dalem
Member
I think this was my first actual post:
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=12258&page=3
-dale
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=12258&page=3
-dale
Afghanistan First
- Thread starter Michael Dorosh
- Start date
-
- Tags
- cm: afghanistan
Elvis
Member
No. The list contains a list of fixed bugs which you said the game did not contain (or to be more accurate
). That is why I suspected you might not have been around then. The game was released with tons of bugs. The game was indeed playable and I hope Ididn't sound like I was implying it wasn't because it was.
And I am sorry if I did not remember when you came into town. I will try to remember. But your memory of fixes needed in the game seems to be the one that needs some dressing up. That is why I provided the list of first patch fixes. To jog your memory.
dalem
Member
You're right, technically a tomato is a fruit.
-dale
-dale
Patrocles
Member
wow! Impressive!
:salute:
I am not a military-minded person at all. I discovered the CMx1 series ~2001/2002. I bought the games after playing the CMBO demo (the one with Yanks attacking across a valley(?)). Anyway...the games were playable right out of the box for me! There may have been bugs but I never noticed them (and this may go back to my lack of military knowledge of what units should be donig or not doing).
Elvis
Member
I think the final patch was released in early 2001 so you probably first found the game in its final" state.
Patrocles
Member
Wasn't CMBO released in 2000? Was it unplayable like CMSF? And iirc, it took BFC ~1 year to patch CMSF to something playable then it seems as if BFC is on par for getting games into a decent playable state. Everyone says BFC supports their games and it shows!
KG_Jag
KG Vice Kommandir
The readme for the CMBO's final patch (v1.12) is dated March 2, 2001. That's less than nine months after the game was released.
Elvis
Member
CMBO was VERY playable when released and it was June 2000. It benefited in a lot of way from having a "beta demo" released in Oct or Nov 1999. CMSF was playable as well but certainly had many more issues coming out of the gates than CMBO did.Wasn't CMBO released in 2000? Was it unplayable like CMSF? And iirc, it took BFC ~1 year to patch CMSF to something playable then it seems as if BFC is on par for getting games into a decent playable state. Everyone says BFC supports their games and it shows!
KG_Jag
KG Vice Kommandir
A number of early buyers could not get CMSF to work on their machines (within game specs). I don't remember that happening with any of the CM x 1 releases.
Elvis
Member
Me neither.
dalem
Member
I don't either, but there had to be compatibility issues with BO - there always are. And the fog table thing was noticed early on, right?
-dale
-dale
KG_Jag
KG Vice Kommandir
PC's with ATI video cards would not show fog on screen.
Patrocles
Member
thanks for the info.
(I should have said "playing issues" for all examples and not "unplayable.")
I'm actually beginning to think that the NATO module will be next out. It's a year in July since the Brits arrived and I think they are aware that they need to get something out sooner. It's also wise to get it out before CMN as I'm not sure there will be all that much interest in it if it's after.
As for CMA, I'm not even sure there is too much interest there as it's even more niche, I for one am not interested in something that looks so much like SF. Also, the nature of that fight means that it will have to be primarily infantry based, and you know how little I'm enamoured by the infantry formations in the new engine.
As for CMA, I'm not even sure there is too much interest there as it's even more niche, I for one am not interested in something that looks so much like SF. Also, the nature of that fight means that it will have to be primarily infantry based, and you know how little I'm enamoured by the infantry formations in the new engine.
Michael Dorosh
der Spieß des Forums
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2004
- Messages
- 15,733
- Reaction score
- 2,765
- Location
- Calgary, AB
- First name
- Michael
- Country
-
Exactly. What kind of scenarios can you possibly have with the new Afghanistan game, incidentally? It's not like there are many sources in North America for "historical research". And if there was, what kind of actions are we talking about? Ambushes of BMP-equipped motor rifle convoys by RPGs and Lee Enfields?
How many ambush scenarios can one possibly play?
You can't have a "shoot the Hind down" scenario because aircraft aren't explicitly modelled.
Light infantry operations, as you suggest, aren't modelled in great detail. The attraction has always been armour.
I suppose it fits the BFC marketing model of "play for six months and discard". Now if only they could get a new replacement game out in those six months, they could get it to work for them.
Michael Dorosh
der Spieß des Forums
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2004
- Messages
- 15,733
- Reaction score
- 2,765
- Location
- Calgary, AB
- First name
- Michael
- Country
-
Incidentally, if they DO release Afghanistan, NATO and Normandy simultaneously, it may well be a large mistake. How many people will give Afghanistan even a glance if Normandy is in the offing? I'd have to believe that even if all three were ready to go out the gate on 1 July, they would stagger the release purposefully to maximize their income.
