So, who's disappointed?

[RSColonel_131st]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Having said that, we are VERY interested in including non-US forces in our games. That is one reason we came up with the Module concept. Instead of excluding them altogether and moving onto the next major title, we have built into our development strategy the ability to deliver "niche within niche" products for those who really want to them.

The "module" concept is a sound one, but then, your first words about that in the announcement were if I recall them correctly "we're likely to include the US Marines too". So that doesn't give the non-US interested players much to hope as it sounds as if our "non-US modules" may at best be the second or third item on a long development list.

Granted, no one knows yet how long it will take to develop and release a module but for me that sounded like "somewhere down the line, 8 to 12 months later in the far-away future, you may see non-US Material in the CM:SF game". Not like "Hey, we made this modular so the non-US players can still have their own forces".

And on top of that, if the "niche" modules really sell far less than the original game as you state in your post, there won't be a lot of other people around to PBEM/play online with as most of the market will just happily stick with the US Modules.

Like you said, you made the rational decision to design for the biggest market. But we don't have to like it, and I for one hope that 1C may just come trough with their Wartime Command in time which would give most international players a piece of their hardware from WW2. If it needs a russian developer to cover those areas, then so be it.

Right now (with the gaming market in general, not just BFC) it seems to me that Euro Customers end up getting the left-overs from the US Market, with the market basically treating us as second-grade customers. Yes, I'm a tad bit bitter about this.

[Shmavis]

Originally posted by Sergei:

Captain: Take off every 'ZOG'!!

Captain: You know what you doing.

Captain: Move 'ZOG'.

Captain: For great justice.

Huh?

[Andreas]

Originally posted by RSColonel_131st:

Right now (with the gaming market in general, not just BFC) it seems to me that Euro Customers end up getting the left-overs from the US Market, with the market basically treating us as second-grade customers. Yes, I'm a tad bit bitter about this.

Err, no. Only Euro customers who are not interested in simulating the most advanced major army in the world have a need to feel like that. Those who are interested in simulating modern warfare regardless of whether it is conducted by US, British, German, or South-Timbouktounese forces have nothing to complain about.

It is not a US/Euro issue, so let's not make it one.

All the best

Andreas

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by KwazyDog:

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

Can you really compare the early 6 wheel designs with the LAV family?

Michael after looking at 100's of photos of the different versions I can tell you from a 3D modelling perspective the 2 are very very similar! I was suprsied how close they were to be honest...I suspect that from a very basic perspective one is just a lenghtened version of the other. Cant say so from a technical perspective though

Dan </font>

[RSColonel_131st]

Originally posted by Steiner14:

The oposition in Europe against the US is big and in Germany it is HUGE.

i.e.: everyone i know is happy, that the US are bleeding that much in Iraq. Most people i know, have big respect for the Iraqi freedom fighters. All people i know were happy that hurricane Katrina hit the USA and not another country (me included).

Stick your head in the toilet and flush, will ya. I'm a proud Euro myself who disagreed with the current war in Iraq, but the ramble you wrote above sends my bull**** detector off the charts. No one here is happy if US Soldiers die or New Orleans (a beautiful city I very much wanted to visit next year) gets flooded over.

BFC, from a fellow Euro - sorry for those idiots.

[dangerousdave]

After getting over the initial disappointment because I'm a huge WWII fan, and looking at more of the info, I've decided I'm not disappointed. I trust these guys to make a kick ass game.

[ October 09, 2005, 08:19 AM: Message edited by: dangerousdave ]

[76mm]

That is one reason we came up with the Module concept. Instead of excluding them altogether and moving onto the next major title, we have built into our development strategy the ability to deliver "niche within niche" products for those who really want to them.

Battlefront has stated that for each game it will develop a couple of modules and then move on to new and fresh topics. Doesn't sound like "niche within niche" at all to me.

This has been my biggest concern about the module concept from day one--while CMx2 may give Battlefront the ability to develop niche products, it doesn't sound like they have the desire to do so (and the potentially limited commercial appeal of such niche products probably doesn't help). To get really niche products, I think they're going to have to rely on third party developers in some manner.

[RSColonel_131st]

Originally posted by Andreas:

It is not a US/Euro issue, so let's not make it one.

Andreas, with all respect, for me it is. After years of getting fed with US Hardware in all sims, RTS and other war-related games there comes a time when I want to see our own stuff feature prominently.

Of course, if your primary interest is a very good game about modern warfare, then CM:SF will do for you. But if your primary interest is to see the european hardware modelled for once, and modern warfare is only your second interest, then CM:SF doesn't do it - until the module comes out.

[Exploding Monkey]

Steiner14 IS A DICK!

Okay, now that I got that out of my system:

I almost had a Phantom Menace moment after I read the announcement. You know, waiting in gleeful anticipation for years only to have something that you cherished in it's original form crapped on by it's maker(s) in its 'new and improved' form? Anyone else feel them same?

