1. This sounds kind of shady to me! I been around BF for awhile and do not recognize this guy at all. He comes out of the woodwork and offers BF a cut of money if he is able to sucker us into giving it to him. I don't think so. I am not about to pay this guy and hope that the game gets support from BF. Then shell out another 50 bucks to BF to buy the damn thing. As others said, Bootie, Rico, and others are already supplying us with this at a level that is sufficient to have lots of fun. Blows my mind that BF says "OK buddy, you raise us 10 grand and we will put someone on this and see what we can do"?
2. I feel you Facman. Keep the BF crew on their side of the fence. Not all of them but I think you guys know the few I am talking about. All you have to do is troll around some of the threads to find them. I love this place as I have "never" seen that over here. Level headed down to earth real people. Plus if that "PENG" or whatever the hell it is thread comes anywhere near this place Bootie better bit#$ slap that thing and send it away!!
Others may think giving their hard earned money to get this done is a great idea. I respect that and more power to you.
2. I feel you Facman. Keep the BF crew on their side of the fence. Not all of them but I think you guys know the few I am talking about. All you have to do is troll around some of the threads to find them. I love this place as I have "never" seen that over here. Level headed down to earth real people. Plus if that "PENG" or whatever the hell it is thread comes anywhere near this place Bootie better bit#$ slap that thing and send it away!!
Others may think giving their hard earned money to get this done is a great idea. I respect that and more power to you.
M
mjkerner
Guest
Despite posting the original link, I'm not married to the idea. It is something I actually thought might help Rico, Bootie and the gang in the long run. Anyway, it wouldn't hurt for people to read the thread all the way through. Steve of BFC has posted BFC's position on the idea there. And, if it helps alleviate some of the work for doing a single player Op campaign (believe me, H2H is the Tits, but I like single player too) I'm for it.
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=110736&page=8
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=110736&page=8
I just read the thread thru and what struck me was the statement made by BF. I didn't get the impression they are very enthusiastic about this idea. Without their enthusiasm, I'm not gonna get very excited.
M
mjkerner
Guest
Yeah, it is a bit of a chicken and egg thing. BF will maybe back it if there is enough interest, but a lot of people aren't that interested if BF isn't going to back it.
D
DasTiger
Guest
Ahhhh. Now I understand. I have also had this happen when I criticized BF. I was highly pissed also.
I read through the thread and the authors google documents. I also read through Noob's thread and his system. While a very exciting and immense undertaking (kudos to both for their time and effort) I just think the systems are too complex with too many rules for the average player to use. Guys like Bootie and Rico with their KISS systems are much more fun and enjoyable. Just my opinion.
I am curious as to the amount of money this guy has to collect for BF to support this? I recall a post from BF saying "The bottom line here is if you guys REALLY want what you've been telling us you want, then you need to put your money where your mouth is and make a commitment. If you aren't willing to do that then I don't see why choppinlt should bother, not to mention us doing a tie in"
I am curious as to the amount of money this guy has to collect for BF to support this? I recall a post from BF saying "The bottom line here is if you guys REALLY want what you've been telling us you want, then you need to put your money where your mouth is and make a commitment. If you aren't willing to do that then I don't see why choppinlt should bother, not to mention us doing a tie in"
Does GM or Ford ask customers to ante up before they develop new cars? Does Microsoft ask customers to ante up before they introduce a new OS? Name me one company that requires it's customers to ante up before they take the plunge on a new product. Basically what BF is saying is, "We don't have to operate within the normal business paradigm, and we don't get sufficient returns from our normal product development, so you guys will have to pay before we produce what you desire." Like I've said before, BF is arrogant and has a tin ear when it comes to listening to the customers that have brought them their success.
~girds for the flames from the BF sycophants~
Actually, I think what BF is saying is that they gave this a go once and don't want to have to deal with it again.
Yep, in all fairness, BF is not involved in developing the product at all. It will be purely stand-alone first and only be considered for some "integration" with CMx2 if it does happen to be good enough. The money will not go to BF, but to the guy with the proposal for the OOC game and the programmer(s) he is going to hire for this to happen. So BF is not asking for money upfront since they are not involved in this - which has also been made clear in another posting by Steve in the same thread.
Which even makes this more questionable. Let us give money to some yahoo that all of a sudden shows up on the forum. Battlefront gives him a sticky and acts like they might support this?? This guy must know someone on the inside. Baffles me that a couple guys over there almost instantly said "hell yeah, I will support this just tell me where to send the check".
P
poesel71
Guest
Ok, here is my POV on this: I love playing CM and I love campaigns. I'm playing in the OOC and I'm playing in noobs (although not his game). The fun is much greater in the OOC because Bootie fudges the games to make them more interesting (this is good!). With a historical system the battles are more often lopsided and boring.
