Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: diablo1

Anyway, I bit the bullet and bought PCO,

Hurray PC:O wins the pennant PC:O wins the pennant PC:O wins the pennant!

Great choice you won't be sorry. This one really is the most challenging and fun to play. CM:BN to me just doesn't even come close to what CMx1 brought us and just feels too much like one of those RTS games instead of a wargame based on its demo. Even the wego game doesn't have all the elements that made CMx1 so great.

And PCO also does not have some elements that made CMx1 great. Oh...and as far as the pennant is concerned...the season is not over yet.

PCO does let the player see the tank armor and gun data stats. As well as the underlying terrain.

ORIGINAL: Jacko

CMBN is superb and in a class of it's own. Having said that, so is PCO. Both games are very enjoyable. And comparing them is completly useless. Every wargamer should support BOTH games. 

I agree.

ORIGINAL: Mobius

PCO does let the player see the tank armor and gun data stats. As well as the underlying terrain.

And your point would be?

I think he means that CMBN doesn't. 

ORIGINAL: thewood1

I think he means that CMBN doesn't. 

Well I've always wanted BF to impliment some sort of encyclopedia of arms, armor, and equipment withe the games. I've always liked the way Rome Total War did it, you know where you "right click" on a unit icon and get all this fabulous history and data on the troops. However, I can't beleive this would be a major factor in determining whether I buy PCO or not or whether I buy CM games or not. It is a non-factor as far as I'm concerned.

I tried the CMBN demo, it runs well, I like its graphics over all, UI and some other features (or the lack of some features) much less. I could buy CMBN, maybe, but not before having the opportunity to buy it patched, in bundle with one or two expansions and cheaper. [;)]

Of course...most everyone is looking for that free lunch.[;)]

ORIGINAL: RedCharlie65

ORIGINAL: thewood1
I think he means that CMBN doesn't. 

It is a non-factor as far as I'm concerned.

Of course.
Data is like badges in the movie The Treasure of the Sierra Madre.

I would settle for waht was in CM1.  That was pretty good.
 
The excuse in CMSF was that it was too secret for them to show.
 
In CMBN it's that we wouldn't understand it.
 
Not sure which it is,

ORIGINAL: Jacko

CMBN is superb and in a class of it's own. Having said that, so is PCO. Both games are very enjoyable. And comparing them is completly useless. Every wargamer should support BOTH games. 

Agree that both games are very good and very enjoyable. Don't see why that should make it uselss to compare them.
Nor do I see why supporting both games should prohibit a gamer from comparing them.

And there is nothing wrong with a gamer preferring one game over another even though he likes them both.

ORIGINAL: thewood1

I would settle for waht was in CM1.  That was pretty good.

The excuse in CMSF was that it was too secret for them to show.

In CMBN it's that we wouldn't understand it.

Not sure which it is,

I envision the armor data as a bunch of triangles (representing the armor plates) with armor thickness, quality, etc. assigned to each one. How would you visualize this without a major programming effort, if at all.

Compare this to the generic hit areas in CMx1.

I think a good compromise would be the hit arrows of ToW, which show - at least - the armor thickness of the hit plate (IIRC). But as long as major game elements (flame-throwers, for example) are missing, I guess we shall not see anything like this.

At the very minimum, there is the color coded display showing the armor rating of the most important vehicle aspects. That is more than nothing.

Best regards,
Thomm

I thinkthat this game would sell better if the full manual were given with the demo as they did for CMN.There is a lot of richness that is not obvious (at least to me) from the tutorial manual.

Henri

ORIGINAL: Jacko

CMBN is superb and in a class of it's own. Having said that, so is PCO. Both games are very enjoyable. And comparing them is completly useless. Every wargamer should support BOTH games. 

This. And its not that expensive even especially with the deal matrix gives. I got the game for free!

ORIGINAL: henri51

I thinkthat this game would sell better if the full manual were given with the demo as they did for CMN.There is a lot of richness that is not obvious (at least to me) from the tutorial manual.

Henri

The full manual is included with the demo.

ORIGINAL: RedCharlie65

ORIGINAL: Ssnake51
Have to say I've been rather surprised at the poor customer support shown on the battlefront forum. And, as others have mentioned, the DRM system for CMBN really sucks.[:@]

Bullshit.

I agree. It is nonsense. [:)] There helpdesk is second to none and I only have good experiences there. Stop bashing BF please, I don't like it.

ORIGINAL: RedCharlie65

I strongly disagree with this.[:-]

All of it? What a strange coincidence.

Agree with Jacko:

ORIGINAL: Jacko

CMBN is superb and in a class of it's own. Having said that, so is PCO. Both games are very enjoyable. And comparing them is completly useless. Every wargamer should support BOTH games. 

ORIGINAL: RedCharlie65

Of course...most everyone is looking for that free lunch.[;)]

I am too busy to release mods for free to do the tester for BF for free, so I'll wait enough patches to have a game enough good in my opinion [;)]

Okay, this is a Matrix forum. We are here to discuss the merits of Matrix games. At times that means we get compared to other games. In this case the CM series of games.

Whether or not you had a good experience with a companies customer service department really doesn't qualify as comparing the two games.

We need to bring this thread back towards a discussion of the merits of the games involved and leave comments about other companies issues for another place and time.

Good Hunting.

MR