set. Which leads me to GSX's question:

Who thought that just because guys liked ww2 wargames they wouldnt like a modern game?

Look back when we made the announcement that CMx2's first game was to be Modern, then look at the years of droning on and on about how boring it would be, not fun, unchallenging, lopsided, stupid, etc. Tons of threads about this stuff. Inevitably, those posters also tried to convince us of the inherent superiority of the WW2 setting.

Again, I don't want to make this into an "us vs. them" thing since I like both and so do many other people. What I am saying is that it's pretty clear that SOME WW2 people do not like modern and some modern (incidentally) have expressed they are sick and tired of WW2. People that fit into these mindsets obviously are going to have less desire to purchase and/or enjoy a game that isn't what they want it to be.

BTW, there is NOTHING WRONG with not liking Modern or not liking WW2.

Steve

[Thomm]

By the way, Korea would be almost WW II and still something different!

Best regards,

Thomm

[GSX]

Look back when we made the announcement that CMx2's first game was to be Modern, then look at the years of droning on and on about how boring it would be, not fun, unchallenging, lopsided, stupid, etc. Tons of threads about this stuff. Inevitably, those posters also tried to convince us of the inherent superiority of the WW2 setting.

I suppose one could argue that this was bound to happen on a CM-1 forum which was dedicated to ww2 games and populated by gamers who liked the genre. After all for many years they were your core customer.

Possibly it may have been a better idea to start a whole new forum from the conception of CMSF, have stated your intent to make it primarily RTS and made it available to those that had no primary interest in ww2.

A sort of bottom up approach?

[Cpl Steiner]

To add to the debate:

I've yet to meet a true wargamer who is only interested in one period, be it modern, WWII, Napoleonic, or whatever. Most wargamers have a deep interest in both history and military technology. In my wargaming career I've played games set in WWII, Napoleonic Europe, the Middle Ages, Hypothetical Future War, and even a few Sci-fi efforts. All periods, past, present and future, have their merits.

I personally was pleased at the choice of a modern Middle East setting for CM:SF. Just because there are some things of a similar nature taking place right now in Iraq doesn't stop me from having some fun commanding a virtual modern army.

[dynaman200]

> I've yet to meet a true wargamer who is only interested in one period, be it modern, WWII, Napoleonic, or whatever

Lots of ASL players are not only locked into WWII, they are locked into ASL. (lots are not as well of course)

[gautrek]

Originally posted by Sivodsi:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> its selling millions of units world wide

Apples and oranges: you can't compare FPSs with strategy/tactical thinking games. FPSs appeal to different audiences altogether for different reasons. </font>

[Melnibone]

Originally posted by gautrek:

So the different audiences matter not one bit.

Of course they matter. COD 1&2 would have sold bundles more than CMX1 - because of the audience. A million copies of Kane & Lynch have been sold - despite mediocre reviews - because of the audience.