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

[Scipio]

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. ...

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

Mord.

But the flavor objects must be realistic simulated, too. A tank can drive over a park bench, and the bench ain't harmed. If you place a pile of them somewhere and a tank fire's on it, maybe the one or two that are directly hit disappear, but the other's stay in place like they are screwed to the ground. Applies to all flavor objects, by the way. Actually, benches can be indeed screwed down to the ground...

[The_Red_Rage]

But the flavor objects must be realistic simulated, too. A tank can drive over a park bench, and the bench ain't harmed. If you place a pile of them somewhere and a tank fire's on it, maybe the one or two that are directly hit disappear, but the other's stay in place like they are screwed to the ground. Applies to all flavor objects, by the way. Actually, benches can be indeed screwed down to the ground...

Not just flavor objects - AFVs plowing through large fences/small fences/building walls will be a most welcome feature.

[c3k]

Absolutely!!

[medlinke]

My solution would be to postpone continued work on a CMx3 engine and just license an existing 3rd party 3d engine.

There are plenty out there from Epic, Id, Valve, etc.

The costs may be high, but quite honestly the look and compatibility issues that have plagued BFC games from day 1 would be well addressed going this route. Additionally, then you're not stuck having to do massive 3d engine upgrades to include new features, etc. The engine can handle largely anything you want to put into it.

Given the multi-core and multi-gig nature of most gamer's computers these days the argument about systems not being able to handle simulations is getting tired. When I look at games that are wildly more complex in terms of how many calculations and polygons that are being rendered in multiplayer environments no less I question more and more the argument that it is computers that cannot handle the workload.

It's admirable to design from scratch your own 3d engine. At some point, however, that work begins to interfere with end user expectations. There is no reason that wargaming has to be ugly. CM proved that wargaming didn't have to look like a virtual tabletop! It's time to go to the next level and the expense of licensing a 3rd party 3d engine might be a good way to go that route.

Heck even govt. military training consultants (3dSolve) in NC are licensing the Unreal engine from Epic to do their work. I'm curious to see how CMx2 continues to evolve as CMx1 had a massive evolution from CMBO to CMAK.

Either way...keep up the good work!

[Battlefront.com]

Medlinke,

My solution would be to postpone continued work on a CMx3 engine and just license an existing 3rd party 3d engine.

Not possible. Those game engines are not only so expensive that it would mean having to put our houses up for sale to get enough cash on hand to buy into them, but it also means getting the completely wrong tool set for the job. Those game engines are optimized for single player experiences and have little to no support for anything else. So what we'd have to do is spend almost as much time reengineering their code to do what we want as it would be to write the code from scratch ourselves. And far cheaper too!

When I look at games that are wildly more complex in terms of how many calculations and polygons that are being rendered in multiplayer environments no less I question more and more the argument that it is computers that cannot handle the workload.

I doubt you can find a game that has more going on under the hood than CMx2 does. It's not just pushing polygons around the screen... it's all the game computations that go on to make those polygons behave realistically. Ask any programmer involved in FPS, and RTS for that matter, games and they'll tell you the same thing... it's all smoke and mirrors when it comes to the gameplay. We have no such luxury.

That is not to say that there isn't anything we can do to improve the framerate of the existing engine. There definitely is (we've already put some of those into v1.10). The problem is the age old one... how much time do we spend on graphics to the detriment of gameplay, how much time do we spend on gameplay to the detriment of graphics? We favor gameplay over graphics, so obviously that by definition means we have more work to do on graphics than we have time to do it. It's an age old problem.

It's admirable to design from scratch your own 3d engine. At some point, however, that work begins to interfere with end user expectations. There is no reason that wargaming has to be ugly.

