Just imagine CloD with WoP map

[biltongbru]

CloD is the most fantastic combat flight sim but it seems that the landscape rendering is causing the major fps/stuttering problems. Wings of Prey is not actually comparable but inferior to Clod in most aspects especially gameplay, aircraft modelling, mission building and lack of any editable land objects but I must admit that the landscape looks much more realistic and has smooth rendering during game play. I wonder why the Maddox team did not use similar algorithms for their mapping coding, but I think there should have been good reasons for this decision.

http://vimeo.com/14661191

[choctaw111]

Then we would hear how the maps need to be larger.

[Lololopoulos]

here is goes again. we've already had several 50+ pages discussion on WOP vs. COD landscape. but I have to say I agree with you.

[philip.ed]

I agree with one of Blackdogs posts from a day or so ago. CloD has excellent components on the map, but they just need to blend together seemlessly.
I think that less trees would be better, in place of 3-D hedgerows around the field boundaries.
More blue-atmospheric haze as well would improve things.
One of the reasons why WoP works so well is because the landscape looks neat and natural; and because of the way the filter and the auto-pop is modelled, the texture transition is very smooth.

Just my two pence (I won't even touch on colour here)

[Doc_uk]

Plz no more, What if Cod was Wop,

[Space Communist]

Hmm yes I can picture it in my mind now, just like flying inside a shoe-box!

[Derinahon]

Promoting your WOP video here? tut

:-P

[kendo65]

Yes - we're at risk of repeating OLD news here, but i have to say, as someone who really had been looking forward to COD for a long time I am really disappointed with the map. That WOP vid really just rams home for me what a poor job the devs have done in creating a believable depiction of the English countryside.

Looking at the WOP video the scenery looks thoroughly convincing and real. When looking at the COD map I'm constantly fighting a sense of disbelief - it just doesn't give me a feeling of reality. It's primarily down to the poor placement of trees. The net result is that things don't quite gel and coalesce to the stage where I just accept it as real. There is always that 'something not quite right' feeling that I have to fight against (usually unsuccessfully). I'm convinced that if the tree placement was redone in a similar way to WOP the map would really come together + maybe a little atmospheric haze as Philip_Ed suggests. It would probably be a fairly major undertaking and is not likely to be done any time soon though. (Maybe eventually by modders?)

I really never thought I'd say this, but the map is close to being a deal breaker for me with the entire game.

Sorry - I know others will disagree with my opinion, but unfortunately that's my take.

[RocketDog]

Same here - the map is a failure as it stands.

[Ali Fish]

Same here - the map is a failure as it stands.

a failure ? thats mighty harsh for a 1:1 scale representation of south east england. the un-educated critique around here is astounding. no wonder the developers shy away from any form of up front discussion. this is a simulation. not a game.

i think it does the job very well. but it isnt anywhere near a failure.. your opinion is more full of failure and the height of ridicule. (rediculous)

western world priveledged philosophy. does anyone round here know what that is ?

[biltongbru]

Promoting your WOP video here? tut

:-P

video for comparison purposes,that should be clear?

[kendo65]

a failure ? thats mighty harsh for a 1:1 scale representation of south east england. the un-educated critique around here is astounding. no wonder the developers shy away from any form of up front discussion. this is a simulation. not a game.

i think it does the job very well. but it isnt anywhere near a failure.. your opinion is more full of failure and the height of ridicule. (rediculous)

western world priveledged philosophy. does anyone round here know what that is ?

Why 'uneducated'?

If the purpose of the game map is to produce a believable feeling of 'being there' then for me it doesn't work, so maybe that makes it a 'failure' in my eyes too.

It's possible that the issues mentioned are another result of the rush job/unfinished nature of the release - I could easily believe that the tree placement issues are due to some overworked graphics person being under too tight a deadline.

(A good analogy may be the AI. They needed to produce some form of AI to ship the game, but what we got obviously isn't the final version. Maybe a similar situation occurred with the map?? Unlike the AI though, which they have stated is being reworked, there has been no word on the map beyond the addition of transparent water and waves, which though welcome, is less important than getting the basic terrain right. It would just be a real shame if the map wasn't eventually made as good as it could be)

I would be interested to know the devs opinion and whether any reworking is planned alongside the myriad of other updates, fixes and improvements.

[jt_medina]

Being the first sim they do as far as I know, it's a success to me. WOP 2 is coming and I hope they improve the FM and DM and also gets an easy to use mission editor.

[Ctrl E]

Being the first sim they do as far as I know, it's a success to me. WOP 2 is coming and I hope they improve the FM and DM and also gets an easy to use mission editor.

i like wop's maps but can's stand the overdone bloom

[Flanker35M]

S!

What I noted from the video of WoP is that there were NONE of following things we have in CoD..

1) Flickering shadows. Really bothering visual issue with CoD. Shadows solid only when close within the "LOD ring".

2) No LOD changes whatsoever, no popping up buildings etc. Extremely smooth transition of LOD, if any. In CoD the "ring of LOD" around your plane.

3) Smooth performance. Simply no slowdowns, stutter or stops. I had it that way too in the demo over Berlin with a ton going on around me, totally smooth experience.

Otherwise I do not comment WoP or CoD. Both represent something related to WW2 so leaving it there.

[Derinahon]

video for comparison purposes,that should be clear?

A tongue in cheek remark from me there.

Back on topic, even though it's missing some of the cinematic flair and tree placement (lol) of WoP, I think the presentation of CoD in game is fantastic. I doubt WoP could scale to the size of CoD's map and still look as pretty.

Personally I don't actually like the cinematic type filters and post processing they use in WoP, it makes the scene look quite dull and muted at times. Not hating on WoP, I have it and enjoyed it for what it is.

[kendo65]

Yes, there are aspects that aren't as good as COD, but regarding the basic terrain representation of the English countryside they really nailed it.

[Derinahon]

Yes, there are aspects that aren't as good as COD, but regarding the basic terrain representation of the English countryside they really nailed it.

I'd agree with that. Can't believe we've entertained another thread on this subject ;)

[flyrob]

People who jump on anyone with critique seem to want this game to be perfect and have to create a dreamworld where it allready is, anyone who threatens that with some reality is uneducated etc....

I have to say, WoP is inferior in any gameplay aspect, but by the looks of it I swear it still looks like a next-generation game while the CoD landscape and stuttering just barely puts it ahead of 1946

[ElAurens]

Hmm yes I can picture it in my mind now, just like flying inside a shoe-box!

This, many times over.

[Derinahon]

Why does everyone come to this forum to praise WoP? Don't they have their own? lol

[BadAim]

"Just imagine CloD with WoP map."

I'm sorry I can't; the concept is just too stupid on too many levels for me to consider.

[justme262]

WOP looks great at a glance but when I got down low and had a closer look at the trees and houses. The shadows were just drawn on the ground as part of the ground texture. There's a huge saving in fps. WOP doesn't compute tree/building shadows in real time and so you can't change the time of day.

Get down low in COD and you can see more and more detailed ground objects. High rez textures and even grass. All with real time shadows that can changed with the time of day and have beautiful dawn and dusk.

[jt_medina]

"Just imagine CloD with WoP map."

I'm sorry I can't; the concept is just too stupid on too many levels for me to consider.

Make your point. Why is it stupid?.

[Tiger27]

WOP is nice in a Hollywood sort of way, but really WOP is so smooth with little or no pop ups etc because the horizon is a lot closer than in CoD and the map itself is tiny, even the no pop-up is replaced by a lot of shadowy buildings that gradually clear, it is a better way of doing it than CoD but really, do you want tiny maps, modelled with modern building placement or something a bit more realistic in size, modelling England as it was in 1940, just my thoughts, I guess we all are looking for different things.

[CharveL]

Really, beyond comparing steak to Spam I think both sides are right. It's much, much more resource intensive doing the scale that CloD has to process not to mention individual plane AI, but there is a lot of room for efficiency improvement.

We really are still in beta right now so they're tacking on stuff as they can manage then optimizing. We'll see, but the flickering shadows really gotta go...

[biltongbru]

Why does everyone come to this forum to praise WoP? Don't they have their own? lol

The comparison has direct relevance and is a valid discussion:)

[biltongbru]

Plz no more, What if Cod was Wop,
Im felling suicidal:(
then don't participate!

[biltongbru]

Get down low in COD and you can see more and more detailed ground objects. High rez textures and even grass. All with real time shadows that can changed with the time of day and have beautiful dawn and dusk.

I agree with you; up close the detail of the vegetation in CoD is awesome but it disappears at 30 meter distance:( When flying (99% of time) and at low altitudes then the trees have a kind of cartoon appearance and is a reality passion killer. I just hope and trust that these will be fixed some day.:)

[Baron]

CloD is the most fantastic combat flight sim but it seems that the landscape rendering is causing the major fps/stuttering problems. Wings of Prey is not actually comparable but inferior to Clod in most aspects especially gameplay, aircraft modelling, mission building and lack of any editable land objects but I must admit that the landscape looks much more realistic and has smooth rendering during game play. I wonder why the Maddox team did not use similar algorithms for their mapping coding, but I think there should have been good reasons for this decision.

http://vimeo.com/14661191



WoP landscape looks much more realistic and has smooth rendering during game play exactly BECAUSE of inferior aircraft modelling, mission building and lack of any editable land objects.


Ask yourselfe why RoF for ex, have major stutter issues as soon as the try to load more than 30-40 objects at the same time.

Ask yourselfe why RoF for ex, have, what, 2,5 km visibillity distance (other aircrafts).

Etc, etc.


Im not using CoD as an example because everyone automaticly assumes everything is broken in it.

[kristorf]

Surely this is a non-thread in a CLoD forum?

[biltongbru]

WoP landscape looks much more realistic and has smooth rendering during game play exactly BECAUSE of inferior aircraft modelling, mission building and lack of any editable land objects.


Ask yourselfe why RoF for ex, have major stutter issues as soon as the try to load more than 30-40 objects at the same time.

Ask yourselfe why RoF for ex, have, what, 2,5 km visibillity distance (other aircrafts).

Etc, etc.


Im not using CoD as an example because everyone automaticly assumes everything is broken in it.

fair explanation thanks

[pupaxx]

Plz no more, What if Cod was Wop,
Im felling suicidal:(

C'mon mate, don't surrender! Just another 50 pages of comments..:grin::grin:
I almost forgot....someone should invite David Hayward to this thread...I'can not remeber his opinion on green-puke filter...!
BUHAHAHAHHHAAAAA ...Sorry, I'can't resist!
Cheers

[Tiger27]

WoP landscape looks much more realistic and has smooth rendering during game play exactly BECAUSE of inferior aircraft modelling, mission building and lack of any editable land objects.


Ask yourselfe why RoF for ex, have major stutter issues as soon as the try to load more than 30-40 objects at the same time.

