 |
|
Shock Force: Let's get over it. - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Combat Mission (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=10) +--- Thread: Shock Force: Let's get over it. (/showthread.php?tid=41918) Pages:
1
2
|
Shock Force: Let's get over it. - Copper - 08-17-2007 I see no point in belaboring the obvious facts with respect to the disappointments we (but not all) share with Battlefront. WE should perhaps understand that we are in mourning over the loss of any further CMx1 evolution, and stuff that cold body into a photon torpedo tube, and blast it off into the deep void of space to the melancholy hiss of the bagpipes. It's over. Time to look at the bright side of things: 1) We still have a great gaming system in CMx1. 2) Shock Force (I cannot in any good right manner associate that name with Combat Mission) does have potential, but in its current form is still unplayable by many of us who use PBEM and QB systems. For those of us who are not into the droll and boring uncon warfare played out within a lackluster desert backdrop (come on now, how many of us really get into playing desert CMAK maps?), there may be some new features and game developments that bring in other modern miltiary units from other countries that I think would be quite interesting. 3) If BF does survive this "evolution", I can see some interest in a WW2 development in this game engine being worth the time and money. PBEM will be fixed, but QB's will be forever lost. I remember the best thing about Advanced Squad Leader was the ability to purchase units, but also, there were some absolutely fantastic scenarios made... so that does offer hope to the playability of the CMx2 engine in the future. 4) CMx2 RT is not RTS. In no way can anyone sanely make the association between command and conquer, warcraft and CMx2. 5) Many of the details in the CMx2 engine ARE better than what we had in CMx1... we are just not used to the vehicle and its controls as of yet. We need to consider this more. 6) There is an obvious movement towards new gaming platforms throughout the industry, our beloved MOO2's, X-COM's and other turn based wargame/strategy games are perhaps indeed a dinosaur and the last of their kind. How do we embrace the new? 7) Besides BF's current failings, beta testing on paid customers, and the need for much more work... the engine is not a piece of crap. It is quite good for what it can do. Let's be realistic: give this game better pathfinding, PBEM AI and other little details, and its not too far away from a GREAT engine... it's just not CMx1. 8) WE can still hope for CMC development... I think the idea was GRAND and it would have given us an engine that we could play out for DECADES on. But you have to realize, that the money is in short product lifecycle, modules, new spinoff games (based on an already tested engine that does not require further sunk costs and huge resources... higher profits), so it may never come. 9) BF is not the only wargame company that is seeking our dollars and attention. Let's not create idolatry here. Look at what Matrix did for CS (Got to buy that SOME DAY) and X-COM. Other gaming companies may be able to deliver a CMx1 type game with WEGO that is a vast improvement over BF's last trilogy, even without the source code. 10) IF worst comes to worser, we all have chess boards, Stratego, and wonderful new worlds to explore courtesy to online and strategy gaming. Who knows when the next PLANETARION, EVE, World Of Warcraft, Second Life, and CIVILIZATION may come out of no where to smack us on the ass and call us Hank. I'm sure the Blitz will be hosting a ladder.... Cheers all! Leto RE: Shock Force: Let's get over it. - Fubar - 08-17-2007 Very eloquent as usual [hirr]Leto. ;) My problem with CMSF isn't it's setting, it's longevity or the game engines move towards RT, i for one have had many great games on CMAK desert maps....if others can't cope with open maps that's their problem, what pisses me off is the fact that i paid good money for a product that falls so far short of the mark that's it's impossible to believe that anybody beta tested it. Yes....i know new games have slight bugs but this game is buggered to hell and should never have been released in this state. I shall seriously reconsider buying any more BFC products in the future if they have a similar amount of quality control. I'm not entirely sure of a UK product consumers Statutory Rights, but i'm sure CMSF breaks them. But as it's a US product i guess they are safe from it. 
