Jump to content

We spoiled brats, we great unwashed, we customers...


Recommended Posts

After giving some thought to the statements being issued by BFC akin to "CM1 had too many goodies, too long a playlife, and you had better get those idea out of your pointy little heads right now", I have decided I have two basic reactions to such rumblings.

The first is one of agreement and understanding. From the economic/time investment model, I can see where they are coming from. The idea of getting several small meals spread out rather than the whole enchilada at once has some appeal, even if it means chasing the moths out of my billfold more frequently.

The second is curiousity. How do they know that there won't be niche gamers who stick with one module and stay there? I never did buy anything but CM, as the Eastern Front and Afrika just didn't twirl my toes. Perhaps I'm one of the guys to blame for the whole module idea, as I was happy enough with CM not to be lured in to purchasing CMBB and CMAK.

I'm trying to relate this whole module idea to what games I have recently been interested in. I bought all the IL-2 progeny, but not any third party add-ons. Call of Duty got me to buy CoD United Offensive.

On the other hand, there are quite a few games that have had sequels and add-ons that have not gotten my consumer dollar vote. I liked Rome: Total War, but the upcoming Barbarian Invasions thingy doesn't seem like a must-have to me.

What has BFC convinced that the CMx2 series of releases will have that potato chip goodness that says "I betcha can't buy just one"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

You should of (should still) get CMBB, best of the bunch in my book - and I'm no eastfront fan myself. Those tank duels are awesome though.

In fact, my next poll* at TPG will be "Which is your favorite CM game?". I'm sure it will be CMBB, but not sure by what margin.

*can I say that word here? tongue.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bloodybucket,

I think they DO believe there are AND will be "niche players". That is part of the idea of CMx2. The way I understand it, CMx2 will not have modules just to extend the Combat Mission name and give it more life, BUT, to have something for everyone to play and enjoy their particular niche.

The whole CM "expirience" is a result of some guys who were interested in WW2 battles and wanted a good computer game that modeled WW2 battles on the company level in the ETO. Coniencidentally that is why you will never see the PTO as far as CMX1 goes. I think CMAK was even made because of popular demand.

In the case of CMBB there are those who loved to play the Finns against the Russians, or the Hungarians, Italians...what have you. With CMx2, instead of giving you the whole Eastern Front, you get a specific battle of Finnish/Russian front (on the compnay level) or a specific battle of the Hungarian/Russian front etc, etc. Ooooorrr, instead of all of Vietnam you get the Tet Offensive or the battle at Ia Drang valley...(to keep in the spirit of Steve's misdirection :D )

The modul aspect of CMx2 can be also be partially sumed up like this...The F/A-18E Superhornet is designed to be easily upgraded to accept new and better software/hardware for weapons systems that do not exist yet.

That might be a bit too much.

The point is "Forward thinking".

So yea, in the case of your enchilada metaphor...they will be taking small bites instead of REALLY, REALLY, REALLY,REALLY,REALLY ...... REALLY big ones.

So, in short, CMx2 will attempt to scratch everybody's itch over time and let the developers keep some of their hair...except Matt.

Did you read some of the post Aka-tom-w(?) reposted of Steve's bones about CMx2?

if you havent, you might want to check it out. It explains the philosohpy behind CMx2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people on this forum talk like CM was the be-all end-all of tactical wargames for the computer. It isn't. It's the best out there, but look at some of the major features

Modelling of offmap artillery sucks. Badly.

Engineering is practically non-existent; barbed wire is indestructable, there is no way to mousehole into buildings, removing mines is done not by special equipment but by satchel charges (WTF - but try doing that with wire and no dice;)

TOEs, especially for Allied troops in CMBO and CMAK, are farcical

Air support way over-modelled

Buildings far too simplified

Terrain tiles way too big, major types of terrain are not present (bocage being the biggie)

Graphics at least five years out of date

List goes on and on. Anyone who thinks they have a "perfect" representation of tactical combat in WW II (or a cutting edge piece of software, technically speaking) on their hard drive is fooling themselves. It's a fun game yes but - point being that I for one am glad CM is in evolution.

Microprose's M-1 Tank Platoon was fun in its day too (actually, it probably still is, if you can find a computer that will run it in DOS mode off of the 3.5 inch floppies). Imagine if we had never progressed beyond that, though. There'd be no community here, for one.

Anyone who thinks CMX2 is just a cash grab or rehash needs to have their head examined. The whole point of these games is to keep pushing the envelope outwards, towards

a) eye candy

B) fun game play

c) realistic ingame modelling of various factors

This may be tangential to the initial post, but I don't imagine it can all be said often enough here.

As for the actual question - what makes BFC think we can't buy just one? Probably some market research, but that's just a guess.

If the modules truly are fit-together in the same way ASL and its modules were - and Steve seems to intimate that it will be - I'll probably buy them all just to have them. I STILL buy ASL modules just to have the product in hand, and I haven't played ASL since high school (with the exception of a couple of rounds of VASL with GJK). I'll buy them all just for completeness' sake. The same way I buy the Special Editions of CM for the same reason (well, and to see my name in the manual)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

End all be all? Of course not. I think every rational person thinks many of the items listed fall into the category of not letting perfect prevent the acheiveable.

I think you are spot on regarding the expectations of evolution though. In an environment of continual improvements in hardware capabilities and advances in development skills, a desire to see more of the shortcuts, workarounds, and compromises properly realized is a given.

The longevity of a game or game system fully depends on the acceptance of limitations within a compensatory structure in that the game works despite its flaws. One would not expect to fire up M1 Tank Platoon and see photorealistic effects and infantry because at the time the hardware to economically portray it was a limitation.

Accepting it for it's excellence at the time is entirely different as you know from what it would be if it were just released. It's just the nature of things.

Now for this module system, I can see myself passing on a particular operation, pod, or whatever if it doesn't appeal to me. However, if the release brings new features, ESPECIALLY if they update previous iterations I'd be more likely to pick it up.

Of course this presents BFC with the problem. (This example is purely a fiction as it should be plain to everyone that I have not a single clue as to the ultimate presentation of the new game.)

Let's say the first module does a bunch of really cool stuff, but has no motorcycles. The second release adds more features, but it involves the Yugoslav campaign and I am not keen on it because I am a lunatic at the time. However it does add motorcycles and I am a fiend for this feature.

If BFC makes the features backtrack to the first module, I might wait until the next release to catch them all up to have motorcycles in the game I played before as a way of re-stoking my interest.

OTOH, simply adding enough unique new features and patching some improvements to the older modules might be enough to warrant purchase of the pod I wasn't keenly interested in originally. This might involve motorcycles playing a role in one mod but not another if they weren't historical for the simulation for example.

I dunno. (BTW, my verbosity today is the result of my anxiousness at hearing about a job offer so I am just passing some time thinking about anything else.)

BDH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good luck with the offer, Barrold. And your example of motorcycles is excellent. Likewise, if module 1 was Canadians in Normandy I would obviously pick it up - but if module 2 was Japanese vs. US Marines, I'd only be moderately interested - unless it included, say, LVTs which could be used by me with my module 1 stuff to recreate the Rhine crossing in 1945.

I do hope the modules all fit together in such a way.

Incidentally, I am wondering if the campaign/operation mode will be solo only? That thought occurred to me today while discussing the "ease" of adding a dynamic strategic layer to CM. I suggested such a thing would be easy given some C++ knowhow and the ability to dump data. It would be much easier to design for two players - writing an AI to make a one player campaign dynamic would be hugely difficult, and as Steve says correctly in another post, like writing an entirely seperate game.

For two players, though, I think would be far more "doable."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Mike

I can't help but think about Squad Leader when I think of a modular game. Each release added to the system as a whole while introducing a great deal of new content.

I can see where upgrading a board game by offering some new rules, counters, and mapboards is incredibly different than a computer game.

The need to scour existing code for every contingency and effect of a newly introduced feature is almost like having to recreate the game itself. Even an object oriented structure would require a great deal of this type of work.

Now if it was a considered part of the development plan to devote resources to the implementation of the additions into legacy modules, that's another matter. I'm not inclined to see where that would be a high priority for BFC (IMMO)as it is considerably more effort than patching errors.

This also applies to the campaign idea in that it would depend entirely on how much was output at the end of the scenario and how much input was then allowed.

For myself, it would have to be quite seamless as I have a low tolerance for clunkiness if the return is only marginally more entertaining than the standard operation provided. That's just me though.

BDH

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recall BFC saying, some time ago and on another topic, that a game industry rule of thumb is each subsequent game 'module' is usually expected to do about half the business of the preceeding one. Tombraider six (or whatever the last one was) didn't have quite the oomph of Tombraider 1.

If computer games can be equated to movie sequals I suspect a new 'module' would have the benefit of a core audiance and familiarization with the product, but it takes more advertising or word-of-mouth to convince people that the newest product is not going to be money wasted on more-of-the-same (CMBO players not buying CMBB). BFC's advantage is that the whisper campaign about CMx2 has given it an advance reputation for being the equivalent of "Godfather II" or the second Starwars of serious computer wargames. The lurking fear among a few out there - HIGHLY unlikely - is it'll turn out to be a "Star Wars Episode I" stinker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BloddyBucket,

This comment from RSColonel says it best...

Added modules should be comparativly cheap to produce, so if more people end up not buying, then it's not as large a problem as with a complete, expensive "mod" like CMAK.
We release more products with less effort per product. This spreads out our risk. Instead of piling all our work up for a single product, which may or may not sell, we spread out our risk by putting a more reasonable effort into the initial release and then much reduced effort into the Modules. The Modules will be priced accordingly to the effort and opportunity cost they entail. In other words, less than the full version.

CMBB took us nearly 2 years to produce, largely because of the content. We know we could have sold just as many copies if we had pretty much just focused on Germans, Finns, and Soviets. We could have left out all the other stuff without losing a single sale. I am sure of that. So we could have, in other words, got CMBB out in maybe 1.5 years instad of 2 for the same return on investment. If there was a demand for Italians and/or Hungarians, we could have put that out as a separate Module.

We also could have probably released the game in 1 year if we had focused the game only on 1943-1945 timeframe, releasing 1941 - 1942 as a Module. We might have lost a little bit of sales initially, but if someone wanted to play only 1941 they would have to purchase the full game anyway, so either they pay full price for both or bide their time until we have a discounted bundle package.

That sort of thing :D

Gunnersman is correct about this giving us the ability to continue, or even to expand, or support for niches within niches. We will never ever make another CMBB again. Never. It just isn't worth it for us, even though personally I will probably always think of it as my most proudest acheivement. However, the Module concept allows us to revisit the Eastern Front without needing to put a hole in our heads first :D We can do it the sensible way and then add Modules as customer demand and available resoures seems to warrent. Everybody wins.

The other thing is we can change settings MUCH more easier and with far less time invested. Therefore, we all get more and different games quicker without sacrificing quality. Which ties into Dorosh's point...

This system allows us to do incrimental improvements and still be sane and well fed. It also means that you won't have to see years go by without fundamental changes to the game system.

The new development strategy we have is a win win for everybody. It isn't about money per se, though obviously just compensation for our risk and effort is part of it too. As it must be until someone figures out a better system for doing business than Capitalism. Oh, like government subsidies that will pay us for things only a small group of people want :D

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

I STILL buy ASL modules just to have the product in hand, and I haven't played ASL since high school (with the exception of a couple of rounds of VASL with GJK). I'll buy them all just for completeness' sake. The same way I buy the Special Editions of CM for the same reason (well, and to see my name in the manual)

<font size="1">Please pardon the brief interruption</font>

Come back to the dark side, Michael! I just got ASLSK#2 Guns!, and also finally got a copy of CoB, RB, Partisan and other ASL goodies as a special gift from 86smopium. Come play them with me! VASL 5.0 was just released, looks great. Email me sometime and we'll hook up. Got some other games I wanted to show you as well (TME, FB). ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by GJK:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

I STILL buy ASL modules just to have the product in hand, and I haven't played ASL since high school (with the exception of a couple of rounds of VASL with GJK). I'll buy them all just for completeness' sake. The same way I buy the Special Editions of CM for the same reason (well, and to see my name in the manual)

