Not so good "first impression"

[SgtMuhammed]

Originally posted by jogr:

sgtgoody - rune:

WTF is the problem? Like I said many times before: I prefer being able to SKIP TIME during the action phase! Is it possible with the new We-Go method? Is it? NO I didn't think so! So yes I prefer having the blue bar CMx1 style as it's MUCH faster and I can skip those pesky moments without action. I have no interest in skipping time during a "replay" when I had to watch the same 60sek action less phase already! Last time I'm going to mention this.

You can't skip time during the action phase. You couldn't in CMx1 you can't in CMx2. If choose not to see this then the problem is with you. So what you are saying is that you knew that nothing was going to happen and so you could skip the replay with the old system and make things go faster? Most of us couldn't read that much into the progress bar. Or do you only play scenarios that you create so that you know when everything is going to happen.

[Cid250]

Performance shouldn't be the main complaint about this game. I have an 3 years old Nvidia 5700, and the game works nicely on WindowsXP.

The main complaint should be about gameplay... this game is far worse than CMBB or CMAK. The orders/waypoint system is worse, the realism about the time needed to proceed instantaneously with orders is worse, all the work done to make this game playable in real time, like the bad TAC-AI is worse.

Definitively, we should start to buy in mass a second copy of the CMBB & CMAK... because they are far better products that this new CMSF in almost every single aspect. CMSF is far from a wargame due to the way that you proceed with orders, morale, etc... and the bad response of the TAC-AI.

CMSF will be popular in the RealTime market, but it has not any improvement over CMBB or CMAK... so, the players that loved that, will find CMSF very unpleasant.

[Xipe66]

BF just needs to take care of some of the babysitting you have to do in order to make RT truly viable (order interface, TAC AI and pathfinding, iconic info queues when certain events take place, etc).

And no, it's not going to score with the WH40k/Company of Heroes/Warcraft III crowd. CMSF in RT is not a classic RTS by any leaps or bounds (although it could learn a few things from the latest RTS installations).

It does feel unfinished though, but it will be way better than CMx1 once it gets polished.

Until bugs are fixed and reasonable requests are filled you either adapt or don't - from my standpoint the gameplay is already more fun than CMx1, eventhough I have to work around alot of clunky interfaces and bugs. But then, to some extent that was true even in the finished and patched version of CMAK.

I've been uncharacteristically fanboyish these past 48 hours, but really, I'm having a blast playing the game and making my scenarios.

[JOGR]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Jogr,

The mouse based camera controls take some time to get used to, that is very true. Almost all of our Beta testers hated it at first, but soon they stopped fighting it and found it was superior to the way they thought it should work. Then they told us to not change it

We are still dedicated to having a great single player experience. This is a tough job for a game this complex. It was hard enough for CMx1, but now... sooooooo much more difficult. We will continually improve things as we go along. We had to do that for CMx1 games too.

That is the message I want everybody to remember. We support our games for YEARS, other developers only support for a few months or weeks. Some never support theirs

Steve

True, and that is why I'm glad I bought SF despite my problems with it.

Some 3D-games got amazing graphics and a decent war theme but CM is a true wargame at heart that just happens to have 3D graphics. This is the concept I fell in love with in the Good Ol' Days when I first discovered CMx1. There was simply no competition. One can only hope SF will grow into a classic just like the other CM titles.

[Battlefront.com]

Cid250,

CMSF is far from a wargame due to the way that you proceed with orders, morale, etc... and the bad response of the TAC-AI.

I'm sorry you don't like the new presentation. You are entitled to your opinion and will not try to get you to change it. I will, however, point out that in your rush to point out the negative you have overextended your opinion into factually flawed argumentation. CMx2 has more detailed "wargame" features than anything else out there, including CMx1 series. I know, because I put that stuff into both (some other guys helped too, but their names escape me at the moment ). The stuff that was abstracted or absent in CMx1 is almost all there now in far more fidelity in CMx2. None of the simulation aspects of CMx1 are missing.

Sure, you don't like the packaging of that information. Again, I won't argue there. But to say CM:SF is somehow an RTS game and not a wargame is quite wrong in the factual sense.

If we were desigining CM:SF to be RTS game, we completely screwed that one up. It's a terrible RTS game. No unit factories or resources to gather, nor healthbars. Terrible

Steve

[Hev]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

That is the message I want everybody to remember. We support our games for YEARS, other developers only support for a few months or weeks. Some never support theirs

Steve

And this we love you for

[Janster]

Cid250, I'm sure I've seen you on the WW2 online forums

Remember we had that discussion about rifle accuracy hehe

Glad to see your a CM fan as myself..altough this Shock Force is gonna be shelved for now, and I'll see what patches can do with it.

Thanks

Janster

[PLM2]

This game feels almost exactly like Squad assault. The lethality is really high, only thing is that in Squad assault squads would run away after so much pressure. I'm not sure if I just havnt created enough pressure, but every unit i've used or came into contact with has not caved even after losing all but one.

I really miss the way units would flee under pressure

[Thomm]

Haven't played my download yet, but the remarks on lack of loss of moral in CM:SF also made me think of Squad Assault, where you have the opposite situation: proper "moral management" is crucial in SA!

Best regards,

Thomm

[Taras Bulba]

Originally posted by Normal Dude:

I have almost the same rig as you, except I have XP and not Vista. My game runs awesome.

+1

[Thomm]

On the other hand, the way units flee to the edge of the map in Squad Assault is not entirely satisfactory either!

Maybe BFC wanted to avoid such behavior altogether?