Rule_303
Member
In spite of the interest shown in CM:A by the dwindling number of BFC community faithful, I believe BFC when they say CMA is aimed squarely at the Russian gaming market. I don't know anything about the gaming market there (or whether they even PAY for games there), but as PJ O'Rourke said, chess is a spectator sport so maybe that's a good indicator.
Also, I suspect BFC's financial downside (as distinct from the opportunity cost of Charles' valuable time) in this venture is strictly limited. Steve has never been enthusiastic about asymetrical warfare (both because it's a slower pace of play and because it highlights weaknesses in the engine around infantry behavior), so I doubt he'd have been willing to put much at risk. I also doubt that CMA will contain any new features that won't also show up in NATO or CMN -- that would be a drain on Charles who is the bottleneck resource as many have observed (himself included).
Also, I suspect BFC's financial downside (as distinct from the opportunity cost of Charles' valuable time) in this venture is strictly limited. Steve has never been enthusiastic about asymetrical warfare (both because it's a slower pace of play and because it highlights weaknesses in the engine around infantry behavior), so I doubt he'd have been willing to put much at risk. I also doubt that CMA will contain any new features that won't also show up in NATO or CMN -- that would be a drain on Charles who is the bottleneck resource as many have observed (himself included).
Last edited:
The trouble is I think that maybe Snowball has forced them to take on more of CMA than they ever thought. Getting yourselves mired with dodgy Russian software designers cant be the smartest thing in the world to do. Especially when they apparently licensed the CM code to them (CM Code anyone?).
I think Snowball dropped the ball and came running to BF, who then felt obliged to take on the workload that Snowball couldnt. Hence, CMA is farmed out all of a sudden to CMN Beta testers or SF Beta testers and the whole CMA beta test begins. Surely Snowball could manage to find its own testers? They have licensed the code, not the company after all.
So, what you end up with is BF supporting a game they didnt figure on getting involved in much, if at all. There being only 1 Charles, then 3 project seem to be one project too far for him. Major time slips seem to have arrived at the same time they started supporting CMA.
As for popularity, please have a look at the BF dedicated CMA forum. I think it gets less posts than the CMBO forum...
I think Snowball dropped the ball and came running to BF, who then felt obliged to take on the workload that Snowball couldnt. Hence, CMA is farmed out all of a sudden to CMN Beta testers or SF Beta testers and the whole CMA beta test begins. Surely Snowball could manage to find its own testers? They have licensed the code, not the company after all.
So, what you end up with is BF supporting a game they didnt figure on getting involved in much, if at all. There being only 1 Charles, then 3 project seem to be one project too far for him. Major time slips seem to have arrived at the same time they started supporting CMA.
As for popularity, please have a look at the BF dedicated CMA forum. I think it gets less posts than the CMBO forum...
Rule_303
Member
I'd guess BFC didn't share the crown jewels with Snowball for this reason, just gave them limited rights to reskin vehicles and develop OOBs. Which is likely why -- as you say -- when this proved to be a more complex task than expected, BFC / Charles had to get heavily involved at the expense of the other projects. I'd hope they'd pull the plug on this venture at some point, and just roll a few Shilkas and other Soviet goodies into the NATO module under some pretext or other and then post the Russian / muj mods in a quiet subfolder to let Afgantsy enthusiasts do their own thing and kind of keep their original promise (and boost sales of NATO). Kind of like AH's "Air Assault on Crete" with special Malta bonus game....
But then I guess opening the door to have Russians (or Chinese or North Korean skinned Russians) fight Blue forces would smack too much of CMx1 "theater in a box" and somehow cannibalize sales from CMSF-2. (As if that one's gonna come out before 2020 at the current pace of development, by which time HALO-16 will be fully holographic and 2D will seem like playing Pac Man).
Whatever happened to CMA? Traditionally a new forum means the game is about 3 months out over at BF. The CMA forum has been up for a lot longer than this, is absolutely dead and there's been nothing new mentioned for ages.
Its times like these that Elvis came in handy as he was play testing this one too.
I'm beginning to think that this game has major problems, maybe not beginning to, Im sure it has as is was yet another game that we thought we'd be seeing in 2009.
Is BF just too small to do more than one game at a time?