Future Plans

[dox44]

+1

[tevans]

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

By that rationale, any car after the Model T is just built by good modders.

Maybe so but I'm not wrong. You haven't really created anything from scratch. You took Tiller's CS series of games and changed some code, data and graphics. That's doesn't make you a game designer. What you're doing has been done for many other games over the years. Take Scourge of War Gettysburg or Waterloo for instance. People have changed the graphics and added new armies and battles for those games. That doesn't mean they created new games. Field of Glory II has an AI mod that even the design team recommends. But that mod doesn't mean that Field of Glory II is suddenly a new game. What you're doing amounts to nothing more than modding and creating a game overhaul. You can find any of the Total War series of games offering the same thing with mods and overhauls. But Creative Assembly isn't going to allow any modder to claim his mod or overhaul results in a new game that he has the right to sell.

I'm sorry if I struck a nerve. But you really need to be honest about what you're doing. John Tiller wrote the code for the CS games. The most you're doing is changing some of the code. Graphics and data too. That's nothing more than modding. Or overhauling an already existing game system. Your analogy of the Model T is wrong too because anybody else who built cars started from the ground up. They didn't take a Model T and add on to it then try to sell it as a new and different car. Ford could possibly have done it but nobody else. Think about it. Do you really think Henry Ford would have allowed something like that to happen? No way. He would have sued the pants off anybody who tried it.

Like I said you guys seem like a talented bunch but you're really not a design team. You're a modding team who mods an already established game. You aren't working with something that you built. You're taking an already established game system tweaking it with new code and some new graphics and data then selling it as a brand new game. To me that's a little dishonest especially when you're saying that you're creating new games and not mods.

[tevans]

ORIGINAL: Big Ivan

I hear you Jason, so the XM-1 Abrams is just a heavily modded M4A1 Sherman, right?

I'll have to get my mind around that statement but I think there is a disconnect somewhere...[:D]

As one fan, I'm looking forward to the new developed JTCS titles hands down. Keep on developing!

His analogy is really flawed. They didn't take a M4A1 Sherman and just throw more parts on it then call it the XM-1 Abrams. Both tanks were designed from the ground up. Nobody took a Model T and added to it then tried to sell it as something else either. That is what is happening here. Tiller created the CS series of games. He wrote the code and designed the game systems. The most these guys are doing is changing code, some graphics and data. That's the definition of modding. It's sure as hell not creating a new game from scratch. It's taking an existing system and overhauling it or adding on to it.

Please explain something to me. How is what these guys are doing any different than other games that are modded. The Scourge of War series has been modded to add new armies and battles. Field of Glory II was modded with a better AI. That doesn't make them new games. These guys are claiming they're creating new games and not mods. I don't see it that way. What they're doing is the definition of modding. What bothers me about it is that they're trying to sell their modded versions as brand new games.

The TOAW series does the same thing too. Norm Koger wrote the code for that game. Look what happened. Somebody came along and added a few things to the already existing systems in place. Now it's being sold as a newer version of the game. It's not a newer version of the game. It's a modded version of the same game. The TOAW series and the whole CS series weren't rebuilt from scratch. The guys working on these games had something to work with. That's my point. They aren't game designers. They're just modders.

[Jason Petho]

ORIGINAL: tevans


Maybe so but I'm not wrong. You haven't really created anything from scratch. You took Tiller's CS series of games and changed some code, data and graphics.

That isn't quite accurate and a misunderstanding of what we are actually doing. Sorry to hear that!

Everything is new, the data all built from scratch to be consistent with the new code, the graphics, the scenarios.. literally, everything with the exception of the basic code. That code has been completely redone as it was found not to the standards that we required for the game.

Comparing the original code and how it has been modified is comparing the 177 cu in engine (from the Model T) to a 2.7 litre EcoBoost V6.

Same basic design, but vastly improved.

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: tevans
The most you're doing is changing some of the code. Graphics and data too.

Gee, sounds almost like a new game or something...[:D][:D]

[carll11]

[:D]
Please explain something to me. How is what these guys are doing any different than other games that are modded. The Scourge of War series has been modded to add new armies and battles. Field of Glory II was modded with a better AI. That doesn't make them new games. These guys are claiming they're creating new games and not mods. I don't see it that way. What they're doing is the definition of modding. What bothers me about it is that they're trying to sell their modded versions as brand new games.

The TOAW series does the same thing too. Norm Koger wrote the code for that game. Look what happened. Somebody came along and added a few things to the already existing systems in place. Now it's being sold as a newer version of the game. It's not a newer version of the game. It's a modded version of the same game. The TOAW series and the whole CS series weren't rebuilt from scratch. The guys working on these games had something to work with. That's my point. They aren't game designers. They're just modders.

< Message edited by tevans -- 1/30/2019 8:54:49 AM >

your point is made/related as if the work on these Games is a distinction with no difference, when it fact there is,big time....... if you can't see it well,frankly, I have a feeling you're predisposed not too.........so to you sir I say, bon voyage'...

[Big Ivan]

Jason,

We go back a long way and I have to say this in your and the development team's defense,

There will always be the non-believers and those with an axe to grind about something that doesn't amount
to a hill of beans. They are splitting hairs here on a bunch of crap that frankly means nothing to me or the Campaign Series. It is a terrific game for what it is IMHO,
truly great! Given me years of enjoyment!

Just keep doing what the hell your doing to John Tiller's Campaign Series. Its all new development in my mind.

I will keep playing your new games as they come out and the old JTCS classics until I freaking die! My only wish is I had more computer
intelligence and training to help you guys out but I will always be in your camp regardless.

Gods Speed! I love what you and the development team does and will do!!!!!

Regards,
Big Ivan[:)]

[tevans]

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

ORIGINAL: tevans


Maybe so but I'm not wrong. You haven't really created anything from scratch. You took Tiller's CS series of games and changed some code, data and graphics.

That isn't quite accurate and a misunderstanding of what we are actually doing. Sorry to hear that!

Everything is new, the data all built from scratch to be consistent with the new code, the graphics, the scenarios.. literally, everything with the exception of the basic code. That code has been completely redone as it was found not to the standards that we required for the game.

Comparing the original code and how it has been modified is comparing the 177 cu in engine (from the Model T) to a 2.7 litre EcoBoost V6.

Same basic design, but vastly improved.

I'm sorry but I don't think I'm misunderstanding anything at all. What makes what you're doing any different from somebody modding a game to add new graphics? Or overhauling a game with new data or new code or new scenarios? That's what modding is. You may have changed, added or tweaked code but you started with a base code and added to it. It doesn't mean that you've made a new game or a new game system. All you're doing is adding to what already existed. It doesn't matter if you add a little or a lot. It still amounts to modding and not creating a new game.

Let me ask you something. Will the next edition of the CS series still carry Tiller's name? It should if you're still using his base code. All I see that you guys are doing is adding to and changing a game that already existed. You can add new code, new graphics and even new scenarios. That doesn't make it a brand new game. It makes it a modded or overhauled version of an existing game.

You say I misunderstand. What's the difference between what you're doing and what modders have done in the past and still do today. Modding takes into account everything you claim you're doing. So how is it any different? I've seen mods that changed code. I've seen mods that changed data and graphics too. Why am I misunderstanding here? Name any game that gets modded and what gets changed. Usually it's data or graphics. With some games even code gets tweaked or changed. Scenarios are usually not done by modders though. That's usually an end user thing.

I'm not trying to belittle your work. I just don't see how you can claim that you're making new games. I'm sure you've put a lot of time and effort into CS Vietnam. What makes it a new game though? Graphics? New code and scenarios? That's a definition for modding. The only possible way it could be a new game is if you scrapped the CS series and all of it's code and did your own thing from scratch. You guys aren't doing that.

[tevans]

ORIGINAL: Big Ivan

Jason,

We go back a long way and I have to say this in your and the development team's defense,

There will always be the non-believers and those with an axe to grind about something that doesn't amount
to a hill of beans. They are splitting hairs here on a bunch of crap that frankly means nothing to me or the Campaign Series. It is a terrific game for what it is IMHO,
truly great! Given me years of enjoyment!

Just keep doing what the hell your doing to John Tiller's Campaign Series. Its all new development in my mind.

I will keep playing your new games as they come out and the old JTCS classics until I freaking die! My only wish is I had more computer
intelligence and training to help you guys out but I will always be in your camp regardless.

Gods Speed! I love what you and the development team does and will do!!!!!

Regards,
Big Ivan[:)]

I not a non-believer and I don't have any axe to grind. I just want somebody to explain to me how changing an older, existing version of a game with new graphics, new code and new data suddenly makes it a brand new game instead of a modded or overhauled game. I own a lot of the Total War series so I'll use those mods and games as my example. If I download a mod that completely overhauls my version of Total Warhammer does that mean that I'm playing a new game? Of course not. I'm playing a modded version of Total Warhammer. How is that any different than what's going on here. Tiller's base code is still being used. It's just being tweaked and added to. Graphics and data are being changed. That's all a definition for modding. I think it's a little dishonest to say that new games are being created. The only thing happening is the existing game is being changed through code, graphics and data. Something that modders do every day.

[Jason Petho]

ORIGINAL: tevans
The only possible way it could be a new game is if you scrapped the CS series and all of it's code and did your own thing from scratch. You guys aren't doing that.

The code is to the point where it is all new because of the grand issues with the old code, it has need to be redone/rewritten.

We are doing exactly that.

That shouldn't be too difficult to comprehend?

[Crossroads]

I am a huge EA Total War franchise fan. Here's a quick history of the Total War games, I own all the games (and their corresponding expansion ganes as well) but those in italics:

Total War Engine v1
[*] 2000 - Shogun: Total War + Mongol Invasion expansion
[*] 2002 - Medieval: Total War + Viking Invasion expansion

Total War Engine v2
[*] 2004 - Rome: Total War + Barbarian Invasion, Alexander expansions
[*] 2006 - Medieval II: Total War + Kingdoms expansions

Total War Engine v3
[*] 2009 - Empire: Total War + the Warpath Campaign expansion
[*] 2010 - Napoleon: Total War + the Peninsular Campaign expansion
[*] 2011 - Total War: Shogun 2 + Rise of Samurai, Fall of Samurai expansions
[*] 2013 - Total War: Rome II (I won't list the expansions anymore, as the DLCs really took off here! Six DLCs for Rome II so far [:)] )
[*] 2015 - Total War: Attila
[*] 2016 - Total War: Warhammer
[*] 2017 - Total War: Warhammer II
[*] 2018 - Total War Saga: Thrones of Britannia[/i]

As seen above, there's been three game engines in the series as a whole, and under those game engines the series has covered a wonderful set of eras. And not only that, as individual games have done that in expanding an era to new wars and campaigns. Medieval II was Europe, Kingdoms expansion extended the era to New World, for intance.

Compare to Campaign Series:

Game engine v1 - evolving game by game, each game a separate compile and codebase:

Talonsoft

[*] East Front (1997)
[*] West Front (1998)
[*] East Front II (1999)
[*] Rising Sun (2000)
[*] Divided Ground: Middle East Conflict (2001)

Matrix Games w. John Tiller

[*] John Tiller's Campaign Series bundle (2007) - East Front II v1.04, West Front v1.04, Rising Sun v1.04

Matrix Games w. CS Legion

Game engine v1.1 - One game engine version

[*] East Front 2 v2.02
[*] West Front v2.02
[*] Rising Sun v2.02

Game engine v1.2 - One game engine version with Adaptive AI

[*] Campaign Series: Middle East 1948-1985 (2015 and a free reimage 2018) w. future DLC Iran-Iraq War in the pipeline


Game engine v2.0 - Lua Event Engine

[*] Campaign Series: Vietnam 1948-1985 (in the works, planned release 2019) w. future DLC Korean War in the pipeline

[*] Campaign Series: East Front 1939-1941 (in the works, planned release 2020) w. future DLCs for 1942-1943 and 1944-1945 in the pipeline

[*] Ditto: Campaign Series: West Front, Pacific front with their DLC in the pipeline.
[*] Ditto: Campaign Series: Cold War with their DLCs in the pipeline

Granted, we as the CS Legion dev team are certainly not Electronic Arts with their massive resources, yet there's a planned approach for the years to come to bring this series forward. Things are taking their time, but we're working in a very systematic manner with the resources we have. For instance, the nations such as United States in CS: Vietnam will be available for CS: Cold War, as well as for CS: Vietnam DLC Korean War. Similarly, the UK in CS: Middle East were built with Cold War in mind, there's the Army of the Rhine there for instance.

Everyone make what they wish with semantics as they see fit, I am not seeing a very different approach into as what we are doing to say what EA is doing with Total War. Lots of eras and wars to come, with new code and graphics added to replace that of the old at intervals.



edit typos

[Noypi53]

What are the plans to release this game in Steam?

[Crossroads]

ORIGINAL: Noypi53

What are the plans to release this game in Steam?

This has not been discussed in detail. Lately, Matrix has released first on their store and then shortly after in Steam, with a coupon code to register a Matrix purchased game there, too. So maybe something like that.

But as said, this has not been discussed yet.

[tevans]

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

ORIGINAL: tevans
The only possible way it could be a new game is if you scrapped the CS series and all of it's code and did your own thing from scratch. You guys aren't doing that.

The code is to the point where it is all new because of the grand issues with the old code, it has need to be redone/rewritten.

We are doing exactly that.

That shouldn't be too difficult to comprehend?

So are you still using base code as you said in a previous post or are all the games being rewritten from scratch? How exactly are you creating new games that way? That's what I don't understand. All you're doing is changing and enhancing an existing game that somebody else (John Tiller) created. What's the difference between what you're doing and modding? I don't see any difference. If you keep anything from the original games then whatever you do amounts to nothing more than modding.

