platoon_michael wrote (View Post): |
1)The problem lies in the fact that those who do complain were here back in the Hey day of CC.
They want to see that Hey day again with lots of people playing online and great mods once again produced. |
schrecken wrote (View Post): |
...elimination of the crawl of death, |
schrecken wrote (View Post): |
so stop whinging then :)
or do you just like whinging for the sake of it? |
mooxe wrote (View Post): | ||
1) Its not a problem. I dont care about the hey days. I don't like the fact that these rereleases are so off the cuff, seat of your pants push it out the door projects. 10 years after the last classic version was released we still have the same old game with a ton of strategic add-ons that are half tested and bugged all to hell. The decision makers are holding the game back from a higher potential by inserting these bugged features and not focusing on the tactical phase. There is very little testing, no "checks and balances". There is very few people actually doing the work to make the game better. There is just half baked ideas hacked into the game and sold as, "hey atleast you are getting a "new" game after all these years!" The word atleast means we are compromising. New maps and new strategic maps do not make a new Close Combat. New tactical features, less bugs, updated graphics (or atleast stop shortcutting on the "3d" buildings and vehicles) and a consolodation of all the great features of all Close Combat versions make a new Close Combat. With the CC2 rerelease we will once again see a slew of new strategic features, more maps that are probably made from cut and paste sections of a 1000 previous maps but nothing new to the actual Close Combat. Summary - 10 years later we are still at square one with just as many bugs. Thats whats annoying me, and many others. |
platoon_michael wrote (View Post): |
In a nut shell as I see it............
2) The Mods that were first released for CCIV(VetBoB,TrueGreen) and CCV (GJS) were considered MUST have Mods. these were the mothers of all Mods because they were the first of their kind. 3)Since then many Mods have been release but none have seem to taken the roll of MUST HAVE Mods. . |
platoon_michael wrote (View Post): |
In a nut shell as I see it............
1)The problem lies in the fact that those who do complain were here back in the Hey day of CC. They want to see that Hey day again with lots of people playing online and great mods once again produced. 2) The Mods that were first released for CCIV(VetBoB,TrueGreen) and CCV (GJS) were considered MUST have Mods. these were the mothers of all Mods because they were the first of their kind. 3)Since then many Mods have been release but none have seem to taken the roll of MUST HAVE Mods. 4)Online gameplay has died as has an appropriate ONE SITE for all to congregate. 5)We we cheated by Atomic with a shitty CCV and never got a proper patch for it,instead we were told BUY THIS NEW GAME 6)The re-releases despite having many UPGRADES over its previous version still has many bugs some of which has had to be forced down the throat of those who created it to be considered a bug and HAS NOT been able to duplicate the HEY DAY we all so much crave. |
Quote: |
Its not a problem. I dont care about the hey days. I don't like the fact that these rereleases are so off the cuff, seat of your pants push it out the door projects. 10 years after the last classic version was released we still have the same old game with a ton of strategic add-ons that are half tested and bugged all to hell. The decision makers are holding the game back from a higher potential by inserting these bugged features and not focusing on the tactical phase. There is very little testing, no "checks and balances". There is very few people actually doing the work to make the game better. There is just half baked ideas hacked into the game and sold as, "hey atleast you are getting a "new" game after all these years!" The word atleast means we are compromising. |
Stwa wrote (View Post): |
The game is graphics AND data intensive, and cannot rid itself of every anomolie.
But, the investment dollars dried up. |
Stwa wrote (View Post): |
I think I could declare CCMT officially DEAD. I might be the only person on the planet playing the game at all. |
Stwa wrote (View Post): |
Graphics and data is easy to fix and it doesn't require paying anyone. The main financial problem are engine updates and removing the engine bugs. |
Dundradal wrote (View Post): |
...would you want to support a community that on the one hand is supporting your work but on the other distributing the old product for free? |
Dundradal wrote (View Post): |
I can understand why at times the developer might not want to update the game if they feel that the community will just stick it to them. Now this might not be the case, I'm just posing an example. |
Dundradal wrote (View Post): |
Also, haven't any of the older community members formed relationships with the developers? |
Dundradal wrote (View Post): |
I'm not going to judge this site for choosing to host illegal copies, |
Dundradal wrote (View Post): |
I would do the same if I thought someone was demanding something from me while at the same time stealing... |
schrecken wrote (View Post): |
In that context then.... GJS was the first real mod of the Strat. map series of game... a mighty fine effort too.
Although, in my view, if you change so much as one weapons data you have created a real mod. |
AT_Stalky wrote (View Post): |
And hi to you to. |
Quote: |
On what base are you saying this site is distributing pirate copies?? If you refer to the (short) time CC2 was hosted here, it was regarded as abandon ware and it soon was made clear it was not, it was removed. |
Quote: |
Are you suggesting that the developer make poor games on purpose, with poor data and buggy as hell just because some pirate there product, and this is the reason why they don’t fix and update CCMT, WaR and TLD? |
Quote: |
Well, the community use to go hand in hand with the current developer, the developer run a cc site named CSO since 1997.
And one sunny day some years back, they got the rights to “develop” CC, and all was fine to begin with, until they realised COI. Then the CSO-community (mostly CC3-ers) started to bring forward complains about that product, and the developer systematically iron fisted em and anyone who dared to suggest that there product had flaws (look at this thread, page 1, post 4 and 9, they are illustrative of what I mean). The CSO site is today all but dead, non except the developer dares post there and non have done so for years… I supose thats what they (really) mean with when they talk about "positive"? |
Quote: |
Ok Judge, …. Illegal … copies … |
Quote: |
Stealing… a community made up by thieves…. Isnt that nice.. Wellcome "mate".. My mother keeps warning me about the bad company... Dont whant to be mixed in with em do we, |
Quote: |
Any more deep insight about this community you whant to share with us? |
Quote: |
Instead of being supportive, the developers mock users lack of knowledge at times. It was really sad to see and read. |
output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT