ORIGINAL: Rebel Yell
But, since you obviously don't want my business, I'll just pass.
Please don't pass, we want your business! [8D]
Regards,
- Erik
If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
Moderator: rickier65
-
Erik Rutins
- Posts: 39641
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Vermont, USA
- Contact:
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
Please don't pass, we want your business! [8D]
Regards,
- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
To All:
Not sure how this will go over, but here goes. I stopped playing CM: AK and BB for several reasons, and I will list why...and maybe it will help avoidance of some of the pitfalls for PCO, but then again, as you will see, my perspective is very different from most war gamers, so take what I am saying with that in mind.
To understand some of these reasons, you have to understand my background, I am a US Army Infantry Officer of over 25 years, a war gamer for over 35 years, I read a lot of history. In a lot of ways the typical guy to play these type games, with the exception I take what I see in a tactical game and compare it to the real world based on my experience doing it. Frankly most war gamers would NOT want their tactical games to be too realistic from a command and control perspective, they just would not have the control they are used to. I used to say on the Blitz forum that if you wanted to play CM in the most realistic manner possible, you should to play with time limits on, outside in the dark, sitting in a mud hole with a map on your lap, and have only a radio to talk to a friend with a computer running the game and he tries to tell you what is going on, and asking for decisions over a radio. My point is real commanders don't get to play squad leader, and have imperfect information to make decisions. Real Commanders lean hard on subordinate leaders to carry through the intent or task and purpose for a given mission. Another disclaimer, all of this has been talked about on most forums that cater to tactical war games and CM in particular.......But back to my list......
1. The fighting, bickering, censorship, general negative environment of both the Blitz CM forum and the Battlefront forum. The BF forum went down hill after CM:SF came out, and I was apart of that at first due to a tremendous amount of frustration by so many of us who were not pleased by what came out. The Blitz forum just became too much of a circus for me any more, I mean when you have open revolt against the moderator, something is wrong.
2. Unlike many, I don't want to have to be a Squad Leader, or worse I found myself playing Vehicle Driver in CM:SF. I preferred LESS control, players should not be able to micro-manage each individual unit, and move them to the next little piece of ideal terrain. If you want to play that way, then you need a game that mirrors Squad Level Combat only, or a Tank Simulator.
3. The entire CM:SF "event" left a really bad taste in my mouth. I was very disappointed that BF would not listen to the people that got them where they were, and instead did what they wanted, which IMO has proven to be a most unwise method of operation or doing business.
4. As far as CM:SF, I hated the "real time" play.....WEGO was the perfect "compromise" while real time seemed to be an attempt to cater to my kids generation. (I understand this may have been changed, but I have not even taken a look at the game in a long time.)
5. All the above said, I decided to start playing more operational level games like HPS Panzer Campaigns and War in the Pacific.
So with all the above said, I can say I really have not played CM regularly in over two years, the last year I was deployed to Afghanistan and frankly did not have the time to do so, and I have moved on to other operational level games. What I liked about CM I will list, and when I play PCO, I think I will know after a few games if I like it or not...sort of an intuitive thing, based on "how it feels", also the interface and easy of that interface will have a lot to do with that.
CM Likes:
1. I LOVE the WEGO system! WEGO is the best system to date, to replicate continuous combat, yet allowing time to make decisions.
2. The time delay based on Squad and Platoon HQ competency levels.
3. Moral of units, and how that could change.....few units fight to the death, most will break and run at some point. CM modeled this very well I thought.
4. Infantry model felt "right", or as good as there was at the time.....better than Steel Panthers to me, as that was my main tactical war game prior to CM.
5. The armor penetration model seemed really good, and took into account a lot of variables unseen by the players into account. I think I read once it even took into account the minor angle differences due to how the vehicle was sitting on the ground relative to the incoming projectile, and even the slope of the ground itself. The graphic and color representation of armor thickness and gun penetration was nice, and allowed quick decisions. (This was my main grip about the Close Combat series of games, the armor model seemed "jacked up", too close, not to proper scale based on the terrain.)
