Mord Posted September 13, 2008 Share Posted September 13, 2008 I second that emotion. And to add to the discussion, I miss water but not to a point where it ruins the game for me. Out of all the things that could have been left out, and were left out, it's low on my list. Knowing we will see it eventually is fine by me. Mord. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie901 Posted September 13, 2008 Author Share Posted September 13, 2008 Well to not sound like a total #$@#%. I did preorder the Marines Module cause water/bridge or no water/bridge I still think the CM series is the best wargame available; PERIOD! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rammer4250 Posted September 13, 2008 Share Posted September 13, 2008 Battlefront I don't know if I am part of the silent majority or not. I am 49 years old and have been playing wargames since I was 9 or 10. I used to push cut out cardboard squares around an unchangeable map. That was fun believe it or not because I knew that that was the best there was at the time. I can't understand the constant whining for this or for that that goes on here, although at times I have benefitted from it (ha!ha!). All games that I have ever bought have constantly changed if they didn't die. Each and every time I paid for a newer or better version. I waited sometimes for years. Falcon 4 is a great example. I am still waiting for Fighter Ops to come out and I will keep on waiting. Oh well enough for the nostalgia. Battlefront has and probably will always be the cutting edge for computer wargaming in my opinion. If it doesn't have water now I know it will in the future. Even if it never does I will always buy the newest (and better than any other game on the market) product of Combat Mission. From the development of the game to the customer support Battlefront is by far the best company I have ever had the privilege to throw my money at. Thank you Battlefront from a 4 decade wargamer. Hi, my name is Ron and I am a Battlefrontaholic! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Kettler Posted September 13, 2008 Share Posted September 13, 2008 Hi, Ron! Mord, Left you something in the sound mod thread. Regards, John Kettler 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 13, 2008 Share Posted September 13, 2008 Thanks guys! I know how easy it is to forget about what one has and focus on what one doesn't. I also know it is easy, as a customer, to forget that just because something looks obvious from an uninformed outside position that perhaps the people doing the work might know their jobs better than you (though I still don't understand why Ford's new 65mpg car will be sold in Europe only!). The problem with CMx1's code was that even little changes were difficult to make, both in terms of time and in terms of negatively impacting the preexisting code. CMx2's code is not perfect, since no code base can ever be perfect, but man oh-man is it easier to work with! There are still fundamental limitations that cause reality to stomp on theory, but they aren't all that significant from our perspective. We have to take the Big Picture, Long View or we'd be out of business already. Like some have gleefully predicted, but will have to eat their words each year we prove them wrong Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mazex Posted September 13, 2008 Share Posted September 13, 2008 The other truism is that uninformed customers always second guess everything we do. Everything we do right could be done better, everything not included should have been included, things included could have been done with out, etc. It's maddening and the primary reason most game developers want as much to do with their customer base as most of us want a sexually transmitted disease. Be thankful we're dumb enough to buck the trend Oh it's been a while since I was here... I must say I never heard anyone indirectly comparing their customers to sexual diseases. That's fresh. Glad to hear that the small insignificant terrain feature in Syria called the Euphrates will be available in the third iteration of the game. And the Mediterranean coast line for that matter (not that it has any strategic value). As a long time customer, I feel that I have the right to be sarcastic if you take yourself that right - m'kay? /Mazex 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted September 13, 2008 Share Posted September 13, 2008 Hi, my name is Ron and I am a Battlefrontaholic! Taking a trip, not taking a trip... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rammer4250 Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 I didn't inhale! I swear I didn't!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzermartin Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 It would be nice if water could be used as an overlay feature, instead of a "tile" so as to apply it over marsh tiles, rocky terrain, and recreate, muddy roads, lakes, rivers, canals, ports, flooded parts of a town with submerged constructions/objects etc. That would mean that depth would vary with ground elevation so it might be a bit difficult to program all the gameplay side effects. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runaway!!! Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 What? No space lobsters? You sir just lost a customer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akd Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 I'm sorry to say Steve, but it sounds like you guys got yourself cornered with a not very well thought-out shortcut you committed to early in development. In other words it seems that CMx2 did not turn out to be quite as universally-modular as everyone hoped it would - which also explains why you outright confirmed that cross-title support is not even on the list of possibilities. In a decent modular system the Content should be completely independent from the Game Engine - allowing changes to one to be carried out without any interference to the other. Where as from what was suggested about Normandy is that the changes to the Game Engine would have to be so dramatic, that the Content will be rendered incompatible with any of the previous versions of the Engine. In lament terms - Tigers will not be taking on T-72s. A little confused and disappointed as of late - and not even specifically due to the lack of "Tiger vs T72" battles, but because of an apparent lack of foresight from this Development. I'm not sure I understand why CM:SF 2 could not include the units, OOBs, models and map tiles from CM:SF so that users could continue to craft present day Mid-east missions and campaigns and mix and match various forces together on a wider variety of maps. Basicly just keep the content available via the editor, no need to update campaigns, QB, etc. Want to craft a Russia versus Arab militia scenario? Why not? It's going to suck when all the CM:SF content is abandoned until maybe we have to purchase it all over again in CM:SF 3, or 4, or 5. Although perhaps limiting the scope and potential for user-made content is part of the business model, encouraging people to buy no-longer supported older titles if they are more interested in modern Middle East conflict. But I understand the time issue. I think we got our hopes up far too much, expecting to someday achieve a holy mecca sandbox CM where we could create all sorts of interesting maps and matchups limited only by our imagination. And I agree water is really a small issue, and I don't think we need it tomorrow. It's just a shame that by the time we get it, all this great content will be gone and we'll be starting over again with the limited terrain possibities and units of the Normandy product. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afreu Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 I don't understand all the fuzz about water. Atm we can simulate water with mud tiles and bridges with a simple workaround. How would it affect the actual gameplay? What's the gain beside a visual improvement and being able to destroy bridges? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted September 14, 2008 Share Posted September 14, 2008 But I understand the time issue. I think we got our hopes up far too much, expecting to someday achieve a holy mecca sandbox CM where we could create all sorts of interesting maps and matchups limited only by our imagination. This is I believe a big part of the issue. Some people seem to think that Battlefront will give them the world on a silver plate for $45. As has been said more than a few times already, CM spoiled a lot of people. That, and other gaming companies whose DirectX Quality Assurance Interns Assistants Department is three times bigger than Battlefront's entire staff. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabal23 Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 I'm not sure I understand why CM:SF 2 could not include the units, OOBs, models and map tiles from CM:SF so that users could continue to craft present day Mid-east missions and campaigns and mix and match various forces together on a wider variety of maps. Basicly just keep the content available via the editor, no need to update campaigns, QB, etc. Want to craft a Russia versus Arab militia scenario? Why not? It's going to suck when all the CM:SF content is abandoned until maybe we have to purchase it all over again in CM:SF 3, or 4, or 5. Although perhaps limiting the scope and potential for user-made content is part of the business model, encouraging people to buy no-longer supported older titles if they are more interested in modern Middle East conflict. But I understand the time issue. I think we got our hopes up far too much, expecting to someday achieve a holy mecca sandbox CM where we could create all sorts of interesting maps and matchups limited only by our imagination. And I agree water is really a small issue, and I don't think we need it tomorrow. It's just a shame that by the time we get it, all this great content will be gone and we'll be starting over again with the limited terrain possibities and units of the Normandy product. Yeah the possibilities could have been endless. I mean they could have released 3-4 expansion packs alone just for CMSF with new flavor items, terrain tiles, ect. We could have been fighting modern conflicts all over the world. Right here in the US if someone wanted to do a scenario for it. I would have payed $15 per for new stuff and new armies. Once CMSF2 comes out people will just play that because it will be the "full package" as far as having bugs worked out and being what this game could have been. It would have been nice to continue making desert themed scenarios if we chose. I just hope someone somewhere makes a great game that just leaves the conflicts up to the designers and publish all the armies of the world with and editor. If I want to recreate the Battle of Fulda Ga, Falkland Islands, or a raid on Colombian drug cartel, then I can. I mean some much of what's out there weapons wise was being used 30 years ago as well, Hell Syria is using most of it as are other smaller nations. The possibilities are endless. I would pay $100 for that game. And the engine is right here. So easy to just open it up and let people create their own storyline ect. This is an international theme and people would be able to put their own spin on it depending on what part of the world they come from. It could have been huge. We can only hope. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 Mazex, Oh it's been a while since I was here... I must say I never heard anyone indirectly comparing their customers to sexual diseases. That's fresh. Glad to hear that the small insignificant terrain feature in Syria called the Euphrates will be available in the third iteration of the game. And the Mediterranean coast line for that matter (not that it has any strategic value). As a long time customer, I feel that I have the right to be sarcastic if you take yourself that right - m'kay? Sarcasm - noun - the use of irony to mock or convey contempt. The problem here is not that you're being sarcastic, it's that you're not doing it very well. I never said water wasn't important, I said it was less important than other things. You completely missed that point and tossed the baby out with the bathwater. Which is exactly the point I was making about some small, but VERY vocal, percentage of our customer base. You guys make us want to give customers less, not more, so keep it up and we'll not include grass for the temperate setting just to irritate you more I'm glad that the majority of customers understand that water would be nice to have for the current setting, but that it isn't that important. I mean, how many battles out of the entire game should be focused on the Euphrates and the Med coast? Statistically, not many should be. This reminds me of the uproar, and I mean UPROAR, that we didn't include "Funnies" in CMBO. "How can you possibly make a serious Normandy game without mine rolling tanks?" Or the fact that we didn't include beach landings at all. "How can you take a game set in France seriously without beach invasions?!?". Or "What?!? A game set in France that doesn't have airborne drops directly simulated?!? Are you SERIOUS?!?". Yup, we've been through this dozens of times before, so we're pretty much immune to this sort of extremist viewpoints. We have to be because we'd have been out of business long ago if we focused on trying to satisfy those who clearly have no desire to be satisfied. Now, water as a component of Normandy/France... very different than Syria. It has been said, by more than one Allied veteran, that it seemed every objective they were tasked with seizing had something to do with a waterway. While river assaults were quite rare, being constrained by bridges, fords, or geographical positioning of waterways was almost the NORM for that setting. Therefore, not including water in our Normandy/France family of games would indeed have a major impact on the game. Which is why water/bridges/fords are at the tip-top of our "absolutely must do" list People can accuse us of not having our priorities straight, but that doesn't mean such charges actually hold water. Heh Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cabal23 Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 Thanks for taking the time to stay in the ring on this one Steve, but I think you are really trying to minimize complaints about the game. I keep seeing BF respond to this supposed fringe group of vocal people, but when I look back , it seems like your core customers(members who have been around for awhile) are the ones hedging their complaints. You guys run the company, so you ultimately just say your right and we are wrong, but water aside, CMSF has had it's share of bumps. I mean you lost a huge chunk of your initial fan base because of the poor state the game was in on release. Look back at your reviews. I think I would have been really sad if those had been my initial reviews. Obviously since then the game has become much better and I for one took my dusty copy off the shelf after the last patch. I just feel if you want to keep growing this franchise and have people keep buying your product, you should really take a good look at what your audience wants. Either there is this huge silent majority no one hears from (that's what most responses from BF sound like after people take issue with this or that) or the people that post here are your core audience. The funny thing is you have a slice of the market no really caters to, it is very elitist and you will have sales regardless, but will you continue to grow your franchise? We all want a healthy community so when people say a game sucked on release and they never play it again, we lose a future member of the community. When people think they didn't get what they purchased and or angry about lack of features, we lose community members as well. I would take comments from the fringe loonies(which in my belief is a lot more of your core customers than you think) a bit more serious. These are hard economic times and people are becoming more informed before they make purchases. What happens when you start losing all your vocal supporters who just want to have a say in the direction of the game? I hope and pray that doesn't happen, as I love this game and it's community. Personally I could care less about water and more about a game engine that is consistent and not replaced in a few years, and give the opportunity for expansion to multiple modern theaters of war. I think that is all anyone here wants. I doubt there is anyone who wouldn't agree that it would be a win/win scenario. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mazex Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 Mazex, Sarcasm - noun - the use of irony to mock or convey contempt. The problem here is not that you're being sarcastic, it's that you're not doing it very well. I never said water wasn't important, I said it was less important than other things. You completely missed that point and tossed the baby out with the bathwater. Which is exactly the point I was making about some small, but VERY vocal, percentage of our customer base. You guys make us want to give customers less, not more, so keep it up and we'll not include grass for the temperate setting just to irritate you more ... People can accuse us of not having our priorities straight, but that doesn't mean such charges actually hold water. Heh Steve Well, I thought my post was pretty sarcastic but then again, English is not my native language so I guess I have to practice more I do understand that few teams are as limited on resources as BFC, and that important things have to be put on the "next version" list that you really wanted to have... I'm really happy that you got the bugs in the version 1.0 release straightened out and I guess that I can live without water for a while more, but it was one of the things that I really missed most when the 1.07 patch made the game play more as I had hoped from the beginning. Being from Sweden I take some collective guilt as I guess it was Paradox pushing the release, which is a pity as it gave the game reviews it did not deserve. Lets hope some of the big gaming sites does a "fresh" review when Marines arrive to correct that. Anyway, when I do my own missions (which is something I kind of like to do in the CM games) I tend to use a lot of water. Therefore it was a great disappointment when I realized that there was no water in CMSF. Look at the following excerpt of the briefing for a scenario that I did for CMSF: "There is a small city ahead of us called Jalil that needs to be secured, as well as the crossroads nearby where two important roads to the sea split. The sea is just two miles ahead so we should be able to smell it soon! We are ahead of the Main forces and we need to secure this city to keep the momentum of the attack! If we succeed, we will be able to get to the Mediterranean today. That will split the Syrian forces in two - and we will be able to get those desperately needed supplies by sea." download link of scenario: http://web.telia.com/~u55702101/CMSF/charlie_dont_surf.zip You can guess what I would have liked to have in the western end of the map... I also guess that my attempt at sarcasm came from the fact that I had hoped that water would make it into the Marines module. There's something with the name or sumfink that made me dream of that... ;-) /Mazex 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panzermartin Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 I guess I can live without water for a while more BFC is lucky to have such a die hard community 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 15, 2008 Share Posted September 15, 2008 Mazex, No problem! However, if you had been Danish I would still expect better from you, since they are a sarcastic bunch You indicate one of the primary problems with including water in CM:SF. Not only would it have to look good, from a graphics standpoint (trust me, reviewers would slaughter us if we had CMx1 type water!), but we would also have to support amphibious behavior since many of the vehicles on both sides are theoretically capable of movement through water. So add that bit of work to our plates as well and Normandy gets pushed even further back, along with everything to follow. One of the big problems we have as designers with "cascading" requirements. Introducing x may require y and possibly z before customers will except it as "complete". Sometimes we find it more valuable to the game as a whole to sidestep a feature because we don't have time to do x, not to mention y or z. As I've said many times for many years, we could take 10 years to make a single release and it would still be incomplete. The real world is just too big, diverse, and complex to do anything more than simulate chunks of it at one time. CM:SF simulates more elements on a modern battlefield than any other commercial military simulation out there, and does each element in more detail. Therefore, when compared to real life CM will always come up short... when compared to other sims out there it will likely always come out way ahead. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lampshade111 Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 Quit a shame CM:SF will never get water even now that we have amtracks, but I can understand why. As long as we can get some by CM:SF 2. Quick somebody go on a thirst strike and perhaps they will change their mind! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Field Marshal Blücher Posted September 16, 2008 Share Posted September 16, 2008 Quit a shame CM:SF will never get water even now that we have amtracks, but I can understand why. As long as we can get some by CM:SF 2. Quick somebody go on a thirst strike and perhaps they will change their mind! It might amuse Steve enough to put water in! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.