CMSF v1.05 Fixes Listed

[Palantir]

OUCH!

Ummm, "we" never said "we" wanted to replace the CMx1 games, only "fix" a few things to make it even BETTER.

But by your comments you have followed the entire CMXX "history" so you know it's more about BFC saying one thing then doing another. Their lack of concern for their "core" gamers was incredibile. A company lying and sending out a "beta" version NOT a complete game is also key to the arguments/discussions.

And DUH! Anyone who likes anything will like that "thing" so RT'ers will like RT games, even CMSF. But when those RT'ers say they love the game because of it's problems they have problems of their own.

Bill- a Berg game with a flaw? He does great work, I love AH's Anzio & SPI's Terribile Swift Sword games.

[KG_SSpoom]

Yep been there from the start with CMBO.
I dont really know if I agree with the BFC lying comment.
1000s of people asked for 100s of things and many were adressed
with different levels of sucess but in no way were all the things adressed.Just not possible.
Sure BFC dissapointed SOME of the core gamers but arent you happy it wasnt a WW2
game? that would have really cheezed people off!
Since no-one can make every one happy there is no reason to continually rip on this game
especially if "its not your thing".
The Beta comment is pretty spot on but it also seems to
be the norm rather than the exception in the computer gaming
Industry now. I would rather see our membership finding the next CMX than continue
to beat on CMSF
My comments are not just directed at this thread but the many that just seem to
be the favorite topic of discussion here anymore.

[KG_Jag]

Steve, my greatest disappointment is that CM x2 (the game engine) is not what we are told it would be--an updated and improved version of CM x 1. From the late summer of 2005, when they first started talking about their new engine, Battlefront told us that the new game would be CM x 2 and said:

"For those of you who aren't aware, CMx2 is a ground up game engine based on the concepts of CMx1 (CMBO/CMBB/CMAK)."

In drips and drabs for the next 2 + years--including post release, word, both direct and indirect, began to come out that pieces of the CM x 1 core were in doubt (e.g. PBEM); would not be included in at least the first Cm x 2 games; and even that what they had made was really a RT game with WEGO bolted on as a sop to the old CM hands. Of course they did much of this as stealthily as possible so as not to kill pre-orders from the CM x 1 community. Such denial and obfuscation continued in Battlefront's posts about CMSF and CM x 2 post CMSF's release. What they were doing in the back room was not making a improved CM x 1 engine, but a new gaming system aimed primarily at: 1. the RTS and FPS segments and 2. the U.S. military as a training tool.

At this point the first part of that plan--to cash in with RTS/FPS gamers has not panned out very well for Battlefront, which now finds CMSF in the bargain bin. The second part hasn't either, but one gets the whiff that those efforts are not yet played out.

I still have some hope that Battlefront, especially if the military contracts don't occur, will build a decent WEGO system with viable PBEM into the current CM x 2 engine, or some version of it, by the time they decide to leave the 2008-2009 Syrian waterless desert. All the shouting represents an attempt by the biggest part of the CM x 1 community to convince Battlefront to return to what is was supposed to have building as CM x 2--or at least the Cm x 2 they were representing to us.

Yes--there is belief among many in the CM x 1 community that Battlefront engaged in deception with regard to what they were building as CM x2. There is not doubt that they were deceptive with regard to what they (and the distribution partner they picked--Paradox) sold at the initial release of CMSF. An initial release of this "quality" may have typical by the likes of Paradox, but not for "we'll release it only when it's done" Battlefront (at least for games they designed and not merely distributed--such as ToW).

[KG_AGCent]

Being an owner of the game and having followed its development for as long as it was whispered to be in the works I think I had invested as much hope and dreams of what I would want in the game as anyone else. Now I have not lapped up every bit of information posted by BF nor followed every thread to its bitter end. I don't think its necessary to do that in order to know that CMx2 was never intended to be an updated CMx1 but a completely new game built from the ground up. Knowing that, I went into this with an open mind and no preconcieved notions of what it was going to be or play like. In concept and general execution I was impressed.

I don't want another CMx1, frankly. The ones we have are fine, they cover most major theaters of action and after three renditions, they got it right, just fine. I have been putzing around with CMSF here and there awaiting the mother-of-all-patches knowing that the game is not in a h2h playable state until many of these problems are solved. The engine has a lot of potential and as it matures it is going to make an incredibly fun game. CMBO was the same way.... 12 patches it took them to get it right, and they didn't really get it all the way right until CMAK. For me, the bottom line is this; they have a very good track record of fixing and supporting their product. I believe this will be no different for CMSF. It has to be, too much is riding on the success of this engine for it to be otherwise.

[KG_Soldier]

Who cares.

[KG_Jag]

Mark, I think you double posted on this thread. But because you were so verbose, it's hard to tell for sure.

[Palantir]

Originally Posted by KG_Soldier

Who cares.

I think he has "moved on" to other things, and so shall we...

[KG_Soldier]

I think everyone but Rob, and mybe Steve, gave up on CMX2 long ago. I lost interest as soon as I heard the setting. Now, If BFC comes out with CMX2 Stalingrad, I'm in. But since I don't give a rat's A$$ about CMX2 as it exists today, tomorrow, or forever, I do get a bit tired of the rehashing of BFC screwed up and have been ass-hats about it. But hey, this is our forum and you Jag are free to post about whatever you wish. I will read them. And I will make a comment, usually a smart-ass one, for that I apologize.

[kawaiku]

I'm gonna personally wait a few more patches before snatching it outta the bargin bin as it seems that it won't be fixed up to some-what "playable standards." I personally wish that it was done in Europe, in a hypothetical Russian Invasion of Europe during the Cold War. There's just more variety and the desert gets dull and boring() over-time as we have seen with CMAK.

My personal beef is the command bar, how unnecessary was that?

and if nobody wants their CMSF, I'll gladly relieve it off of them for and easy price

[KG_Jag]

Regardless of whether Mark cares or not, here's the latest of what Battlefront says about the immanent v1.05 CMSF patch:

"Posted by Battlefront.com (Member # 42) on December 14, 2007 11:54 AM:

BigDuke6,

quote: I think you guys are dead wrong on the pathfinding issue, at least sometimes.

Uhm... how many different ways do I need to put this before you will grasp what should be a pretty simple concept. I'll break it down for you:

1. Pathfinding is a very tricky thing and it is generally impossible to have a complex environment (i.e. realistic, not gamey) produce 100% expected results 100% of the time.

2. Version 1.04's pathfinding is pretty good, overall. Generally units do what they are told to do.

3. There are bugs in v1.04 that are unacceptable and lead to various infantry and vehicle problems.

4. We have fixed all the bugs we could identify for v1.05.

5. We can not guarantee that 100% of the bugs have been identified and fixed as of v1.05. We can guarantee that we will fix any identified bugs in subsequent releases as those bugs are identified.

6. We can never guarantee that people will always see, all the time, the behavior they expect. Sometimes this may even be due to the unrealistic expectations of what a particular unit is capable of doing and not liking the ramifications.

So... are you going to kick up a fuss again when for the nth time, or are you going to do the sensible thing and wait for the v1.05 patch to see if you are getting all worked up about nothing?

Steve

[ December 14, 2007, 09:30 AM: Message edited by: Battlefront.com ]"

Link:

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/b...;f=52;t=003409