Why the secrecy?

[Directive#21]

Like many others on this forum, I am greatly disappointed. I own 2 copies of each CM game and have been casual participant of this forum since the summer of 2000.

Here is the thing:

I am certain that CMSF will be an excellent game in all respects, BFC’s reputation suggests nothing less. However, the subject matter simply does not interest me and I am upset that I have spent the past 2 years waiting for a game that isn’t coming. If BFC had been forthright about the subject matter for the 1st release of the new engine, I wouldn't feel this tremendous letdown. I'm not suggesting that BFC intentionally set out to mislead anyone, but there has been this great veil of secrecy surrounding the topic of CMX2 and it seems to have served no rational purpose, but rather has fueled the sense of letdown that is now being expressed on this forum.

Bottom line, (and I am expressing a personal opinion, which is after all, the point of this forum), I am not enthusiastic about the subject matter of CMSF and it will have to compete with other PC gaming options for my attention when it is released. If it had been a tactical WW2 game, I would have purchased it without regard or reservation.

The above aside, I wish CMSF all the success..

-Zach

[J Ruddy]

Wow, he followed mD's template to a T.

[Salkin]

And here it is :

http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=000395

//Salkin

[J Ruddy]

[Delayed double post?]

Things are getting strange around here...

[RMC]

Wow, he followed mD's template to a T.

[Darren J Pierson]

Someone can say that again.

[J Ruddy]

Wow, followed he T to template mD's a T.

[Battlefront.com]

The primary reasons we didn't mention the subject matter until now was because:

1. The WWII whiners would have thought that there was a chance to change our minds. If you think we've got a bunch of whining going on now... I shudder to think what it would have been like 2 years ago.

2. We had nothing to show for the game until recently. Imagine us saying that CMx2 is going to be very different, haven't yet told you how, and then told you it was going to be Modern... all with no details. People would have had nothing to do but look at CMAK, picture it with modern stuff, and then set about griping for 2 years about how bad it was going to be so why don't we just do WWII again.

3. From a competitive angle we think it is best to not always tell all the other game companies out there what we are doing until we feel they can't do anything about it.

So, while I do understand that those of you who aren't interested in Modern at all, no matter how we do it, would have rather known about this 2 years ago... we're sorry you had to wait this long to find out. Sorry you also didn't pick up on the heavy vibes that I've put out over the last 8 months that at least clearly cast doubt on WWII being a sure thing for the first release. Under the circumstances, we did the best we could to tip you off without getting ourselves into a pickle.

Sometimes game company needs and game customer needs don't neatly overlap. At least in our case the importance on game quality does

Steve

[J Ruddy]

That was awfully gentle of you Steve. Are you growing you're own "tea" again?

[Moon]

Just a tiny correction... saying "I have spent the past 2 years waiting for a game that isn’t coming" isn't correct. That game is coming, just not as the first release of the new engine. But it won't take 2 years (like it did with CMBB following CMBO) for the second WW2 title to appear. Much less than that.

Martin

[J Ruddy]

Originally posted by Moon:

But it won't take 2 years (like it did with CMBB following CMBO) for the second WW2 title to appear. Much less than that.

I'm happy as a Frenchman who's invented a pair of self-removing trousers.

[Stavka_lite]

The development and accuracy of the "D" template is absolutely amazing... I am just as amazed as how many people did not read the ENTIRE initial post from BF.C but stopped as soon as they see something they don't like and go ballistic. I find these folks very entertaining and they keep me amused between game releases.

BTW CMC looks very cool.

[PSY]

Originally posted by Directive#21:

I am upset that I have spent the past 2 years waiting for a game that isn’t coming.

Isn't that a bit dramatic considering that a WW2 based CMx2 game will be coming out 8-12 months after CM:Shock Force?

Yes, you'll have to wait a bit longer and yes if you're a WW2 afficionado that does suck. But you aren't waiting for a game that isn't coming. You're waiting for a game that won't arrive until after Battlefront takes care of their modern warfare fans.

[Directive#21]

Steve said:

Sometimes game company needs and game customer needs don't neatly overlap.

I understand this and agree. However, as a repeat customer and a casual follower of this forum, I expected to have my finger on the pulse a little bit more.

JRUDDY said:

[Delayed double post?]

Things are getting strange around here...

So you post 4 times to tell me that this topic has been approached? Nice... another mindless cheerleader. As registered member #16051, I guess its not anomalous that subject matter is repeated?

In case I wasn't clear, I have enormous respect for Steve and Charles and intend no disrespect. I am registering my honest feedback as a customer.

-Zach

[Hertston]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

So, while I do understand that those of you who aren't interested in Modern at all, no matter how we do it, would have rather known about this 2 years ago... we're sorry you had to wait this long to find out. Sorry you also didn't pick up on the heavy vibes that I've put out over the last 8 months that at least clearly cast doubt on WWII being a sure thing for the first release. Under the circumstances, we did the best we could to tip you off without getting ourselves into a pickle.

I'd just like to point out that not all of us who are a tad disappointed have any objection to 'modern' - although it depends how you define 'modern' to some extent. I'd certainly no particular desire to see a WW2 game ahead of, say, a Vietnam game, Cold War game, US v. China or Russia game. It's just the particular scenario (US v Arab) that doesn't appeal, not least because across all genres (and including wargames) its now as "old" as WW2 and rather less interesting.

[MikeyD]

Moon, you're unfortunately standing up to a religious movement here! The cult of WWII Germany.

