A bit concerned...

[FragerZ]

I still think you have a duty to advertise more. If I weren't lucky enough to have an uncle show me CMBO, then I would have never had been interested in combat mission. And that would have really sucked.

I came from a Starcraft background, and I know that those players love going in depth into strategy and tactics. I think you do have a market in the Starcraft and in particular the Company of Heroes type, if you can get your message across.

I'm 21, and I've tried to convince a bunch of people to play CMAK. However, no one my my age can get over the graphics, and the we-go. Now that CMBN has reasonable graphics and has real time, I think I will be able to change their mind.

[dieseltaylor]

How many CM:SF players here thought they would never enjoy modern warfare?

Battlefront

Playing CM:SF has not make me love modern warfare, or for that matter playing the CM:SF representation of it. So that is one. : )

[yllamana]

Most of the time when I see someone get attacked for criticizing the game, it's because of *how* they communicate it - in short, they are usually being unpleasant butt-heads (to put it eloquently ), obviously trolling.

(Sorry to just quote the one when many people responded similarly!)

Oh, there are definitely some of those types. Personally I don't think attacking them is a great idea either, but that's not what bothers me. What bothers me is people who seem to be on a hair trigger and get set off by good criticism too. The interesting thing is that these same people can often be very good and productive posters, but this inability to let criticisms of the game stand does hurt the forum and drive posters away, I think (it certainly makes me want to post less).

Even that paragraph of mine produced some weird defensive comments, like Wodin's ("Also I will defend members on here...so excellent people frequent this forum who all share a passion for CM...also I've personnely experienced a very generous offer by a forum member...well above the call of duty...) and Battlefront-Steve's ("...you have made very wide (and not positive) comments about the people who frequent this Forum.")

I didn't make any "wide" comments. I made nonspecific comments out of a desire to not call anyone in particular out. Even the people I'm thinking of I've also seen making great contributions to discussions. That doesn't make the hair trigger defensiveness less of a bad thing, though. It drives discussion elsewhere at best, stops it completely at worst. If I felt like the community wasn't worth the time of day then I wouldn't bother posting (and I assume that goes for most of us here!).

Gotta love automated bot virus websites, right? I only download software from the websites I know to trust. Random GOOGLE searches for downloads is risky.

It was the first link on your CMSF demo download page.

Yeah, there are some bugs in CM:SF's keyboard camera that have been fixed recently. Short of it is the camera was never really designed to be used by keyboard, so the bad behavior of the keyboard slipped by unnoticed by us.

That's good to hear. The camera controls are one thing I've heard other people commenting on.

I'm just rambling now, but I guess my point is: This game could appeal to a lot more mainstream audience with just a few changes. Nothing that would water down the "simulation" experience, and nothing that would compromise what the game is.

Yeps. I think improvements in presentation and interface in particular would add a lot to the game's playability for relatively modest investments of development time.

I like relating user interface to friction. The UI is the contact point between the user and the system. A good UI you don't really notice - it has very little friction, very little wasted energy. A bad UI causes a lot of friction and wastes energy. In the case of a game, that can mean that the wasted energy is worth more than the fun you get out of it, either right away (so you don't buy it at all) or as the fun drops over time (in which case that wasted energy eventually overtakes the fun and you stop playing).

So now that I've related my personal hobbyhorse that nobody else cares about those of us who think a realistic wargame is a totally great idea (ie. those of us who post on this forum!) get a lot of fun out of playing for that reason and can bull our way through a fair bit of wasted energy because of it. Those who might enjoy the game a lot (let's say, enjoy it as much as Starcraft 2) will run into that problem, though, and just go back to Starcraft 2 instead because its UI and presentation causes a lot less friction.

It probably also doesn't help that Combat Mission's options for playing with others are extremely limited. I can't really say to a friend, hey, get Combat Mission and we can play against each other! because they won't want to play against each other, they'll want to play together, so then our "playing together" is limited to swapping anecdotes which, while fun too (especially since CM's level of simulation leads itself to great stories), is probably not enough to sell them the game next to stuff that lets us play together.

I'd also point to games like Myth and perhaps especially Dawn of War 2 or maybe Company of Heroes as examples of wargames that were quite popular. While Dawn of War 2 has the Warhammer 40k license (whoa, a wargame too!) to drive sales, it's very wargamey. You could say CMx1 was a bit niche because of its abstractions and WeGo, but I don't think you can really say the same about CMx2, with its real-time play and 1:1 modeling of soldiers. I'd say the historical gulf between wargames and "strategy games"/RTS has always largely been abstraction, and CMx2 basically closes that gap and makes it accessible to anyone.

