Proof why 1to1 representation is not a good idea.

[Yoozernamemember]

I suspect a conflict-of-interest between Relative Spotting and WEGO.  That is, a person can fully inspect what each unit relatively sees, and then inspect the overall 'non-selected-unit-borg-reprted-overallspotting' and make gamey decisions.  That is why I would want to play in 'ironman' FOW mode when playing WEGO.  I would also want a chess 'you-touch-it-you-use-it'.  That is, once a unit is selected, it must be issued orders.
 
I also like the WEGO for WWII as far as command/control/communications.  It was always my thought that WEGO commands time-structure is better suited for WWII abstraction. 

[Stridor]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Why does anyone have an issue with comparing CM and PC?  They are both playing at exactly the same scale.  They are simulating the exact same times in history.  I imagine they will both cover the exact same theater.

I think that drives good healthy discussion.  I have a feeling if we were all a little too sensitive in discussing that, PCO wouldn't even exist.

From what I have seen of CMBN in videos and read in AARs, I don't think there is any real point comparing the two games anymore.

Sure, they both play very differently, but that is perhaps not the point. One game clearly has had a lot of money invested on development of the code and graphical assets. The other has had exactly nothing ($0) spent on it, and sadly it shows. Now of course Matrix is giving away their game for free for the most part. I guess they really had to do this otherwise they would have been seen to be making money off the backs of a lot of volunteers hard work.

And boy did those boys work hard! I know! But still they all had day jobs, and work was done on an "interest only" ad-hoc fashion without any Matrix leadership input or a even a cohesive design plan.

Bottom line is if you are lucky enough to have money and time to play both, then great do that and enjoy. But if, as I suspect, most of us only have time (or money) to devote to one game "system", I strongly suspect you would be better off with CMBN.

All IMHO (as the coder of PCO).

S

[Enigma6584]

Interesting...[X(]

[thewood1]

Don't think CM2 wasn't built on the bcks of volunteers.  There are a lot of testers building scenarios, doing alpha testing, fixing QBs, building textures, etc. for free.

[HintJ]

I'd rather play PCO mainly because it is on the Eastern Front.

Sure I'm interested in CMBN, but I think SciFi games like Supreme Commander are more interesting than Normandy games.

ORIGINAL: Stridor

But if, as I suspect, most of us only have time (or money) to devote to one game "system", I strongly suspect you would be better off with CMBN.

All IMHO (as the coder of PCO).

S

If CMx2 had a msg box, a decent bino view, randoms camps, toggleable grid, and a better mapmaker, then I'd probably agree w/you

[Pillar]

There's that, and I think there is a hardcore crowd that are unsatisfied with the CM2 system in terms of realism and unit behaviour.  For me the best thing about CM2 over CM1 was the terrain "resolution" in height and size, because small unit infantry tactics became more involved.  With PzC:O modeling terrain at that detail level now I don't expect to be playing CM2 engine games again until they redo the modern stuff.

[junk2drive]

Just because it is volunteer effort does not make it any less of an effort than a big budget game. In fact the passion for the game made this one better than the paid team made the originals.

Anyone that has messed with Linux knows there are good open source games out there that are made by volunteers.

[general_solomon]

ORIGINAL: junk2drive

Just because it is volunteer effort does not make it any less of an effort than a big budget game. In fact the passion for the game made this one better than the paid team made the originals.

Anyone that has messed with Linux knows there are good open source games out there that are made by volunteers.

all their good works are much appreciated. thanks to all that have worked on this project.

we will appreciate your work buy purchasing a copy of pco.

[Mobius]

I retired from programming several years ago. I would have spent more time playing golf and less on 3D modelling except for a shoulder injury which is now better.[:D]

[junk2drive]

Even though Stridor is being Eeyore about the product, he did a heck of a job of fixing glitches and enabling our visions and wishes.

[Mobius]

The main thing is to have fun. You can play the game and have fun. You can play the campaigns and have fun. You can make scenarios and have fun. You can make your own realistic maps and have fun.

The open system allows you to make your own models of structures, guns and tanks and put them in the game. That is a lot of fun too.

[Mad Russian]

I personally can't imagine than any other game ever got the kind of attention that PCO was given. Whether it was a paid effort or not.

I, for one, am proud of how PCO has turned out, especially as a free update.

Good Hunting.

MR

[diablo1]

The open system allows you to make your own models of structures, guns and tanks and put them in the game. That is a lot of fun too.

Not to me it isn't that's boring as hell on a Sunday Morning. I guess some gamers (if you can call them gamers) like to play with their tinker toys. I prefer to play a game not redesign it.

[HintJ]

ORIGINAL: diablo1

The open system allows you to make your own models of structures, guns and tanks and put them in the game. That is a lot of fun too.

Not to me it isn't that's boring as hell on a Sunday Morning. I guess some gamers (if you can call them gamers) like to play with their tinker toys. I prefer to play a game not redesign it.

Sounds like you need to be playing an XBox or something.

One of the greatest advantages to many PC games is the ease of modification, and the fun involved w/that. And yes, it is fun I think.

[Yoozernamemember]

I don't quite understand the comments by Stridor.
 
I have already bought into the 'system' as far as Panzer command.  Twice.  There would be no way I would not try the upgrade and all the scenarios and campaigns, etc.  As a CMx1 fan, that does not play CMx1 anymore, it will fill a void.
 
I recently downloaded the demo for shockforce/marines/etc.  I don't see it as a defined system.  The RT/WEGO 'systems' show a lack of product definition.  I would never play this 'Shockforce' product over what I have seen so far in the mOBIUS videos.  i would never buy the modern CMx2 products.
 
I am most interested in seeing if a game can utilize relative spotting to increase game enjoyment.  I look forward to playing PCO and trying the demo for CMBN.  The comparison will interesting and I do not see how anyone can really judge at this point un less they are on the PCO development team AND somehow on the CMBN development team.

[Yoozernamemember]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Don't think CM2 wasn't built on the bcks of volunteers.  There are a lot of testers building scenarios, doing alpha testing, fixing QBs, building textures, etc. for free.

And there are plenty of people unemployed at the present time. So, there are ample volunteers.

As a person that was once accused by the '1:1 guy' as being 'on the dole' because I was unemployed in the early 90s and '00s, I find it exceptionally satisfying that they might be leaning on this 'dole-pool' now. They wouldn't expect people that should be looking for work to play thier beta projects I hope????

Nyuk-Nyuk-Nyuk

[thewood1]

They have been working on it since well before the economic meltdown.  Most of the people I know working on it are "gainfully" employed.
 
All my point was about was that BFC leans on "volunteers" very heavily.  To the point that I don't think they coule produce the game without them.

[Mobius]

ORIGINAL: HintJ
Sounds like you need to be playing an XBox or something.
One of the greatest advantages to many PC games is the ease of modification, and the fun involved w/that. And yes, it is fun I think.

The ability to make game mods and share them with a community is one of the advantages the PC still has over the xboxes and Ithings.

[Enigma6584]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

They have been working on it since well before the economic meltdown.  Most of the people I know working on it are "gainfully" employed.

All my point was about was that BFC leans on "volunteers" very heavily.  To the point that I don't think they coule produce the game without them.

Volunteers are indeed used for testing, map making, scenario design and creation. Coding, graphic arts for the game etc. are all down by BF and its paid employees. That is a big difference in my book with respect to what Stridor had stated...that being even coders were not paid employees of Matrix. Or is he wrong?

[thewood1]

The base game was coded by paid programmers.  I think any changes since PCK were volunteers.
 
I am not saying volunteers did any programming.  But some of the graphics from the community have found their way into released games in CM.