Moon Says that CM x 2 Normandy Coming in 2009

thewood

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2004
Messages
2,594
Reaction score
12
Location
Boston
Country
llUnited States
Zoiks...I gave up on this thread a couple days ago and peaked in out of curiosity. I feel like I should take a shower now.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,733
Reaction score
2,765
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
That's a good point. We don't know, really, how well CMSF did and is doing. We might be completely misreading the lack of internet buzz, as Elvis points out, and/or Steve could be a self-made millionaire on the side. No way to know any of that. Odds are that neither of those things are true and that CMN really is a "make or break" for them, but that of course is just sheer speculation. Which can be fun.

-dale
That was my entire point all along. And it's pertinent to the release date. I have no idea what the other off-topic whining about showers, personal attacks, etc. are in aid of. Software companies release games to make money. It's that simple. And there is a large difference between a company run as a hobby business, where the owner can laugh off his investment if he is being supported by another income, or a - as you put it - make or break game in the works. In a thread devoted to the topic of the timing of the release of that "make or break" game, all these things are considerations of some importance.

As you point out, almost all of the factors are matters of sheer speculation on anyone else's part.

Which can, I agree, be fun.
 

British Tommy

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2004
Messages
737
Reaction score
9
Location
mission control, UK
Country
ll
British Tommy, while I complely understand why you have singled me out please remember that I am not the only one who is addressing Michael. Zonso, KenRicg,Phillip,NUTEERNAME and even Geordie toname a few of the ones making pubic comments. That being said, because my comments have been so simple and obvious and picked up on by anyone with an interest I don't feel the need to comment further.
Maybe I was a bit harsh on you and Michael but this whole arguement is stuck in a loop and someone needs to break it.
 

Geordie

CM Moderator
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Messages
2,111
Reaction score
13
Location
Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
I'd echo the loop thing. Also I think the thread has gone a long way off track. The original purpose was about it being out in 2009, I think.

My brain hurts after reading some of the threads here lately.
 

NUTTERNAME

Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2010
Messages
1,943
Reaction score
37
Location
N
Country
llVietnam
Then lock it up.

Battlefront is a private corporation. No one has stock in it. Why would SG need to let a bunch of nits-on-the-net know his personal finances? Its preposterous. Again, if Dorosh is so obsessed by the things he wants to know about others, maybe he needs to reveal all the information about himself first?

I own a private business as well as hold down a full time job. But owning that business does not stop me from meeting my job's expectations. Many people do that AND have a working spouse. Its called being successful.
 

Elvis

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
2,918
Reaction score
14
Location
Pennsylvania
Country
llUnited States
Then lock it up.

Battlefront is a private corporation. No one has stock in it. Why would SG need to let a bunch of nits-on-the-net know his personal finances? Its preposterous. Again, if Dorosh is so obsessed by the things he wants to know about others, maybe he needs to reveal all the information about himself first?

I own a private business as well as hold down a full time job. But owning that business does not stop me from meeting my job's expectations. Many people do that AND have a working spouse. Its called being successful.

True.

As you point out, almost all of the factors are matters of sheer speculation on anyone else's part.

Which can, I agree, be fun.
Unless the ones speculating are named Elvis or Phillip or anyone else who speculates, assumes or believes with a narrative different than yours.
 

dalem

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
2,298
Reaction score
62
Location
Columbia Heights, MN
Country
llUnited States
Unless the ones speculating are named Elvis or Phillip or anyone else who speculates, assumes or believes with a narrative different than yours.
I don't recall you catching flak for speculations on the game and its design. Your style (or perceived style, perhaps) of personal pokes and deliberate or unconscious steering of crtiques and crtiticisms of BFC or CMx2 off-topic, that you catch (and I've given plenty of) flak for. But your insight into the game itself is valued, IMO, whether you believe that or not. Or care. :)

-dale
 

Palantir

Member #86
Joined
Aug 7, 2002
Messages
4,877
Reaction score
1,706
Location
The Heartland
Country
llUnited States
Been gone for a bit: this thread reads like a bad children’s after-school program on how not to get along or play nicely with others.

Anyway...
CMx2 is consciously designed to have far less replay value than CMx1 did...
Since this is openly admitted by BFC just who & why is anyone STILL playing the game? And if it has little replay value why would there be any interest in forums or tourneys for it? Those could last longer than their planned 6 month obsolescence decree. If it works just like BFC wants then most of those casual players have dumped it already & have moved on away from BFC (leaving behind just those unwanted grognards). BFC assumes that those masses of flighty players will magically reappear to waste another $30+ for another *worthless* game. * worthless by their own statement that they won't look back at a game after 6 months or the players still playing it because - it was designed to be thrown away after a few months anyway. Now that’s a quality self-fulfilling company statement you can believe in!!*

... BFC's ideal customer... today plays the campaign delivered with the title
that admittedly has little if any replay value.

