Battle Front just released 2.0 for CMBN
If you a new customer you have to do the following.
1. Buy CMBN 1.0
2. install CMBN 1.0
3. Active license.
4. Download & install the 1.1 patch
5. Buy CMBN 2.0 Upgrade
6. Download & install the 2.0 upgrade.
7. Another License ???
This doesn't even include the install and license of the CW module. Gee I wonder what can go wrong?
This looks like a customer service nightmare!
Why is BattleFront still selling the 1.0 version of CMBN? One would think there would be some sort of auto utility to do this crap!
To be fair, I think they lowered the price of CMBN another 10 bucks.. but you're right.. you should be able to buy it as 2.0!
The issue isn't the price, it's all the install and license nightmares. If steam worked like this, they would have gone out of business!
From the Battlefront.com website. There will be a 2.0 version to buy soon...
Lastly, the Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy v1.0 base game remains available at a special sale price of $35. A new full package upgraded to v2.0 will be made available shortly at the regular price, and v1.0 eventually phased out entirely.
Last Updated ( Tuesday, 11 December 2012 )
Saw a thread on there that said you didn't have to install 1.1.. as it's fixes are in the 2.0 Upgrade... I still have not taken the CMBN plunge due to price, but it's getting really attractive now!
You do not need the 1.11 patch.
You can upgrade to v2.0 fine from the vanilla v1.0
QuoteSaw a thread on there that said you didn't have to install 1.1.. as it's fixes are in the 2.0 Upgrade... I still have not taken the CMBN plunge due to price, but it's getting really attractive now!
The readme notes for the 2.0 upgrade says you have to update to 1.1 before you upgrade to 2.0?
Glad to see they are coming out with CMBM 2.0 version but, with more modules, patches, licenses and maybe even more upgrades coming, I think Battlefront needs a utility to install, update, & license the game. Remember if you change your video card or other hardware you have to re-install and re-license this stuff again!!!
you need 1.1 but you do NOT need 1.11, 2.0 includes all 1.11's fixes
to be fair this is only the same nightmare anyone else has to face when they join the bottom of the ladder for a game thats been out for a bit
The 3rd age mod for MTW2? An upto date Stainless Steel? Darth's most recent patch for Empire? Warhammer total war - and thats just the Total War franchise
Quote from: SgtRock on December 11, 2012, 02:04:17 PM
The issue isn't the price, it's all the install and license nightmares. If steam worked like this, they would have gone out of business!
BF really makes some bizarre decisions. This whole idea of needing to pay $10 to upgrade an old game just rubs me the wrong way. I mean, does Paradox charge you $10 to upgrade CK2 with one of their mega patches? Nope. In fact, I can't think of a single publisher that does this. I like CMBN, but considering I paid $55 for the original game, and now need to pay another $10 for a patch (of all things), I am getting a bit disgusted with this nonsense.
Quote from: RooksBailey on December 11, 2012, 03:30:09 PM
Quote from: SgtRock on December 11, 2012, 02:04:17 PM
The issue isn't the price, it's all the install and license nightmares. If steam worked like this, they would have gone out of business!
BF really makes some bizarre decisions. This whole idea of needing to pay $10 to upgrade an old game just rubs me the wrong way. I mean, does Paradox charge you $10 to upgrade CK2 with one of their mega patches? Nope. In fact, I can't think of a single publisher that does this. I like CMBN, but considering I paid $55 for the original game, and now need to pay another $10 for a patch (of all things), I am getting a bit disgusted with this nonsense.
this isnt a patch, it isnt fixing anything thats broken - its new material for CMBN, new software, an update - you pay for CKIIs DLCs, you pay for Battlefronts new software - whats the difference?
I'm going to have to disagree as this type of content (http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2047&Itemid=517) would be considered patch material by any other publisher. When CK2 releases a patch, it always contains this type of new content for the base game regardless of whether you are buying the associated DLC or not. Most publishers would include this stuff gratis for their old customers and not charge for the privilege of updating a game they already paid for.
Don't misunderstand me: I think CMBN is a great game, but this nickle and dime stuff wouldn't be tolerated with most other games.
New material? You mean functionality that should have been in the game from the start? Functionality that mostly or completely existed in the first generation of Combat Mission games twelve years ago? I wonder how much the flamethrower (NON)patch is going to cost us?
Quote from: Ubercat on December 11, 2012, 03:47:11 PM
New material? You mean functionality that should have been in the game from the start? Functionality that mostly or completely existed in the first generation of Combat Mission games twelve years ago? I wonder how much the flamethrower (NON)patch is going to cost us?
who says it should? you? are you the designer? the software company?
Right after my model of company car came out they released an updated one - do i get to go to BMW and say 'excuse me, you SHOULD have put those features in my car - i want them all installing in this one for free? Sound ridiculous? Just because we're talking about £10 instead of £10000 doesnt give anyone a divine right to say what should have been in your old version, and about that old version - you bought it, you paid for it, if ones morals were that high, dont buy it - and if you didnt buy it, youre in the wrong thread
My folks still have a black and white TV, fk me if im not taking that to Sony to demand my free colour update
We're not talking about a car, it's a computer game and it's common for publishers to provide UI and gameplay improvements for free. Battlefront can do whatever they want of course, but it isn't the norm for their industry.
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:07:43 PM
We're not talking about a car, it's a computer game and it's common for publishers to provide UI and gameplay improvements for free. Battlefront can do whatever they want of course, but it isn't the norm for their industry.
its precisely because its a computer game that people think theyre entitled to something for free. Once the price escalates people have the good sense to realise its something they shouldnt/couldnt afford and are prepared to compromise on luxury models and tailor their purchase to their budget. But games? jesus, suggest you should spend £10 pounds on a game and its like taking food off your table!
Paradox will dig into a tiny part of CKIIs code, fiddle with user allowances and a few graphics and hey presto the Republic DLC and we will all pay £8 for it. What have battlefront done differently, added to the UI, added to the AI and other parts of the game.
Dont get me wrong, im not a fanboy before that gets thrown, i would have the same arguement for anyone that said they shouldnt pay for the Republic DLC for paradox. I just need one person to explain to me the difference between that, which you will happily pay for, and CMBN which you wont
I pay for DLC when it includes actual new content, meaning new scenarios, missions, campaings, whatever. And only then if I feel it warrants the price.
Again, BF can charge for whatever they want, but the fact is that most other game companies give away what they are charging for in the latest 'upgrade'. That's why people think that UI improvements and fixes should be free, because the precedent has long been set by the rest of the industry that those sorts of things are free.
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:21:47 PM
I pay for DLC when it includes actual new content, meaning new scenarios, missions, campaings, whatever. And only then if I feel it warrants the price.
Again, BF can charge for whatever they want, but the fact is that most other game companies give away what they are charging for in the latest 'upgrade'. That's why people think that UI improvements and fixes should be free, because the precedent has long been set by the rest of the industry that those sorts of things are free.
what would you do if it was Mirth Enterprises.com?
Quote from: undercovergeek on December 11, 2012, 04:24:26 PM
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:21:47 PM
I pay for DLC when it includes actual new content, meaning new scenarios, missions, campaings, whatever. And only then if I feel it warrants the price.
Again, BF can charge for whatever they want, but the fact is that most other game companies give away what they are charging for in the latest 'upgrade'. That's why people think that UI improvements and fixes should be free, because the precedent has long been set by the rest of the industry that those sorts of things are free.
what would you do if it was Mirth Enterprises.com?
Find an easier field than independent computer wargame developer.
lol, fair enough :P
Frankly I just want Battlefront to host their own damned patches and upgrades instead of the crappy hosting sites they're use now. Those sites install all sorts of crap you don't want and include suspecious files in the download folder. The $10 is a small quibble if it keeps them afloat.
