Could this game be Crap?

[hoolaman]

Kind of just playing Devils advocate here, but since this game is literally weeks away from release, I thought I would throw my thoughts out there.

My impressions, based on all of the small snippets released so far:

* The maps seem very very small

* The way the buildings are oriented and the flat terrain makes the city maps look as primitive as CMX1.

* The "Sky Box" horizon looks just as bad as in CMX1. How about some textures on the ground outside the map area.

* There will seemingly not be that many vehicles modelled.

* No parked cars?

* The draw Distance and colour saturation into the distance for the bushes and grass looks weird.

* If there is only arid terrain (which is literally all we have been shown) it will be very boring, and not even capable of modelling the terrain in half of Syria.

I am also concerned that BFC's last several releases did not go off without a hitch. Critical issues such as crashing and poor performance were not caught before release, as well as some serious game balance issues. (T72, ToW)

Is the Beta testing regime at BFC extensive enough to test the right number of hardware combinations? Are the Beta testers taking a critical enough look at gameplay? ToW seems to have some really glaring gameplay and hardware issues that have to be fixed before the game goes from OK to Great.

Anyway, I realize the game is not out and that CMX2 engine is something of a work in progress, but I just wanted to provoke some discussion because I want this game to be a success.

[panzermartin]

Draw distance and color saturation problems are due to the lack of "haze" effect that would add depth and smooth the map edges I think. It is on the 99% 3d games, it could be in CMSF too...maybe it is planned for these last weeks? I remember how much better cm maps looked when in foggy weather. Atmospheric and most believable.

Parked cars can be placed, as civilian vehicles are included and maps can be pretty larger than what you see.

[panzermartin]

Most maps I've seen on the sreenshots are not impressive indeed, some are dead flat and uninteresting but the editor looks incredibly flexible and a talented designer will do wonders.

[pad152]

Most maps I've seen on the sreenshots are not impressive indeed, some are dead flat

It's the desert, duh!

I do wonder if the game will suffer from the limited number of units types! We sure were spoilled with all of the different units types in the CM1 games.

I do hope LOS/LOF work a hell of alot better than TOW.

[Cpl Steiner]

No! :mad:

Seriously, a lot of the issues referred to as "crappy" are in the graphics department. Cast your minds back to CM:BO's graphics and then ask yourself if you thought CM:BO was a crap game? The moment I saw the demo for CM:BO I was blown away, not because the graphics were great but because for the first time ever I had a genuine ground combat simulator on my PC. I thoroughly expect to be blown away by CM:SF too. Like the "Wargamer" reviewer said, minor issues like clipping pale into insignificance against the sheer awesomeness of the game's potential as a modern combat simulator.

[ChrisND]

Originally posted by pad152:

Well I don't think they can help this. Modern armies generally don't have a zillion different models of combat vehicles. And even the different models are often differences a gamer wouldn't notice.

[MikeyD]

Awh c'mon guys.

We're getting 1:1 represented company (or perhaps larger) scale combat with great piles of spot-on accurate modern equipment; running in realtime as an option; with individually tracked bullet trajectories; with an assymetric warfare option including Jihadis and IEDs; with a full game editor with Red-on-Red/Blue-on-Blue promised... and we're really afraid the game's going to be 'crap' because the ground on a couple Beta screenshots wasn't bumpy enough? :eek:

Up in the game announcement They mentioned the 'basic training' campaign map would accurately reproduce an actual major Army training area. If we can't have fun playing that then we're simply inacapable of having fun.

[Speedy]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

Red-on-Red/Blue-on-Blue promised...

Yeah I can't wait for the second coming of the Confederacy.

[NoxSpartana]

Originally posted by Speedy:

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

Red-on-Red/Blue-on-Blue promised...

Yeah I can't wait for the second coming of the Confederacy. </font>

[ChrisND]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

Awh c'mon guys.

We're getting 1:1 represented company (or perhaps larger) scale combat with great piles of spot-on accurate modern equipment; running in realtime as an option; with individually tracked bullet trajectories; with an assymetric warfare option including Jihadis and IEDs; with a full game editor with Red-on-Red/Blue-on-Blue promised... and we're really afraid the game's going to be 'crap' because the ground on a couple Beta screenshots wasn't bumpy enough? :eek:

Up in the game announcement They mentioned the 'basic training' campaign map would accurately reproduce an actual major Army training area. If we can't have fun playing that then we're simply inacapable of having fun.

BUT BUT BUT it isn't World War Two ETO! It HAS to suck!!!! :eek:

[Kineas]

My greatest concern is that the design and the UI is biased towards the realtime mode too much.

