How is CM:SF regarded?

[Lets_All_Fight]

I was suspicious of the change but fell in love with the game very quickly. I'd probably go as far to say that CMSF is my favourite Combat Mission title. While i am looking forward to CM:N and it's various modules, the one I am waiting for is the next modern day title. I'm probably as excited about the NATO pack as I am about the WW2 game.

[Phantom Captain]

I'm one of the old schooler WWII aficianados that, back at the time, didn't feel interested or that I would care for the modern era at all. When it was released and all the complaints, bugs, etc. came out in the wash I simply sat on the sidelines and continued to PBEM CMBB to my hearts content. Actually glad I did! I drifted off into that world for some time, years in fact, and got involved in other Civil War gaming goodness while CM:SF was patched, fixed and brought up to it's current state. I'm really glad I waited and jumped in to the version we have now.

Now, I totally love CM:SF, Marines, Brits, to the detriment of the earlier games even though I'm still playing CMBB, and am soo looking forward to NATO too. Have to also say I'm completely surprised by how much I was anticipating Afghanistan and how much I'm enjoying that theater and combatants and how much it has sucked me in. I think it speaks volumes on what Steve said in that it doesn't really matter the module or era, a great game or system will stand out for itself and draw those who would be interested to it.

I would even say that I too think I enjoy the modern era more now than WWII (Blasphemy I know but it's true!!). In all honesty, as others have pointed out, it's just a great system and such a niche for us wargamers where nothing else even compares. If you are into wargaming at all I don't see how anyone could complain by what we get here even if it's not EXACTLY what we desire, expect and want. For me, just having the CM games really satisfies my wargamer obsession in a way that no other games ever have. Coming back to the forum and the games really felt like coming back home. No other games have EVER gotten the time, the life and love out of me like these games and I'm just happy to have them.

That said I'm DEFINITELY looking forward to the return to WWII with this engine. I can only imagine how both east and west fronts are going to be as time goes by and the games are released. Even so, I'm really really looking forward to the next modern era installment with just as much anticipation.

[Sivodsi]

Watch it sonny! I'm a very deep lurker ....

And thus, we are lucky!

[moneymaxx]

I've heard a bit about the big angry period in '07 about SF, but I can't really see how anyone could be disappointed with all the improvements.

Normally BFC releases games "when they are done". Not so CMSF. Rumors say that because of Paradox (their partner at that time) they had to release a unfinished product. At that point all the future improvements were unknown and many thought that CMSF was not only unfinished but could not be fixed at all (I kind of doubted it as well despite of BFC´s track record of supporting their games).

I found the game in its initial release unplayable (sorry Battlefront) and disliked the setting, not so much because it's modern but because I think US against Syria is very unbalanced. After waiting soooooo long after CMBB/CMAK I was very disappointed and since no other company releases games for my wargaming needs became slightly sad, others became depressed and many others angry.

After some months I picked up CMSF on Ebay, still did not like it. But today, even though I have not changed my opinion about the setting, I find CMSF entertaining because BFC has improved it so much. Actually I'am even thinking about buying the modules (but only if there is a NATO/British/Marine bundle ).

That I play CMSF despite of the setting says a lot about the quality of the underlying engine. Even more important is that CMSF proved once again that Battlefront does not abandon their games. Therefore I have high hopes for CM:N, even if it's not perfect on release it will only get better.

BTW can we have a new CM:N bone ?

[MikeyD]

Actually I'am even thinking about buying the modules

I've got to say if you haven't played module scenarios then you've missed out on the best part of the game's advancement. The scenario designers have learned to love Google Earth. There's nothing like a correctly scaled real location scenario map to make it feel like the real thing. A few scenarios even provide latitude and longitude coordinates of the actual spot! Paper Tiger in particular should get a medal for for his upcoming NATO maps.

[LJFHutch]

I've got to say if you haven't played module scenarios then you've missed out on the best part of the game's advancement. The scenario designers have learned to love Google Earth. There's nothing like a correctly scaled real location scenario map to make it feel like the real thing. A few scenarios even provide latitude and longitude coordinates of the actual spot! Paper Tiger in particular should get a medal for for his upcoming NATO maps.