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:26:06 PM
Quote from: undercovergeek on December 11, 2012, 04:24:26 PM
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:21:47 PM
I pay for DLC when it includes actual new content, meaning new scenarios, missions, campaings, whatever. And only then if I feel it warrants the price.
Again, BF can charge for whatever they want, but the fact is that most other game companies give away what they are charging for in the latest 'upgrade'. That's why people think that UI improvements and fixes should be free, because the precedent has long been set by the rest of the industry that those sorts of things are free.
what would you do if it was Mirth Enterprises.com?
Find an easier field than independent computer wargame developer.
LOL
Like running a gaming website?
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:21:47 PM
I pay for DLC when it includes actual new content, meaning new scenarios, missions, campaings, whatever. And only then if I feel it warrants the price.
Again, BF can charge for whatever they want, but the fact is that most other game companies give away what they are charging for in the latest 'upgrade'. That's why people think that UI improvements and fixes should be free, because the precedent has long been set by the rest of the industry that those sorts of things are free.
Well - I have to agree with geek. Its all very well getting on a high horse about it but the other choice is that they dont do it at all - because they cant afford it. Seems to me if thats the choice its not really one at all. In any case - these arent UI "fixes" they are changes to the game. Nothing was broken they just made it work better - and there are other changes also. If you are talking about precedents a lot of companies do that and bundle it as DLC. Ignoring the economics of a tiny company like battlefront with two developers and other companies with larger staff bases who can afford to put stuff like this out for free is like comparing apples with oranges.
The point is they are responding to what people wanted and keeping the old game updated. For a company like battlefront to be able to support that you have to pay for it. There is simply no economic choice about it - I suspect if they had the resources to do it for nothing they would have. So whilst I understand to some extent the gist of your post - you are ignoring the reality of what they can do and still keep in business.
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:21:47 PM
Again, BF can charge for whatever they want, but the fact is that most other game companies give away what they are charging for in the latest 'upgrade'. That's why people think that UI improvements and fixes should be free, because the precedent has long been set by the rest of the industry that those sorts of things are free.
That's my response almost exactly.
Quote from: Zulu1966 on December 11, 2012, 04:50:01 PM
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:21:47 PM
I pay for DLC when it includes actual new content, meaning new scenarios, missions, campaings, whatever. And only then if I feel it warrants the price.
Again, BF can charge for whatever they want, but the fact is that most other game companies give away what they are charging for in the latest 'upgrade'. That's why people think that UI improvements and fixes should be free, because the precedent has long been set by the rest of the industry that those sorts of things are free.
Well - I have to agree with geek. Its all very well getting on a high horse about it but the other choice is that they dont do it at all - because they cant afford it. Seems to me if thats the choice its not really one at all. In any case - these arent UI "fixes" they are changes to the game. Nothing was broken they just made it work better - and there are other changes also. If you are talking about precedents a lot of companies do that and bundle it as DLC. Ignoring the economics of a tiny company like battlefront with two developers and other companies with larger staff bases who can afford to put stuff like this out for free is like comparing apples with oranges.
The point is they are responding to what people wanted and keeping the old game updated. For a company like battlefront to be able to support that you have to pay for it. There is simply no economic choice about it - I suspect if they had the resources to do it for nothing they would have.
Who's getting high horsed about it? As I've said repeatedly, they can charge for anything they want. And I agree they are charging for it because they are small and essentially have a single product that requires all of their resources. However, it isn't an unreasonable observation that they are charging for what most others give away, even other developers of computer wargames. None of these niche publishers are all that large compared to the mainstream game companies.
thats that sorted then - all round to Mirths for tea and crumpets?
Quote from: LongBlade on December 11, 2012, 04:49:15 PM
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:26:06 PM
Quote from: undercovergeek on December 11, 2012, 04:24:26 PM
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:21:47 PM
I pay for DLC when it includes actual new content, meaning new scenarios, missions, campaings, whatever. And only then if I feel it warrants the price.
Again, BF can charge for whatever they want, but the fact is that most other game companies give away what they are charging for in the latest 'upgrade'. That's why people think that UI improvements and fixes should be free, because the precedent has long been set by the rest of the industry that those sorts of things are free.
what would you do if it was Mirth Enterprises.com?
Find an easier field than independent computer wargame developer.
LOL
Like running a gaming website?
Exactly. We all know you sleep on a pile of hundred dollar bills, LB.
Quote from: undercovergeek on December 11, 2012, 05:01:07 PM
thats that sorted then - all round to Mirths for tea and crumpets?
Gin & Tonics and tofurky :)
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 05:03:19 PM
[ tofurky :)
Keep your vegitarian propaganda to yourself!
hmmm, ill G & T with anyone but like Meatloaf said - i wont do that!!
Ill bring my own turkey
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:59:03 PM
Quote from: Zulu1966 on December 11, 2012, 04:50:01 PM
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 04:21:47 PM
I pay for DLC when it includes actual new content, meaning new scenarios, missions, campaings, whatever. And only then if I feel it warrants the price.
Again, BF can charge for whatever they want, but the fact is that most other game companies give away what they are charging for in the latest 'upgrade'. That's why people think that UI improvements and fixes should be free, because the precedent has long been set by the rest of the industry that those sorts of things are free.
Well - I have to agree with geek. Its all very well getting on a high horse about it but the other choice is that they dont do it at all - because they cant afford it. Seems to me if thats the choice its not really one at all. In any case - these arent UI "fixes" they are changes to the game. Nothing was broken they just made it work better - and there are other changes also. If you are talking about precedents a lot of companies do that and bundle it as DLC. Ignoring the economics of a tiny company like battlefront with two developers and other companies with larger staff bases who can afford to put stuff like this out for free is like comparing apples with oranges.
The point is they are responding to what people wanted and keeping the old game updated. For a company like battlefront to be able to support that you have to pay for it. There is simply no economic choice about it - I suspect if they had the resources to do it for nothing they would have.
Who's getting high horsed about it? As I've said repeatedly, they can charge for anything they want. And I agree they are charging for it because they are small and essentially have a single product that requires all of their resources. However, it isn't an unreasonable observation that they are charging for what most others give away, even other developers of computer wargames. None of these niche publishers are all that large compared to the mainstream game companies.
Well personally, I think that if other developers are giving new stuff away for free (though I have yet to be convinced I have seen any product give away changes on the same scale as what battlefront have done with this upgrade) then that is a bad decision. Business wise. Personally if people are adding stuff to a game and not fixing things that are broken I have no issue at all paying for it.
Well considering you're going to have to have the patch/update/upgrade/whatever to play Market Garden, Everyone who plans to play that one will have to buy it. Not that I care. I'll be buying both because there is nothing else on the market that compairs to CMX2 games and what they do at the tactical level.
I buy because I am a powerless consumer tool of the game industry.
I buy because it gives me lots of endorphins over in my brain.
WTF is tofurkey? It sounds like some kind of abomination.
It's a vegetarian feast!
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwhatscookingamerica.net%2FVegetarian%2FTorfurky2.jpg&hash=f2eb4dc405d2eb2892b567d335977313c1b58bcf)
Jesus! Aren't there rules against posting pics like that!
Anyway, I suppose BF have to make a judgement call. They want to maintain the goodwill and future purchasing likelihood of their client base by supporting their product (patches for things that are broken/wrong), but at the same time when they do that they're paying people to do stuff that will bring them no income. There must be a tipping point where the patch/upgrade must need to develop income if it is to be justified economically. There is a limit as to how far good will towards existing customers will generate further sales, and companies have to decide when to make that cutoff and start charging for improvements.
The customer makes a decision about whether what they're being asked to buy constitutes an improvement (worth paying for) or a fix (should be free), and, as we've seen in this thread, that's a subjective thing.
That is true. ^^ However it has been my experience on these forums
that some people feel they are being robbed no matter what.
I was right! That tofurkey is An Abomination Unto The LORD!!!!
Somebody help! I thought you could get kicked out of Maine for
even having pictures like that.
Angry people just need to boycott battlefront. Show them that there's a financial impact to their greed. But with the support of loyal fans, they think their schemes are rewarding and good business.
I'm not sure I get the anger here honestly. Nor am I sure I'd call it "greed". It's not like they locked up the ability to mod the game so you have to buy DLC for a tank skin or new army uniforms. For crying out loud paradox just released 2 new dlc just today for EU3 at $5 a pop just for a reskin. I can understand the frustration but really it seems like such a little fish all things considered.
Some people are angry at Paradox too. Anyway, people have choice not to buy anyway. Maybe they're angry because they think they're entitled to free stuff. I've been hearing this from early adopters. It sometimes pays to wait.
To show my appreciation for charging me $10 for an upgrade, I'm gonna send Battlefront a big Tofurkey along with my money.
Quote from: undercovergeek on December 11, 2012, 03:20:08 PM
you need 1.1 but you do NOT need 1.11, 2.0 includes all 1.11's fixes
to be fair this is only the same nightmare anyone else has to face when they join the bottom of the ladder for a game thats been out for a bit
The 3rd age mod for MTW2? An upto date Stainless Steel? Darth's most recent patch for Empire? Warhammer total war - and thats just the Total War franchise
CMBN patches aren't mods.
I hope that they at least
host their patches for the CM series at their own site, unlike some of the other Battlefront updates that are only hosted by 3rd parties. It's stuff like this that makes me criticize BF's modus operandi.
Quote from: Father Ted on December 11, 2012, 06:59:10 PM
Jesus! Aren't there rules against posting pics like that!
Anyway, I suppose BF have to make a judgement call. They want to maintain the goodwill and future purchasing likelihood of their client base by supporting their product (patches for things that are broken/wrong), but at the same time when they do that they're paying people to do stuff that will bring them no income. There must be a tipping point where the patch/upgrade must need to develop income if it is to be justified economically. There is a limit as to how far good will towards existing customers will generate further sales, and companies have to decide when to make that cutoff and start charging for improvements.
The customer makes a decision about whether what they're being asked to buy constitutes an improvement (worth paying for) or a fix (should be free), and, as we've seen in this thread, that's a subjective thing.
Its not a patch - its an upgrade. Kind of like rebellion was for Sins - and I had to pay for that. I really dont see why people think at all they should get it for free.
Quote from: Nefaro on December 11, 2012, 11:17:39 PM
Quote from: undercovergeek on December 11, 2012, 03:20:08 PM
you need 1.1 but you do NOT need 1.11, 2.0 includes all 1.11's fixes
to be fair this is only the same nightmare anyone else has to face when they join the bottom of the ladder for a game thats been out for a bit
The 3rd age mod for MTW2? An upto date Stainless Steel? Darth's most recent patch for Empire? Warhammer total war - and thats just the Total War franchise
CMBN patches aren't mods.
I hope that they at least host their patches for the CM series at their own site, unlike some of the other Battlefront updates that are only hosted by 3rd parties. It's stuff like this that makes me criticize BF's modus operandi.
Well - I guess it has to do with bandwidth cost. Maybe BF are just more financially astute than the other small developers. I dont mind that if it means they stay in business longer. To my mind they are the ones who actually run a small wargame development company - so I am going to figure they know more than me about the economics of that than anyone else here.
People always seem to forget that BFC is a tiny company.
On top of that they are making games for a niche market.
Is it really that bad to charge $10 to bring the game engine to the standards of their latest offering?
It's not like CMBN didn't work or had major gaps. Like so many paradox games which are being brought up.
Many times a developer abandons a game while working on the next one and you just need to buy part 2 and get an evolved version. BFC gives you the option to get the older game back to current standards, but for a price.
I see absolutely no problem in this.
A big grey area here. Some see it as the
Devs abandoning CMBN in favor of CMFI engine. CMBN was supposed to be a platform for Europe add-ons. But CMFI seems to be a different line by itself. CMBN got obsolete pretty quickly. So is that support or abandonment?
Well I am not sure what you are implying with saying CMBN is obsolete. Pure nonsense in my opinion.
Quote from: jomni on December 12, 2012, 05:06:48 AM
A big grey area here. Some see it as the
Devs abandoning CMBN in favor of CMFI engine. CMBN was supposed to be a platform for Europe add-ons. But CMFI seems to be a different line by itself. CMBN got obsolete pretty quickly. So is that support or abandonment?
They upgraded the engine, which is a good thing and you can upgrade CMBN and CMBN:CWF which is a good thing. So I'm happy to pay them 10 bucks so that they will keep up the good work.
Quote from: mirth on December 11, 2012, 05:02:36 PM
Exactly. We all know you sleep on a pile of hundred dollar bills, LB.
Puh-lease.
I sleep on a mattress of gold bricks cushioned by hundred dollar bills.
HPS & Tiller do a great job in this regard. i am still thinking about getting the Italy title.
It seems to me you made a purchase which is your own decision. It was good.
Then they made something better for your purchase. They want some money
for this enhancement package. You think they should give it to you for free because
some other guys gave you something for free. They do not want to. You feel raped.
I think you have an undeserved sense of entitlement. I drive a truck. It has a certain
size engine. It works fine. There is a model out now with a bigger engine.
Does the dealer owe me a newer bigger engine for free? Why am I writing like this?
I sound like my cousin who teaches Special Ed.
Yes 2.0 is both a patch & upgrade. From the Battlefront forums "CMBN v2.0 has lynx available in QB setup", something not in any patch.
Battlefront split the CM2 code when they created CMFI, it's not our fault they couldn't correctly maintain CM2 code the same for two games, what happens when with the next split (East Front game) or next West Front game? To me the issue isn't the cost but, the player nightmare of install/re-install order of the game, patches, add-on modules, upgrades and license issues. You can't even get all of the patches from the Battlefront website for some games. I want to see some sort of utility or automated process to manage the install, update and license of CM games.
Clearly BF could have evaded much of the criticism if they had just added in some new content as a sweetener. Some new maps, a few more vehicle variations, some map tweaks etc.
However, personally, I'm OK with paying the $10 for the patch as it is.
Quote from: SgtRock on December 12, 2012, 11:44:51 AM
Yes 2.0 is both a patch & upgrade. From the Battlefront forums "CMBN v2.0 has lynx available in QB setup", something not in any patch.
Battlefront split the CM2 code when they created CMFI, it's not our fault they couldn't correctly maintain CM2 code the same for two games, what happens when with the next split (East Front game) or next West Front game? To me the issue isn't the cost but, the player nightmare of install/re-install order of the game, patches, add-on modules, upgrades and license issues. You can't even get all of the patches from the Battlefront website for some games. I want to see some sort of utility or automated process to manage the install, update and license of CM games.
I'd rather the company spent time making games than automating the install, update and licensing.
For example, let's look at the v2 coding situation: CMBN and CMBN:CWF are out there working fine. Should they stop working on
CMFI and work out how to fix CMBN first? At that rate they would be stuck forever fixing CMBN. Better that they got CMFI working
and then upgraded CMBN (and even fixed up the Lynx). That way there is progress on all fronts. Better stuff faster seems like a better
plan. And the install and stuff just doesn't seem like that big a deal.
Quote from: ArizonaTank on December 12, 2012, 11:54:26 AM
Clearly BF could have evaded much of the criticism if they had just added in some new content as a sweetener. Some new maps, a few more vehicle variations, some map tweaks etc.
However, personally, I'm OK with paying the $10 for the patch as it is.
You get the Lynx in Quick battles, I hear.