6. The "Hull Down" feature relative to another direct fire target was nice.
7. Sometimes your Squads changed their orders, due to the stupid orders you gave them or the situation. This was VERY realistic IMO. (Just wish it took place more often.)
8. Vehicle breakdown or bogging.....I think vehicle breakdown could have been replicated more. (Most Tigers tanks were not killed in combat, they ran out of gas or suffered mechanical failure and the crew was forced to destroy them if they could not be recovered or were in danger of falling into enemy hands.)
9. Workable artillery model, but I think CM:SF was hugely superior however.
10. Last the first 3D graphics of the game, and it just looked so cool to watch the battle. I don't think I ever grew tired of watching the combat, tracers, burning tanks, smoke...all a first that really sealed the deal for me to learn and play CM the first time I saw it, and on top of all that, it "felt right".
What CM needed:
1. A "follow me" command
2. Ability to plan and manage artillery better for deliberate attacks, fires by round count, example fire a Battery 6 on target XYZ, which means that in a battery six rounds per gun will be fired on that target, pre-planned targets, smoke/WP and HE mixed, time on target and so on. In other words, more and better ways to manage the biggest killer on the battlefield. (Talk to an Artillery guy for more details, I am just a grunt.) Perhaps attacks in CM were not true deliberate attacks, but more of the "hasty" variety and that is why. But I always tried to make my attacks very deliberate, with lots of artillery and combat power committed at the decisive point.
3. Players should not be able to move Squads perfectly, to every perfect piece of terrain, more "fuzzy" orders and more uncertainly is more realistic, see next point for more.
4. More uncertainty in the area of Command and Control, or C2 if you will. For Example, orders may not be followed, orders may be misunderstood, orders may be disregarded, and the chance of this could be higher based on leadership, moral and experience of subordinate leaders and distance from the higher HQ. Trust me, when the leader is not near, units have a higher chance of doing "their own thing". A way of doing this may be by settings, there could be a "High C2" setting or something....just an idea, as I know most people will want to micro-manage their units and want "perfect" obedience of orders.
Notice I NEVER said 1:1 representation of infantry........graphics are nice, but I would rather have good play in the abstract, then perfect realism and 1:1 representation.....another major pitfall of CMSF, and I think frankly if they had it to do over again, they would avoid. It opened a Pandora's box of problems and cries of "my guy did not take cover" or "there was cover and blah, blah, blah......
Thats is about it.
(Added as an Edit) Frankly I only added this long post without reading all the other posts, and had forgotten about the previous CM:SF negative comments made by some. I do not and did not mean this to become an anti-CMSF rant, I was only trying to express my thoughts on where I am at when it comes to tactical war games, and my thoughts on those type of games. I hear CM:SF has gone through a lot of fixs and is much better now. Last I have bought and tried Achtung Panzer Kharkov. The jury is still out on it for me, but most of my problems with that game were system related, as I still have a fairly old computer. The main issue I had with APK, was Parodox and it's stupid download service, and it was always pooping open to tell me to buy something.
Not sure how this will go over, but here goes. I stopped playing CM: AK and BB for several reasons, and I will list why...and maybe it will help avoidance of some of the pitfalls for PCO, but then again, as you will see, my perspective is very different from most war gamers, so take what I am saying with that in mind.
To understand some of these reasons, you have to understand my background, I am a US Army Infantry Officer of over 25 years, a war gamer for over 35 years, I read a lot of history. In a lot of ways the typical guy to play these type games, with the exception I take what I see in a tactical game and compare it to the real world based on my experience doing it. Frankly most war gamers would NOT want their tactical games to be too realistic from a command and control perspective, they just would not have the control they are used to. I used to say on the Blitz forum that if you wanted to play CM in the most realistic manner possible, you should to play with time limits on, outside in the dark, sitting in a mud hole with a map on your lap, and have only a radio to talk to a friend with a computer running the game and he tries to tell you what is going on, and asking for decisions over a radio. My point is real commanders don't get to play squad leader, and have imperfect information to make decisions. Real Commanders lean hard on subordinate leaders to carry through the intent or task and purpose for a given mission. Another disclaimer, all of this has been talked about on most forums that cater to tactical war games and CM in particular.......But back to my list......
