Close Combat Series :: View topic - Close Combat 5 Re-Release Debate

through

[^/[Print]\]

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat The Longest Day

#1: Close Combat 5 Re-Release Debate Author: mooxe,

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:55 am
—
CSO Simtek & Matrix Games are currently planning to re-release Close Combat 5.

I have been thinking alot lately on this event. I would like to share my opinions on it with everyone who reads here, in the hopes of generating some debate.

Overall I do not see any advantage for the Close Combat Community in re-releasing this game. There are a number of reasons for this, I will list them off. I will speak as if the re-release is official. The word bug is used to describe an imperfection, defect or incompatibility.

- Matrix Games and CSO Simtek will be fixing a number of bugs. Fixing these bugs will make our current version incompatible with the new version since the EXE and DLL files will be changed. This forces us to upgrade if we want to play people on the new version. Basically re-releasing CC5 as a version incompatible with the original version means trying to create a new community of players from nothing. Can this be done with a seven year old game? CC5 5.01 has either been selling or pirated for the past seven years. There is a huge pool of players out there right now that can all play each other. Why are they starting from scratch by releasing a version thats not compatible with the 1000's out there?

- It has been stated by a few people that re-releasing gets the name Close Combat back out in there. But what exactly will that do? If you were one of those people, explain your theory. Close Combat is still Close Combat, 2D top down RTS, seven years old and only two player. People do not play a game simply because they are reminded its out there and see it at Matrix Games. They play because of what the game has to offer. Re-releasing CC5 doesnt offer what we all want these days. Even with the bugs fixed.

- One of the biggest problems is not being fixed. The firewall issue. When the re-release finally comes, just like in the CoI forums there will be a ton of firewall related posts and frustrated customers.

- The mods all have to be converted. This is being done with CC3 to CoI. I suppose it can be done for the new version. Its very time consuming. This also creates two versions of mods for each "side" of the CC5 community.

- Lets look at CoI. Granted its early, but there seems to be no action. Only techsupport posts, complaint posts and the occaisional AAR. BHQ usually empty also. CC2 regularly has more users in it. I will venture to predict CoI will do nothing long term for the CC community. The main bugs were not fixed (firewall), and theres no CoI website.

- Gamespy constantly gets new players right now. We have sustained about the same levels in Gamespy for years now. The only tapering of numbers we have seen started around the beginning of 2004. Since then there have been a steady amount of new players replacing the retired players.

- Matrix Games released CoI for $49.99 USD (boxed version). Assuming they market CC5 as a patched re-release and not a new game with its own new name, is this realistic to pay that much for a patched game?

Assume there was no re-release. Contemplate whether or not you will continue to play CC5 5.01 in its current state. Ask yourself these questions.

Will I stop or continue playing CC5 5.01 if......

...they dont fix the 00:00 crash?
...they dont fix the force selection screen peek?
...they dont fix the reinforcement bug?
...they dont fix the supply problems?
...they dont fix the hosts advantage?

From my experience with the community, the majority of people did not stop playing CC5 because of these bugs and the other small ones. They quit because its old, graphically outdated, only two player, too many firewall problems and some incompatibility problems. Also, many new games out there gave them the features they wanted. At the very least, why are none of the real problems being fixed?

The last questions...

- Will re-releasing CC5 create and sustain a new player base online and offline that can be part of our community?

- What exactly is the motivation to re-release CC5 and what thought has been put into its impact upon this section of the CC community?

My summary...

Its too late to do this. The CC5 community is too old and established to be uprooted and started from scratch again. Trying to revive CC5 to its 2000-2003 days will not work plain and simple. We wont see any long term revival of CC5 online or even offline. CC5 has worked and kept us hooked for seven years now.

Last edited by mooxe on Fri Feb 01, 2008 2:18 am; edited 2 times in total

#2: Author: Polemarchos, Location: Polemarchopolis

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:58 am
—
well i am just fine with CC5 as it is, as long as new mods come out every year and older ones updated.

i would rather get used to the bugs than playing a game that splits the fans. I hope they will do a patch version of the original CC 5.

#3: Author: Pzt_Mac, Location: Oregon

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:46 am
—
Well, I don't think it would be a horrible idea to rerelease it.

But to do so would require them to fix ALL of the bugs, as you've noted above. Anything less than that would be a real let down, and most likely a failure at the box office.

What's behind a rerelease? Clearly a multitude of things I would wager, not the least of which is money... hopefully to use for a future Close Combat in all it's glory.

Mods are THE single most important thing to CC5. As we all know, they've kept the community alive, along with CC sites and clans. So if they brought those into the mix for a rerelease, which would be absolutley required, that would help.

But, you bring up a lot of valid points, all of which would need to be addressed.

But let's be real, I think we'd all be a hell of a lot more interested in a CC6 than a rerelease of CC5.[/u]

#4: Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:42 am
—
CC5 is my favorite version and it really only needs the bugs fixed. Thus I would like a re-release as it will;

- it has a higher chance of being done since it is less work than CC6
- will be here before CC6
- will fix the compatibility problems some have with XP
- will be a better base for all our favorite mods

#5: Author: dacman82, Location: Perth, Australia

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:56 am
—
I personally have been dissatisfied with the CoI release as it didn't really bring anything new to the table yet i had to pay full price ($83AUD) for a game which I basically already own. I thought it would be worth it as there would be an influx of new players from which I would have no problems finding a game I have troubles getting a game at GS) but now I constantly find BHQ empty.
Overall I dont think a rerelease would be worth it for the money I'd have to pay and as Mooxe mentioned it would split the community into the haves and have nots. I'm not sure if Matrix is using these rereleases as a test for the elusive cc6 but if they are I believe they should invest all the time and money into going straight for the new product. All I've seen lately is a lot of dissension and dissapointment (my opinion...) and Id hate it to have a ngative effect on the eventual release of CC6.

#6: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:05 am
—
Based on the CoI release...I'm not really too keen on the idea of another 'remake or repackage' of the CC series. Making the remake version incompatible with the original release is not a good idea.
Why not just re-release the games as is...with maybe some additional bonuses like extra maps, extra campaigns and ops, maybe extra units, what if scenarios etc.
A re-release of CC5 with bonus stuff would be more appealing...maybe market the game as "CC5 Collector's Edition", "CC5 Gold" or something like that.
Old CC5 fans will certainly buy the re-release (especially if it's sold at budget price) and new players can (maybe) also join in on the fun more easily.
As for the bugs...they need fixing...but if it makes the fixed CC5 incompatible with the original (for H2H and mods)...it will be just like CoI...the need for all mods to be upgraded...H2H players split in two (people with the original game, and players with the new version). We've lived with the CC5 bugs for how many years now? I've gotten used to them Smile

As for incompatibility with new OS and new Systems...why not just keep the original CC5.exe...and work on a launcher program instead. Something like the utility available at CSO...a program that disables directdraw and various other settings before launching the game...maybe couple that with a good CPU slowdown software to deal with the fast scrolling problem.

#7: Author: RD_Cobalth-77,

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:36 am
—
I am not waiting for the re-release of CC5.

In fact for the same reason why I didn't buy COI. It would cost me a lot more than 49.99 US dollars (+shipment + taxes).
I bought CC3 years ago, together with CC1 & CC2 (the Trilogie version) for not even a third of that price!
To me Simtek & Matrix are not helping us, they are only helping themselves. We already bought their games years ago. Now they are telling us to throw those games away and buy them AGAIN, and even for a higher price.
If they really want to help us, they should release only a patch (like the 50.1)for free ( or for a few dollars). So that it is easy to install and there will be NO players with different versions online.
If that is not possible, then leave it as it is. And they should be busy with CC6. They can change all the bugs and bad things from the previous Close Combat games and even ad a lot of new features in the new CC6 game.

Of course, as always, ...SHOW ME THE MONEY !!!

#8: Long live CC6------ Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 10:37 am
—
Hm

First its ofcose good that CC still is commercially alive..

-If Sim Tec would realise an “update” or a bug fix for CC5 it would be grate preferable without cost as it just to fix bugs, or low cost for XP etc compatiblety.

-To realise the CC series in again, as with CoI, and CC4new, CC5new would not do much for bring new players in.

-A divert community… Confusion, incompatibility in a small community, yes, lets see, hmm CC2, CC3, CC4, CC5, CoI-CC3, CoI-CC4, CoI-CC5 ?? The problem here is ppl will be in different places, and to few ppl in a game room will make the game die.. Few will draw new ppl into a empty room.

My X-mas list…
The most natural way to fix the “bugs” in CC and whatever, is just to make CC6, with a mod swop system in it. Ie; it would also be able to run CC3-4-5 reg as mod’s (maybe even CC2 or just a conversion of CC2 system). “How about that for sales argument ..”

The new CC6 platform would be worked with to the ultimate perfection, and with one system all effort would be put in to it, not as it will be today with 3+ systems. Most CC players would then be in one game room, thus have a larger community.
A flourishing CC community under a single umbrella.
A CC6 system witch is back compatible and have the new wanted stuff in it.

BG or points for force pool? In CC6 should have both, with a click one select if to select trops with either points or BG, making it compatible with both main wills in the community.

Get a uniform system, a new system, a umbrella for the whole community..

Stalk

#9: Author: king_tiger_tank, Location: the Band and State of Kansas

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 11:54 am
—
actually i wouldn't mind it, cause someone has to fix the bad AI problem anyways.

#10: personally, Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 12:24 pm
—
I'd love to see CCV fixed and done over like CoI.

i have had close to 6 months of CoI bliss(after a 3 year+ absence of CCIII), mostly AI though, i put myself through Vista hell...then new modem firewall hell....

to the cc2/3/4/5 combination'umbrella' it cant and wont happen, im no tech man, but even i know the engines are all so unique...

cost of CoI, the download for 49 bucks, no shipping dude!

IF ALL of mooxes sujestion for a major fix are implemented, with a new GC, new maps, mod swap,and maybe a few kool features from CCM family(debussing/enbussing) i'd pay $100+ anyday! consider this: i have played ccv for what, 7 years on and off,for like $50? i'd get another few years out of ccv re release i garanted!,considering other games are lucky to last a 'normal' person some weeks/months!...but years! my god...its like a cent a day!

yes bring on cc6!

i'd even give cc2 another crack if re released!

#11: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 1:03 pm
—

king_tiger_tank wrote:

actually i wouldn't mind it, cause someone has to fix the bad AI problem anyways.

ahhh...completely forgot about the poor AI! The AI MUST be fixed in the rerelease. But fixing the AI would probably mean a new upgraded version of CC5 not compatible with the original version...decisions...decisions Rolling Eyes

#12: Author: Blackstump, Location: Hunter Valley Australia

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 2:32 pm
—
my opinion... to bloody late.. we the community own ccv now ... give us the key to the engine .. or we boycott simtec on any future games they try to to sell us... together we stand divided we fall... im just not damn well interested in giving up the work that has been done by people who dont ask for a cent ... for the thousands of hours they have spent making my life enjoyable.. if this version of ccv goes down then so do i... and i can honestly say ive never played another pc game..spend my money on another ccv and lose all my mods NO BLOODY WAY..

#13: Re: personally, Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 4:43 pm
—

Stalky wrote:

My X-mas list…

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

to the cc2/3/4/5 combination'umbrella' it cant and wont happen, im no tech man, but even i know the engines are all so unique...

Well, it was not directed to a “tec man”. It was my X-mas list, thus directed to Santa to make my dream come true….

What can and can’t be done is beside the point at this stage; it’s what best for the community and ultimate CC gaming it’s about… Its a goal... Then one have to accept limitations for many reasons…

But... Is it a dream situation to have 8 CC-platforms as we are currently heading toward? I have my doubts...

Think about it:
We today play CC4 in CC5 as mod, thus take advantage of the better system in CC5, still with CC4 maps and units… We would in same way play CC5 in CC6 platform, etc, with all the improvements of firewall, Win XP, AI, and this and that advantages.. Still in one place and under one platform, CC6...

Stalky

PS: I would rush to get CC6 and spend my money on it!

#14: Author: Pzt_penguin,

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 6:05 pm
—
I think a patch would be better than a re-release, but that means no money
for simtek so I doubt thats gunna happen. :zzz

I really doubt a re-release of the same old thing is going to generate that much buzz or sales. That and how the re-release sounds right now it would be a patch that cost 30 to 40 bucks. Sad

I mean if your going to do that why not take the time and just re-do the hole thing and make a new version. Take close combat into the 21 century. I mean you don't have to have dazzling graphics to make a great game look at paradox's hearts of iron series. Thats my 2 cents Smile

#15: Author: LitFuel716,

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 7:00 pm
—

Blackstump wrote:

my opinion... to bloody late.. we the community own ccv now ... give us the key to the engine .. or we boycott simtec on any future games they try to to sell us... together we stand divided we fall... im just not damn well interested in giving up the work that has been done by people who dont ask for a cent ... for the thousands of hours they have spent making my life enjoyable.. if this version of ccv goes down then so do i... and i can honestly say ive never played another pc game..spend my money on another ccv and lose all my mods NO BLOODY WAY..

Uh, actually no, you don't own it...someone bought the rights so they can do what they want. I just don't see the problem, you make it sound like CC is on top of the charts without any re-releases(it's not by the way). If there is to be a CC6 and beyond a little extra income and interest has to be generated.
I've noticed on Ebay since COI went on sale that Ebay sales for the other CC games have definitley increased, and the bids have gone up a bit for stuff that was easy to pick up for a few bucks(exceptCC3, and many of these sales are copies)...so it is increasing interest from the old and the new players. I love the series and I'll buy anything that comes along that has fixes or lot's of new maps or whatever...I know much thought is of the versions being compatible online but I really think most have no clue how many actually just play this single player, bad AI or not. I think you would be stunned..for all the hype for all games these days for online play it's a fact that over 50%(i'm setting it low) play single only no matter the game. I play most of my games single as well, so the how many people are playing online argument really doesn't tell the whole story. If the re-release improves the AI a bit and with some of those mentioned fixes it has to be a good thing. Personally, I was rooting for a CC2 re-release but I'm sure there are doing 5 because of the mods available and it needs the most fixing. I have a feeling if it wasn't for the fact you guys play online all the time you wouldn't have a beef but there are far more then you out there who see's this differently who don't.

#16: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2007 9:45 pm
—
What I think Litfuel is missing though is this online community was just as important as the modders in keeping this game alive. If the online community was not around either playing or posting in forums, there'd be no feedback on the mods. There'd be nobody saying how great they were, or providing support. Think about it, if it wasnt for CSO, TH, Cases, CCS and every other site out there, what would we have now? Probably nothing. The re-releases are coming out because we still have an online community.

What blackstump means by us owning CC5 shouldnt be interpreted legally. This is our community, the online players, the (single) players who play mods, the modders and everyone else who feeds thier CC habit from online resources. We kept this game going this long. We made it successful for our needs. Our community isnt just the people who play in Gamespy or BHQ. Our community is what made CC last. Many of us feel we have some sort of ownership in what should happen to it since we've been playing and modding it for seven years.