Quote from: jomni on December 12, 2012, 05:06:48 AM
A big grey area here. Some see it as the
Devs abandoning CMBN in favor of CMFI engine. CMBN was supposed to be a platform for Europe add-ons. But CMFI seems to be a different line by itself. CMBN got obsolete pretty quickly. So is that support or abandonment?
That's my niggle with the whole deal. Seemed like support moved on rather quickly to me. All in the eye of the beholder, I suppose.
But add the annoying DRM, and things like the odd update hosting situation, limited download period, etc , and I don't feel like a cherished customer but a wallet that needs to be plundered as cheaply as possible. If I were financially well-off, I probably wouldn't care as much but I've been a tight bastard these last few years and when I have to make choices, this kind of stuff leaves a bad taste. I'd go as far as saying that I have as much, and likely more, confidence in buying a StormPowered product. At least I don't have to worry about scrambling to back up my stuff and digging around 3rd party sites for updates filled with browser-trash installs.
If they gotta do it, they gotta do it. I'll also complain about it on occasion. :P
For those who want something for nothing (http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=107549)
Quote from: Yskonyn on December 12, 2012, 04:43:33 PM
For those who want something for nothing (http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=107549)
Because being condescending to your customers helps.. ::)
Quote
..
OK, so where does that put you, the person complaining about the $10 upgrade? In a world of make-believe world, unreasonable expectations based on absolutely no concept of our costs or industry standards. You therefore have some options going forward:
1. Do no buy the Upgrades. They are for people who want new features not originally part of their purchase.
2. Buy the Upgrade and be thankful we offer it at all. Most game developers do not offer an extension of their existing product, but instead charge full price for a new experience.
3. Don't buy the game at all until you feel it is "finished". At some point we will stop making CMx2 games, and at that point you can pick it up for one price and have ALL the features everybody else paid for along the way. Of course they will have been playing for many years and you will have to instead wait many years. But that is your choice.
4. Get so disgusted with us you stop buying our stuff entirely and instead buy someone else's highly realistic, 3D tactical combat games. Or just don't buy wargames at all. Your choice.
The truth of the matter is we probably spent more making the Normandy 2.0 Upgrade than we will receive in revenues from it at $10 a unit. Does anybody think it's a good idea for us to lose money on what we produce? I mean, really... how long do you think we'll continue supporting a small, rather whiney niche market AND lose money doing it?
The market will decide if this is a good strategy or not. The alternative is to either not make the Upgrades at all (i.e. you will NEVER see an improvement to the games you buy) or we will simply charge everybody $100 per base game and offer 3 or 4 Upgrades at no extra cost. But under no circumstances will we go out of business trying to satisfy people who obviously take great joy in being unreasonable.
Bottom line here is if you don't value the features we've provided for $10 then don't buy it.
This is exactly the kind of thing I expect to see. I'm actually kinda surprised that they've kept the insults somewhat mild in comparison to some of the other crap that's flown in their forums. It's blow-ups like these that make internet browsing so fun. :-*
I think it was a hilarious tongue-in-cheek post and I agree with every word of it.
If anyone feels attacked by it, they at least know they belong to the exact group the focus in the post is on. ::)
Quote from: Bison on December 11, 2012, 04:44:49 PM
Frankly I just want Battlefront to host their own damned patches and upgrades instead of the crappy hosting sites they're use now. Those sites install all sorts of crap you don't want and include suspecious files in the download folder. The $10 is a small quibble if it keeps them afloat.
I disagree a little with that. One of the sites you're referring to is the The Patches Scrolls. The Patches Scrolls is not a crappy site and it's owner Matthias Rauhut makes a serious effort to avoid viruses and other malware infecting the patches he hosts.
I speak from personal experience when I worked with him last year in tracking a trojan we'd found in an update for the "Montjoie" game hosted by the developer Tchounga Games (and sold through Gamersgate) - which had parted ownership of its domain to another party, whose name flagged up lots of red malware warnings by Symantec and Google also subsequently identified a link to a Nigerian based scam.
Quote from: Yskonyn on December 12, 2012, 05:15:58 PM
I think it was a hilarious tongue-in-cheek post and I agree with every word of it.
If anyone feels attacked by it, they at least know they belong to the exact group the focus in the post is on. ::)
+1
and good for Steve - in a world of Political Correctness and the customer is always right bull**** its refreshing for a company owner to come out and say what he feels - if you dont want my f****** game, dont ******* buy it
Quote from: Boggit on December 12, 2012, 06:21:46 PM
Quote from: Bison on December 11, 2012, 04:44:49 PM
Frankly I just want Battlefront to host their own damned patches and upgrades instead of the crappy hosting sites they're use now. Those sites install all sorts of crap you don't want and include suspecious files in the download folder. The $10 is a small quibble if it keeps them afloat.
I disagree a little with that. One of the sites you're referring to is the The Patches Scrolls. The Patches Scrolls is not a crappy site and it's owner Matthias Rauhut makes a serious effort to avoid viruses and other malware infecting the patches he hosts.
I speak from personal experience when I worked with him last year in tracking a trojan we'd found in an update for the "Montjoie" game hosted by the developer Tchounga Games (and sold through Gamersgate) - which had parted ownership of its domain to another party, whose name flagged up lots of red malware warnings by Symantec and Google also subsequently identified a link to a Nigerian based scam.
But you shouldn't have to go anywhere, that you would be 'nervous' about to download a patch.. One of those sites has misleading links, that does try to get you to download crapware putting stuff in your startup.. I'm glad I run No Script and Watchdog, so I can catch that crap.. but the average customer, shouldn't have to do that!
I just wish people would stop arguing about what the upgrade doesn't add, and start talking about how what it does add effects gameplay. That way, some of us who are on the sidelines could actually make a reasoned decision as to whether or not the $10 is worth it.
It's worth reading the whole thread. I have a whole lot more sympathy with Steve Grammont's viewpoint since I read the whole thread.
I'll probably get the update, because I like the changes that went into CMFI and will probably go for the Market Garden Add-on anyway once it's out. $10 is not a deal breaker for me, and I understand that BF want to see a return for their efforts. I noticed Steve was suggesting a bundle price anyway for Market Garden and upgrade, which has the upgrade @$5, which makes it even less of an issue for people - if it ever really was an issue in the first place. I think Battlefront as a small Indie developer produce some excellent and unique games, and I think they're entitled to be cut more slack on this sort of thing than the big corporates who have the budgets to do free updates without feeling the pain.
Quote from: Tuna on December 12, 2012, 06:37:43 PM
Quote from: Boggit on December 12, 2012, 06:21:46 PM
Quote from: Bison on December 11, 2012, 04:44:49 PM
Frankly I just want Battlefront to host their own damned patches and upgrades instead of the crappy hosting sites they're use now. Those sites install all sorts of crap you don't want and include suspecious files in the download folder. The $10 is a small quibble if it keeps them afloat.
I disagree a little with that. One of the sites you're referring to is the The Patches Scrolls. The Patches Scrolls is not a crappy site and it's owner Matthias Rauhut makes a serious effort to avoid viruses and other malware infecting the patches he hosts.
I speak from personal experience when I worked with him last year in tracking a trojan we'd found in an update for the "Montjoie" game hosted by the developer Tchounga Games (and sold through Gamersgate) - which had parted ownership of its domain to another party, whose name flagged up lots of red malware warnings by Symantec and Google also subsequently identified a link to a Nigerian based scam.
But you shouldn't have to go anywhere, that you would be 'nervous' about to download a patch.. One of those sites has misleading links, that does try to get you to download crapware putting stuff in your startup.. I'm glad I run No Script and Watchdog, so I can catch that crap.. but the average customer, shouldn't have to do that!
@Tuna
You make a fair point and I understand your concern. I've usually gone with the Patches Scrolls for the reason I've given. Whilst I've not been disappointed by them, I can't speak for the other sites. If you've had a bad experience, I suggest you let us know which site gave you the problem and inform Battlefront Support so they're aware of it.
Quote from: Boggit on December 12, 2012, 07:13:16 PM
Quote from: Tuna on December 12, 2012, 06:37:43 PM
Quote from: Boggit on December 12, 2012, 06:21:46 PM
Quote from: Bison on December 11, 2012, 04:44:49 PM
Frankly I just want Battlefront to host their own damned patches and upgrades instead of the crappy hosting sites they're use now. Those sites install all sorts of crap you don't want and include suspecious files in the download folder. The $10 is a small quibble if it keeps them afloat.
I disagree a little with that. One of the sites you're referring to is the The Patches Scrolls. The Patches Scrolls is not a crappy site and it's owner Matthias Rauhut makes a serious effort to avoid viruses and other malware infecting the patches he hosts.
I speak from personal experience when I worked with him last year in tracking a trojan we'd found in an update for the "Montjoie" game hosted by the developer Tchounga Games (and sold through Gamersgate) - which had parted ownership of its domain to another party, whose name flagged up lots of red malware warnings by Symantec and Google also subsequently identified a link to a Nigerian based scam.
But you shouldn't have to go anywhere, that you would be 'nervous' about to download a patch.. One of those sites has misleading links, that does try to get you to download crapware putting stuff in your startup.. I'm glad I run No Script and Watchdog, so I can catch that crap.. but the average customer, shouldn't have to do that!
@Tuna
You make a fair point and I understand your concern. I've usually gone with the Patches Scrolls for the reason I've given. Whilst I've not been disappointed by them, I can't speak for the other sites. If you've had a bad experience, I suggest you let us know which site gave you the problem and inform Battlefront Support so they're aware of it.
OK.. if you vouch for the 'Patches Scrolls' Site then I will specifically search for that one on the list next time I go for an update.. fyi.. have not bought CMBN yet.. getting close though ;D
Quote from: Tuna on December 12, 2012, 07:24:44 PM
Quote from: Boggit on December 12, 2012, 07:13:16 PM
Quote from: Tuna on December 12, 2012, 06:37:43 PM
Quote from: Boggit on December 12, 2012, 06:21:46 PM
Quote from: Bison on December 11, 2012, 04:44:49 PM
Frankly I just want Battlefront to host their own damned patches and upgrades instead of the crappy hosting sites they're use now. Those sites install all sorts of crap you don't want and include suspecious files in the download folder. The $10 is a small quibble if it keeps them afloat.
I disagree a little with that. One of the sites you're referring to is the The Patches Scrolls. The Patches Scrolls is not a crappy site and it's owner Matthias Rauhut makes a serious effort to avoid viruses and other malware infecting the patches he hosts.
I speak from personal experience when I worked with him last year in tracking a trojan we'd found in an update for the "Montjoie" game hosted by the developer Tchounga Games (and sold through Gamersgate) - which had parted ownership of its domain to another party, whose name flagged up lots of red malware warnings by Symantec and Google also subsequently identified a link to a Nigerian based scam.
But you shouldn't have to go anywhere, that you would be 'nervous' about to download a patch.. One of those sites has misleading links, that does try to get you to download crapware putting stuff in your startup.. I'm glad I run No Script and Watchdog, so I can catch that crap.. but the average customer, shouldn't have to do that!
@Tuna
You make a fair point and I understand your concern. I've usually gone with the Patches Scrolls for the reason I've given. Whilst I've not been disappointed by them, I can't speak for the other sites. If you've had a bad experience, I suggest you let us know which site gave you the problem and inform Battlefront Support so they're aware of it.
OK.. if you vouch for the 'Patches Scrolls' Site then I will specifically search for that one on the list next time I go for an update.. fyi.. have not bought CMBN yet.. getting close though ;D
@Tuna :)
I haven't had a problem so far with the patches scrolls, and I've had quite a few from them over the years. So for me, they're ok.
I like CMBN. I got it with the Commonwealth Forces bundle and for me it was a good buy and I enjoy it a lot.
I'm not bursting an artery over the upgrade price like some. It's not a deal breaker for me. I like what BF did with CMFI and will definitely be upgrading. I'll either get it with the Market Garden Bundle or possibly before. The only reason I've not bothered yet is because atm I've got enough on my plate to be busy with, rather than any reason not to get it.
Quote from: Boggit on December 12, 2012, 07:13:16 PM
Quote from: Tuna on December 12, 2012, 06:37:43 PM
Quote from: Boggit on December 12, 2012, 06:21:46 PM
Quote from: Bison on December 11, 2012, 04:44:49 PM
Frankly I just want Battlefront to host their own damned patches and upgrades instead of the crappy hosting sites they're use now. Those sites install all sorts of crap you don't want and include suspecious files in the download folder. The $10 is a small quibble if it keeps them afloat.
I disagree a little with that. One of the sites you're referring to is the The Patches Scrolls. The Patches Scrolls is not a crappy site and it's owner Matthias Rauhut makes a serious effort to avoid viruses and other malware infecting the patches he hosts.
I speak from personal experience when I worked with him last year in tracking a trojan we'd found in an update for the "Montjoie" game hosted by the developer Tchounga Games (and sold through Gamersgate) - which had parted ownership of its domain to another party, whose name flagged up lots of red malware warnings by Symantec and Google also subsequently identified a link to a Nigerian based scam.
But you shouldn't have to go anywhere, that you would be 'nervous' about to download a patch.. One of those sites has misleading links, that does try to get you to download crapware putting stuff in your startup.. I'm glad I run No Script and Watchdog, so I can catch that crap.. but the average customer, shouldn't have to do that!
@Tuna
You make a fair point and I understand your concern. I've usually gone with the Patches Scrolls for the reason I've given. Whilst I've not been disappointed by them, I can't speak for the other sites. If you've had a bad experience, I suggest you let us know which site gave you the problem and inform Battlefront Support so they're aware of it.
gamershell is the one the comes to mind. Not a virus but several add-on bs files.
Quote from: Bison on December 12, 2012, 07:53:24 PM
gamershell is the one the comes to mind. Not a virus but several add-on bs files.
You're right. I remember seeing that in the .rar file. I usually delete it out when I use their d/l's.
I've been using the Patches Scroll for years with no problem. Even their mirrors are trustworthy.
I wish that people who want to make negative statements
would identify themselves as product owners who have a legitimate
complaint or loud mouthed windbags who have a worthless opinion about
everything and rarely buy. Call me fanboi, I care not, I enjoy the
product and I wish they would have sexy girls deliver it free to my machine while
I sleep. But that ain't gonna happen.
Quote from: Longdan on December 12, 2012, 11:44:23 PM
...I wish they would have sexy girls deliver it free to my machine while
I sleep. But that ain't gonna happen.
What's the point of them being sexy girls if you are asleep? Alternatively, why would you want to be asleep assuming sexy girls were doing the install? You're a strange bird.
Quote from: Longdan on December 12, 2012, 11:44:23 PM
I wish that people who want to make negative statements
would identify themselves as product owners who have a legitimate
complaint or loud mouthed windbags who have a worthless opinion about
everything and rarely buy. Call me fanboi, I care not, I enjoy the
product and I wish they would have sexy girls deliver it free to my machine while
I sleep. But that ain't gonna happen.
I own CMSF (the physical copy) and CMBN+Commonwealth.
I'm not even that annoyed about them charging for an upgrade to it. Just that the game engine updates were ended in favor of new version 6 months after I bought the Commonwealth package on release, 12 months after the original. It's just another quick re-release scheme, so why shouldn't BF catch some criticism like the others that do the same thing?