1. The fighting, bickering, censorship, general negative environment of both the Blitz CM forum and the Battlefront forum. The BF forum went down hill after CM:SF came out, and I was apart of that at first due to a tremendous amount of frustration by so many of us who were not pleased by what came out. The Blitz forum just became too much of a circus for me any more, I mean when you have open revolt against the moderator, something is wrong.
2. Unlike many, I don't want to have to be a Squad Leader, or worse I found myself playing Vehicle Driver in CM:SF. I preferred LESS control, players should not be able to micro-manage each individual unit, and move them to the next little piece of ideal terrain. If you want to play that way, then you need a game that mirrors Squad Level Combat only, or a Tank Simulator.
3. The entire CM:SF "event" left a really bad taste in my mouth. I was very disappointed that BF would not listen to the people that got them where they were, and instead did what they wanted, which IMO has proven to be a most unwise method of operation or doing business.
4. As far as CM:SF, I hated the "real time" play.....WEGO was the perfect "compromise" while real time seemed to be an attempt to cater to my kids generation. (I understand this may have been changed, but I have not even taken a look at the game in a long time.)
5. All the above said, I decided to start playing more operational level games like HPS Panzer Campaigns and War in the Pacific.
So with all the above said, I can say I really have not played CM regularly in over two years, the last year I was deployed to Afghanistan and frankly did not have the time to do so, and I have moved on to other operational level games. What I liked about CM I will list, and when I play PCO, I think I will know after a few games if I like it or not...sort of an intuitive thing, based on "how it feels", also the interface and easy of that interface will have a lot to do with that.
CM Likes:
1. I LOVE the WEGO system! WEGO is the best system to date, to replicate continuous combat, yet allowing time to make decisions.
2. The time delay based on Squad and Platoon HQ competency levels.
3. Moral of units, and how that could change.....few units fight to the death, most will break and run at some point. CM modeled this very well I thought.
4. Infantry model felt "right", or as good as there was at the time.....better than Steel Panthers to me, as that was my main tactical war game prior to CM.
5. The armor penetration model seemed really good, and took into account a lot of variables unseen by the players into account. I think I read once it even took into account the minor angle differences due to how the vehicle was sitting on the ground relative to the incoming projectile, and even the slope of the ground itself. The graphic and color representation of armor thickness and gun penetration was nice, and allowed quick decisions. (This was my main grip about the Close Combat series of games, the armor model seemed "jacked up", too close, not to proper scale based on the terrain.)
6. The "Hull Down" feature relative to another direct fire target was nice.
7. Sometimes your Squads changed their orders, due to the stupid orders you gave them or the situation. This was VERY realistic IMO. (Just wish it took place more often.)
8. Vehicle breakdown or bogging.....I think vehicle breakdown could have been replicated more. (Most Tigers tanks were not killed in combat, they ran out of gas or suffered mechanical failure and the crew was forced to destroy them if they could not be recovered or were in danger of falling into enemy hands.)
9. Workable artillery model, but I think CM:SF was hugely superior however.
10. Last the first 3D graphics of the game, and it just looked so cool to watch the battle. I don't think I ever grew tired of watching the combat, tracers, burning tanks, smoke...all a first that really sealed the deal for me to learn and play CM the first time I saw it, and on top of all that, it "felt right".
What CM needed:
1. A "follow me" command
2. Ability to plan and manage artillery better for deliberate attacks, fires by round count, example fire a Battery 6 on target XYZ, which means that in a battery six rounds per gun will be fired on that target, pre-planned targets, smoke/WP and HE mixed, time on target and so on. In other words, more and better ways to manage the biggest killer on the battlefield. (Talk to an Artillery guy for more details, I am just a grunt.) Perhaps attacks in CM were not true deliberate attacks, but more of the "hasty" variety and that is why. But I always tried to make my attacks very deliberate, with lots of artillery and combat power committed at the decisive point.
3. Players should not be able to move Squads perfectly, to every perfect piece of terrain, more "fuzzy" orders and more uncertainly is more realistic, see next point for more.
