Progress. Things are looking up.

Redwolf

Member # 3665
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
5,113
Reaction score
44
Location
MA, USA
Country
llUnited States
Thinks are really looking up.

The status of FoW on foxholes has changed to "most likely" and some hack to protect heavy weapons (AT guns etc) in there in initial positions seems to be definitely in, in dependently of the foxholes (a non-foxhole hack for guns, basically).

In addition to that Steve reports that in code they have you cannot spot vehicle dust clouds and muzzle blasts unless you have spotted the vehicle first. Not perfect since LOS to the top of the cloud now doesn't count, but if this isn't progress I don't know.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1125077&postcount=260

(disclaimer: sometimes code that already is in turns out non-working and doesn't make it into releases, so don't bet your life on it but there it is)
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
Thinks are really looking up.

The status of FoW on foxholes has changed to "most likely" and some hack to protect heavy weapons (AT guns etc) in there in initial positions seems to be definitely in, in dependently of the foxholes (a non-foxhole hack for guns, basically).

In addition to that Steve reports that in code they have you cannot spot vehicle dust clouds and muzzle blasts unless you have spotted the vehicle first. Not perfect since LOS to the top of the cloud now doesn't count, but if this isn't progress I don't know.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1125077&postcount=260

(disclaimer: sometimes code that already is in turns out non-working and doesn't make it into releases, so don't bet your life on it but there it is)
Steve has waffled back and forth on exactly what - one or two elements of the overall design - in the last two days, showed explicitly that they have done precisely no planning or conceptualization of what the new game will look like or how they will code it or what the feature set will involve.

How is this positive? Steve has reversed himself on everything he's talked about in the course of that discussion - from "no FOW foxholes and trenches" to "some FOW, maybe, some of the time". On other issues, he's revealed no idea what they will do or how they will do it, both related to foxholes and unrelated.

What's the positive part?
 

Redwolf

Member # 3665
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
5,113
Reaction score
44
Location
MA, USA
Country
llUnited States
I still see practical issues with actually implementing some of these (along with a couple more skeletons in the basement).

But this is definitely a change in what Steve wants.

It might turn out too hard to get right, but it's progress.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
I still see practical issues with actually implementing some of these (along with a couple more skeletons in the basement).

But this is definitely a change in what Steve wants.

It might turn out too hard to get right, but it's progress.
:laugh: So we're defining victory as getting Steve to at least want the right things!

Now we need to get Charles to code them. :bite::yummy:
 

Redwolf

Member # 3665
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
5,113
Reaction score
44
Location
MA, USA
Country
llUnited States
Honestly I'm more pragmatic than people give me credit for.

The important stuff was upgraded from "what?!?" to "yeah we want it, too".

Don't care how it came together.
 

Geordie

CM Moderator
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Messages
2,111
Reaction score
13
Location
Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
What I think is important, maybe the most important fact here, is that without guys questioning things like Foxholes there would be no discussions about the impracticality, or reality of aspects of a game that are fundamental to its Core enjoyment.

Before SF came out, we knew nothing about it. Now we know how CM-2 works, there are some good questions flying around. If nothing else it forces BF to think about them. If this had happened before SF was born, then maybe it would have been a better game.

So like Redwolf, I dont care how it happens, its the end results that matter to me.
 

dalem

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
2,298
Reaction score
62
Location
Columbia Heights, MN
Country
llUnited States
But you need to apply the Crap Factor.

I know I'm Captain Negative, but I still don't think CMN is going to be a salvageable game. It'll be wrapped around CMx2, after all.

-dale
 

Sirocco

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
255
Reaction score
0
Location
England
Country
ll
Before SF came out, we knew nothing about it. Now we know how CM-2 works, there are some good questions flying around. If nothing else it forces BF to think about them. If this had happened before SF was born, then maybe it would have been a better game.
It's a bit of a double whammy; the forum wasn't used to its full potential to help move the series forward, and a lot of what we'd all taken for granted as being core CM features dropped through the cracks unseen.
 

Geordie

CM Moderator
Joined
Jan 27, 2005
Messages
2,111
Reaction score
13
Location
Scotland
Country
llUnited Kingdom
But you need to apply the Crap Factor.

I know I'm Captain Negative, but I still don't think CMN is going to be a salvageable game. It'll be wrapped around CMx2, after all.

-dale
But, and despite its faults, it still remains a decent game (SF). The more I play it, the more I get used to its wily ways, sometimes you need to know how to play a game, not just whats in it. If you know what I mean.

What Steve and co dont seem to understand is that you can be negative about some aspects while on the whole being positive about the game in general. Which is not a good attitude to take, but its their baby and I suppose they want you too look into the Pram and say 'thats a nice baby', not 'thats a nice baby, but look at the size of its nose'.
 

thewood

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2004
Messages
2,594
Reaction score
12
Location
Boston
Country
llUnited States
Geordie, you hit the nail on the head. If you have anything negative to say about CMSF, regardless of how positive you are about the overall game, you become one of Steve's hated customers. A qualification on that; If its an aspect of the game Steve has already said is an issue, they don't treat it as bad. If its a design issue that Steve was hoping no one would notice, that's when the hammer comes down. Here is the process for Steve changing his mind:

1) Ignore issue but if enough people make some noise about it...move to #2
2) Say its too hard
3) Berate person(s) bringing issue up
4) Rationalize the issue as being either insignificant or the way its supposed to be.
5) Berate some more
6a) Say Charles will look into it
6b) Charles says that its probably not that hard
7) Steve presents it as gift to the community
8) Steve makes it seem he planned on doing this all along and critcizes the group that pushed for the change
9) the beta brigade hails BFC as greatest company since Toyota

How many times have we seen this. Now my real prediction is Steve will look at this thread as justification for saying cusomters are unappreciative.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
Geordie, you hit the nail on the head. If you have anything negative to say about CMSF, regardless of how positive you are about the overall game, you become one of Steve's hated customers. A qualification on that; If its an aspect of the game Steve has already said is an issue, they don't treat it as bad. If its a design issue that Steve was hoping no one would notice, that's when the hammer comes down. Here is the process for Steve changing his mind:

1) Ignore issue but if enough people make some noise about it...move to #2
2) Say its too hard
3) Berate person(s) bringing issue up
4) Rationalize the issue as being either insignificant or the way its supposed to be.
5) Berate some more
6a) Say Charles will look into it
6b) Charles says that its probably not that hard
7) Steve presents it as gift to the community
8) Steve makes it seem he planned on doing this all along and critcizes the group that pushed for the change
9) the beta brigade hails BFC as greatest company since Toyota

How many times have we seen this. Now my real prediction is Steve will look at this thread as justification for saying cusomters are unappreciative.
Best flowchart since Grade 7 math class.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
From Steve today:

We are thinking of putting it in as an option for WeGo play. It makes no sense for RealTime since there are natural forces at work there which, in fact, the Command Delays are artificially trying to replicate.

The Command Delays are one of those features where either you like 'em or you hate 'em. There's legitimate points on both sides from both a gameplay and realism standpoint. It's one reason why you don't see threads about this like you do for something like Quick Battles or (most recently) trenches. In fact, if anything the sporadic and rather short lived discussions about Command Delays seems to indicate to us that most people are content to not have them. Which is why we are thinking along the lines of adding them back in as an option.

Steve
Wow. They haven't conceptualized this either, yet. Am I being too harsh, or is all the discussion on CM:N just wayyy too premature? People keep talking about it like it will be a 2009 release, but they keep talking like they don't have a clue how they will implement a single line of code yet. Or is it just me?
 

Sirocco

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
255
Reaction score
0
Location
England
Country
ll
It does point to not having an adequate roadmap. I like flexibility, but from a programming standpoint you need to have most of this mapped out. It's not just dropping a feature in, quite often changes have a ripple effect.
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
If they haven't even coded any of this stuff yet, when are they going to test it?

People are asking if CM:N will be out for the D-Day anniversary on June 6, but someone here suggested Christmas 2009 as far more likely. I think I would have to agree with that assessment, if anyone wants to give any thought at all to actually designing scenarios and then playtesting major features like bocage and command delays which apparently they haven't even conceptualized yet. Wow. Unless this is just an elaborate smokescreen, which is possible, but seems unlikely given past discussions with past releases.
 

Sirocco

Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2008
Messages
255
Reaction score
0
Location
England
Country
ll
I would be surprised, and disappointed, if CMN were out before Spring next year. Disappointed because it would suggest it was undercooked.
 

thewood

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2004
Messages
2,594
Reaction score
12
Location
Boston
Country
llUnited States
One thing to keep in mind. Regardless of BFC's spin on CMSF's release, they will not release CMN even close to CMSF's terrible condition if they are remotely competent. A CMN release even close to the condition of CMSF at 1.0 would likely be the death knell for BFC as we know it.
 

dalem

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
2,298
Reaction score
62
Location
Columbia Heights, MN
Country
llUnited States
As I've said for a while now, if they do a WWII game it will not be CMx2 - it will be CMx3, which will look and feel a heckuva lot more like CMx1 than CMx2 does. And an essentially-new engine means late 2010 for them.

-dale
 

Michael Dorosh

der Spieß des Forums
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 6, 2004
Messages
15,586
Reaction score
2,506
Location
Calgary, AB
First name
Michael
Country
llCanada
There has to be something coming out in the interim between now and late 2010, no? TOW and CM:C and the CM:SF modules (British and possibly one more) may all appear between now and then, I suppose (or not at all). I just wonder if we won't see something else pop up in the interim.
 

Redwolf

Member # 3665
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
5,113
Reaction score
44
Location
MA, USA
Country
llUnited States
It does point to not having an adequate roadmap. I like flexibility, but from a programming standpoint you need to have most of this mapped out. It's not just dropping a feature in, quite often changes have a ripple effect.
I disagree, in particular in a one-programmer shop.

These are things you can try to code and if they don't work out and/or are too hard you just skip to the next item.

Overplanning is the death of projects like these. Imagine somebody says "command delay must be in" and it turns out hard. Then what? Delay the release by 3 months?
 

Redwolf

Member # 3665
Joined
Sep 2, 2002
Messages
5,113
Reaction score
44
Location
MA, USA
Country
llUnited States
There has to be something coming out in the interim between now and late 2010, no? TOW and CM:C and the CM:SF modules (British and possibly one more) may all appear between now and then, I suppose (or not at all). I just wonder if we won't see something else pop up in the interim.
One more modern CMx2?
 
Top