In your first three games you gave them (us) the opportunity to blow up Shermans with Tigers over and over and over (CMBB had lend-lease Shermans), like some ritual sacrifice or formalized Japanese Kabuki drama. But this new game? No Shermans - No Tigers - that's like forgetting to include Jesus when you open a new Baptist church! Admit your herasy, fighting with Strykers is equivalent to worshiping the goddess Baal!

I'm finding BFC's reasoning behind going modern much less fascinating, from an anthropological point of view, than the board's rather...um... zealous reaction to the news.

[RMC]

Syria had (and may still have) some Panzer IVs. Would that be enough?

[J Ruddy]

Originally posted by Directive#21:

So you post 4 times to tell me that this topic has been approached? Nice... another mindless cheerleader. As registered member #16051, I guess its not anomalous that subject matter is repeated?

Hi Zach,

Your inability to identify who posted what or even read what was posted is only exceeded by your inability to use the search function.

I'm so very sorry that I didn't sign on to the Forum the moment I bought CMBB, I didn't realize that having a low member number was a sign of intelligence or that it gave extra validity to ones posts on this forum.

I find it ironic that you still don't get the joke that your initial post matched up so well to MD's sarcastic post about all the self indulgent "I don't like it, but that's OK" posts that have happened over the last week or so (if you check my history you'll find one posted by myself), or the fact that for some reason my initial reply posted twice with a significant time delay in between, followed by another identical post (made in jest by RMC) and finally (in response to "Someone can say that again") a fourth post with the words scrambled (once again in jest - hopefully to try and keep the mood of the thread light before someone started to throw dung at you for not using one of the previous thread for this topic).

To sum it all up, if you don't like what I post, bite me.

Thanks for caring.

jr

[RMC]

Originally posted by J Ruddy:

...I didn't realize that having a low member number was a sign of intelligence or that it gave extra validity to ones posts on this forum.

Much to learn you yet have, young padawan.

[Mace]

Wow, followed he T to template mD.... oh, never mind.

[Directive#21]

I'm so very sorry that I didn't sign on to the Forum the moment I bought CMBB, I didn't realize that having a low member number was a sign of intelligence or that it gave extra validity to ones posts on this forum.

Uh...no. What I'm saying is there are 13000+ registered members on this forum, thus topics repeat.

I know, I should have searched for this topic. Ah... but then I wouldn't have been able to properly register my dissent.

-Zach

P.S. Did MD's post cover that? Ha... I think not!

[Salkin]

Originally posted by Directive#21:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I'm so very sorry that I didn't sign on to the Forum the moment I bought CMBB, I didn't realize that having a low member number was a sign of intelligence or that it gave extra validity to ones posts on this forum.

Uh...no. What I'm saying is there are 13000+ registered members on this forum, thus topics repeat.

I know, I should have searched for this topic. Ah... but then I wouldn't have been able to properly register my dissent.

-Zach

P.S. Did MD's post cover that? Ha... I think not! </font>

[ParaBellum]

What I don't like about this whole issue is that apparently everybody not immediately celebrating CMSF is labeled as a "WW2 whiner". I am not affiliated with BFC in any way. I love the CM series of games and appreciate how the dev team has interacted with us on these forums for the last years. But in the end I'm just a guy who buys (or doesn't buy) their products. And if I am somewhat reserved towards one of their products for a number of reasons I think it's ok to voice my oppinion, in a sensible and polite way.

Is it so hard to understand that for some people the setting of CMx2 is actually less than thrilling? And that some see problems regarding the replayability value and game balancing issues? I understand that some posts have been rather ridiculous and offensive but I think that BFC has recently lashed out quite a bit in defense of their "baby" too, see Steve's "WW2 whiner"-comment in this thread just to give an example. Of course, it's your game, it's your business, but some of your comments makes you look a tiny little bit arrogant, you know?

[Dogface]

I know, I should have searched for this topic. Ah... but then I wouldn't have been able to properly register my dissent.

You could have emailed BF.c. I would but I dont care what the next game will be.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by ParaBellum:

What I don't like about this whole issue is that apparently everybody not immediately celebrating CMSF is labeled as a "WW2 whiner". I am not affiliated with BFC in any way. I love the CM series of games and appreciate how the dev team has interacted with us on these forums for the last years. But in the end I'm just a guy who buys (or doesn't buy) their products. And if I am somewhat reserved towards one of their products for a number of reasons I think it's ok to voice my oppinion, in a sensible and polite way.

Is it so hard to understand that for some people the setting of CMx2 is actually less than thrilling? And that some see problems regarding the replayability value and game balancing issues? I understand that some posts have been rather ridiculous and offensive but I think that BFC has recently lashed out quite a bit in defense of their "baby" too, see Steve's "WW2 whiner"-comment in this thread just to give an example. Of course, it's your game, it's your business, but some of your comments makes you look a tiny little bit arrogant, you know?

Welllllll, you know there's criticism and then there's criticism. I don't recall BFC making a big deal of well-reasoned, rational, temperate criticism even if it wasn't what they were hoping for at that particular moment. But we've been witnessing a lot of posts by people who have gone ballistic first crack of the bat. I mean, we're talking serious hysteria here. For those, I think Steve's and other BFC members' responses have been very mild and restrained.

Now, I know that the web is a place where people seem to feel entitled to turn into the kind of raving maniacs that they wouldn't allow themselves to be in regular life. This is a widespread attitude, yet not one that I always feel obliged to respect. For my part, I wish the raving maniacs would can it so that we can get down to some serious, rational, well-founded criticism...and tell BFC just exactly in what ways they got it totally wrong.

Michael