The look of CM - were are we going from here?

[Battlefront.com]

We've had this discussion about opening up the game to fundamental modification about 20000 times since CMBO was first released. The answer has always been, and will always be, the exact same one I've always given:

NO

Every time this comes up we go through the same tired arguments, with my responses being completely ignored, discarded, and then promptly forgotten about by the people that want everything without having to pay for it. The fact is that our futures rest on the sales of the products we make, your futures do not. We have every rational reason to expect that opening up the game engine to massive modification by customers will be the end of this. I know some of you do not think this to be true, but honestly we don't give a hoot. It's our asses at risk here, not yours. Going with a naive plan, which goes contrary to everything we know about this business (from the perspective of a niche market), and hoping for the best is simply not going to happen. And we should be thanked for this

The problem with many of the things mentioned here is that there is no code support for them. In order to have code support Charles has to take time away from the game aspects. Making damaged models, for example, is relatively easy. The artwork itself has never been the problem. Making better surrounding non-battle terrain (sky boxes or what have you) is also a coding issue, not an art issue. So the only way for this stuff to get into the game without Charles coding is to release the code as Open Source, which of course is the ultimate form of suicide for us. Therefore, that's obviously not going to happen

The graphics in CMx2 are far superior to CMx1 and will continue to improve over time. The speed of these improvements will no doubt be slower than any of us want, but as long as the game progresses and evolves well enough it won't matter.

Steve

[Scipio]

Hire a second programer. Double the speed of development. Sell 1 million copies more.

[Canada Guy]

BF, don't get too upset even though I am sure that you have replied to this countless times.

I think most of us agree that releasing the code would be a bad idea in the long run for everyone. You would get those people that would say X and some would say Y (just like the QB unit values from when QBs were first introduced) and who would there be to say who is right and who is wrong. I would prefer to have your company make the final decisions and the only way that will happen is if you control the source code. This is also your stream of revenue and without your dedication (and revenue reward) this would not have occurred.

I am sure that the same complaining went on when you first introduced CMBO.

It would be nice though to have the same access that modders had to CMx1. I know that I have changed the splash screen and the interface graphics to make it more to my liking for both CMAK and CMBB (Red ? something mod) and I appreciated that you allowed this to happen and that there were people dedicated enough to work on this. You have only a limited amount of time to dedicate to making this game work and all the time having people on your back asking for even more.Modding the interface might not be possible in CMx2 as it would require access to the code though.

You may have said it before but what can be modded in CMx2 and what kind of tools have to be used?

[dan/california]

It seems to me that the best area to turn the community loose on would be flavor objects, if this is doable in terms of the underlying code.

[MikeyD]

Ah! I found my old Texas shopping mall map. Pretty much unplayable (unless things change drastically in v1.10 patch) but it was a hoot to construct.

[Battlefront.com]

If we were sure that a second programmer would double our sales, we'd start looking for one What we have done, already, is outsource the content to some extent. This is a good way to increase speed and variety without losing control and revenue. Yup, we think it makes more sense to pay out money to get more content than to get it for free. That's how much faith we have that opening up the engine to major modifications would be a net positive for our bottom line

Canada Guy,

There's nothing in CMx2 that can't be modded that was also modded in CMx1. The difference is that the model complexity of CMx2 makes it much more difficult to mod from an artistic standpoint. In other words, the bar has been raised on modder skills simply because the models themselves are far more detailed. The upside is that out of the box the game looks tons better than anything CMx1 could ever muster. The downside is that if you are someone who loves refreshing the look of the game periodically, there will probably always be less to choose from compared to CMx1. Even when WW2 becomes the primary theater for the game engine.

MikeyD,

Damn... that is sweet! I think most people would relish blowing it up, so I'd recommend putting a whole bunch of "PRESERVE" Objectives all over it

Steve

[MikeyD]

Hey, i know. i should construct an Army vs Marines Blue vs Blue scenario out of the shopping mall! Let's 'em wail on each other for awhile!

About modding building skins. it can be done, the textures are numbered sequentially and can be added to. BUT building textures aren't random so they'd have to be selected by hand at map design stage. And I don't know what would happen if someone without the 'wall texture #13' mod uploads a scenario asking for 'wall texture #13'. Might default to another texture, might crash. i don't know.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Ah! I found my old Texas shopping mall map. Pretty much unplayable (unless things change drastically in v1.10 patch) but it was a hoot to construct.

This game needs zombies.

[cabal23]

OMG this is so crazy. I was just thinking a few days ago how to make a zombie themed scenario. I was playing the Copper Mine Riot scenario and the designer has you start out behind all these civies and they are you shield. I immediately though what an awesome idea for a scenario. Somehow create a scenario where you have to take a ace load of spies and have them head at a group of soldiers. Score would be contingent on how many spies you kill. Unfortunately there is no hand to hand in this(to my knowledge), so with no weapons, it would be a very boring scenario, but the mall map would be perfect...at the least for a screen shot.

[Other Means]

This game needs zombies.

You stole my idea you dirty sub sea-level dweller

[LongLeftFlank]

I've riffed on this before, but...

"The new Oldsmobiles are in early this year"

[Scipio]

If we were sure that a second programmer would double our sales, we'd start looking for one What we have done, already, is outsource the content to some extent. This is a good way to increase speed and variety without losing control and revenue. Yup, we think it makes more sense to pay out money to get more content than to get it for free. That's how much faith we have that opening up the engine to major modifications would be a net positive for our bottom line

Steve

Steve, I promise you that it will double your sales. If even this ain't help...