That sounds really good actually I've got Marines but that's it, wasn't really interested in the British before, but I'm hoping to get the module bundle when/if it comes out. Probably the thing that put me off more than anything when I first came to SF was the plain maps (tried the latest demo for the Brits and this seems to be fixed), there just wasn't that much detail put into them, things like clutter items and that.

[phil stanbridge]

That sounds really good actually I've got Marines but that's it, wasn't really interested in the British before, but I'm hoping to get the module bundle when/if it comes out. Probably the thing that put me off more than anything when I first came to SF was the plain maps (tried the latest demo for the Brits and this seems to be fixed), there just wasn't that much detail put into them, things like clutter items and that.

I concur that the modules really add another level of depth. These people still playing the original content - get out there and pick up the modules! You don't know what you're missing! (BFC marketing campaign mode OFF )

You simply have to buy the British module if you've got the Marines one just for comparisons sake. You'll be surprised but it feels like a completely different game. I have found the British module the most challenging personally. Plus being the latest module you get the best campaign (in my opinion), best single missions plus the latest features. I've played through the British campaign to completion three or four times now, and playing through once again, slightly differently this time. It's tough!

Take into account as well Afghanistan has some added features and a few fixes that are missing from SF - these are bound to make an appearance in NATO thus extending the life of the game even further.

[Zatoichi]

It's interesting to see just how much better CMSF is now compared to its release - there are a ridiculous number of improvements, adjustments and brand new functionality (not to mention of course actual bug fixes). Add all of this to the new content introduced by the modules and the 3 years of experience gained by the very talented scenario and campaign creators (both those contained in the modules and those released independently) and you have a superb game that is undoubtedly about to get even better with the (hopefully imminent) introduction of the NATO module.

I guess I'm a bit odd in that I liked the game right off the bat, so I've been an extremely happy gamer for the last 3 years watching a game I enjoy getting better and better with each patch and module. Yes, the bugs were frustrating, and yes, it can always do with more features or tweaks, but having the current evolved engine as the basis for 'CM:WW2 title unknown' promises great things for the future.

So how do I regard CM:SF? Pretty darn highly.

Just my 2 pence.

[LJFHutch]

Hmm, but how is SF regarded in general though? (not by the mainstream of course, I think it was IGN's original score of 5 or 5.5 or something that turned me onto it, dismayed as I was with the high scores of games I cared little about). I mean, I assume it is more successful than the first series of games, given BF's own success?

[Sivodsi]

Hmm, but how is SF regarded in general though? (not by the mainstream of course, I think it was IGN's original score of 5 or 5.5 or something that turned me onto it, dismayed as I was with the high scores of games I cared little about). I mean, I assume it is more successful than the first series of games, given BF's own success?

What do you mean by 'in general'? If you are asking on this forum you will get generally positive replies, naturally. If you ask the general public you will be hard put to find anybody who has heard of it. Asking the question seems to me like an exercise in futility. I don't know what kind of answer you expect.

So, most people here - me included - will tell you its a great game because we hang out here because we enjoy the game. But most people not here have never heard of the game and so can't tell you anything about it.

Strange? Common sense to me.

The best way to find out is to install the demo and try it out. But I put it to you that you will not find out the true joys until you play H2H. So, if you are really cautious, just buy the base game and start a PBEM and see how it goes. If it grabs you, get the rest of the modules. If not, forget about it.

[Wodin]

There is one CM forum on a website that I've never posted on as I'd be to scared to say I like CMSF and praise it....so if you go there and ask that question it will be ripped apart....I've even noticed laments on how terrible CM Normandy will be and it's not even out...it's great they love CMx1 so much but the hatred they hold for CMx2 is something to behold....I was late into the CMSF arena so I've only experienced a superb highly playable wargame.....I still own CMBB and CMAK (though for me CMAK is the weakest of the CM family as I have no real interest in the theatre and found little extra to offer in new features over CMBB to balance out my disinterest in the African campaign) and for me CMBB is a classic as is CMSF.