4. More uncertainty in the area of Command and Control, or C2 if you will. For Example, orders may not be followed, orders may be misunderstood, orders may be disregarded, and the chance of this could be higher based on leadership, moral and experience of subordinate leaders and distance from the higher HQ. Trust me, when the leader is not near, units have a higher chance of doing "their own thing". A way of doing this may be by settings, there could be a "High C2" setting or something....just an idea, as I know most people will want to micro-manage their units and want "perfect" obedience of orders.
Notice I NEVER said 1:1 representation of infantry........graphics are nice, but I would rather have good play in the abstract, then perfect realism and 1:1 representation.....another major pitfall of CMSF, and I think frankly if they had it to do over again, they would avoid. It opened a Pandora's box of problems and cries of "my guy did not take cover" or "there was cover and blah, blah, blah......
Thats is about it.
(Added as an Edit) Frankly I only added this long post without reading all the other posts, and had forgotten about the previous CM:SF negative comments made by some. I do not and did not mean this to become an anti-CMSF rant, I was only trying to express my thoughts on where I am at when it comes to tactical war games, and my thoughts on those type of games. I hear CM:SF has gone through a lot of fixs and is much better now. Last I have bought and tried Achtung Panzer Kharkov. The jury is still out on it for me, but most of my problems with that game were system related, as I still have a fairly old computer. The main issue I had with APK, was Parodox and it's stupid download service, and it was always pooping open to tell me to buy something.
"Actions Speak Louder than Words"
-
Mad Russian
- Posts: 13255
- Joined: Sat Mar 15, 2008 9:29 pm
- Location: Texas
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
ORIGINAL: Rebel Yell
That was not a troll. It was actually a compliment.
I have looked at every tactical wargame that has come out since CMBO, and this is the first non-CM one I was ever actually going to buy, thanks to the many great features you've been able to include. Its far from perfect, but it has a long of things that all of us have wanted. But, since you obviously don't want my business, I'll just pass.
I too wasn't replying to your post as a troll comment.
Who said we don't want your business. I agreed with you.
We want gamers to play PCO. Then they will decide for themselves where it fits on their HD's. I would think there is more than enough room for TWO games on our HD's.
Of course, nobody can determine if PCO is right for you, but you. I suggest you at least give it a chance before walking away.
Good Hunting.
MR
The most expensive thing in the world is free time.
Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.
Founder of HSG scenario design group for Combat Mission.
Panzer Command Ostfront Development Team.
Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm Development Team.
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
Fantastic post, Zemke 4.
-
[hirr]Leto
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:29 pm
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
ORIGINAL: Mad Russian
ORIGINAL: Rebel Yell
That was not a troll. It was actually a compliment.
I have looked at every tactical wargame that has come out since CMBO, and this is the first non-CM one I was ever actually going to buy, thanks to the many great features you've been able to include. Its far from perfect, but it has a long of things that all of us have wanted. But, since you obviously don't want my business, I'll just pass.
I too wasn't replying to your post as a troll comment.
Who said we don't want your business. I agreed with you.
We want gamers to play PCO. Then they will decide for themselves where it fits on their HD's. I would think there is more than enough room for TWO games on our HD's.
Of course, nobody can determine if PCO is right for you, but you. I suggest you at least give it a chance before walking away.
Good Hunting.
MR
Brother Z:
You summed this up better than I ever could... and I agree with most everything here. Especially the rabid, frothing, cut your own nose off to spite your face attitude that BFC had in their transition from CM1 to CM2. If you had posted the above on the BFC forum, you would now be hanging by the neck from a virtual loft rafter somewhere. I just do not understand why a gaming company would allow that. Oh well.
The statement about 1:1 infantry and how if it doesn't add to the feel and flow of the game is right on the money.
PCO has a chance to give the CM1 crowd what they wanted all this time... let's just wait and see before we make any rash comparisons... and for me, if there are two games out there that give me what I want, I am the richer man for it. Why some fanboi's have to draw lines in the sand based on ideological reasons (especially for a game, for christ's sake) is beyond me.
Cheers!