Actually, there are plenty of reasons wargaming has to be ugly... it's a niche market and "pretty" costs a lot of money. Those games based on the engines you cite have budgets that are in the millions of Dollars. Our budget might be bigger than any other wargame out there, but it's small potatoes compared to those games. And we only make a decent, and sometimes tough, living off of the profits. Even if we could raise a few million out of thin air, I wouldn't invest it into a wargame at all. Nope, if we had the kind of money to invest in a FPS game engine we'd do the smart thing and make a FPS game Not only is that the only thing that can be effectively done with those game engines (see previous comments), but it's also the only thing that has a chance of making back enough money to cover the expenses!

Plus, I don't think anybody with an ounce of sanity can say that CM:SF is "ugly". Not as pretty as a $50,000,000 game... sure enough, but compared to the other wargames out there... not bad at all

I'm curious to see how CMx2 continues to evolve as CMx1 had a massive evolution from CMBO to CMAK.

Actually, it had a massive evolution from CMBO to CMBB. There was no difference between CMBB and CMAK in terms of graphics programming, polygon counts, or texture quality. The only thing added to CMAK was dust.

I suspect you'll be pleased with the graphical change between CM:SF and CM Normandy. We're not just swapping out tree models and grass textures, that's for sure However, we're not planning massive night/day differences in graphics quality between any two games families. Instead, we see things on an evolutionary spectrum with each one being better than the one that came before it. Since the development times are shorter between families (which we all want) there is not enough time to be revolutionary from one to the other. But in a few years when one looks at what we release then compared to now, I am sure there will be a huge visual difference.

Steve

[Mord]

I think you should prove that and show us a model! LOL.

You're killing me man!!

So since you are here...might we be getting back the Kill Lists, Fire, Sound Contacts and

Detailed Hits for the Normandy game?

Mord.

[Smaragdadler]

Maybe there is some answer already in some thread, but I have not found it. So sorry for asking again in this case:

The first WW2 setting will be Westfront - Normandy. This means there will be no snow and all the landscape/building objects in the editor will be in 'normandy-look'?

The next module will then be Ostfront? And it's first then, when we will get snow but also now east-european look?

I really would like to see/make some scenarios about the not so offen seen episodes of WW2-Westfront in Central europe. (Westwall - Aachen, Hürtgen Forest Sep-Feb 44 and Thuringia/Saxony in April 1945).

That means for editor: - half-timbered houses, black-pinetree woods without underbrush, oak/beach-tree woods with underbrush and some addition to artillery and roadblock/IED model's to simulate Hürtgen-style forest fighting.

The Hurtgen Forest, covering roughly fifty square miles just south of ancient city of Aachen along the German-Belgium border, was described by those who were there, as a "weird and wild" place. Here "the near one hundred feet tall dark pine trees and dense tree-tops gave the place, even in daytime , a somber appearance which was apt to cast gloom upon sensitive people." It was like a green cave, always dripping water, the firs interlocked their lower limbs so that everyone had to stoop, all the time. The forest floor, in almost perpetual darkness, was devoid of underbrush. Add to this gloom, a mixture of sleet, snow, rain, cold, fog and almost knee deep mud. This was to be setting for the most tragic battle of World War II.

The ill supplied Americans were inexperienced and did not know how to fight against pillboxes. Their training at home had not taught them the techniques they would need to survive in the wooded areas.

“When the Germans, secure in their bunkers, saw the GIs coming forward, they called down presighted artillery fire, using shells with fuses designed to explode on contact with the treetops. When men dove to the ground for cover, as they had been trained to do and as instinct dictated, they exposed themselves to a rain of hot metal and wood splinters. They learned to survive a shelling in the Huertgen by hugging a tree. That way they only exposed their steel helmets.”

With air support and artillery almost useless, the GIs were committed to a fight of mud and mines, carried out by infantry skirmish lines plunging ever deeper into the forest, with machine guns and light mortars their only support. For the GIs, it was a calamity .

Sgt. Mack Morris was there with the 4th and reported:

"Hurtgen had its fire-breaks, only wide enough to allow two jeeps to pass, and they were mined and interdicted by machine-gun fire. There was a mine every eight paces for three miles. Hurtgen's roads were blocked. The Germans cut roadblocks from trees. They cut them down so they interlocked as they fell. Then they mined and booby trapped them. Finally they registered their artillery on them, and the mortars, and at the sound of men clearing them, they opened fire."

