Events log... please BF!

[JonS]

But a more simplistic click-able casualty light/warning that takes you right to the hotspot would be useful.

Isn't that what the triangles at the top of the screen are for?

[Lethaface]

Isn't that what the triangles at the top of the screen are for?

Perhaps, but you need to be on steroids in order to see whats going on there, when your facing the other direction.

No, because some votes are more equal tham others

If you read properly, I'm on the more equal side

Err ... but then it wouldn't be RT

True, but who cares?

RT-extended whatever, the form is more important then the name. Even if I'm not allowed to make any changes I would like a replay function. And why not make it possible to make some changes, from tactical hindsight? It would almost practically be WEGO with custom timed turns. However that doesn't stop it from being interesting in my opinion.

Anyway, I only bid $0,02 for this feature; the crisis being the crisis etc.

[Battlefront.com]

CptWasp,

Often the customer doesn't know exactly what he wants; but when some mechanic or feature is clearly requested by more than one player/customer, it's often an interesting one.

Right, but the problem with gamers is they have more requests than can be counted. And some of them are extremely uninteresting Some are completely contradictory to the idea posted by the previous person. Others might be interesting but would take 5 years to develop. So no, just having the same idea repeated a few times does not impress us automatically.

Very often the devs and architects like me and you have their own idea of the software/component, a "mental project", and this hides the real needs of the customers (or of a part of them, obviously, I understand that an event log can't interest players not using RT). When at work someone is requesting a feature not in my mental project I find it a trouble, by instinct; but very often it's what the customer is expecting from me.

Here we agree. Many people have requested various improvements to information overload that is typical for wargames. We've got a number of things in mind that would be far more useful, we feel, than a text based event log.

Another issue with customers is they kinda like to assume that this is the first time the idea has been brought up. As it so happens with this one, it's certainly not the first time. In fact, my original design for the CMx2 UI back in 2004 did have an Event Log. Yup, you heard correct... I had that in the design, allocated UI space for it, and determined some basic rules for keep the information overload to a minimum. But by the time we got to implementing the UI Charles and I decided the idea wasn't going to work. Not the specific design, but the concept as a whole. So you see... it's already been kicked around for many years, therefore my rejection of an event log now is not a knee-jerk reaction.

Sorry, it was only an example to give an idea of the relevance of the feature for me. What I want to say is that for me another module with some other tanks is secondary to an engine feature like this.

My response was based on the assumption that this is what you meant, so I stand by my response And that is we can not possibly prioritize development based on what a few people say they want. It's too small a sampling. Which was AKD's point and I 100% agree with it. Features can not be held to some sort of popularity standard. If that were the case we'd probably have Spawning and Power Ups

I think that before taking a clear position against an idea it would be interesting to see how many players are interested... then, if the number of interested persons is marginal, it can be rejected with a simple "we will evaluate it".

I prefer to be honest with you guys. The idea of an Event Log is a very old one and it has been repeatedly brought up, thought about, and rejected based on logic which hasn't changed. So it's not likely to change the next dozen times it's brought up so why not just tell people it isn't going to happen? I think that's the better way to engage our customers, but of course it isn't the norm.

There is no need of censuring it. I think that an event log is not a fuzzy vision of Nirvana. It's a very common thing, and a lot of real time simulations have it. Close Combat (and I think it has less need of it than CMSF, because the map is smaller and easily scrollable); the awesome Panther Games series (HTTR, COTA, BftB); if I remember well Operation Flashpoint; IL-2...

Simpler games, slower pace, fewer units, fewer events, etc. all make an event log more viable. Combat Mission is, in many ways, the worst of all worlds for many design ideas. For example, people would love to see 10km x 10km maps. With the level of detail CMx2 has this is physically impossible, so just because a Panther Games release has 10km x 10km maps doesn't mean it will work for CMx2 either in concept or in execution.

Now, we do agree that we should give people access to more features which help keep track of their battle's progress. In Normandy you will see Kill Stats back in the game, for example. There are more features like that planned. But an Event Log is not one of them.

Then, you are the boss, so you are right

Not really since there is no right or wrong here. An Event Log might very well work for you, but I doubt it will be useful to most people. That doesn't mean you're wrong and the rest are right, it simply means we need to do what is in the best interests of the customer base as a whole and sometimes (often) that means someone's concept of an improvement won't happen. Sometimes just until the next release, sometimes never.

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

MeatEtr,

IMO a rolling one minute replay function for RT players is far more important than a event log. But a more simplistic click-able casualty light/warning that takes you right to the hotspot would be useful.

It would be somewhat useful if the first source of contact were off screen. But once a battle is really engaged that light would be lit up red probably 100% of the time. Not very useful

CM currently has audio cues for some things and visual effects for others. I don't disagree that we could do more to let players know what's going on with their units, but some ideas will either do nothing to improve the situation or will actually risk increasing information overload. So we have to be careful about what we don't do as much as we take care with what we do implement. We don't have time to waste on features that don't wind up working as intended.

Steve

[MeatEtr]

In Normandy you will see Kill Stats back in the game, for example. There are more features like that planned. But an Event Log is not one of them.

Steve

Awesome, this is great to hear, has this been mentioned before? If not then it's a mini-bone. Speaking of which, when in the hell are we gonna get a Normandy bone? It's been quite awhile now and with NATO and CMA now shipped along with the 1.31 patch, it's time. Or do we all have to wait for x-mas?

Btw, when a unit's icon flashes due to taking a casualty, can the time it flashes be made a user selected option. As it is now, it flashes I think for about three seconds. If I could I would change this to like ten seconds or so.

[CptWasp]

Steve

Only a comment: sometimes customer needs evolve and change. A given feature could be secondary when a game has still bugs, and can be very reasonable when the game is mature. I'm here since... I don't remember but now I have 2 childs and before no one I have seen the event log request already, but I requested it again (as stated in my first post) because it's the only thing I would add to this game today.

Thank you for the kind response.