Combat Mission status

Started by RyanE, May 27, 2018, 02:09:59 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.



Apocalypse 31

#92


Yeah. Nope.

Looks like the same CMx2 game engine...the same engine that was developed in the 1990s.

You can slap all the lipstick on that pig, but it still looks like crap (HELLO? Shadows? ANTI ALIASING?) and performs like crap.

Edit: I am so disappointed.

RyanE

The performance is what I can't get over.  My brother upgrades his computer frequently and with each nVidia card, 850, 940, 1050, and then 1060, the performance of CM seems to get worse.  His latest is an i7-8700 with a single core processor speed of 4GHz and a 1080 and he gets 27 fps in Barkman's Corner ( a mid-sized scenario in CMBN.)

My old Dell laptop running Win7 and an A10 AMD chip with a five year old Radeon chipset runs it at 30 fps.  We have tried everything with the new computer to no avail.

Apocalypse 31

Quote from: RyanE on June 20, 2018, 01:02:41 PM
The performance is what I can't get over.  My brother upgrades his computer frequently and with each nVidia card, 850, 940, 1050, and then 1060, the performance of CM seems to get worse.  His latest is an i7-8700 with a single core processor speed of 4GHz and a 1080 and he gets 27 fps in Barkman's Corner ( a mid-sized scenario in CMBN.)

My old Dell laptop running Win7 and an A10 AMD chip with a five year old Radeon chipset runs it at 30 fps.  We have tried everything with the new computer to no avail.

Exactly!

I'd be ok with the graphics, if the game AT LEAST ran smoothly. But it doesn't, and can't handle large maps either.

RyanE

btw, the FPSs I quoted are locked to the Panther at level 2 for the entire first 10 turns.  No no movement of the tank or the camera.  I have always used that as a benchmark.

Zulu1966

Quote from: Apocalypse 31 on June 20, 2018, 10:17:30 AM


Yeah. Nope.

Looks like the same CMx2 game engine...the same engine that was developed in the 1990s.

You can slap all the lipstick on that pig, but it still looks like crap (HELLO? Shadows? ANTI ALIASING?) and performs like crap.

Edit: I am so disappointed.

Looks fantastic. Can't wait for the release. CMSF was released in 2007 so palpably not the 90's and palpably not the same engine as CMX1

I find it quite easy to set anti aliasing and shadows in the interface both of which are supported and run great from a performance point of view.

I was going to post a couple of screenshots of that other game with the total war level of graphics that can deliver a map like that with the same excellent realistic representation of tactical engagements that CMX2 does. But couldn't remeber what it was called. Perhaps as you obviously know what it is you can oblige for me
"you are the rule maker, the dictator, the mini- Stalin, Mao, Hitler, the emperor, generalissimo, the MAN. You may talk the talk and appear to be quite easy going to foster popularity, but to the MAN I say F*CK YOU." And Steve G is F******g rude ? Just another day on the BF forum ... one demented idiots reaction to BF disagreeing about the thickness of the armour on a Tiger II turret mantlet.

Jarhead0331

Grogheads Uber Alles
Semper Grog
"No beast is more alpha than JH." Gusington, 10/23/18


mirth

"45 minutes of pooping Tribbles being juggled by a drunken Horta would be better than Season 1 of TNG." - SirAndrewD

"you don't look at the mantelpiece when you're poking the fire" - Bawb

"Can't 'un' until you 'pre', son." - Gus

RyanE

These look pretty good.

I have never embedded a pic before so here are a couple links to some pics...

http://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/55-we-love-screenshots/?do=findComment&comment=182878

http://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/55-we-love-screenshots/?do=findComment&comment=181606

http://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/55-we-love-screenshots/?do=findComment&comment=175229

Before anyone says it...You can easily play SB at the same level as CM, especially after the last update.  You can play in vehicle, outside vehicle, by platoon/squad, from an elevated position (as in CM), or by map (looks more like a real map).  I play hours and never enter a vehicle.


Apocalypse 31

QuoteI play hours and never enter a vehicle

I normally like the "big picture" perspective, but damn, it feels good to sling some HEAT every now and then.

Also, the infantry in SB are really bad, as in, not working properly. They have problems engaging that, according to the developers, has to do with pathfinding.

Edit: Have you seen the SB screenshots with the new shading?


Zulu1966

#102
Quote from: RyanE on June 20, 2018, 03:31:41 PM
These look pretty good.

I have never embedded a pic before so here are a couple links to some pics...

http://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/55-we-love-screenshots/?do=findComment&comment=182878

http://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/55-we-love-screenshots/?do=findComment&comment=181606

http://www.steelbeasts.com/topic/55-we-love-screenshots/?do=findComment&comment=175229

Before anyone says it...You can easily play SB at the same level as CM, especially after the last update.  You can play in vehicle, outside vehicle, by platoon/squad, from an elevated position (as in CM), or by map (looks more like a real map).  I play hours and never enter a vehicle.

Yes I have  SB and those shots look good. But really I van point you to.many CM screenshots that loom just as good taking at the right.time.and angle and really there' is nothing in those shots I can see that particularly elevates it above CM. Certainly in game I find the SB environments much less aesthetic than CM.

Yes can play SB at a certain level yo sort of mimic CM but it is not des8gned for that by any stretch of the imagination. It is first and foremost simulator of vehicles. And in that respect nothing like CM.

CM IS not perfect and graphics with a lot more resource and money could be.better bit as a proper war game it is still miles ahead and I don't marry up what I see in game which I believe with a good map maker is highly effective with the vitriol others seem to heap on it graphically.

I run a not particularly new or high spec machine and never had an issue running the.game.
"you are the rule maker, the dictator, the mini- Stalin, Mao, Hitler, the emperor, generalissimo, the MAN. You may talk the talk and appear to be quite easy going to foster popularity, but to the MAN I say F*CK YOU." And Steve G is F******g rude ? Just another day on the BF forum ... one demented idiots reaction to BF disagreeing about the thickness of the armour on a Tiger II turret mantlet.

RyanE

I'm not saying SB is better than CM.  Just that other tactical games have good graphics too.  Frankly, you lose some credibility discussing CM graphics.  They are incredibly dated.  Are they serviceable?  Yes.  Have they improved them in the last two years?  No.  They were almost dated on release of CMSF, let  alone a game released a year ago.

I see you say CM isn't perfect, yet even the slightest hint at some saying something negative about CM and you are right there with a comment about how great this or that is.  CM's performance on any hardware from the last three years is bad.  There is no way around it.  They hitched themselves to a technology that was dying 10 years ago when they released CMSF.

I love playing the games.  But I am sick to my stomach over how they have petered away the support of a broader community with how they release product, keep the engine up to date, and talk to their customers.

Apocalypse 31

Well said.

Another example of how bad map sizes are in CM.

A 4x4 km Combat Mission area overlayed on a regular Steel Beasts map.