Calling me a loud-mouthed windbag for expressing disappointment at what was reportedly going to be a base game with regular DLC release being turned into a re-release at full price, shortly after getting into the whole deal, has been a souring experience. I had also previously been put off by being forced to pay a ridiculously symbolic dollar for the privilege of 'upgrading' my CMSF DVD copy into a limited online install version, while being refused the latest updates for the non-DRM version I had previously purchased until I did so. I've never experienced something like that before.. holding a patch hostage to force DRM on a customer's product long after purchase.
I suppose I should just shut my 'windbag' and put up with this re-release like a good automaton? It's just a complaint about a company's poor policies, and BF isn't the only one to receive this criticism. Far from it. But it's one of the few that gets the name-calling flowing, it seems.
Quote from: Nefaro on December 13, 2012, 10:48:34 AM
Quote from: Longdan on December 12, 2012, 11:44:23 PM
I wish that people who want to make negative statements
would identify themselves as product owners who have a legitimate
complaint or loud mouthed windbags who have a worthless opinion about
everything and rarely buy. Call me fanboi, I care not, I enjoy the
product and I wish they would have sexy girls deliver it free to my machine while
I sleep. But that ain't gonna happen.
I own CMSF (the physical copy) and CMBN+Commonwealth.
I'm not even that annoyed about them charging for an upgrade to it. Just that the game engine updates were ended in favor of new version 6 months after I bought the Commonwealth package on release, 12 months after the original. It's just another quick re-release scheme, so why shouldn't BF catch some criticism like the others that do the same thing?
Calling me a loud-mouthed windbag for expressing disappointment at what was reportedly going to be a base game with regular DLC release being turned into a re-release at full price, shortly after getting into the whole deal, has been a souring experience. I had also previously been put off by being forced to pay a ridiculously symbolic dollar for the privilege of 'upgrading' my CMSF DVD copy into a limited online install version, while being refused the latest updates for the non-DRM version I had previously purchased until I did so. I've never experienced something like that before.. holding a patch hostage to force DRM on a customer's product long after purchase.
I suppose I should just shut my 'windbag' and put up with this re-release like a good automaton? It's just a complaint about a company's poor policies, and BF isn't the only one to receive this criticism. Far from it. But it's one of the few that gets the name-calling flowing, it seems.
I dont understand the re-release bit ? what was "re - released" ?
I want them to deliver it while I am sleeping.
As in post-coital slumber which upon your upcoming delivery, JH
you will find to be but a fleeting memory. One more congrats...
you will remember sleep but it will never be the same.
Quote from: Longdan on December 13, 2012, 11:29:12 AM
I want them to deliver it while I am sleeping.
As in post-coital slumber which upon your upcoming delivery, JH
you will find to be but a fleeting memory. One more congrats...
you will remember sleep but it will never be the same.
?>>> :o
Is this one for the Poetry Corner or has Longdan been enjoying a nice dish of mushrooms? They make a magic meal... ;D ;)
Quote from: Longdan on December 12, 2012, 11:44:23 PM
I wish that people who want to make negative statements
would identify themselves as product owners who have a legitimate
complaint or loud mouthed windbags who have a worthless opinion about
everything and rarely buy. Call me fanboi, I care not, I enjoy the
product and I wish they would have sexy girls deliver it free to my machine while
I sleep. But that ain't gonna happen.
I'm sorry, I didn't realize that voicing criticism would offend you this badly. Yes, I'm the annoyed owner of CMBN/CWF as well as CMFI. "Annoyed" does not equal
frothing at the mouth anti-capitalist, though, as you seem to want to paint me. In the future, I will keep my loud, windy mouthed opinions to myself, unless I'm blowing sunshine up Battlefront's ass.
We should have a list somewhere on the forum of which companies it isn't OK to criticize. It would save me getting into trouble.
Sorry Ubercat. I meant that there is a lot of noise from those who
don't own or won't own the product. Just noise. If you would only
buy it if it was 2 bux on steam I think I can set aside your opinion
as it tells me nothing about the game or its worth. It seems like so
much noise in these debates is from those who just have an opinion...
not a desire to learn anything about the topic at hand or buy it.
Quote from: Jarhead0331 on December 12, 2012, 06:54:46 PM
I just wish people would stop arguing about what the upgrade doesn't add, and start talking about how what it does add effects gameplay. That way, some of us who are on the sidelines could actually make a reasoned decision as to whether or not the $10 is worth it.
I've played all of the CM (even the rare and wonderful CMAK) games. The big bump for me was CMSF. I developed a way of playing that game and it has stayed the same til now: real time with lots of fooling with the editor. I got the 2.0 version of the current game because
I always get all of the CM stuff sooner or later so why not sooner?
I know this doesn't help with the reasonable decision thing -- but here's my current angle: I'm happy with CMBN and CMBN:CWF and I'm not motivated yet to move on to CMFI or even Market Garden, so I'm getting the v2 so as to keep up with the game without messing with my current happy focus on Normandy.
Quote from: Longdan on December 13, 2012, 12:06:24 PM
Sorry Ubercat. I meant that there is a lot of noise from those who
don't own or won't own the product. Just noise. If you would only
buy it if it was 2 bux on steam I think I can set aside your opinion
as it tells me nothing about the game or its worth. It seems like so
much noise in these debates is from those who just have an opinion...
not a desire to learn anything about the topic at hand or buy it.
Fair enough.
Quote from: Nefaro on December 13, 2012, 10:48:34 AM
I suppose I should just shut my 'windbag' and put up with this re-release like a good automaton?
You should read the linked thread above 'For those who want something for nothing'.
If it still isn't clear what v2.0 is and is not then I don't know what would make it clear to you.
One thing it definately is not is a re-release of the game. It's merely an evolution.
Quote from: Yskonyn on December 13, 2012, 02:03:39 PM
One thing it definately is not is a re-release of the game. It's merely an evolution.
Semantics.
Shrug. Ok.
Admit it guys, the game is so good it's like drugs. Once you play, you will never think twice buying add-ons, upgrades, spin-off's.
That's why some people are not buying to avoid THE TRAP and are pretty vocal about it. Just like how people are against drugs even without trying them.
(https://www.grogheads.com/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2F6%2F6e%2FAckbarStanding.jpg&hash=1dfb6ba0e8ea88b387a794a13624f3fd479c555c)
Heh.
There's little wrong with the game. Like anyone else, I'd like to see more of 'this' or a fixed 'that'. I'm not bitchin' about the game, just some of the company's publishing & hosting tendencies.
I'm not trying to smash some people's favorite toy into pieces, so there's no need to get hostile. I'm also not giving BF a special pass, where other companies get the same criticism, just because they created CM 13 years ago.
Quote from: Nefaro on December 13, 2012, 10:19:00 PM
Heh.
There's little wrong with the game. Like anyone else, I'd like to see more of 'this' or a fixed 'that'. I'm not bitchin' about the game, just some of the company's publishing & hosting tendencies.
I'm not trying to smash some people's favorite toy into pieces, so there's no need to get hostile. I'm also not giving BF a special pass, where other companies get the same criticism, just because they created CM 13 years ago.
Well personally I dont see any difference between this and what Sins rebellion was - didnt hear too many complaints about that. granted the content was different but the principle exactly the same. the issue isnt people taking umbrage at your complaint - they just cant understand what it is you are actually complaining about given every man and their dog is doing the same.
Quote from: Zulu1966 on December 14, 2012, 12:30:56 AM
Quote from: Nefaro on December 13, 2012, 10:19:00 PM
Heh.
There's little wrong with the game. Like anyone else, I'd like to see more of 'this' or a fixed 'that'. I'm not bitchin' about the game, just some of the company's publishing & hosting tendencies.
I'm not trying to smash some people's favorite toy into pieces, so there's no need to get hostile. I'm also not giving BF a special pass, where other companies get the same criticism, just because they created CM 13 years ago.
