A port too far.

[max power 21]

In my opinion it doesn't seem like a mediocre Xbox game right now...

[Dajunka 10]

Okay, let me ask you guys a couple of questions.

If the decision had been made to make CCGM PC exclusive. Do you honestly think that it would look, play and feel the same as the version we have today?

Will Arma III be a console port, and if not, then why not?

Edited May 19, 2012 by Dajunka

[max power 21]

I think it would probably have a higher texel ratio on the polygons near the camera if it was PC exclusive. The rest, I can't say. It seems to play fine to me.

[st!gar 3]

OFP had a console port and it turned out fine. The OFP port did not effect the way that ArmA turned out, did it?

The problem here is that OFP had a console port, but it was not a console port.

[Gazzareth 1]

The problem here is that OFP had a console port, but it was not a console port.

From my understanding the lead platform for CCGM is the PC - not the other way around .. .. So how is it a console port ??

G

[gunso 10]

Console? after what Dayz mod do for arma 2 even for a game that's at the end of it's peak, BIS efforts in supporting user made mods finally pays off. It's better than wasting a lot of money for advertisement.

PC +1

Console 0

[max power 21]

I'm not really seeing the relevance here, gunso. The sales figures quoted by Gazzareth indicate that consoles sell around about 1000% more games than PC. You think that that is possible with every game they release in the future because there are relying on some mod that may or may not materialize at just the right time? Please.

[Joseph Archer 10]

I am also dissapointed with the xbox 360 port nature of the game. I would have liked this information up front, rather than supporting the P&C for what I believed was a PC game in development. I will be more cautious in spending my money with BIS in the future.

:p

[Dajunka 10]

I don't think your average gamer gives two and a half fluffy ducks about profit margins and the annual turnover for software company's. They are more interested in getting a good quality game that shows what a PC can do......brummmm.....brummmm.

[scareya 1]

I guess that's just as wrong from the average gamer then as from the software companies to not care about what their customers want. And I would like to place emphasis on the fact that PC gamers are customers, too. I do grant any developer the right to earn money though. Heck, without earning money they wouldn't be able to keep in business. But there must be a way to create games that give PC gamers the interface and the comfort they are used to.

I think what all those guys are demanding is this: Don't cripple PC games because the consoles are relying on limiting game controllers, suffer from not enough memory and use old-fashioned hardware. There MUST be a way to develop cross-platform without castrating PC gaming.

Carrier Command Gaea Mission is a great game which I really like. But I do find some things very limiting (compared to the original from 1985) and I am afraid those limits are brought by the limitations of the consoles. I don't like the limitations. But I do like CCGM even with them...

Edited May 21, 2012 by ScareYa

[Gazzareth 1]

I don't think your average gamer gives two and a half fluffy ducks about profit margins and the annual turnover for software company's. They are more interested in getting a good quality game that shows what a PC can do......brummmm.....brummmm.

They should be - the developers need to make a profit so that they can bankroll the next game - the bigger profit the more the incentive to make the next title, if they are not making a decent profit on games then there is no way that they will get the finance to keep on going.

I am also dissapointed with the xbox 360 port nature of the game. I would have liked this information up front, rather than supporting the P&C for what I believed was a PC game in development. I will be more cautious in spending my money with BIS in the future.

It was pretty clear on the website that it was going to be coming out on consoles as well as PC - not sure if it stated that it would be the XBOX only at that point, but it shouldn't have taken a genius to work out which one(s) it was likely to come out on.

G

[Hawk Firestorm 10]

No it wasn't in fact the announcement that is was being pushed to console was only made on the 17th, infact I think I started this thread long before the annoucement as I was concerned it was being pushed down that route as I and I'm sure many others who stumped up expecting a PC remake that took the game to the next level, only to get a half breed console game.

Nor was it many months ago when I posted a thread on the forums after seeing footage of the game and it being described as having 'strategic elements', because at the time from what I saw it appeared to me that they had gone out focused on the graphics side of the game, but didn't seem to have a grip of the base gameplay engineering that made the original so popular, and the more I've seen in the demo has confirmed this it seems my concerns were spot on sadly.

I suspect like myself many here were expecting a quality PC remake, that expectation being set both that it was comming from BI, who have been a PC developer and produced many of the games I currently own.

To do this game justace it required the power and versitility of the PC, its processing power, input method that lends itself to game with strategy and depth, where consoles were designed for waggle waggle waggle, shoot boom ya dead.

I suspect and this is speculation on my part that BI is having funding issues with the current climate, and considering how little progress the game has made since it was annouced, and someone over there looked at carrier command as a cash cow to cash in the brand name to raise funding for Arma3.

Which is sadly because if BI had gone about this the right way, and set out their stall to keep the bar where it should be, this game had the potential to out do any other title or series they've done todate, and some here maybe hoping that mystically between now and sept it will appear but it simply won't.

At the moment I'm seeing a game with nice graphics and little depth, that I would place below hostile waters and by long chalk gameplay wise, never mind a full remake, and the biggest culprit its going that way is the decision to push it to console and the sacrifices that have had to be made to do so.

I guess the guy in the footage was correct it is going to be a game with 'strategic elements' (very few) and basically be a joypad waggling FPS wonder with a carrier in it, carrier command on the box but none of it in it.

If they had gone out from teh get go and designed a console game fair go, but this convergence idea is one of a idiot practiced by a fool, two different platforms one deisnged for FPS type games, and consumers who tastes lean towards the deign of the platform, and the other which is very varied, who consumers tend to have more demanding and varied tastes.

Which is as I've said you can make a PC game and then try adapt it to the console but I've never seen one that has worked the other way round, and I certainly think the developement of the two should be spearate other than the very most basic of elements, each tailored to the platform its going on, and more importantly the consumer base.

And to be honest I don't think this title was ever suited for consoles, not unless you completely abandon the elements and design which made the game so popular in the first place, it started on the PC it should have stayed there, its the only platform with the power and versitilty capable of doing it justace.

There's simply not nor do I believe will there be, anywhere near enough depth, especially on the strategy front to appeal to many PC users, I'm sure the thumb wagglers will love it for a week or two.

Graphics 8/10 gameplay and design 3/10 could do far far better, and indeed should be.

[parmenides 11]

No it wasn't in fact the announcement that is was being pushed to console was only made on the 17th, infact I think I started this thread long before the annoucement as I was concerned it was being pushed down that route as I and I'm sure many others who stumped up expecting a PC remake that took the game to the next level, only to get a half breed console game.

Nor was it many months ago when I posted a thread on the forums after seeing footage of the game and it being described as having 'strategic elements', because at the time from what I saw it appeared to me that they had gone out focused on the graphics side of the game, but didn't seem to have a grip of the base gameplay engineering that made the original so popular, and the more I've seen in the demo has confirmed this it seems my concerns were spot on sadly.

I suspect like myself many here were expecting a quality PC remake, that expectation being set both that it was comming from BI, who have been a PC developer and produced many of the games I currently own.

To do this game justace it required the power and versitility of the PC, its processing power, input method that lends itself to game with strategy and depth, where consoles were designed for waggle waggle waggle, shoot boom ya dead.

I suspect and this is speculation on my part that BI is having funding issues with the current climate, and considering how little progress the game has made since it was annouced, and someone over there looked at carrier command as a cash cow to cash in the brand name to raise funding for Arma3.

Which is sadly because if BI had gone about this the right way, and set out their stall to keep the bar where it should be, this game had the potential to out do any other title or series they've done todate, and some here maybe hoping that mystically between now and sept it will appear but it simply won't.

At the moment I'm seeing a game with nice graphics and little depth, that I would place below hostile waters and by long chalk gameplay wise, never mind a full remake, and the biggest culprit its going that way is the decision to push it to console and the sacrifices that have had to be made to do so.

I guess the guy in the footage was correct it is going to be a game with 'strategic elements' (very few) and basically be a joypad waggling FPS wonder with a carrier in it, carrier command on the box but none of it in it.

