Only one scenario?

[PzB74]

That's a bit much, closer to 2.5 USD per l liter fuel here in Norway.
Pretty sure average salaries are much higher than those in the US as well.
The price for another Battlefront game cost me less than 1.5 hours at work.

Right shall be right [;)] but I agree, point has been made.

The expansion pack for WitP (AE) is created upon wishes from gaming community and a lot of volunteer effort.
So I don't recognize all of Mr Mighty's arguments - but it is possible that more community involvement is desirable?

ORIGINAL: Ola Berli

HercMighty,

You repeat yourself in all threads. I think You have made Your point Sir!

Stop crying about life in USA. For the price in my country for a Golf WW. You can get a Lexus or big Mercerdes in USA. Do You know what 1 liter petrol cost in Norway? Answer: 4$ . And we drill after oil in the whole North sea being the 5 biggest producer of oil in the world.

[JudgeDredd]

This will probably be my one and only post in this forum...I don't want to piss on peoples parades that are looking forward to it...but I wanted to say this, whilst SSG were visible

The main issue I have with your games is lack of content and until I see you produce a game with content worthy of my ever increasingly diminishing ££s due to the increases worldwide on just about every product required for life, then I will not hand over my money.

The last game I had from you was Carriers at War, and content was severely lacking. The game had some excellent options...but they wore thin very, very fast...no content and a map which didn't afford the gamer much in the way of tactics and certainly very little replayability.

So I just wanted to express the same concerns other people have. Take note. It is a genuine concern and one which stops you receiving my money.

I will now depart and allow the people who wish to talk constructively and enthusiastically about this up coming release.

[Ola Berli]

PzB,
 
ops I sat the price a bit high. Close to 3 $. You also know that the price is higher outside Oslo. After all a price on petrol who I think had fired up a little revolution in the states. Or perhaps Pzb have a small sosialdemocrat in his stomach and think the price is at it should be ? [:D]
 

[Duck Doc]

I have KP, BiN, BiI & BF (& CaW). I have been playing SSG's games since the release of TAO. Although I have not been playing BF much lately & although I have not played it nearly as much as I have the other two, similar titles I own I consider it a valuable addition to my gaming collection & I do not regret its purchase at all. I have plenty of games on my shelf I don't play often & a few I play a lot. That is the way gaming goes for me. BiI & BiN have repaid me many times over.

I particularly appreciated the advances made in the game engine with the release of BF & I consider it a challenge to master. I am returning to BF with a friend & we will be doing some PBEM games. I was disappointed that there have not been more additional scenarios released for BF but the one that has been, Crusader, is a great scenario. That is five battles, one small, one medium, three big ones. That is plenty.

There have been problems prgramming the AI for BF scenarios but I would be more than happy with scenarios meant to be played just by PBEM.

I have been frustrated with SSG's approach at times, especially with the way the manuals are written & some of the game concepts are a bit opaque & difficult for me to wrap my brain around. However I love the game engine & have since I first played TAO. Wargaming doesn't get any better.

I too am on a budget. I have to consider my gaming purchases more carefully these days but I plan on buying Kharkov because I am excited about the evolution of the game engine & I consider it my duty as a gamer to support designers who make the games I enjoy playing through thick & thin.

I also consider it necessary to trust the designers even when they don't seem to be listening. I would like to get responses to my posts but I am mature enough to live with the disappointment. I am not that important. Imagine trying to make something by committee, especially one as huge & vocal as the wargaming one. Trying to please everyone is impossible. Every gamer knows how it should be done. Sid Meier's response to similar criticism was, "Ok, go out & learn C & program it yourself!"

If you don't like the game concept or consider it not worth the investment then by all means don't buy. But remember, it is an investment. You pay as you go along & the games get made. Nobody is getting rich developing wargames & I consider my self lucky that SSG has been making the games I love to play & I would be very sad if they stopped.

If all this makes me a "fanboy" sycophant then so be it. I don't look at it that way.

[Howard7x]

ORIGINAL: HercMighty

And this will be the death of SSG. You have a niche market that you think you know. And as a result we have seen SSG's titles slowly dwindle to this. You hide away in your bat cave concoting what you think we'll like and then are disapointed and don't understand when we complain. It's will even be harder to sell your titles now as the world economy suffers. Energy prices, food, the necesseties are going to eat into our budgets.

I said it over on your forums. Your stance of not discussing anything with your fan base is stupid. Sure some questions here and there get answered but that isn't what I am talking about. You need to engage your fan base and discuss your titles and really listen to what we are asking for, because we make up the niche market, not you.

And with the economy the way it is and people trying to decide if they want to support this title I would implore you to rethink the above statement by you.

