December 09 Summary of Combat Mission projects

[Sequoia]

For your viewing pleasure I have put together a list of all Combat Mission projects Steve has semi-officially announced, plus the semi-official projected release dates. I hope this will be of service to many of you.

Combat Mission Shock Force

Base Game Released July 07

US Marines Module Released Sept 08

British Forces Module Released July 09

NATO module Release first half 2010

Combat Mission “Normandy" (unofficial name)

Base Game Release first half 2010

“Commonwealth” Module Release 2nd half 2010

“Arnhem-Sept ’44 ” Module Release ?

“Even more ’44 stuff” Module Release ?

Combat Mission “Soviets in Afghanistan” (unofficial name)

Base game (only one announced) Release first half 2010

Combat Mission “Battle of the Bulge” (unofficial name)

Base Game Release ?

Possible modules not mentioned yet ( probably at least Commonwealth, and Spring ’45)

Combat Mission “Operation Bagration” (unofficial name)

Base Game Release ?

Possible Modules not mentioned yet (Finns hinted at plus follow ons to end of war.)

Also mentioned was a desire to do Eastfront games for 1943,1942 and 1941 in that order.

Combat Mission Shock Force II (unofficial name) Modern Combat between major powers.

Base Game Release first half 2011

Possible modules not mentioned yet.

[Vergeltungswaffe]

I'll take the lot. Have it delivered by Christmas, please.

[Bergerbitz]

Can I have the #1 combo with cheese, please? Oh, and also by Christmas.

Thanks, eh?

[MikeyD]

For some odd reason I'm more jazzed about Afghanistan than Normandy, I realize that's herasy for some.

Perhaps its because Afghanistan is the only title on the list that can legitimately claim alpine terrain! I'll be a bit miffed with Snowball if they only produce more rolling Eurpean-style terrain maps for their scenarios. I WANT FRICKIN' MOUNTAINS!!!! :p:p

[Bertram]

Perhaps its because Afghanistan is the only title on the list that can legitimately claim alpine terrain! I'll be a bit miffed with Snowball if they only produce more rolling Eurpean-style terrain maps for their scenarios. I WANT FRICKIN' MOUNTAINS!!!! :p:p

[MikeyD]

..ah, but not in Normandy

I knew someone would mention that word alpine so I double-checked the dictionary before typing: alpine (small 'a') is any mountain. Like a person don't have to be an actual cow to be called bovine.

[Nicdain]

Afghanistan is the only title on the list that can legitimately claim alpine terrain!

well, geologically speaking, both alpine and himalayan mountains have formed in the same orogenic phase and they have common physiographic and morphologic features, so calling Afghanistan mountains "alpine" is IMHO correct.

my .02 geologic €uros

[GSX]

Combat Mission Shock Force

Base Game Released July 07

US Marines Module Released Sept 08

British Forces Module Released July 09

NATO module Release first half 2010

If we follow this model, and nothing I have read here seems to indicate otherwise, then the Base game is followed by Modules at roughly yearly intervals.

So CM Normandy would be released in say Jun 10, then CMN Commonwealth in Jun/Jul 11 etc etc. I see absolutely no evidence that the modular system produces new games any faster than this 1 yearly interval. Despite all the rhetoric here about timelines etc the actual game and module times speak for themselves. Marines was advertised as going to be out way before it actually appeared (with a broken campaign) and the Brits was advertised as going to be out in Dec 2008, with an actual release of Jul 2009.

Simply by using this forum to predict game arrival times means that some of you will need to be a lot more patient than you have been as there seems to be a 6-8 month delay on any timeline given by BF for cm-2 games.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

This seems to come up regularly, mostly by criticaster who for whatever reason seems to think this proves them right on the inferiority of the CMx2 engine.

Most of the delays stems from both the engine, the module system and the external team being new. Yes, there's been delays and will be again (I don't think we'll be seeing CM:N as soon as Steve hopes) but things wil probably get better over time.

And in the mean time we should get a steady trickle of content.

I don't see the problem.

[GSX]

This seems to come up regularly, mostly by criticaster who for whatever reason seems to think this proves them right on the inferiority of the CMx2 engine.

Most of the delays stems from both the engine, the module system and the external team being new. Yes, there's been delays and will be again (I don't think we'll be seeing CM:N as soon as Steve hopes) but things wil probably get better over time.

And in the mean time we should get a steady trickle of content.

I don't see the problem.

Well I for one certainly dont see any inferiority in the CM-2 engine. Its far superior in most respects there. All my statements are based on observations from this forum over the past few years. Its nothing to do with the game engine at all.

[Sgt Joch]

GSX, I don't see your comment as criticism, it is a fair question. The approximately 10 months delay between releases of modules is a fact. I know BFC is hoping that as the system mature, it may be possible to shorten that delay, but only time will tell. From the little bit I have seen from the inside, these projects always wind up taking more time than everyone expected.

Your timeline sounds about right to me, but I do not speak for BFC and I tend to be a pessimist at heart...

[MikeyD]

Snowball CM:Afghanistan title came entirely out of left field. So nobody can complain about an extended wait for that game - we weren't aware of its existance until recently!

As to 'blaming the game engine'. Nobody, not even the Beta guys, knows what goes on when BFC is offline. Perhaps - just speculating - the whole Snowball team got arrested for selling bootleg T-shirts outside a Sting concert in Moscow. Perhaps Steve has been busy in court recently fighting multiple paternity charges from supermodels. We just don't know.

This board sometimes reminds me of my mother. You're a bit late for dinner and she immedately starts peculating "Oh, perhaps there's been a horrible car crash! Perhaps he fell in the bath tub and can't get up!"

[dan/california]

Take the estimate, triple it, add even more time if the project fells "hard". Repeat after every new roadblock comes up. It saves a great deal of disappointment and high blood pressure.

[sfhand]

If BF can continue to whittle down the module development time cycle we may yet see the hoped for 4 month cycle before too long. I still have way too much CMSF of all existing varieties to explore before I start getting antsy about unreleased titles and modules.

Of course, Dragon Age Origins isn't helping me get through my CMSF backlog...

[Battlefront.com]

Elmar said it best:

This seems to come up regularly, mostly by criticaster who for whatever reason seems to think this proves them right on the inferiority of the CMx2 engine.

Most of the delays stems from both the engine, the module system and the external team being new. Yes, there's been delays and will be again (I don't think we'll be seeing CM:N as soon as Steve hopes) but things wil probably get better over time.

And in the mean time we should get a steady trickle of content.

I've explained many times now that the delays we're seeing are a continuing part of the up-front costs of having a true "engine" instead of a linear one game at a time made by one team. It's taking us longer than we would like to get the code, tools, and personnel setup to make this happen, but we're making progress on all of that *and* Normandy, *and* Afghanistan, *and* NATO all simultaneously. There's even been some work done on Normandy's Modules.

The bottom line is that the past is not a good yardstick for the future for two reasons:

1. A lot of the last 2.5 years was spent making basic fixes/improvements to the game engine in addition to adding tons of new functionality. From now on we'll only be adding stuff, so much of what happened in the last 2.5 years won't be repeated.

2. Much of the delays getting ourselves setup for consecutive development is behind us as well. Not entirely, but lots of one-time investments are checked off and won't be repeated.

Our fear isn't about having too few releases over the next year... it's having too many. I'm sure you guys, at least, don't fear having too much to choose from

Steve

[LuckyStrike]

Things are good in CM land

[GSX]

Elmar said it best:

I've explained many times now that the delays we're seeing are a continuing part of the up-front costs of having a true "engine" instead of a linear one game at a time made by one team. It's taking us longer than we would like to get the code, tools, and personnel setup to make this happen, but we're making progress on all of that *and* Normandy, *and* Afghanistan, *and* NATO all simultaneously. There's even been some work done on Normandy's Modules.

The bottom line is that the past is not a good yardstick for the future for two reasons:

Our fear isn't about having too few releases over the next year... it's having too many. I'm sure you guys, at least, don't fear having too much to choose from

Steve

And yet, you have been saying this for quite a long time. Since CMSF arrived and maybe before. You also said that CMN would definitely be out in 2009.

Dont get me wrong, I'm really not particularly bothered when CMN or the NATO module arrives, I will more than likely get the latter anyway, even if its a year from now. I also enjoy SF as it is right now, with a couple of misgivings about the infantry.

However, the fact remains that I can only judge whats happening next by whats happened before with the CMx2 engine. I suppose I could say that you had to do so much work on CMSF because it needed it and was probably released about a year or so before it should have been. So with this in mind, I really dont want CMN rushed and released too soon.

But, BFC are the ones driving the expectation levels here by stating that a module will be out every six months and a new game every year. Which, hasnt, so far, been the case.