So this comes around to the question on why CC5 is being re-released.

What is the motive?

If you want to make a version thats only catering to the single players out there who do not join the community, then your not helping the people who made this game last.

There are far more single player people out there who do see this differently. They have nothing at stake except whats in thier wallets.

If the motive is money, then fine. It wont benefit our community and we can stop talking about its impact cause we know it wont do anything for us. I am sure Matrix Games cares less about this community, they care more about marketting a product to us by using Simtek to do most of the work, leaving us holding the bag in the end.

LitFuel716 wrote:

Blackstump wrote:

Last edited by mooxe on Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:54 am; edited 1 time in total

#17: Author: Hayduke_C4,

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 3:43 am
—
I haven't been around the CC community for the past couple years, though I've been an avid CC maniac since CC1. Lots of good times at the TH site, where many of you may have remembered me as "folksywisdom". Anyway, most of the bugs I could stand, but after 5 years I think the random game crashing bug and the 0:00 crash bug finally compelled me to stop playing CC. Another factor in stopping was the number of good reliable campaign opponents dwindled online.

There has to be thousands of former players like me just waiting for some new life to be breathed into this game in order to justify a return. I think we need more than the same old game at this point. That should be in the form of a new CC, a CC6, with some graphic improvements and new features we've all been talking about for years. There has to be bellls and whistles added, without altering the essence of the game, to draw in new players. The steady influx of new players is essential to keeping CC alive.

#18: Author: Pzt_Coyote, Location: Zwolle, The Netherlands

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 12:42 pm
—
Thinking about it a patch and re-release would be great offcourse. And I think there could be a way to not divide the community in the process.
If Simtek would just fix the bugs in CC5 and release it like that and offer a patch for free to get the current CC5 compatible with the re-release version, everyone would be happy. They would still sell their re-release, and keep the community happy and growing at the same time. Mods would still need adjusting offcourse.

But if it was up to me (and the resources were available for Simtek, don't know anything about that) I'd say leave the re-releases and go straight for CC6, implementing all the goodies from CCM and RAF, making it really bugfree etc. That I think is the best bet on getting new life into the CC community.

#19: CC6 Author: CR,

Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2007 7:55 pm
—
As a Marketing Exective (yes old people play CC too) that handles issues like this one, this is what you do:

- Expand and deliver a bigger, better and new CC6 game.

How does CC acquire new players? How do rekindle old CC gamers back in the fold?
Do the owners/developers of this game want to make money? Does the on-line commmunity want more members ? Do the modders want all the platforms to work from?

To answer all these questions: you take everything you have done in the entire series, combine it into this new release with all the spit and polish, market the hell out of it and everyone comes out a winner. Yes, money will ultimately win out.

Do not think small, [b]think big.[/b] and better. Everyone wants something new and updated, better value. Doesn't everyone on-line want more potential opponents to play? Nobody wants CC to slide and go away. Send a message, everyone wants something bigger/better, all the different options discussed here wrapped up under one tree. You do that and they can't resist putting something out there that will make them more money and satisfiy everyone' thirst.

Finally, I have been a closet CC player/ fan since CC2 debuted. And I also want to thank all the modders and on-line community. Well done

This debate is great and what makes CC fun to play.

#20: Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:21 am
—
The re-releases, if they are like COI or better,will improve the original games and are the must have version for anyone new to CC. Atomic is gone. They didn't generate enough sales/money for more retail releases. They tried the military route and couldn't make that way either. If it wasn't for Destineer and Simtek CC would be dead. Simtek is a small group but they are all we have as a CC community and they definitely will not grow if the only way people will support CC is by saying they will only download free patches for 10 + year old games....

Wither you agree or not with the price or releases they do some things that I don't believe people can debate;

1 - add some new people to the CC community
2 - bring in money which increases the chance that we do get a new CC
3 - fix issues with XP (not everybody has this problem but a lot do)
4 - improve the platform that the community mods run on
..... a - fixed bugs, commander importance, game volume control, etc.
..... b - modswap is better than the CC config managers
..... c - Matrix is converting the mods (10 so far for COI)

Are there some down sides, of course.

Yes the CC community could be split more with the re-releases but that already happened with CC2 to 5 (I'm still amazed to see the number of people in the CC2 H2H areas). Should 3 or 4 or 5 never have been released since they split the community?

Yes the online part of the game could have used more fixes/improvements. But once you get past learning how to configure your firewall it does work.

Yes the price is high if you have all the games already. But most things aren't free and what money is left after expenses gets split between three companies (Destineer - the source code owner, Simtek - developer and Matrix - distributor). The money these companies get may allow for CC6 and more to be done. You get to decide what do with your money and they get decide what do with theirs. Maybe it will be CC6....

#21: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 3:45 am
—

Quote:

If it wasn't for Destineer and Simtek CC would be dead.

I can only disagree with you on that. Would we all of just quit if they didnt pick up the ball? We've only been given CoI, and some smoke and mirrors about the next version. We started CCS right before both those companies picked up CC. We wouldnt of started this site if we noticed the game was dieing out. We started it because it was going strong.

Quote:

Simtek is a small group but they are all we have as a CC community and they definitely will not grow if the only way people will support CC is by saying they will only download free patches for 10 + year old games....

I disagree again. We have more to this community than Simtek. Like I said Simtek is still new and is only about 2 years old?

Quote:

2 - bring in money which increases the chance that we do get a new CC

Are you saying the new CC is still a dream? Simtek is saying its coming. So exactly what chances are being played here?

Quote:

4 - improve the platform that the community mods run on
..... a - fixed bugs, commander importance, game volume control, etc.
..... b - modswap is better than the CC config managers
..... c - Matrix is converting the mods (10 so far for COI)

Those are good ideas, but in reality I think the best thing is to just make CC6 rather than keep fixing older versions. These would of been awesome fixes a few years ago.

Quote:

split more with the re-releases but that already happened with CC2 to 5

Big difference here. The releases of CC brought a NEW GAME to the table, not a patched up version of the same one.

Quote:

The money these companies get may allow for CC6 and more to be done.

Telling people to buy the re-releases so we MAY get a chance at CC6 is really a bad form of marketting. Its like teaching a dog (thats us) to do a trick (buy rerelease) so he gets the biscuit (CC6).

#22: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 4:51 am
—
Release a free patch to fix the bugs.
For money...re-release commercially CC5 with the patch...say market it as "Gold Edition" "Platinum Edition", or "Collectors Edition" etc. I'm sure a lot of old CC5 players will buy a well packaged rerelease (maybe add extra discs with maps, ops/GCs).
For compatibility issues with new OS/Systems...just work on a good launcher program to deal with the problem.

#23: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:18 am
—
Jeesh,can't you guys take a joke?

A free patch for CCV would be the ideal thing to have.

But

If they add more to the game why can't they charge for it?
There are other bugs lke the hidden veiwing of your opponents FP behind the "P"

Having an online stable CCV is a win/win for everyone.Just the meere fact that were getting one after all these years is amazing to me.

#24: Author: Blackstump, Location: Hunter Valley Australia

Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:37 am
—

squadleader_id wrote:

Release a free patch to fix the bugs.
For money...re-release commercially CC5 with the patch...say market it as "Gold Edition" "Platinum Edition", or "Collectors Edition" etc. I'm sure a lot of old CC5 players will buy a well packaged rerelease (maybe add extra discs with maps, ops/GCs).
For compatibility issues with new OS/Systems...just work on a good launcher program to deal with the problem.

Squad leader hits the nail on the head here...but ill throw the dog a bone, and when i say dog im talking about the developers not the community..as Squadleader said release a patch for the bugs we got now... and make sure its compatable with our mods.. for free.. (since we never got a patch after allready paying for the original game) then repackage the patched version as gold edition or whatever, the majority of this community will re buy the version just to have it tucked away in there vaults.. so lets do the figures there.. umm.. 15000 in the community say $50 abouts.. hmmm now say 2/3rds community buy it, ill be blowed 1/2 a mill, then get on with developing cc6 say another 10,000s buys it theres another 1/2 mill, what im getting at here as im sure destineer, simtek, matrix know.. this is where there buyer base is..this is where there game will filter out from by word of mouth to the other 100,000 players that we talk to about this game who dont ever see the community but are still buyers of the game this is where they get there quick turnover from release ..this is where they can cover there production costs and this is where and i mean the community, we have the power to get what we want... not where they can feed us crap and make us roll over, as a community (you will see unity in that word) we have a very real stake in this game, i think messes simtek, destineer and matrix should take Squadleaders thoughts to heart, if their prepared to keep the community happy by throwing us a bone ( the compatable patch) and we get to keep our mods.. im prepared not to bite them by not buying a patched version that will allow me to use the communities mods and look favourably at buying cc6 if they get around to it... but please dont shove this other crap at me..if they think there marketing campaign can out market this community their wrong..theres been more hours spent building,refining, improving, and selling this game for free.. then they can ever match,, so have a think about that, before you put some bells and whistles on my bike and take the bloody tyres off.

#25: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 5:54 pm
—
I don't see where the new owner of the rights to CC has any obligation to give any of you something for free.
Would it have been nice to have had years ago? sure it would.

Dividing the community?
I don't know the answer to that, time will tell.

But look at it this way your/our game is getting new life,how can you be disspleased with that?

Oh thats right it costs money

And if you Mooxe dont like my posts the bann me,it's your site Mooxe do what you like.
But if I can post I will post what I wish to.

#26: Author: Pzt_Wruff, Location: Pzt Befehl Hauptsitz

Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 8:22 pm
—
What we need is CC compatibility with next generation operating systems. That's the biggest threat to the survivability of this game.

I appreciate what Simteck is doing, though if we can't play CC on our new comps then there's really no point in re-releasing anything.

#27: Author: pvt_Grunt, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 8:26 pm
—
I like COI! It sounds like a confession around here but hey -

Any way, the game plays well, doesnt crash, and it's fun! There's 10 mods available and always a player somewhere to fight with.

Downside - Firewall problems, not compatible, $50 aus, marketing confusion.

So, for a CC5 re-release -

1) - Fix the firewall hassles! MOST important

2) - Simtek says it couldnt implement the changes and keep it compatible. Squadleader's idea is good, but it wont happen. It will kill sales of the re-release if a free patch is available.

3) - I paid $50 for COI, I paid $80 for CC5 years ago when it was new. COI is a better game Out of the Box. What's the issue?

4) - A lot of people thought they were getting a completely new game. CC5 re-release should be called "Gold Edition" "Platinum Edition", or "Collectors Edition" etc. - Good Idea.

Also, use Gamespy, not BHQ. It has more players on it. I think there is some politcs involved here. I think BHQ is a better program, its simpler to use, but the players are on GS. If the firewall issue is resolved it will be easier still.

Grunt

#28: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2007 10:59 pm
—

pvt_Grunt wrote:

2) - Simtek says it couldnt implement the changes and keep it compatible. Squadleader's idea is good, but it wont happen. It will kill sales of the re-release if a free patch is available.

4) - A lot of people thought they were getting a completely new game. CC5 re-release should be called "Gold Edition" "Platinum Edition", or "Collectors Edition" etc. - Good Idea.

Yeah...my idea was what I thought to be the 'ideal win-win solution'...but in the real world...may not happen Smile

But if the "Gold Edition" is well packaged (with extra stuff, maybe extra discs or even on DVD, new more comprehensive rulebooks, historical notes etc) a lot of CC5 players would buy it...the collector's item factor should rope in a lot of sales. Also since the game is 5 years old...some CC5 owners might just want to replace their worn out CDs...but I bet a lot more would buy the game just to complete their CC series collection.
So pricing is important here...Simtek/Matrix might have to sell CC5 Gold Edition as a budget price release. But I don't think that's gonna happen either Wink

Pzt_Wruff wrote:

What we need is CC compatibility with next generation operating systems. That's the biggest threat to the survivability of this game.

I appreciate what Simteck is doing, though if we can't play CC on our new comps then there's really no point in re-releasing anything.

Like I mentioned before...the compatibility issue can be fixed with a good launcher program. Something like CC Launcher...combine it with a CPU slowdown program to fix the fast scrolling...better yet a slowdown program for fast gaming video cards.

#29: Author: Blackstump, Location: Hunter Valley Australia

Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 7:09 am
—

platoon_michael wrote:

I don't see where the new owner of the rights to CC has any obligation to give any of you something for free.
Would it have been nice to have had years ago? sure it would.

Dividing the community?
I don't know the answer to that, time will tell.

But look at it this way your/our game is getting new life,how can you be disspleased with that?

Oh thats right it costs money

And if you Mooxe dont like my posts the bann me,it's your site Mooxe do what you like.
But if I can post I will post what I wish to.

Michael.. i think you missed my point.. when you say our game (CCV) is getting new life.. are you still playing ccv or its mods ? as far as i can see the majority of the community are playing its mods ( supplied here for free by people who love this game ) if the patch isnt compatable then the re release of the same game isnt compatable with us.. why not just get on with making cc6.. if the new owners of ccv rights expect to sell the base game to this community , then they better listen to want we want.. because i for one aint gunna spend my money on ccv again, just to lose my mods.. so yes i am displeased with the concept just as you should be ( do you really want to play ccv without the bugs and sacrifice everybodys hard work on their mods ) i dont see whats so hard about the concept of a compatable patch for free.. then remarketing the "gold edition" i know i would buy it to have my bug free copy compatable with current mods as my second copy to put away for safe keeping...newbies will also buy the game and then be able to download the plethora of mods that keeps this game going.. then simtek should get on with building cc6 that where all waiting for... then the community will be modding it for years to come... as far as i can see we hold the cards for there sucsess.. so united we stand divided we fall as will there company if we dont buy it...no they dont owe us anything for free.. what im saying to them is dont give us ccv again( stoped playing it 5 years ago)in a version that isnt compatable with our mods and expect us to jump thru hoops to buy it... if they want us to buy the game and cc6 after.. how about they make it compatable and we may support the company..if we all stick to gether here this is achievable im sure.. this is a very big buying block as im sure they know... it is possible that they see the modders of this game as a threat to there sales we need to let them know that the modders of this game will increase their sales not detract from them..BTW as far as i can see mooxe was trying to keep the argument on this subject .. not to make a list of what was wrong with ccv, we all know the problems are well listed, and secondly i havent got a problem spending money on somthing that increases my fun but have with somthing that means im stuck with a game i was playing 6 years ago and cant use to play what mod im enjoying now.. just dosnt make value to me..