HercMighty, you have made your point. Now move on please. Quite frankly your criticism is not justified to the level its been given. If you dont like the fact that theres one main map and 10 scenarios based on that map, im afraid you are missing the point of SSG's titles.

BF was a bad release from SSG's point of view. They realise the issues they faced and have moved on from that, thats why they didnt support it + they were working on CaW. If you dont see that then im sorry. If this new engine is a keeper and they are able to mod like they could in BII, i dont see why you have a problem as there will be loads of great scenarios made for this game. If you go to SSG's main site and look at the scenarios page, BII's editor allowed for some truely fantastic user based scenarios. Judging by what ive read thus far, SSG have refined the editor so that this will once again be the case.

Looks to me like development time has been spent on the engine and the AO and mystery systems rather than the number of scenarios at hand. If they get a system that works well and they can build on and add new scenarios to, i dont see the number of scenarios with the release being an issue. You can bet your bottom dollar that the main modders over at RUN5 already have their hands on the editor and are working on custom scenarios for just after the release date.

As someone who has been playing SSG's titles continually for the last few years, i was also bitterly dissapointed with BF.

Im looking positively towards this release.

[tevans6220]

BF would not have been a bad release if the editing tools had really been usable. Even after learning how to make maps and enter all the data there was still the question of how to program the AI. From what I read on the SSG forums there were only two people who ever made anything with the BF AI (Roger & Ian) and they had no time to write a guide since they were busy with work. That in my opinion is why BF was not a success. SSG gave us the tools to make scenarios but couldn't be bothered explaining the parts they left out of the manual. If the same thing happens with this game, I predict it will have the same fate as BF at a faster pace since there's only one scenario. SSG if you're going to give us the tools then please have the courtesy to at least teach us how to use them. It will aid in the longevity of your game.

[Gregor_SSG]

ORIGINAL: tevans6220

BF would not have been a bad release if the editing tools had really been usable. Even after learning how to make maps and enter all the data there was still the question of how to program the AI. From what I read on the SSG forums there were only two people who ever made anything with the BF AI (Roger & Ian) and they had no time to write a guide since they were busy with work. That in my opinion is why BF was not a success. SSG gave us the tools to make scenarios but couldn't be bothered explaining the parts they left out of the manual. If the same thing happens with this game, I predict it will have the same fate as BF at a faster pace since there's only one scenario. SSG if you're going to give us the tools then please have the courtesy to at least teach us how to use them. It will aid in the longevity of your game.

The AI is always going to be the hardest part of scenario creation to explain, and we haven't done a good job of doing that, partly because it has kept changing as we have kept improving it. However, since it isn't going to change significantly for the next two games, we will make a better job of doing just that.

However, this something that will have to wait until after the game is released. For one thing, the new improved game manual is allready butting up against Matrix's 200 page limit. For another, the task will require a united effort from Roger, Ian and myself and that just won't be feasible until after the game itself is out.


Gregor

[tevans6220]

ORIGINAL: Gregor_SSG

ORIGINAL: tevans6220

BF would not have been a bad release if the editing tools had really been usable. Even after learning how to make maps and enter all the data there was still the question of how to program the AI. From what I read on the SSG forums there were only two people who ever made anything with the BF AI (Roger & Ian) and they had no time to write a guide since they were busy with work. That in my opinion is why BF was not a success. SSG gave us the tools to make scenarios but couldn't be bothered explaining the parts they left out of the manual. If the same thing happens with this game, I predict it will have the same fate as BF at a faster pace since there's only one scenario. SSG if you're going to give us the tools then please have the courtesy to at least teach us how to use them. It will aid in the longevity of your game.

The AI is always going to be the hardest part of scenario creation to explain, and we haven't done a good job of doing that, partly because it has kept changing as we have kept improving it. However, since it isn't going to change significantly for the next two games, we will make a better job of doing just that.

However, this something that will have to wait until after the game is released. For one thing, the new improved game manual is allready butting up against Matrix's 200 page limit. For another, the task will require a united effort from Roger, Ian and myself and that just won't be feasible until after the game itself is out.


Gregor

Gregor I wasn't trying to be overly critical. I've purchased every SSG game going back to the C64 days and I'll be purchasing this one too. I'm just looking for some assurances that documentation on AI programming will be forthcoming for this game. Battlefront was and still is a great system but I think that not having the proper support (AI documentation) held it back as far as scenario building was concerned. Hoping that people will just figure it out or stating that nobody has the time to write a guide just isn't in the best interest of sales. Especially when similar systems such as the TOAW system comes fully documented. I just want to make sure this game doesn't run into the same problem. And since there is basically going to be only one battle the success of this game will rely heavily on user created material that will hopefully be playable against an AI.

