landscape of official storm of war trailer

[David198502]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GtsNqaE1yU

yesterday i saw this trailer for the first time, and i have to confess, i was really impressed by the landscape storm of war had back then.
i was told that the trailer was made in 2007 and used the old il2 engine.
what i really dont understand, how is it possible that the landscape in this trailer is sooo much superiour to the one we have now.

i dont want to citizise the devs with this thread.and i dont want to start another compare thread.thats not my intention.
what i would like to know is, how long would it take for the devs, to change the current landscape, so that it would resemble the one of the trailer.
in my opinion the former landscape looks way more natural and convincing, at least for me.
especially the colours and the placement of trees and hedgegrows are in my focus.

is it possible, with this amount of staff, to make such huge changes to the landscape?is it plausible that we will see something like that one day?or is it an unrealistic expectation?
i dont have no glue about programing so i thought i would ask.

ps: i know there are far more important things right now.

[furbs]

All i want from that landscape is the colors and trees.
The colors are spot on perfect. Luthier who ever made the colors on that vid, get him back please.

Im sure the topography and other things are much better on our new landscape but please the colors and tree placement are perfect for England.

If you like that vid, you might want to look up the Mysticpuma vid too.(il have a look round for it)

[furbs]

here it is...


http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-1866144906641648934

[RedToo]

Something, somewhere went horribly wrong.

RedToo.

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

yes it looks good, reminds me of WOP:)

[JG52Krupi]

Jesus Christ almighty you guys should campaign for a whinging sport to be added to the Olympics I am sure we would have the bronze, silver, and gold medal winners on this forum... Surely you have something better to do than constantly bitching....

[Raggz]

I never saw the point in crying over something that don't exist. This has been beaten to death a hundred times.

You don't have it, you won't have it, you'll never get it!!!!

[CrazySchmidt]

I never saw the point in crying over something that don't exist

The thing is, it did exist that's the point.

I've given up with expectation for this sim for at least another 12-18 months. I'm sure by then it will be absolutely brilliant or it won't be here at all. I sure do hope it is the earlier.

Here hoping.

CS. :)

[the Dutchman]

I never saw the point in crying over something that don't exist.
The thing is;it DID exist,that trailer based on the il-2 engine,(is it?)somehow looked better than CoD,especially the terrain,so yeah what happened?

[Zappatime]

I'm curious to know what happened to the German locos and railway vehicles all I can find in the FMB objects are British tank engines, unless someone knows better, I wanted to make missions attacking German supply trains etc:confused:

[Raggz]

As developing progress and new things are added like physics and other things, stuff has to be balanced. Add some and remove some. It's the way games are built. We just can't have it all and everyone want something different. It's been said a hundred times that the engine is built for the future. In i a few years we might have it all and be able to run it with good FPS. As of now there's no point bringing up all these things as we probably won't be able to have it playable with reasonable FPS with all the goodies.
I rather have great plane physics and models than trees blowing in the wind or water splashing on the beaches. The colors is another matter which is a matter of taste, more or less.

I'm not bashing heads here. It's just how it's done.

[6S.Manu]

As developing progress and new things are added like physics and other things, stuff has to be balanced. Add some and remove some. It's the way games are built. We just can't have it all and everyone want something different. It's been said a hundred times that the engine is built for the future. In i a few years we might have it all and be able to run it with good FPS. As of now there's no point bringing up all these things as we probably won't be able to have it playable with reasonable FPS with all the goodies.
I rather have great plane physics and models than trees blowing in the wind or water splashing on the beaches. The colors is another matter which is a matter of taste, more or less.

I'm not bashing heads here. It's just how it's done.

The bolded part make me gives me a bone chill.

Using "new" technlogies like WPF and WCF doesn't mean the game is made for the future: Multithreading, PhysX, DX11 and 64bit are. Modular applications (with SDK) are the future, where you add planes, tanks, ships and buildings to a WORKING physic/graphic/sound engine.
Not adding a incomplete physic/graphic/sound engine to a pair of well made planes.

We can only wait, but this was not designed as a game for the future.. sure it wasn't at the Euro release.

[CrazySchmidt]

As developing progress and new things are added like physics and other things, stuff has to be balanced. Add some and remove some. It's the way games are built. We just can't have it all and everyone want something different. It's been said a hundred times that the engine is built for the future. In i a few years we might have it all and be able to run it with good FPS. As of now there's no point bringing up all these things as we probably won't be able to have it playable with reasonable FPS with all the goodies.
I rather have great plane physics and models than trees blowing in the wind or water splashing on the beaches. The colors is another matter which is a matter of taste, more or less.

I'm not bashing heads here. It's just how it's done.

The leading video example most certainly did not imply that purchasers of this sim should expect to wait years to see in game examples of what was demonstrated in the video!!

I personally appreciate seeing this video again because it reminds me of why I was so excited about this (then pending) release and why I had such high expectations. I'm curious now, are you a member of the 1C development team? or have you at least had some experience in the process of programming and game development? You certainly imply authority and understanding of the process in your last reply.

Unless you are a member of the development team or are close to them your words are simply opinion at best, as are the rest in this forum, good, bad or indifferent!

Personally I believe this is one of the best threads in recent weeks that actually brings the point home for a lot of fans. Where the hell did all this promise go???

Jesus, I and many others parted with our hard earned coin based on this level of promise, when the bloody hell am I going to get what I paid for!!

Yep, I get it... apparently it's a year or so from now.

I support everyone in this forum bringing up their gripes over and over again, because it is what the developers need until they come back with a suitable solution for everyone that has purchased this.

CS. :)

[Tree_UK]

The leading video example most certainly did not imply that purchasers of this sim should expect to wait years to see in game examples of what was demonstrated in the video!!

I personally appreciate seeing this video again because it reminds me of why I was so excited about this (then pending) release and why I had such high expectations. I'm curious now, are you a member of the 1C development team? or have you at least had some experience in the process of programming and game development? You certainly imply authority and understanding of the process in your last reply.

Unless you are a member of the development team or are close to them your words are simply opinion at best, as are the rest in this forum, good, bad or indifferent!

Personally I believe this is one of the best threads in recent weeks that actually brings the point home for a lot of fans. Where the hell did all this promise go???

Jesus, I and many others parted with our hard earned coin based on this level of promise, when the bloody hell am I going to get what I paid for!!

Yep, I get it... apparently it's a year or so from now.

I support everyone in this forum bringing up their gripes over and over again, because it is what the developers need until they come back with a suitable solution for everyone that has purchased this.

CS. :)

+1, nicely worded buddy and just as I feel.

[Tree_UK]

As developing progress and new things are added like physics and other things, stuff has to be balanced. Add some and remove some. It's the way games are built. We just can't have it all and everyone want something different. It's been said a hundred times that the engine is built for the future. In i a few years we might have it all and be able to run it with good FPS. As of now there's no point bringing up all these things as we probably won't be able to have it playable with reasonable FPS with all the goodies.
I rather have great plane physics and models than trees blowing in the wind or water splashing on the beaches. The colors is another matter which is a matter of taste, more or less.

I'm not bashing heads here. It's just how it's done.

We may well be able to run it in the future, but it already looks outdated 'the landscape that is'. The idea that this game was built for 2013 or whatever Luthier said was just rhetoric, if they ever do apply DX11 to this game which i think again is never going to happen then we might start seeing something that is on a parallel to what can be done with modern day software coding and hardware.

[Dano]

The thing is;it DID exist,that trailer based on the il-2 engine,(is it?)somehow looked better than CoD,especially the terrain,so yeah what happened?

Because it had too many limitations, rivers were all wide, vertical cliffs were not possible, definition was low, etc etc.

At some point you have to understand that the IL2 engine is old and cannot continue to be upgraded efficiently, thus they built a new one.

You should be able to mod the il2 engine to look like that, but I suspect you'll come to the same conclusions as Oleg's team did, that it was time to start over with the ability to look forward again, it's probably not coincidence that RoF dropped the IL2 engine.

[RedToo]

Because it had too many limitations, rivers were all wide, vertical cliffs were not possible, definition was low, etc etc.

At some point you have to understand that the IL2 engine is old and cannot continue to be upgraded efficiently, thus they built a new one.

Yes but something, somewhere went horribly wrong. The existence of Spitgirl is evidence of this.

RedToo.

[Dano]

Yes but something, somewhere went horribly wrong. Spitgirl is evidence of this.

RedToo.

In the campaign department yes, personally I think CoD's landscape looks great, it just needs some tweaks so that it gels together better.

[CrazySchmidt]

yes but something, somewhere went horribly wrong. Spitgirl is evidence of this.

Redtoo.

lol!!

Is she real... I heard she only appeared in your nightmares just like Freddy!

[the Dutchman]

Because it had too many limitations, rivers were all wide, vertical cliffs were not possible, definition was low, etc etc.