-> http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=85271&page=2

Any chance to see this in CM someday?

[Mord]

Ostfront is going to be its own title. Which means it will have it's own modules. According to Steve the first will be based on Bagration. So snow will probably come in a later title. I imagine when they do release a title that involves snow they will do one for each theater back to back to make it easier on the coding and to cut down the time it takes to publish them. Kinda like the time frame they are sticking to for East and West fronts now, both of which are summer of 44.

Normandy will be France with a few module add ons up until autumn. I imagine at some point, we'll be able to simulate Ardennes/Hurtgen...hopefully we'll have a Bulge Title.

It's been stated each country/battle will have the appropriate terrain and buildings as per the setting.

Mord.

[LongLeftFlank]

That means for editor: - half-timbered houses, black-pinetree woods without underbrush, oak/beach-tree woods with underbrush and some addition to artillery and roadblock/IED model's to simulate Hürtgen-style forest fighting.

Any chance to see this in CM someday?

Overcast, mud and lots of phone poles (I'm too lazy to alpha channel out the leaves on the Type D trees to create bare trunks right now).

[Smaragdadler]

This is the enthusiasm I like to see !!! ...thany you very much for this!

Here is a link with some pics who show buildings:

http://www.bildagentur-walder.de/katalog/d/nw/dn/huertgenwald_01.htm

Hürtgenwald mod-nirvana:

http://www.walder-verlag.de/reisen/1-19_reisefuehrer_sehenswertes_aachen-euregio-nordeifel.htm

[Smaragdadler]

I have no idea of game-engines, so this may be absolutly useless, but what about this (it's for free as far as I understand)?:

What is Nebula ?

The leading Open Source 3D game and visualisation engine used in dozens of commercial games and professional visualisation applications released worldwide.

* A well-tried and robust C++ game engine

* An "Operating System" for games

* OpenSource - It's free !

* Multiplattform (Win, Linux, Irix, Mac, Xbox)

* A portability wrapper (unified APIs)

* An abstraction layer (simplified APIs)

* A DX9 rendering engine

* An extensive and most modern feature set

* Flexible scripting: TCL, Python, LUA, ...

Brand new game framework MANGALORE

* Built on top of Nebula

* SQLite driven game database

* 100% separated data and logic

* Flexible message system

* Type-Safe attributes

* Entity / Level subsystems

* Expandable through user provided properties and manager classes

* Bullet proof loading / saving of game state out of the box

* Speed up game development

* Proven stability and performance. Already used in 20+ shipped products

http://www.radonlabs.de/technologynebula2.html

[John Kettler]

Steve,

You failed to note that many of the high end FPSs are in fact steaming piles thereof. In many of them, weapon modeling is so awful that a bareheaded man can take three x 7.62 mm rounds squarely in the head and still keep coming. Cover which would be instantly sieved not only isn't under small arms, but even direct hits from heavy caliber weapons. Powerups and health packs are insane on their face, though in certain games, combat drugs aren't. Ricochets aren't modeled. Armor degradation from multiple impacts isn't modeled. Soldiers can, in some cases, survive direct hits from tank main guns. Right. Combatants can run as fast backwards and sideways as they can forward. Elite soldiers can't, in many cases, jump or climb over even a foot high obstacle. Most can't crawl or go prone, either. You can't see him, but are instantly detected and accurately fired upon, by a high speed, evading foe, usually with lethal effect. If you have AI controlled friendlies, they have an unholy penchant for a) getting underfoot, blocking critical points, c) walking into your line of fire, while d) never running out of ammo while you're forever scrounging anything that'll fire.