... then patiently sits around waiting for the next one to come out.
Nope, those kids have moved on to the next NEW flasher game & will not look back once at this quasi RT/tac/slow/patched up game.

BFC's ideal customer... BFC don't give a crap if he joins the forum, tries to make scenarios or has a go at playing a QB against human opposition, never mind starting up a bloody website. None of that earns them any money...
Correct. However, it IS just those players that make scenarios, play the QB's, posts on forums and discuss' the tech data that even still remember BFC's name or know that BFC is still in business after years of "advertising" silence and MAY buy that next game or modular.

What is sad is that BFC went from a friendly niche war-gamers company that made games because they loved to play & make them for their fellow gamers into a company that now: doesn’t care one bit if their customers liked the game they worked so long & diligently on (as long as they ponied up the money for it (suckers)) or are still playing that "great" game after 6 months even though it was specially make just for them.
 

Elvis

Member
Joined
Mar 6, 2009
Messages
2,918
Reaction score
14
Location
Pennsylvania
Country
llUnited States
Odds are that neither of those things are true and that CMN really is a "make or break" for them, but that of course is just sheer speculation. Which can be fun.
-dale
As you point out, almost all of the factors are matters of sheer speculation on anyone else's part.
Which can, I agree, be fun.


I don't recall you catching flak for speculations on the game and its design. Your style (or perceived style, perhaps) of personal pokes and deliberate or unconscious steering of crtiques and crtiticisms of BFC or CMx2 off-topic, that you catch (and I've given plenty of) flak for.
Do you and Michael have some kind of corner on the market for speaking about BFC outside of the actual game itself?


But your insight into the game itself is valued, IMO, whether you believe that or not. Or care. :)

-dale
I appreciate that and will bear that in mind. Thank you.
 

Zonso

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2009
Messages
300
Reaction score
2
Location
A station near you
Country
llCanada
Interesting Palantir, but not without the usual hyperbole it seems. The whole gaming market has been reduced to the 'next best thing' today, including wargames. You need look no further than usenet or the Wargamer or the Matrix forums, wargamers buying and wanting new games like new shiny objects, play them for a bit then move on to the next shiny object. Matrix, the publisher, obliges the market by pumping out something new as frequently as possible, even old stuff rehashed because nostalgia is a powerful incentive. That's been the reality for some time.

Whether you like CMSF or not(have/do you even play it?), it has literally hundreds of hours of gameplay and loads of replayability. You arguments otherwise equally apply to CMx1 or any other game for that matter. How many people have moved on from CMx1? Your motives sound like you want a security blanket type game that will satisfy your gaming needs for the rest of your life.
 

dalem

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
2,298
Reaction score
62
Location
Columbia Heights, MN
Country
llUnited States
Your motives sound like you want a security blanket type game that will satisfy your gaming needs for the rest of your life.
To be fair, what some of us want is for the only company to successfully provide us with what we think is the "perfect game" to do it again +1. That's not unreasonable to hope for or pine for - after all, they did it once before. They're doing something else instead, and we're talking about it. That's all.

-dale
 

KG_Jag

KG Vice Kommandir
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
1,782
Reaction score
180
Location
New Braunfels, TX/Reno, NV
Country
llUnited States
Zonso--you're way off the mark with regard to wargames and the computer war gaming market. Virtually every very successful war game since at least the late DOS era had great depth and usually included an excellent editor, if not a construction kit. Panzer General, the Campaign Series, Steel Panthers, Close Combat, TOAW, CM x 1... While wargamers are hungry for the next great wargame, that is largely because we have been in wargame winter for about 3 years. The road flairs, as Dale describes them, may sell in other genres, but not as a wargame.

That leads to the question of whether or not CMSF--and by extension CM x2 is/will be wargames. I think the answer is "yes", but with some intentional diluting to win both military and cross-over markets. That has hurt BF with its dedicated CM x 1 base and has not won them the legion of new customers they sought as a new base for sales. There are not enough of the new type of customer and they are not as committed as the old ones.

CMSF (and CM x 2) will be seen by wargamers as compared to CM x 1. It comes off badly in that regard. There is less of almost everything. A new product line should be more and better, not less, different and entirely different from what the customer wanted. The biggest single problem was that CMSF was a piece of crap when it was released--and for a very long time thereafter. It's subject was not a popular one--asymmetrical near future war in very limited terrain and at unrealistic ranges. Steve made all of this much, much worse with his "marketing". While Elvis has conceded that CMSF was released in a late alpha or early beta state, Steve never has and probably never will.

So how many people have moved on from CMSF, which was in the bargain bin a few months after its release? How's that CMSF community doing compared to the now ancient one for CM x 1? How were the reviews, both by critics and gamers, of CMSF compared to any of the CM x 1 games?