Ask yourselfe why RoF for ex, have, what, 2,5 km visibillity distance (other aircrafts).

Etc, etc.


Im not using CoD as an example because everyone automaticly assumes everything is broken in it.

Exactly, considering the scope of CoD and the fact it can already have a lot more objects on screen than ROF, they actually do well with the landscape, a lot of people seem to be seeing all oF CoD's negatives and then compare them with all the positives of other sims, it's a flight sim, with todays hardware it is never going to have the ground detail of Crysis 2.

[RocketDog]

a failure ? thats mighty harsh for a 1:1 scale representation of south east england. the un-educated critique around here is astounding. no wonder the developers shy away from any form of up front discussion. this is a simulation. not a game.

Well, my astounding, harsh and uneducated critique is based on the fact that I actually live in the area covered by CloD's map and frequently fly over it in a glider.

Generally, I find that CloD does a poor job of reflecting reality. The colours of the fields are wrong, the distinctive and near-universal dark hedges are missing, the trees are too light and so look like tropical specimens rather than the trees that actually grow in England, the horizon is too sharp and the colours don't mute into a blue haze in the distance like they do in real life [1]. Other sims get these things right, CloD doesn't. Of course, it's better at dawn and dusk, and best of all at midnight. Unfortunately, a BoB sim that doesn't work well in daylight is a bit limited.

What's exasperating about these (IMO serious) failures is that they were all quite avoidable. A lot of what's wrong is just the colour palatte. So claims that CloD looks less realistic than WoP because it's actually much more advanced rather miss the point. For instance, ClodD's higher resolution terrain textures could actually have used realistic colours and still kept their high resolution.

Speaking only for myself, I find the peculiar landscape CloD uses to represent England to be a real immersion killer. I didn't mind when IL-2 represented the Kuban or somewhere as a vast green plain, because I don't know the place in real life. But England is very familiar and it just doesn't look like CloD's representation. WoP (if the filters were removed) and FSX do a rather better job, in my opinion. Even RoF's France looks more like England, at least from high up.

To this particular English pilot, CloD looks like a cartoon version of the real England put together by someone who has never been here and didn't do much research before starting. And perhaps that is exactly what it is.

Now, obviously, some people are perfectly happy with CloD's England. And good luck to them and I hope they enjoy their game.

1. Some problems may be because I use an ATi 6970 and CloD doesn't seem to have been designed with modern ATi cards in mind. On my old GTX285 the horizon did look better.

[Baron]

1. Some problems may be because I use an ATi 6970 and CloD doesn't seem to have been designed with modern ATi cards in mind. On my old GTX285 the horizon did look better.


Well, u can chock that up to AMD`s willingness to work with different teams during development = non existant if its not "wothy of thire effort", unlike NVidia who DID work with Oleg and team. ;)

[biltongbru]

Well, my astounding, harsh and uneducated critique is based on the fact that I actually live in the area covered by CloD's map and frequently fly over it in a glider.

Generally, I find that CloD does a poor job of reflecting reality. The colours of the fields are wrong, the distinctive and near-universal dark hedges are missing, the trees are too light and so look like tropical specimens rather than the trees that actually grow in England, the horizon is too sharp and the colours don't mute into a blue haze in the distance like they do in real life [1]. Other sims get these things right, CloD doesn't. Of course, it's better at dawn and dusk, and best of all at midnight. Unfortunately, a BoB sim that doesn't work well in daylight is a bit limited.

What's exasperating about these (IMO serious) failures is that they were all quite avoidable. A lot of what's wrong is just the colour palatte. So claims that CloD looks less realistic than WoP because it's actually much more advanced rather miss the point. For instance, ClodD's higher resolution terrain textures could actually have used realistic colours and still kept their high resolution.

Speaking only for myself, I find the peculiar landscape CloD uses to represent England to be a real immersion killer. I didn't mind when IL-2 represented the Kuban or somewhere as a vast green plain, because I don't know the place in real life. But England is very familiar and it just doesn't look like CloD's representation. WoP (if the filters were removed) and FSX do a rather better job, in my opinion. Even RoF's France looks more like England, at least from high up.

To this particular English pilot, CloD looks like a cartoon version of the real England put together by someone who has never been here and didn't do much research before starting. And perhaps that is exactly what it is.

Now, obviously, some people are perfectly happy with CloD's England. And good luck to them and I hope they enjoy their game.

1. Some problems may be because I use an ATi 6970 and CloD doesn't seem to have been designed with modern ATi cards in mind. On my old GTX285 the horizon did look better.

Well said Rocket dog, your testimony is pretty much undisputable; I am a keen supporter of Clod and did a lot to promote this sim even before its release and strongly believe that the challenges must be faced and solved.

It is however very interesting to see so many forum members who act in denial with some of the issues of Clod and actually BS themselves to such an extent that they believe there is no problem:) Some of them even become ill mannered with their replies....:(

[philip.ed]

+1 to Rocket-Dog.
But RD; if you had said that before, I am sure Ali would have agreed with you on many levels :-P

[jg27_mc]

...but by the looks of it I swear it still looks like a next-generation game while the CoD landscape and stuttering just barely puts it ahead of 1946

I own CloD, but never flew it. Made a few benchmarks with the tracks provided and that was it. Currently don't even have steam crap installed.

I flew the WoP demo and it was far inferior (FM, DM) regarding all the little details comparing to IL-2 1946. I'm not into console games... And WoP had an arcade fell that I hated.

But when it comes to graphic representation, I completely agree with flyrob, although I must state that the WoP green filter is a pain in the ass, completely overdone IMHO.

Cheers

[Derinahon]

...

It is however very interesting to see so many forum members who act in denial with some of the issues of Clod and actually BS themselves to such an extent that they believe there is no problem:) Some of them even become ill mannered with their replies....:(

Are you saying that anyone who disagrees with you is BS'ing themselves?

I don't think that's true. I think that the majority are happy with the way the game looks in most respects, but then there's the hard core 'it has to be a perfect representation of real life' crowd who will continue to complain in the strongest terms and make 'Oh if only CoD looked like WoP' threads.

There's my mildly I'll mannered reply for you :p

[biltongbru]

Are you saying that anyone who disagrees with you is BS'ing themselves?


No not at all! Please read again carefully what I have said and then you would see that your comment is out of context:)


"It is however very interesting to see so many forum members who act in denial with some of the issues of Clod and actually BS themselves to such an extent that they believe there is no problem Some of them even become ill mannered with their replies...."

[Derinahon]

'some of the issues' ...including the current discussion obviously, no? Anyway I accept that you don't think anyone with a differing opinion is deluded, I just felt it was a bit of a harsh statement to make :-P

[biltongbru]

'some of the issues' ...including the current discussion obviously, no? Anyway I accept that you don't think anyone with a differing opinion is deluded, I just felt it was a bit of a harsh statement to make :-P



Okay I apologise if it came over too harsh to you, I am just as great a fan as you are on this sim and I will stick with it because there is no substitute. I just had to make the point. With my initial question I got some good answers and I thanked them...

[jt_medina]

View distance is not that different, take a look at those shots. Both games are maxed out.
Sorry if shots are sized down I don't know how to show them in full screen.

Trees, houses fade very smoothly on the horizon in WOP and the distance you can see are in both cases very similar, maybe FOV is wider in IL2 COD but overall I prefer the WOP landscape despite in some cases color can look a bit unrealistic and over saturated.

For those who say that WOP can show better landscapes because planes have less quality I have to say that IL2 COD pays more attention to detail but overall the graphical WOP experience is amazing.

Yes everything else in WOP (FM,DM,mission editor, multiplayer) is still unfinished but they are pointing in the right direction. This is their first sim and they got it almost right. Give them more time to release WOP 2 and if they are smart enough they can deliver something that may compete with IL2 COD.

http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/4.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/8.jpg

http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/9.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/5.jpg

[jg27_mc]

Taking only the jpegs in consideration, it seems that there's 10 year gap between both.

I am always freak out every time I look to the CloD landscape at daylight. It just seem so wrong and ugly.

[proton45]

Who knows...but,

This thread is basically about "eye candy"...eye candy is fixable (at some point_lol). If I where them, I'd be focusing my efforts on the frame-rate, as well as the other "behind the scenes" (less glamorous) game-play issues involved in making this an exceptional flight-combat sim. After all, what good is a "polished-nurd"?

The "look" of the game is an "immersion" issue...important (yes), but is ultimately fixable...I'm glad that this sim is around, and I'm glad that the team is working hard at making this a first class gaming platform. Ultimately, the hardcore flight-combat simmer is going to benefit from their hard work and we should support them...this game engine could form the foundation of our virtual battlefield for decades to come...

[RocketDog]

The difference between the way Dover is represented in the top two shots is pretty remarkable.

[Mad G]

View distance is not that different, take a look at those shots. Both games are maxed out.
Sorry if shots are sized down I don't know how to show them in full screen.

Trees, houses fade very smoothly on the horizon in WOP and the distance you can see are in both cases very similar, maybe FOV is wider in IL2 COD but overall I prefer the WOP landscape despite in some cases color can look a bit unrealistic and over saturated.

For those who say that WOP can show better landscapes because planes have less quality I have to say that IL2 COD pays more attention to detail but overall the graphical WOP experience is amazing.

Yes everything else in WOP (FM,DM,mission editor, multiplayer) is still unfinished but they are pointing in the right direction. This is their first sim and they got it almost right. Give them more time to release WOP 2 and if they are smart enough they can deliver something that may compete with IL2 COD.

http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/4.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/8.jpg

http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/9.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/5.jpg



OMG! WOP map now!!! Is so much superior comparing to CloD! It´s almost real. 1C could grab this WOP terrain as 777 grabed IL2 1946 engine.

[jg27_mc]

...I'm glad that this sim is around, and I'm glad that the team is working hard at making this a first class gaming platform. Ultimately, the hardcore flight-combat simmer is going to benefit from their hard work and we should support them...this game engine could form the foundation of our virtual battlefield for decades to come...

I am fond of this vision as well. :cool:

[Jatta Raso]

View distance is not that different, take a look at those shots. Both games are maxed out.
Sorry if shots are sized down I don't know how to show them in full screen.

Trees, houses fade very smoothly on the horizon in WOP and the distance you can see are in both cases very similar, maybe FOV is wider in IL2 COD but overall I prefer the WOP landscape despite in some cases color can look a bit unrealistic and over saturated.

For those who say that WOP can show better landscapes because planes have less quality I have to say that IL2 COD pays more attention to detail but overall the graphical WOP experience is amazing.