???I see a complete coastline with cliffs,complete villages packed with houses,very detailed fields bordered with treelines...

[kendo65]

It is annoying to see the obvious superiority of the earlier terrain. I'd never seen the MysticPuma vid before, so thanks for posting - look at the terrain around the 15:50 mark - looks good.

As developing progress and new things are added like physics and other things, stuff has to be balanced. Add some and remove some. It's the way games are built.
...
...
I rather have great plane physics and models than trees blowing in the wind or water splashing on the beaches. The colors is another matter which is a matter of taste, more or less.
...

I don't think this is valid at all - the current COD has as many or even more trees than the earlier version - number and resource usage isn't the point. 'Artistic' use of the elements is where they have screwed up so royally.

The early version demonstrates conclusively that they knew HOW to make a realistic, believable representation of the terrain. My guess is that when the early version was binned they either didn't have enough time (or maybe the services of a talented enough graphical artist) to recreate the authentic look.
The current map has for me all the indications of a rushed job.

I'm aware that different people have different opinions and that some feel the terrain issue is comparatively unimportant. But, I'm definitely not one of them. I've tried to get into the game and give it a chance, but the poor terrain is too much of a turn-off. It's the main reason why I've shelved the game for now. I can also say that unless it is fixed and improved in the future i don't think I will have the desire to get back into the game.

Hopefully it will be, by the community using the SDK if not the devs.

[Dano]

???I see a complete coastline with cliffs,complete villages packed with houses,very detailed fields bordered with treelines...

Cliffs aren't vertical was the issue I beleive we were told, by definition I mean the mesh, ie we now have a high resolution mesh that allows for fine elevation changes rather than the actual textures applied.

[CrazySchmidt]

???I see a complete coastline with cliffs,complete villages packed with houses,very detailed fields bordered with treelines...

Hell, did you spot that as well? I was starting to think it was just me...

[furbs]

here it is...


http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-1866144906641648934

Look from 14.30 to 16.30 = perfect English landscape right there...nice FPS...no flickering shadows..lots and lots of trees placed to look organic and natural.

[Ataros]

in my opinion the former landscape looks way more natural and convincing, at least for me.
especially the colours and the placement of trees and hedgegrows are in my focus.

I think if modern lighting system is removed from CloD the colours would look the same as in the video, i.e. darker.

We do not have enough clouds or high-altitude overcast ingame to reproduce normal weather and therefore have colours more natural for rare bright sunny days in mid summer when atmosphere is absolutely transparent for sunlight.

When we have hardware to run the weather system or it is optimised enough the lighting would not be as bright and landscape colours would change naturally.

On sunny days colours become very acid. Just Google it
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--kt3jjW13sY/TZDNiAZn2NI/AAAAAAAAACA/ScDQiIrV0No/s1600/Sunny_Day_by_EinKurogane.jpg

http://www.wallcoo.net/nature/sz194-tree-and-grassland_blue_sky/wallpapers/1280x1024/Single_tree_in_green_field_with_blue_sky_JA094_pho to.jpg

http://www.wallcoo.net/nature/sz194-Tree-and-grassland_blue_sky/wallpapers/1600x1200/Single_tree_in_green_field_in_sunny_day_JA089_phot o.jpg

Open in separate tabs and compare to this or any other CloD screenshot https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-rY4ccAKbm2I/TeTVZ0ONtTI/AAAAAAAABeQ/jPnPQo40Zq4/2011-05-12_00061.jpg

Thus, I would not dramatize current state of landscape colours based on personal perceptions. Perception depends on what you compare the colours with. Older games just do not have as advanced lighting system and may look darker even without high-alt clouds\overcast which is wrong.

[JG52Krupi]

You guys take the biscuit, never ever have I met such a bunch moaning speculating buffoons.

There are countless games that had tech videos that have looked much much better than the final product and if you think the landscape looks bad then you clearly have not spent much time playing. I agree that the colours at certain times are too bright but it's a flying sim not a sodding 1940 Britain sim GROW UP.

The Internet everyone is apparently an expert :rolleyes:

[Baron]

Thats what i keep saying, there will always be: "but, but, but"!!! from people who are never ever satisfied, always.


P.S Someone should alert all the monitor manufactures, there seems to be a all out epidemic bug causing the calibration feature on the screens to conk out.

[kendo65]

Ataros, for me the issue is more about the overall believability of the landscape and specifically placement of trees, though colour could be improved too - and will probably be the easier fix.

JG52Krupi - I was waiting for the 'it's a flight-sim, not a 1940s terrain sim' line to come up. As i've already said, different people put different priorities on things. But a flight-sim has to simulate more than just the aircraft and their systems to a good standard - it has to create a believable world for them to fly in. So a flight-sim set in 1940s Britain does unavoidably have to be something of a '1940 Britain sim'.

It doesn't need to be perfect or to prioritise the terrain above the aircraft and the flying, but it should be believable. For me the early version was and the current version isn't. Personal opinion. Sorry if you disagree, but no need to start name-calling.

[CrazySchmidt]

You guys take the biscuit, never ever have I met such a bunch moaning speculating buffoons.

There are countless games that had tech videos that have looked much much better than the final product and if you think the landscape looks bad then you clearly have not spent much time playing. I agree that the colours at certain times are too bright but it's a flying sim not a sodding 1940 Britain sim GROW UP.

The Internet everyone is apparently an expert :rolleyes:

WTF are you talking about? Did you even bother to read the leading thread?

Speculation is something that is derived from uncertainty, there is no such uncertainty implied in the video in the leading thread, it is clearly implied that these features would be available with purchase of product.

Jesus help me, how many more of you misguided fools are out there?

CS. :)

[Danelov]

Umm...Old sailors say " It's bad luck to change the name of a boat".Well, with the game maybe that was not all bad luck.

[Baron]

I think if modern lighting system is removed from CloD the colours would look the same as in the video, i.e. darker.

We do not have enough clouds or high-altitude overcast ingame to reproduce normal weather and therefore have colours more natural for rare bright sunny days in mid summer when atmosphere is absolutely transparent for sunlight.

When we have hardware to run the weather system or it is optimised enough the lighting would not be as bright and landscape colours would change naturally.

On sunny days colours become very acid. Just Google it
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--kt3jjW13sY/TZDNiAZn2NI/AAAAAAAAACA/ScDQiIrV0No/s1600/Sunny_Day_by_EinKurogane.jpg

http://www.wallcoo.net/nature/sz194-tree-and-grassland_blue_sky/wallpapers/1280x1024/Single_tree_in_green_field_with_blue_sky_JA094_pho to.jpg

http://www.wallcoo.net/nature/sz194-Tree-and-grassland_blue_sky/wallpapers/1600x1200/Single_tree_in_green_field_in_sunny_day_JA089_phot o.jpg

Open in separate tabs and compare to this or any other CloD screenshot https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-rY4ccAKbm2I/TeTVZ0ONtTI/AAAAAAAABeQ/jPnPQo40Zq4/2011-05-12_00061.jpg

Thus, I would not dramatize current state of landscape colours based on personal perceptions. Perception depends on what you compare the colours with. Older games just do not have as advanced lighting system and may look darker even without high-alt clouds\overcast which is wrong.


Personally, if i see, everyday, what some people here claims how Britain, grass on a sunny day etc look like (im pretty sure grass on a sunny day anywhere in the northern hemisphere look pretty much the same) , i would have my eyes checked asp.

The grass for ex, some people say it should look like is more how grass looks after 1 straight month of blistering sun and no rain what so ever.

And no, Britain colours isnt specially in any way what so ever compared to say Sweden.

The colours look darker and more toned down only when there is complete overcast.


The layout is another matter.


Colours in Cod.

Pic. 1 at 06.00
Pic. 2 at 12.00
Pic. 3 at 16.00


Sometime i wonder if people forgotten that CoD have Dynamic Lighting and colours change depending on time of day. But hey, maby we should go back to no Dynamic Lighting so the colours "feel" better.

[Ataros]

But a flight-sim has to simulate more than just the aircraft and their systems to a good standard - it has to create a believable world for them to fly in.

I logged very few hours in a small aircraft flying most of the time at 300m (on hot summer days mostly). For me neither RoF nor DCS create as believable world as seen from this altitude as CoD. For me CoD provides more photorealistic experience i.e. not as cartoonish as some other sims. It very well reminds of experience I had in RL e.g. even rising my heart beat say when I am on my final but the runway is not clear ingame. Original IL-2 did not give this feeling for example.

Landscape will be improved further of cause.

Upd. For instance compare difference between light and shade colours on a cloudy day here
http://www.ivask.ru/content/rus/mnu/238/F3_1280.jpg

[150GCT_Veltro]

Storm of War landscape did look damn good. I've never understood why they did change it with Jurassic.

