Jump to content

Not as much fun as previous games.


Recommended Posts

Well I must admit after playing a couple of games over the last few days.(and yes I know some of you will have knocked up thousands of hours on this game) and missing out entirely the CMSF game due to lack of interest I am finding this current game a lot less fun than the previous games.

Part of it down the awe full interface with totally unintuitive lay out and key system. I seem to spend a lot of my time having to backspace through various units orders as I have inadvertently stupidly changed their orders due to clicking somewhere else on a different unit who just happens to be in command of them, This usually means if I don't spot it that I tell the Panther in the corner scenario to reverse down the road towards the enemy or I order my half tacks to drive out into the open and get blown up.

I am also finding the lack of easy to see combat info a major off putter in my fun in this game.I am comparing this game to the original games here.In the previous games it was easy to see who was shooting at who(maybe the target lines helped) and that way you could swoop across the map and replay that part of the battle.but know I find that I am having to watch whole sections of a turn to find out why my tank/halftrack/unit has died(and we are only playing a small force for now till we get used to the game).

I must admit for the fun factor I find the original games better.In fact I just wish this game was a improved version of them.But unfortunately it seems to have missed(for me anyway) some of the things that made the first games such a laugh to play against my mates.

Maybe it trying to be too serious but for me I am playing a PBEM game at the moment but don't seem to have much interest in playing other wise.Which is a bad thing as i couldn't put the first games down (once I found them).

Its not like the game is bad.In fact I think a very very good game is trying to get out at the moment.But the small niggles I have just take the enjoyment of playing it away from me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 204
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

All that sort boils down to not liking it because it is different to CMx1. Maybe you might want to try the demo of PC:O.

I don't have it and have not tried the demo yet but from what I have read of it it appears to be alot more like the CMx1 series than CMBN so maybe you will get more enjoyment out of that one, alternatively you could play CMBN a bit more till you become accustomed to the UI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The lack of targeting lines like in CMx1 is one of the biggest minuses in this game, I hope they will be re-added in a patch someday.

I think it would have to show target lines from each individual soldier, because that is the way the game is calculating combat. That would be a lot of lines. Any targeting you order just expresses a priority and only applies to soldiers that have LOF to that target.

The game design also presumes that you don't issue a lot of targeting orders -- that the TacAI is doing nearly all the targeting itself. So, presumably you should be able to keep track of what targeting you've ordered without needing target lines.

If I right about all of that, I doubt that BFC is going to bring a Show All Targets option back into the game. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been playing for three days straight and loving it. Usually I get tired of staying in one place for so long and have to go do something else. For me it's the little things. And there are alot of little things. Details. It sucks me in. And I don't mean just graphic details. I mean how when a tank turns its hull the turret will attempt to stay pointed in one direction trying to stay on target (That was not in CMSF when it should have been). And how tanks will turn their turret in the general direction of a contact reports even though that said tank has no visual contact itself.

Different strokes for different folks. It seems you might prefer larger scale battles. And THATS...OK. ;)

I hope you keep playing and it grows in you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CMx2 is a different game. Nothing has been removed or changed, unless you are comparing to CMSF. I enjoy CMBN. It certainly does play differently than CMx1 games, but that's to be expected when you move to a new game engine. There are some things I like and some things I don't like, but nothing is a deal breaker for me. There are a few bugs that I am sure will be fixed sooner or later. I like the interface and I don't understand the complaints. For example, I can't imagine how someone could possibly bail their troops from a vehicle unless that's what they wanted to do. Of course, you may enjoy CMx1 over CMx2, and that's a valid preference, but don't criticize CMBN because it doesn't tickle your particular fancy. If there are other games you like better, then play them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The funny thing is, after four years of playing the CMx2 game engine I find CMx1 downright unplayable. Worst camera controls imaginable, every last detail abstracted beyond all recognition. I say good riddance CMBO. I'm not nostalgic for CMBO at all. I'm not the only one either. I can't think of anyone who plays CMx2 who has been able to go back again. You try playing the game for five minutes and you roll your eyes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I must admit after playing a couple of games over the last few days.<snip>

Part of it down the awe full interface with totally unintuitive lay out and key system. I seem to spend a lot of my time having to backspace through various units orders as I have inadvertently stupidly changed their orders<snip>

I must admit for the fun factor I find the original games better.In fact I just wish this game was a improved version of them.But unfortunately it seems to have missed(for me anyway) some of the things that made the first games such a laugh to play against my mates.