Yes everything else in WOP (FM,DM,mission editor, multiplayer) is still unfinished but they are pointing in the right direction. This is their first sim and they got it almost right. Give them more time to release WOP 2 and if they are smart enough they can deliver something that may compete with IL2 COD.

http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/4.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/8.jpg

http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/9.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/5.jpg

wop is not perfect, but in certain aspects it just puts CoD groud depiction in an inferior league... i of all people don't like to say this and hope CoD gets tunned in the future... the type of trees was a wrong choice IMO, too much processing power and they don't look so good in distance. there are other issues.. look how the rivers blend with the land in WoP because they actually draw the shores instead of an abrupt transition between land and water... etc anyway whoever takes a look at these SC and doesn't do justice to WoP ground colour grading, tree clusters, general lightning well, are in dire need of an eye check

[ElAurens]

WOP is too damn green.

Green cloud bottoms, green haze at the horizon, green green green.

What planet is that and why have that alien race decided to inaccurately model Earth of 1940?

Intergalactic amusement park?

[guiltyspark]

what people need to realize is that birds of prey/wings of prey is vastly innaccurate about the elevation layout of dover.

the country side is pretty flat and boring from the air.

the reason birds of prey made it so hilly was because its signifigantly better looking than just a flat area.

I think instead of re-doing the map altogether

luthier and freinds should find less performance effecting foliage and fill in the map some more.

[philip.ed]

I think CloD has the ability to model the landscape better than WoP, but it will need a lot of work.
TBH, I can;t understand why the map in CloD doesn't look tailored. 6 years or so of work, you'd expect to see the sea go in towards the coast with shallows textures; you'd expect the fields to be almost individually modelled and coloured realistically; you'd expect a transition process as smooth and realistic as WoP.
I'm not bashing CloD, but unless these elements are ready to be implemented, the map needs a lot of work to even look 'photo-realistic' as Oleg said it would.

[David198502]

I think CloD has the ability to model the landscape better than WoP, but it will need a lot of work.
TBH, I can;t understand why the map in CloD doesn't look tailored. 6 years or so of work, you'd expect to see the sea go in towards the coast with shallows textures; you'd expect the fields to be almost individually modelled and coloured realistically; you'd expect a transition process as smooth and realistic as WoP.
I'm not bashing CloD, but unless these elements are ready to be implemented, the map needs a lot of work to even look 'photo-realistic' as Oleg said it would.

+1.
i think the potential is there, but it will need a lot of work.
i can understand why people ask for a map which resembles the map of wop.
the colours and the position of trees just look strange and not real in cod.
btw, i wished i could say the opposite.

[guiltyspark]

what the modders have managed to do with some lighting changes

http://i1003.photobucket.com/albums/af156/AliFishGMT/abecfc1b.jpg

[jg27_mc]

WOP is too damn green.

Green cloud bottoms, green haze at the horizon, green green green.

What planet is that and why have that alien race decided to inaccurately model Earth of 1940?

Intergalactic amusement park?

You definitely have a point regarding the green filter.

what the modders have managed to do with some lighting changes

Still not as good as WoP... But it is much better.

[Mad G]

Southern England in CloD looks like a plain choppy vegetables salad drawing.

[bw_wolverine]

I still don't understand this debate when it comes to performance.

WoP isn't dealing with anywhere near as large an area as CLoD. Someone in the thread mentioned 'flying in a shoebox' and that is exactly what it feels like.

The terrain may look great (although personally I agree with the people who say that the filter is a little too much on WoP), but it's quite possible that the performance and appearance are connected with the area being dealt with.

My friend and I who fly in '46 all the time tried playing WoP as a bridge gap game between '46 and CLoD and we both felt it very claustrophobic.

For us, that was the game breaker. It wouldn't even have mattered if we only flew scramble missions contained easily in WoP's maps and never even bothered hitting the edges of the map. We KNEW those edges were there and that broke the sim aspect for us right there.

With '46s maps and CLoD's there is still a finite area you are playing in, but it's sooooo much larger than you need that it doesn't feel finite at all.

I'll trade a bit of performance right now and a some visual accuracy/splendor for that.

[philip.ed]

Wolverine; I agree regarding performance.
TBH, what it comes down to mostly is the layout of the terrain, and the way the transition process and LoD models are simulated.

I mean, as an example, even if you drive around Southern England and encounter a hill, you will notice how any trees which you see below you have no visible trunks. From what I've seen, CloD doesn't really model this, and of the trees it models they don't look dense and attached to the terrain so much as they do in reality. Colour is another issue; as trees go into the distance, they look much darker than up close.

These are only really small factors which affect the visual appearance to quite a significant degree. The question is how hard it is to implement 3-hedgerows, darker/denser trees et al.
With a willing modding team....(one can only imagine)

[Mad G]

Darkening the tree´s green won´t affect performance and I believe it would improve visually. Seems that these Speed Trees dont´t go well with the map.

In WOP I can do some fix in the drivers CP but in CloD doesn´t change much. Look


http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/3035/52978543.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/690/52978543.jpg/)


http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/6006/94980289.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/594/94980289.jpg/)

[jt_medina]

Lasts ones, please don't hate me.
I really hope IL2 COD really becomes a great sim but it really needs a lot of work at least in the graphical terrain aspect.
I hope this thread will help people and developers to see what IL2 COD is lacking of.
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/25.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/19.jpg
The real thing.
http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/38307-1/da49245a.jpg

http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/23.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/10.jpg

http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/38297-2/da49183a.jpg


http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/22.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/14.jpg
http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/38353-1/DoverCastle-db50956.jpg

[biltongbru]

Thanks for this effort Jt-medina: I think it gives some good substance to this thread:) Everyone can now decide for himself if some of the pictures looks a bit cartoonish. :)

[BadAim]

Make your point. Why is it stupid?.

OK I will. As CarveL already said, it's comparing steak to spam. CloD is a state of the art flight simulator, and WOP is a Console arcade game port. The problems that CloD is suffering don't bear on that fact. The entire line of reasoning is irrelevant. And in my opinion Wop looks like crap. That is why I feel that the idea is too stupid to entertain.

Thank you for making me entertain it. :)

Edit: As for your last post JT. There is no hating here (at least on my part). It's a question of scope. CloD has a much larger scope than WOP, it makes the two incompatible. The differences in detail are because of that difference in scope, and nary the twain shall meet.

[DK-nme]

Lasts ones, please don't hate me.
I really hope IL2 COD really becomes a great sim but it really needs a lot of work at least in the graphical terrain aspect.
I hope this thread will help people and developers to see what IL2 COD is lacking of.
The real thing.
http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/38307-1/da49245a.jpg

http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/38353-1/DoverCastle-db50956.jpg

Tihi, I don't like all that green color - seems fake...
;)

You are so right and like your picture examples clearly show, CloD has some serious gfx problems, that hopefully will be solved within reasonable time. The immersion has to be there (Am I the only one to find landscape graphics of CloD equal or just slightly better than the original il-2 gfx's?).
By the way, I flew over Berlin last week (in RL, that is) and did the same in WoP this morning. I have to say, I was baffled and astonished by how real and authentic that map seemed. The light settings and colors are almost perfect and from certain angles, it almost seem photorealistic - like being there again (and for real).
Also, the smoke colomns in WoP are far better and more realistic than those in CloD (hopefully something Luthier and team will change over time)...

[Jatta Raso]

*gasp* the vegetation in WoP looks strikingly realistic from medium-far range...

all in all i just hope the 1C team picks up some ideas to improve CoD on what can be done about the issues raised in this thread, it has become better already, i really noticed the better lightning in roads with the last fix, as their lack of definition was something i wasn't particularly pleased with... so with the potential CoD has shown, upgrading or tuning some graphics options is a must-be effort. i know there's a lot of features not seen waiting to be activated, like seashore waves, transparent water, flocks of seagulls, clouds and weather system, effective night light and so on... i see a long road ahead, i'm hoping the team takes this as constructive criticism and don't drop the ball on us (as not everyone come here to flood the threads with smileys)

[jg27_mc]

...CloD is a state of the art flight simulator...

Hilarious. :rolleyes:


...The differences in detail are because of that difference in scope, and nary the twain shall meet.

I partially agree on this one... But it certainly doesn't explains it all!

[RocketDog]

You are so right and like your picture examples clearly show, CloD has some serious gfx problems, that hopefully will be solved within reasonable time. The immersion has to be there (Am I the only one to find landscape graphics of CloD equal or just slightly better than the original il-2 gfx's?).

There there is room for optimism because some of the fixes could be implemented quite quickly.

A huge improvement would come from simply replacing the lime-green trees with darker ones. Better still if a decent atmospheric haze could be introduced that made them look even darker in the distance. A further improvement would be to make the tree foliage come down a bit closer to the ground and hide the silver-grey tree trunks. In the photos of the real world (and in WoP, for that matter) tree trunks are hardly visible from the air and look very dark if they can be seen. Field colours should be fixable too, but it may need a texture artist to go over the terrain almost field by field.

I'm still rather surprised that they could have got such basic features of a real-world landscape so wrong. We've ended up with very nice 3D models (as good as RoF's) flying over a landscape that is arguably worse than many found in IL-2 1946.

[biltongbru]

Another aspect in the quest for realism with Clod is that vegetation is a dynamic entity and display movement with windy conditions. I can just imagine the enormous computing power needed for this; every tree leaf and every blade of grass; maybe not necessary at this stage?:)

[jt_medina]

I'm still rather surprised that they could have got such basic features of a real-world landscape so wrong. We've ended up with very nice 3D models (as good as RoF's) flying over a landscape that is arguably worse than many found in IL-2 1946.

1000% agree.
I saw some pictures from 6 months ago and they looked way better than it looks right now.
I'll give you a few examples. Shots I kept on my harddrive.
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/grab0102.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/grab0110.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/grab0101.jpg

http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/grab0003t.jpg[/IMG]

People can say they look cartonish but I loved them.

[pupaxx]

Hi guys,
in recent past I followed up for 50 pages an analogue discussion and I promised to myself to not get involved in wop_vs_Clod_landscape cause at the end its just matter of personal taste, judgement, it is difficult to bring someone else on your thinking or just share a minimum of objectivity...and so on....but I admit CloD landscape is the more intriguing key of this sim. And I pretend to be get 'involved' by a 2011 Sim...The overall looking 4me must be heavily tuned
I like so much WoP, especially the way WoP represent the landscape and how natural elements are merged together...(let go green filter issue and bla bla...)..
Having said that...
Me too I don't like too much the overall lime-green looking of CloD...it is not convincing but...I looked in my archive and I would like to share some picts taken in july 2008 at Duxford...lime-green is not so fanciful I say..look
6016
6017

The pict are for sure overexposed but hues are there! I well remember how much the grass green was reflected on the under surfaces of Airplanes; specially the spit with sky belly; even when they come at landing, at 5-6 meters of altitude, this green was so violent to enlight the under surfaces.
Look at the spit flyby..it was at 15 mt height..and look at the medium sea grey how much is influenced by the grass!