[CrazySchmidt]

You don't have to be a pilot to now what the ground looks like from inside an aeroplane at any altitude, you just simply have to have flown and looked out the window.

I've seen it, CloD is not close.

[Ali Fish]

Personally, if i see, everyday, what some people here claims how Britain, grass on a sunny day etc look like (im pretty sure grass on a sunny day anywhere in the northern hemisphere look pretty much the same) , i would have my eyes checked asp.

The grass for ex, some people say it should look like is more how grass looks after 1 straight month of blistering sun and no rain what so ever.

And no, Britain colours isnt specially in any way what so ever compared to say Sweden.

The colours look darker and more toned down only when there is complete overcast.


The layout is another matter.


Colours in Cod.

Pic. 1 at 06.00
Pic. 2 at 12.00
Pic. 3 at 16.00


Sometime i wonder if people forgotten that CoD have Dynamic Lighting and colours change depending on time of day. But hey, maby we should go back to no Dynamic Lighting so the colours "feel" better.

this is the reason it doesnt look as good in your opinions. For me its exactly the same. the issue is artistry ! and solely artistry. when you have no shaders over your work your work is raw. It looks how you designed it. when you add more and more shaders over the art it distorts the art and the artist can not work in the perfect static enviroment anymore. Its a comprimise in order to incoroporate the fact that your image has to look different at different times of day and enviromental situations.

heres the Fact: 90% of the time of day the colours work as they should they are colours you see out over a landscape through direct and non direct lighting. Most of your opinions are incapable of understanding the ART has to look good over a 24 hours period and be affected by cloud cover and lighting angle. IMHO there is a period of time between 1 to 2 hours that most of you fly at that does appear incredibly wrong. thats about 20% of the day to night schedule and funnily enough the time of day your all flying. Out with those times the scenery is absolutely stunning in its presentation.

The Scenery is not going to get better because its as good as it will get. you guys must fix your conceptualisation on the matter.

If i want to get critical i would be criticising a few factors. the scale of the fields. the lack of a wild urban tile representing wild countryside. the scale of the fields affects the colours believe it or not. more smaller scaled fields with a selection of say 5 colours. when your eye sees this it affects the relationships between the colours. in not so many words its these relationships that bring you to the wrong conclusion that the colours are off. wether you believe what i say or not. it is not the colours that are wrong.

[furbs]

You guys take the biscuit, never ever have I met such a bunch moaning speculating buffoons.

There are countless games that had tech videos that have looked much much better than the final product and if you think the landscape looks bad then you clearly have not spent much time playing. I agree that the colours at certain times are too bright but it's a flying sim not a sodding 1940 Britain sim GROW UP.

The Internet everyone is apparently an expert :rolleyes:

Krupi, take the fingers out your ears mate,
its not our fault that the colours and layout of the SOW landscape
are better than CODs, these are just the facts as most of us see them.
What we would like to happen is that Luthier sees these threads and if its at all possible in the future he changes some things...thats all we want.

You do know that Luthier doesn't cry when somebody points out these things right?

Most of us would like to know if they can get the colours and layout right once, why did the colours and layout change in COD?

[JG52Uther]

I was at the same show as Mystic,and sat at that computer.It looked better than what we have now IMO.

[furbs]

just to compare...

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/2121/bob1u.jpg
By furbs9999 (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/furbs9999) at 2011-07-08

http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/8456/launcher201107081347319.jpg
By furbs9999 (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/furbs9999) at 2011-07-08

[Ataros]

Most of us would like to know if they can get the colours and layout right once, why did the colours change in COD?

Regarding colours they already answered this question back in March and the answer was that the lighting engine is changed and became more advanced/complex. Sorry I can not find the link now it was probably at sukhoi.ru forums.

Please see my post on the previous page and Ali Fish post above.

Regarding layout they could develop some sort of algorithm for automatic tree placement as the map is to big to place all trees manually. The demo for IL-2 engine probably had trees placed by hand as area was smaller or they were not as pressed for time by UBI back then. Another thing the devs mentioned that number of trees and number of types of trees was reduced for optimisation.

just to compare...

The 1st one just has like 5 times more individual trees with more branches = low fps on current hardware. We will have this amount of trees in 5 years when hardware is ready. No problem.

[Baron]

just to compare...

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/2121/bob1u.jpg
By furbs9999 (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/furbs9999) at 2011-07-08

http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/8456/launcher201107081347319.jpg
By furbs9999 (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/furbs9999) at 2011-07-08

And some of u choose the former?

Wow is all i can say.

[furbs]

Of course...the first shot is a screen capture of a screen @82kb

The second shot is a screenshot i just got 5 mins ago...jpeg@1.55 mb

The COD shot shows much more detail(as it should)in a computer generated landscape of don't know where.


The top shot shows a landscape with colors and layout that look like England.

[Lixma]

And some of u choose the former?
I certainly would.

[JG52Uther]

And some of u choose the former?

Wow is all i can say.

ROFL

The former looks like a pic of England.
The second looks like a game.

[150GCT_Veltro]

just to compare...

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/2121/bob1u.jpg
By furbs9999 (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/furbs9999) at 2011-07-08

http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/8456/launcher201107081347319.jpg
By furbs9999 (http://profile.imageshack.us/user/furbs9999) at 2011-07-08

.......

There is no comparisons i think. The first one looks like the english landscape, the second......is just horrible.

A "suicide" the CoD's landscape.

Storm of War did look much better also in the tiles, but we'll never have a new landscape considering they are working on russian landscape now, and Luthier simple ignores these complains.

Really, i can't still believe we have a so horrible landscape in CoD.

[furbs]

Just to add...The COD shot is taken at 6am to show it in its "best" light.

[Cpt Dremmen]

http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/5230/bob1ucopy.jpg (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/219/bob1ucopy.jpg/)

Uploaded with ImageShack.us (http://imageshack.us)

[furbs]

yep...perfect Drem!

[Jatta Raso]

something, somewhere went horribly wrong.

Redtoo.

+1000

[Jatta Raso]

I never saw the point in crying over something that don't exist. This has been beaten to death a hundred times.

You don't have it, you won't have it, you'll never get it!!!!

one of the dumbest things ever to be seen in here. sounds just like dictatorshi(t)p

[Dano]

Just to add...The COD shot is taken at 6am to show it in its "best" light.

And given the shadows in the other shot it's also taken at around the same time of day, either am or pm.

[Jatta Raso]

Look from 14.30 to 16.30 = perfect English landscape right there...nice FPS...no flickering shadows..lots and lots of trees placed to look organic and natural.

to be honest there is no possible comparison between those and what we have now; my question boils down to: if IL-2 Sturmovick engine could do that, why IL-2 Cod can't? of course it can, it's not a matter of resource usage, rather an art direction issue i think. putting the colour grading issues aside, the trees just look weird in CoD, especially from about 1000m; the former version was more natural as it didn't had that 'lollipop effect' with the trees (tree trunks oddly visible from the air even in between woods)

[the Dutchman]

I just zoomed in on google maps somewhere near the channelcoast and actually it looks much more like CoD than the demo.......but i dunno if the fields were also ploughed back then(probably) also?

[Cpt Dremmen]

i fly from westhampnett (goodwood) regularly near tangmere and the image i re hashed is more realistic believe me. the clod graphics are just to sharp there is no depth of field and long haze out of fucus

[JG52Krupi]

WTF are you talking about? Did you even bother to read the leading thread?

Speculation is something that is derived from uncertainty, there is no such uncertainty implied in the video in the leading thread, it is clearly implied that these features would be available with purchase of product.

Jesus help me, how many more of you misguided fools are out there?

CS. :)

ITS PURE SPECULATION BECAUSE NO ONE HERE KNOWS THE REASON WHY THEY DROPPED THE LANDSCAPE.

The only reason mentioned here was that the old engine was too limiting so if true you are asking to have the old engine back that they felt they could not get the game they wanted from.

So I am a fool ROFL, might be but at least im no hyprcrite :D

[Jatta Raso]

i fly from westhampnett (goodwood) regularly near tangmere and the image i re hashed is more realistic believe me. the clod graphics are just to sharp there is no depth of field and long haze out of fucus

been thinking about posting that, lack of depth of field = unreal sharpness over long distance trees and clouds (though that's something the devs should be capable of enabling)

[RCAF_FB_Orville]

All i want from that landscape is the colors and trees.
The colors are spot on perfect. Luthier who ever made the colors on that vid, get him back please.

Im sure the topography and other things are much better on our new landscape but please the colors and tree placement are perfect for England.

If you like that vid, you might want to look up the Mysticpuma vid too.(il have a look round for it)

Im sure the topography and other things are much better on our new landscape but please the colors and tree placement are perfect for England

+1000 Furbs.

Don't get me wrong, COD landscape has its good points, particulary the topography/elevation and grass/field rendering at low alt.

However, pause the vid at 1.34-5, I'm telling you now, hand on heart it is pretty much bang on perfect....... it would be great if we could have something like this back. It truly is far more accurate.

I'm sure its not 'mission impossible' to do.....even short term you can make small tweaks (like darker trees) and change the landscape pallete, it would make a world of difference. If the tree placement (which is much more accurate and convincing in the vid) is too much work at present then maybe it could be done in small increments and that would be better than nothing.

Either way, once the SDK is released I'm sure the modders will sort it out anyway. It's a very valid gripe I'm afraid, and certainly not pointless whinging. It is important that when you are flying over something that purports to be England, that it....errr.....actually looks something like England. ;) As per the vid. Just saying......don't hate me for my beliefs, chaps (which just so happen to be completely correct lol ). :grin:

[BigPickle]

lol i love the way people think the SDK will do everything. I'm almost certain an SDK for this game will be quite limited, but i could be wrong of course.

[RCAF_FB_Orville]

lol i love the way people think the SDK will do everything. I'm almost certain an SDK for this game will be quite limited, but i could be wrong of course.

Perhaps Pickle....you may be right. I have no idea what the SDK will allow, like I have no idea if working AA amongst other things will be featured. People keep asking (nicely) but the silence is deafening. ;)

[David198502]

Im sure the topography and other things are much better on our new landscape but please the colors and tree placement are perfect for England

+1000 Furbs.

Don't get me wrong, COD landscape has its good points, particulary the topography/elevation and grass/field rendering at low alt.

However, pause the vid at 1.34-5, I'm telling you now, hand on heart it is pretty much bang on perfect....... it would be great if we could have something like this back. It truly is far more accurate.

I'm sure its not 'mission impossible' to do.....even short term you can make small tweaks (like darker trees) and change the landscape pallete, it would make a world of difference. If the tree placement (which is much more accurate and convincing in the vid) is too much work at present then maybe it could be done in small increments and that would be better than nothing.

Either way, once the SDK is released I'm sure the modders will sort it out anyway. It's a very valid gripe I'm afraid, and certainly not pointless whinging. It is important that when you are flying over something that purports to be England, that it....errr.....actually looks something like England. ;) As per the vid. Just saying......don't hate me for my beliefs, chaps (which just so happen to be completely correct lol ). :grin:

+1
the new engine has its own advantages, but nobody can convince me about the tree placing,lack of hedgegrows and colours.advanced lightening system..???have you looked at the tree's colours?i flew over pink fields,which turn into dark green when you go down low.
of course the appearance of grass when you fly down low is amazing,and also that they modeled every leaf(although thats insane,they better should have positioned each tree).but as soon as you are 100meters above them,.... honestly they look funny,thats the best i can say about them.the position of them is a pain in the a..,not even to mention that you can fly through them like casper the little ghost.
improved engine?why does the game look worse in many aspects than it did with the old engine?s

[Ali Fish]

fix for tree colours Close & Far. enjoy.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=306799&postcount=1

[David198502]

thx ali!i was hoping that you would continue with your mod.will try it!

[RCAF_FB_Orville]

fix for tree colours Close & Far. enjoy.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=306799&postcount=1

Nice one Ali, thanks a bunch it looks grand and is far more accurate. :) I have seen other attempts (and I think it is indeed possible to change aspects of the landscape too, but limited?) I think using the 'Kegetys' thingymajig? (Not a techie).

Only downside is its only for offline, don't fancy getting perma-banned from Steam lol, but excellent for offline in the meantime. Online is rubbish atm anyway, I can't even get sound. Nice one! Finally things are slightly (nah, a lot) more bearable. I'll start flying it again now. :grin:

[Ataros]

improved engine?why does the game look worse in many aspects than it did with the old engine?s

This happens every time new technology is introduced. When first cars appeared on the market they had more flaws than advantages compared to horses: noisy, uncomfortable and broke every 10 km. Only enthusiasts purchased them. First digital cameras produced much worse photos than film ones. Stereoscopic 3D video more often gives you headache instead of enjoyment atm, etc. etc. I do not get why people pretend it is something unusual.

If you are not an enthusiast wait several years till technology is mature enough for you before purchasing the product. I never purchase the 1st product in a new series unless it is my hobby and I am ready to take risks to test new technology on myself being a "test rabbit". But this is completely conscious decision. Some people just tend to blame others for their own decisions I guess.

[David198502]

This happens every time new technology is introduced. When first cars appeared on the market they had more flaws than advantages compared to horses: noisy, uncomfortable and broke every 10 km. Only enthusiasts purchased them. First digital cameras produced much worse photos than film ones. Stereoscopic 3D video more often gives you headache instead of enjoyment atm, etc. etc. I do not get why people pretend it is something unusual.

If you are not an enthusiast wait several years till technology is mature enough for you before purchasing the product. I never purchase the 1st product in a new series unless it is my hobby and I am ready to take risks to test new technology on myself being a "test rabbit". But this is completely conscious decision. Some people just tend to blame others for their own decisions I guess.

i dont blame nobody.and i like this sim!i really do enjoy it, because as i already said, it has some features that are way more advanced than in the old il2.like CEM.
but the colours and placement of trees really disturb the immersion.and i think its not a real problem to solve those issues.ali just released his darkertrees mod.try it!the game now looks much better with it.unfortunately the placement is the original and looks like the map has acne.

[RocketDog]

i fly from westhampnett (goodwood) regularly near tangmere and the image i re hashed is more realistic believe me. the clod graphics are just to sharp there is no depth of field and long haze out of fucus

I fly gliders from Wiltshire and have been very disappointed by CloD's ghastly attempt at representing England. Some of the old IL-2 maps were much better.

The major mistake they have made seems to be in using a lighting engine that works best at sunrise and sunset but fails when it's supposed to represent bright sunlight. This is unfortunate given that the BoB was mostly fought in daylight.

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

.......

There is no comparisons i think. The first one looks like the english landscape, the second......is just horrible.

A "suicide" the CoD's landscape.

Storm of War did look much better also in the tiles, but we'll never have a new landscape considering they are working on russian landscape now, and Luthier simple ignores these complains.

Really, i can't still believe we have a so horrible landscape in CoD.

are you sure the top one isnt WOP?:)

[David198502]

given the amount of posts that this thread has in such a short time, it seems that its not only me who is concerned about the lanscape issues.i assume that the majority of the members here is in some way dissapointed by some features of the landscape.and the few who defend COD's landscape, only argue that others are whinging, but dont actually claim that the landscape looks great in their view either.

i dont think its whinging.its dissapointment cause we expected much.may be too much.but i dont want to believe that.i still have faith that the devs will improve those issues as well as performance and bugs.
but as long as they dont even recognize those questions, i think it can only help for progress, to ask again and again.
in the end we all want improvement of COD. it can only be positive to let the devs know what we want to be improved.

[150GCT_Veltro]

are you sure the top one isnt WOP?:)

Speculations, you know it. Nobody will say us if Storm of War tiles has been sent to WoP team or not.

I say them CRAZY if they did drop these tiles for the CoD textures.

[Tree_UK]

Firstly, I wish you all had been this passionate about the landscape during development when I was saying how dreadful it looked, maybe something may have changed, secondly Oleg promised us that the landscape would be many many times better than WOP - he either lied or as we now know he hadn't been involved in the deveolpment for a year and a half before release he maybe hadn't seen how bad it was.

Biggest issues for me:-
Landscape is rubbish
Sounds are rubbish
MP sounds dont work
No flyby sounds
No engine start up sounds
Flickering shadows are rubbish
Not being able to end a flight in multiplayer, or refuel/rearm or press refly is simply pathetic
Servers randomly disconnecting is tiresome and rubbish
Anyone seen a windsock yet?
Flying through Trees is er rubbish
Micro stutters are still there, they are rubbish
AI Planes flying around with the landing gear down - rubbish
AI is rubbish
Big rectangle lakes in the middle of maps, rubbish
Then we got all the bugs - they are rubbish
Buildings popping up in 2011!! Rubbish
etc...

....and to add to that, after the cash that i spent on this game had been quickly trousered Luthier then announces that they had released an 'half finished' game, well 4 months later I would like to see the other half that I paid for, or at least some regular communication, Im going to put it in big letters COMMUNICATION, thats all it takes to remove a little bit of the heat Luthier, you've heard it said many times on here why dont you listen to your customers?

[RocketDog]

That pretty much sums it up.

[RCAF_FB_Orville]

Firstly, I wish you all had been this passionate about the landscape during development when I was saying how dreadful it looked, maybe something may have changed, secondly Oleg promised us that the landscape would be many many times better than WOP - he either lied or as we now know he hadn't been involved in the deveolpment for a year and a half before release he maybe hadn't seen how bad it was.