Then we have games where one side's weapons lack usable reticles when in higher magnification, big tanks with no magnified optics of any sort, unlimited ammo, switchology for critical controls which varies from game to game--just to be cool, I think, unreadable data blocks, invisible walls, games which teach antitactics, interfaces seemingly designed by coders on acid trips, checkpoints separated by seeming light years, systems which lose all your painstakingly acquired prior progress, games that hang up, and that's without discussing the ones which look great, have fantastic intro movies, yet are fundamentally unplayable.

In many cases, features that made an earlier game great are removed in a later one in that series. I have a friend, for example, who's played both H2 (X-box) and H3 (X-Box 360) campaigns all the way through at Legendary, I believe. Despite the stunning visuals of the latter, it is his considered opinion, after many hours of play, that H2 was by far the better and richer game experience. We've also discovered that box copy lies like a rug (finding split screen co-op, not deathmatch, that works is rare), that you can have Hollywood grade intro movies and an unplayable game (ArmorCore 4), that a game can be really cool yet force you to set it aside (Kane & Lynch). Even when you have relatively decent modeling of certain weapon/target events, you can still have such ridiculous dreck as Ghost Recon 2?: Las Vegas, in which you're forced to advance headlong, in the face of hordes of all-knowing AI opponents, while saddled with multiple own side idiots. And did I mention that their body armor, in some cases, would do a BFV proud?

While there are exceptions, BiA, for example, where the design team went through a mini infantry experience and actually live fired weapons, most designers have zero understanding of such things as weapons, weapon effects, sights, weapon handling, reloading, morale, unit cohesion, terminal ballistics, recoil, cover value, etc. Perfect Dark Zero is an excellent game, provided you ignore a whole series of things, not least of which are the ridiculous secondary and tertiary weapon modes, modes someone no doubt thought were cool. I rather suspect, too, that heads in particular couldn't endure the kind of fire routinely endured in that game, unless it's your character's head, in which case, you're dead. Who, in his/her right mind, charges straight at an unsuppressed foe, let alone one firing in full automatic? This is common, as is being instantly and effectively engaged from well outside of effective range, targets that not only dance like they're on crank, but unerringly move just when you have them finally sighted in, views that make it impossible to fight effectively (try strafing right below while flying), pedestal mounted weapons which don't elevate high enough to effectively engage aerial targets.

As a general rule, the worst CM briefing is an informative marvel compared to what you get in an FPS. Elite troops, even in situations where they ought to have detailed threat info, go in sans even a map, frequently accompanied by incessant hectoring and useless cues.

This is but a partial catalog of the massive unreality that pervades FPSs, for about 1.5 x the price of CMSF, in the case of the X-box 360, generally with no patches, either. I've seen firepower that would shred a house not even down the man it hit, yet you'll see the game touted as "realistic and gritty." Would there was an affordable way to get the incredible environments of, say, H3, AI foes and friendlies that actually performed realistically, to include proper friendly fire hazard modeling, and all the wonderful under the hood stuff that makes CM what it is! How about a TOW type gorgeous environment with upgraded CMSF under the hood stuff for Normandy? The North Africa TOW practically makes me weep when I think of what we could do in CMSF with even a few of the goodies so lavishly on display there.

Regards,

John Kettler

[Scipio]

This is the enthusiasm I like to see !!! ...thany you very much for this!

Here is a link with some pics who show buildings:

http://www.bildagentur-walder.de/katalog/d/nw/dn/huertgenwald_01.htm

Hürtgenwald mod-nirvana:

http://www.walder-verlag.de/reisen/1-19_reisefuehrer_sehenswertes_aachen-euregio-nordeifel.htm

Hey, that's cool. I was often walking with my parents around Simonskall! There's a destroyed Westwall-pillbox just a few meters behind the so called 'castle' and a sickbay under one of the houses!

[Scipio]

I doubt you can find a game that has more going on under the hood than CMx2 does. It's not just pushing polygons around the screen... it's all the game computations that go on to make those polygons behave realistically.

Steve

Steve, you should advertise CMx2 as the benchmark for realistic hardware testing.