[Scipio]

If we were sure that a second programmer would double our sales, we'd start looking for one What we have done, already, is outsource the content to some extent. This is a good way to increase speed and variety without losing control and revenue. Yup, we think it makes more sense to pay out money to get more content than to get it for free. That's how much faith we have that opening up the engine to major modifications would be a net positive for our bottom line

Steve

Ever considered to get some coding help from '1C games', since you publish their games already? While I think that the gameplay of 'theatre of war' is weak, compared to CMSF, the graphics has some good things. The maps look more 'livelily', they have a better damage model for tanks (at least they have one ), the ruins look better, and finally, the trenches are far superior to the CMSF trenches. Have I mentioned water and bridges? Surely no need to copy 1:1...

[Scipio]

Ah! I found my old Texas shopping mall map. ...

Nice work, and thank you very much for hitting the nail on the head ! Maybe that's a problem I have with the maps. If you cut out the arabic signs, it could be anywhere...in the USA.

Towns in middle-east (as well as in europe) are old, naturally grown, chaotic, with very small road and spaces between building, and buildings of very different styles and ages are side by side : And no, they do not have all flat tops!

[Other Means]

Tanks have a very detailed hit/damage model. You can see damage under the little spanner icon.

It's not shown on the model if that's what you mean?

[panzermartin]

Nice mall, but yeah I have to agree that most build up maps come out looking strictly modern urban with straight roads and boxed houses. There is a range of buildings/textures missing that would make environments look less arificial and cardboard-like.

[Scipio]

...

It's not shown on the model if that's what you mean?

Yes, that's what I mean!

[Gryphon]

It would be nice if the map was more like a tabe top (CMx1) and less like a floating world in space and time

[Cpl Steiner]

It would be nice if the map was more like a tabe top (CMx1) and less like a floating world in space and time

I whole-heartedly agree! The old CMx1 style of map, which showed a cutaway section on each side a bit like you'd see in geology books, not only looked nicer but helped with the perception of height changes on the map. This new "disembodied map floating in air" style just doesn't cut it IMHO. I can see why it was done but a second best solution is no solution at all in my book. I'm tired of seeing shrapnel exploding UNDER my map!

[Other Means]

Yes, that's what I mean!

Fair enough. Steve has said that's one of the things they want to get in.

[Scipio]

... I can see why it was done ...

You do? I never understood this!

[Battlefront.com]

Scipio,

Ever considered to get some coding help from '1C games', since you publish their games already?

As has been explained many times before, sometimes by programmers who haunt these Forums, in real life it doesn't work that way. It would take us less time to write our own code than it would to integrate (INTEGRATE) the code from someone else's program.

There are no quick fixes, so it's useless to try and come up with one. Even adding additional programmers doesn't really help. Why? Because all the customer does is move the bar further up. Check out the discussion areas for games with $10m-$50m budgets. Are those gamers satisfied with what they have? No, they are not (at least they claim to be unsatisfied). So why should we risk going out of business to pursue a "fool's errand"? Not smart at all from our perspective, nor from the perspective of people besides us who want to see more product from us in the future.

As for the organic shapes of cities, this is one of the things that computers suck at really badly. The only way to make chaotic, almost randomly aligned and greatly varied structures is to have hand built maps. Even those are still not nearly as organic and chaotic looking as real life areas, but they definitely are better looking than CMx2 (which is better than CMx1 by far).

Computers like order and therefore anything that is disordered comes at the expense of a lot of extra CPU cycles, RAM, and polygons. CMx1 and CMx2 have purposefully traded off the ability to do highly complex, organic looking urban areas in favor of user accessible map editor and far more detailed game mechanics. If we dumbed down the game a LOT and allowed people to build maps in expensive 3D programs, we could of course have far more refined maps. But that's not the direction we should take the game in so it's really not a possibility.

Best we can do is over time do is make improvements along the way. CMx2 offers so much more variety and detail in its Editor than CMx1 could ever dream of offering. We're comfortable we're heading in the right direction as quickly and as responsibly as we can.

Steve

[Mord]

Too me it's the flavor objects that can and will help overcome any perceived "static-ness" when it comes to map making. The more of those we have the better the maps will look. When you look at maps, where people really took their time and placed flavor objects with an eye for detail, you can see the difference. They look real and organic. I don't know how hard it is to code them and whatnot, but if it's not very hard, it would be the easier path to take.

I really hope we will see lots of them in the WWII game.

Having said all that, CMSF's editor is a thousand times better than CMX1, easy.

Mord.

[Paper Tiger]

Too me it's the flavor objects that can and will help overcome any perceived "static-ness" when it comes to map making. The more of those we have the better the maps will look. When you look at maps, where people really took their time and placed flavor objects with an eye for detail, you can see the difference. They look real and organic.

100% agree with this. I use a lot of these when I'm making my maps but after a while, you're just repeating the same old formula with those crates, sacks, and palettes.

[Scipio]

...

Best we can do is over time do is make improvements along the way. CMx2 offers so much more variety and detail in its Editor than CMx1 could ever dream of offering. We're comfortable we're heading in the right direction as quickly and as responsibly as we can.

Steve

Well well... Good thing is that I can be a pain in your ass for some further years and blame you for not realising all the great ideas.