Shall I upgrade?

[Von Earlmann]

I've uninstalled CM myself......a long time ago :-)......too arcady

To each his own

[Kool Kat]

I've given up on CS and uninstalled it, I don't even like the unrealistic game system, let alone the bad graphics.
I can't remember being so disappointed with a game for a long time because I'd heard good things about CS and it seems to have a big fan following, so I don't know whether it's me who's nutty or them.

EDIT- No hard feelings, I'm not singling out CS, I regularly uninstall other stuff too

This may date me... :cool2:

I cut my teeth on the old AH Panzerblitz & Panzer Leader board games. Anyone remember those PBM "pen & paper" turns? Record your movement, resolve your battles using random numbers in the stock listings, and send your turn by "snail mail" to wait a week or more for your opponent to receive, record and then return his turn to you? :chin:

Then Talonsoft released the CS game system. Wow! No more scratching out your wargame turns on a pad of paper. Now, we could "push around" pixel-based tanks and troops with the computer doing all the record house keeping. Sure the game graphics were not cutting edge 3D, but the AFV models looked and sounded good as they moved across the electronic battlefield. System requirements were kept to a minimum so players did not have to upgrade their entire PC systems with each new release of the CS. Multiple turns could now be completed in a day and PBeM replaced the pen & pencil PBM system.

Following the demise of Talonsoft, Matrix Games took an aging 10 year + game system and interjected new life into it with new scenarios, units, nationalities, rules, options, etc. And both Jason and the Beta Brigade have listened to and incorporated input and suggestions from the players themselves on how to improve CS. I don't know of too many other PC game companies that have responded in such a positive manner to their customers.

So, to each his own.

I come from the "old school" of gamers... and I really like the CS game system. I know what we gamers had before and what is available today. I guess I look beyond any shiny "chrome" of graphics and just appreciate the game "engine." :cool:

[PoorOldSpike]

I come from the "old school" of gamers... and I really like the CS game system. I know what we gamers had before and what is available today. I guess I look beyond any shiny "chrome" of graphics and just appreciate the game "engine." :cool:

Me too mate, but in real life units attack and move in waves and columns whereas in CS they do it individually which jars a bit.
I abandoned Steel Panthers for the same reason.
As for graphics, if we're going to spend hours staring at a screen they should at least be easy on the eye. Pity there's not one more zoom-in level with CS so we can really get down there among the weeds with the troops.
Incidentally I went back to delete my earlier critical post but it was too late, somebody had already picked up on it and quoted it.
By the way, I've told Matrix I won't be requesting any more free review copies from them or any other company as I simply don't have the time any more to do reviews.
My sensational PC:Kharkov review will therefore stand as a memorial to my awesome reviewing skills, here-

http://www.gamesquad.com/forums/showthread.php?t=74778

[Kool Kat]

Me too mate, but in real life units attack and move in waves and columns whereas in CS they do it individually which jars a bit.
I abandoned Steel Panthers for the same reason.

If I understand your point - you are looking for a game mechanic that allows individual units to attack together (simultaneously) against enemy units - correct? Almost like an area movement / combat system? Currently, CS replicates that only in assault combat that works as a simultaneous movement / combat system against defenders. I believe that it would require a herculean effort to recode CS... and I believe in the process it would alter / destroy the CS game mechanics and current "feel" of the system. What would come out of any such effort would be something completely different from the CS turn-based game we know today.

As for graphics, if we're going to spend hours staring at a screen they should at least be easy on the eye. Pity there's not one more zoom-in level with CS so we can really get down there among the weeds with the troops.

I work in the IT technology field and I understand that any "new," "improved," "better" widget you want to introduce into a product comes with a price tag. So, for "one more zoom-in level" what are you willing to pay for as a customer? Suppose that zoom-in capability adds an additional $10 or $20 dollars to the final product? Is it worth it? How important is that extra zoom-in ability to the functioning of the game? Is it just "eye-candy" or does it serve some other vital function? What graphics resolution(s) do you want to support? Do you want true 3D graphics quality that requires both a dedicated high-end graphics card and a duel-core gaming PC platform? What about folks that own older PCs - force your entire user base to upgrade in order to enjoy a new CS release? What is the opportunity for introducing new players to a 3D CS release? And so that thought process continues... :chin:

Please know that I am not trying to be difficult with you. Just presenting a view from the manufacturer's side of product development. Also, just to set the record straight, I do not work for Matrix Games, but I do support both development and marketing IT technology teams in another industry.