<snip>

Wow sorry to hear it. I am personally having a great time and I have two CMBN PBEM and four CMBB PBEM games going on at once. Yes, it is a bit much.

I never got into using keys in the old games - I'm a mouse guy so while I miss re-adjusting way points after placing them I have not been confused by keys that suddenly changed their meaning. Yay being inefficient pays off for once:)

I especially like being able to give combat orders at different way points. That is an improvement over the old game.

If I had to pick only one game it would be CMBN for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to hear your of your frustration, Gautrek. I'm sure it pains you and I hope that over time you feel better about the game. I haven't played CM1 in ages so the transition was much easier for me. But this new game has much to offer and I suspect that the CM2 games to come will address many of your concerns. Try to stick it out, you may be pleasantly rewarded for doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The funny thing is, after four years of playing the CMx2 game engine I find CMx1 downright unplayable. Worst camera controls imaginable, every last detail abstracted beyond all recognition. I say good riddance CMBO. I'm not nostalgic for CMBO at all. I'm not the only one either. I can't think of anyone who plays CMx2 who has been able to go back again. You try playing the game for five minutes and you roll your eyes.

Actually, I like both CMx1 and CMx2. But they are so totally different that I don't think they should both share the "Combat Mission" name.

The issues stated by the OP are because of some expectation derived from CMx1, I think. It isn't, IMO, an 'either or' problem--it is a naming problem. I think that BF should have renamed the CMx2 games in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you played CMx1 before, but skipped CMSF altogether, give yourself 10-14 days regular play with CMBN (demo or full game).

Why?

To see if some of the quirks, issues - perceived or real, different game design, different controls, higher fidelity etc. will grow on you, or not. If it grows on you, you might find some quirks/irritations are no game breakers per se.

Forum members mentioned that their initial opinions changed after some regular play after a bit of time investment. If it does not grow on you during this period of regular play, it will not be your cup of tea, no matter what people say here. But you need a little bit of time to get away from your muscle/brain memory due to the CMx1 trilogy, before you should emphatically say: "Not for me."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I reckon it's perfectly legitimate to come and seek feedback on finding the game less fun. I can empathise with this. And it's important for folk to know "is it just me??"

I've found there are two hurdles (at least) to having fun.

The first is the UI. It may be a fantastic thing with experience, but it is very hard to get used to, _particularly_ coming direct from CMx1, where (as I've pointed out before) there are direct clashes (especially in mouse movement and ctrl-click) that are downright disorienting. The "whoa, vertigo, crap where am I looking" is not fun. This is quite overcome-able though. It just is not fun in the early stages.

Then there's the fact that it's actually hard. I mean, it's hard to actually get a good result. There is so much to learn about what works and what doesn't, and how to recognise it. For example, I just lost a couple of tanks to keyholed oppo tanks from not recognising the corridor of LOS that they had. Once I saw it I thought "doh, why did I drive my guys past _that_. But "what a corridor of LOS looks like" is different, and not as easy to spot. I could go on with other examples... the principal of them will be the same: there is a lot to learn before you can actually have fun at getting a good result.

There is reward though ... the sheer detail of the movies is fantastic, and the challenges are mosly "realistic". Like it _is_ hard for commanders to recognise where LOS corridors might be. So that's a fun challenge. There are some not-fun challenges to overcome too, like "how to make foxholes and trenches work". There's definite pain involved in the trial and error here that relates to "what ought to work in real life does not work in the game". I'm hoping that once I have these sussed it will be all fun from there...

GaJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I've only had time to play the demo, I'd suggest a "new" mentality is needed to fully enjoy the CMx2 engine.

The emphasis should be on tactical maneuver/employment of your forces. No need to issue many fire commands, except for area fire, arty, or MG's (cover arcs not inluded). Let the AI do the micromanagement, and focus instead on tactical deployment/movement of your units. CMx2 FORCES the player to use tactics successfully to achieve results.

The UI can be daunting, but, with time, I've gotten used to it. Can it be improved? Of course (especially for moving units), but for the amount of data that is conveyed, it's not that bad.