[panzermartin]

Originally posted by pad152:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> Most maps I've seen on the sreenshots are not impressive indeed, some are dead flat

It's the desert, duh</font>

[gibsonm]

I suspect BTS / BFC didn't have complete control over T-72 or ToW (they are basically other people's products being bought up to BTS/BFC standard).

I'm pretty sure that CM:SF being a 100% BTS/BFC creation will fit the bill.

[Klavan]

I sincerely preferred a solid gameplay+editor system instead of perfect polish graphics and fancy stuffs like working AN/PEQ2...... although I recognize the BFC's need to attract a more "generic" category of players who are always looking for stunning graphics stuffs.

By lookig at the editor's screenshots and info (not to mention the eventual expansion packs) released by now I really think this game have a lot of potential in terms of longevity and flexibility, which are usually two very important conditions that needs to be met for a game to gain success on the market.

In addiction to this, I'm sure thare are plenty of very skilled map and mission makers around here who will help keeping this game alive and to survive and eventually grown even more after it's release.

[unsobill]

defenetely TOW was made by 1c and they take GREAT pride in working with Battlefront - they consider them aces in realism expertease - as for T-72 was made by also russian brigade IDDK/Crazy House and also an extraordianry dearfull ambition project - most of Battlefront projects have extremely ambitios and way ahead of its time - yes its not EA or other pop studio that have 150 projects over a month and millions of brainwashed minions dying to go home from work a.s.a.p ;D so ofcourse it could be CRAP to someone or even some minorities but, just like any other ambitios project, its also desired by small but strong "realismfobing" community and they'll be happy with what they'll be getting....

[Steiner14]

IMO a visual distance effect (haze) is very important to create a feeling of depth on the 2d screen. Therefore fog in CM doesn't only look better, it simply feels better with a much higher immersion effect.

Probably this is the main reason, why i didn't find the screenshots not that extremely exciting so far.

Maybe Battlefront decided to switch it off for the demo-pics and keep it back as a nice surprise for later?

[allenj7]

Based off the beta I previewed:

1. The maps can be huge...kilometers across in either direction. They just haven't released any of them to the press. I edited one that was a good 2 km x 2 km (I don't have the patience for anything larger).

3. A realistic number of vehicles: tanks of multiple types for each side, jeeps, APCs, etc. The texutures for each just aren't done yet so they might look the same in screenshots (placeholders).

4. You can put in parked cars, plus destroyed or disabled vehicles. You can even put an empty humvee in a location and have an infantry squad try to reach it to drive out of the map. Hey, that gives me a scenario idea.

5. There are four grass textures and lots of trees, so foresty areas are possible. Again, they just haven't released maps in these areas yet. But I've edited some

[panzermartin]

This is most enlightening, thanks! CMSF is going to rock, no doubt about it.

Minor things I'll be propably missing :

Graphics:

-distance haze(?)

-less blocky looking houses and less perfectly orientated rows of them(a 0/45 degrees orienation game engine limit).

-characteristic building types, like garages, small shops, etc.

-a couple more civilian vehicles (buses/trucks)

-multiple skins per vehicle(?)

- as for effects I cant tell much from beta screens, only that fires look a bit CMBOish still.

Gameplay:

Well its always close to perfect but I'd still miss AA guns, technicals (I think they were ruled out) mortars for the red side, etc. No big deal anyway, just a few more things to toy around

To be honest, I wasnt expecting half of the things already included, like the civilian vehicles, the VIEDs, spies, 100 different flavor objects(!), the impressive vehicle and soldier details and animation, deformable terrain etc...huge work. For me, it is already mission accomplished!

[allenj7]

There is distance haze...you can set the weather to clear, hazy, something in the middle, and overcast.

Technicals are in there, at least in an older scenario. I distinctly remeber seeing a guy standing up in the back of a truck with a machine gun; I'm not at home to check to see if they are still in the editor, though.

[panzermartin]

Ahh thanks, it should be on on the screenshots too, they would definetely look better with it.

[Steiner14]

@allenj7

Are you sure? Recently released pics from gallery4 with overcast weather do not show any distance effect:

http://tinyurl.com/2j3k5h

[allenj7]

Overcast: no. Hazy: yes. The two are mutually exclusive.

[panzermartin]

Hmmm..I still can't understand why a slight haze isnt default on all environmental conditions.

[allenj7]

I think it may be, it's just that none of the scenarios that have screenshots for them are big (size wize) enough for it.

[Dirtweasle]

Originally posted by Hoolaman:

Could this game be Crap?

Yea it could, the chances are quite small though especially in comparison to the chances of it being a decent product.