All hail the future though, it seems like gaming heaven to me.

[Sixxkiller]

Since when has Battlefront ever hit an expected release date? LOL. Most software companies dont and since in real war no plan lasts contact with the enemy, how can a software company that simulates it do it?

Steve is an optimist, thats for sure. If he says this Christmas and its not out until next, well that's Steve. I am pretty sure he would like it out sooner than even you guys do, but its his company and if his misses his target, well that's less money for him. Not like the game is gonna be better the sooner it gets out anyway.

Oh and BTW, even the beta guys get optimistic Steve and his oh it will be a WEEK OR SO that can turn into much much longer . Hang in there tho guys, they really are going as fast as they can.

[Mord]

I don't care how long it takes (well, kinda) I just want to hear or see some stuff on (one or all) of the three definite products we know are on the way...that at least soothes the ache a bit.

Hopefully the guys will never be forced to allow something to ship again in the state CMSF was in...it's worth the wait for everyone, 'specially BFC. Those old threads were just vicious!

Mord.

[Nicdain]

I just want to hear or see some stuff on (one or all) of the three definite products we know are on the way...

That's exactly what I'd like to have, too. I'm having a great time with CMSF, so I can wait for CM:N or CM:A or Nato the time needed to have these games solidly built.

But I think that a sort of development diary (Ok, not daily, nor weekly, but at least monthly!) with news about the engine, screenshots and so on would be nice to whet the appetite.

I suppose that at the present stage of development, there must be something to say or see about the three titles.

Ok, just my thoughts

[Götz von Berlichingen]

Elmar said it best:

I've explained many times now that the delays we're seeing are a continuing part of the up-front costs of having a true "engine" instead of a linear one game at a time made by one team. It's taking us longer than we would like to get the code, tools, and personnel setup to make this happen, but we're making progress on all of that *and* Normandy, *and* Afghanistan, *and* NATO all simultaneously. There's even been some work done on Normandy's Modules.

The bottom line is that the past is not a good yardstick for the future for two reasons:

1. A lot of the last 2.5 years was spent making basic fixes/improvements to the game engine in addition to adding tons of new functionality. From now on we'll only be adding stuff, so much of what happened in the last 2.5 years won't be repeated.

2. Much of the delays getting ourselves setup for consecutive development is behind us as well. Not entirely, but lots of one-time investments are checked off and won't be repeated.

Our fear isn't about having too few releases over the next year... it's having too many. I'm sure you guys, at least, don't fear having too much to choose from

Steve

Sooooo, can we still expect CM:N out by April....?

[Sequoia]

I thought I'd bump this since there's been a lot of questions about it lately. Obviously CMSF:NATO, CM:Afghanistan and CM:Normandy did not make it out in the first half of 2010.

[phil stanbridge]

Our fear isn't about having too few releases over the next year... it's having too many...

This is somewhat of a concern. Obviously with the ETO you've said yourself you're looking at somewhere in the region of 16 modules - that sounds plain ridiculous from a marketing point of view. With the potential slippage you'll be looking at rolling out modules for this one engine over the next 4-5 years. By then the engine would be obsolete and things in CM land would have moved on considerably. Using some logic (even if it is slightly mis-guided) I can't really see how this will work, even though I really want it to

[Sequoia]

This may be me wanting it to work as well but here are some things to take into consideration:

CMSF modules have sold better than expected.

CM:Afghanistan non-Russian sales have been better than expected even with NATO right around the corner. They haven't mentioned how Russian sales have been, but I assume Battlefront knows, but it is Snowball running that show.

There is a large subset of people who will buy WWII but not modern, and vise versa so it is not all the same customer base.

Even though WWII Westfront is the most popular, Eastfront will have a large Russian fanbase already familiar with Battlefront games.

So there's hope my friend.

[Wodin]

Battlefront...release as many as you can....I'm sure alot of people buy a game every month...I'd be more than happy to buy a module\game a month...I view this series as a collection aswell as a game.

I am more than happy with the CMx2 engine and I know it will be improved with each module so a period of 4 to 5 years is of no real consequence. The engine wont be obsolete because it will get improved over each module and there is nothing else out there to make it obsolete.....I can't see anyone bothering to do what Battlefront are doing...

From what I can tell CMx2 has been designed in away that they can constantly add too and improve the engine....as far as I know CMx2 is the engine that is going to be used for the East Front aswell...CMx3 wont arrive until the next modern game.