[Battlefront.com]

Hmm, but how is SF regarded in general though? (not by the mainstream of course, I think it was IGN's original score of 5 or 5.5 or something that turned me onto it, dismayed as I was with the high scores of games I cared little about).

In the era of downloadable demos and the ability to talk directly with people playing the game (i.e. Forums like this), reviewers are rapidly becoming irrelevant. It's one of the reason why the games magazine business is nearly extinct.

In the end it's all about personal preferences. CMx1 is hailed by many WW2 wargamers as the best there ever has been. But there are those who say Steel Panthers should hold that title. Others still say Close Combat. A few, even, say Panthers in the Shadows is the best. The only way to find out which one is the "best" in your own opinion is to try them all out and decide for yourself.

I mean, I assume it is more successful than the first series of games, given BF's own success?

CMBO is still the best selling game we've ever had. The reasons for that are somewhat unrepeatable, partly because it was the first and partly because the retail market was at its peak and has since all but evaporated. We got a lot of money from retail CMBB also benefited greatly from the same retail deal we setup for CMBO, especially because it was too good for how well it actually sold (our retailer publisher wasn't happy with the results). Therefore, CMBB had a huge chunk of retail money it didn't "deserve". This puts CMBB as our second best selling game, though significantly lower than CMBO. CM:SF base game comes in third, CMAK forth. If we include all CM:SF products CMBB will likely lose its place as #2 once NATO is released.

Despite what WW2 centric gamers may say, Modern is a very popular setting for a wargame. Certainly more popular than North Africa and not too much less than Eastern Front. But Western Front still is king and we expect CM: Normandy will confirm this again. The interesting thing will be to compare CM: Normandy to CMBO. We expect CMBO will still keep its #1 position, but mostly because of its unique circumstances mentioned above. Then again, we might be surprised. CM:SF has sold more than we expected

Steve

[CaptRio]

once NATO is released.

He said NATO is going to be released this friday!!!!!!

[LJFHutch]

What do you mean by 'in general'?

I suppose in the general market of CM, if that makes any sense .... it was late, forgive me

The best way to find out is to install the demo and try it out. But I put it to you that you will not find out the true joys until you play H2H. So, if you are really cautious, just buy the base game and start a PBEM and see how it goes. If it grabs you, get the rest of the modules. If not, forget about it.

I've got CM:SF, had it for a year or two now, I was just interested in .... well thread title.

CMBO is still the best selling game we've ever had.

Wouldn't that mean that the series has declined in terms of sales and total players though? I thought that SF/modules sold well?

In any case, I hope that CM:N goes well. I expect it will do, due in no small part to the WW2 setting. This is all conjecture of course, but I would think a lot of people who are/were angry with SF/prefer x1 due to it not being set in WW2/being different to what they are used to. In fact I'd go as far as to predict that many of those who currently don't like it would claim SF was great if it had been set in WW2.

Comparing the two it seems the biggest difference - especially in how they are played - comes from the modern hardware and skill imbalance, not so much changes in the game itself. Were CM set on another planet with Space Lobsters it would play out radically different from anything we've seen so far. In fact, it would no doubt be a much bigger difference than from BB/BO/AK to SF.

Or ... something. I could be totally wrong, I suppose we'll have to wait for CM:N to find out

[Field Marshal Blücher]

Wouldn't that mean that the series has declined in terms of sales and total players though? I thought that SF/modules sold well?

Well, keep in mind that CM:BO has been out for many, many years more than CM:SF.

[Sivodsi]

I've got CM:SF, had it for a year or two now, I was just interested in .... well thread title.

.. and have you tried PBEMing? That was the other part of the sentence...

[LJFHutch]

.. and have you tried PBEMing? That was the other part of the sentence...

Unfortunately no, I usually prefer RT. I haven't played a lot of MP though, when I first got SF I had a really bad time with crashes. It'd go for maybe 10-20 minutes and then just die on me, only my own really small scenarios worked, and even they sometimes crashed. As such I pretty much gave up on both playing it mp and the whole game really. Got back into it a few weeks ago and it's running fine, really enjoying it. Unfortunately there's not a lot going on in the Xfire group ("Task Force Milsim") anymore, so I don't have many opponents. I'd like to get back into MP though, PBEM too - especially now I understand how it works.