Well personally I dont see any difference between this and what Sins rebellion was - didnt hear too many complaints about that. granted the content was different but the principle exactly the same. the issue isnt people taking umbrage at your complaint - they just cant understand what it is you are actually complaining about given every man and their dog is doing the same.
I recall hearing grumblings over the
Sins re-release but I don't think many people here play it. I picked up the original series just because it was on sale cheap, and I've barely touched it, so I dunno much about the whole deal. I'd complain about that, too, but I just don't play
Sins.
I've also grumbled about the Harpoon re-release (a regularity but at least they wait a few years between each one), the GGWAW re-release (took a couple-three years there), and a couple more that don't come to mind immediately, around you guys. I think some of the previous Paradox patches being sold inside expansions is somewhat similar and lots of people gnash teeth about that, including myself. This isn't something I
just began bringing up against Battlefront. It's also not my only issue I've taken with them so things haven't been improving in my opinion, either.
I'm not emotionally invested in the CMx2 series so I'm not going to convince myself that I need to buy updates & expansions anymore. Some take my criticism as an assault on their sacred cow and get downright hostile, but I call it as I see it for any such publisher tendencies whether enjoying the core software or not.
Sorry if I manage to offend Battlefront users in the process, but please don't accuse me of not owning the software and not knowing what I'm talking about, because I speak my opinion. Let's try keeping the flamefest to a minimum, yes?
While we're at it, would anyone like me to anger them with criticism of Apple or some other company I've not been terribly happy with? :-*
I'd LOVE to hear your views on Apple :P
I've had my own issues with the activation system on Combat Mission Shoch Force.
I do not like the process at all and it can and has been troublesome. Someone (and other I believe) have had issues with activation...their fault or the DRM is kind of irrelevant - if it wasn't there it wouldn't be a problem.
My problem is I love the games (and love to hate the games with some noticable short comings which escape me now).
I also don't particularly like the feel at the Battlefront forums.
But their games - I can';t fault them. And fwiw I don't actually mind the $10 patch/mod/upgrade (delete as you see fit). I can see other peoples views on it and I understand them - but I personally don't mind it.
We share the same sentiments Judge. Love the game but not fond of BF and their antics. But I a controlled myself not to go into CMBN early. Seems to be paying off.
Quote from: jomni on December 14, 2012, 04:51:35 AM
We share the same sentiments Judge. Love the game but not fond of BF and their antics. But I a controlled myself not to go into CMBN early. Seems to be paying off.
So why do you consider it antics ? Things change - and no plan survives first contact with the enemy. I dont get the assumption its some kind of underhandedness rather than them just not being able to follow their original plan because it didnt work out that way.
That's the good thing about a forum like this that is not 'owned' by a gaming company.. People can 'speak freely' on their opinions, without worrying about getting slammed for it...
Quote from: Nefaro on December 13, 2012, 10:19:00 PM
Heh.
There's little wrong with the game. Like anyone else, I'd like to see more of 'this' or a fixed 'that'. I'm not bitchin' about the game, just some of the company's publishing & hosting tendencies.
I'm not trying to smash some people's favorite toy into pieces, so there's no need to get hostile. I'm also not giving BF a special pass, where other companies get the same criticism, just because they created CM 13 years ago.
I'm giving them a special pass because they created CM 13 years ago and have kept improving things. That's a great model: just keep making better games in your niche. I wish there was a game company like Battlefront or RoF for every niche I like to play in.
I guess that would be a lot of niches, but still it would be fun. If expensive for me. I guess I'd have to cycle the niches which would be interesting too.
So it would be RoF for flight simulators
Battlefront for WWII super-detailed tactical
Byzantium 1908 for warships and zepplelins
CactusCrunch for WWII warships and planes
TotalProvince for Provincialnthousands of Barbarians and so on up to 1900
Angola1980 for Real Cold War air land and sea nastiness
I guess that covers my current computer war gaming interests. And they would all get special passes just for making good games.
Quote from: MengJiao on December 12, 2012, 11:57:15 AM
Quote from: ArizonaTank on December 12, 2012, 11:54:26 AM
Clearly BF could have evaded much of the criticism if they had just added in some new content as a sweetener. Some new maps, a few more vehicle variations, some map tweaks etc.
However, personally, I'm OK with paying the $10 for the patch as it is.
You get the Lynx in Quick battles, I hear.
LOL...it such a little tank...I missed it...:)
Yeah but it was fierce. Rowr!
Quote from: MengJiao on December 14, 2012, 10:31:39 AM
I'm giving them a special pass because they created CM 13 years ago and have kept improving things. That's a great model: just keep making better games in your niche. I wish there was a game company like Battlefront or RoF for every niche I like to play in.
Agree. I'm also giving BF a pass because CMBN and CMFI are just the best games in their category. The best mix of realism, eye candy and great squad level game play out there. The PC based wargaming universe would be a shallow place without them.
I think it's great that they are keeping the engine fresh.
I wish Tiller would do a major update to his game engine....I'd gladly pay for that as well.
Please MJ what are TotalProvince?
BF has spoken about the issue... "Take it or leave it"
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=107549
Quote from: jomni on December 15, 2012, 01:20:44 AM
BF has spoken about the issue... "Take it or leave it"
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=107549
Yskonyn posted that on Page 4 of this thread.
Ah missed it. This thread has grown so long already.
Quote from: Nefaro on December 14, 2012, 12:59:10 AM
While we're at it, would anyone like me to anger them with criticism of Apple or some other company I've not been terribly happy with? :-*
Yeah.. Go ahead ;D. A bit of venting steam is healthy. DRM is always a good target.
As a bona fide customer I hate it, but developers seem to buy into the idea that it reduces piracy, which somehow I doubt. A friend of mine did some research of various torrent sites which belie the effectiveness of so-called anti-piracy measures. As gamers of course we should and most do act properly, and buy our games to keep the hobby alive. It's quite shocking how many "cracked" games you can get on some torrent sites. I suspect that the people who use them never buy legitimate copies anyway, so are not really ever going to be in a developers customer base and don't care if the developer stays in the marketplace or not. On the flip side, I guess that a lot of the torrent sites are riddled with malware, so in a sense nothing comes free.
Took the plunge this afternoon.. ordered CW bundle and the upgrade... I hope I get into this!!!.. LOL.. 65 is so painful, with all the great deals on Steam and GamersGate these days... but a lot of the bargains, I get, I don't even play.. just grab them cause they're bargains.... Sometimes you find some Gems.. Sometimes they're just crap (but if they're crap, at least they didn't cost you a log).. I know this series ain't crap... I have the ShockForce Bundle... I just hope I really get into it.. cause even though I like ShockForce, I really don't play it a lot.. Hoping this theatre and the enhancements will turn on the charm!..
Quote from: Boggit on December 15, 2012, 01:35:35 PM
Quote from: Nefaro on December 14, 2012, 12:59:10 AM
While we're at it, would anyone like me to anger them with criticism of Apple or some other company I've not been terribly happy with? :-*
Yeah.. Go ahead ;D. A bit of venting steam is healthy. DRM is always a good target.
As a bona fide customer I hate it, but developers seem to buy into the idea that it reduces piracy, which somehow I doubt. A friend of mine did some research of various torrent sites which belie the effectiveness of so-called anti-piracy measures. As gamers of course we should and most do act properly, and buy our games to keep the hobby alive. It's quite shocking how many "cracked" games you can get on some torrent sites. I suspect that the people who use them never buy legitimate copies anyway, so are not really ever going to be in a developers customer base and don't care if the developer stays in the marketplace or not. On the flip side, I guess that a lot of the torrent sites are riddled with malware, so in a sense nothing comes free.
Yeah, the DRM is the biggest obstacle for me buying this... I have no problem with schemes like Steam or Matrix, but this limited activation thing irks me. I don't want to have to worry about hard drive failures, machine upgrades, etc "stealing" my activations. I might give in once I upgrade to a new machine and OS, but just can't pull the trigger before that....