Er, anyway.

yllamma..I had no problem moving around CMSF...which is odd as normally I do struggle with 3d games..but it took me a couple of mins to get it...also if you hate CMSF ui then you wont like CMBN...hope you havent pre ordered.

I really like CMSF. I'll probably get the little module bundle soon. I also plan on preordering CMBN, but held off because of the comments on how high-quality the Mac version is. I'll try out the demo and see which one is better, then go for that.

That doesn't mean I can't see the problems in the UI, though.

In my eyes it takes a few mintues to get used to it. I found everything about CMSF straight forward, didn't even read the manual, the orders where straight forward in my opinion....

I'm glad to hear you didn't have a problem with it, but to the beginner's eye it certainly doesn't seem to make a lot of sense. Okay, so here we have some vertical bars with some bullets and grenades underneath. Maybe that means... firepower of various kinds? Here we have a picture of an eyeball and radio. Er, okay, no idea what the eyeball means - I guess the radio means they have a radio. Well, that's positive at least. Maybe the eyeball means they have eyes. Maybe if I mouse over it... no, that doesn't seem to do anything.

Then over here we apparently have some kind of gun show, with little icons next to them that mean, er, something. Mousing over those doesn't do anything - oh, except it tells me what the guns are. At least that helps! But it still doesn't tell me what this torpedo-looking thing is. Maybe after a dozen missions or so I'll notice it lights up a squad member on the left and guess that the torpedo is some kind of AT weapon. Anti-tank torpedo?!

Even a simple thing like mouseover tooltips would improve the UI immensely.

again myself I had none of the problems you had...so I don't see it as some inherent game problem but maybe a user problem or even a PC probelm as what you describe sounds like with regards to the camera jerking around, your getting crashes and music problems, all things no one else is experiencing..

There's actually a thread on the CMSF forums (or maybe it was the CMA ones) about the sound issue. Basically, when you exit the setup screen it screws up the sound until you relaunch the game. Obviously the workaround is to just relaunch the game if you ever use the setup screen, but as going to the setup screen is something a player is likely to do the first time they launch the game it's not a great first impression.

Anyway, my whole point was that the presentation and UI are likely to scare people away. I mainly included my experiences there because I thought people might be interested in them and I feel they illustrate the point reasonably well.

So er, wall of text, signing out!

[gunnergoz]

I still think you have a duty to advertise more. If I weren't lucky enough to have an uncle show me CMBO, then I would have never had been interested in combat mission. And that would have really sucked.

I came from a Starcraft background, and I know that those players love going in depth into strategy and tactics. I think you do have a market in the Starcraft and in particular the Company of Heroes type, if you can get your message across.

I'm 21, and I've tried to convince a bunch of people to play CMAK. However, no one my my age can get over the graphics, and the we-go. Now that CMBN has reasonable graphics and has real time, I think I will be able to change their mind.

I appreciate your CM evangelism. I hope that your friends who try it come to like it and learn some history in the process. Not everyone needs to be a WW2 buff or tank grog to enjoy these games...but it helps! If it gets people invested in learning something new and expanding their minds, it's fine by me.

[Sixxkiller]

I think BFC is ok with not playing the same games that the bigger publishers play. The quality of CMBN is right up there with bigger studios. They havent let greed get in the way of what they want to do. I bet this game sells 300k plus copies so I am confident no one on the team will starve, Steve will get his uniforms, Moon will get to stay employed, and MikeyD will get to add little small details to the graphics that I dont even notice needed attention until he redoes it like 300 times!

[WineCape]

Most of the time when I see someone get attacked for criticizing the game, it's because of *how* they communicate it - in short, they are usually being unpleasant butt-heads (to put it eloquently ), obviously trolling.

For example, you've just criticized aspects of the game, and I predict you won't be attacked because you managed to do it while not intentionally trying to irritate everyone around you.

.......

1. Rude posters are not the same as critical posters. Each get a different reaction and I will not have it any other way here. Rude posters have NOTHING to offer us as a community, so the sooner they shape up or get lost the better.

2. Our customer base is allowing us to make the best wargames out there, bar none. Having more customers would be nice, and we aren't opposed to it, but we're not going to chase after customers that don't exist.

3. There are rough edges in CM:BN still. But from experience we've found people who are interested in the game will tough through it and eventually figure out a comfortable way to play (as they did for CMx1). Those that don't have the patience to get through the UI probably don't have the patience for the game itself. So the primary goal of improving the UI is to give our actual customers a better experience rather than changing things for a customer that doesn't exist.

