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

through

[^/[Print]\]
Goto page : Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next :| |:
Close Combat Series -> Close Combat The Longest Day

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

Posted: Sat May 19, 2007 12:42 am
—

kweniston wrote:

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

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

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat The Longest Day

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

Goto page : Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next :| |: Page 5 of 10