Biggest issues for me:-
Landscape is rubbish
Sounds are rubbish
MP sounds dont work
No flyby sounds
No engine start up sounds
Flickering shadows are rubbish
Not being able to end a flight in multiplayer, or refuel/rearm or press refly is simply pathetic
Servers randomly disconnecting is tiresome and rubbish
Anyone seen a windsock yet?
Flying through Trees is er rubbish
Micro stutters are still there, they are rubbish
AI Planes flying around with the landing gear down - rubbish
AI is rubbish
Big rectangle lakes in the middle of maps, rubbish
Then we got all the bugs - they are rubbish
Buildings popping up in 2011!! Rubbish
etc...

Err, actually Tree other people did point out the crap things about it too, but cut some slack with it being beta.

Ok Tree we'll admit it. You saved the world mate. Single handedly (Christ.... lol). :grin:

Some don't see the point in banging on about things every other 5 seconds, on a daily basis though, and have better things to do. Once or twice should be enough. Have to admire your persistence though. 'Obsession', the new fragrance by TreeUk. (LMAO :grin:)

PS completely agree with all your other points and I'm just ribbing yer a bit mate. :grin: You're a Star. :grin:

[Tree_UK]

Err, actually Tree other people did point out the crap things about it too, but cut some slack with it being beta.

Ok Tree we'll admit it. You saved the world mate. Single handedly (Christ.... lol). :grin:

Some don't see the point in banging on about things every other 5 seconds, on a daily basis though, and have better things to do. Once or twice should be enough. Have to admire your persistence though. 'Obsession', the new fragrance by TreeUk. (LMAO :grin:)

PS completely agree with all your other points and I'm just ribbing yer a bit mate. :grin: You're a Star. :grin:

lol, well I saved nothing mate as it happens, look at the state its in, to be fair during the development many people that did get passionate were quickly silenced by means of a ban, myself (many times) included, I know a lot of people were a little more subtle than myself and maybe that is the correct way of going about things, sadly its just not me.

[LoBiSoMeM]

This sim engine has much more positive points than negative. But some people here try to just focus on negative points, because maybe don't have a real life and see themselves like some "crusaders" against the evil Maddox Games, with all - let's say clear - lies about some know "issues" about the sim that the dev team always know and use an evasive approach...

Ok, we all know that Tree was right about everything. Now we can move foward? The sim is really fun, even with the flaws. It's plain obvious. Let´s try to fly the sim and let the dev team work over the problems.

Yes, we can fly this sim, MP, SP... Use FMB... It's working even withou stutters over London now with lower texture settings...

[Tree_UK]

Yes, we can fly this sim, MP, SP... Use FMB... It's working even withou stutters over London now with lower texture settings...

Really MP is working?? Thats odd, the most people Ive seen online at best is around 40 spread across the choices of about 8 servers - thats impressive for the greatest flight sim ever.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Really MP is working?? Thats odd, the most people Ive seen online at best is around 40 spread across the choices of about 8 servers - thats impressive for the greatest flight sim ever.

We only have now limited full real missions and some "airquake" servers... People need to have time to create good MP servers nad missions, and we have some bugs to devs solve, like the sound one. But now we can have some fun in MP servers without constant crashes/diconnects.

You sound like a broken record now. I like your points some months ago, but now you are just boring. Go fly this bugged sim and try to have some fun!

[furbs]

We cant...thats the point. SP has no campaign. MP has no sound or CO-OPs or the servers brake after a hour.

[Cpt Dremmen]

We only have now limited full real missions and some "airquake" servers... People need to have time to create good MP servers nad missions, and we have some bugs to devs solve, like the sound one. But now we can have some fun in MP servers without constant crashes/diconnects.

You sound like a broken record now. I like your points some months ago, but now you are just boring. Go fly this bugged sim and try to have some fun!

we are trying to play mp mate but it crashes on the sound and basically its poo, we want it to be brilliant but its NOT...far far from it...Rise of flight will put in ww2 planes and bingo

[LoBiSoMeM]

OK, just keep whinning... Maybe it's fun!

I'll try too!

[furbs]

We don't want to be bleedin moaning....we want to be flying sqd coops or taking part in online wars.
We want to take part in the "Battle of Britain" SP where you can join a sqd maybe and seem as if your fighting in the BOB and it tracks my kills and flights....and maybe even put my pilots name in!!!
and we dont want to look at fecking spitgirl. "trust me on this" Luthier said...i did...and Luthier was wrong.

[Tree_UK]

We don't want to be bleedin moaning....we want to be flying sqd coops or taking part in online wars.
We want to take part in the "Battle of Britain" SP where you can join a sqd maybe and seem as if your fighting in the BOB and it tracks my kills and flights....and maybe even put my pilots name in!!!
and we dont want to look at fecking spitgirl. "trust me on this" Luthier said...i did...and Luthier was wrong.

trust Luthier.... its far too late for that.

[LoBiSoMeM]

:cry:

[kendo65]

Oleg mentions in the video (around 16.00-18.00 I think ...) that the game is still Open GL at that point.

Seems that in the abandonment of that and the shift to Direct X they maybe overstretched themselves timewise??

I also have to agree completely with Tree's listing of 'things that are rubbish' about COD - would also point out that he forgot the not working AA - that's rubbish too...

Sorry folks, never thought the day would come when I would become a paid- up member of the whingers and mud-slingers club.

Just want to add that I REALLY, really want to see this sim reach its potential. I'm sure it will eventually. It is just sad that things have so obviously been snafud along the way by circumstance, bad luck or misjudgement. And - I agree with Lobisomem's point about the many really outstanding features of the game/engine (the recent review in PCPilot did a good job of listing them and I realised that we've maybe 'banked' the positives and taken them a bit for granted - number of flyables, cockpits, dm, CEM ,etc) ...but, the truth remains that for me all those good points are, at this time, overwhelmed by the faults to such a degree that I can't really enjoy them. And, foremost among the faults for me is the terrain.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Sigh..................again.

But here's a question for you old hand tech-heads.

What would prevent the devs simply taking Ali Fish's and/or Baron's mods and releasing them as part of the official patches once checked out by 1C? Or at least looking at them and doing their own version?

From the shots I've seen on the mod threads they're certainly an improvement over stock. I've not installed them though, due to paranoia regarding future online bans etc.

Come to that, if it's do-able by one bloke in his spare time, surely a team could correct many such issues in a much shorter time frame.

Makes me wonder what they are working on

[LoBiSoMeM]

Oleg mentions in the video (around 16.00-18.00 I think ...) that the game is still Open GL at that point.

Seems that in the abandonment of that and the shift to Direct X they maybe overstretched themselves timewise??

I also have to agree completely with Tree's listing of 'things that are rubbish' about COD - would also point out that he forgot the not working AA - that's rubbish too...

Sorry folks, never thought the day would come when I would become a paid- up member of the whingers and mud-slingers club, but I too honestly feel that at this time the overall state is best summed up by 'rubbish'.

Just want to add that I REALLY, really want to see this sim reach its potential. I'm sure it will eventually. It is just sad that things have so obviously been snafud along the way by circumstance, bad luck or misjudgement.

Weak VGA too. If the members of "whingers and mud-slingers club" with weak VGAs just lower texture settings to reduce A LOT the stutters in actual build of CloD, or do an upgrade, the club will shrink a lot...

We just still remais with the founder Tree, with his high-end rig... :-)

[baronWastelan]

Sigh..................again.

But here's a question for you old hand tech-heads.

What would prevent the devs simply taking Ali Fish's and/or Baron's mods and releasing them as part of the official patches once checked out by 1C? Or at least looking at them and doing their own version?

From the shots I've seen on the mod threads they're certainly an improvement over stock. I've not installed them though, due to paranoia regarding future online bans etc.

Come to that, if it's do-able by one bloke in his spare time, surely a team could correct many such issues in a much shorter time frame.

Makes me wonder what they are working on

I appreciate the compliment on the Forest Green mod! Regrettably, those sorts of changes are like slathering makeup on an ugly zit. It wouldn't be a good use of the 1C:MG's time to incorporate such a mod into an official update when the entire landscape is in need of surgery.

[Walshy]

I appreciate the compliment on the Forest Green mod! Regrettably, those sorts of changes are like slathering makeup on an ugly zit. It wouldn't be a good use of the 1C:MG's time to incorporate such a mod into an official update when the entire landscape is in need of surgery.

Sorry mate but your sailing close to the wind there ....... Ugly zit?? What's the colour of the sky on your planet? Comparing CLOD with FSX ................... Clod is far better

[David198502]

Weak VGA too. If the members of "whingers and mud-slingers club" with weak VGAs just lower texture settings to reduce A LOT the stutters in actual build of CloD, or do an upgrade, the club will shrink a lot...

We just still remais with the founder Tree, with his high-end rig... :-)

do you have an affair with your VGA?how often do you want to mention that point again?nobody here with low or mid range machines is complaining that they cannot play the game with maxed out graphics fluently.im sure most turned down their settings to be able to play.the problem is people with really high end rigs still suffer with performance issues.and even with everything maxed out, the look of the landscape in some aspects is questionable.
they are all complaining about missing,not working or bad looking features, and not their VGA.

it seems that you are not interested in others opinions and dont even care to read the posts, or you are not capable of doing so.
why do you post then in these threads?
why dont you open up a seperate "My lovely VGA"-thread.

[philip.ed]

Regarding the landscape, whilst the trees in this scrapped development video blend nicely with the scenary, mostly all of the trees look like traditional Christmas-trees in shape. These trees aren't widely seen, as the video dicates, across the English landscape.
One of my main gripes of the trees in CloD is the trunks. If you drive across the SE of England, mostly all of the trees you will see in the countryside, when grouped, have their trunks obscured by foliage. When flying, they just look like a mass of foliage which blends into the terrain. CloD's trees look like lollipops.
The same is true for hedges; I'd best my middle testicle that if you drive down a country lane, a hedge will seemlessly grow in size, creeping into neighbouring trees; again creating a huge mass of foliage. This is all missing from CloD.
Look at RoF. I know the comparisons have been done to death, but the trees there (from the air) look very similar to what I have described.

[kendo65]

... whilst the trees in this scrapped development video blend nicely with the scenary, mostly all of the trees look like traditional Christmas-trees in shape. These trees aren't widely seen, as the video dicates, across the English landscape.
...

Very true - I'd noticed that myself. Expect it would have been easily fixed though.

[kendo65]

I'm a little concerned that there has never been any comment on this whole landscape issue from Luthier.

Understandably other issues may be considered more in need of an immediate fix, but this has been complained about more than anything other than sound and MP. Both of those are receiving priority attention - they've gone so far as to bin the old sound and start again from scratch.

No real acknowledgement that they consider anything about the terrain to be a problem. The only news was that we can expect to get transparent water, new coastline and breaking waves. Very nice, but some comment about their take on current terrain would be welcome:

ok as it is OR
could be improved but it's too much trouble and we've better things to do OR
we actively intend to improve the landscape and will take steps as soon as resources permit

[David198502]

+1.a comment on this issue and the whole thread would cease to exist.

[SYN_Repent]

lobisomem why do you continue to say people dont have a real life because they say things are wrong with this game??

it comes down to the fact that me, and probably many others have to work about half a day to pay for this unfinished product. for me this is a hobby, playing flight sims and other games, but in between work, spending time with my son and girlfriend i want to play a game that works, not mess about with broken crap. if i knew it didnt work i wouldnt have bought it, simple. perhaps its different for you, perhaps your life is so fulfilled that in between snorting cocaine off prostitutes bottoms, hitting golf balls from the deck of your million $ yacht and going to parties with jonny depp, you can play for half an hour then go for a dump and wipe your ass on a $50 note.

and if your game works go play it a lot more instead of coming here and trolling, or is the fact that no one is in multiplayer ruining your fun??

[furbs]

LOL...great post!

[LoBiSoMeM]

lobisomem why do you continue to say people dont have a real life because they say things are wrong with this game??

it comes down to the fact that me, and probably many others have to work about half a day to pay for this unfinished product. for me this is a hobby, playing flight sims and other games, but in between work, spending time with my son and girlfriend i want to play a game that works, not mess about with broken crap. if i knew it didnt work i wouldnt have bought it, simple. perhaps its different for you, perhaps your life is so fulfilled that in between snorting cocaine off prostitutes bottoms, hitting golf balls from the deck of your million $ yacht and going to parties with jonny depp, you can play for half an hour then go for a dump and wipe your ass on a $50 note.

and if your game works go play it a lot more instead of coming here and trolling, or is the fact that no one is in multiplayer ruining your fun??

No, it's not a "great post" at all. Just another whinner post.

You guys are simmers or gammers? You like to spend money in the last FPS franchise title, like CoD, and have some SP fun one day and spend one week more in brainless SP "Quake" style? You want that from CloD?!?!

That's what appears to me... all this CRAP about "trees don't have collision meshes, the terrain looks ugly, the SP are broken, we have MP sound bug"...

I fly in IL-2 for TEN YEARS! I fly all this time not because of some "SP campaign"... Not for some "bug free airquake" from release! I'm a simmer, I like the SIMULATION aspect of the series, like to see good FM, DM, have tools to the community create own scenarios, campaigns, etc. I DON'T NEED A PERFECT PRODUCT FROM RELEASE, I DON'T SEE CLOD AS A NEW FPS TITLE, IT'S THE NEXTGEN AIR COMBAT SIMULATOR, WITH LARGE LIFESPAM!

If you want to "play a game", go for a game. You don't understand what it's all about. It's much more than a "game", that's why a lot of fools can't see 0.1% of the capabilities of the software and talk a lot of CRAP!

Simple as that. I have a girlfriend, work, and are really glad to pay like 50 dollars for this software. I know I'll be flying in it more ten years... And I'm flying in it NOW!

Reporting bugs is one thing. What people are doing now is just brainless whinning.

[pupo162]

Reporting bugs is one thing. What people are doing now is just brainless whinning.


you by yourself are a all new type of whiner the "Im-rich-my-game-works-soe-everyone-elses-msut-work-too-whinner"

and yes. It was a GREAT post.

[RocketDog]

I would have thought that simulating the real-life landscape was something that CloD should have aspired to. As it is now, it has an fantasy landscape.

[SYN_Repent]

im a simmer and a gamer, and have been since i can remember, it is my hobby, my next door neighbour plays cricket as a hobby, but he uses a fully working cricket bat, not one thats snapped in half and broken.

[JG52Krupi]

I would have thought that simulating the real-life landscape was something that CloD should have aspired to. As it is now, it has an fantasy landscape.

Next time you play the game or get on a plane try not to take LSD... What is so bad about the landscape I KNOW it would be nice to have hedges and the colours could be tweaked but in the grand scheme of things the ground does not look bad in fact its the opposite it looks very good.

[philip.ed]

...WITH LARGE LIFESPAM! ...




Ooh, the irony. :cool:

......

Everything can be improved, and CloD is not alone. Realistic campaigns; a representative BoB scenario? This is what I want, and CloD doesn't have it. BoB2 does, and BoB2 does it beautifully. Aside from a dated DM (and dated graphics) BoB2 offers all of what you have said to the offline player, so where does CloD come into this? A long 'lifespam'? Yes, definitely, but the question is when?
Luthier himself has always advocated constructive criticism, and largely that is what this topic is made of. The landscape can be improved, for many it currently detracts from the immersion, and if it can be improved, why not tailor it to the community? Many of whom live in Blighty and can offer a lot of useful advise.

I think it's clear that the terrain is still very much WIP, but official comment on this would put a lot of minds at rest. Indeed, I'm sure many would welcome trees which are as poor as RoF's up-close if it meant they had hit-boxes, and looked awesome from any distance other than 2-metres away. Trees which have individual leaves are awesome, but most of my flying happens at altitudes above 3-metres ;)

[LoBiSoMeM]

you by yourself are a all new type of whiner the "Im-rich-my-game-works-soe-everyone-elses-msut-work-too-whinner"

and yes. It was a GREAT post.

I'm not rich. My system isn't an expensive one. I just have a brain and can build a rig that runs new titles Ok.

I can run this title in a HD 4850 512MB lowering the textures. If people can't configure settings, go buy a console.

[David198502]

no we all need new VGAs

[LoBiSoMeM]

Ooh, the irony. :cool:

......

Everything can be improved, and CloD is not alone. Realistic campaigns; a representative BoB scenario? This is what I want, and CloD doesn't have it. BoB2 does, and BoB2 does it beautifully. Aside from a dated DM (and dated graphics) BoB2 offers all of what you have said to the offline player, so where does CloD come into this? A long 'lifespam'? Yes, definitely, but the question is when?
Luthier himself has always advocated constructive criticism, and largely that is what this topic is made of. The landscape can be improved, for many it currently detracts from the immersion, and if it can be improved, why not tailor it to the community? Many of whom live in Blighty and can offer a lot of useful advise.

I think it's clear that the terrain is still very much WIP, but official comment on this would put a lot of minds at rest. Indeed, I'm sure many would welcome trees which are as poor as RoF's up-close if it meant they had hit-boxes, and looked awesome from any distance other than 2-metres away. Trees which have individual leaves are awesome, but most of my flying happens at altitudes above 3-metres ;)

So, why you talk about collision meshes in trees? :cool:

You people really don't undestand yeat that the "personal taste" tweaks in "landscape", thinking about colours, vegetation placing, textures, is the last thing to be adressed in this sim engine? And yes, people are ALREADY modding this, is easy to do!

It's really fun: we have an 1:1 map of BOB scenario, filled with towns, roads, railroads, forest, all elevations, rivers, cliffs, landmarks, etc, but it's all "crap or poor landscape"... My God! Listen to your words!

Some just don't deserve the work made in this title. Never in my life I saw so negative people! You make me a little sick...:(

[Orpheus]

I think it's clear that the terrain is still very much WIP, but official comment on this would put a lot of minds at rest. Indeed, I'm sure many would welcome trees which are as poor as RoF's up-close if it meant they had hit-boxes, and looked awesome from any distance other than 2-metres away. Trees which have individual leaves are awesome, but most of my flying happens at altitudes above 3-metres ;)

I'm not so sure about that, in fact I get the impression that the terrain side of the optimisation is done, and has been for a while. They have improved it significantly, I can run original textures (just, still some stutter) since the last patch, which would have been impossible at release.

That said the massive texture size, as well as the colouration is still an issue that deserves a dev comment. Texture settings at Low or Medium make the terrain look absolutely awful, High is better.. but still not great (and not even that much difference between high/original in terms of performance now either). The colouration issue is more of a personal preference, but slightly darker trees and fields overall would be nice.

What, if anything I'd like to see Luthier comment on is simply whether it's possible to improve the appearance of the low/medium/high ground textures, so that people using those settings aren't playing a game that looks ten years old - and whether performance can continue to be improved across all ground texture settings.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Terrain here = texture painting...

People of vision... Only I like the work on elevation data, to say just one point? Only I know that we have HUGE limitations in realistic and detailed ground textures in flight sims with LARGE scenarios, in low level flight?

People talk like it's easy to do and the Maddox Games crew are stupid... Go paint trees to personal taste, please...

[philip.ed]

So, why you talk about collision meshes in trees? :cool:

You people really don't undestand yeat that the "personal taste" tweaks in "landscape", thinking about colours, vegetation placing, textures, is the last thing to be adressed in this sim engine? And yes, people are ALREADY modding this, is easy to do!

It's really fun: we have an 1:1 map of BOB scenario, filled with towns, roads, railroads, forest, all elevations, rivers, cliffs, landmarks, etc, but it's all "crap or poor landscape"... My God! Listen to your words!

Some just don't deserve the work made in this title. Never in my life I saw so negative people! You make me a little sick...:(

If we make you sick then throw up.
Anyway, I said MOST of my flying. I may go down to tree-top levels, but not to the extent that I can see individual leaves. Use your brain man! In any case, trees with hit-boxes are completely necessay for crash-landings, because otherwise it just ruins the immersion when you see that Oak-tree coming into view, thinking to yourself 'damn, I'm going to hit it' and then you crash right through it without a scratch.

It's great having this map, but improvements can be made. What you're adovating is that if you had a car that could drive, that's the only purpose it serves. Have you got a CD player in your car? Are your seats heated? Do they need to be?! No, but it's a nice luxury. A beautiful landscape really adds to the immersion. If you live in England, and see a terrain in CloD that looks like any country other than Blighty, it doesn't really stir any patriotic attachments.

@Orpheus, I can see what you mean. The reason I think the terrain is still partially WIP is because of the issues the team had with incorporating speed-tree. It's caused them issues, and I imagine that they would want to look into it. And when they do look into it, hopefully they will assess the other terrain 'issues' as well. When the SDK is released (or if it is released) hopefully there will be a mjor modding effort to really bring this terrain up to photo-realistic standards. Oleg promised it, and hasn't really delivered.

[LoBiSoMeM]

If we make you sick then throw up.
Anyway, I said MOST of my flying. I may go down to tree-top levels, but not to the extent that I can see individual leaves. Use your brain man! In any case, trees with hit-boxes are completely necessay for crash-landings, because otherwise it just ruins the immersion when you see that Oak-tree coming into view, thinking to yourself 'damn, I'm going to hit it' and then you crash right through it without a scratch.

It's great having this map, but improvements can be made. What you're adovating is that if you had a car that could drive, that's the only purpose it serves. Have you got a CD player in your car? Are your seats heated? Do they need to be?! No, but it's a nice luxury. A beautiful landscape really adds to the immersion. If you live in England, and see a terrain in CloD that looks like any country other than Blighty, it doesn't really stir any patriotic attachments.

The biggest release problem was perfromance. We still have performance issues with detailed textures. You appears to don't understand that.

"Immersion" with stutters aren't so good. SpeedTree is great, I dont have any major drop in FPS even with all leaves. There is no real problem with detailed trees. This isn't related with problems in calculation of trees hitboxes. You are in truble to undestand that.

The same with trees colours and placement: "easy" to solve, but it's a minor priority in patching, and people with patience in community can do that. I don't suffer a lot with tree placement/colour, so, isn't a real big problem. Will be cool if it's imporved, I agree, but we can fly ok now.

You are just like Tree: since after first release yu just focus in the damn "scenario colour". You only see that. I'll throw up now...

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

lol Lob mate,heres a bucket:)

[David198502]

we can fly ok now....true, but the problem is ok is not good enough.especially for a product like a WWII flight sim.
and i dont think that it has minor priority.this thread shows that the majority or at least a big percentage of members here are dissappointed by the landscape.
maybe it has minor priority for you. and maybe members here on the forum who are hardcore flight simmers bought this sim for CEM and so on(including me)and not because of the overall look,...but you will not gain many new customers, even when it was perfekt in realism and performance, if the product looks outdated. most kids, who are the potential future flight simmers, wont buy it, if they look at the back of the cover and see an strange looking landscape.
i really think it is an very important issue this sim is facing.imagine this sim with photorealistic graphics!then this product would be sucessfull for the next decade for sure.

[philip.ed]

*Facepalms*

Oleg himself said that they were having to work hard to get the best out of speed-tree. Aesthetically, a lot of work is still needed. If Speed-tree auto-generates the trees, then there-in may lie the problem of hit-boxes, as opposed to trees in-grained as part of the map. For the latter 'solution' a lot of work would be required, but the effects may be awesome (although tricky to work-around to dinstinguish between high and low settings)
Either way, the focus here is on aesthetics. No one is rebuttling the fact that there are more serious issues with the sim; but one cannot avoid the fact that the terrain is far fom perfect.

[capt vertigo]

Y'know..
I never whine.
But I totally agree with this post.
I mean, the state of this game in no way resembles the game in the video..
What the heck happened..? Was it lost in a fire..?

Just weird, really..

Mike

[Wolf_Rider]

you still making friends there, LoBi?

[LoBiSoMeM]

you still making friends there, LoBi?

Yes! And flying with FreeTrack full support! How life is going here in NP? :cool:

[Meusli]

Here it is ingame colors. Simply other time of day...
However I agree that tunes of the colors should be done in future. It isn't simply there in the game just gamma or RGB. In realoity there is done very compex mix of real light laws. It is very hard to get them alos like the human eye will see it. From another point of view, how it is done with physics - it is right. Color changed depending time of day, altitude, thickness of air masses, etc


Like all subjects on this forum it has been touched upon before. Maybe we should get weekly apologies from Luthier so we can all feel better. Let them sort out the game first colours second.

[furbs]

Yer...your right, its only been 4 months now.

[Jatta Raso]

people are entitled to make criticism, it's their right and there are plenty reasons for that. i just can't understand these childish intolerance towards criticism from some.. what's the point, do they like it so much they don't want to even hear about 'change'? do they think they own the thing? WHAT ?????????? IS THERE A POINT? always keeping with the whining and bitching because some people express and justify their views.. and they call us whiners.. when that's all these ppl do, never bringing anything to the discussion except "it's ok as it is" "i know better, you don't" "i'm smart, your dumb" "i can see, you're blind" etc.. empty, childish, and above all pointless. those who criticize do it so because they want CoD to get as good as it can. those who whine about justified complaints, i'd really like to see their point. maybe they ignore the reason of this thread; take a look at the vid in OP, we've been lied, plain and simple, not saying intentionally, but nevertheless

personally what hurts me the most is to see that things looked better in previous stages, seeing much simpler games out there having much better landscape (yes WoP, and if you don't like the green colour all over then compare in grayscale, works just the same because it's not a colour issue; trees, tree placement, towns and tiling just end up looking plain better); as for landscape not being a central feature, that's much more debatable than colour grading and such; i for one like immersion and want as believable terrain as it gets; i don't think anyone else taste on this matter is more important or overrides my own; i've seen simpler or older sim games conveying the feeling of england countryside much better than CoD (hello BoB 2). it's not a matter of HW resources, rather an art direction and the time spent with it. i'd say the countryside on CoD looks good. BUT I'LL BE DAMNED IF RIGHT NOW IT LOOKS LIKE ENGLAND!!