If they had gone out from teh get go and designed a console game fair go, but this convergence idea is one of a idiot practiced by a fool, two different platforms one deisnged for FPS type games, and consumers who tastes lean towards the deign of the platform, and the other which is very varied, who consumers tend to have more demanding and varied tastes.

Which is as I've said you can make a PC game and then try adapt it to the console but I've never seen one that has worked the other way round, and I certainly think the developement of the two should be spearate other than the very most basic of elements, each tailored to the platform its going on, and more importantly the consumer base.

And to be honest I don't think this title was ever suited for consoles, not unless you completely abandon the elements and design which made the game so popular in the first place, it started on the PC it should have stayed there, its the only platform with the power and versitilty capable of doing it justace.

There's simply not nor do I believe will there be, anywhere near enough depth, especially on the strategy front to appeal to many PC users, I'm sure the thumb wagglers will love it for a week or two.

Graphics 8/10 gameplay and design 3/10 could do far far better, and indeed should be.

Sadly to say I fully agree.

I eager awaited this game to be a top successor of its original but seeing it has Console controls (similar to Stormrise) and very shallow strategic elements , I knew there went something wrong.

The full potential of a successor won't be seen until September.

The only hope that this game could be a success would be if there would be a modding scene and the game engine would allow this to unleash its full potential

This game doesnt need a story, it needs a compelling stratgic mode, an open hudge world which is fully explorable / conquerable (no timewarps and load screens omg why do they do this crap).

Edited May 22, 2012 by Parmenides

[Nicholas 5]

I saw it appeared to me that they had gone out focused on the graphics side of the game

I find it odd that you're saying this, when just last month you said this:

While the grahpics are good etc, the gameplay I find rather lackluster and below that of the orginal, rather than improving it.

I hope you do realize that Bohemia Interactive is quite a small studio compared to others and I don't believe they would have the workforce to work on a console version and a PC version separate from each other.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Nicholas

[Hawk Firestorm 10]

What's odd about it, I've said yes the graphics are good, though I think the design of the landscapes wasn't thought out well especially considering use by a AI.

But graphics alone don't make a game, and I suspect there's many smaller groups that have produced products alot better than games offered today.

If size was related to quality then EA would be the rolls royce of the gaming industry and erm *cough*

[Nicholas 5]

But graphics alone don't make a game, and I suspect there's many smaller groups that have produced products alot better than games offered today.

Exactly, not a single item alone will make a game. It is primarily about gameplay, correct? I think they've done well recreating the old Carrier Command. People will complain though that it is too similar and they didn't improve it. But then, those same people would complain that the game isn't enough like the original.

[Gazzareth 1]

No it wasn't in fact the announcement that is was being pushed to console was only made on the 17th, infact I think I started this thread long before the annoucement as I was concerned it was being pushed down that route as I and I'm sure many others who stumped up expecting a PC remake that took the game to the next level, only to get a half breed console game.

Nor was it many months ago when I posted a thread on the forums after seeing footage of the game and it being described as having 'strategic elements', because at the time from what I saw it appeared to me that they had gone out focused on the graphics side of the game, but didn't seem to have a grip of the base gameplay engineering that made the original so popular, and the more I've seen in the demo has confirmed this it seems my concerns were spot on sadly.

The only announcement made was that the choice of the console(s) being the XBOX 360, the site explicitly stated from at least the end of January (which is when I started looking at it) that the game would also be coming out on consoles. It was on the main page in info where it now says XBOX 360, it also said coming first quarter 2012 - which has now changed with the date.

G

[maddogx 13]

Yeah, the info about it coming out on next-gen consoles is pretty old, only the XBox360 & PC exclusivity is new.

Just looking at the first version of the CC:GM article on Wikipedia (from December 2009), it says the game will be released on PC and next-gen consoles, so this shouldn't be news to anyone.

[Dajunka 10]

Na, BI really dropped the ball on this one. The game is going to be good, but not great like it should have been. Somebody needs sacking.