#30: future of cc... Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 11:57 am
—
future operating systems somebody was talking about,

i have Vista Home premium, on a second HDD, as its not compatable....YET...with HD TV tuner, and ATI driver for my graphics(told 6 months max). but i have CCV(windows 98 compatibility mode) working FINE. CoI works with windows XPsp2 compatibility mode, a 5 second operation(right click on CCV/CoI .exe(icon on desktop) click on properties,the compatibility(make selection of operating system) them click on "apply".

blackstump was talking about 'losing mods' i can tell ya, with CoI,10 mods out(note some getting fixed such as WF10(was 9.1) and vietnam v2 is coming(im testing tonight for simtek) and i can assure you all mods are coming, some are going at it hammer and tong. not just the same, but better!CCV will be surely also be released with major mods(guessing GJS,stalingrad,afrika) at CSO at the same time as commercial release.

cc6 is a major task, look shit happens when u get a rushed game(cciv had maps reduced in size, and quantity(who remembers azinos fiasco lol) and ccv bugs where frequent!

#31: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:08 pm
—
My 2 cents;

Well, what a news, for each one, player, moder, mapmaker, it must be amazing to read than CCV will be redone and that not for free.

Think about this: How a team can make a rerelease of a game when they didnt released any official patch for this game?
Personnaly i guess than if CCV is still played and survived it's mostly cos of
YOU, cos of US. Without some people, without all the player, all the moder CCV would already R.I.P.
That's why i think about CSO simtek and Matrix isnt the good way.
Personnaly i would, if i was able to had any chance to be hearing, i would
say why making price money for any CC older opus rereleased? As those
game is old, been officially in "sleep" by developer so far.

For me Matrix should try to give to the CC community some piece of gift like making any re release for free. Just redone some CC2/3/4/5 DVD and group
them in a Box for a special Gold edition at small price u ll be able to buy all
the CC opus for 50$US. Then any rerelease will be free to download while the community is waiting for CC6.

But i know why they doing that, it's just publicity for CSO simtek and
nothing more. Personnaly i was a CC fan since the begining of the first opus
and personnaly i dont think i ll buy any re release of CC cos i guess i payed
enought in time, money so far for CC.

Other think is: How a developer can make a redone when they dont recruit
our CC veteran? Apparently the team who worked on COI will work on CCV
rerelease, what a joke. They should recruit some of our veteran to help them on what to add to this new CCV.

Last edited by ZAPPI4 on Sat Apr 28, 2007 1:35 pm; edited 1 time in total

#32: Author: RedScorpion, Location: Neverland

Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 3:50 pm
—
my cents, its a fuckin rip off to charge 49USD for a game like Cross of Iron! Its been out since ages. Althow it may be a great game, its just way too much money than whats is honourable. Siding Zappi somehow, I think it would be super with a GOLD edition or such of all CC games and mods and then you could charge like 40USD and get away with it. But hey, try to connect a bit with us thats been here most of the time since CC5, having a community that actually inspired the mod makers to keep on going at certain points. Zappi's idea of having some contact with the old CC5 vanguard for instance wouldnt be bad? We played this game for so many hours on hours, discussing every aspect of it. We will also have something to say about things and how they ought to work. Just some god damn ideas to share anyway.

#33: Hmm Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Mon Apr 23, 2007 5:10 pm
—
Yehhh !

I would prefer to get CC6 first…

Gold ver...
Ultimat CC-Dream pack.. Maybe not everyone’s dream, some will not play this and that ver, but, all in one place, will make community stronger. Play over diff CC ver is possible, easy, take a CC5 game until the CC3 player comes or vice versa. .. Price tag of ??$

Gold Ver..... Razz

Ye, Always someone to play..
Yes, a dream come true…
How to?? Diff exe or whatever... I don’t know...

No matter what... A developer ought in there best interest talk to the main users..
We are the CC5 gamers...
Understand our complains, wishes and our dreams.. Then after reality have its limitations, maybe something can come out that is good..
What good for users will be good for developer...

Stalky

PS: CC3 and COI, I have during last 24 houres, been in CC3 game room 8 times, at one time there was a single player there, the rest of times it was empty.... As i here BHQ is emty to..
In CC5 there was at same times 8 to 11 players, and at one time only 2 players.

#34: my 2 cents... Author: nikits72, Location: Athens/Greece

Posted: Wed Apr 25, 2007 6:46 pm
—
but i dont know if i ll pay for the re-release.It too soon to say. I ll wait and see what will be in there.

Having in mind that we may be in a hurry to make conglution before we see the actual release (will it be something funny like CoI? or something better?)
Although ,from what i read here, it doesnt sound interesting.
But a re-release ,cannot harm the community (this one). I am sure mooxe e.t.c. will create the appropriate sub-forums Smile

so noone will get lost from one more title (if it can be told likewise).

In the contrary.It might be good for the community.

Simtek is a company.
Companies are to gain money.
Even with silly (actually funny) tries as CoI or a cc5 re-release they earn money .
It is ok with me but i am bothered the way they try to do it.But it is their right to do it (since they got the rights Wink

)
Some Veterans of the CC community may feel offended -or even angry- from a so superficial approach to the subject (or so we think).Specially when so many serious mods (like GJS e.t.c. were made for free).

Though, Simtek is not taking much care right now of what CC comunity wants or says (orelse they would make cc6,hopefully in their future plans).
They approach the market in global and they dont work 4 the community ,nor they spend their time on how to help the community cause they know we like CC and will follow ANY (good or bad) CC product ,one way or another ,even for a short period of time ,only as much needed as to give the bucks (even from curiosity to a new CC product).

So the question of how/why Simtek will help the community with a re-release is out of subject (as it seems up to now at least).

The community is here for so many years no matter what.
Have no fear,no harm will be done.Possibly the opposite.

Thx 4 reading this.
Nik.

P.S.1 Thus said having in mind that :
-The interests of the community are not always the same with the interests of the company.
-We should be patient to see first the re-release.

P.S.2. Really ,i am so curious.Is there any reply ,any post from someone from Simtek somewhere around this forum or they totally ignore us?
If there is ,please give me the url to read ,orelse i still love them since they make something (even close to nothing-->see CoI) for CC.

#35: lol Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 6:24 am
—
I do 'testing' for simtek, and i can assure you, there r many others testers here,and some working for simtek are regulars here! almost all are instantly recognisable 'CC Grognads' it shocked even me!

I volentired my time to make it 'good' offer imput and improve the re releases!

And its good to know i can have some imput into cc6 when it comes down(from heaven).

I also concur, a re release cant hurt, like CoI, it bought new blood, and i been hooked for months...remembering i quit cc3 some years ago,i wont return to the 'stock' or even moded version.

#36: Author: nikits72, Location: Athens/Greece

Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 4:40 pm
—
Good to hear that Anzac_Tack is involved somehow.

Do me a favour mate. Protest or suggest for a cc6 title to simtek.
(Maybe you have already done Wink

)

With all the respect to your effort for the betatesting of the re-releases and the changes that these titles have we all know that it is not something that we should HUuuraaaahhhh about. Is it?

Thx,
Nik.

P.S. My question above is retorical and goes to CoI .

#37: Author: Pzt_Mac, Location: Oregon

Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 6:15 pm
—
Like Tacky, I've been doing testing for Simtek. Granted, Tacky only works when there is free beer involved, but he does what he can (Tacky says, "Fosters is the greatest beer in the world").

But from everything that I've heard, CC6 is being produced. And it's not just on the drawing boards, it's actually in the creating/testing phase. So, having an updated CC3 and CC5 with a CC6 right around the corner is fine by me when it's all said and done.

#38: Author: nikits72, Location: Athens/Greece

Posted: Thu Apr 26, 2007 6:27 pm
—
Pzt_Mac also involved?
Cool.
And with cc6 being produced not so bad after all eh?

Thx,
N.

P.S. Athough cc6 is being produced for so many years now,or so it was rumored all this time Twisted Evil

(Excuse me mates for this caustic humorous comment)

P.S.2 So ,if we want to show some good will ,might the re releases are the introduction -to make some noise around for CC to the world ,before the actual CC6 title. (Crowd's voice----->Yeah ,right Twisted Evil

)

#39: Interesting Posts Guys Author: Sulla,

Posted: Fri Apr 27, 2007 12:19 pm
—
Hia Guys,

Ok, the for and against on any re-release has been gone over ad-nauseum. Simple, vote with you wallet Wink

CC6 is happening and is already underway! This will be a bigger advance than seen in any previous version jump before. Much bigger than CC2 to 3 or 4 to 5. This is not only off the drawing board but underway. Not giving too much away, but it will have 5 seperate campaigns and a whole raft of new stuff.

Work will also be starting on what will effectively be CC7. New engine, but CC to the core!

On any testers etc, you all know who you are and NDA's are there for a reason guys! Tak and all of the testers do a very good job and I am bloody sure will have fun testing CC6.

Oh, and I am NOT Spartacus Wink

Sulla or Ceaser were much better IMHO <G>

Sulla

#40: Re: Interesting Posts Guys Author: mooxe,

Posted: Sat Apr 28, 2007 2:57 pm
—

Sulla wrote:

Hia Guys,

Ok, the for and against on any re-release has been gone over ad-nauseum. Simple, vote with you wallet Wink

Sulla or Ceaser were much better IMHO <G>

Sulla

Sulla, it has been gone over alot, but not on these forums. People will tend to express different feelings when not having the developer team moderating thier posts.

To sum up all my feelings on it, I am happy CC6 is being developed, but I just wish CC5 wasnt being redeveloped.

People who stand behind the saying that any new release is good for the community probably dont remember RtB or understand the shotgun effect on sales and advertising.

#41: Author: Pz_Meyer,

Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 4:51 pm
—
It may be that the re-release of CCV will be the direct path to CC6, re-releases are a way of funding the newer projects. Hollywood plays old movies to generate income to make sequels. But personally I wouldn't mind if it was much better than the original as far as game play and better graphics.

#42: What make Close Combat so good -- Author: swallone,

Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 4:53 pm
—
What makes the Close Combat Series is it's scale, and unit strategy. The 2d is enjoyable and more importantly simpler to play and enjoy. Also, it has far more realistic war results, and realistic war simulation then any other game I've played in many years, which is why I keep coming back to it. When you play the mods Close Combat lovers work so hard on you see a dediction and love of realism - the vehicle models, the fire effects, the uniforms! This is what all of us want more of - scale, realism, effect, and history. It would be great to have CC re-released with more of what we love. Then new players would flock to the new game. Come on Matrix, go for it! Take us one level, hell - even two levels higher!

#43: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:20 pm
—
Like Stalky said, it would be very great to let the community of Close combat taking care of any update on re-release about older opus of CC.

Question in 2 part for the actual developer:

1: Dont you think than the community, who made so many mod, unofficial patch etc did a great job?
2: If yes, why not let the community "developping" officially any re-release while developper working on newest opus?
For The game and the community it will be a gift from the developper. From the developper it will be less money to spend in those sort of mod what you named re-release and focusing all the money and the time in the things than THE community is waiting for. CC6

#44: Author: DAK_Von_Manteuffel, Location: Zaragoza (España)

Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2007 11:59 am
—
I, am one of the affected ones, that have bought the C O I , that so great deception caused. Not even I have used it. I think that they would have to concentrate all its energies, about the CC6, adding all the advantages of the CCM and the Royal Air Force, without bugs and to a reasonable price. I want to comment, that in my opinion, the success of the CC5, is because it is easy to obtain, I I have the original one, but many of the CC5 players have obtained a copy, that favors the distribution, single I want to put like example the used operating system more, Windows XP, 70% of the programs, are copies.

#45: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Tue May 01, 2007 1:14 am
—
Howdy,

This is the only thread I have actually moderated in this forum. Please keep your replies inline with the 1st post, or inline with the idea of this thread while replying to someone elses reply. Any off topic posts will simply be moved the OT version of this thread. Thank you.

#46: Author: 7A_Ghoa10, Location: Spain

Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 11:48 am
—
i think the only way to save and increase cc comunity is CC6 , i am waiting this game for years and i cant understand why this companies are making re-released of old cc games instead put all the efforts to develop the new CC6,which must be in my opinion more than 1vs1,because if only make new maps, teams ..... will be like other mod of cc

#47: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Wed May 02, 2007 1:09 pm
—
I would like to say more..

First things, i dont want to attack anyone. developper, tester etc...
My word can seems to be agressif, and i'm sorry about that. But
u may change side and look all this from gamer eyes.
We took care of any CC ( when i say we, i means the entier community)
We maded mod, unofficial patch cos we were waiting for this from developper
and as it didnt came we did it ourself.
Why did we do that? simply cos we saw the CC capacity
and wanted to add more fun in it. Also we tryed to fix bug
who maded game unplayable sometime.
The community took the place of the developper while
the delopper didnt send us any hand, any effort on it.
So i know actual developper wasnt the developer who put CC in sleep for so long.
But actual developper should heard us and look than what we waiting is:
- a new Opus with all CC feeling all in new socket.
- Some recognition of the power and capacity to made a nice game
to the community by, for exemple, let us making any patch or mod
( like it was as now) for any older CC.
- Keep the community active by adding any new opus in line of our community ( and not trying to split it by making re-release uncompatible with other older CC game)
- Using the entier community evolving in CC6 or any re-release.
As we v got so many player, moder who work or play at CC since 10 years now.
Do you know than someone else will know better the game than thos older CC gamer?
Anyways, i'm happy for CC to see than we had right to still on this game and than our deeper dream will, apparently, bring early. I have nothing more to say than:
Viva CC, Viva the community, Viva us

#48: Author: CSO_Linebacker,

Posted: Sat May 05, 2007 8:56 pm
—

ZAPPI4 wrote:

1: Dont you think than the community, who made so many mod, unofficial patch etc did a great job?
2: If yes, why not let the community "developping" officially any re-release while developper working on newest opus?

Basically, everybody who is working on it, testing it, etc. are all longtime members of the modding community.

#49: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Sat May 05, 2007 9:42 pm
—
Yeah for sure, you arent stupid enought to use rookie i guess.
But where are the real veteran, i means the one who play CC for long time
but the one who played many battle.

I know each one of your tester, and a good part of your developer.
But excuse me i dont see any real veteran. Well dont let me say what i
dont say.
i means i dont see those real veteran in your team, of course many of them are veteran of CC but for sure they arent veteran of CC gameplay.
If u care i can made a list with all those Real veteran than who waiting for any call from u Wink

But i know u ll dont need it, cos u think u got a good team, and u got a
good team but not the better one.
Anyways good luck and trust me u ll pass side of many things by not using our real CC veteran cos u know the mens who made the game arent the mens who play with it. After 10 years of CC online, i never seen any moder around constantly to play Wink

#50: ? Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 8:00 am
—
zappi, is the translation correct? 'real veterans'?

'edited original'

bad to answer when drunk....

burp...

cc nutz 11th year...

#51: Author: king_tiger_tank, Location: the Band and State of Kansas

Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 11:22 am
—
If they're going to make a re-release of another Close Combat game, they should do CC4, since it has many problems.

#52: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 1:05 pm
—
real veteran yes, well i means true veteran

True veteran = men who been around CC for long time
who played many, many, many time

#53: Author: Pzt_Mac, Location: Oregon

Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 5:54 pm
—
There are plenty of veterans involved.

We all have our dream team of who we would want to be working on this, but it's not always possible. But personally I feel that the people involved are all experienced CCers.

Also, as far as I know, anyone could have tested who wanted to as long as they contacted the powers that be and signed an NDA.

I might draw an analogy here between mechanics and drivers - they both love cars - but not everyone can race Wink

#54: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 6:00 pm
—
Yeah Mac; they v got plenty of veteran

But they are just Modder veteran.
The most critical point is why they dont use The true veteran player.

For exemple, i never been contacted by them. But i'm the professionel CC
racer Wink

and i'm not alone to get this experience .
So dont tell me they v got the better team as they dont call the true CC veteran

#55: Author: Pzt_Mac, Location: Oregon

Posted: Sun May 06, 2007 8:00 pm
—
I wasn't suggesting that they had the better team, only a team.

If you're interested in testing, you should contact them. They put out a general call to the public some time ago, so I'm not sure if it's still open, but I'm sure they could use your veteran skillz.

#56: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 4:22 am
—
another "newbie" heard from

I've only been playing h2h since 1999.... real veterans laugh at me when I ask for a game.

"You need to earn your stripes"... "we've been playing since 1997"

#57: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 4:27 am
—
i believe he is talking about the game at the title of the debate ``CC5``,u were probably playing it in 1997 with Mr Smith.

#58: thats the bit i dont get... Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 5:33 am
—
started cc1 when it came out, what, 11 years ago lol...

thousands of games H2H,never made 1 map, naver made 1 mod, cant do graphics, or sounds...just play!

#59: Fooood Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 9:01 am
—
Maybe Z mean, "generalist or specialist"!

Generalist eat any CC,
Specialist only have CC5 on there food menu,

Its not about who know CC best in general.

Food for thoughts...

#60: ... Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 11:41 am
—
....i think thems fightin words...

#61: Author: Blackstump, Location: Hunter Valley Australia

Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 7:23 am
—
hmmm that would make me a specialist then, never played any other game but ccv and mods, that means any other computer game at all,

#62: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 1:02 am
—
Well.... I suppose the thread has run its course.

I find it really funny to me that theres people out there who think I am abusing my authority as a CCS admin by starting this conversation, and by posting a link to it on the main page. Running this site does come with a certain sense of duty to the community. If my duty is to say oh everything is fine, then put my pompoms on and jump up and down saying go go simtek" then I'd be lieing and misleading people. Explain exactly how I am abusing my authority on this site I run. Speak up!

No doubt this makes it look like I am on a some anti-simtek campaign in thier eyes. I can only say to these "yes-men" that you are totally wrong. I do not agree with everything Simtek does. Am I supposed to keep my mouth shut just in case someone gets swayed by my opinion or what? You people need a reality check. CCS is a pretty strong beacon on the internet to attract new gamers no matter what I have to say. They see this support network, and thats more inclination for them to buy into whats selling right now. This site is prepared, preparing and ready to support coming versions of Close Combat from Simtek. I realize who has control of Close Combat right now, but you people I am talking about must think I am blind. This site depends on CC, and for it to be successful in the future, what exactly do you think is going to happen at CCS?

Anybody should be able to stand up and say something is a bad idea, especially in the CSO forums - without getting flamed. I am not a yes man and I dont believe anything with Close Combat stamped on its cover is good for us. I have tried to post my comments in CSO forums, but I get assaulted by the yes-men legions. My point of view is, I do not believe everything Simtek is doing (CC5-re-rel.) is good for the community. I will let it be known.

So you nay-sayers out there, as you have labelled me, speak up and let your opinion be known or shut up!!

Last edited by mooxe on Wed May 09, 2007 12:45 pm; edited 1 time in total

#63: Author: Pz_Meyer,

Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 1:35 am
—
re-releases are only good to unltimately fund new projects like cc6, which may or may not happen if it only depends on prior games being re-released.

The sad reality is that if cc is such a strong game then there shouldn't be a problem making cc6 just happen, because the game will supprot itsself like the other ones did.

And mooxe by all means say what you have to say, and this is a really cool site, hey you even get mods before anybody else!!

Can I post pics of my girl friend?? Very Happy

#64: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 1:49 am
—
how come my thread got moved?
all i said was after sula said there making cc6 and even cc7
all i said is i wouldnt be buying cc5 re release.
i thought it was relevant to the debate i.e it being about CC5 re release debate.
and i dont buy the need to re sell CC3,CC4,or CC5 for having funds for CC6.
company or charity?
doesnt it worry any1 they have CC7 planned,before having funds for CC6 to go ahead.
or is it part of the plan to make us rebuy CC6 & CC7 re releases as well?
simply coz they get rushed thru,how can seriously contemplate CC7 without knowing of the CC6 bugs which may arise.
i never asked for a CC5 rebuild,only ever asked for CC6.
i sure as hell wont feel guilty about not buying CC5 re release
CC6 is the future not 8-10y.o rebuilds.

#65: its time Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 7:54 am
—
yes its time to put this post to the general forum where it belongs, where i think it should of been the entire time.

#66: Author: Antony_nz,

Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 9:09 am
—
They have to fix the problem when you disband your unit with no supplys you keep the tanks, At guns ect.

They need to fix that.

#67: Re: mmm Author: mooxe,

Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 12:47 pm
—

ANZAC_Lord4war wrote:

how come my thread got moved?
all i said was after sula said there making cc6 and even cc7
all i said is i wouldnt be buying cc5 re release.
i thought it was relevant to the debate i.e it being about CC5 re release debate.
and i dont buy the need to re sell CC3,CC4,or CC5 for having funds for CC6.
company or charity?
doesnt it worry any1 they have CC7 planned,before having funds for CC6 to go ahead.
or is it part of the plan to make us rebuy CC6 & CC7 re releases as well?
simply coz they get rushed thru,how can seriously contemplate CC7 without knowing of the CC6 bugs which may arise.
i never asked for a CC5 rebuild,only ever asked for CC6.
i sure as hell wont feel guilty about not buying CC5 re release
CC6 is the future not 8-10y.o rebuilds.

I think most would have a hard time disagreeing that CC6 should be the priority now.

#68: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 4:40 pm
—
When i came online to play for the first time i was looking for The server
where i ll found mod patch and forum. Naturatly i goes to CSO.
Of course CSO was the only dedicate server for CC.
I was so happy and saw the server really good for all i was searching.
It was around 10 years ago. Since my first visit the server never changed.
Of course it changed as many mod ans new CC opus came online.
But the server always look like a real big bazard.

With all the other admin, we decided to take the payement for a server.
We payed from our pocket just to take the community aware of all mod and
news about CC. We managed ( some admin more than so other... Very Happy

)
to keep all mod updated as fast as possible. We spend many hours to take care
of CCS and the CC comunity. And it worked, cos the community saw CCS
admin playing like them. Yes we was even online to play, to meet the
comunity. On the battlefield or simply to speak.

Some month ago i heard than CC isnt death. Woaw, new opus will come.
Wondefull. But what was my disappointment when i saw than, except some
post at CSO forum, no one from developer came here and posted officially
something to say to you all the CC comunity this wonderfull news.
No one came, and no one will come. What a pitty, for me it look like
if the developper dont care about CCS comunity. They have 5 admin to
contact if they care but nothing. Yes CC is alive, but the community look
like splitted in 2. Well of course CSO server working any official CC release.
And what about CCS? Nothing. Well i'm a human and i can understand the
vanity in all that. But anyways, CCS will still stucked at the CCS comunity
and at all the CC comunity. They dont want us? Ok but where are all the CSo modder? I means when do you see them?
Someone had already played oagainst one?
When did they come to play?
They play between them for sure. As i never
see them on GS.
But never mind, we will follow CC and will post anything than we wanted to post.
We dont need any permition or so to do that.

#69: I Will Not Buy The Released CC5 because of the following.... Author: Steelgunner,

Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 10:25 pm
—
First of all, I am still pissed at the re release of CC3. The bugs where not fixed there and its just an updated mod on a disk...... just like Marks disk he did for the mods he put on a disk. Marked did not ask for money, just shipping and the cost of the disks...... I gave him a few extra bucks for his time and for the fact he did not ask for any money. The so called room lobby does not work and I have yet to play a game online with anyone in their lobby!!! WiLLL THAT BE FIXED FOR CC5? Their re release of CC3 was far from seamless.... so I do not expect the CC5 re release to be seamless.

It was not worth the $50 dollars I spent ( Release of CC3 ) ....... I have got so many years of fun through the other Mod Makers that did not have the greed in their pockets and gladly made mods for the community for the sake of the game. I salute you even more. ( The Mod Makers! )

Do not buy this release, i no someone will post it up on a free download site for free at a later date, which I found the CC3 re release game there too. Too late for me, they have my $50 bucks.

Maybe the gang behind this is thinking of re releasing Pac Man too! Razz

#70: steelgunner Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 5:45 am
—
steelgunner, have you been to the help forum at cso/simtek?

i could get your BHQ running within minutes if you posted ur problems(like going into CoI folder,then CCIII folder, opening "support" folder, installing "close combat CC" and maybe the other 2 files may be needed(microsoft VM and IE support)...the forum has much more help, also sounds like firewall issues, i had these, but a simple 5 minute port forwarding and or nortons/zone alarm allowing also might be the problem,lastly u need to sign up to BHQ, a reply takes a minute or 2,then get password and ur off!(dont forget to add CoI to play list)

i tested CoI for months....put it on my AMD PC(win xp then win vista home premium!), my wifes HP PC(win xp)and my laptop toshiba with win xp, it worked first time on all....i even linked 2 at a time(1 wireless) for LAN games.

its a shame you have had problems, its good to have CCIII bought back to Windows XP standards,and bugs fixed, im a big fan of the new GC also.

#71: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 6:18 am
—
yer that was kool all that stuff that Mark done for free.

#72: Re: steelgunner Author: RedScorpion, Location: Neverland

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 1:20 pm
—

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

its good to have CCIII bought back to Windows XP standards,and bugs fixed, im a big fan of the new GC also.

sorry for interrupting again, mooxe and others, but did they actully fix any bugs of stock CC3? an updated version of CC5 would enhance its worthiness of our hard-earned money for sure.

#73: Author: Vman,

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 8:24 pm
—
I think they should forget about making any more remakes and just start working on CC6 ASAP. We don't want the same thing in a new package, we want a new thing in a new package. That is what will bring new customers and players to the CC franchise.

#74: Author: AT_kampf,

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 9:50 pm
—

mooxe wrote:

What is the motive?

.

[/quote]

looks to me that they need funding for a cc6 and this is there only way to build up enough resourses for a cc6 release

#75: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Thu May 10, 2007 10:42 pm
—
business loan.
they need to be confident that what they have to sell will sell.
with that confidence,a business loan is not a problem.
delivering the goods and selling them is.

#76: Author: Colossos,

Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 3:04 pm
—
Hi all,

I am a big CC fan too and from the moment COI came out , I downloaded it (after paying ofcourse) and played for like 15 minutes to realise it is exactly the same as CC III. Can anyone tell me what they really changed?? And yes, I know the Matrix site gives all the improvements but I cant seem to see them.
Ok, the game code is old and for them it is difficult now to allow everyone easy access to multiplayer games with all the routers and firewalls. So forget all the multiplayer aspects they give with the game because NO ONE is playing it online because of the many problems!!!!! Ok ok, I can understand that. But than they say "Improved AI". Woohoo, improved AI I thought and played watching the so-called AI in action: Let me tell you that they didnt change ANYTHING AT ALL! They just ripped of the money of fans who love the CC series.
And now they are going to do the same with CC5??
For anyone who is doubting about the re-release of CC5: Just look what they did with CCIII and COI.
CoI: - no multiplayer , no single-player (yes, the AI is THAT bad)

A disappointed fan (please start with CC6)

ps: One guy said it right once: I can set up my team in the beginning of the game, press the begin button, leave my pc , come back half an hour later, get a decisive victory...

#77: Author: campcreekdude,

Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 12:30 am
—
id buy Close Combat 5 or any close combat series that i see in the store!

They should have a pack with Close combat 1-5.

I would want new stuff if they plan on re-releasing it... But if not it will probably be in the $9.99 bin at wal-mart. Where i found Close Combat battle of the Buldge.. re-released under "super savings series" ubisoft.

All close combat games are worth buying.
oh yea the only one i own is Close Combat 4.. too hard to find any in store anymore.
i gave up looking a a long time ago.

#78: Author: Hutche,

Posted: Sat May 12, 2007 2:04 am
—
My wish would be a fix so you can jump from the zoomed out screen in battle to the zoomed in screen by clicking on the area of the map you want to zoom in on, so you dont have to use that damn -/+ button. If you get what I mean.

Also it would be great for them to sort out the compatability issues. Bringing back some of the cool things that were in 1, 2 and 3 would also be good. As long as they dont blow the original concept.

Making battlefields and battlegroups larger with allies function could enable 2+ multiplayer. My fear is that if they dont re-release, the game will slowly die. But they probably only care about dollars so it will probably be a failure.

Anyway I could go on forever.

#79: Author: TTorpedo, Location: Portugal

Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 11:23 am
—
Hi all. Very interesting points/ discussion going on here.
For myself i would rather have all the efforts going in the build of CC6. I would prefer to have it for 100$ than to pay 35$ X3 for each re-release.. (that i now i will).
I bought COI as i did´t one CC3 or have ever played it, CC5 is still my favourite but since I got a 22 inch monitor it looks like crap ( not to mention dual core...) where COI looks fantastic (having sometimes 3/4 of the map on screen). The point is that although the CC gameplay is still unbeatable, the little annoying tec aspects are detracting new and past users to comeback.
This said i would prefer a Gold release with the same games 1 to 5, with "just" the technical/ compatibility aspects resolved, together with a free patch for the community of course. I would pay the same 100$ to found it, no questions asked.

CC6 seem to be shaping as the last of the series on this engine ( apparently CC7 will use a new one!) probably will use all the features already implemented on the Military Sims versions, along with up to 10 h&h. so it as all the potential to unite the community on a stable xp/ vista compatible platform. And attract some of the past (million!) players that abandoned the series, something that a re-release cannot fulfil.
I´m afraid no new players will embrace the new CC without a new engine.

PS: By new engine i don´t mean 3D, a little off post but have a look:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xpd_D_SY0x8

#80: Author: kweniston, Location: Netherlands

Posted: Wed May 16, 2007 1:01 pm
—

Hutche wrote:

Making battlefields and battlegroups larger with allies function could enable 2+ multiplayer.
.

2 vs 2 or even 3 vs 3 coop multiplayer, with a left flank/center/right flank deployment would be much fun I think (!), though I guess that's never going to be implemented.
I can imagine giving orders via Teamspeak to my 2 officers on both flanks: "I don't give a damn! Send those boys in or I'm gonna have you courtmarshalled!" Twisted Evil

OT: I don't care for rereleases, just give us a new game. The video game industry makes lots of money (more than Hollywood), and with some loans/sponsors/etc it should be feasible to do this without rereleasing old games for some $.

#81: Author: Pzt_Wruff, Location: Pzt Befehl Hauptsitz

Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 12:42 am
—

kweniston wrote:

CCM did it. It was buggy as hell, but I must say that we did have a couple of very memorable 3v3 battles. 3v3 CC is so awesome.

#82: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 11:44 am
—
for sure cooperative game in 3Vs3 will be very great
But
what's happening in case of disconection from one or more player?
It's the real problm in this kind of game.

#83: Author: TTorpedo, Location: Portugal

Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 11:52 am
—
Ai should take over that player units. And if possible only is team should be aware of that fact.

#84: Author: Mistmatz,

Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 11:57 am
—

ZAPPI4 wrote:

for sure cooperative game in 3Vs3 will be very great
But
what's happening in case of disconection from one or more player?
It's the real problm in this kind of game.

Autoassigning troops to another player with a message for instance. Or pause the game and let the remaining players distribute the troops among each other. Of course no option of assigning orders in that time. Wink

#85: Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 7:05 pm
—
Let me be the first to say I think that the CC3 re-release was actually worse in some ways from the original CC3. But CSO did not shy away from what was going to be included and done in the CC3 re-release. So naturally with all the people never bothered to research they were angry for getting the exact same game. They priced it at $50, which is completely absurd for anyone who already owns the original.

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 8:12 am; edited 1 time in total

#86: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 7:32 pm
—
Maybe so Troger (I don't know)

But atleast you can buy the game now,and the price will drop just like all games do.Hopefully they will keep the online download up and running for many years.

50 bucks is still better than the $100+ people were asking for on e-bay for CCIII.

The best bet on the re-releases should be CCV (inmho)

Ofcourse i'm probably still stuck with noone wanting to play CCIV no matter how many times it gets re-released. Sad

Letting the A.I. control units if a player is droped?
Oh god no please
Divy them up between who is left still playing.

#87: Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 9:05 pm
—
That is the only upside to re-releasing, it's easier for people to get the game. Unfortunately not the game we are all playing, that we all paid full price for years ago!

Matrix Games has no history of lowering the prices of games substantially, so that's a pipedream.

Developers gave those who already owned CC3 no real reasons to get CoI (I'm sure it'll be the same case with CC5 re-release).

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 8:08 am; edited 1 time in total

#88: Author: king_tiger_tank, Location: the Band and State of Kansas

Posted: Mon May 21, 2007 9:36 pm
—
I agree with everything you say troger and i've came to a conclusion, Matrix games company is a bunch of lazy ass people who only edit old games and charge 50 bucks for it, when you could go to ebay and buy it 40 cheaper and actually have a quality game.

#89: Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 5:34 pm
—
I don't think Matrix Games is really to blame KT, CSO Simtek are the ones who 'made' it. Matrix Games is just the publisher, but a couple of those Matrix guys are CCrs so if they played the game before it was released they would know nothing new was created.

To their credit, and I've always said this; they did not shy away from the fact of what was done to CoI. SO if anyone felt 'cheated' by buying the CC3 re-release, it's their fault because CSO said exactly what was changed. That still doesnt excuse the price they want for the game.

They may be making some profits but I'm sure it has some people questioning their goals.

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 8:10 am; edited 1 time in total

#90: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 6:28 pm
—
Anyways,

Redone a 10 years old game look like Space invader or Pacman redone.
At least those classic game was for free or for a very low price.
What does they wanted by redone older sleeped game?
Does they feel really to conquer RTS world by this?
Or does it was a gift for all CC fan?
In this latest option, the game should be free.
Like i said below, The game stil alive cos the community keep it alive for so long.
So why trying to drip the community with COI, RTB,CCM...?
Only 2 solutions for reply to this question.
Or they are stupid.
or this is only vanity.
I guess you know my view on which solution it's

#91: Why?? Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Tue May 22, 2007 9:19 pm
—
CC3 re-relese is named under COI name, why???

I’m thinking, would not "CC3-new edition" or whatever be more appropriate and more describing of the contents?

What will CC5 re-relise be named ?

How about Close Combat Knight's Cross with Golden Oak Leaves, Swords and Diamonds

Wow, I pay 1000 $ anyday for it, add a plastic medal in the box, and I pay 2000 $

Uhhh...

Stalk

#92: Author: kweniston, Location: Netherlands

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 12:37 am
—
I guess many of us feel the same way, stop with rerelease crap, if you really want to do something for the WWII CCS fans, bring us a new game, which we are all willing to pay for.

It's up to them. Any more rereleases without significant changes I'll be willing to download and delete, not pay for. Worthless rereleases are worth... exactly... nothing.

#93: Author: Blackstump, Location: Hunter Valley Australia

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 6:03 am
—
As ive said before..the majority of this community dont want a re release of ccv that isnt compatible with all our mods... so give us the compatible patch for free... this will make us sing the praise's of the makers and make us salvitate for the coming of cc6( and i dont care who owns the company now , its a fact we all payed for ccv and NEVER GOT A PATCH.. )i wont care how much cc6 will cost, ill pay it.. but if you cut the community in pieces buy selling a non compatible ccv patch, then dont expect me for one, to jump thru hoops to support your company.. ill wait to get a pirated copy and use your profit margin to buy beer and smile everytime i play YOUR GAME FOR FREE...not only this.. if everyone took my advice on this, and you look at the membership of just this community and each individuals circle of friends who play this game and never get on gamespy or ccs, then your looking at a substansial number of ccvers who are potential cc6ers.,. pissing us off wont help your profit margins... believe me...

#94: Author: king_tiger_tank, Location: the Band and State of Kansas

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 5:11 pm
—
yeah if none of us were to buy the re-release of CC5, they would lose a large amount of profits, which would probably send them the message that we want something different, thus would probably mke CC6 come alittle faster, but then again i could be wrong.

#95: Author: RD_Cobalth-77,

Posted: Wed May 23, 2007 7:06 pm
—
I'll ad a third solution, Zappi: it's both of them. They are stupid AND it is vanity!

#96: Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Thu May 24, 2007 7:27 pm
—
I don't really care about compatibility with mods (although that's another factor to consider). It's all the other things I've mentioned. CSO is actually working on porting CC3 mods over to CoI, so they would probably make the same effort with CC5 mods.

The main issue is; they won't offer anything new.

I think it's in bad taste to be wasting the community's and their own time on this venture.

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 8:05 am; edited 1 time in total

#97: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sun May 27, 2007 12:20 pm
—

Quote:

The main issue is; they won't offer anything new

Maybe/maybe not as far as the game goes.

One of "The biggest" things to look forward to inmho is someone who is working with the code on a regular basis.
I would assume and I use that term loosely would be the hopes of seeing newer and better tools to edit CC.

If they can't put forth the time effort to give us all the things we want due to time/money.
I atleast hope they will be able to allow us the means to edit more of the game and possibly be able to add things to it.

Things like no more blank slots in things like the Terrain file,the Scrngdg etc etc. "more crushable elements".more moveable items through the RTB Tool.Easy editing of support.
I mean the list is never ending.

NO MORE HEX EDITING and NO MORE DOS PROGRAMS TO EDIT CC.[b]

Atleast thats one of the biggest things I look forward to.

oh btw I am not on the projects team anymore so I hope that concludes my "Yes Man" approach to the re-releases.
I just don't have the time or means to do it,thus allowing me more time to be a Troll Smile

#98: Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Mon May 28, 2007 3:04 am
—

platoon_michael wrote:

Only new tool you are going to get is a Mod-Swap (aka Plugin Manager), wait a second... don't we already have that? Oh yes we do, but it be official, whoopie!!!

I hope the modding area does get some upgrades, most of the time a games community can create better work..

The editing area needs updating but I doubt you'll see new modding tools with re-release.

#99: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 2:48 am
—

Quote:

To their credit, and I've always said this; they did not shy away from the fact of what was done to the mod (basically everything I said above). SO if anyone felt 'cheated' by buying the CC3 re-release, they're idiots, because CSO said exactly what was changed. But that still doesnt allow them to slap a price tag such as $50 for work they basically didnt do...

CSO_Beeblebrox did say that in the forums. However, Matrix mentioned nothing official or even unofficially about this on thier storefront.

#100: Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 7:41 am
—

mooxe wrote:

CSO_Beeblebrox did say that in the forums. However, Matrix mentioned nothing official or even unofficially about this on thier storefront.

Well maybe not on their storefront but the Matrix forums had most if not all of the information that the CSO forums had.

I may be different here but when I am prepared to spend money, almost regardless of price, I research what I'm buying. I wouldn't ever buy a game until I demoed it or felt confident through research that is worthwhile.

I hope those people who felt cheated (and rightly so) learned a lesson. Laughing

#101: Author: Pzt_Mac, Location: Oregon

Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 6:57 pm
—
Because I am a tester for SimTek I have been given a unique opportunity and instight into the future of Close Combat.

And although everything is top secret, I will say this:

CC6 will infact be the best thing the Close Combat series has ever seen to date, bar none. The odds of people playing CC5 on the scale that we do now after CC6 is released is slim. I'm not saying it will happen immediately, infact b/c of the following CC5 has, it will probably take some time. And yes there will be tweaks and patches that will need to happen like anyother game, but in time CC5 will go the way of CCIV and CCIII before that.

With that in mind, let the CC5 rerelease happen with a smile. If you want a classic, by it. If not, then use the copy you already have and continue to play H2H with the fanatics who hang out in GS. I highly doubt there will be some big overlap of players with the new version and the old version. CC6 will come before that can ever happen most likely.

So, CC5 rerelease will generate income for the creators as they produce CC6... and beyond.

#102: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 7:27 pm
—

Quote:

CC5 rerelease will generate income for the creators as they produce CC6

How many times have we heard its being done for the money now? If thats the motivation behind this product then they are taking Close Combat where it shouldnt be going.

#103: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 9:39 pm
—
yer pretty insulting to be honest,to still be playing that line.

#104: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Tue May 29, 2007 11:45 pm
—

Pzt_Mac wrote:

So, CC5 rerelease will generate income for the creators as they produce CC6... and beyond.

Won't CC6 and beyond generate income when they friggin release it? Very Happy

#105: Re: mmm Author: Pzt_Mac, Location: Oregon

Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 1:02 am
—

ANZAC_Lord4war wrote:

yer pretty insulting to be honest,to still be playing that line.

LOL, insulting? Did I insult you personally? Well that's weird.

Sure, I understand that they're repackaging an old game. Yes, I too would prefer for the powers that be to just put out a final fix, once and for all, free of charge, and be done with it. And yes, making money off of mods that were done free of charge is shit. However, if they get permission first, which I sincerely hope they do, and the creators of the mod okay it, then great. If they don't, well then bad voodo on them.

But I can't help but think if they did have a simple fix that could solve the bugs in CC5 and wouldn't change it's core, meaning that all of the mods we love would still work with it, wouldn't they have done that along time ago? The reality to me (only my opinion here) is that a fix was going to change some significant things about the game, and it wasn't going to be simple, and the mods weren't going to work with it if they did. Which means somebody bought the rights to the game as a business venture, wants to fix it, and wants to make money on it. I'm sorry if this is an unpopular notion, but it just might very well be the truth, right or wrong.

I'm not going to argue over the cost of something or whether we should buy it - if you think it's worth it, buy it, if you don't, then don't.

This post was really more about the potential of CC6 and what a rerelease of CC5 could possibly do for it - Feel free to move it to the CC6 thread as it probably belongs there.

#106: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 2:32 am
—
Pzt Mac said

Quote:

LOL, insulting?

yer,for ignoring what the players really want.CC6.
most dont believe the we cant make CC6 until we resell CC4,CC5 crap.

Quote:

Did I insult you personally? Well that's weird.

no i didnt take it personally at all,it is a debate thread.
2007 as well.

#107: Author: Pzt_Mac, Location: Oregon

Posted: Wed May 30, 2007 9:31 am
—
I'm not ignoring the fact that people want CC6. Hell, I want CC6 just as much as anyone.

And no, the argument that CC6 won't exist without rereleases is wrong, I agree there.

I'm glad that you didn't take er personally Wink

#108: Author: CSO_Linebacker,

Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:27 am
—

Troger wrote:

Matrix is who sets the timeline, thereby effecting what could and could not be done, and Matrix sets the price as well.

#109: Author: CSO_Linebacker,

Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 6:32 am
—

squadleader_id wrote:

Pzt_Mac wrote:

So, CC5 rerelease will generate income for the creators as they produce CC6... and beyond.

Won't CC6 and beyond generate income when they friggin release it? Very Happy

True enough, but remember that it is humans that make these things possible.

Your statement is akin to your boss calling a meeting in the morning, and saying that you will all be working for the next 6 months on a project at work, and during those 6 months you will have to make do without a paycheck, because nobody will be getting paid until sometime after the project is complete.

#110: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 10:06 am
—

CSO_Linebacker wrote:

squadleader_id wrote:

Pzt_Mac wrote:

So, CC5 rerelease will generate income for the creators as they produce CC6... and beyond.

Won't CC6 and beyond generate income when they friggin release it? Very Happy

Hmm...CC6 and beyond is a professional project/business, right? It's not a mod project I hope Wink

So there should be some initial investment or capital involved...simply put, the developers should have calculated the cost for the development of CC6 (and beyond)...then when they sell the game the sales should be projected to at least cover the cost of development...and after reaching BEP also generate income for the developers.

If the business model is re-selling repackages of older game in the series to pay for the development costs of new games...I don't think that's a very healthy business model Smile

So for the next 'project'...if we expect CC7 to be released...we'll have to put up with a plethora of worthless CC2-CC6 rereleases, repackages, merchandising etc so the developers can come up with enough dough to start developing CC7? Wink

If CSO Simtek and Matrix want to generate some extra income from the series...then at least just stick to releasing Gold Editions, Special Editions, Collectors Edition etc of the series (see my previous posts)...don't confuse the community by releasing reworked versions of the same game that's incompatible with the original releases.

#111: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 12:36 pm
—
thank you Squadleader ID ``thats what im meaning``

#112: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:00 am
—
That post was totally worthless

So if they called it CCIV GOLD

you would be happy to see it?
What a joke.

Just bitching to be bitching arent you?
Is it that time of the month for you?

5 years ago you would have BEGGED for this kind of attention.
Now that it's here you just want to talk trash.

#113: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 12:27 am
—

platoon_michael wrote:

That post was totally worthless

So if they called it CCIV GOLD

you would be happy to see it?
What a joke.

Just bitching to be bitching arent you?
Is it that time of the month for you?

5 years ago you would have BEGGED for this kind of attention.
Now that it's here you just want to talk trash.