When you plan to be selling less, it is not a great idea to add to that by saying that "less" also means a mere 6 month life span. This is especially true when you one and only CM x 2 game was still a piece of crap far longer than 6 months from its release.
 

Zonso

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2009
Messages
300
Reaction score
2
Location
A station near you
Country
llCanada
Zonso--you're way off the mark with regard to wargames and the computer war gaming market. Virtually every very successful war game since at least the late DOS era had great depth and usually included an excellent editor, if not a construction kit. Panzer General, the Campaign Series, Steel Panthers, Close Combat, TOAW, CM x 1... While wargamers are hungry for the next great wargame, that is largely because we have been in wargame winter for about 3 years. The road flairs, as Dale describes them, may sell in other genres, but not as a wargame.


Am I? From your games list you are living in the past and don't seem very cognizant of the current market. Just from the top of my head:

Field of Glory

War in the Pacific AE

Crown of Glory EE

Forge of Freedom

CMSF: British Module

AGEOD AACW

Kharkov: DotD

HPS Pick your flavour

GG WbtS

Guns of August

Conquest of the Aegean

Wargaming Winter eh?
 

Zonso

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2009
Messages
300
Reaction score
2
Location
A station near you
Country
llCanada
To be fair, what some of us want is for the only company to successfully provide us with what we think is the "perfect game" to do it again +1. That's not unreasonable to hope for or pine for - after all, they did it once before. They're doing something else instead, and we're talking about it. That's all.

-dale
No of course not, though it does have a Don Quixote motif. :)
 

KG_Jag

KG Vice Kommandir
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
1,782
Reaction score
180
Location
New Braunfels, TX/Reno, NV
Country
llUnited States
Wargaming Winter eh?
Yes!!

You really think that the last few years have been good or even decent ones for computer wargames!? You are the first of many with whom I have communicated on the subject to stake out that position. What year was worse than your "standard of excellence" [btw the examples you provided cover multiple years] from say 1996 through 2005--and why?
 

Palantir

Member #86
Joined
Aug 7, 2002
Messages
4,877
Reaction score
1,706
Location
The Heartland
Country
llUnited States
The whole gaming market has been reduced to the 'next best thing' today....
I really don't care what the whole market is doing since they didn't bother to make a CM type game for me, I'm only interested in what the company that makes the game I'm playing is doing.

CMSF..., it has literally hundreds of hours of gameplay and loads of replayability...
Then by BFC's own mission statement they screwed up making CM:SF: they DO NOT want players spending countless hours/months or heaven forbid years playing CM:SF like we are doing with CMx1. They want players to buy it then get done with it BEFORE their next "great" release whenever that will be so they will buy that.

You arguments otherwise equally apply to CMx1 or any other game for that matter..
Not true, CMx1 is still being played and enjoyed after how many years now like as mentioned above TOAW etc.?

Your motives sound like you want a security blanket type game that will satisfy your gaming needs for the rest of your life.
And that would be just horribile in what way? You mean to say that you DON"T want a game to be designed (by BFC) that is so good that you can play it for years on end? :crosseye: You'd rather buy games purposely designed by a company so limited in scope that they can be forgotten in 4-6 months over & over? Not me I'd much rather have a SINGLE game that can be added onto and expanded for years to come instead of designed to be incompatable with itself in 6 months. We just want an updated & improved CMx1.
 
Last edited:

Zonso

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2009
Messages
300
Reaction score
2
Location
A station near you
Country
llCanada
Field of Glory - 2009

War in the Pacific AE - 2009

Crown of Glory EE - 2009

Forge of Freedom - 2006

CMSF: British Module - 2009

AGEOD AACW - 2007

Kharkov: DotD - 2008

HPS Pick your flavour - 2009

GG WbtS - 2008

Guns of August - 2007

Conquest of the Aegean - 2006


I take it you don't consider any of these good wargames then?
 

KG_Jag

KG Vice Kommandir
Joined
Aug 5, 2002
Messages
1,782
Reaction score
180
Location
New Braunfels, TX/Reno, NV
Country
llUnited States
Zonso--I'm not taking the bait. The main part of my post was about BF, CM x 1 and CM x 2. Your post in response was an evasive maneuver away the core of my post and the points made therein.

That said--answer my question about which year from 1996 through 2005 was worse and why. Your thin list makes my point.
 

wengart

Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2009
Messages
238
Reaction score
3
Location
Knossos
Country
ll
I still can't quite figure out why BFC won't do a TIAB game. It seems like the natural progression of things CM:N --> CM:Bulge--> CM:ETO. BFC could even tack it onto CM:Bulge as the final module. Although certain items from CM:N may not be portable (maps especially) the TO&E and terrain seems like it could be brought along fairly easily. They could then sell it for the total cost of CM:N family + CM:Bulge modules (assuming its a CM:Bulge module you would already own the Bulge base game) while giving heavy discounts for each base game or module you already own.
 
Top