Leto
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
Thanks Leto and Pford,
I tend to buy more wargames than I play, in other words I may buy three and only play one regularly. Right now the one game that has my attention is War in the Pacific:AE, just bought Decisive Campaigns:Warsaw to Paris and trying to learn it. I do plan on getting PCO, and will offer any insights I can.
I don't blame BFC too much. They had a vision, they went for it for good or worse. I wish them all the luck in the world. Competition for the dollar or love for a certain project will only enrich our hobby, love created WitP:AE.
As I said before, I may buy several games, (which should make game companies happy), as I am always looking for "The Game", (I am sure some of you know what I mean), but I seldom play more than one or two, the rest just gather dust, or get deleted from the HD. I hope PCO becomes one of the few I would play, as it would be nice to get back into some tactical wargaming.
I tend to buy more wargames than I play, in other words I may buy three and only play one regularly. Right now the one game that has my attention is War in the Pacific:AE, just bought Decisive Campaigns:Warsaw to Paris and trying to learn it. I do plan on getting PCO, and will offer any insights I can.
I don't blame BFC too much. They had a vision, they went for it for good or worse. I wish them all the luck in the world. Competition for the dollar or love for a certain project will only enrich our hobby, love created WitP:AE.
As I said before, I may buy several games, (which should make game companies happy), as I am always looking for "The Game", (I am sure some of you know what I mean), but I seldom play more than one or two, the rest just gather dust, or get deleted from the HD. I hope PCO becomes one of the few I would play, as it would be nice to get back into some tactical wargaming.
"Actions Speak Louder than Words"
-
junk2drive
- Posts: 12856
- Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 7:27 am
- Location: Arizona West Coast
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
Everybody is looking for the Holy Grail. The problem is that everybody's vision of what that is, is different.
Conflict of Heroes "Most games are like checkers or chess and some have dice and cards involved too. This game plays like checkers but you think like chess and the dice and cards can change everything in real time."
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
Hey Everyone,
I have been and still am playing CMBB/CMAK for years, however I'm excited about PCO. I have been waiting for a long time for what I hope PCO will offer. I have spoken to several friends who also are old CM players and after just "finding out " about the release of PCO and the apparent willingness of the developer to keep adding, we are all in.
Looking forward to the game. CM vet of the great white north. ( Canada eh)
PPLCI
(Andrew)
I have been and still am playing CMBB/CMAK for years, however I'm excited about PCO. I have been waiting for a long time for what I hope PCO will offer. I have spoken to several friends who also are old CM players and after just "finding out " about the release of PCO and the apparent willingness of the developer to keep adding, we are all in.
Looking forward to the game. CM vet of the great white north. ( Canada eh)
PPLCI
(Andrew)
-
Joseph_Nevsky
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2009 4:14 pm
- Location: Spain
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
ORIGINAL: pplci
Hey Everyone,
I have been and still am playing CMBB/CMAK for years, however I'm excited about PCO. I have been waiting for a long time for what I hope PCO will offer. I have spoken to several friends who also are old CM players and after just "finding out " about the release of PCO and the apparent willingness of the developer to keep adding, we are all in.
Looking forward to the game. CM vet of the great white north. ( Canada eh)
PPLCI
(Andrew)
+1
Also, I´m totally agree with Zemke_4. Well said! [:)]
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
CMx1 was great in many respects. The problem was that it did not sell any more. Otherwise why would they have thrown the old engine over-board?
CMx2 solved this problem, obviously. Proof being, that BFC is still in business, and expanding.
The principal problem for many was that CMx1 is not being developed further. I hope that this gap will now be closed by PC:O for them.
Best regards,
Thomm
CMx2 solved this problem, obviously. Proof being, that BFC is still in business, and expanding.
The principal problem for many was that CMx1 is not being developed further. I hope that this gap will now be closed by PC:O for them.
Best regards,
Thomm
-
koiosworks
- Posts: 813
- Joined: Sun Jun 20, 2004 8:14 pm
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
ORIGINAL: Thomm
CMx1 was great in many respects. The problem was that it did not sell any more. Otherwise why would they have thrown the old engine over-board?
CMx2 solved this problem, obviously. Proof being, that BFC is still in business, and expanding.