I have Divided Ground and CS Middle East. Both are good games. Please explain to me how CS Middle East is a new game. It's just an enhanced version of Divided Ground. Do those enhancements make the original game better? You bet. But those enhancements were added to a game which already existed. How is that any different than some modder doing a complete overhaul of a Total War game? That modder had to start with the original game just like you start with an original. Anything that modder creates does nothing more than change aspects of the original game. That's exactly what you're doing.

If I'm wrong and you're completely rewriting code plus adding new graphics and data systems then why would you even bother calling your creation the Campaign Series? Tiller created the Campaign Series. Why wouldn't you want your original design called and sold as something else. That why I asked if Tiller's name was going to be associated with the next version of the Campaign Series. If you're scrapping everything he wrote then why use his name and if you're aren't scrapping everything then I don't see how you can call it a brand new game.

[tevans]

@Crossroads I have the entire Total War series. I know that they came out with different versions. Creative Assembly has developed every single one of them. Almost every single one of those games gets modded too. Some with complete overhauls. But every mod starts with the original game and needs the original game to run a mod. How is that any different from what you guys are doing. You're taking an old series of games and enhancing them by changing code, graphics and data. That's what modders do. I'm not saying that what you guys are doing is necessarily a bad thing. I'm just saying that all it amounts to is modding. Whatever you create just changes or adds to an already existing game. Nothing wrong with that except for the claim that they're new games. They aren't new. The only possible way they could be new games is if every single one of them was created from scratch. But if you're going to go to all the trouble to do that then why still call it the Campaign Series? Call it something else and let it stand or fall on it's own merits.

[Jason Petho]

If you're scrapping everything he wrote then why use his name and if you're aren't scrapping everything then I don't see how you can call it a brand new game.

Marketing 101

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: tevans
If you keep anything from the original games then whatever you do amounts to nothing more than modding.

That's really what you think? Then why don't you mod up a 3D version of the campaign series which uses its OOB? You seem to have a very exaggerated view of what constitutes "modding".

[demyansk]

All the hps games I own along with Tiller all play in a similar fashion. However, always changes in the content whether it's WW1 or WW2. As far as I am concerned, Vietnam will be a new game compared to middle east. I like it that way, I don't want to learn an entire new system. I have all the Battlefield games from EA. Always somewhat different themes, changes in graphics, New weapons but still me running around trying to survive. All these games being developed and items in general borrow from previous versions. Radios, tv's, computers, auto's, trains and the list goes on. I don't complain too much because these guys know way more than I do about creating games and I always have the choice to buy or leave alone. I tend to buy, it's the American Way, quality is where it's at.

Keep up the good work on the games. I enjoy them very much and I am sure you are making below minimum wage with all the work being done.

[tevans]

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: tevans
If you keep anything from the original games then whatever you do amounts to nothing more than modding.

That's really what you think? Then why don't you mod up a 3D version of the campaign series which uses its OOB? You seem to have a very exaggerated view of what constitutes "modding".

Very simple reason. I don't mod this game. But I have made mods for other games. My view isn't exaggerated at all. Maybe you can tell me the difference between what's going on here and modding. Crossroads brought up the Total War series. Let's take a look at that for an example. Total War Warhammer 1 & 2 both have been modded extensively. There are overhaul mods that actually change the way the game plays as well as adding more units and graphics. Code and data was changed in those mods. Tell me how that is any different than what's happening with the Campaign Series.

Even closer to home take a look at the Scourge of War series. People have modded those games to add new units, graphics and battles. They've made new maps and changed some of the data. That's what I see is going on here. There's nothing wrong with it except for the claims that they're making new games. No. All they're doing is changing some code, data and graphics to an already existing game. Somewhat like an overhaul mod. People creating overhaul mods for games such as Total War aren't claiming to have made new games. They know better.

I'm not saying that Jason and his team are doing a bad thing by enhancing these games either. In fact, I think it's a good thing. But let's call it what it is. They aren't new games. Not as long as they're building on to the existing game. If they start from scratch there really isn't any point in calling it the Campaign Series anymore because it won't be the Campaign Series that John Tiller created.

New games to me are built from the ground up from scratch with new ideas. Not from taking an existing game and changing it or adding on to it. There are plenty of Matrix games that get modded. Graphics get changed. Data is changed and in some instances even code has been changed. New scenarios and campaigns are created too. Like I said, I have no problem with what Jason and his team are doing but call it what it is. They aren't new games. They're enhancements to already existing game. That's what modding is. How is it not the case here?

[tevans]

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

If you're scrapping everything he wrote then why use his name and if you're aren't scrapping everything then I don't see how you can call it a brand new game.

Marketing 101

That's not marketing. It's being deceitful. You aren't creating new games. You're only overhauling and enhancing an existing game series. In other words you're modding the game to create new units and theaters to play in. Nothing wrong with enhancing the series like you're doing. Just call it what it is.