[Adam Parker]

I think it's ok for Herc to voice his opinion - it's the first I've seen it as I don't visit Run5 unless I'm playing a game and have a question.
 
But had BF been supplied with more professionaly created scenarios and Carriers at War been released with the variety supplied in the current patch, well, I'd be playing them now but I'm not.

[Berkut]

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

I think it's ok for Herc to voice his opinion - it's the first I've seen it as I don't visit Run5 unless I'm playing a game and have a question.

But had BF been supplied with more professionaly created scenarios and Carriers at War been released with the variety supplied in the current patch, well, I'd be playing them now but I'm not.

Indeed.

Herc, you keep right on voicing your concerns and opinions. Internet bytes are pretty much free, and fi people think you are over-stating your case, they are welcome to not read your posts.

Demands that people stop posting criticism is weak BS, IMO.

[Ola Berli]

The problem with this HercMighty is that he repeat himself on all threads! His point have been made. And he only have to not buy the game,
vola his problem is solved. Now we must move forward in anticipation for this coming game.

[Howard7x]

ORIGINAL: Berkut

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker

I think it's ok for Herc to voice his opinion - it's the first I've seen it as I don't visit Run5 unless I'm playing a game and have a question.

But had BF been supplied with more professionaly created scenarios and Carriers at War been released with the variety supplied in the current patch, well, I'd be playing them now but I'm not.

Indeed.

Herc, you keep right on voicing your concerns and opinions. Internet bytes are pretty much free, and fi people think you are over-stating your case, they are welcome to not read your posts.

Demands that people stop posting criticism is weak BS, IMO.

He has voiced his opinions on EVERY thread. Same thing, over and over and over and over again. Thats just negativity without even seeing the damn game play. Im sorry but until theres more detailed information on this game, the criticism is weak BS, IMO. He made his point, which i could understand... the first time around.

[vonji]

SSG, like any other company, must make profits, I think, and my opinion is that they do like others, look for example the release of games like "dawn of war " from THQ : 3 or 4 games (very similar ) the game engine is the same, but they change the maps, scenarios and they introduce some new stuff.

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: vonji

SSG, like any other company, must make profits, I think, and my opinion is that they do like others, look for example the release of games like "dawn of war " from THQ : 3 or 4 games (very similar ) the game engine is the same, but they change the maps, scenarios and they introduce some new stuff.

There's a difference between 'new game' and expansion pack (even stand alone ones). DoW had expansion packs.

[PzB74]

To get ahead of things: A suggestion for an expansion scenario for the Donets game engine ->

Operation Mars, November-December 1942

Another unknown but major battle were the Russians lost 330k dead. Also known as Zhukovs greatest defeat.
The battle is largely unknown to the common public. Would follow nicely along the lines of Disaster on the Donets.

Here's a link to a good book on the battle: Zhukov's Greatest Defeat: The Red Army's Epic Disaster in Operation Mars, 1942

[Canuck_jp]

Well this release is certainly news to me!  I've always been disappointed by the lack of scenarios in SSG's products, despite buying all of them so far (except for CAW).  I won't say that I won't buy this one but I'm very disappointed that...what, two years after and there are only about 2 user made scenarios for it?  I will wait for at least a year or two after release before picking up this new one and I'll only do that if I see plenty of user made scenarios.

[Howard7x]

Canuck,
 
I too am dissapointed with the lack of scenarios but i think they have looked at the engine and made it something that they want to keep now for subsequent releases. Battlefront was such a leap and i dont think they were quite happy with how it turned out.  So while this one has only 1 scenario + 10 virants, now all they have to do for the next games is make scenarios. There should in theory be alot more on the way. Plus the mystery virants idea sounds really exciting and hopefully will cut away the gamey part of wargames. Already knowing what each others objectives and units are at turn 1 takes away a huge part of what an operational wargame should be about. I just hope SSG can pull it off.

[BlackSunshine]

I too own all of the DB/BF games and have to say that BF was a letdown to say the least.

The game was great, in fact I wrote a well received AAR on the forums here.  The problem was the lack of scenarios and the complexity of the editor.

Will the editor in Kharkov be easy to use?  If so, then you will see a wealth of user made scenarios, and infinite replayabilty.  See TOAW and AT.
 
 

[sol_invictus]

I feel the same way. Bought all the SSG releases but BF was a letdown. I will also proceed warily with this release.

[benpark]

I just purchased the game, as I like many of SSG's games.

I'm not sure the market will support this direction of one scenario at the full $50 price tag.
I'm certainly not (re-)buying the next "Across the Dneper" add on at these rates. I would pay for a game along the model of "Battles in Normandy", with one immense map, and several sub scenarios in the future.