The principal problem for many was that CMx1 is not being developed further. I hope that this gap will now be closed by PC:O for them.
Best regards,
Thomm
And this is the answer to the question posed in the thread. If no one buys these types of games (because they are so in love with their one and only 'perfect' game) then the fact is these types of games will no longer be made by anyone. Eventually, the old-love game won't even run on new machines.... I simply can't understand why people can't seem to enjoy two 'flavors' of something. I like regular coffee, but sometimes I like an expresso....
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
ORIGINAL: koiosworks
I simply can't understand why people can't seem to enjoy two 'flavors' of something. I like regular coffee, but sometimes I like an expresso....
Well if you have been eating beef all along and then someone offers bologna with promises of improved flavour to come... You get the idea.
Somewhat related, I was just reading on a Stardock forum re the botched Elemental release. They had sold more than 82,000 copies in the opening days, not bad I think for the 'been there/done that' TBS genre - they just combined the 'best of' elements and went 3D and you have a 'winner'.
Edit: Just in case I wasn't clear. I don't think PC originally offered enough new or reasons to buy, they look to be changing that now.
-
[hirr]Leto
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:29 pm
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
ORIGINAL: Ron
ORIGINAL: koiosworks
I simply can't understand why people can't seem to enjoy two 'flavors' of something. I like regular coffee, but sometimes I like an expresso....
Well if you have been eating beef all along and then someone offers bologna with promises of improved flavour to come... You get the idea.
Somewhat related, I was just reading on a Stardock forum re the botched Elemental release. They had sold more than 82,000 copies in the opening days, not bad I think for the 'been there/done that' TBS genre - they just combined the 'best of' elements and went 3D and you have a 'winner'.
I'd restate that by saying that if you've been eating beef all along and then someone offers you salmon, the flavors may be too diverse to overcome for some people, and others may simply not like it. Certainly, if you're subsistence has been beef, and now someone is forcing you to eat salmon, you won't be very happy with them. So you look for beef substitues, maybe some ostrich.
But all the while you wonder why the beef you have been eating couldn't have been upgraded to a prime rib or tenderloin... in the meantime, legions of salmon lovers march across the land saying that salmon is better for you, tastier and is by far the better product. Those that disagree with the salmon lovers are destroyed in an avalanche of salmon zealotry that crushes all opinions and leaves nobody ever to talk about beef again because it is inferior... stunningly, the salmon people also produced and ate beef... but don't talk about it any longer. And for some reason, the first batch of salmon was very fishy smelling and tasted horrible. With some good recipes, they've dressed up the salmon with a lemon dill sauce and have made it edible, but that fishy taste is always at the back of your throat. But the salmon eaters smile and gobble it down.. they actually like that fish taste in their mouths now! Plus everyone eats salmon now, and beef eaters stoned to death... so they really have no choice.
In the meantime, a small band of beef lovers continues to promote beef and the salmon eaters absolutely can't stand the beef eaters. The beef eaters then in turn loathe the salmon eaters for their arrogance, hubris and because, well, they just smell like fish.
I for one also eat tuna, foi gras, pork and even escargot, so I have no problem with a little bit of each... it makes life interesting and TASTY! Yet, for me, the salmon produced still has that fishy taste in the back of my mouth, and because I do not have to smile and say that it tastes great around my friends, I go without. I am hoping that the fishy taste gets expunged, but I have my doubts, because that fishy taste seems to being branded as the new great flavor (and if you don't like it, you just don't get it... perhaps you are not as evolved in the palette as the salmon eaters?)
Only time will tell. And who knows? Maybe I'll like fishy tasting Salmon someday (there will have to be a lot of LEMON involved, though I tells ya!!!)
Cheers!
Leto
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
ORIGINAL: [hirr]Leto
TL - DR
Lost me? Are you talking about PC or Elemental?
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
ORIGINAL: [hirr]Leto
ORIGINAL: Ron
ORIGINAL: koiosworks
I simply can't understand why people can't seem to enjoy two 'flavors' of something. I like regular coffee, but sometimes I like an expresso....
Well if you have been eating beef all along and then someone offers bologna with promises of improved flavour to come... You get the idea.