Cheers

[pupaxx]

....another palette sample
6020

look at the trees..

[philip.ed]

The thing which people are forgetting is the difference between the CloD and WoP terrains.
CloD has realistic 3-D trees (which look amazing up close, and not too bad from a distance (not focusing on colour here) whereas WoP uses trees which have a 2-D image which revolves as you move around them (very similar if not identical to Il-2's trees).
Indeed, WoP doesn't model 3-D/2-D grass, or indeed realisticall created buildings.

But this is one of the reasons why WoP is so easy to play over and FPS friendly. Indeed, RoF uses similar tree models to Il-2, and they work very well for flying.

So maybe, CloD was just being too ambitious, or the right intentions were there, it just wasn't pulled off correctly. I think the latter.

[kendo65]

I don't agree with the argument that CLOD's terrain has to look that way because of the greater area and its heavier use of resources.

It is the way the various resources (trees, buildings, etc) are placed on the map that is the issue here - they don't need to use more - they could use exactly the same amount but in a better more natural way.

My personal biggest hate is the constant use of the double line of trees seen in this pic. Used repeatedly along roads and rivers. Very lazy, and I have never seen anything looking like that in reality.

I'm pleased to see the general reaction to this thread. More people feel this way than I thought. Hopefully the devs will take note.

[Jatta Raso]

once we break the first wave of what i call positive trolling (blindly defending the developers by trolling legitimate criticism which is trolling nevertheless) the positive discussion of these matters can then come to surface

looking at IL-2 1946 or BoB II you can see how far they went in graphics improvement, and it is obvious the discussion of these issues with CoD need to start taking shape. WoP 2 has been anounced and is coming soon... i would't like to see it plainly putting CoD to shame graphics-wise

btw it was Mr Oleg that kept depicting former IL-2 and the then upcoming CoD through recurrent comparisons with other sims, naming them or not; and since this is Mr Oleg's forum and none other, i find absolutely legitimate that comparisons can be hold in order to frame CoD performance, as this is an attitude in all consistent with the founder previous remarks. all other comparison haters can start their own forum and ban me right away. with all respect towards Mr Oleg and the community.

[Avala]

But, but,but . . . the water is so nice! http://www.cosgan.de/images/midi/froehlich/d015.gif

[RocketDog]

Actually, the waves move much too quickly on the water, but that's best saved for another topic :).

[Tree_UK]

The thing which people are forgetting is the difference between the CloD and WoP terrains.
CloD has realistic 3-D trees (which look amazing up close, and not too bad from a distance (not focusing on colour here) whereas WoP uses trees which have a 2-D image which revolves as you move around them (very similar if not identical to Il-2's trees).
Indeed, WoP doesn't model 3-D/2-D grass, or indeed realisticall created buildings.

But this is one of the reasons why WoP is so easy to play over and FPS friendly. Indeed, RoF uses similar tree models to Il-2, and they work very well for flying.

So maybe, CloD was just being too ambitious, or the right intentions were there, it just wasn't pulled off correctly. I think the latter.

The Trees arn't that realistic, you can fly through them!! which i think is a terrible shame. The terrain detail really does let this Sim down, its shoddy and badly coded and I still cannot believe its an entirely new engine. And then we have that awful shimmer still that we had all those years ago in the original IL2.

WOP 2 could easily be the answer to all our prayers, Oleg and Luthier have certainly left the door wide open for someone to steal thier crowns.

[Lololopoulos]

The Trees arn't that realistic, you can fly through them!! which i think is a terrible shame. The terrain detail really does let this Sim down, its shoddy and badly coded and I still cannot believe its an entirely new engine.
WOP 2 could easily be the answer to all our prayers, Oleg and Luthier have certainly left the door wide open for someone to steal thier crowns.

WOP and COD graphics both suck in terms of being REALISTIC. But I firmly believe that WOP is the one that sucks less.

For one, WOP landscape is a lot more eye-pleasing than that of COD.

WOP landscape looks like a an artwork, while COD looks like a video game.
Neither come close to what we actually see in real life, but I would prefer the artwork to the looks of a video game.

[Tree_UK]

The Irony here is Oleg maddox once passed a comment stating that Storm of war would not look so cartoony as WOP!..yeh sure Oleg!...now its CLOD that looks cartoony!.......

During development i made a statement that the terrain looked like a badly painted water colour by a child. Sadly, I still stand by that.

[Lololopoulos]

I'm glad threads like this come up time after time. I hope it can draw some attention to the devs. Hopefully one day they will have an over-haul to the texture, color, ground object placement and etc. after they have fixed the sundry of gameplay problems that still exist right now.

[DK-nme]

I'm glad threads like this come up time after time. I hope it can draw some attention to the devs. Hopefully one day they will have an over-haul to the texture, color, ground object placement and etc. after they have fixed the sundry of gameplay problems that still exist right now.

Oh, I really hope, that this little pearl (CloD, that is) in time, will prevail!
And what if guys like canonUK or Redko79 could have a try on the terrain feature? Those guys are pure map artists/wizards. They've made several maps for il-2 46, that actually look alot better than CloD terrain/maps does at the moment.
For reference, check out CanonUK's retextures and the Channelmap (his work is awesome). And check Redko79's MTO map here (amazing work. Repainted, retextured and build up sand-grain by sand-grain):http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cnnPlf32SQ&feature=BFp&list=WLA16C37B17D8723E1&index=89

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

agreed,they look very good

[Ataros]

Try playing ArmA2 on a Call of Duty map.

It would not have any of ArmA2 problems but would you play it? Sure some people would... if they purchased the wrong game in the first place :grin:

[philip.ed]

The Trees arn't that realistic, you can fly through them!! which i think is a terrible shame. The terrain detail really does let this Sim down, its shoddy and badly coded and I still cannot believe its an entirely new engine. And then we have that awful shimmer still that we had all those years ago in the original IL2.

WOP 2 could easily be the answer to all our prayers, Oleg and Luthier have certainly left the door wide open for someone to steal thier crowns.

Hmm, good point on the trees. I wsa talking aesthetically, but that is definately something else which needs to be taken into consideration.
It seems that CloD is more a test of what is capable (or rather, not capable) with current hardware, with the incentive of it being absolutely bloody amazing in the future (I mean, what other flight-sim models individual leaves on the trees! It's just bonkers! But, arguably, quite cool)

[David198502]

well modeling individual leaves is insane,while you can fly through whole forests.
i think they focused on wrong things in designing the map.while i agree that its pretty cool to have grass blowing in the wind,and every single leave animated, i think the overall look of the landscape is a bit disappointing,considering that it was six years developed.what i think could improve the appearance a lot, is to get the colours right, and the position of the trees.i mean in clod we dont have real forests.instead we have a crowd of individual trees positioned near each other.but you can see between the trees on the ground.
and there are those trees next to roads and rivers which just look strange.and the colours of the trees,well it was mentioned now several times...get them darker.
also the colour of the fields.i have to confess,i have only been to england once,and that was 10years ago.so im not an expert when its about british landscape.but the look of england in cod just doesnt convince me.i have seen fields almost pink coloured.there are many colours(in my opinion too many) that just seem wrong to me.and it would eat no recources from our rigs to show different colours.

well and looking at those wop screenshots,make me feel even more dissapointed about the landscape in clod.i know there is plenty wrong when its about realistic look in wop either, but the position of the trees and the overall look, just looks more natural to me.

[Ekar]

I think the biggest difference between ClOD and WOP terrain is that WOP looks like it is relying more on photographic textures, while ClOD's textures appear to be more hand painted. The WOP textures also have good resolution and use to good effect a secondary colour/noise map to break up the pixelation at low altitude. WOP's England map is probably the weakest map in the game (due to the 'green' filter)- some of the others are really beautiful and give a good sense of realism for a modern game. When I compare these to ClOD, I am unfortunately disappointed with ClOD's terrain visuals. Tree clumping and placement is more natural looking in WOP. Terrain elements hang together better- cities or built up areas appear as part of the landscape rather than being plonked on top.

I would agree with other posters that the ClOD artists may have spent too much time working on individual assets and less time trying to make everything work together as an efficient and believable whole. It's this discontinuity between elements as well as the hand painted, artificial look of the ground textures that brings down ClOD's terrain visuals, imo. Disappointing, but not unfixable. I hope the terrain gets a look at by the devs at some point because it's doing a disservice to the awesome cockpit graphics, which I believe are probably the best in flight simming right now.

[ChicoMick]

Even low shots look good I think.

...just an innocent comment btw ;)

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/picture.php?albumid=106&pictureid=718

[Ekar]

This looks brilliant.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOYvdW8THtU&feature=related

[David198502]

i totally agree.the cockpits are just awesome in clod!also the planes look very impressive in my opinion.the damage model is unprecedented detailed.and also the flight model is something i do not want to miss anymore with its CEM.and exactly these features prevent me of going back to il2 1946.
some minutes ago i tried it again.and well,i have to say...in some aspects, its looking better than clod.i flew over slovakia map and the trees have a better colour and also the buildings seem not less detailed than in clod.there are even clothes lines with clothes on it between buildings.

[ATAG_Doc]

WOP is nice but still yesterdays sim.

[HamishUK]

I think the point here is that CloD was intended to be an all aspect sim where you can jump into AAA and tanks as well as aircraft. This if my memory recalls was Oleg's vision to have a sim where we fight on all levels.

With this in mind I can understand the level of ground details for CloD. I am however very sceptical the ground based side of this game will ever see the light of day? It has obviously drained resources and caused more issues than we know about.

Personally I prefer WoP's terrain (same as DCS's A10C) over CloD's as it 'feels' more realistic with the level of detail. But both have their good and bad points and the ideal solution is somewhere inbetween.

[HamishUK]

WOP is nice but still yesterdays sim.

I don't think that was in question it was more about the terrain model.

[Friendly_flyer]

One of the things I have always found lacking in the IL2 maps (I don't have CoD yet, waiting for new computer) is a natural placement of buildings. The auto-populated IL2 towns have the houses all lined up neatly. In real life, buildings follow inclines and roads, not the adjacent building. Houses are built together, forming continous structures. Here's a real life shot of 1940's small industry from West Bromwitch, and an attempt at replicating the look in FMB, using as few different objects as possible (large number of texture maps swamps the CPU):

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37/Friendly_flyer/Maps/OldindustryWestBromwitch.jpg?t=1306159386

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37/Friendly_flyer/Maps/FactoryV.jpg?t=1306159470

This kind of thing takes an insane amount of time. This is where I think the community can really be of help to the developers.

[RocketDog]

Even low shots look good I think.

...just an innocent comment btw ;)

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/picture.php?albumid=106&pictureid=718

That looks excellent!

[jf1981]

Hi

In my opinion, this has to do with the fact that CoD is realistic & complex management oriented while WoP is Graphic design oriented. Much work has been done in one or the other way but not both ... yet.

[ATAG_Doc]

But at the end of the day this is the one that is being heavily developed and is the sim of choice going forward 2011 and beyond.

[David198502]

well but it should look at least superiour to il2 146.but in many instances it doesnt.look at the trees colours and positions.look at the colours of fields....
i will stick with clod because of its flight and damage model, but the overall look of the landscape is a pain in the ass.and i really hate to say that!

[ATAG_Doc]

If some of us were able to travel back in time and actually strap on one of them spitfires I am sure some would mention that these spitfires do not fly / look the same as in IL-2. lol Can't please everyone.

[David198502]

If some of us were able to travel back in time and actually strap on one of them spitfires I am sure some would mention that these spitfires do not fly / look the same as in IL-2. lol Can't please everyone.

well all i would say:"damn it looks like reality"

[David Hayward]

WoP looks like complete crap. It cracks me up that there are people who are still trying to sell green puke as looking better than CoD.

[BRIGGBOY]

WoP looks like complete crap. It cracks me up that there are people who are still trying to sell green puke as looking better than CoD.

+1

[Lololopoulos]

Even low shots look good I think.

...just an innocent comment btw ;)

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/picture.php?albumid=106&pictureid=718

i don't see any "green puke".

[usr]

In my opinion, this has to do with the fact that CoD is realistic & complex management oriented while WoP is Graphic design oriented. Much work has been done in one or the other way but not both ... yet.

Or in other words: lack of visual talent. Which basically means keeping the capability of fair judgement of ones own work even after many hours have been invested. Talented people keep evaluating other options, while less talented people are blind with pride once they get anything done (i know more about this than i'd like to...).

Between all the technical topics in both computer stuff and simulated plane stuff the visual aspect was obviously lost. The mentality was probably a lot like "if it's ugly, throw more triangles at it". The problem with this is, in addition to the obvious performance pitfall, that "more triangles" will not automatically translate to "more beauty": If the basic visual content is good, then putting more technical resources to work on it (more triangles, higher texture resolutions, more shader fx) will certainly make it look even better. But if the basic visual content is lacking, no amount of technology you throw at it will make it look good.

Considering the (over?) ambitous level of detail of the CoD project and the anti-creative nature of a sim that above all tries to be very accurate (so it's more an investigative process than a creative one), this lack of what i call visual talent should not come as a big surprise.

Maybe the "Forgotten Battles" of CoD will be used as an opportunity to mend some of those visual aspects. If, with a few bulk operations on the texture sets the general color palette can be made a lot more enjoyable this might even be the key ingredient to make this hypothetical "Forgotten Battles Junior" really feel a bit like a new (even if related) game and less like a pay-patch.

[jf1981]

Or in other words:[...]

This sim is not bad visually but it's looking half finished on that matter.
To me of course.

[Danelov]

Maybe recycling the terrain in WOP format and COD avoided a lot of problems and bugs.Also the win in FPS can be considerable. Maybe a little less cosmetic but in this way the team can worked in the importants things and bugs of the Simultator and less at the side the cosmetic side.

[David Hayward]

i don't see any "green puke".

That photo, and every WoP screenshot of England, has a puke green hue to it. If you can't see it, it's because you are desperately trying to pretend it isn't there.

[ATAG_Doc]

That photo, and every WoP screenshot of England, has a puke green hue to it. If you can't see it, it's because you are desperately trying to pretend it isn't there.

yup

[jt_medina]

That photo, and every WoP screenshot of England, has a puke green hue to it. If you can't see it, it's because you are desperately trying to pretend it isn't there.

Most of us agreed that at some moments colors in WOP are over saturated, but I think what most of us mean is that graphically speaking wop looks way better and if we overlook this excessive color saturation, buildings, trees look better implemented in the landscape.

People can say, WOP maps are smaller, agreed fm and dm is not as good as in IL2 COD but, I play both and wop feels much more immersive in the graphical aspect(only :grin:) sometimes almost photo realistic.

I am the one who would really like to see WOP graphics with IL2 COD.

[David Hayward]

Most of us agreed that at some moments colors in WOP are over saturated, but I think what most of us mean is that graphically speaking wop looks way better and if we overlook this excessive color saturation, buildings, trees look better implemented in the landscape.

People can say, WOP maps are smaller, agreed fm and dm is not as good as in IL2 COD but, I play both and wop feels much more immersive in the graphical aspect(only :grin:) sometimes almost photo realistic.

I am the one who would really like to see WOP graphics with IL2 COD.

Yes, if you can ignore the fact that the WoP colors are laughably bad it looks great. Sadly, I can't ignore colors so bad that they make my eyes bleed.

[ATAG_Doc]

End all of these sentences with "for now". CoD isn't and doesn't have a completion goal. It's a journey. It will have all you can stand and more.

[DK-nme]

WoP looks like complete crap. It cracks me up that there are people who are still trying to sell green puke as looking better than CoD.

Being childish in your rhetoric, doesn't help you in your cause or crusade against the all conspiring WoP...

EDIT: In fact, you are being very unfriendly in your approach towards everyone, who doesn't seem to share your point of view. Remember, "taste and preferences" cannot be discussed...

[Jatta Raso]

Yes, if you can ignore the fact that the WoP colors are laughably bad it looks great. Sadly, I can't ignore colors so bad that they make my eyes bleed.

that's rich! if i used the same evolved line of dialog i'd say some may find radioactive green an eye therapy then...

[Hunden]

Plz no more, What if Cod was Wop,
Im felling suicidal:(

Please do not use this phrase lightly I'm deeply offended.

[kendo65]

That photo, and every WoP screenshot of England, has a puke green hue to it. If you can't see it, it's because you are desperately trying to pretend it isn't there.

You are totally right. We all can see it. That bit isn't good and is not something any of us would want to see replicated in COD.

But what some of us think WOP does well is the landscape and terrain under the green filter (so just to really labour the point completely: green filter....bad, landscape.... good).

For why a lot of us think the landscape is good (ie more real and natural looking than COD) see the previous posts, but please understand you are attacking a different elephant in the room when you keep going for the green filter thing (or map size for that matter).

Cheers.

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

Hallelujah

[150GCT_Veltro]

WoP could have too much green but the tiles (textures) are really amazing and much better than the CoD textures in DX10. CoD landscape should be reworked from scracth because is looking really bad for my opinion. CoD with WoP landscape would be another world.

Look also at the Rise of Flight autumn (fall) textures, coming soon......DX9.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4macujbv95k&feature=player_embedded

Somentimes would be better simple to say the truth: CoD textures are horrible.

[SQB]

All WOP has that is better than COD is the volumetric lighting, which looks brilliant, the lack of toxic greens and the way objects blend naturally in to the environment.

Unfortunately, instead of toxic green grass the world has little contrast and very low saturation :(

[pupaxx]

All WOP has that is better than COD is the volumetric lighting, which looks brilliant, the lack of toxic greens and the way objects blend naturally in to the environment.

Unfortunately, instead of toxic green grass the world has little contrast and very low saturation :(

...me too I dislike toxgreen..but consider my picts at page 7 and 8 in this thread..I think it is something to consider..:)

[Tree_UK]

Dont forget though, it could all look so different once we get the DirectX 11 patch. :grin::grin: A little off track here, but do any of you remember during development myself and many others kept asking Luthier why he kept showing us screen shots of unweathered 109's and alsways the same skin/paintscheme, he said it was because he liked his 109's to look all shiney and new, of course it was nothing to do with the fact that the game doesn't save any of the paint schemes or weathering!! lol, what a little liar he turned out to be our Luthier!! Not having a go here just genuinely think its funny :grin::grin:

[David Hayward]

For why a lot of us think the landscape is good (ie more real and natural looking than COD) see the previous posts, but please understand you are attacking a different elephant in the room when you keep going for the green filter thing (or map size for that matter).
Cheers.

Countless screenshots have been posted showing that the CoD terrain and layout is quite close to real life, while WoP terrain repeats and looks like someone puked on it. It's not even a close call. WoP looks like complete crap and plays like complete crap. I deleted it from my PC.

[Tree_UK]

Countless screenshots have been posted showing that the CoD terrain and layout is quite close to real life, while WoP terrain repeats and looks like someone puked on it. It's not even a close call. WoP looks like complete crap and plays like complete crap. I deleted it from my PC.

lol, this guy is really funny. :grin:

[David Hayward]

lol, this guy is really funny. :grin:

I'm not nearly as funny as the Wings of Puke fanboys. :grin:

[philip.ed]

Isn't he just?
I don't even think David has been to England before, let alone lived there all his life and flown over it a number of times. He is completely incredulous, but then that leads to delussionment, so it's clear to see why.
I won't even bother posting any shots of england to demonstrate that WoP more accurately reflects the layout of the terrain here in Blighty, because guess what? I've already done it, Rocket Dog has already done it, as have many others.
CloD has a number of things which are better than WoP, but the layout of the country-side, then way the trees are orientated, and the way the LoD models of bulding's is transitioned is much better.
Don't get me wrong, colour-wise WoP really does fail to replicate England, but that is not really the point, so the green-puke-filter rubbish is rather irrelevent.

CloD has the ability to look perfect, but the areas in which it fails on are extremely important: 3-D hedgerows (mising from every flight-sim I can think of); darker trees; neat land-arrangement of fields and housing estates; and, something which hasn't really been touched on, and accurate portrayal of trees from the air (the trunks should be completely invisible, with just a mass of foliage being seen.)

[Ali Fish]

mwahahaha someone is on my side ! the construct of the scenery is good. yes the colours bad. without hours and hours of tweaking it cant be made better. when i get those hours in front of me. i will deliver a new colour experience.

[JG52Krupi]

+1 he is very funny I mean why post that comment David it's obvious that wop landscape only looks good at a certain height and is about 1/10000 of the size of the clod map.

Only a spastic would even consider comparing them both.

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3193446/Photos_of_English_countryside_.html

[David Hayward]

but that is not really the point, so the green-puke-filter rubbish is rather irrelevent.


It's completely relevant when it's causing your eyes to bleed. You might be able to ignore it, but I can't.

[Ali Fish]

ok, im going to give you folks a WOP makeover. it wont be pretty though.

[philip.ed]

If your eyes are bleeding go to a hospital. TBH, I can't find any credibility in a poster's view, especially when it comes to the subject of visual aesthetics, when he is telling me his eyes are bleeding.

Here's some help for you; the filter does not affect the layout of the terrain. You, my dear sir, are just being childish. And you are what, 47 did you say? It's amazing how adults can act so childish.

