WoP + CoD = Wopcod

[revi]

With the graphic brilliance of WoP and the depth of CoD, a gap in the
market has been exposed...that SIM that has both.

[speculum jockey]

With the graphic brilliance of WoP and the depth of CoD, a gap in the
market has been exposed...that SIM that has both.

I think there might an exposed gap in your head.

Wop's graphics are stylish, and deceiving, not brilliant. Currently CloD is operating at less than peak efficiency. When it's fully patched I'm sure nobody will even remember WOP let alone compare it's misleading graphics to CloD.

[ATAG_Doc]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rqH4fUbko2U/TS3fflBSfGI/AAAAAAAASvw/DGYxNzhwMkM/s1600/troll.jpg

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

I think there might an exposed gap in your head.

Wop's graphics are stylish, and deceiving, not brilliant. Currently CloD is operating at less than peak efficiency. When it's fully patched I'm sure nobody will even remember WOP let alone compare it's misleading graphics to CloD.

I will, I love it:)

[furbs]

Forget the FM, DM, planes, sounds, lighting, size of maps, ground handling, fire and smoke affects, wierd green tint and online gametypes...they all are CRAP in WOP, i think i played it for about 2 hours then unistalled.

The only aspects of WOP i think are better than COD that i would gladly swap are...
The very well done way fields and towns are rendered and feel(but not the green tint)
The clouds, not fantastic but better than what we have now.
Tracers(just my personal taste)

[Doc_uk]

Plz, no more of these threads, i cant take anymore:rolleyes:

[Kongo-Otto]

Plz, no more of these threads, i cant take anymore:rolleyes:

+1!

[Hatch]

I think there might an exposed gap in your head.

Wop's graphics are stylish, and deceiving, not brilliant. Currently CloD is operating at less than peak efficiency. When it's fully patched I'm sure nobody will even remember WOP let alone compare it's misleading graphics to CloD.
:) Of course WoP graphics are brilliant.

We're not really flying over Kent are we ?
So both are trying to deceive you into thinking you are.

And which tricks are employed to "simulate" that is irrelevant.

Let's just wait and see what the future brings.
Some competition is a good thing for the flight sim world.

Now what I'm hoping for is a BOB2, OFF, WoP, CloD, RoF Sim.:cool:

[Meusli]

With the graphic brilliance of WoP and the depth of CoD, a gap in the
market has been exposed...that SIM that has both.

Cheers Revi, we all look forward to your new game release and hope that it beats both CLOD and WOP in sales. Being such an expert and all it can not possibly go wrong...

[Mysticpuma]

I wonder where Oleg Maddox has gone to?

What if he joined up with Gaijin (who make WoP)......he could have a Fully Functional Death Star, as-long as he remembered to fill a 2-meter vent-shaft!

I like both IL2:HSFX5.1 and WoP....I have both, they are both great IMHO.

I don't think WoPCoD would work, I'd much rather see "Pray Clod gets Wings"

:rolleyes:

Cheers, MP

[squidgyb]

Haha, no one remembers the shitstorm in the Ganjin forums (admittedly most people were still playing IL-2 at the time, owing to WoP being pretty, but, erm, not much more) when they revealed that half the features they promised weren't coming to WoP - but were going to make their way into the sequel.

I much rather the fact that CoD is, and will be, fully supported and will be fixed up to what everyone expects from it. Hell, I reckon that if we were all a bit more organised, and created specific threads in the right forum sections with suggestions, and not let every one of them fall into a trolling frenzy, we might actually get to shape this sim exactly how we would like it - but that does require patience and an understanding that things won't get fixed within a few days/hours, or even necessarily in the next patch - just because someone has just spotted it and considers that fault game breaking.

[Lololopoulos]

I totally agree on a merge of WOP and COD, which WOP's graphics and everything else from COD.

[kimosabi]

WoP isn't even close to CoD when we compare the amount of ground objects rendered. It's silly to even compare the two. WoP is like dressing up a pig, it might look "better" to some but underneath it's still a pig.

[LoBiSoMeM]

"WoP graphics are brilliant", but WoP planes look like crap, also the cockpits, also the ground units (what ground units?), also the water, also the effects, alos the fixed damage model visuals...

Oh, but AA is working right and the terrain with fixed shadows look OK! Amazing! "Brilliant"!

Really a benchmark for flight sims graphics... I'm far away of be a fanboy of Clod, need a lot of hard work to be a "final product", but all this crap about "WoP brilliant graphics" is poor...

[M1sF1rE]

The cockpits in Clod are great looking and so is the water, but lets face it the terrain is cartoonish. Pastel colors for the fields? WOP stomps Clod in the terrain department.

The fact is WOP has had about 4 updates in the last month or so and is still more fun to fly. The tracers in WOP are perfect whether you think their realistic or not. They just rock. The gun sounds are way better as well.

I wanted to love this sim, but I'm not a hardcore purist like many in this forum. I don't post much, but I spend a lot of time here looking for the next big fix. The beta patches just made my experience worse.

I'm sure in 6 months or so this will be the place to be, right now this game is a heaping mess.

Bash away, don't really care.