Did you bother to read the posts from the beginning??
The point of this thread is oppinions about CSO Simtek/Matrix releasing a reworked version of CC5 that might be incompatible with the original version (like what they did with CoI).
So...like I said before (a few times!)...why not just rerelease a CC5 Platinum Edition (compatible with the original version, compatible with the mods, compatible for H2H)...add some extra disc or a DVD with extra maps, campaigns, scenarios or whatever.
Reap some cash from the older series without cluttering and confusing the CC Community with new-reworked-versions-but-basically-just-the-same-5-year-old game-tweaked-a-bit-here-and-there. Rolling Eyes

CSO Simtek hoping to pay for the development of CC6 from the sales of CC2-CC5 rereleases...now that has got to be a joke, right? Wink

#114: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 1:07 am
—
Platoon Micheal said

Quote:

So if they called it CCIV GOLD
you would be happy to see it?
What a joke.

I wouldnt id think CC4 Gold might get confused with CC4 battle of the bulge.
Sort of like how CC3 is now.

Quote:

Just bitching to be bitching arent you?

well some are saying the same about you,but ill cut u some slack,and say i dont care if they rip the CC4 community,if all 5 or 6 of you want it rebuilt.

Quote:

Is it that time of the month for you?

are you referring to a womens menstrual cycle? my guess would be the average CC5 player is not using the same female hormone pills as you.

Quote:

5 years ago you would have BEGGED for this kind of attention.
Now that it's here you just want to talk trash.

mmmm....5 years ago i recall players saying it would be kool if they supported their product,and released a fix to some obvious bugs.Of course we never thought about paying for it,and their was calls for CC6 5 years ago too,but as u see we still waiting.Its not enough for people like you that we still support the game today.

nothing personal....let the debate flow

#115: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 10:21 am
—
So far this topic show us how CC rework, new opus etc, affect and occupy
all the community. Get a place to know what to do, what will be fine to see
and what we dont want to see is good. Very confortable.
But dont you feel to speak with a wall? I means, we speak together.
we exchange some very nice idea. But this discution seems without interest
because no person in charge does not seem to take these ideas like serious.
In fact When some CSO Simtek member come on the forum to reply in this topic.
It is always for defending theirself but never to speak about our ideas.
Look when this topic was open and count how many time CSO came
to reply. Now count how many time they spoke about the idea than this topic contains.
I hope just to see a real discution between the developer and us.
I suppose it was what MOOXE wondered too when he posted this topic.
And i suppose it was what every one who replyed to this topic wondered.
Well maybe they think than it exist a better site where speaking about CC.
Maybe they think than CSO site is the only one where to be able to speak officialy about CC.

#116: Author: Blackstump, Location: Hunter Valley Australia

Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 11:18 am
—
Zappi is spot on... if cso developers need money to release cc6 .. go to your bank.. dont expect us to buy some non compatible ccv re realease bullshit to raise money first , at the expence of all the community minded mod makers.. i support them first... they have allready delivered for me... an all they ever asked was my opinion.. then they gave me patches.. more then matrix ever delivered after paying for the game..

#117: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 11:25 am
—

Quote:

well some are saying the same about you,but ill cut u some slack,and say i dont care if they rip the CC4 community,if all 5 or 6 of you want it rebuilt.

Yea I know that stinks all 5 or 6.And 3/4's of them probably can't stand me.

Quote:

my guess would be the average CC5 player is not using the same female hormone pills as you.

Now thats a good one.I laughed at that one.

And no I didnt read all the posts,I feel no need to.
But how does one get somebody to fix/ or re-release something unless somebody works on it?
And if somebody works on it they either do it for free or they do it for money?
In this case it happens to be for money.
My opinion may suck and my sense of humor not appreciated,but im almost willing to bet at some point and time someone somewhere will figure out how to make the old/new compatable.

Heck it might even be as simple as sending the old gammer the .exe and maybe a few other files.
I don't know,but I hope so.

and btw I take nothing personal

#118: Author: hata, Location: Hong Kong

Posted: Sat Jun 02, 2007 1:26 pm
—
I think all this re-release was part of the agreements when simtek negotiated with Matrixgames regarding publishing cc6.

So, even simtek heard our voices loud, they can do nothing about it and have to do what being told by Martixgames.

#119: Author: CSO_Linebacker,

Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 1:49 am
—

hata wrote:

So, even simtek heard our voices loud, they can do nothing about it and have to do what being told by Martixgames.

Spot on...but nobody seems to hear that when we say it. But that's ok...I enjoy donating/volunteering hundreds of hours for these projects and seeing everybody moaning and whining that they are not being listened to....they are, it's just not Simtek's call. But please everyone, keep complaining, I find it so motivating to help me continue the hard work and keep me facing toward the final goal.

#120: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 2:38 am
—

CSO_Linebacker wrote:

hata wrote:

So, even simtek heard our voices loud, they can do nothing about it and have to do what being told by Martixgames.

So are we to believe Simtek has absolutely no say whatever on what changes are to be made? Its just some remote controlled satellite zombie buffer company? These revelations just keep stacking the deck against any success that could be made here.

#121: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 3:12 am
—

CSO_Linebacker wrote:

hata wrote:

So, even simtek heard our voices loud, they can do nothing about it and have to do what being told by Martixgames.

Ouch!

Gotta applaud Matrix...now they have the (mighty) CC Series in their hands...and they don't have to put money upfront for the development of the upcoming sequels...from what you're saying, looks like Simtek is doing all the dirtywork to get the wheels rolling again. Matrix even took their friggin time releasing CoI when Simtek already delivered the game, right? Yup doesn't look good people.

#122: Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 6:51 am
—

CSO_Linebacker wrote:

Like it isn't known that former close combat players work for Matrix! If anyone at Matrix bothered to play CoI they would have noticed everything included in the game was basically a mod and that it never deserved such a price.

A 'timeline' for a re-release!? What a laugh.It's CC3 plus existing mods!

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 8:02 am; edited 1 time in total

#123: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 1:14 pm
—
Boy this topic sure does seem to get meaner by the minute.

#124: Hmmm Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 5:11 pm
—
Uch.....

http://www.closecombatseries.net/CCS/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=3825

I dont get it, was not this one of the arguments used by Sim?? Or is it a one off?

?

#125: Author: Pzt_Mac, Location: Oregon

Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 8:51 pm
—

platoon_michael wrote:

Boy this topic sure does seem to get meaner by the minute.

Jeez I guess. But a flamer flames for flaming Rolling Eyes

#126: hmmm Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Sun Jun 03, 2007 10:00 pm
—

Pzt_Mac wrote:

platoon_michael wrote:

Boy this topic sure does seem to get meaner by the minute.

Jeez I guess. But a flamer flames for flaming Rolling Eyes

Or defence for defending the defender? :zzz

#127: Author: jomni,

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 3:13 am
—
Do the original modders get some sort of compensation or commission from the repackaged games?

#128: Author: pvt_Grunt, Location: Melbourne, Australia

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 8:02 am
—

jomni wrote:

Do the original modders get some sort of compensation or commission from the repackaged games?

Good question, I believe the original Real Red modder was consulted and actively participated in the COI release.

As far as payment goes, that might be a delicate question, as a few of the COI team seem to have left the building permanently.......

I hope CC5 gets re-released, sorry if that upsets anyones mod collection. Schreken has done a great job of updating CC3 mods for COI, the same can be done for a re-release of CC5.

Most of the COI criticism is about money, I bought it and I'm happy with it , that's all I can say.

#129: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 3:46 pm
—

pvt_Grunt wrote:

... Most of the COI criticism is about money, I bought it and I'm happy with it , that's all I can say.

I dont agree.
It's not only about the price...

Look at what COI offered to CC3.
New graphic, sound, etc...? Well many mod offered that already since many years.
MMCC3? Well it was under development for many years. And if u look closely
u can see many problm. Like u cant see who is online, just know how many are.
U cannot speak with them, how to settled a specific game on this way.
Vehicles pathfinding? In fact CC3 get the better pathfinding coding after CC2.
So i dont guess it was updated, and if it was, it's simply "stupid" cos i never
saw CC3 vehicle turning in circle to reach a target on CC3 except when driving
thought a minefileds or an unpassable point.
In fact the major things who create debate around CC3 release is, i guess :
They did a rerelease alone in their room ( all the re release staff ) while
all the community waiting for a CC6 maded by the staff of all the community Wink

#130: Author: CSO_Linebacker,

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 2:27 am
—
Troger, you really have no clue. Two companies, that are not Simtek, make the decisions on these things.

I am not part of the re-releases, so I couldn't tell you anything but the politics. To say that my hard work, and that of another well respected graphics guy, is 'importing mods'...is just another statement from someone who is not involved, that reaffirms my opening statement.

#131: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:08 pm
—
Having all the bugs fixed for CCV and then adding a 2 on 2 for online gameplay would make for a huge sell I think.

Most mods for CCV have big enough maps that could support 4 people playing.

#132: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Tue Aug 14, 2007 5:55 am
—
can any1 provide a quick update on this thread?
i dont think ive read anything since page 5.
and simply not interested enuff to read it
but would like to know.
p.s no propaganda u ugly muthas!

#133: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Wed Aug 15, 2007 5:16 am
—
Official Update of This Thread

Opinions vary widely

Opinions are open to discussion

Opinions are opinions

#134: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 4:43 pm
—
Theres no news anywhere at the moment. Lets hope its stalled indefinetly or cancelled entirely. A summary of all my previous posts would be... we want new material not a recylced game (which will be incompatible with all current versions of CC5).

#135: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 11:48 pm
—
that makes 2 opinions the same!

#136: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 3:09 am
—
With the restructuring of Simtek, creation of Strategy 3 Tactics and the development forums move to Matrix, it looks like things have started to spin again.

I find it very frustrating to on the path that is being taken.

What is the goal of this re-release?

It will surely not revitalize the modding or online gaming community to any noticable level in the long run. The euphoria of CC5 and the CC engine of 1 vs 1 play are long dead. This game, with map enhancements, bug fixes will not appeal to many. You have to ask, did people leave the game because of maps? Did they leave becauce of bugs? The majority would say no. They left because its old, there more fun games out there, and 1 vs 1 is just not how things happen anymore.

The only way the CC code can be made appealing these days is by making it multiplayer with continuing engagements. This is the ONLY way. Modern Tactics cant do it because of its modern setting, no auto connect from a lobby and no continuing engagements....bugs bugs bugs... Even with a patch, it will be in vain. This game died before it got pushed out (and pushed out too early).

Everybody knows that we need a multiplayer continuing battle mode.

In almost every wishlist over the past decade its been mentioned. They say it will take two years with no for sure chance of success, well then give it a shot because we've waited 10 years already! CoI, CCMT, and the CC4 and CC5 rereleases will only be in vain. Map enhancements, bug fixes, the old games on the store shelves is not whats needed. CC must be taken to the next level of gaming if there is to be any reasonable amount of success.

#137: Author: zcharles, Location: Italy-Forum Iulii

Posted: Wed Dec 12, 2007 3:39 pm
—
you're right: CC is and old game; they should spend some money also in improving graphics; vehicles and bildings must be done in 3D; so we would have auto-shadows and right angle of the light over vehicles, and more frames during movment, and more options of burning-damaging vehicles and buldings; don't need 3D for zoom or rotating view, just for a more detailed battlefield; we need a hause to be complitly destroyed; we need a tank with the turret damaged, or the engine burning, but still operating. And we need more frames even for soldiers; they are tooo tooooo toooo old. They should have 100 times more frames; digging, reloading, entering a room, shooting, fighting, hidding, assaulting... more weapons in theyr hands, more of all; those are things that also a small team of programmer can do, but not modders like we. The game can be let the same, but in 2007 need a new graphic (smokes, explosions... did you saw helicopters in CCMT??? HORROR!!), and, as you say, new multiplayer capability.

#138: Author: Kojusoki,

Posted: Thu Jan 03, 2008 7:26 pm
—
My opinion:

- I will buy a new version o CCV even with the same graphics and near - no changes - just with bugs fixed and some improvments added. I know that the developer should make it for free - CCV with bugs is an incompleted program and things like bugs shouldnt exist. So making a rerelease of CCV, and asking money for this is not fair...
But from an another hand - all of us are not fair towards developers either (I belive there is noone who havent pirated anything before - mp3's etc Wink

. So, once again - Simtek and Matrix - fix the bugs, PLEASE, DO NOT make any other, add some slight improvments and I will spend for this my money - just DO IT FAST Smile

To be honest - I DO NOT complain on graphics etc - I think it is better then it would be in 3d. Also, such a realism level, such an "approach" to the tactical and strategic level - all suit me.

I was even thinking how much would it be to buy the copyright fo the program/code. What if I were the owner, what would I like to add, change...
Era? No, WW2 theater for 'close combat' kind of game is the best. Lets take WW1 - no fun - for maps used in CC, there would be one long trench on the bottom of the map, same one on the top and... and nothing else. Boring.
Modern Era? With all those ATrocket weapons? Perfect sniper rifles? For such *small* area like we play on CC tanks would be completly usless and snipers would be the Masters of Death... Bigger maps? Then it wouldnt be a *close combat* anymore but simply a whole battlefield... Not exacly what I am expecting.

Other scenarios, areas, seazons? Yes, but this game is more or less modders friendly... So as one of those improvments I mentioned at the beging, lets make this game simply even MORE modders friendly. Such a move (tools for modders) in this rerealase will make an easy and fast reborn of the community with all GJS, SAS and Stalingrad mods... What kind of tools? Maybe an easy editor of unit statistics (firepower, "aromur" or whatever there is so If I am pissed of a super-rambo-commando German sniper in GJS I simply lower his stats to the allied level;)

Maybe some changes of the strategic field - that one could mix BGs together or move 2 BGs at the same spot... For me, Campaigns are the cream of the game.. That is why I didnt buy CCMT...

At the end: this game is ALMOST an ultimate game for me and I am ready to pay AGAIN for so much fun. And yes, I am ready to pay for what I have already paid for - for fixing bugs only - my helath is much more valuable for me then those bucks (which are getting cheaper and cheaper;) - you cannot even imagine how pissed I am when I see a crash after disbanding one of yours BGs in one of our GC's Wink

PS
Im playing CCV since it appeared.

#139: Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Fri Jan 04, 2008 12:31 am
—
I agree with you Kojusoki. I don't need graphics, maps or sound changes just code changes to fix the bugs. Any additional changes on top of that would be a bonus.

CC5 is my favorite version of CC and I would pay to get it fixed so that my favorite game (and platform for the mods) was even better.

#140: Author: Vman,

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 4:10 am
—
Frankly, I think it's a bad idea for another re-release.

CoI didn't do enough to attract new players, so this "getting the name out there again" bit isn't as effective as it sounds.

Their funds are limited, and I don't know how much they expect to retain from this re-release. It would be best if they just focused on CC6 and get on to creating their next CC with that new engine I've been hearing about.