<font size="1">Please pardon the brief interruption</font>

Come back to the dark side, Michael! I just got ASLSK#2 Guns!, and also finally got a copy of CoB, RB, Partisan and other ASL goodies as a special gift from 86smopium. Come play them with me! VASL 5.0 was just released, looks great. Email me sometime and we'll hook up. Got some other games I wanted to show you as well (TME, FB). ;) </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by GJK:

Please pardon the brief interruption</font>

Come back to the dark side, Michael! I just got ASLSK#2 Guns!, and also finally got a copy of CoB, RB, Partisan and other ASL goodies as a special gift from 86smopium. Come play them with me! VASL 5.0 was just released, looks great. Email me sometime and we'll hook up. Got some other games I wanted to show you as well (TME, FB). ;)

Ahhem you can add me to the list as I was hording.. er um holding teh RB and mapboards for smope.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Dogface:

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

Please pardon the brief interruption</font>

Come back to the dark side, Michael! I just got ASLSK#2 Guns!, and also finally got a copy of CoB, RB, Partisan and other ASL goodies as a special gift from 86smopium. Come play them with me! VASL 5.0 was just released, looks great. Email me sometime and we'll hook up. Got some other games I wanted to show you as well (TME, FB). ;)

Ahhem you can add me to the list as I was hording.. er um holding teh RB and mapboards for smope. </font>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

...now I have to go out and buy the second starter kit? :mad: Oh, well, gives me an excuse to go to the local game store. I hate walking out of there without having purchased something.

Get it and lets play some of those scenarios - something to do while we're passing the time.... ;)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Dogface:

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

Please pardon the brief interruption</font>

Come back to the dark side, Michael! I just got ASLSK#2 Guns!, and also finally got a copy of CoB, RB, Partisan and other ASL goodies as a special gift from 86smopium. Come play them with me! VASL 5.0 was just released, looks great. Email me sometime and we'll hook up. Got some other games I wanted to show you as well (TME, FB). <ahttp://community.battlefront.com/uploads/emoticons/default_wink.png' alt=';)'>

Ahhem you can add me to the list as I was hording.. er um holding teh RB and mapboards for smope. </font>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

snip snip snip

This system allows us to do incrimental improvements and still be sane and well fed. It also means that you won't have to see years go by without fundamental changes to the game system.

snip snip

Steve

Example: The initial release is Battle of the Bulge and it doesn't allow using captured guns.

Then module #2 comes out and it deals with partisians in the Pripet marsh. That module adds using captured weapons/ammo.

After that module #3 comes out and its 1940 France. And its two big features are way cool (but highly unusable) forts and small craft boats.

Here's the question: If I buy 1 and 3 will I be able to have the captured weapon feature? :confused:

Now if I bought all three and played a Battle of the Bulge could I use captured weapons there????

[ September 08, 2005, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: General Colt ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve,

Reading your most recent comment about modules, I was wondering what you have in mind as to gauge the interest of the community in specific modules/major releases. In other word, can you tell us anything regarding how you plan to go about deciding which era/theater deserve your time and attention... Polls ? Voodoo ? Chicken bones ? Or maybe plain BFC interests/lack of therein...

I ask because even though the new business strategy and CMx2 engine allows for more games faster, there is still a finite amount of work you can put into these games, hence some strategic choices here and there...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

What kind of diseased maniac puts GI:Anvil of Victory on the shelf right next to Squad Leader, but before Crescendo of Doom and Cross of Iron (and especially in that order? No wonder Steve won't shovel your driveway! :mad:

Hoist by mine own petard!

Hey, do I owe you a turn or vice versa?

-dale

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

What kind of diseased maniac puts GI:Anvil of Victory on the shelf right next to Squad Leader, but before Crescendo of Doom and Cross of Iron (and especially in that order? No wonder Steve won't shovel your driveway! :mad:

To really tick you off, he's got my copies of all those sitting around his house to boot.

Unless those are mine.

But I doubt it. That would imply that Dale cleaned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...