My two cents, for anyone that cares

[seppDieter]

Originally posted by Elvis:

seppDieter, I don't either BFC or 1C cared whether I liked CC or CM for that matter. CC and ToW are as similar and different as the Sim City series and Civilization series. Both are games that start with building a small town and growing your city/empire through various stategies. Both can be engaging games about how to build a society. But both have completely different methods of modeling these things. The ONLY thing in common between any of the games is that they are set in WW2.

.

i dont fully agree, as i know CC inside out i see that many things in TOW are inspired from CC (like the soldiers rewardings, the unit selection screen is almost an exact copy of the one in cc2, simply the way the game works, airstrikes, artillery etc...) and that are good things.

but when you say the only similarity between these games is WW2, then i dont agree. both games are strategic, realistic RTS, battlegroup to squad based games. so they should actually be quiet similar. not because they would have copied each other, but because they both would have modelled REALITY. but what bothers me are the differences between them, are the differences between TOW and CC intentional?? was it intentional to overpower the power of tanks?

was it intentional to not allow units to hide in ambush?

was it intentional to not add smoke grenades?

was it intentional to hardly give any cover possibilities for the infantry?

was it intentional to not add a sense of suppresion for the soldiers?

was it intentional not to ad a dynamic campaign mode?

...

it seems to me that where the game is different from CC, that those are the weak points of the game. and the things people have trouble with.

and i really hope all the things i summed up were not intentional, and that they are so because of technical issues.

because if all those things were intentional, then we have to come to the conclusion that the game as it is now, is exactly how they wanted it to be :eek: and that it was never their intention to make the game truly realistic.

please tell me im wrong

[KiloAlpha4]

I gave the game a chance and I have to say in it's present state there is no way it is even close to any kind of realism there are just too many faults with it. I can also say it is not worth 45 dollars with all the faults. So to that this will be my last 1C game purchase.

[Vegeorite]

Close Combat is a great game and a true wargame!! And I agree that ToW rightly picks up on some of its successful aspects.

CC was so intuitive to use and in 2D you aren't bothered by animation issues - although I get the screaming abdabs about the men and tanks being out of scale with terrain - I think it's just that the game was created by 12' lizard-men - yes, Dasman, you know who you are!! :eek:

There is radical discussion of where CC6 might go - I'm sure the poacher turned gamekeepers who now own the game know the possibilities and issues with the game. I hope they don't slavishly follow the format nor shold ToW.

[Pas De Charge]

I dont think its fair to say im defending battlefront, I've only ever bought one game from them and I happen to hate CM (it's just not my type of game). This was meant to be a rant about some of the weiredness in the forum but I've just made it much worse

[Ghost1]

Originally posted by Andreas:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Ghost1:

Quote by Andreas...

"I have not even looked at the game, so I can not comment on actual criticims or praise regarding it."

And that just about sums it up!

You are still not getting it, but that is not really surprising, since you seem to have mental issues.

You can criticise the game all you want, and I would not comment (and in fact haven't, anywhere). It's when you indulge in paranoid theories about BFC and beta testers manipulating the board that I start to care, and I'll comment.

I doubt you'll get it this time round, but it is always worth trying.

All the best

Andreas </font>

[BillyBob]

Originally posted by Ghost1:

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

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Ghost1:

Quote by Andreas...

"I have not even looked at the game, so I can not comment on actual criticims or praise regarding it."

And that just about sums it up!

You are still not getting it, but that is not really surprising, since you seem to have mental issues.

You can criticise the game all you want, and I would not comment (and in fact haven't, anywhere). It's when you indulge in paranoid theories about BFC and beta testers manipulating the board that I start to care, and I'll comment.

I doubt you'll get it this time round, but it is always worth trying.

All the best

Andreas </font>

[Moon]

Ghost1 has been banned for abusive behaviour towards other forum members.

Martin

[Tripps]

In the forum or privately?

[BillyBob]

Originally posted by Moon:

Ghost1 has been banned for abusive behaviour towards other forum members.

Martin

Originally posted by Andreas: You are a nutbar if you think that BFC gives enough of a monkey's about your mental state to ask their beta-testers to defend the game from your criticism. They either do it of their own will, or they don't.