#141: Author: Kojusoki,

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:43 am
—
well... we have Close Combat marines with new features... Do you like it? I dont, so I prefer to have an old, but WORKING kind of game, to an another brillant concept:)

CoI was not a success, becouse it was a rerelease of a *really* old game, with *really* old graphic and, what is important in CCV, without a "strategic level".
I think those two are reasons, rerelease of CoI wasnt a good idea.
Same with CCM - there is no strategic level and that is why people are not so happy with this (although there are some iother things, this one is the most important)

#142: Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:07 pm
—
----

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:56 am; edited 1 time in total

#143: Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Sun Mar 02, 2008 11:14 pm
—

CSO_Linebacker wrote:

Troger, you really have no clue. Two companies, that are not Simtek, make the decisions on these things.

I am not part of the re-releases, so I couldn't tell you anything but the politics. To say that my hard work, and that of another well respected graphics guy, is 'importing mods'...is just another statement from someone who is not involved, that reaffirms my opening statement.

CoI changed nothing but graphics and data changes that were already in mods for CC3, fact!

Simtek knows CC. They know they are wasting our time with the re-releases.

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:14 am; edited 1 time in total

#144: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:11 am
—
It was a re-release...not a give away for free release.

You should say "thank you" that enhancements and added value were included in the re-release package all at no extra cost.

I worked for simtek on the CoI release.... my bill and hence the cost to you was $0.00.

This is the case for most, not all, involved in the CoI release.

And let's not forget, you are not obliged to purchase anything... it's your choice, so why winge.

If on the other hand you want to by CC it's now available and supported.

What is better value .. a re-release of old code with no enhancement or a release with enhancements and XP compatibility fix at no extra cost?

If you can't do the math then common sense will get you no where.

#145: Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:27 am
—

schrecken wrote:

It was a re-release...not a give away for free release.

You should say "thank you" that enhancements and added value were included in the re-release package all at no extra cost.

I worked for simtek on the CoI release.... my bill and hence the cost to you was $0.00.

This is the case for most, not all, involved in the CoI release.

And let's not forget, you are not obliged to purchase anything... it's your choice, so why winge.

If on the other hand you want to by CC it's now available and supported.

What is better value .. a re-release of old code with no enhancement or a release with enhancements and XP compatibility fix at no extra cost?

If you can't do the math then common sense will get you no where.

No one wanted a re-released CC3. There was nothing you couldn't already get in the original with mods!

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:58 am; edited 1 time in total

#146: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 3:39 am
—
LOL

take a pill

#147: ^$%^& Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 4:46 am
—
holy shit batman!

i got pernamently banned from CCS for 10% of that rant!

troger, that was some outburst. please remember this forum is read by children, and obviously written also. grow up bloke. shrecky just said simple facts.

try the 'edit' button.

#148: Re: ^$%^& Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 5:51 am
—

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

holy shit batman!

i got pernamently banned from CCS for 10% of that rant!

troger, that was some outburst. please remember this forum is read by children, and obviously written also. grow up bloke. shrecky just said simple facts.

try the 'edit' button.

Yeah Tack, your one of them who bought it cause you blindly supported them.

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:59 am; edited 1 time in total

#149: well Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 8:31 am
—
i respect your opinion.

and thankyou for using less graphic language.

CoI didnt bring thousands back to the game, yes i agree to some extent it was to 'old' to re distribute, but as a 5 year fan of that version, i appreciated the XP fix, better tank pathing, new GC, recoded maps(vastly improved vehicle movements),the almost elimanated tank 'dance of death',and a few new units, and basically making it RR0822(my favourite for 3+ years).NO mod ever has or will fix such problems.

i appreciated the rework,thus luke warm liked CoI,but i respect some didnt. changes where made, lots of time and effort,testing was done, this you neglected to mention or appreciate. If u choose not to play, thats A OK by me,thats your Right. but to defame all by association...its gone to far.

if we ever see ccv rework same will apply,problems NO MOD maker can EVER fix will be. many features will be added.again u can choose to purchase OR not.

I can take critism from something i have done, but i dont work for cso/simtek/strategy3tactics/matrix. that would require onging pay. i just occationally have my say,and tested.

i have assisted dima and panzerjagen, testing for free also, and i really enjoyed there work, and said so here! ditto anything else! all for FREE! if u make a new mod, want extensive testing, im available! unbiased and detailed critique.

i dont get into flaming, never have, im just sticking up for an aussie who got shat on for association.

i wont begrudge troger,or anybody else. never have or will, its all bad karma to me.

#150: Re: well Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Mon Mar 03, 2008 11:13 pm
—

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

i respect your opinion.

and thankyou for using less graphic language.

CoI didnt bring thousands back to the game, yes i agree to some extent it was to 'old' to re distribute, but as a 5 year fan of that version, i appreciated the XP fix, better tank pathing, new GC, recoded maps(vastly improved vehicle movements),the almost elimanated tank 'dance of death',and a few new units, and basically making it RR0822(my favourite for 3+ years).NO mod ever has or will fix such problems.

i appreciated the rework,thus luke warm liked CoI,but i respect some didnt. changes where made, lots of time and effort,testing was done, this you neglected to mention or appreciate. If u choose not to play, thats A OK by me,thats your Right. but to defame all by association...its gone to far.

if we ever see ccv rework same will apply,problems NO MOD maker can EVER fix will be. many features will be added.again u can choose to purchase OR not.

I can take critism from something i have done, but i dont work for cso/simtek/strategy3tactics/matrix. that would require onging pay. i just occationally have my say,and tested.

i have assisted dima and panzerjagen, testing for free also, and i really enjoyed there work, and said so here! ditto anything else! all for FREE! if u make a new mod, want extensive testing, im available! unbiased and detailed critique.

i dont get into flaming, never have, im just sticking up for an aussie who got shat on for association.

i wont begrudge troger,or anybody else. never have or will, its all bad karma to me.

I'll agree that CoI made CC available again, and that’s all I’ll agree on. CC3 worked for me on XP, no problems. And I played CC3 for hundreds of hours on XP. CC3 had almost all of the data changes CoI had in the form of mods. I didn't feel the vehicle movements were even slightly better, in my experience. Simtek didn't really came to make improvements on tank pathfinding anyhow. I felt that in some instances it was actually worse then stock CC3, for reasons I won't brother with getting into.

Let’s face it, the CoI forum is riddled with people who were livid at how CoI offered nothing new, nothing that CC3 didn’t already have. And, let me point out, I was right there calling them utter fools for buying it. CSO made it perfectly and crystal clear what they did to CoI, anyone who knew anything about CC3 would know that it was CC3+mods, plain and simple.

For CSO’ers to be so pretentious to think they did those in the CC community some huge service, well get real! You did very little work on CoI, and then on top of that charged full game price!

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:46 am; edited 1 time in total

#151: Author: Senior_Drill, Location: 22134

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 8:32 pm
—
Troger, one thing is that you are kinda aiming at the wrong target. The original intent of Simtek, through a license from the source code owner, Destineer Studios, was to fix the Direct X problems and make the games available again from somewhere other than bargain bins and EBay. Period.

That's Developer work. The only publisher and distributor that was interested in the Marketing work was Matrix Games. Matrix, as publishers oft times do in the gaming industry, set some conditions of there own, the first and fore most one was the adding of the mods.

It was not a Simtek idea (and there were only four or five of us at that time), and in fact, when I first heard about it, as the one who would have to actually do the files, it was already a fiat acompli - the rights had already been negotiated with Ron Gretz and a new name chosen. It was "Go and Do, or We Get Someone Who Will." The publisher also set the price, against all suggestions from what they viewed as "just hired hands".

In the CoI forums, I tried to be as open about it as I could about what the re-release had become and got into trouble for it. Matrix Games was calling the shots, held all the cards and signed the oft delayed and shorted paychecks. I still haven't been paid for work I did well over a year ago and probably never will be, so I should be the one with the attitude instead of you.

A lot of the antagonism and anger was directed at CSO and the CSO website, when the objections should have been raised on the Matrix forums, not that it would have done any good there, either. A lot of people got their hackles raised and barked a lot at each other, but it was like protesting a road repaving to the dump truck driver instead of at the department that ordered it.

#152: Author: Troger, Location: L4W's place, Australia

Posted: Tue Mar 04, 2008 10:43 pm
—

Senior_Drill wrote:

Troger, one thing is that you are kinda aiming at the wrong target. The original intent of Simtek, through a license from the source code owner, Destineer Studios, was to fix the Direct X problems and make the games available again from somewhere other than bargain bins and EBay. Period.

Yes, indeed, I agreed on that. It made CC3 available, it made certain there were no problems with Direct X and would work with future versions of Windows. But ... it already worked for the vast majority of people with XP and Direct X, and if it didn't there were workarounds people could do to get it to work.

Senior_Drill wrote:

That's Developer work. The only publisher and distributor that was interested in the Marketing work was Matrix Games. Matrix, as publishers oft times do in the gaming industry, set some conditions of there own, the first and fore most one was the adding of the mods.

It was not a Simtek idea (and there were only four or five of us at that time), and in fact, when I first heard about it, as the one who would have to actually do the files, it was already a fiat acompli - the rights had already been negotiated with Ron Gretz and a new name chosen. It was "Go and Do, or We Get Someone Who Will." The publisher also set the price, against all suggestions from what they viewed as "just hired hands".

In the CoI forums, I tried to be as open about it as I could about what the re-release had become and got into trouble for it. Matrix Games was calling the shots, held all the cards and signed the oft delayed and shorted paychecks. I still haven't been paid for work I did well over a year ago and probably never will be, so I should be the one with the attitude instead of you.

A lot of the antagonism and anger was directed at CSO and the CSO website, when the objections should have been raised on the Matrix forums, not that it would have done any good there, either. A lot of people got their hackles raised and barked a lot at each other, but it was like protesting a road repaving to the dump truck driver instead of at the department that ordered it.

Matrix Games has employees who know CC3 and know that CoI is not worth the money if you already own CC3!

Thanks for clearing some things up on some threads, some openness is great. The way Simtekers and the like deflected accusations was created speculations like mine. Being forthright like you have just done is much preferred.

Last edited by Troger on Sun Feb 27, 2011 7:49 am; edited 1 time in total

#153: Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2008 3:22 am
—
A true re-release would have been good, as it would have been compatible with CC3. But the product released was not a true re-release nor did it offer enough benefits to get everyone on board to move to it.

Unfortunately for the community that was probably the worst case scenario...

#154: mmm Author: ANZAC_Lord4war, Location: Sydney Australia

Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2008 3:20 am
—
lmao off troger saying simtek is suss

ohh wiping away the tears

#155: Re: mmm Author: kweniston, Location: Netherlands

Posted: Fri Mar 21, 2008 3:31 am
—

ANZAC_Lord4war wrote:

lmao off troger saying simtek is suss

ohh wiping away the tears

He said Matrix is suss.

Imho all rereleases are worth next to nothing if they don't offer anything substantial new features, instead of a few bug fixes or user created material. What they offer is dividing established communities, like we're witnessing right here. A brand new 21st century game is what we need, and what we will pay $50 or more for. Graphics, not so important in this particular genre, gameplay/multiplayer/realism/AI/stability all the more so.

#156: Author: Pzt_Decoy,

Posted: Thu Mar 27, 2008 10:12 pm
—
What i would like to see is CC5 as it was meant to be, fix the supply and disband issues ! Where disbanded units would lose much of there equipment.

These 2 things alone would make a world of difference.

#157: Re: ^$%^& Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:53 am
—

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

MMMH Tack, u never been banned by us my friend

#158: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 10:56 am
—
I guess the major problem with all those re release of any CC opus is their uncompability with the original...
Sort of splitting the CC community.
Seems that's all who worked with the re release wanted to get new
community Wink

#159: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 12:31 pm
—
Bug fixes would be welcome...as long as the original can also be patched with the same fix.
As for compatibility problems...I've said this a few times before...a simple Official Game Launcher Utility would do the job.
Something like the CC Starter Utility...so people who has problems running the game in new systems and new OS can just use the Launcher. The new re-release should be compatible with the original release...but comes with an official launcher utility.
Why not go this route?

#160: Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 2:19 pm
—
Yes bug fixes, thanx!

If they who decide thought about this, they should have realised a "patch" or update for say, 10 dollars to us who already have CC5 CD? That would be less bad and cause less split in community, IMO.
This will give some kudos to distributor/re releaser, and do they need that… All we seen up to date is “greed” and yes I understand they must be able to price there product so they can make a living of it, but not by taxing the old fans. A re release should aim at the new consumers (if it’s not about taxes), yet hold onto the old fans, by making them happy.
But re-relies the same game with a new price tag, 50 $?? So we are to buy the same game again to get the fix we never got. brrrrr.... Will I pay 50 bux for that?? Hm, na, I sort of got a really faul taste in my mouth after CCMT...

And I’m also a bit worried, lets say the CC5 re-relies have a “command centre” or what it called as COI has now, and as one shall get a mod it link me to "CSO" download!!!, isn’t that a bit, "bad" for competition...
Should it not link to a neutral page, that has multiple links to "all" the CC resource sites in community? And this page would be easy to updated, so as old actors disperse and new comes will be added / removed.
Any monopoly will be bad for consumers, and the vulnerability of one actor is not a grate idea. Anything bad for consumer will punish the corporation in the end… (that’s a fact)
The consumer is always right in the end, and if matrix/Strategy 3 practices “favouritism” and just link to CSO, I believe one may expect a consumer reaction? But said that, Sulla have say in public that CSO shall not be “CC-corporate” anymore, just a fan site. So if that is REALLY so, I guess/expect he will see to it that the CC5 re realise will link to all resource sites in community..

Well see…

#161: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 5:04 pm
—
I forgot...the CC Game Launcher utility should handle the Direct-X problems, and also have a built-in CPU/Graphics Card slow-down program to fix the fast scroll problems.

Then again...if it's packaged as "just the same game with fixes and a cool Game Launcher utility"...Matrix/Strategy 3 can't charge 50 bucks for it...so I guess we'll probably see some new/rebuilt (but same) version of CC5 along the line as CoI...incompatible with the original CC5 version Sad

#162: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 5:13 pm
—
D-Day will not be compatible with CC5 at all.

#163: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 7:54 pm
—

Quote:

And I’m also a bit worried, lets say the CC5 re-relies have a “command centre” or what it called as COI has now, and as one shall get a mod it link me to "CSO" download!!!, isn’t that a bit, "bad" for competition...
Should it not link to a neutral page

I agree.

i see that (coi download linking to CSO) as a mistake made by the publishers.

I think such a scheme should link to an independant page... with maybe links from that out to various community website.

#164: Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:19 pm
—
Ohh, and I almost forgot, the tools for make CC5 GC, and other essential tools for CC5, must either work for the new relise, or Matrix/Strategy 3 must make em either em self and give it to comunity or by supporting (money) to the current tool makers to upgrade there tools so they work with the new CC5..
If they forgetting this, they have strangled this CC5 relies to a slow and painful death already in the bud.
Cause a CC game and no support for mod making of it, will just not work, death.. ..

#165: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:33 pm
—
I dont think an independant page would fly with Matrix. IMO the best option is to include a list of sites. The command center seemed more of a hindrance than anything. The links it provided could of been created in the games main screen and subsections as was done in atleast CC5.