Best regards,

Thomm

[Sirocco]

I have mixed feelings about the game, and I'm not sure why. I didn't like the modern setting when it was announced, and perhaps part of the problem for me is the lethality of modern weapons, and the visibility of opponents. You can't beat the subtlety of WW2. The LOD, pathfinding, and the UI also contribute. The latter can be corrected, but the former? I do wonder whether when those issues are fixed that the subtleties of modern combat might come through more, or at least be more noticeable.

[GSX]

Well I always said I'd pass judgement once I'd played the demo.

I have just played the demo......

The AI, isnt very good.

For the size of the map the engagement ranges are not realistic.

The control system is dire, not intuitive at all and seems clunky and a step back, not forwards.

The Syrians have no chance (Ive only played the demo).

The graphics, while OK arent anything special when compared to other games of a similar genre (I'm including Warhammer here as this game has the same sort of feel to it). My squad went to cross a wall and ended up walking through it then jumping just after they climbed it. When not zoomed in the graphics are no better than CMx1, my opinion.

For a brand new spanking, lets forget the old game, move on and stop crying about something thats much better game. Why is the US soldiers speech exactly the same as CMBO, a Ten year old game? In fact the whole sound package is very poor.

The camera controls are worse that TOW. Its not a factor of getting used to them as I play other games that use the same system, only better, I spent more time orientating the camera than I did fighting the enemy. Its great that you finally got round to using the Mouse, but its clear that the control is way too sensitive. Perhaps the option to tweak it would be good.

Is it meant to be played H2H or only against the AI in a campaign mode?

Longevity? Right now I'm not sure it has any. I may buy it, but only in about 2 months when it is in the bargain bin at the local PC store.

I've tried to think of some positives, but right now, compared to the rest of the RTS games out there I dont think it makes an impact. I also cant see what a Marine Module could possibly bring to it as the graphics would be the same.

I hate to feel this way about a company that has brought me so many hours of gaming pleasure but I only have the Demo to go on.

Cheers

[acrashb]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

I remember Rune made a scearnio for CMBO that took 10-15 minutes per turn to calculate and the framerate was single numbers.

The point is that that scenario in CM:SF would run poorly because the 10 minutes previously used to calculate turn results would have to be shoe-horned into 1 minute of real-time, even in "wego" mode, leaving inadequate time for tacai, pathing, etc.

So either the scenarios are kept really small or the blue bar comes back.

[Runyan99]

And I keep reminding the Blue Bar fanatics that they have no reason to believe that the game 'skips' routines for pathfinding, tacai, etc, which is what you are implying when you say 'leaving inadequate time for', when processor power gets maxed out. Someone has already said that time slows down on a low end machine.

The only legitimate arguement then for a blue bar is that it would make the game turns play smoother on low end machines. It wouldn't improve pathfinding.

Are you making a performance argument for low end systems and big scenarios?

[ August 03, 2007, 11:33 AM: Message edited by: Runyan99 ]

[MarkEzra]

Originally posted by sgtgoody (esq):

[/qb]

You can't skip time during the action phase. You couldn't in CMx1 you can't in CMx2. If choose not to see this then the problem is with you. So what you are saying is that you knew that nothing was going to happen and so you could skip the replay with the old system and make things go faster? Most of us couldn't read that much into the progress bar. Or do you only play scenarios that you create so that you know when everything is going to happen. [/QB]

[ng cavscout]

Originally posted by GSX:

Well I always said I'd pass judgement once I'd played the demo.

I have just played the demo......

The AI, isnt very good.

For the size of the map the engagement ranges are not realistic.

The control system is dire, not intuitive at all and seems clunky and a step back, not forwards.

The Syrians have no chance (Ive only played the demo).

The graphics, while OK arent anything special when compared to other games of a similar genre (I'm including Warhammer here as this game has the same sort of feel to it). My squad went to cross a wall and ended up walking through it then jumping just after they climbed it. When not zoomed in the graphics are no better than CMx1, my opinion.

For a brand new spanking, lets forget the old game, move on and stop crying about something thats much better game. Why is the US soldiers speech exactly the same as CMBO, a Ten year old game? In fact the whole sound package is very poor.

The camera controls are worse that TOW. Its not a factor of getting used to them as I play other games that use the same system, only better, I spent more time orientating the camera than I did fighting the enemy. Its great that you finally got round to using the Mouse, but its clear that the control is way too sensitive. Perhaps the option to tweak it would be good.

Is it meant to be played H2H or only against the AI in a campaign mode?

Longevity? Right now I'm not sure it has any. I may buy it, but only in about 2 months when it is in the bargain bin at the local PC store.

I've tried to think of some positives, but right now, compared to the rest of the RTS games out there I dont think it makes an impact. I also cant see what a Marine Module could possibly bring to it as the graphics would be the same.

I hate to feel this way about a company that has brought me so many hours of gaming pleasure but I only have the Demo to go on.

Cheers

I have also played the demo, and a few hours of the preview in Chicago. I disliked alot of the features at first, such as the new orders system, and I think it still needs refining, such as hot keys that do commands no matter what tab is selected. For example, "T" being target even if the movement tab is selected. I also am looking forward to the tool tips, and for my ATGM teams to stop running about when they do not have orders to do so. I also do not yet enjoy playing in real time, and have only done it once, but I missed too much of the action, and now I play the we-go version exclusively.

I find that I am enjoying the game more the more I play it. I like the increased detail, and the smaller scale. I like the modern weapons, and the setting is not my first choice, but it is growing on me.

But, as for the Syrians having no chance. I have won the demo scenario, smashing steel, twice as the Syrians, the last time without losing any tanks, just some BMPs. The Syrians are not doomed in every scenario.

If you have the retail version, and still hate it, I would be willing to take it off your hands for $20.00. Otherwise, I will have to wait a few weeks to buy it myself.