[Hunden]

Plz, no more of these threads, i cant take anymore:rolleyes:

Hey doc couldn't agree with you more but why would you bother reading it then and why would I ?:confused:

[Buchon]

Is a nice entertainment, does not ? :grin:

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

well im glad i dont read them anymore :)

[revi]

Oh please...dont cry about your dissapointments of Clod.
This thread is not for that.
I'm sure your darling will one day grow into a lovely swan, & your love and patience will be rewarded.
What Im saying is that there parts of both WOP and CLOD that bought together, would give a well needed addition to the Simming world.
(Most of you hardcore CloDers have actually admitted that already in your response).

Never mind being able to count the nostral hairs of the panzer commander.
Give me a game that runs well, looks good, and gives a believible scrap, & without having to buy a new rig.

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

Never mind being able to count the nostral hairs of the panzer commander.

now that is funny :)

[JG52Krupi]

Revi your an ass

Open your eyes the graphics in wop are not great.

The ground looks good but that's because they only have a small area to load and can fill it with detail. Cod on the other hand has incrediable detail from all heights and is ******* HUGE in comparison.

Looking ahead Wop 2 will look fantastic BUT it will not be for everyone's taste.

Take stalker and metro2033 for a kind of example. Metro is a fantastic game and has tones of atmosphere and is an awesome game BUT IMHO it only holds up against stalker in terms if graphics everything else stalker clearly kicks ass because it's not confined by rails I.e. Corridor shooter. I am sure the same will be said for wop2 sure it's gonna look nice and will be fun to play but at the end if the day it's a dogfight game while clod is the whole shabang the real deal.

[jojimbo]

Open your eyes the graphics in wop are not great.

The ground looks good but that's because they only have a small area to load and can fill it with detail. Cod on the other hand has incrediable detail from all heights and is ******* HUGE in comparison.


wop terrain graphics are some of the best ever created:FACT

the area CoD loads is "smaller" than CFS3 and runs like a bitch:FACT
(was dissapointed there were no channel islands)

WoP loads and runs smoothe, there definately an engine problem with CoD.

CoD terrain and graphics look terrible:FACT

[JG52Krupi]

wop terrain graphics are some of the best ever created:FACT

the area CoD loads is "smaller" than CFS3 and runs like a bitch:FACT
(was dissapointed there were no channel islands)

WoP loads and runs smoothe, there definately an engine problem with CoD.

CoD terrain and graphics look terrible:FACT

U clearly need your eyes testing FACT, the terrain looks good fir me its optimised for all heights.

There is nothing wrong with the terrain in clod other than the colors and last time I flew at a low height in wop I was duisturbed by how bad it is.

Wop runs fine because it doesn't push your hardware clod does and that has nothing to do with the bad optimisation it's simply a FACT that it would push our hardware like the original il2 did and RoF etc

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

it wasnt optimised to run on multi cores for a start,since the patch that has improved it, but thats 1 example .

[Blackdog_kt]

I wanted to love this sim, but I'm not a hardcore purist like many in this forum.


And that's exactly why you prefer WoP. There's nothing wrong with it, it's a matter of personal taste. ;)

For example, what you say about the tracers i find it to be generalizing a bit. They are excellent as to what criteria? They are movie like, if you want it to be like that then they are obviously going to be excellent for that purprose.
If another set of criteria was applied we could say they are certainly not looking like the real thing...i've fired 20mm AA cannons in real life, guns that are very similar to those found on WWII aircraft, and CoD's tracers are the most faithful rendition on a computer screen up to this point.

What i'm trying to say is, people can and should have their own opinions. We just can't expect everyone to agree when we describe things with definitive and superlative terms like "excellent" or "the worst ever" (or say something subjective and then stamp the word "fact" in big fat capitalization at the end of the sentence, like someone else did a few posts down :-P ).

It's importnat to say what each feature is good/bad for, because there's not a single way that's best for everything and there are a lot of different sets of criteria that can't be satisfied by a single implementation ;)

In short, WoP is a very good dogfight game, it focuses on dogfights so the maps are small and aircraft management is minimal. CoD is part of a different gaming genre that tries to recreate more of the experience on flying an aircraft, so it carries along more demands.

I think that comparing the two just because they feature aircraft is like comparing lions to panthers, sure they're in the same family of animals but they're definitely not the same kind.

Personally, i prefer seeing things looking closer to how they are in reality even if that means they will be less impressive. If i want a hollywood experience i will spend time on another game, but in a simulation i prefer things to be real-life believable even if that makes them more boring.

I think a big part of the gnashing of teeth with CoD is just that, a lot of people picked up IL2 through WoP and have similar expectations, so they totally gloss over the huge part of gameplay that lies within the more difficult realism settings in the sim. I fly with all the engine management and temperature effects on, so i get much more impressed with CoD than i get frustrated. If people fly in relaxed difficulty settings and miss out on 50% of the gameplay the sim has to offer, then it's obvious they will get bored fast and start noticing the negative aspects more.

As for flaming, it's not people who say "i prefer impressive over realistic" that get flamed, they just have a difference of opinion, so i don't think anyone will flame you. Usually it's the people who try to convince everyone that impressive always equals realistic that attract the flak. Cheers ;)