#166: Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Sat Mar 29, 2008 8:59 pm
—
Yeh, as long as its NOT ONE single site that the consumer is lead to by default. Many is better then one, how its done and so, I dont care.
Competition, not monopoly will bring qualety to consumers...

#167: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 12:22 am
—
If you have to include the Command Center...for mod downloads...just make it link to the Matrix website. From there you can have links to CCS, CSO and other indie sites hosting the mods.

#168: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 3:20 am
—
That would seem to make the most sense.

But even Cc5's link to the Ms Gaming Zone is now a dead link...... so nothing is guaranteed.

#169: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 3:29 am
—

schrecken wrote:

That would seem to make the most sense.

But even Cc5's link to the Ms Gaming Zone is now a dead link...... so nothing is guaranteed.

Yeah...but Matrix is the distributor of the CC5 re-release.
The links should only die if Matrix no longer supports the game, right?
And as long as Matrix supports the release...they should also update the mod links page (at the Matrix site).

#170: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 8:48 am
—
Again I would agree.

But Matrix aren't as big as MS and you can see what has happened there.....

#171: Author: platoon_michael, Location: Right behind you

Posted: Sun Mar 30, 2008 1:24 pm
—
Why not an option of allowing the user to input his own link for Mods/Maps?
This way when things do change after time (and they almost likely will change)
The user can get his downloads from anywhere he wants.
I agree about the whole patch thing instead of buying a new game.
But what am I gonna do about it?

I'll pretty much wait and see if it's a game worth buying,then decide.

#172: Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 5:59 pm
—

Quote:

I agree about the whole patch thing instead of buying a new game.
But what am I gonna do about it?

Michaels, you just did something about it, you said what you think in public. Smile

Thanx god for CCS is totaly independent from the developer....

#173: Author: flick,

Posted: Mon Mar 31, 2008 7:33 pm
—
I'd like a deployment/mission planner like in CCIII.

#174: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 3:09 pm
—

flick wrote:

I'd like a deployment/mission planner like in CCIII.

Already got one for CCV it'snt really the same as for CC3
But i use it communly and it's well done.
U cant edit Vl location or name, u cant edit briefing text.
But u can do all the rest what CC3 editor did

It's on the Download / CCv / misc i guess anyway around the download/CCV
section

#175: Author: ZAPPI4, Location: Belgium Liege

Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 3:10 pm
—
I forgot to name it ...

CCV Requisiton editor
Or CCReq

#176: Author: flick,

Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 5:30 pm
—

ZAPPI4 wrote:

I forgot to name it ...

CCV Requisiton editor
Or CCReq

Wow, I was wondering what that did. Thanks!

#177: Author: Senior_Drill, Location: 22134

Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 7:56 pm
—
The simplest solution for ensuring that any sort of "command center" stays usable is to put all the links used into a text file that is used by the application. That way it could be easily updated and added to by both the distributor and the players.

The same thing goes with modding tools. The tool makers probably never foresaw the long life the CC games would have or the relience on their tools. They created problems by having the tools look at particular registry entries or .exe offsets. Zeppo9's plugin managers are a good example. He should have never written them to check the registry for the installed game file locations, but simply had the user browse to the game file location. For all his good work, some of Cpl Filth's tools look to specific file offsets, but he never identified what those were so that the tool could be hex edited to adapt to changes.

squadleader_id wrote:

schrecken wrote:

That would seem to make the most sense.

But even Cc5's link to the Ms Gaming Zone is now a dead link...... so nothing is guaranteed.

#178: Author: shasadou, Location: Moscow

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:34 am
—
i m all for the re-release.

50$ seems to me a fair price to pay for "ideal" cc5 and potential increase of community.

there are modders who are altruistic enough to adapt gjs or stal to the new cc5.

btw, what is the effect of re-release of cc3? this cross of iron? does anyone obtain any data? i did buy it but it appeared to be just the reg cc3, so nothing new to me and obvisously waste of money

btw, i have just recently returned to gamespy cc5 community, started a gc as jerries with mik from asutralia - tremendous nostalgy =).

i have encountered many new faces on gamespy - this warmed my heart =)

and i just i have come to think that there is an enormous number of people playing offline,who have never been to gamepsy or former msn zone. and its just a question of attracting their attention to this fantastic opportuniy of H2H fighting.

#179: Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 1:34 pm
—
with luck, in time IF all re releases do come out, and will all be in BHQ for one central CC gaming area. i prefer gamespy,but if BHQ had the numbers...its no new Zone but it will do! gads sake i just wanna meet players and kill pixels!

#180: Author: BobbyDazzler, Location: Manchester

Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 11:36 am
—
its nice that game companies are taking an interest in re-developing games with superb fan bases such as CC.. but the truth is what do they really know about the game and its followers? the orignal CC4 and CC5 platforms were ok but lets face it there pretty lame in their original format. The dedicated work of all the mod developers is worthy of a gaming oscar, they worked hard and have taken CC to where it deserves. jus about every mod i have played over the last 5 years has been superb in most respects, why do matrix think they can do a better job of recreating CC5 than the community of developers already at work... why doesnt matrix games put some of the community developers on their payroll since in all fairness i cant think of any other group of people who are better suited or experienced in the creation of mods?!?

#181: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Tue Dec 02, 2008 1:23 pm
—
Strategy3tactics are all community members.

the games are developed by S3T not Matrix

#182: why bother, Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 5:11 am
—
WaR is basically CCV made into CCIV, so why waste time remaking CCV, mods for WaR will soon make WaR CCV was,(but a lot better),most if not all the ccv bugs are gone,just change strat and bingo, CCV.

it would have to have some pretty dam good new features for me to buy it.

but i would then call it CCVI

#183: Author: Kojusoki,

Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 3:09 pm
—
I know I shouldnt tell it, but for me it would be ok if only they would make:
-a good multiplayer platform.
-REALLY stable multiplayer game

And maybe, as a "nice feature" for all those complaing:) that there are no improvemnts:
-3D FOR DEPLOyING only (im not sure, but I belive it is not such a big deal to create an easy 3d engine showing the map). Cerating a 3d game would kill the spirit, but making deploment in 3d would help a lot.

-you can skip AI for me as it will never be even a bit human

#184: Re: why bother, Author: CSO_Sbufkle, Location: Canada

Posted: Wed Jan 21, 2009 5:31 pm
—

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

WaR is basically CCV made into CCIV, so why waste time remaking CCV, mods for WaR will soon make WaR CCV was,(but a lot better),most if not all the ccv bugs are gone,just change strat and bingo, CCV.

it would have to have some pretty dam good new features for me to buy it.

but i would then call it CCVI

Makes more money this way.. thats why the time is beign put in without overhauling it to poorer fascal gain...

#185: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 10:24 am
—
Kujoski, there used to be 3D zoom out maps for CC5. I used them for years but lost them over time. Website I got them from is gone to. It was quite useful for determining LOS.

#186: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Fri Jan 23, 2009 7:36 pm
—
I've got some CCIV 3d maps archived away somewhere too.

#187: Re: why bother, Author: ZombieZamboni,

Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 8:49 pm
—

CSO_Sbufkle wrote:

Makes more money this way.. thats why the time is beign put in without overhauling it to poorer fascal gain...

beign fascal.....what? you can't spell the words being or fiscal? ....likely too much knowledge of business cramming your brain to allow room for the English language

so has Atomic called you yet to take over as CEO?

maybe they don't know who you....really....are

#188: Re: Close Combat 5 Re-Release Debate Author: mooxe,

Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 5:55 pm
—
Call me crazy if you want.... I decided to answer my own rhetorical questions nearly two years later...

mooxe wrote:

CSO Simtek & Matrix Games are currently planning to re-release Close Combat 5.

I have been thinking alot lately on this event. I would like to share my opinions on it with everyone who reads here, in the hopes of generating some debate.

Overall I do not see any advantage for the Close Combat Community in re-releasing this game. There are a number of reasons for this, I will list them off. I will speak as if the re-release is official. The word bug is used to describe an imperfection, defect or incompatibility.

- Matrix Games and CSO Simtek will be fixing a number of bugs. Fixing these bugs will make our current version incompatible with the new version since the EXE and DLL files will be changed. This forces us to upgrade if we want to play people on the new version. Basically re-releasing CC5 as a version incompatible with the original version means trying to create a new community of players from nothing. Can this be done with a seven year old game? CC5 5.01 has either been selling or pirated for the past seven years. There is a huge pool of players out there right now that can all play each other. Why are they starting from scratch by releasing a version thats not compatible with the 1000's out there?

I realize now that the new rerelease of CC will not create a new player base.

mooxe wrote:

- It has been stated by a few people that re-releasing gets the name Close Combat back out in there. But what exactly will that do? If you were one of those people, explain your theory. Close Combat is still Close Combat, 2D top down RTS, seven years old and only two player. People do not play a game simply because they are reminded its out there and see it at Matrix Games. They play because of what the game has to offer. Re-releasing CC5 doesnt offer what we all want these days. Even with the bugs fixed.

It will do what CoI, CCMT and WaR did.

mooxe wrote:

- One of the biggest problems is not being fixed. The firewall issue. When the re-release finally comes, just like in the CoI forums there will be a ton of firewall related posts and frustrated customers.

Still true.

mooxe wrote:

- The mods all have to be converted. This is being done with CC3 to CoI. I suppose it can be done for the new version. Its very time consuming. This also creates two versions of mods for each "side" of the CC5 community.

Its very likely that some mods are being converted. There will not be another side created.

mooxe wrote:

- Lets look at CoI. Granted its early, but there seems to be no action. Only techsupport posts, complaint posts and the occaisional AAR. BHQ usually empty also. CC2 regularly has more users in it. I will venture to predict CoI will do nothing long term for the CC community. The main bugs were not fixed (firewall), and theres no CoI website.

Still true.

mooxe wrote:

- Gamespy constantly gets new players right now. We have sustained about the same levels in Gamespy for years now. The only tapering of numbers we have seen started around the beginning of 2004. Since then there have been a steady amount of new players replacing the retired players.

I am logging in this week from Afghanistan after about six months of absense and still see a steady number. The rerelease if it was to be compatible would not make any real effect with the number of online players.

mooxe wrote:

- Matrix Games released CoI for $49.99 USD (boxed version). Assuming they market CC5 as a patched re-release and not a new game with its own new name, is this realistic to pay that much for a patched game?

We can assume it will be patched and have extras as did CoI. It is not worth the price when compared alongside of mainstream games, but this is now a niche market where price isnt much of an issue.

mooxe wrote:

Assume there was no re-release. Contemplate whether or not you will continue to play CC5 5.01 in its current state. Ask yourself these questions.

Will I stop or continue playing CC5 5.01 if......

...they dont fix the 00:00 crash?
...they dont fix the force selection screen peek?
...they dont fix the reinforcement bug?
...they dont fix the supply problems?
...they dont fix the hosts advantage?

From my experience with the community, the majority of people did not stop playing CC5 because of these bugs and the other small ones. They quit because its old, graphically outdated, only two player, too many firewall problems and some incompatibility problems. Also, many new games out there gave them the features they wanted. At the very least, why are none of the real problems being fixed?

Remains unanswered, upon release we shall see if people make a permanent switch. Firewall probs will not be fixed though.

mooxe wrote:

The last questions...

- Will re-releasing CC5 create and sustain a new player base online and offline that can be part of our community?

mooxe wrote:

- What exactly is the motivation to re-release CC5 and what thought has been put into its impact upon this section of the CC community?

A niche market has been found, and will be exploited.

Theres no debate anymore, its definetly coming. Its impact will be the same as all the previous impacts. However, its being marketed to a niche community and will sell which equals enough success for whoever is counting.

#189: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 9:48 pm
—
The impact of any release (of any game) can't be forseen.

What can be forseen is improvements in what I consider the best game on the market.

If you like other games better... go and play them.. it's simple.

If you like CC and want to play the version with the most up to date features and bug fixes then your choice is clear.

If you like CC and want to be involved in it's evolving future , your choice is clear.

If you want to hang around moaning about a game that doesn't exist (the successor to CC), then keep doing that.

Is it worth all the effort of maintaining a website/Forum etc of a game you no longer like or play?

#190: Re: Close Combat 5 Re-Release Debate Author: Astonvallio,

Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 2:46 am
—

mooxe wrote:

Theres no debate anymore, its definetly coming . Its impact will be the same as all the previous impacts. However, its being marketed to a niche community and will sell which equals enough success for whoever is counting.

Is there any expiry date?

#191: Author: mooxe,

Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:41 am
—

schrecken wrote:

The impact of any release (of any game) can't be forseen.

What can be forseen is improvements in what I consider the best game on the market.

If you like other games better... go and play them.. it's simple.

If you like CC and want to play the version with the most up to date features and bug fixes then your choice is clear.

If you like CC and want to be involved in it's evolving future , your choice is clear.

If you want to hang around moaning about a game that doesn't exist (the successor to CC), then keep doing that.

Is it worth all the effort of maintaining a website/Forum etc of a game you no longer like or play?

I actually do still play and like it. Currently I am trying to bash through a WaR GC vs AI in record time.

#192: Author: lemon42,

Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2009 8:43 am
—
I still like the game. It has still some unique things which can't be found in other games.

But a re-release of CC5 would be welcome if we would have some perspective of what is planned/scheduled. A fixed CC5 next and then a real new build one with an engine that real gives new options ? Clouds/rain ? Some terrain profile feature ? Ability to load troops into small carriers and unload them ? Para troopers which will land first to get some more atmosphere (must not be something fancy. Select where you want to deploy your units and when you hit begin they will be on paras and landing (5 - 20 seconds lost in the first move for a newly landed BG).
Planes can be shoot at and can be destroyed ?
Maybe the ability to build sandbag barriers when a BG is in one tile for 2 moves without opponent contact?
Much better online client ?

There's a lot which could be done and which would give real some new. While the current re-releases are fine and they support and try to get rid of the bugs, it would be also great to have real new features Smile

#193: Author: Jace10,

Posted: Thu Apr 23, 2009 3:59 pm
—
I have often wished for a more modular version of close combat. I think it would be great if you could add and swap battle groups as you wish, then people could make and play there favorites against the AI or other human players.

You would have to re-do the way the game reads files for unit graphics etc, but if you could put all the data and graphics necessary for one BG into a single directory it would work. Each weapon, soldier, Team, vehicle etc would be listed in data files + weapon graphics, unit badges, uniform colours, leader pic, BG and Req images etc etc.

Its a lot of reorganisation but it would mean you could fight any battle group on any map. The notion that WaR is a leap forward in modability is laughable, but this might be. You would also have to redo map selection and maybe make it easier to import maps, design own campaigns etc.

As it stands the current Mods being released as new products are just new front screens and a few new maps. I don't see Girlie soldiers and see-through buildings as an improvement in my gameplaying experience.. So back to CCV for me...

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat The Longest Day

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Page 1 of 1