As I said, we're quite happy with where we are. Are things perfect? Nope, and they never will be. Fortunately, they don't need to be in order to be happy. Good life lesson there that goes beyond wargame development.

Now that's a voice of reason and common sense, which isn't always as common as you would like to believe.

[Wodin]

yllamana...good to hear you got things sorted it just didn't sound as if you had in your first post...also good to know you enjoy CMSF...again didn't notice you saying that in your first post...as for the sound issue I never experienced it but I bought the game two years ago so it might have been fixed by then. My gripe with CMSF music was that it was the most annoying music I've ever heard. if soemthing was going to drive people away it was that, first thing I modded. Also I agree with tool tips, I always like them, but I have come across games without them that are way more complicated to work out.

I still disagree with you on your opinion of people on the forum. Check out Gunzer post. Thats the way most do it and it's going to get regulars backs up.

FragerZ...not sure what you mean by a duty to? A duty to who? If they don't need to advertise then so be it. I'm sure in the day of the internet anyone who would be interested in CMBN will hear about it. Advertising is for big boys.I have a feeling many on here have no idea of the costs of advertising...you have to sell lots and I mean lots of product just to cover the costs. The gain for BF would be minimal if at all, most likely it would result in a loss.

The only poeple who are out there who would be interested in this series are young kids who prefer more cerebal games and have a taste for military history. This brings new blood in and they get to hear about other games. Fianlly for the general RTS war crowd Theatre of War would have brought them into BF and I'm sure to god they would have seen CMBN by now...but I turely believe the forum will be full of "the graphics are crap" etc etc if BF aim to get the mainstream games players.

[Other Means]

I agree, I think the UI is the main stumbling block for new players, both in what it does – the lack of movement scaling in the camera controls, the default keys with no key editor, no “snap to view” etc. and what it doesn’t do – show the amount of calculation under the hood that makes this as close to a simulation as possible, the lack of gestalt feedback when you're viewing the whole map, the lack of specific audio cues (“Enemy 500m left!”) etc.

If people come to this game after being sold on the “realistic” modelling, how do they know it’s correct and that it matters? Currently they don’t really. We've got hit-text in CM:BN and that helps but it could do with so much more.

But BFC know this as well as anybody and, as usual, have prioritised the game engine first. I think that makes sense. At least when you DO get to know the game, it’s something you're going to keep coming back to.

[noxnoctum]

Ya the default hotkeys in CMSF were/are absolutely horrible... that alone would turn off a lot of people who didn't realize you could change them by editing that one-can't-remember-what-it-was file.

Anyways, I don't think they should waste any money on advertising... the people who will buy it already know about it most likely.

[Gurra]

We're not in a retail mentality at any level of our operations.

I would consider paying three editions of CMBN of worth in homage for that statement. :cool:

[Moon]

I still think you have a duty to advertise more. If I weren't lucky enough to have an uncle show me CMBO, then I would have never had been interested in combat mission. And that would have really sucked.

Funny enough, if we advertised more and you didn't have a really cool uncle, the chance is extremely high that you still would not have heard about Combat Mission. In other words, our reliance on (free) word of mouth rather than extremely expensive advertising seems to be paying off!

There is no doubt that if we put $$$ into ads, there would be more players. But there are three points you have to consider and they are three of the main reasons we don't do (almost any) ads:

1) in order to create visibility through ads, you have to spend a LOT of money. You have to hit many media at the same time and keep the frequency high. Anything less than that is likely to miss critical mass. The ad campaigns you guys are used to are part of HUGE EXPENSIVE campaigns paid by large corporations. The quickest way for a small indie company like ours to go out of business is to try and compete with their dollars.

2) getting more players isn't the aim of an ad campaign. The aim is to drive in so many more players that we generate a net profit, and end up with more $ than we had before paying for the ads. Because of 1) above, due to the huge expense that needs to go into this to make a difference, this means that there must exist out there a HUGE pool of potential players. We're talking about tens of thousands of new players, just to cover the costs. After 10+ years and with a lot more ads in the past that we did, all of which failed to find that untapped huge player pool, it seems very unlikely that it exists.

3) I'll let you in on a secret. Advertising games rarely pays. Not even for the big corporations. The main reason to do ads is not to convert the ad itself directly into revenue, but rather to get editorial coverage from the media. I wouldn't go so far as to say that you are "buying" editorial coverage, because it's certainly not as direct as that (at least not with reputable media), but overall the main benefits of ads are visibility which leads to coverage. In order to properly exploit this, you need a whole staff of PR people on top of your ad spending, however.