Only, Lucas is an egotistical idiot and the Battlefront boys are a calculating bunch. Despite working on stuff that didn’t please everyone (and honestly, who really can accomplish such a task) they have always taken a step forward with their games. I didn’t care for the whole Afrika Corpse thing so I didn’t buy it, but others didn’t like the whole Russia thing either (which I loved).

But each time, Battlefront pushed on with their ideas, never apologizing or looking back, all the while accepting our ideas and criticisms as they did so. And each time they improved on what they had achieved before.

With that in mind, I’m going to postpone judgment until I get my little paws on a demo and can get a feel for this new game in its modern setting. I can say that I am disappointed with the story line a bit because I’m really tired of seeing my nation’s troops having it out with Arabs EVERY DANG NIGHT on the television, but I’ll still withhold my final judgment until the demo.

I do applaud BFC though for breaking out of the WWII mire. It’s the theater I’m mostly interested in just like all of you, but quite frankly, after six or seven years of it I was getting quite tired of it. A break is badly needed.

Game on...

[Wicky]

Last time I looked in Battlefront's featured products there isn't much in there that is solely dedicated to US forces.

If variety is what you like then we've spoilt rotten

Originally posted by RSColonel_131st:

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

It is not a US/Euro issue, so let's not make it one.

Andreas, with all respect, for me it is. After years of getting fed with US Hardware in all sims, RTS and other war-related games there comes a time when I want to see our own stuff feature prominently.

Of course, if your primary interest is a very good game about modern warfare, then CM:SF will do for you. But if your primary interest is to see the european hardware modelled for once, and modern warfare is only your second interest, then CM:SF doesn't do it - until the module comes out. </font>

[Sgt Steiner]

Hi all

Tad dissapointed about setting for new game and highly unlikely I will buy it but at least now we know.

Will just have to wait for WWII.............such is life

I have had years of pleasure and great value for money from CM series and will continue to do so.

I am actually more than ever dissappointed that CMAK was never upgraded to include the 'missing' AFVs etc

C'est la vie............

[flamingknives]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

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

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

Can you really compare the early 6 wheel designs with the LAV family?

Michael after looking at 100's of photos of the different versions I can tell you from a 3D modelling perspective the 2 are very very similar! I was suprsied how close they were to be honest...I suspect that from a very basic perspective one is just a lenghtened version of the other. Cant say so from a technical perspective though

Dan </font>

[tooz]

Well, after almost two years of waiting for the big news on CM2, I am disappointed in "Shlock Force" [sic]. I'll only buy the game if Junk2drive can mod it into a decent WW2 desert war game.

If the game sells well, then BFC made the right choice. If not, then the customer base has made a statement.

Back to the trilogy I go.

[Sergei]

Originally posted by Shmavis:

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

Captain: Take off every 'ZOG'!!

Captain: You know what you doing.

Captain: Move 'ZOG'.

Captain: For great justice.

Huh? </font>

[mitchberg]

Disappointed? Not at all. When I heard that BFG was rebuilding the system, I thought "wouldn't it be cool if they extended it to near-modern warfare, but kept WWII?"

However, I AM very interested in getting other nations - Brits, Germans...hell, all of NATO, the UN, the Burmese for all I care - modeled.

Get on it.

[Andrew H.]

Part I. The Setting.

In general, I'm disappointed by the choice of subject matter - I have never had much interest in modern warfare or in non-historical settings.

On reflection, however, and somewhat cautiously, I've come to think that maybe this game will be okay - and pretty much only because BFC is making it. I have also followed the pre-announcement discussions on these boards, and - while viewing them through a WWII prism - generally agreed with where the design was going.

I do have some qualms, although I suspect that many of them will be allayed once I see more screenshots and find out more about the game. I know that the screenshot made me subconsciously compare the game to OFP (which I don't own), simply because it was showing a FPS level of detail. I think that more screenshots showing whatever CMx2-speak is for the level 3 view will make the game seem less unfamiliar and less derivative of what is already out there. (Aside from CM, of course). (As a second aside, it occurs to me that I put off buying CMBO for a couple of months because, having seen similar level one screenshots, I assumed it was some sort of FPS as well. It's nice to see how my judgment has matured in the intervening 5 years. )

So if I think the game as CMx1 except with my squads having modern assault rifles and support vehicles, it starts to seem, actually, intriguing.

II. The Scope

A. Modules

I'm very hopeful about the smaller scope and module system. After buying a CMx1 game, I would have happily paid BFC $25+ every 6 months or so if they could have brought out additional modules to freshen the game (paratroopers that actually fall from the sky as reinforcements W00T!) or add additional units. As comprehensive as CMx1 is, it's important to remember that it's still not really complete - there's no pre-Barbarossa fighting, for example, nor has CMBO been brought up to the level of CMBB. I think that a module system would have increased the chances of that happening substantially.