And to add; yes, I agree that comparisons between CloD and WoP are largely irrelevent. Because WoP is modelling a lot less details than CloD is. The comparison over terrain layout is only to show that, even without 3-D hederows or the like, not much is needed to be well on the way to make the CloD landscape look more like England.

[David Hayward]

And to add; yes, I agree that comparisons between CloD and WoP are largely irrelevent. Because WoP is modelling a lot less details than CloD is.

Then why do you keep doing it? CoD looks better by a very large margin. There might be a few small details that WoP gets better because it's map is much, much smaller, but, overall, CoD crushes WoP like a little ugly bug.

[DK-nme]

Countless screenshots have been posted showing that the CoD terrain and layout is quite close to real life (...).

Man, how ignorant could you possible be (sorry for the harsh word, can't seem to find a better and less "hard" word for it)?
Are you being obnoxious for the fun of it, or is this your real and honest oppionon?
You totally deny the fact, that the present terrain of CloD compared to 2011 standards, is somewhat left behind (mildly underestimated). It is not even close to reality (look at the way trees are "planted" symetric on both sides of the roads). And the overall colors are terrible (cartoonish at the moment). I hope though, things are going to evolve, for the better, but it looks a bit grim, at the moment...

And what if the bleeding from your eyes is caused by something else - blindness perhaps???
;)
(Sorry, couldn't resist)

[David Hayward]

Man, how ignorant could you possible be (sorry for the harsh word, can't seem to find a better and less "hard" word for it)?
Are you being obnoxious for the fun of it, or is this your real and honest oppionon?

I've seen countless photographs and screenshots that all support my view, and NONE that support yours. Feel free to post some photographs and screenshots which support your view. But, as of now, it isn't even a close call. CoD crushes WoP.

[kendo65]

David, you are really not listening to or taking on board anything that anyone is saying. The specific point we are making about one feature of WOP has been made many times now in this thread. You keep arguing about something else despite being told that most people already agree with your point (the green thing!)

We get your position, but there comes a point where it is wise to just 'agree to disagree' with what others are saying, otherwise this thing will degenerate into :

"Oh yes it is..."
"Oh no it isn't...", etc , etc

[David Hayward]

David, you are really not listening to or taking on board anything that anyone is saying. The specific point we are making about one feature of WOP has been made many times now in this thread. You keep arguing about something else despite being told that most people already agree with your point (the green thing!)


Sorry, but you're doing the exact same thing. You're ignoring the green puke and tiny map size and zooming in on some small detail of WoP that you like better than CoD. When you compare the overall look, including the green puke, CoD blows WoP away. It's not even a close call.

[philip.ed]

Then why do you keep doing it? CoD looks better by a very large margin. There might be a few small details that WoP gets better because it's map is much, much smaller, but, overall, CoD crushes WoP like a little ugly bug.

I only do it because the actual modelling of the terrain is not directly related to performance here. CloD models thousands of trees, which look like some almighty God ejaculated them over the South-East. The layout is not realitic to any real degree.
WoP is more realistic in this aspect, which is a point you seem to fail to realise.

Here we go, a rather poor WoP shot (note, not highest settings)

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachment.php?attachmentid=5823&d=1304697864

another, better, one:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachment.php?attachmentid=5824&d=1304698427

There's a nice neat layout of trees and fields here; no hedgerows, but then what sim models those?

http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/22130-1/hallplaceleighkent-ba27118.jpg

Nice shot of England, here.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachment.php?attachmentid=5190&d=1301958818

And CLoD. Note the horribly, and unrealstically, coloured trees, and lack of dense foliage and neatly orinentated fields/trees.

I'm not bashing CloD; it has all the elements to be perfect, but it just needs a push to get it there.

[philip.ed]

Sorry, but you're doing the exact same thing. You're ignoring the green puke and tiny map size and zooming in on some small detail of WoP that you like better than CoD. When you compare the overall look, including the green puke, CoD blows WoP away. It's not even a close call.

No, we all agree on that :rolleyes:
We are all talking about the layout of the terrain, and were doing so before you trolled in here.

[Tree_UK]

Can you see where I was coming from with the 'badly painted water colour' now Philip. :grin:

[David Hayward]

And CLoD. Note the horribly, and unrealstically, coloured trees, and lack of dense foliage and neatly orinentated fields/trees.

I'm not bashing CloD; it has all the elements to be perfect, but it just needs a push to get it there.

I don't see anything horribly unrealistic about the CoD screenshot. It looks a LOT close to the photo than either of the WoP screenshots. The CoD colors are MUCH better, and the CoD tree layout is closer to the photo than WoP. The only problem I see with CoD is that the trees should be slightly darker. Other than that, it blows WoP away.

[David Hayward]

Can you see where I was coming from with the 'badly painted water colour' now Philip. :grin:

I'll take "a badly painted water color" over "someone puked on my map" any day.

:grin:

[kendo65]

Sorry, but you're doing the exact same thing. You're ignoring the green puke and tiny map size and zooming in on some small detail of WoP that you like better than CoD. When you compare the overall look, including the green puke, CoD blows WoP away. It's not even a close call.

No. I'm not ignoring those issues. I've already said that I agree with you about them.

You're right that I/we are picking out one specific detail of WOP - that is the whole point of this thread. That one specific detail that some of us feel WOP does well and where COD could be improved if it did something similar.

[DK-nme]

I've seen countless photographs and screenshots that all support my view, and NONE that support yours. Feel free to post some photographs and screenshots which support your view. But, as of now, it isn't even a close call. CoD crushes WoP.

Sigh. So, you are not only pretending being an ignorant, you in fact are one.
I don't think I would be able to convince you, whatever screenshots I would post. Like now, you would catagoricly deny any evidence presented before you and thus I don't even bother trying...
Your way of ranting and defining reality as you see it (and thus it MUST be true for everyone else!?! - is very egocentric and infantile) and very much resembles the rhetoric forms of religious madmen...

[David Hayward]

No, we all agree on that :rolleyes:
We are all talking about the layout of the terrain, and were doing so before you trolled in here.

WoP has a tiny map. Comparing layout is utterly ridiculous. Besides, the photos show the CoD layout looks as good as the WoP layout.

[DK-nme]

WoP has a tiny map. Comparing layout is utterly ridiculous. Besides, the photos show the CoD layout looks as good as the WoP layout.

You are free to have your own oppinion in the matter and that is fine, but plz don't try to convince us or tell us what to think or like...

[David Hayward]

Sigh. So, you are not only pretending being an ignorant, you in fact are one.
I don't think I would be able to convince you, whatever screenshots I would post. Like now, you would catagoricly deny any evidence presented before you and thus I don't even bother trying...
Your way of ranting and defining reality as you see it (and thus it MUST be true for everyone else!?! - is very egocentric and infantile) and very much resembles the rhetoric forms of religious madmen...

I might be ignorant, but the people who made the sim agree with me.

[David Hayward]

You are free to have your own oppinion in the matter and that is fine, but plz don't try to convince us or tell us what to think...

I don't have to convince you of anything. If you want the game to be changed it's you who has to do the convincing. So far you are failing completely.

[DK-nme]

I might be ignorant, but the people who made the sim agree with me.

Ha-ha-ha, like stating: It's true, because the bible says so.
Or: I know I'm right. God is with me, because I'm a true believer and you're not...

:grin:

[David Hayward]

You're right that I/we are picking out one specific detail of WOP - that is the whole point of this thread. That one specific detail that some of us feel WOP does well and where COD could be improved if it did something similar.

Judging from the screenshots that were recently posted the only thing WoP gets better than CoD is the color of the trees. I really don't see how you could find the WoP terrain layout to be better. I'm not saying this to be difficult. I really don't see what you are seeing.

[jt_medina]

I've seen countless photographs and screenshots that all support my view, and NONE that support yours. Feel free to post some photographs and screenshots which support your view. But, as of now, it isn't even a close call. CoD crushes WoP.
I think you should visit the doctor or buy a new monitor, because my eyes don't "bleed" when playing WOP.

No one here is saying that colors in wop are not oversaturated because they are. But you can't negate that overall landscape is much better implemented in WOP.
Pay special attention to the last three pictures.

I play both and I like both sims in their respective areas they are good at.

Lasts ones, please don't hate me.
I really hope IL2 COD really becomes a great sim but it really needs a lot of work at least in the graphical terrain aspect.
I hope this thread will help people and developers to see what IL2 COD is lacking of.
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/25.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/19.jpg
The real thing.
http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/38307-1/da49245a.jpg

http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/23.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/10.jpg

http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/38297-2/da49183a.jpg


http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/22.jpg
http://i930.photobucket.com/albums/ad145/jt_medina/14.jpg
http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/gallery/d/38353-1/DoverCastle-db50956.jpg

[David Hayward]

Ha-ha-ha, like stating: It's true, because the bible says so.
Or: I know I'm right. God is with me, because I'm a true believer and you're not...

:grin:

Are you drunk?

[David Hayward]

No one here is saying that colors in wop are not oversaturated because they are. But you can't negate that overall landscape is much better implemented in WOP.
Pay special attention to the last three pictures.

Yes, I actually can negate it.

And the last three pictures were taken from different altitudes.

[150GCT_Veltro]

After so many years, we should have to complain only about the Spitfire or Emil FM, and not about a DX10 landscape but we are....so something is gone wrong in the landscape. England in DX10 should have been something different i think as for France.

You like it? Good for you but for a lot of us it looks terrible if not horrible, and in DX10 this shouldn't have to happen.

[David Hayward]

You like it? Good for you but for a lot of us it looks terrible if not horrible, and in DX10 this shouldn't have to happen.

I know you think it looks terrible. However, you don't help yourselves by comparing it to WoP. WoP is a complete disaster.

[jt_medina]

Yes, I actually can negate it.

And the last three pictures were taken from different altitudes.

What are you talking about!!!???.

[kendo65]

Think this thread is now kaput! (or should be)

Oh no isn't
Oh, Yes it is!

Can you see where I was coming from with the 'badly painted water colour' now Philip. :grin:

I think you've been proved right on a lot of things Tree. Been asking myself how I got it so wrong in the run-up.

[David Hayward]

What are you talking about!!!???.

Look at the trees in the CoD shot. They are tiny compared to the other shots. It was obviously taken from a different altitude and/or much further away.

[jt_medina]

Look at the trees in the CoD shot. They are tiny compared to the other shots. It was obviously taken from a different altitude and/or much further away.

NO!!, Altitudes in all shots are almost the same!!. Don't even try this!.
FOV is different in WOP for this reason they may look further in COD.
You only complain but never prove a thing. I spent time trying to get same shots as accurately as could.
Stop it, unless you have a better point than my eyes are bleeding or WOP is a disaster.

[150GCT_Veltro]

I know you think it looks terrible. However, you don't help yourselves by comparing it to WoP. WoP is a complete disaster.

If you prefer i could say also that Storm of War (the fisrt engine) did have some better english textures.