[kremator 1065]

Let's just wait and see gents... no point in getting your knickers in a twist! There is plenty of time between now and release to tweak (and add things). Should they stay like they are then, perhaps, you have cause to complain, but remember that noone forced you to buy the P&C beta.

[Hawk Firestorm 10]

No there isn't, nothing new will be added now that hasn't been already planned on till the release in Sept, other than minor tweaks.

That being a console game, okie fair enough get them to stump up front to support it, don't reach out to your PC customer base and then go off and make a three wheeled skoda.

[Gazzareth 1]

Na, BI really dropped the ball on this one. The game is going to be good, but not great like it should have been. Somebody needs sacking.

Nothing like jumping on the bandwagon, I take it you are NOT the same Dajunka that said:::

To put it plainly, I think Carrier Command GM is a great game, I have recommended it to everyone I know, as well as spread the word all over the net. I bet at least 100 of those beta...

or

It is a game to get truly lost in, as was the original. I feel so relieved that they kept all of the parts of the game that made it so remembered. And to think it's not even finished yet....

or

My graphics were already beautiful and then I installed all the recommended compatibly win 7 updates ( not security updates) and your nor going to believe this, but my graphics have become even better.

It seems to me that a few people in the thread have more of a problem with the FACT the game is going to be ported TO consoles rather than the game itself.

G

[Hawk Firestorm 10]

Absolutely not.

Console 'ports' are of lower quality and depth, if I 'dislike' them its purely because of this, the PC is the higher bar here by far.

The reason they are are very simple the platform has a tight design focus and technical capabilities, the consumer tastes between those that use them are generally vast, there is a small group that kind of live inbetween the 2, but for the majority they are poles apart.

You can do one or the other well or try and do both badly.

BI's user base is going to be made up of PC users, that's a no brainer some will go for it many many more won't.

Gaming tastes as with everything are subjective, there are for instance people like myself who do play FPS games, although liking flight/combat sims and strategy and RPG, but most of all the reason I have these tastes is on a game by game basis and the PC games I've come to enjoy were all very well crafted, and other game 'ports' like DA2 I utterly reject because they are vapid, and lack depth because of the limitations of consoles and the influence its had on the design path to try put it to them.

This is another, and I'm absolutely positive I will be far from alone here.

Like I said if your a primarily a PC developer and you take on a remake of a PC game, then say okie PC users were going to remake it what in heck do you think people are going to be expecting at the end of it?

Joypad waggling nonsence with sonic the hedhog? I think not.

Like I say there's no middle ground here, if you take such a licence and people trust you as a maker of good PC games and you don't deliver, or in this case go completely against what the majority of your consumer base is expecting from you to deliver, that damages your brand and once you've done it you never get it back.

It's a double edge sword really, peoples expectations are going to be high indeed, you've got the opportunity to make a great sucess, or completely fluff it and damage your brand, and alienate your existing customer base, and damage their faith and trust in your brand.

But in answer to your statement no I don't hate consoles per say, I hate the degredation and effect they have had on the quality and variety of products being thrown out the door, and yes I see much of that in this offering and yes like I'm sure many will be I'm greatly disapointed in both BI and this title.

Frankly they can do alot better, and yes I do think they have utterly fluffed a licence few only could dream of ever obtaining and the opportunities that it presented.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Hawk Firestorm

[Nicholas 5]

It seems to me that a few people in the thread have more of a problem with the FACT the game is going to be ported TO consoles rather than the game itself.

Exactly. Like I said earlier:

I'm sure that if they never would have announced that this would be on consoles, you would probably be quite happy with it. But the fact that it is also coming out on consoles, people like you will look for things that they can complain about saying that it is just a crappy console "port".

BI's user base is going to be made up of PC users, that's a no brainer some will go for it many many more won't.

BI's primary userbase is mostly made up of military simulator/ArmA fans. I hope you realize that this game isn't aimed directly at the ArmA userbase to begin with. They are trying their best, and they are doing a damn good job, to make it easy to play and available to as many people as possible.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Nicholas

[Gazzareth 1]

Exactly. Like I said earlier:

Sorry missed that after reading the diatribes over the consoles .. .. ..

G