Still I think campaigning would benefit greatly from the ability to have an interface to CM. For one it could decrease the workload of the umpire or it could make campaigns without umpires possibly. Well, we could also clone Bootie - let's see if that gets traction on kickstarter
I've spent money on much sillier things than an OP-level Normandy game that might get an interface to CM. So if this game will or will not be made doesn't matter. It will show BFC the number of people that would actually pay money for that feature in CM.
I want it, I pay.
Still I think campaigning would benefit greatly from the ability to have an interface to CM. For one it could decrease the workload of the umpire or it could make campaigns without umpires possibly. Well, we could also clone Bootie - let's see if that gets traction on kickstarter
I've spent money on much sillier things than an OP-level Normandy game that might get an interface to CM. So if this game will or will not be made doesn't matter. It will show BFC the number of people that would actually pay money for that feature in CM.
I want it, I pay.
Don't get me wrong ... if someone actually managed to build a working campaign interface programme for CM ... I'd be the first to buy it.
Y
Yskonyn
Guest
I disagree. It's not BFC that will develop this.
They have just made crystal clear that they are not going to jump into another strategic layer project again, unless it will be abundantly clear the playerbase wants it.
I find Steve's explanation quite logical actually.
And if this guy developing OOC delivers, then BFC will look at how they can help integrating it. They just can't spare the time to take another gamble beforehand. And as we all like to get new shiny CM games, I am glad they want to play it safe.
Now, there is still the 'chicken or the egg' issue here; if people do want a strategic layer like this proposed project, but are afraid of supporting it (would you feel more comfortable if it was a kickstarter project?) then nothing will happen.
On the other hand, if the guy is a scammer, you will definitely loose your money.
So, if you want to back the project, you'll need to do some research about the how and what of this guy and his project. Once more people start to feel more comfortable, others will follow to back it up. It just needs momentum.
On a side note; I think it's very good we are sceptical about the project. I just don't agree with the way BFC is labelled to be the bad guy here.
From following this on his little google docs page he is shooting for a cool 125,000. If he was serious about this, I believe he should of had a lot of things (programmer, some better conceptual game renderings, more specifics on game play) lined up before posting it up to the public. I hate to be negative but reading what this thing is going to consist of just does not impress me right now. The maps that he put up look like childs play compared to others I have seen. Some of you guys that are on the more positive side I would appreciate it if you could enlighten me on what exact things you are seeing that puts this above and beyond or are you just keeping a good attitude hoping for more quality stuff?COO Designer
Jul 16
I am trying to collect as much info on this as I can. If anyone has any reliable data, please let me know. In the mean time, keep letting me know your thoughts.
This much I can tell you from my experience so far: Mobile development is CLEARLY a booming industry. So there is potential to reach new potential players/customers who may or may not even be interested in the tactical battle feature. Since the industry is booming, I have run across a LOT of mobile developers, which means good competition, i.e. lower prices. I am told that development costs are typically cheaper, but again I am trying to get good data (i.e. solicit good bids) from various people, both PC and mobile dev. In the mean time I am hoping that a programmer from the gaming community will volunteer, thus keeping costs down. I have one volunteer, but he has very limited time he can work per week.
I want to state that I am not married to any game platform. I simply want to choose the platform that will best help us achieve our end goals. Keep in mind that at this point we probably need to look beyond the CM community. Right now, I am looking at goal of $125,000 to create COO on iPad. I am waiting for bids on PC. I don't believe the CM community is large enough and/or supportive enough to develop COO by itself. By this I mean that if/when we get COO produced and sold, if we lose 1 CM player due to the initlal chosen game platform (eg iPad), but we gain 3 others, then COO is gaining significant support overall. That shows BFC any effort they give in making COO compatible with CM will provide a good return on their investment. And we can always make a version for PC later, because that is a definite priority for me. The goals are 1) produce COO; 2) Show BFC that COO is popular enough that BFC wants to support interfacing! Thoughts?
P
poesel71
Guest
I think he is currently in the pre-kickoff phase. He's collecting information about player interest and got BFC to support him. Which I think is a good start. To judge him this early on missing screenies or concept art is a bit unfair. There's no decision on the platform yet which will have quite an impact on how the game looks and plays. So it would be again a bit premature to have these areas finished.
I would be surprised if we see this game earlier than a year from now.
I would be surprised if we see this game earlier than a year from now.
You think? He posted this:
so I am curious to see more. If he is this far ahead and basically just needs to collect funds to hire a programmer, I would like to see more before shelling out cash for it. I am game as anyone on the idea but not getting my hopes up and opening my wallet until I am a little more convinced. You have to be honest here and agree that he has given very limited information up to this point. He is going to have to sell this thing hard to raise that much cash. To be honest CM is a small market and unless some heavy pocketed players jump on board this is going to take some time like you state. I will cross my fingers for the guy.