However i'm not comparing WoP with CoD all around (or CloD?) but only the tiles (textures). Colors can be changed or improved with filters (usually blue is fine to rise the green), but bad textures can be only changed with new ones.

We are talking about a DX10 landscape. Yes i don't like it, i don't like it at all, as for sounds and clouds but if i can still hope for new sounds and clouds, i really doubt we could never have a nice landscape here.

However, somebody here said that was great also the violet England posted by Oleg some months ago, so.....

For my opinion this landscape should be trashed and reworked from scratch.

[David Hayward]

NO!!, Altitudes in all shots are almost the same!!. Don't even try this!.
FOV is different in WOP for this reason they may look further in COD.


OK, the FOV is different. Comparing different FOV is as pointless as comparing different altitudes. Find 2 shots with the same FOV and altitude.

[David Hayward]

However i'm not comparing WoP with CoD all around (or CloD?) but only the tiles (textures).


That comparison is not nearly as much in WoP's favor as you people seem to think it is. I see virtually no difference. If anything I think CoD might be slightly better.

[VO101_Tom]

http://smileys.emoticonsonly.com/emoticons/s/sharing_popcorn-1245.gif

[jt_medina]

OK, the FOV is different. Comparing different FOV is as pointless as comparing different altitudes. Find 2 shots with the same FOV and altitude.

No you do!.
Screenshots are there. Intelligent open minded people will make their own conclusions.

I am done here.

[David Hayward]

No you do!.


I'm not the one trying to convince people that they should add WoP features to CoD. So far you are failing.

[150GCT_Veltro]

That comparison is not nearly as much in WoP's favor as you people seem to think it is. I see virtually no difference. If anything I think CoD might be slightly better.

Don't forget about the game requirements.

We are talking about DX10 and powerfull hardware to run it. Like it or not, the quality of these textures is really poor in 2011.

However i've been joked the first time with this release. Be sure, it will not happen again.

[David Hayward]

Don't forget about the game requirements.

We are talking about DX10 and powerfull hardware to run it. Like it or not, the quality of these textures is really poor in 2011.

I eagerly await a WW2 flight sim with higher quality textures (that does not look like someone puked on it). How long do you think I'm going to have to wait?

[DK-nme]

I eagerly await a WW2 flight sim with higher quality textures (that does not look like someone puked on it). How long do you think I'm going to have to wait?

For ages. So, the question is: How old are you and how many years have you left for waiting?
:cool:

[150GCT_Veltro]

I eagerly await a WW2 flight sim with higher quality textures (that does not look like someone puked on it). How long do you think I'm going to have to wait?

CoD was the last chance.

[Jatta Raso]

I'm not the one trying to convince people that they should add WoP features to CoD. So far you are failing.

you know what? i was going to post the same set of 3 SC in greyscale to end this green filter nonsense (that only applies to ONE map of WoP btw) but never mind, point has been made. i see a lot of people realizes that we should't be seeing the tree trunks from the air, just masses of green instead of little toothpicks with green heads in the distance, which WoP does LOADS better than CoD. i don't mind that CoD trees look amazing up close, as they look odd in medium-long distance and above all, they look Mediterranean instead of northern.

not to mention that water merges seamlessly with land in the seashore or rivers, where in CoD water just cuts through land abruptly... the water splashes of WoP are better... the water trails of moving ships are more believable as they include side ripples...
point is there are graphical aspects that CoD needs to catch up, since in the simulation area does so much, and the cockpits are so gorgeous... what a shame to ruin that with terrain errors that could be improved and somewhat ruin the immersion for many people

as a closer, Dear trool that has been trooling one entire thread by himself, you hurt your reputation so much (in case you had any 'cause i don't know you); i'm not even gonna comment what you said.
anyone that doesn't realize the points been made looking at the 3 SC set presented, anyone who doesn't realize that real trees in that real place seen from the air look like A and not like B, with the photo of the real place and SC of A and B right in his face, is in complete denial. boot licking the 1C team doesn't do anyone any good. there you have your attention. i'm done here

[David Hayward]

CoD was the last chance.

I doubt it. CoD will be improved. 777 might get into the WW2 market. The WoP folks might get rid of the puke filter and come up with a more realistic game. Someone else could get it into the market.

But, for now, CoD certainly looks better than any of the other current WW2 options.

[Jatta Raso]

you know what ? i changed my mind, here it is, no green filter, everyone forget the eye bleed and let's have a blast; let's see someone tell in everyone's face that trees from the air in reality look more like CoD and less like WoP, and do the ridicule once more

[David Hayward]

If you don't like CoD, that's fine. But post actual photographs if you want to make your point. Don't post WoP screenshots. WoP is a disaster.

[Jatta Raso]

ok i get the point. :evil:WoP IS THE DEVIL:evil: i'm really done here...

[Tree_UK]

I think the phrase we are looking for is 'you cannot educate pork' . :grin:

[150GCT_Veltro]

Ok, it has a lower resolution than CoD, and it's very similar to IL2 but is not WoP.

This is (was) Storm of War.

http://www.150gct.it/users/150GCT_Veltro/StormOfWar.jpg

Was it so bad? Textures and colors didn't for my opinion.

Just to know your opinion.

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

Somebody told me David Hayward is really Oleg Maddox in disguise,now I understand where he's coming from.

[David Hayward]

I'm beginning to see why some of you think WoP is so great.

[Ali Fish]

am i not helping ? is anyone else ?

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=288226&postcount=113

[philip.ed]

Any argument beyond this is pointless.
I, a resident of England for all my life, have posted screenshots showing that WoP models the layout of fields better than CloD. From what I can see, 99% of posters here agree with me. Indeed, having actually experienced the terrain here in England, I think my credibility far outweighs David's.

What does David have to show? Nothing.

I think we are done here.

[David Hayward]

Any argument beyond this is pointless.
I, a resident of England for all my life, have posted screenshots showing that WoP models the layout of fields better than CloD. From what I can see, 99% of posters here agree with me. Indeed, having actually experienced the terrain here in England, I think my credibility far outweighs David's.

What does David have to show? Nothing.

I think we are done here.

Congrats on your big "victory"! Be sure to let us know when the Queen plans to confer your knighthood.

[ATAG_Doc]

I am telling you guys again it's like taking your women to a party and having some strange new really very hot women show up and all the guys notice her. But leave it to your women to start to trash her and she doesn't even know her. This is normal. She is very territorial and feels threatened by her.

We need more flight sims so you guys pool your money together and buy one or develop one and make it bigger and better than all the rest. We'll buy it. But at the end of the day this girl is the prettiest one at the dance.

[philip.ed]

No question about that! It's leaps and bounds over WoP! But this one feature is just better represented in WoP, and that (as they say) is that.

I'm not out for moral victories over faceless forum goers in the internet. I want to see this sim improved, and terrain wise, this is one element which needs improving (among many).

'Nuff said.

[ATAG_Doc]

No question about that! It's leaps and bounds over WoP! But this one feature is just better represented in WoP, and that (as they say) is that.

I'm not out for moral victories over faceless forum goers in the internet. I want to see this sim improved, and terrain wise, this is one element which needs improving (among many).

'Nuff said.


Phillip you must have been absent when it was announced let me get my attendance records...hmm..Phillip Phillip ahh yes! You were!

Phillip this isn't a finished product. It's an evolution and it's ongoing. It's a trilogy. Me entiende?

Unlike WoP where its released and then followed up with some fixes and much of the add-ons are done by a community of users.

This (obviously) is just the Battle of Brittan. Following? Well far be it from me to point this out to all of you but Phillip the end of that battle was't the end of the war.

There is much much more to come. Sit back. Relax. Have a coke.

WoP was fun. If you dedicated a lot of hours and time making maps pretty we thank you and love it! But the reality is there is a new Sheriff in town.

And his name isn't Reggie Hammond. It's Cliffs of Dover.

[philip.ed]

Huh? I don't think you know me at all....

I have no affection for WoP in the slightest; I don't even own the game.

I know that CloD is a development process, but in many respects, that's another way of saying that the release was an insult to the community, who were under the impression that, after 6 or so years of development, the game would be a proper release.
Where is the BoB? I'm not trying to be rude, but it's not even in the game. I'll play BoB2 for that.
So CloD is currently all about the visuals and the limited combat experience; hence why this topic set out to show that the terrain needs a fair amount of improving.

I know that CloD will be awesome in time, for many it already is, and watching the game unfold is an enjoyable process. But WoP never really was competition in the first place.

[David Hayward]

that's another way of saying that the release was an insult to the community, who were under the impression that, after 6 or so years of development, the game would be a proper release.


I didn't take the fact that WoP is a steaming pile of poop as an insult. I don't know why you would take CoD's condition as an insult. I fully expected CoD to be loaded with bugs. At least CoD can be fixed.

[DK-nme]

(...) At least CoD can be fixed.

Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha, David, you funny guy.
And what would you know wether fixing this game is possible or not??? Are you a hardcoding programmer of 1c dev. team?
I think not. But hey, though a bit naive, its ok to hope...

[David Hayward]

Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ha, David, you funny guy.
And what would you know wether fixing this game is possible or not??? Are you a hardcoding programmer of 1c dev. team?
I think not. But hey, though a bit naive, its ok to hope...

No, I've been coding hospital software for the last 20+ years. There is no such thing as software that can't be fixed. How much programming experience do you have?

[DK-nme]

No, I've been coding hospital software for the last 20+ years. There is no such thing as software that can't be fixed. How much programming experience do you have?

Other than a short introduction to c++, absolutely none.
:cool:
But hey, I'm not the one to proclame, wether something is fixable or not.
I also wouldn't dare make such a statement without first having studied the hardcoding intensively...

[David Hayward]

I also wouldn't dare make such a statement without first having studied the hardcoding intensively...

Considering that you have ZERO programming experience, that is probably a good position for you to take. In fact, you shouldn't talk about coding at all. I have 20+ years of programming experience, and I'm quite confident that any code can be fixed.

[ATAG_Doc]

This is so weird. There are developers all around me at work and they have these same exact conversations with each other but face to face.

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

Bet Oleg could fix it.or maybe Jimmy Savile.:) (thats for a few older Brits)

[Ali Fish]

stop the squabling and understand that the tree colour alone in COD ruins the overall feel of cod. this proves it folks. darker trees in cod makes a hell of a difference.

http://i.imgur.com/9I33nl.jpg (http://imgur.com/9I33n)http://i.imgur.com/O4uzll.jpg (http://imgur.com/O4uzl)

[jt_medina]

stop the squabling and understand that the tree colour alone in COD ruins the overall feel of cod. this proves it folks. darker trees in cod makes a hell of a difference.

http://i.imgur.com/9I33nl.jpg (http://imgur.com/9I33n)http://i.imgur.com/O4uzll.jpg (http://imgur.com/O4uzl)

Good work. When can you have it ready for download?.
Seems really way better.

[philip.ed]

Brilliant! How do they look like from up close, Ali? I'm just thinking that a bit more green might be needed, in case the trees look almost black from a short-distance.

[jt_medina]

Considering that you have ZERO programming experience, that is probably a good position for you to take. In fact, you shouldn't talk about coding at all. I have 20+ years of programming experience, and I'm quite confident that any code can be fixed.

Arrogant.

[Ali Fish]

Brilliant! How do they look like from up close, Ali? I'm just thinking that a bit more green might be needed, in case the trees look almost black from a short-distance.

the same colour. the far trees blend with the close up model.they have got a bit of a rough alpha transparency presently which might be why they were left so colourfull. an easy fix.

[kendo65]

:shock: Quite a transformation! Suddenly the field textures seem to come together as well.

[David Hayward]

Slightly darker trees sounds like a pretty tough programming issue. I'm not sure it can be fixed.

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

good work Ali.

[jt_medina]

the same colour. the far trees blend with the close up model.they have got a bit of a rough alpha transparency presently which might be why they were left so colourfull. an easy fix.

Why don't just release it.

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

No, I've been coding hospital software for the last 20+ years. There is no such thing as software that can't be fixed. How much programming experience do you have?

of course it can be fixed David re the darker trees..you said so yourself.

[RocketDog]

the same colour. the far trees blend with the close up model.they have got a bit of a rough alpha transparency presently which might be why they were left so colourfull. an easy fix.

Nice work on the darker trees, it looks so much better with your mod. I hope it's something you can release.

[ATAG_Doc]

I am hopeful that soon there will be a way to submit things like this for release globally. Sort of like an app at the app store ya know.

Maps and sounds!

As long as it passes their test where it doesn't go crazy and allow white planes with blood splatters all over it as I seen once before I think that would be great.

[Jatta Raso]

now this is the kind of meaningful contribution i was expecting. good job on the new colour grading, can't wait to test fly over it

[Tree_UK]

Could we not just send this fix to luthier, and let him put it in the next patch? Ali fixed in a day what oleg as been working on for 6 years, way to go Ali!! :grin:

[Ali Fish]

Could we not just send this fix to luthier, and let him put it in the next patch? Ali fixed in a day what oleg as been working on for 6 years, way to go Ali!! :grin:

luthier or whoever just needs to see that image and a spare 20 minuites to apply the changes. im sure he has more important things to do first though.

[ChicoMick]

That's excellent Ali, just doing that has brought the much needed contrast and depth to old pasty light green watercolours.

good work, I want some :-P

[Ali Fish]

thanks. BTW the trees are too dark when down low on the hi poly models :grin::-P:grin::-P:evil: and i think thats what the low poly tree colour model is based on. but i know what i prefer. also isnt it amazing that by changing one colour it allows our eyes to not be affected by the cosmic green goulash.. its about balancing the scene really not so much any individuall texture. and the trees have just worked a treat in that respect. i believe it all needs an extra shader to really work properly.

[MACADEMIC]

Hello,

Don't mean to intrude, just because some here said nobody would be working on any other flight sims. Gaijin announced this today:

http://forum.gaijinent.com/index.php?/topic/3719-gaijins-new-mmo-wwii-game-birds-of-steel/

Best,

MAC

[Mad G]

http://i.imgur.com/O4uzl.jpg (http://imgur.com/O4uzl)

Good work. When can you have it ready for download?.
Seems really way better.


The way to go! Now I can smell tea! Thanks! Looking forward to your mod.

[robtek]

That is no sim, it's a arcade game.

[ATAG_Doc]

I will buy it and support it. I just do that. We as a group of people regardless of the infighting need all of them we can get to be a success on whatever level the publisher and developers consider it to be a success. I probably will only end up using the disk as a coaster or most likely give it my daughter to play. But yes I will buy it. I usually buy and try'em all.

[MACADEMIC]

That is no sim, it's a arcade game.

Hi robtek,

I don't think it's an Arcade game, although there may be a mode in the game that allows a more Arcade style gaming experience. On the question of 'Flight Sim' or not, you're right, strictly speaking. Flight Simulators are certified training aids for real pilots. Everything else would best be called a Flight Simulation Game, but I'm okay with calling them sims. No difference there to Cliffs of Dover. By the way, it's hard to tell from the announcement only how good or bad the game will be exactly, isn't it?

Anyway, my only point was that the genre is receiving attention from different developers (WWII aviation that is).

Best,

MAC

[Zephyr_66]

That is no sim, it's a arcade game.
Yes, but they will port it to PC for the peer to peer "Sim-Lite" market.

[Lololopoulos]

LOL. i was sensing that "Birds of Steel" thread was gonna turn into yet another 50+ page debate over the graphics. But the moderator promptly locked it. Good work! :grin:

[DK-nme]

stop the squabling and understand that the tree colour alone in COD ruins the overall feel of cod. this proves it folks. darker trees in cod makes a hell of a difference.

http://i.imgur.com/9I33nl.jpg (http://imgur.com/9I33n)http://i.imgur.com/O4uzll.jpg (http://imgur.com/O4uzl)

Nope, color doesn't explain everything in this matter. I constantly hear praising of how gorgeous CloD looks, especielly up close. Well hey, this is no FPS, so why bother?
This is a flight sim and I wanna see things from above - way above - and this is were CloD seems to fail.
I've posted some screenies - a polite request from my dear friend David :cool: - and on those screenies (not made by myself) it is clear, how this games GFX engine is outdated or not up to the 2011 standards.

My ten commandments (screenies), who depicts some of the GFX problems this game is battling, and which hopefully will be fixed in near future (though I do not trust to hope):
1. 3D objects and buildings are way to sharp in contrast to the softening surroundings (rendering or LOD problem's?).
2. The blurry landscape in the horizon, looks like a cotton blanket.
3. The grey smudges representing cities at high altitude are ugly as hell and are in fact GFX leftovers from il-2 sturmovik (a game, that now is 10 years old).
4. The water is wronly scaled (compared to the surroundings) and it is terrible colored (no water in N-Europe is colored that way!)
5. The awful shore, that seems to hover above the water.
6. The smoke colomns, that are limited in hight (again leftovers from il-2 sturmovik).
7. The weidlooking trees, that look like small lullypops.
8. The clouds that looks like small cottonballs (totally unrealistic - we need real atmospheric cumulus clouds!)
9. The overall colorpalette is somewhat flat and unrealistic.
10. The compleely missing immersion effect of being high above the ground/water.

Alot of the above features are actually well modelled in WoP. I'm no fan of that game, to arcade, but the terrain GFX are some of the best I've seen. Furthermore, though I sincerely hope, that CloD will prevail in the long end, I don't want to delude myself by stating, that CloD at the present state is the best and most photorealistic game out there (or having the potential to become), cause at the moment, it simply isn't (far from it).

Hopefully you've been seeing this post aswell, David...

[DK-nme]

Just to support my earlier post...

[DK-nme]

...and again

Edit: Wow, I'm totally impressed by the game GFX's (Not!). I'm actually terrible dissapointed, yet hopes that things will change...

[DK-nme]

...and just to stir things up (an older GFX engine and what it is capable of - WoP):

[jt_medina]

Funny thing is in my opinion trees set to low or very low look better than in higher settings. Which seems illogic.

[DK-nme]

...and yet again (ducking for cover):

[jt_medina]

...and just to stir things up (an older GFX engine and what it is capable of - WoP):

Despite what people say WOP looks awesome. The Berlin map pure awesomeness

[Blackdog_kt]

My ten commandments (screenies), who depicts some of the GFX problems this game is battling, and which hopefully will be fixed in near future (though I do not trust to hope):
1. 3D objects and buildings are way to sharp in contrast to the softening surroundings (rendering or LOD problem's?).
2. The blurry landscape in the horizon, looks like a cotton blanket.
3. The grey smudges representing cities at high altitude are ugly as hell and are in fact GFX leftovers from il-2 sturmovik (a game, that now is 10 years old).
4. The water is wronly scaled (compared to the surroundings) and it is terrible colored (no water in N-Europe is colored that way!)
5. The awful shore, that seems to hover above the water.
6. The smoke colomns, that are limited in hight (again leftovers from il-2 sturmovik).
7. The weidlooking trees, that look like small lullypops.
8. The clouds that looks like small cottonballs (totally unrealistic - we need real atmospheric cumulus clouds!)
9. The overall colorpalette is somewhat flat and unrealistic.
10. The compleely missing immersion effect of being high above the ground/water.


Points 4 and 8 have been confirmed as in development various times. Meaning, there is transparent water and dynamic weather in the works and it will come with the patches.

As for the rest i can't be sure, but the sim is what it is for now. I'm more concerned about actual gameplay issues because the graphics are functional enough as they are now and you guys keep hogging all the attention with graphics related requests :-P

Does anyone actually fly these planes or are we all just looking at them for the most part? :grin:

[Ali Fish]

its a tough life being graphics in il2. here's an objective look at what our scenery is going through.
http://youtu.be/XUa_viVGNNs

[kendo65]

...

As for the rest i can't be sure, but the sim is what it is for now. I'm more concerned about actual gameplay issues because the graphics are functional enough as they are now and you guys keep hogging all the attention with graphics related requests :-P

Does anyone actually fly these planes or are we all just looking at them for the most part? :grin:

I think 'functional' is a good word for the current state of play in a lot of the terrain graphics features.

People obviously have different preferences and opinions about the most important features of the game.

What would worry me is if the devs were to settle for merely 'functional' looking terrain and devote all their attention onto other technical aspects. There should obviously be a balance achieved between the quality of the different elements (graphics, fm, dm, gameplay, AI, etc, etc) with most effort being addressed to wherever the sim is currently weakest.

So I'm actually pleased that threads like this draw the devs attention to the terrain aspects as something that many of us would like to see improved.

Having said that, maybe it's now time to move on. I think they'll have got the message by now.

But it would be nice to hear from luthier what their take is on this issue - we know some terrain improvements are on the way, but what will be the extent of future improvements?

[Ploughman]

I wish the landscape graphics were functional. If you haven't got a very good system they're anything but unless you turn them right down in which case landscape hardly describes the undulating, blurred wasteland populated by the occassional poorly skinned box representing a building of some sort and the odd lonely windmill spinning gently in the breeze. If we're going to have a functional placeholder of a landscape why not stick with a pimped Il-2 46? At least that ran like greased owl effluent on my rig.

I've a Q6600, GT9800 1GB, 4GB RAM, Vista32 so granted, tepid at best, and perhaps I deserve to be exiled to on-line maps and mid-Channel actionand have unreaslistic expectations of being able to fly round in a believable simulated environment.