But hey, continue living on Planet Lalaland where you are important enough for someone to care.

So we'll be waiting to hear that Andreas has also been banned? Hmm?

Oh no, I forgot, he's one of the resident shills, with special privilages.

[Slapaho]

You are trying to convince people not to buy a game because you don't like it. What a bunch of nobbers. You are getting very boring. We have all heard you (many many times) so give it a rest. You talk about 'realism' but wtf do you know about realism - its a ****ing game you arseholes.

[BillyBob]

Originally posted by Slapaho:

You are trying to convince people not to buy a game because you don't like it. What a bunch of nobbers. You are getting very boring. We have all heard you (many many times) so give it a rest. You talk about 'realism' but wtf do you know about realism - its a ****ing game you arseholes.

You'll also be getting banned I suppose?

[Moon]

No, Billybob - Andreas has no privileges, and if he started telling others to go see a vet for his problems, he would be banned just like anyone else. We have banned enough long-time members who went ballistic at one point or another in the past to prove that there are no double-standars.

Slapaho, watch the language.

Martin

[BillyBob]

Originally posted by Moon:

No, Billybob - Andreas has no privileges, and if he started telling others to go see a vet for his problems, he would be banned just like anyone else. We have banned enough long-time members who went ballistic at one point or another in the past to prove that there are no double-standars.

Slapaho, watch the language.

Martin

"Go see a vet"

and

"You are a nutbar"

Same ballpark, no? Neither particularly heinous examples of abuse, but a new customer (somebody who has given you his money for your game) gets banned for his, while an older resident (who has NOT given you his money for this game) gets nada?

Talk to me about "double standards" mate.

[Moon]

Ghost1 has worked hard in his 16 posts to get banned. Noone gets banned for just one post.

Martin

[BillyBob]

Originally posted by Moon:

Ghost1 has worked hard in his 16 posts to get banned. Noone gets banned for just one post.

Martin

Then maybe, as a noob, you might have considered giving him a PM'd warning, just to set him straight?

If you'd already done that I apologise. If you hadn't my comments stand.

[ April 30, 2007, 06:16 AM: Message edited by: BillyBob ]

[Moon]

You are reading what you want to read. I said that NOONE gets banned for just one post. Ghost1 has been banned for his entire posting history, not just one post.

Martin

[Nefarious Edge]

Ok, I've been reading these posts and have been rather quiet this whole time. I will now weigh in. First off, I LOVE CM. I didn't expect a new CM from this game, however, I did expect realism. COH is already out there for those who want "fun".

My first fears crept up when BF announced a "preorder" deal. I work for marketing in DaimlerChrysler, and I must admit, its a bit of red flag. If the demo had been released earlier, then yes, no problems here. Alas, this was not the case. Demo delayed. Oh oh. I am surprised our units in this game cannot take cover because BF seems to be a master of it.

Quick question. Has anyone purchased Neverwinter Nights 2? I bought it shortly after release and the same thing is going on over there as here. Albeit on a much larger scale.When you have a reputation for quality, and then release an inferior product, there will be backlash. Some don't agree, I respect that. But I think, most on the whole, have found this product to be poor.

If you didn't like the product, by all means, get on here and bitch. We may yet make something out of the game. But don't cry about money wasted. I preordered despite my misgivings based on their sound rep. and lost. I won't make this mistake again.

I have noticed, as I did with NWN2 forums, a LARGE number of people who blindly get behind a product they wanted to badly like. You kind of have to sift through these guys and remember to stay on topic. Ghost1 did sound like a crazed madman, although many of his points were valid. BillyBob and a few others I can't recall have done a good job of trying to hold this company accountable for the products they put out. Kudos.

[Moon]

Nefarious Edge, thanks for your post! We have no problem about people bitching. Once. Twice. Three times even.

But after a few dozen posts saying the same over and over, and hijacking threads from people who would like to discuss the game, it simply gets to the point where it turns into a rant. The bad thing about that is that rants tend to turn people off, even if *some* valid points are raised. They also sooner or later will force us to ban some people, not for what they said, but how they did it.

This will be counter-productive on all accounts.