Edit: oh, and yeah, it's out on torrent sites, so it's not like they've solved their pirating problem anyway, just ticking off current and potential buyers.
Quote from: smittyohio on December 15, 2012, 02:59:52 PM
Quote from: Boggit on December 15, 2012, 01:35:35 PM
Quote from: Nefaro on December 14, 2012, 12:59:10 AM
While we're at it, would anyone like me to anger them with criticism of Apple or some other company I've not been terribly happy with? :-*
Yeah.. Go ahead ;D. A bit of venting steam is healthy. DRM is always a good target.
As a bona fide customer I hate it, but developers seem to buy into the idea that it reduces piracy, which somehow I doubt. A friend of mine did some research of various torrent sites which belie the effectiveness of so-called anti-piracy measures. As gamers of course we should and most do act properly, and buy our games to keep the hobby alive. It's quite shocking how many "cracked" games you can get on some torrent sites. I suspect that the people who use them never buy legitimate copies anyway, so are not really ever going to be in a developers customer base and don't care if the developer stays in the marketplace or not. On the flip side, I guess that a lot of the torrent sites are riddled with malware, so in a sense nothing comes free.
Yeah, the DRM is the biggest obstacle for me buying this... I have no problem with schemes like Steam or Matrix, but this limited activation thing irks me. I don't want to have to worry about hard drive failures, machine upgrades, etc "stealing" my activations. I might give in once I upgrade to a new machine and OS, but just can't pull the trigger before that....
Edit: oh, and yeah, it's out on torrent sites, so it's not like they've solved their pirating problem anyway, just ticking off current and potential buyers.
I'm with you guys, there.
I think the complaints about Battlefront's release schedule/contents/pricing/whatever would be fewer if it weren't for the DRM scheme (and the limited download time to d/l the program).
The types who pirate the stuff aren't likely to buy it in the first place. And spending time and/or money on creating, implementing, and providing customer service for the draconian DRM schemes is just a waste of resources that could probably be better used towards development rather than pissing off legitimate patrons. I think the DRM companies, who profit from selling their versions to publishers, have ratcheted up the pirate & reseller paranoia for years in order to make better bank. Enough so that it's become the norm to force customers through hurdles & headaches because the scare tactics have worked so easily. A good example of that flowing over into the public eye happened years ago when the StarForce employee, who was arguing with paying customers on a forum about their crappy DRM damaging hardware and providing false positives for customers, posted a link to a pirated copy of something with little DRM at the time (Was GalCiv or some such) in a fit. Of course, the d-bag didn't mention that their own crap was also being pirated, I'm sure. There was - and has been- money to be made off of marketing DRM. Some companies have even started creating their own so they don't have to pay as much.
It's a sad state, and if the DRM continues to build there will be some big consumer rights cases vs IP Law going on. Hell.. special interests companies have already tried to enforce their own control over the internet, via political cronies, more than once, and failed. All because they claim that they need it because of Piracy. Looks like some have learned from the DRM companies' brainwashing..
(Where's the 'Rant Off' smiley?)
I been through the hassle of their DRM with issues when I tried to reinstall CMSF and its modules on a newly purchased laptop.
Turns out the games can only be installed on two different PC's.
While it was a pain in the behind to have to contact them in the first place, I must say that their customer support was quick and efficient. My licenses were 'reset' within 24 hours and I could proceed with my activations on the new laptop.
There was a warning though, that this kind of 'reset' can only be done a few times. Has to do with the DRM system itself.
Activations themselves are replenishable, though and they can do it for you might you have run out.
So as far as the download/activation limits I see no real danger in losing your bought software, but the 'reset' do bother me a bit. Especially since there is no (easy) way to unlicense your games. That stinks.
Well it's a trade-off. In the old DRM with manual unlicense, people forget to do that step when they uninstall or when their computer dies.
The new DRM with limited activations makes it easier for people because there's no extra step.
I didn't think there was a way to unlicense the CMBN or CMFI like you can with CMSF. I think it's crap that the customer cannot unlicense the game on an old rig before installing on a new one. I've never had an issue with CMSF or CMA, but I'll be damned if I didn't have to contact them when I wanted to install CMBN and CMFI on my new desktop. If you are going to go the licensing route fine, but there needs to be a means to unlicense the game too. That is just poor planning. No way around it. And yes I like Battlefront's games and no the $10 engine upgrade doesn't bother me at all.
Quote from: Bison on December 15, 2012, 08:22:54 PM
I didn't think there was a way to unlicense the CMBN or CMFI like you can with CMSF. I think it's crap that the customer cannot unlicense the game on an old rig before installing on a new one. I've never had an issue with CMSF or CMA, but I'll be damned if I didn't have to contact them when I wanted to install CMBN and CMFI on my new desktop. If you are going to go the licensing route fine, but there needs to be a means to unlicense the game too. That is just poor planning. No way around it. And yes I like Battlefront's games and no the $10 engine upgrade doesn't bother me at all.
pretty much where I stand.
Quote from: Bison on December 15, 2012, 08:22:54 PM
I didn't think there was a way to unlicense the CMBN or CMFI like you can with CMSF. I think it's crap that the customer cannot unlicense the game on an old rig before installing on a new one. I've never had an issue with CMSF or CMA, but I'll be damned if I didn't have to contact them when I wanted to install CMBN and CMFI on my new desktop. If you are going to go the licensing route fine, but there needs to be a means to unlicense the game too. That is just poor planning. No way around it. And yes I like Battlefront's games and no the $10 engine upgrade doesn't bother me at all.
Wow...thanks, wasn't aware of this. What about multiple installs on your home network. I believe CMSF supported a few activations.
I've got it installe on my laptop and desktop. I had issues when I got a new desktop, installed the games, and attempted to activate them. The part that got me mad with CMFI is I didn't use all of my alotted activations. Anyway here is the explanation that I got from Battlefront customer service.
Typically each 'Online Activation System' game will have 4 activations that initially come with the game. In the past you could add an activation yourself to these games once every 365 days after purchase. However the web interface for doing that does NOT work with CMFI and future games. The programming support (from our DRM vendor) to allow for that isn't available and we don't know when or if it will be available in the future. So for now with CMFI you will have to request activations from the Helpdesk (as you're doing). With CMBN and Commonwealth and other 'Online Activation System' games you can most likely add an activation yourself by now. If not, let us know the license keys and we can add one for you.
With eLicense games you get two concurrent activations and the ability to UNLICENSE installations. If you need to run the game on a third computer, then you will need to deactivate the game/module on one of the two previous computers it was installed on.
The problem with CMBN is there is no way to deactivate the license. If you look at your CMSF game install, there is an unlicense option. That is not the case with CMBN or CMFI. Additionally if you look at the license self help you can only add 1 license install every 365 days and this option is limited to CMBN . You can have the game concurrently installed on 2 computers, so if you had a third computer for whatever reason you'd have to unlicense on one of the computers. However see point one for the obvious issue with this scenario. I think you can request Battlefront unlicense one of them, but of that I'm not sure I think they give you a new license number (another seperate issue). Regardless it's a poorly designed system if the customer is not allowed to unlicense the product. I don't know about the details of the vendor issue described but is a poor publishing choice anyway you look at it. I will give Battlefront credit for be very responsive, but again if you require a license to run the program and require unlicensing to install on a new/different computer then the implied freaking task is that the customer can unlicense your product from their end.
This is not the first eLicense issue I've seen in the past year or two.
They evidentally went completely AWOL on the Solecismic guy (Front Office Football 2k7 text manager game) for a stretch of time, when he was asking for help resolving issues. I got the impression that they can be spotty when it comes to support. Ridiculous. These DRM companies wouldn't earn one red cent if I had my way.