RE: Shock Force: Let's get over it. - British Tommy - 08-17-2007 Good points there Leto (must click you! :) ) and also Fubar makes some excellent points (clickies for you also!). As I stated elsewhere, I'm not into the modern warfare which is why SF does not interest me. What shocked me was reading about the state of SF when it was released. I hold BF in high regard and to sell a bug ridden product like SF to it's fans saddens me. It also damages BF's name within the wargaming community. I'm also looking forward to the next generation of CM and hopefully it will be better tested before being released. I think there is still a lot of life left in the old CM games, especially if designers continue to bring out scenarios and the modders continue their excellent work. We can only keep our fingers crossed concerning CMC and hope it comes out before next year. RE: Shock Force: Let's get over it. - Copper - 08-17-2007 Bob Millard Wrote:Good points there Leto (must click you! :) ) and also Fubar makes some excellent points (clickies for you also!). Ahhhh.... forbidden clicky... such a rush... But back to all seriousness, buggy state that SF was introduced, let's all look past that: BFC is not the typical game company, and has a fraction of the big boys resources... ethics aside re: release state, they are doing what they can to fix everything and make it better... so let's anticipate the fixes and forget about the bugs and messy release. BFC will not give up on this. IF this is truly a "community" then their are aspects of it that we the gamers have to realize are a two way street regarding playing, testing and contributing to make the final product better. I don't want this to lapse into another "BFC don't listen to us" debate, but it truly is a two way street, even if we did not get what we asked for... and remember, the CMx1 crowd is only a segment of the aggregate market. Much like politics, everyone can't everything they ask for.... Cheers! Leto RE: Shock Force: Let's get over it. - Fubar - 08-17-2007 [hirr Wrote:Leto] From what i've seen on the BFC forums it's not "we the gamers" who need to learn it's a two way street but BFC. Anyone who asks a question that gets deemed critical gets set on by the brown nose brigade. And there are other small time games companies like MadMinuteGames, Ageod and Shrapnel Games Inc. that manage to make quality products that work from the get go and have first rate QC, so size of the company can't be used as sole excuse to shoddy workmanship.
RE: Shock Force: Let's get over it. - kineas - 08-17-2007 Wargaming will live on. We still have CMx1, SPMBT, and I think someone will sooner or later fill the space what BFC left when departed from the CMx1 line... And there are a lot of products, HTTR, vasl.org, you probably know a lot more... RE: Shock Force: Let's get over it. - Fubar - 08-17-2007 kineas Wrote:Wargaming will live on. We still have CMx1, SPMBT, and I think someone will sooner or later fill the space what BFC left when departed from the CMx1 line... Long live the mighty SPMBT....i must get back to giving Wigams Nato troops a bloody nose. Just kiddin' Marcus. ;)
RE: Shock Force: Let's get over it. - Copper - 08-17-2007 With endless posts like this maybe you never will? If you have not played CM-1 before playing Shock force, you wouldnt play CM-1 after..... RE: Shock Force: Let's get over it. - McIvan - 08-17-2007 I would. And I like CMSF.....mostly, anyway....it has a great deal of potential. But CM-1 is simply far superior in accuracy of execution, and that's a valuable attribute as far as wargamers are concerned. RE: Shock Force: Let's get over it. - RedDevil - 08-17-2007 POG Wrote:If you have not played CM-1 before playing Shock force, you wouldnt play CM-1 after..... There is a bit of truth in your assessment here... anyone who bought SF wouldn't jump on buying anything from BFC in the immediate future simply based on their experiences with SF.. they would be led to think the quality was MIA pretty quickly IMO. Perhaps there is opportunity there for SF I suppose, but it's not something I'm going to invest in. Good luck to those who endure. I just picked up GRAW2, it's still one of the top RTS games on the market and it played rather well without needing patching it right away. :whis: Opps....steering OT here :P I'm thinking business here, And BFC being a small company needed some funds (cash flow) to booster their dwindling capital, notably after the ToW release that I'm sure didn't meet expectations and released this product far to early without any serious testing (I'm of the opinion there was NONE) now to play catch up, they HAVE to make something out of this engine.. regrettably it might not happen, but we shall see as time ticks along. I don't expect to see anything for the CMx1 version to appear anytime soon based on the amount of effort needed to correct SF's flaws and the building of subsequent add on Mods needed to generate funding again for the NEW engine. So anyone for some GRAW2 online? 
|
){kind=link}