We have given more than enough freedom (and still do) to everybody to voice his opinion on this forum. More so than on any other publisher board I have seen. Some people abuse this and have turned from voicing to shouting, and sooner or later they will have to stop shouting or will have to leave.

Funny enough, meanwhile the game has excellent sales. The demo is out there for everybody to see what they think of the game. It turns out so far that the majority is liking it, but they're just voicing (sometimes in email) and not shouting.

Martin

[Slapaho]

But I think, most on the whole, have found this product to be poor.

based on what? You dont even know how many people bought the game - let alone their satisfaction levels. Just because some people voice a negativity (continuously) does this constitute 'most' finding the game poor?

Sorry for my less than articulate repsonse previously Moon. I come to the forums to learn tactics, glean information about the game (not specifically armour penetration values in 'the real world', although interesting, if they are not reflected in the game then I don't mind - though a lot of people clearly do - good discussion and informative for the most part until hijacked) or to try in some way to help people get the best from the game, as people help me.

Because I am a satisfied customer I am being made out to be a 'fanboy', an idiot that needs to be told why I should not like this game. Why should I and others who do like this game be chased off by a bunch of self serving and tedious people who think they have a given right to post. So they dont like LoS, LoF, cover, the AI - they dont like the game - wtf do they want us to do about it. The points have been made, I am not defending the game, I understand from the posts they are disatisfied, I understand guys as does everyone else, but do you have to post in every thread the same diatribes and the non-constructive negativity (I wouldn't call it criticism as it went beyond that after about the 5th time I saw 'the game is a turd' or some such).

[CriticalMass]

am I a dissapointed customer? sure am (it's the LOS thing)...will BFC/1C (who apparently now have an American distributor - announcement on SimHQ) fix the product? hopefully/probably...can I wait? yep...would they have fixed it so soon if several "decenters" hadn't posted here? maybe not.

Geez, I run Vista for gods sake (and I like it, so that prolly make me a nutbar)

[Moon]

What announcement on SimHQ are you referring to, CriticalMass?

Martin

[flintlock]

Originally posted by Moon:

...meanwhile the game has excellent sales. The demo is out there for everybody to see what they think of the game. It turns out so far that the majority is liking it, but they're just voicing (sometimes in email) and not shouting.

It's good to read the game is enjoying strong sales early on. I'm thoroughly enjoying the game myself, and I'm confident ToW will continue to improve with time. Good sales bode favorably for entertaining an expansion, and I would love to see this title spawn a successful franchise.

[Mannheim Tanker]

Funniest statement of the week:

Originally posted by Pas De Charge:

And frankly, this is THE MOST realistic rts I've played, even without things like mortars, smoke and enterable buildings.

Hehe...that's like saying internet porn is THE MOST realistic thing next to actual sex, even without the partner and need to make do with your own greased palm.

Pas De Charge, the problems that people are griping about are fairly central to realism in this genre. Line of sight, proper cover, Tac AI, and weapons selection are integral to a realistic experience. You can certainly argue that ToW is fun, but please don't claim it's anywhere near realistic.

[CriticalMass]

go to http://www.simhq.com/news_archive/news_archive_2007.html

click the archive for April 23, 2006 to April 27, 2007, in summary:

Announcements:

1C Company announced today that it will begin publishing its titles in the United States. 1C is the largest publisher in Europe (by covered territory) and plans to release their top new games in the US for the first time ever. Between a new distribution and co-publishing partnership with Atari, Inc. and new offices in the West, consumers will soon be able to buy 1C’s game in most retailers across the nation. 1C’s new lineup spans multiple genres including first-person shooters, action titles, real-time strategy, simulation and role-playing games.

A different 1C perhaps? If so, sincere apologies.

edit: just found this too - http://int.games.1c.ru/

[Chazman]

"Funny enough, meanwhile the game has excellent sales. The demo is out there for everybody to see what they think of the game. It turns out so far that the majority is liking it, but they're just voicing (sometimes in email) and not shouting"

Mr. Moon, you have had excellent sales and the the game went Gold before it shipped or the demo was out.

It went gold on the excellent reputation BF had with every hard core wargamer, including me.

Your reputation is now shot, because this game is a huge disappointment and I suspect the sales will plummet after the word gets out.

Shame on you guys for putting your name on this title!