Somewhat related, I was just reading on a Stardock forum re the botched Elemental release. They had sold more than 82,000 copies in the opening days, not bad I think for the 'been there/done that' TBS genre - they just combined the 'best of' elements and went 3D and you have a 'winner'.
I'd restate that by saying that if you've been eating beef all along and then someone offers you salmon, the flavors may be too diverse to overcome for some people, and others may simply not like it. Certainly, if you're subsistence has been beef, and now someone is forcing you to eat salmon, you won't be very happy with them. So you look for beef substitues, maybe some ostrich.
But all the while you wonder why the beef you have been eating couldn't have been upgraded to a prime rib or tenderloin... in the meantime, legions of salmon lovers march across the land saying that salmon is better for you, tastier and is by far the better product. Those that disagree with the salmon lovers are destroyed in an avalanche of salmon zealotry that crushes all opinions and leaves nobody ever to talk about beef again because it is inferior... stunningly, the salmon people also produced and ate beef... but don't talk about it any longer. And for some reason, the first batch of salmon was very fishy smelling and tasted horrible. With some good recipes, they've dressed up the salmon with a lemon dill sauce and have made it edible, but that fishy taste is always at the back of your throat. But the salmon eaters smile and gobble it down.. they actually like that fish taste in their mouths now! Plus everyone eats salmon now, and beef eaters stoned to death... so they really have no choice.
In the meantime, a small band of beef lovers continues to promote beef and the salmon eaters absolutely can't stand the beef eaters. The beef eaters then in turn loathe the salmon eaters for their arrogance, hubris and because, well, they just smell like fish.
I for one also eat tuna, foi gras, pork and even escargot, so I have no problem with a little bit of each... it makes life interesting and TASTY! Yet, for me, the salmon produced still has that fishy taste in the back of my mouth, and because I do not have to smile and say that it tastes great around my friends, I go without. I am hoping that the fishy taste gets expunged, but I have my doubts, because that fishy taste seems to being branded as the new great flavor (and if you don't like it, you just don't get it... perhaps you are not as evolved in the palette as the salmon eaters?)
Only time will tell. And who knows? Maybe I'll like fishy tasting Salmon someday (there will have to be a lot of LEMON involved, though I tells ya!!!)
Cheers!
Leto
Two words: 'abstract' and 'genius'.
FNG
Our doubts are traitors, and make us lose the good we oft might win by fearing to attempt.
Our doubts are traitors, and make us lose the good we oft might win by fearing to attempt.
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
ORIGINAL: [hirr]Leto
PC and BFC
I guess I am dense then lol because I am really lost now. I don't think for a moment PC Kharkov was a 'salmon', in fact as I alluded to it was severely lacking in certain areas compared to CMBB, a game BFC released eight years ago, hence the lack of incentive to buy and support. AFAIK BFC has no plans to return to the Eastern Front any time soon so am unsure your point re PC. PC Ostfront looks to address a lot of the issues people found lacking in Kharkov and hopefully will become an alternative 'expresso' as Koiosworks originally stated.
-
junk2drive
- Posts: 12856
- Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 7:27 am
- Location: Arizona West Coast
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
I think he means that CMSF is salmon...
Conflict of Heroes "Most games are like checkers or chess and some have dice and cards involved too. This game plays like checkers but you think like chess and the dice and cards can change everything in real time."
-
[hirr]Leto
- Posts: 17
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2010 6:29 pm
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
Ostrich = Ostfront.
Salmon = CM2 engine (CMSF)
Beef = CMx1
Tenderloin = : (
Escargot = Snails. mmmm.
Cheers!
Leto
Salmon = CM2 engine (CMSF)
Beef = CMx1
Tenderloin = : (
Escargot = Snails. mmmm.
Cheers!
Leto
-
junk2drive
- Posts: 12856
- Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2002 7:27 am
- Location: Arizona West Coast
RE: If I Own CMBB why get PCO?
mmm beerr = Homer Simpson
Conflict of Heroes "Most games are like checkers or chess and some have dice and cards involved too. This game plays like checkers but you think like chess and the dice and cards can change everything in real time."