Jump to content

Rather than release dates...


Guest Guest

Recommended Posts

The biggest problem would be that depending on the stage of development, things change too rapidly. Sometimes we dont even have a chance to get a few games going before there is another version up.

And a common misconception is that they dont like the nit-picking and suggestions. I know quite a few suggestions that are in because of you yahoo's out here. Just because they are staff or we are beta testers doesnt mean we corner the market for ideas/suggestions/complaints. Just the packaging you guys put it in that draws live fire occasionally. :P. I mean they didnt wake up yesterday and discover that wargamers such as yourselves are a bit grog(gy) before/during/after your morning coffee. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think the under the hood stuff stays under the hood to prevent min/maxing of the game. its quiet understandable.

also i dont think its bad that you need to dig throguh XX.XXX thousend posts to learn one tiny bit of information you wouldnt have got anywhere else.

Most players who play your game are going to read the manual and your dev blogs/journals and that's *it*.

about the Dev Blog, i think that the only ones reading the dev blog are the ones checking the forums. the ones not checking the forums...how should they ever "find" the blog? the blog would help expose the information but not to bring it to a different group of folks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The main problem with something like this is that it takes time to write up a dev journal like this. And it can't be done by someone outside of the the core team, either, so you're cutting right into important coding time. For a small team like ours, that's painful. And it means that usually at the times when the most gets done there is the least time for something like dev journal updates.

Having said that, something similar to a dev journal does exist. It's right here, in the forum, as part of Steve's regular posts and replies. You do need to hunt for it a bit, and it would certainly be nice to organize it better into a blog; and in fact we are trying to do that to some extent, mirroring some of the bigger posts/threads in the Blogfront. It could be more consistent and more frequent, and we do have plans to do just that. (well, Steve promised! :))

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Moon said, it takes up time and time from doing the actual development work. And I would STILL need to spend time posting and discussing things here, so it would further distract us from development work. Plus, as we have seen many times there is often a lot of "tempest in a teapot" about things which people haven't even played yet.

On top of all of that, there basically is no coding going on for CM:SF Brits except for minor tweaks to existing behavior and/or bug fixes. As I've said, we're working on Normandy now and there's absolutely no way I'm going to start talking about the details of that stuff until much later. A couple of tidbits here and there, no problem, but it's way too early to start getting into detailed discussion about things which may very well change before any of you actually see it in person.

Yes, we're well aware there are a lot of things going on under the hood that you guys don't know about. That was true for CMx1 as well. The results are what people should focus on, not unseen game mechanics and data. If people can't see the improvements in CMx2 over CMx1 then they aren't looking or are blind. Experience has shown that for that type even detailing things side by side doesn't make a damned bit of difference. Instead I just waste more of my time trying to dull an axe which the person is intent on keeping sharp. I'm speaking from experience here and anybody who has hung around this Forum long enough knows exactly what I'm talking about :D

So instead of spending 1000 hours explaining 1000 things preemptively, without knowing what people find important, I'd rather spend 500 hours explaining the 50 things that people really find a need to know more about. Less time chewed up on my end, more detailed answers for the things which really matter. Everybody wins.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At present we're coding things for Normandy which are rather... how shall I put this... "obvious" :D Things like water, bridges, new trees, etc. None of these things have "wow" appeal, in the sense that the stuff is both expected and predictable in how it will work. And of course we're doing low level stuff that none of you guys will care about specifically. "The game seems to run faster" is what people will say and there might be 2 dozen reasons for that, none of which are very interesting except to programming geeks ;)

What you guys REALLY want to hear about, in detail, isn't being coded yet. Things like the new QB system, which formations are included off the bat, etc. When we do get to that sort of thing I'll definitely be dropping bones. The Blog has been the traditional vehicle for fairly major bones and so it shall continue to be.

For now it's just steady progress. We even have a first draft on a German soldier in M43 tunic. But man, he's an ugly sucker without textures ;)

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you guys REALLY want to hear about, in detail, isn't being coded yet

ahh, new QB system, cover armor arc, TCPip WEGO hopefully with replay sooner or later, cant wait!!! :)

Things like water...

i have no idea how one codes water, or codes anything for that matter, but i imagine doing water is connected with some fun moments. i dont know, do you guys have to set propperties for water? like viscosity(english word?) and the like?

iam sure there are some moments where you will come into the test map and the water will be all over the place and wont behaveing like water at all...or some such.

i can imagine some fun screenshots with this theme :)

actually i find that quiet interessting, how are you guys approaching water in CMx2? if you have a little time maybe you could elaborate, if there is anything interessting to say about that at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i have no idea how one codes water, or codes anything for that matter, but i imagine doing water is connected with some fun moments. i dont know, do you guys have to set propperties for water? like viscosity(english word?) and the like?

iam sure there are some moments where you will come into the test map and the water will be all over the place and wont behaveing like water at all...or some such.

i can imagine some fun screenshots with this theme :)

actually i find that quiet interessting, how are you guys approaching water in CMx2? if you have a little time maybe you could elaborate, if there is anything interessting to say about that at all.

I don't know if you have checked out or play any of the Total War series but according to some of their interviews they apparently had one guy doing nothing but coding water for an entire year before their latest game "Empire Total War" came out. Judging from that I would imagine that water is a difficult and time consuming thing to code. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if you have checked out or play any of the Total War series but according to some of their interviews they apparently had one guy doing nothing but coding water for an entire year before their latest game "Empire Total War" came out. Judging from that I would imagine that water is a difficult and time consuming thing to code. :(

To hell with that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Water in CM:SF is a matter of graphics, nothing more than that because a) it isn't necessary and B) it's time consuming. If we were to do ocean or huge river amphibious operations... then we would have to do things like currents, swells, and other factors if we were to do water correctly. Which is partly why we aren't doing that ;)

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something you could do is release information in the style of a dev journal showing and explaining what is being coded at present.

It's amazing really how much I see in CMSF is not really explained anywhere, or perhaps some things are but they require quite a bit of research on the forum or quite a following here.

Most players who play your game are going to read the manual and your dev blogs/journals and that's *it*. If you want us to know how amazing CMSF is compared to the old engine, all those "under the hood improvements", why not talk about them while you're coding them?

Just bookmark Steves posts like this. Makes it quicker and easier to track/check out his posts. It's not a blog thing but it's close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just bookmark Steves posts like this. Makes it quicker and easier to track/check out his posts. It's not a blog thing but it's close.

Actually I think it would be nice if the forum supported a feature whereby whenever someone from Battlefront posts in a thread the thread is marked somehow so people know that a Battlefront response is in that thread. In the "Total War Center" forum they put a little "CA" next to a thread whenever someone from Creative Assembly posts in a thread. It would just make it easier if someone wants to identify those threads with BFC responses in them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...