So in summary, in order to do ads properly, you have to play the big boys game on a large scale. If you don't/can't/or don't want to, then instead of spending money for an ad here or there, word of mouth produces the better results for us. I say that after doing it for 10 years.

Funny enough, I also say that while preparing a 2 page spread for a German print mag But it's a (very) special offer. I guess the bottom line is that we do ads from time to time, and you will see the odd ad for Normandy here and there down the road; or perhaps you'll miss it.

Martin

[Plastic viking]

Ya the default hotkeys in CMSF were/are absolutely horrible... that alone would turn off a lot of people who didn't realize you could change them by editing that one-can't-remember-what-it-was file.

So what we, the community, needs to do is help write HOW-TOs for how to change these things then and get the posted here on the forum, that will help. I for one will face these challenges myself. I downloaded the CMSF demo years ago and tried it. I managed to do absolutely nothing with it and gave up (I don’t like modern setting anyway).

I think a bit of “here is how you make your CM:XX experience better” on the forum, posted by the community just may have made me stick with it. Have a moderated thread with the best HOW-TOs maybe? And, rest assured, I am your target audience for CM:BN.

[Wildman]

If you like the game, another option is to make your own video. We've had several that show people actually playing the game, but frankly the creative power of the people who just play the game and don't work on it astound me.

I'm positive there is a video genius (or someone willing to work hard) who is reading this board who could build a movie usin the CMBN code that would rival any big game store. Battlefront can't do this, but heck, if you like the game and want others to like...why not do something like that on your own. Put it on YouTube...send it on Twitter...status on Facebook...send it to your local News Outlet (Ok maybe not that one). The point is, we the community are the best advertising ANY computer game can get...how often have you bought a game you probably wouldn't because your friend was all GA-GA about it?

[Vinnart]

I have seen the game advertised on niche websites such as Combatism, and The Wargamer. The Buzz seems up for the types interested in more realistic gaming like the folks here. Seems like many who used to play CMx1, but skipped CMSF are getting the word. I play CMSF, am active in the forum, and still got the first press release with first screens from a buddy who doesn't CMSF, or forum, but was a CMx1 player.

[Silverswift]

Well, I think if one particular thread got over 142,000 hits, BFC must be doing something right. Figure 1/3 are the same people logging in on different computers, that leaves almost 100,000 people. Not too bad, maybe?

[Barkhorn1x]

Oh, there are definitely some of those types. Personally I don't think attacking them is a great idea either, but that's not what bothers me. What bothers me is people who seem to be on a hair trigger and get set off by good criticism too. The interesting thing is that these same people can often be very good and productive posters, but this inability to let criticisms of the game stand does hurt the forum and drive posters away, I think (it certainly makes me want to post less).

A couple of points:

1. Oh, I think ridiculing/making fun of a troll poster is not only good fun (and it is) but wholly appropriate as I for one am sick of posters who do not observe the common decencies of public discourse on the web (due to anonymity) when you KNOW they do not act like that in the real world. As ye sow…(and all that) And if they get pissed off and leave these boards, small loss.

2. Hair triggers? Hmmm…I for one have not seen any evidence of that reaction to criticisms of the game that is factually presented or presented as opinion in a non-abusive way. Kanzel’s post from earlier this week failed that test and he got what he deserved.

3. Inability to let criticisms stand? Again, what evidence can you offer here that this is actually the case? I have seen dozens of threads discussing some “hot button issues” and there will be more – just wait until the game releases. These threads are still here in all their critical glory.

4. A little respect goes a long way in this world, yes?

[MengJiao]

Guys... it's okay for people to criticise the game.

There's no game to criticise so I can't abide criticism of it.

[Wodin]

At the end of the day CMSF has kept them in business with modules over the last 3 or 4 years so I really can't see a problem with CMBN and modules doing the same...

So why advertise all over the place? I really think it would be throwing away money rather than bringing it in...

Also alot of people don't take criticism well...I don't like it...but if phrased properly and in a constructive manner giving credit where it's due but go on to ask about what they would have prefered\changed instead I have no problem with it...things can be phrased in a way where it doesn't come across as negative...like saying "this worked really well and I'm enjoy so and so but maybe " " needs to be changed so instead of " " we get " "...any thoughts?" Now that is a good way to go about things on a forum I reckon...your getting your point across without any chance of a backlash...unfortunatley people on the net feel they can say things in away that they would never say face to face...manners\politeness and other great qualities go right out the window...

So it's not the criticism that people react to but the way it's put across....especially if they are very keen on a product and even more so if the product has a niche market you usually find very loyal and devoted customers, they may be quick to jump on someone who comes out with things like "heap of junk" etc etc...and if their compliants aren't really a problem with the game but more a case of the game not being what they thought it would be so they automatically join a forum and start slagging it off right and centre, or throwing out criticisms in a hostile or negative way you will find that they will get a semi hostile reception. (It maybe a problem with their PC setup but they quickly denounce the game as shi#t)

[Sgt Joch]

Ya the default hotkeys in CMSF were/are absolutely horrible... that alone would turn off a lot of people who didn't realize you could change them by editing that one-can't-remember-what-it-was file.

To each his own I guess, I have been playing CMSF regularly since 2007 and find the UI easy to work with. In fact, when I fired up CMBN beta and realized BFC had changed the hotkeys, my first reaction was: WTF!?!, my second was to copy in the CMSF hotkeys.

I like being able to use my left hand to control the viewpoints with the QWEASDZX keys, use the space bar to select orders 90%+ of the time and use the mouse in my right hand to select units and give movement/targeting orders.

[Wodin]

Found no problems with controls myself...took me about five mins..there must be a knack to do it right obviously which I must have got quite quick...I've found alot of 3D games camera a nightmare especially playing RTS...it's whats allways got the better of me in the end in RTS game..where playing WEGO you have time to zoom around to your hearts content..maybe why I have ha dno problems with it...I'm sure if it was RTS only I'd have found it more difficult.

[Juju]

The only thing that's important is our ability to sell enough games to make it worth doing. Based on the preorders for CM:BN so far... we're not concerned we'll come up short on this one. Not concerned at all

Steve

Lively discussion here. But if you guys are happy, I'm happy.

[Battlefront.com]

Two points...

Yllamana, we've heard this sort of complaint you raise for 12 years. It's perception more than fact. Criticism "stands" here just fine. What I find really, really ironic is the person making such charges is themselves criticizing and what happens? Posts deleted? Position ridiculed? Personality ridiculed? No, none of that. Intellectually challenged? Absolutely. If someone feels the need to post an opinion, criticism or not, they need to be prepared to accept that someone is probably going to disagree with it. I find that many people don't understand that basic principle of debate.

As I said, this charge has been levied here on a regular basis for 12 years. Yet our base of support has done nothing but grow and the number of posters here that compliment how discussions are handled far exceed the people who complain (especially when the trolls are factored out).

FragerZ,

As Moon pointed out... a point of diminishing returns on advertising is quickly reached, then exceeded. Think about it. If a full page 1 month add costs $3500, we need to get at least 100+ people to buy a copy of CM just to break even on the cost of that one specific ad (there are other costs besides the ad space itself). Since the laws of advertising require consistent repetition to be effective, it quickly means a huge investment for an unlikely large enough return to justify it.

It's an age old business dilemma... to what extent do you risk the bird in the hand for the two in the bush? For us, we've learned that we can eventually get the two in the bush by simply existing and making great games. It's one of the reasons why we're still here and the likes of SSI are not.

Steve

[stikkypixie]

I agree with a lot of what yllamana has said. A lot of the gripes I have with CMSF (I've only bothered with the demo) and CMBN (judging from AARs and facts iterated on this forum) are the same ones he has. The keyboard movement controls are more than awkward and the change to "relative hotkeys" adds confusion and unnecessary keystrokes. The UI is also cluttered and confusing. Additionally, there's no guided walkthrough or tutorial in the CMSF demo, which turns off a lot of people.

Not saying that you're wrong, I really don't like the relative hotkeys either. But I do have to say that the interface issue is just a matter of getting used to. It is also highly subjective.

Anyway the hotkeys system can be changed in a minute (or use the space bar). The interface needs to convey a lot of information, if you have ever played close combat you know it can be much worse but even then CC still remains highly enjoyable .

As for the camera controls, I'm one of those persons who use the mouse to do the navigating so I rarely use the keyboard, to be honest I don't know any game where the best way to move around a 3D map is the keyboard. And once you discover the glory that is crtl+left click you never go back.

CMBN will apparently include a tutorial, so at least that is covered; although no tutorial can convey all the things you have to consider to get most out of your troops.

[Erwin]

I am always amazed that you take the time and trouble to respond to stuff like this, Steve.

99%+ of us here are big fans and will buy your game(s) whether they come out next week or next year.

So I hope you can take some time to relax and conserve your energies for the important tasks.

[stikkypixie]

First impression: the top download link for CMSF demo goes to some random shady download site, which tries to give me a CMA demo setup file that's like 5MB in size. Whoops. Oh well, let's try another one. Well, that worked.

What link is that? I just tried it and I end op at worthplaying.com and it is perfectly legit. Just curious.