Obviously, like many others I have been following the threads at both Matrix and BF concerning new and upcoming ww2 games.
I have to say that its been a refreshing change to have a company that actually shows what their game does. I am impressed by the guys making PCO, their openess, their willingness to describe what they are doing and how they are doing it. To be honest it really puts BF in a bad light.
What I know about PCO in less than 2 weeks far outweighs what I know about a title I have to describe as CMN. BF has promised much in the 1-1 world or ww2, unfortunately, it has delivered very little. About 3 screenshots, one of them over 2 years old, some descriptions of bridges and a whole lot of promise.
Along comes the PCO team and with in a short period Ive seen loads of vehicle models, a huge amount of building, water, bridges, smoke coming out of chimneys. I know about the ability to tailor game turns to my liking. I know that armour and guns will rock back when firing. Ive seen AARs and DARs. Ive seen how air support works. I know about the artillery, heck they even put a Maus in and Ive seen a screenshot. It goes to show that when you want to, you can.
BF has constantly stated that this and that is in and everyone playing it is loving it and were going to love it. Quite frankly, Im pre-disposed now to not believe a word of it, I havent actually seen much proof of anything and I would have thought by this time that we could have a forum, working title and at least an AAR of some 1-1 battle.
SO why did I put CMBB in my title?
Quite simply, PCO seems to me the game CM-1 should have become. It seems to have all or most of the elements guys at BF had been asking about. Improved graphics are in, tailoring turns are in, running water, better campaign modes. Detailed reporting of armour hits, i.e. some feedback from the action. A one key switching of map modes. An editor that looks easy to use. High modability, which leads to the ability of designing other conflicts. Its almost as if the guys designing PCO looked at PCK and CMBB and said, lets combine the best elements of both games and see what wargamers would like to add to them and design that.
Now, Im not one to get too excited though, I do realise that none of the new games are out yet and Ive yet to play anything on a PC. I have played a lot of CMBB though, a bit of PCK and quite a bit of CMSF. I imagine CMN will be much like CMSF (nothing to prove me otherwise that Ive seen so far). Im also begining to think that PCO is a kind of hybrid CMBB+ and if it is, then thats the one Im most interested in.
I see the possibility that PCO will provide me with the next level in ww2 wargaming where as CMN will just provide a new bit of 1-1 ww2 gaming. I may still buy CMN, but if I get PCO first and the CMN demo is just more CMSF but in ww2 uniforms while PCO is that CMBB+, then all bets are off.
Editted to add - I wouldnt be surprised if BF actually show more screenshots and give a bit more information soon about CMN following the PCO revelations.
I have to say that its been a refreshing change to have a company that actually shows what their game does. I am impressed by the guys making PCO, their openess, their willingness to describe what they are doing and how they are doing it. To be honest it really puts BF in a bad light.
What I know about PCO in less than 2 weeks far outweighs what I know about a title I have to describe as CMN. BF has promised much in the 1-1 world or ww2, unfortunately, it has delivered very little. About 3 screenshots, one of them over 2 years old, some descriptions of bridges and a whole lot of promise.
Along comes the PCO team and with in a short period Ive seen loads of vehicle models, a huge amount of building, water, bridges, smoke coming out of chimneys. I know about the ability to tailor game turns to my liking. I know that armour and guns will rock back when firing. Ive seen AARs and DARs. Ive seen how air support works. I know about the artillery, heck they even put a Maus in and Ive seen a screenshot. It goes to show that when you want to, you can.
BF has constantly stated that this and that is in and everyone playing it is loving it and were going to love it. Quite frankly, Im pre-disposed now to not believe a word of it, I havent actually seen much proof of anything and I would have thought by this time that we could have a forum, working title and at least an AAR of some 1-1 battle.
SO why did I put CMBB in my title?
Quite simply, PCO seems to me the game CM-1 should have become. It seems to have all or most of the elements guys at BF had been asking about. Improved graphics are in, tailoring turns are in, running water, better campaign modes. Detailed reporting of armour hits, i.e. some feedback from the action. A one key switching of map modes. An editor that looks easy to use. High modability, which leads to the ability of designing other conflicts. Its almost as if the guys designing PCO looked at PCK and CMBB and said, lets combine the best elements of both games and see what wargamers would like to add to them and design that.
Now, Im not one to get too excited though, I do realise that none of the new games are out yet and Ive yet to play anything on a PC. I have played a lot of CMBB though, a bit of PCK and quite a bit of CMSF. I imagine CMN will be much like CMSF (nothing to prove me otherwise that Ive seen so far). Im also begining to think that PCO is a kind of hybrid CMBB+ and if it is, then thats the one Im most interested in.
I see the possibility that PCO will provide me with the next level in ww2 wargaming where as CMN will just provide a new bit of 1-1 ww2 gaming. I may still buy CMN, but if I get PCO first and the CMN demo is just more CMSF but in ww2 uniforms while PCO is that CMBB+, then all bets are off.
Editted to add - I wouldnt be surprised if BF actually show more screenshots and give a bit more information soon about CMN following the PCO revelations.
Last edited: