Jump to content

Thanks guys for CMAK and CMBB patch


Recommended Posts

First, thanks for those anticipated patch !

Three little question :

- Will those patch work on a non-english version of the game ?

- May it have an impact on some non-english texts ?

- The buying page mention à new "licence code". Is it a new "e-licence" with online activation or a new cd key ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I'm thinking this will get me in hot water............

But I've been reading "Battle Cry of Freedom", and realized how much these guys suffered for the right (amongst others) to say what they thought.

Just a tiny bit of background on me for perspective.

I've been playing wargames since the 1970s.

I've ordered a fair amount of games from Battlefront (CM series, SC1,2, addon, etc).

Fortunately, I have been reasonably successful in real life, so that $5 for a functional game is fairly trivial for me.

So, here goes.............

1) I dont' think Battlefront should have shut down the other thread on the $5 patch. It was a useful, interesting discussion, in my opinion. Yes, I understand that a company forum is a private club, and the owners can act how they please. But its poor PR.

2) Charging $5 (or any sum) for a game patch is very, very unusual. I haven't researched the topic exhaustively, so I wont' say unprecedented. But it certainly is uncommon.

3) I have about 100 games. The only ones I have that plays on XP and not on Vista are the Combat Mission series. I am by no means a programming expert. However, given the above, a neutral observer would be forced to conclude that there was something unusual, or different, about the CM series programming (such as using unsupported shortcuts, etc). Assuming that I am correct, and that Battlefront used an unusual programming strategy, not supported by MS, is it unreasonable that Battlefront should be asked to produce a fix? There are lots of other examples where this has been done (Sid Meiers Gettysburg for one).

4) It is not clear that PBEM on an unpatched, XP, is compatible with the patch.

5) Given the above points, this has the potential to be a PR disaster for Battlefront. I would guess that somewhere fewer than 500 people would pay for this patch. Thats $2500. After administrative costs, maybe $1000 profit. I'm astounded that Battlefront woudl risk their good name for $1000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2) Charging $5 (or any sum) for a game patch is very, very unusual. I haven't researched the topic exhaustively, so I wont' say unprecedented. But it certainly is uncommon.

No doubt that it is unusual. But it is also unusual that a game dev goes back and patches a game that is 6 and 7 years old too. The core game(CMBO) came out in like 99, that's a decade now. :eek:

But then again, that Philip guy made this patch right, so did you guys pay him to do it and thus is why the $5 dollar fee? I personally don't need this patch since the latest Nvidia driver 190.38 fixed my Vista+DX10 problem. But I'm just curious what the $5 fee is actually for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mind the $5, but the elicense. DRM gets introduced into game that didn't have it before.

Myself, I have CMx1 games on a network drive and I use them from my Windoze box if it happens to be up, or from Linux/Cedega when not. That won't fly with elicense anymore.

And yes, Matrix' system is more liberal. While I have to get the registry keys into both the real Windows installation and the fake one Matrix does allow me to have them in there at the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly does this DRM involve? I've seen it mentioned in several places, but don't actually know what it entails. I purchased all three games, so I'm not worried about getting "caught" with an illegal copy or anything like that. But I do plan to have the games installed on multiple machines (XP desktop and, with the patch, planned to use it on Vista laptop). I also use the noCD exe files so I don't need the CD. Does DRM mean I won't be able to have it on both machines? Or that the noCD exe file won't work? Both? Neither?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly does this DRM involve? I've seen it mentioned in several places, but don't actually know what it entails. I purchased all three games, so I'm not worried about getting "caught" with an illegal copy or anything like that. But I do plan to have the games installed on multiple machines (XP desktop and, with the patch, planned to use it on Vista laptop). I also use the noCD exe files so I don't need the CD. Does DRM mean I won't be able to have it on both machines? Or that the noCD exe file won't work? Both? Neither?

With the eLicense you can have a program installed on two machines at once. It's pretty simple, well supported, and hasn't given me any problems. I'm gonna guess that Redwolf is objecting to it simply because it is DRM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What exactly does this DRM involve? I've seen it mentioned in several places, but don't actually know what it entails. I purchased all three games, so I'm not worried about getting "caught" with an illegal copy or anything like that. But I do plan to have the games installed on multiple machines (XP desktop and, with the patch, planned to use it on Vista laptop). I also use the noCD exe files so I don't need the CD. Does DRM mean I won't be able to have it on both machines? Or that the noCD exe file won't work? Both? Neither?

The no-cd patches will of course be gone after you install these patches, they are completely replaced. Of course a CD isn't required with any of the 1.04 patches.

The elicense limit is two installs. So going from the old code to the 1.04 that would mean I cannot go around the house and invoke CMx1 from any Windows instance (from the network drive) anymore. Because now I have to 1) a machine would have to go through the actual install (CMx1 didn't require an install, you can just call the exe and that's it) and 2) no more than 2. In my particular instance that would be my Linux install and my late Windoze box. I could not e.g. fire up CMBB on my wife's notebook to do one of the "empty turn" replies for PBEM. And this example isn't made up, it is what I did.

Despite what some people might want to imply I am implying I don't think that battlefront's elicense is particularly bad. It is pretty nice and liberal as far as DRM goes.

I do object, however, to first buying a game under license A (whatever it is) and then having is forcefully re-licensed to license B, when license B is more restrictive.

And of course there's always the "what happens when the activation server is gone?" question.

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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...