What's the best place for finding opponents? Ideally I'd like to find a group who just like to play it instead of anything competitive - I lean more toward the recreating battles/what ifs/messing around in a realistic way.

[Sivodsi]

What's the best place for finding opponents? Ideally I'd like to find a group who just like to play it instead of anything competitive - I lean more toward the recreating battles/what ifs/messing around in a realistic way.

These forums are as good a place as any. Do you want to start one? I'll PM my e-mail.

Another place is world at war where you can play ladder games, but maybe this could be considered 'competitive'.

[Battlefront.com]

Wouldn't that mean that the series has declined in terms of sales and total players though? I thought that SF/modules sold well?

Depends on what you mean. Reread what I wrote about the unique circumstances surrounding the CMBO release. There were larger market factors which favored CMBO's level of sales than just popularity. Having said that, it is true that each of the next two CMx1 games sold less than the one before it. That's a fairly normal experience for direct sequels, though we had higher expectations for CMBB. We learned a valuable lesson that adding more stuff to a game doesn't mean more sales.

Total number of players, for the same period of time, is difficult to estimate when retail is factored in. So excluding retail the most number of units sold goes something like this:

CMBO

CMBB

CM:SF

CMAK

If you look at that you'll see that the last game released is more popular than the one that came out before it. Therefore, even if you ignore obvious factors like WW2 being a larger audience than Modern, the popularity of CM series is going back up.

Now, if you look at CM:SF *and* its Modules, CM:SF will most likely bump up ahead of CMBB with NATO's release. This is relevant only in terms of revenue and not individual players because Modules require the base game. Since we care only about the income to effort ratio, we don't really care about how many individuals are playing or not. Likewise, even though more individuals purchased CMBB than CM:SF base game, CMBB cost us more to develop than CM:SF did (when one considers CMBB only produced one sequel while CM:SF is a game engine).

Certainly only a fraction of the people who purchased a CMx1 game are still playing them. Based on the number of Vista upgrades we have a rough idea of the activity level. I'd guess that less than 1% of all CMx1 games purchased are still being actively played. That number is fewer than the sales of a single CM:SF Module, therefore it's clear that 3 years out CM:SF has far more people playing it than are still playing all three CMx1 games combined. Which is the way it should be considering CMx1 games are between 6 and 10 years old.

Steve

[mike_the_wino]

Since we care only about the income to effort ratio, we don't really care about how many individuals are playing or not.

Steve

I just dropped $71 to have the latest CoD dropped on my door 2 days after release. Can't be bothered picking it up this time of year and all that. I would easily go the same for CM:N.....if it was available so let's work something out here.

[vincere]

Certainly only a fraction of the people who purchased a CMx1 game are still playing them. Based on the number of Vista upgrades we have a rough idea of the activity level. I'd guess that less than 1% of all CMx1 games purchased are still being actively played. .

Steve

Holy Cow, a Vista upgrade for for CMBB. Make that 1.01%, i'm off to look for it.

Bravo. Great effort for back support. Nnd thankd for sharing that inisghtful information in the post.

Effort to sales ratio has Vietnam written all over it to my lay mind.

[phil stanbridge]

I don't really understand what that vista upgrade is all about? I reinstalled CMAK earlier today on my laptop - admittedly it's Windows 7 now, but it worked flawlessly. Admittedly I haven't tried fog effects and the things that used to be a problem.

[Mord]

I don't think you need it if you are using Win 7.

Mord.

[Battlefront.com]

From what I last saw CMx1 on Windows 7 is "touchy". Early results showed CMx1 had the same problems on it as it had on Vista. But some people apparently had success getting it to run. Nobody got it running on Vista as far as I know.

Steve

[GDog]

For nearly a year I have regarded CMSF very ATI unfriendly.

Just coming back to these forums for the first time in a long time, sounds like that might be a thing of the past, but will have to find out for myself soon when I try the new CATALYST Drivers.

*EDIT* In all fairness it should or could be said that ATI is very CMSF unfriendly.