It is true that a module-style system will cost more, and also that I'm not perhaps as price sensitive as some other people. On the other hand, even when I was in college I used up way too much of my disposable income buying SL modules, several of which barely played - I don't think I played Hollow Legions at all, and I only played one scenario in Red Barricades. They were pretty to look at, though.... (Aside from which, I'm sure I'll spend way more to upgrade my computer than I'll ever spend on the game).

Obviously, the module concept could be misused by bringing out modules that added little extra value. But given BFC's value-for-money track record, though, that is the least of my concern.

B. Combat

I've always thought that CM was strongest and most realistic as an infantry game. But I, like most WWII gamers, I suspect, really like tanks. Which meant that a lot of my CM battles devolved into a primary tank battle with a secondary infantry battle...but usually the side than won the tank battle was then free to safely unleash the tanks on the infantry. While scenarios could largely contain this danger, and of course picking infantry only was always an option, the primary tank/secondary infantry fights were, I think, all too common.

I think that this will be quite different in SF, and, while having vehicles, they will play a different role than they did in CM.

I am also looking forward to the asymetrical forces because I like games where you have to play each side differently. You did get some of this in CM if you played, say, crack germans vs. green russians.

III. Community

I do hope that the new setting and module system do not fragment the CM community.

IV. Conclusion

Right now, I'm inclined to pre-order. While I am quite disappointed that it will be years before the WWII game I was waiting for comes out (and I think that this might be the root of much disappointment on the forum), I am at least optimistic that I will have an interesting game to play in the interim.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by tooz:

I'll only buy the game if Junk2drive can mod it into a decent WW2 desert war game.

Now THAT tickles me! Can't wait to see it.

Hmmm....sort of the opposite of the thread running now where modern equipment is compared to 1944-45 stuff.

Humvee becomes M3 halftrack?

I don't think anyone would seriously bother....would they? Even the weapons are in 3D now...

[Gromit]

Disappointed?- meh... only slightly.

WW2 might have been nice, but after the virtual decade of effort Steve, Charles and the gang have given us, they deserve the benefit of the doubt. Steve's points are good ones, particularly about developing 2 games at once if not doing the modern one first. I'll play the demo when it comes out to see how the new engine feels and then look forward to the second release, knowing the lessons from CM:SF will greatly benefit the WW2 title.

Besides guys; there are going to be a lot of interesting titles released for PCs in the next year, and that doesn't even scratch what new console stuff is coming down the pike.

Never hurts to broaden your horizons guys!

[Exploding Monkey]

True dat Gromit.

[phil102]

I got interested in WW2, particularly the eastern front, by reading a few books on it. Before I starting reading about it the only thing I knew about WW2 was what I saw in the movies. 'A Bridge too Far', 'The Dambusters' etc etc. All Hollywood bull****.

I never realised that the bloodiest, most brutal and most protracted fighting of WW2 took place in the east. As my interest developed I thought it would be a good idea if a game existied that was historically accurate and went some way to simulating actual events. I bought CMBB and it blew me away. Ive been addicted ever since. My only regret is that i dont have enough spare time to play it more.

When the announcement came out about CMSF I was sorely disappointed for many reasons. I started playing CMx1 because of my interest in WW2, not the other way around. Like the vast majority of people in this country I'm strongly opposed to the US invasion and occupation of Iraq and US policies in the middle east. Basing CMSF in Syria in 2007 is, in my opinion, a way of basing the game on what is currently going on in Iraq without actually having to say so. Actually basing the game in Iraq would probably not be acceptable so BFI choose to base it on the next best thing, Syria. I would find it objectionable to play a game based on events which simulate very very closely the events currently going on in Iraq.

The game is aimed at a wider market that the current CMx1. Good for BFI. They need to make money like all companies.

I for 1 wont buy it. I look forward to the WW2 version when ever it comes out.

[Guest BigAlMoho]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

If CMx1 was a major improvement over ASL, just think of what CMx2 could be for XCOM

Steve

I know I am not supposed to post until the demo comes out but I couldn't resist:

Yes, CMx1 was a very major improvement over ASL, but it fell WAY short in terms of scope... and so, due to that failure, we will probably never see a game system that lives up to the standard that ASL set...

[Ryan Crierie]

My only disappointment is the name picked; hopefully before release, they'll come up with a better title;

but for now, Shock Force will have to do as an interim standin.

[Andrew H.]

Originally posted by Ryan Crierie:

My only disappointment is the name picked; hopefully before release, they'll come up with a better title;

but for now, Shock Force will have to do as an interim standin.

"Syrian Freedom"

[jim crowley]

Disappointed; massively.

Surprised: not in the least.

To look forward to: a very narrow slice of WW2 in maybe two years time.

Mood:

[Ales Dvorak]

Originally posted by Andreas:

There's always CMBB and CMAK.