CM:BN is NOT an easy game to master. This means it's not as "fun" as CMx1. More realistic, yes. Harder to learn/master, yes. More "fun" (subjective), is conditional on the player's perspectives.

I would suggest not comparing CMx1 to CMx2.

Go into CM:BN as if it's an entirely new game, but in the same setting and same spirit as CM:BO. I think with an open mind (that is not comparing) you will learn many things and come to appreciate the new engine.

Ideally, we will eventually get difficulty toggles for "more fun" (easier gameplay), but I doubt development time will allow for such features.

As soon as budgets allow for "more fun" (gameplay), a bunch of us will scream for "more real"!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our official position on this topic is "we can't please everybody". One only has to look at the reception CMBB had to figure out that changing anything causes some people to not have fun with the game any more. Some people didn't like CMBB because of the content, some didn't like it because we changed how machineguns worked (I'm serious). Some hated Rarity even though they could turn it off. Just the mere fact that it was in the game somehow reduced their enjoyment. Etc., etc.

With every step forward someone will feel they can't go any more in that direction. Tons of Steel Panthers and Close Combat people refused to play CMx1. And they refused to play either Steel Panthers of Close Combat either. Yet in theory all three games should have appealed to the same player. For some it did, but I'd say that was few and far inbetween.

Overall the feedback from CMx1 players about CM:BN has been overwhelmingly positive. Even more positive than we had hoped for, to be quite honest. We thought some aspects of the game would be a "harder sell" to CMx1 players than they turned out to be. Therefore, we're quite pleased with how things are going and we're going to keep moving things forward.

My advice to people who don't think they like CM:BN, but loved CMx1, is to figure out specifically what is tripping them up. Talk with players who are enjoying the game and try keeping an open mind. It's possible that there are remedies. Or possibly not. Either way, CMx1 is every day further in the past and CMx2 is ahead of us.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Although I've only had time to play the demo, I'd suggest a "new" metality is needed to fully enjoy the CMx2 engine.

Yes, that is rather critical.

CM:BN is NOT an easy game to master. This means it's not as "fun" as CMx1. More realistic, yes. Harder to learn/master, yes. More "fun" (subjective), is conditional on the player's perspectives.!

I think a lot of CMx1 players forget their own initial reaction to CMx1 when they came upon it. Many were initially frustrated that their Panthers were getting picked off like flies or their infantry melted when trying to close assault Shermans. Hull down? A concept hardly any computer wargame touched before CMBO. How about the TO&E organizations that nobody had ever played with before? Lots of figuring out what to do with Volksgrenadier forces, for example.

Anyway, CMx1 was so different from other wargames that a lot of people stopped with the Demo and retained their interest in Steel Panthers and Close Combat. Some warmed up to CM later on, others still have not. But I think most found CMx1 to be quite a challenge when they first played it. Now, with perhaps 10+ years past, I can see that many have forgotten what it's like to try something truly new.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I fully understand that it is necessary to be open for a new mentality for CMx2.

But some aspects are not related to subjective feelings, they are objective facts. For example the problem, that the player is not informed if a tank or another important weapon engages a deadly threat or such unit is being engaged. Either the player misses the most thrilling moments, or he is forced to observe every single tank/TD/ATG in every turn for the whole turn.

With only two platoons of tanks and a hot phase of 30 minutes, that makes 180 (!) minutes to watch! This destroys every joy. The fun is turned into horrible, extremely time consuming labour.

Ok, it is possible to fast forward and to check afterwards if something had happened. But that is pure barbarity. That's like looking the end of a movie first or reading the last chapter first before deciding, if it is worth the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But some aspects are not related to subjective feelings, they are objective facts.

An objective fact - that's something that everyone experiences or perceives equally, right? Without bias or opinion. Like gravity, or temperature.

For example the problem, that the player is not informed if a tank or another important weapon engages a deadly threat or such unit is being engaged. Either the player misses the most thrilling moments, or he is forced to observe every single tank/TD/ATG in every turn for the whole turn.

So, that's an objective fact, meaning everyone experiences this problem equally?

Which is odd, because I've never really had a problem with this apparently objective fact. In either CMx1, or CMx2. But maybe we just play the game differently, meaning we experience different realities and different objective facts.

Which, objectively, means there's a problem with your objective facts.

Or sumfink.

Objectively yours

Jon

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.


×
×
  • Create New...