[Wolf_Rider]

the np is just fine LoBi ;) ... FT is getting rather bugged, or so I've been reading

oh LoBi, and btw way, the landscaping in COD needs a major overhaul

[philip.ed]

people are entitled to make criticism, it's their right and there are plenty reasons for that. i just can't understand these childish intolerance towards criticism from some.. what's the point, do they like it so much they don't want to even hear about 'change'? do they think they own the thing? WHAT ?????????? IS THERE A POINT? always keeping with the whining and bitching because some people express and justify their views.. and they call us whiners.. when that's all these ppl do, never bringing anything to the discussion except "it's ok as it is" "i know better, you don't" "i'm smart, your dumb" "i can see, you're blind" etc.. empty, childish, and above all pointless. those who criticize do it so because they want CoD to get as good as it can. those who whine about justified complaints, i'd really like to see their point. maybe they ignore the reason of this thread; take a look at the vid in OP, we've been lied, plain and simple, not saying intentionally, but nevertheless

personally what hurts me the most is to see that things looked better in previous stages, seeing much simpler games out there having much better landscape (yes WoP, and if you don't like the green colour all over then compare in grayscale, works just the same because it's not a colour issue; trees, tree placement, towns and tiling just end up looking plain better); as for landscape not being a central feature, that's much more debatable than colour grading and such; i for one like immersion and want as believable terrain as it gets; i don't think anyone else taste on this matter is more important or overrides my own; i've seen simpler or older sim games conveying the feeling of england countryside much better than CoD (hello BoB 2). it's not a matter of HW resources, rather an art direction and the time spent with it. i'd say the countryside on CoD looks good. BUT I'LL BE DAMNED IF RIGHT NOW IT LOOKS LIKE ENGLAND!!


Well said!

[Baron]

And, believe it or not, the devs doesn't have to listen. U might think they have to because u are entitled, but they really don't have to. If they think its fine there really isn't much u can do about it and if they do change it its because they CHOOSE to listen.

Cold hard truth, i know.

As for making changes, the quote from Oleg in another post should tell u that it MIGHT not be so easy as most of the "experts" in here think. The colour changes has to correspond with lighting conditions, times of day, dynamic lighting etc.etc. What is the point of having dynamic lighting, dynamic weather (when it arrives) if the "perfect" colours etc. only looks "perfect" at 12.00 noon

Its one thing for a modder to do it since he doesn't have to pay any attention to the rest of the game and how the "whole" works (and they rarely do) but another matter entirely if u have to stand by your work towards a boat load of "experts" for years to come. Because, as we all know, there are quite a few in these forums that have a real hard time letting go.

As for how it looks now, i couldn't care less if some people think it doesnt look like ENGLAND because the colour is a bit off, or if the trees isn't placed correctly (seriously?) because, as a WHOLE, it looks good to me and as far as i know IT IS a BoB flight sim, u know, the one that took place up in the sky, And NOT a "true representation of ENGLAND" sim. There are other more important things to do first.

But who knows, maby the change will appear one day because the CHOSE to listen, even if they don have to. ;)


BTW. This: "those who whine about justified complaints, i'd really like to see their point." Tells me everyone who have a "complaint" or want a fix automatically assumes he is right and anyone who disagrees is a "whiner" and is therefore not entitled to think "it looks ok". Not a very mature approach, is it? Tells me the "problem" lies in those who have "legitimate complaints" to begin with. Takes us right back to: the devs can do whatever the like and think whatever they want, its their product, their choise to listen or not listen. Just because u bought a COPY doesn't automaticaly make u the CeO of the company. For ex. from my end (regarding this issue) u saying BoBII represents a better representation of England than CoD is something i cant for the life of me rap my head around, i just cant. Imo that game looks like ****** (insert bad word). So, in your opinion, who should the devs listen to? Or maby its easier for them if they go by what THEY think?

[robtek]

You said it Baron!!!

It is very astounding what people think, they have bought for about 50 bucks.

The americans, i think, have this saying: love it or leave it.
I wonder how so many people can express their love only in the range from critisizing (constantly) to outright bashing (also constantly).
That reminds me of a dad, spanking his son for some minor offense, saying: it is only for your best.

[Ali Fish]

It's really fun: we have an 1:1 map of BOB scenario, filled with towns, roads, railroads, forest, all elevations, rivers, cliffs, landmarks, etc, but it's all "crap or poor landscape"... My God! Listen to your words!

Some just don't deserve the work made in this title. Never in my life I saw so negative people! You make me a little sick...:(

generally my thoughts on the matter. To come up with this negativity for me means you are comparing COD with other games out there. That is the unfair part. Compare COD to somthing more appropriate and its very likely that debate would see COD at the top of the list. bar any colour discussions in respects of colouring i believe there is an issue.

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

im comparing Cod landscape with my visuals of countryside in kent from late 50's onwards, it just doesnt look like English counTryside To me neither THe colours or the layout etc,im enTiTled to an opinion as I bought the game.

I like a lot about Cod,i dont like the landscape because it doesnt immerse me in the feeling of being over England let alone Kent,WOP does by the way just incase you wanted a comparison of what i think looks more realistic and on my new monitor the wop doesnt look over green at all to me:)

oh and thats really why i dont care about this game anymore so ive deleted it and am concentrating on FSX

[kendo65]

I'm just going to state what is obvious from the pages of this thread - some people have an issue with the landscape and some don't. Can we all at least agree that others are entitled to their own opinions no matter how wrong we may think they are?

As there is no point continuing to argue over the same points, maybe it would be an idea to have a poll - one question 'How happy are you with current COD terrain?'. 4 possible answers -

Very happy - don't want changes
Reasonably happy - but would like to see improvements
Unhappy - Big changes needed
Very unhappy - This issue ruins the game for me

Getting some numbers on how people feel would at least give the devs an idea of how important (or not) this is to fix.

Baron and Robtek make some good points, but on the 'love it or leave it' idea, as someone who looked forward to this game for years, and who really wants to enjoy it and play it I find I am in danger of 'leaving it' (for the foreseeable future at least) because certain aspects ruin things for me atm. Please realise that most of us with genuine issues about this game's current state are not whining for the sake of it or because we enjoy it.

responding to ALi Fish - I'm with SsSsnake here too. There are quite a few il-2 maps (modded and unmodded) that I prefer to current COD. [a word of explanation to pre-empt the inevitable 'wtf' response - yes I know that COD is technically superior with better lighting, but the fact is a lot of the il-2 maps do the job of creating believable terrain better for me - they work within their limitations and manage to fade into the background without jarring the eye constantly as COD seems to for some (?) of us]

[Jatta Raso]

And, believe it or not, the devs doesn't have to listen. U might think they have to because u are entitled, but they really don't have to. If they think its fine there really isn't much u can do about it and if they do change it its because they CHOOSE to listen.

Cold hard truth, i know.

As for making changes, the quote from Oleg in another post should tell u that it MIGHT not be so easy as most of the "experts" in here think. The colour changes has to correspond with lighting conditions, times of day, dynamic lighting etc.etc. What is the point of having dynamic lighting, dynamic weather (when it arrives) if the "perfect" colours etc. only looks "perfect" at 12.00 noon

Its one thing for a modder to do it since he doesn't have to pay any attention to the rest of the game and how the "whole" works (and they rarely do) but another matter entirely if u have to stand by your work towards a boat load of "experts" for years to come. Because, as we all know, there are quite a few in these forums that have a real hard time letting go.

As for how it looks now, i couldn't care less if some people think it doesnt look like ENGLAND because the colour is a bit off, or if the trees isn't placed correctly (seriously?) because, as a WHOLE, it looks good to me and as far as i know IT IS a BoB flight sim, u know, the one that took place up in the sky, And NOT a "true representation of ENGLAND" sim. There are other more important things to do first.

But who knows, maby the change will appear one day because the CHOSE to listen, even if they don have to. ;)


BTW. This: "those who whine about justified complaints, i'd really like to see their point." Tells me everyone who have a "complaint" or want a fix automatically assumes he is right and anyone who disagrees is a "whiner" and is therefore not entitled to think "it looks ok". Not a very mature approach, is it? Tells me the "problem" lies in those who have "legitimate complaints" to begin with. Takes us right back to: the devs can do whatever the like and think whatever they want, its their product, their choise to listen or not listen. Just because u bought a COPY doesn't automaticaly make u the CeO of the company. For ex. from my end (regarding this issue) u saying BoBII represents a better representation of England than CoD is something i cant for the life of me rap my head around, i just cant. Imo that game looks like ****** (insert bad word). So, in your opinion, who should the devs listen to? Or maby its easier for them if they go by what THEY think?

pal why do you quote me if you CHOOSE not to address anything i said?? what have i said specifically about colours?? when was i implying demands to devs?? nowhere i think. you just lack concentration when reading. and your BTW end paragraph, i can't answer that, it just doesn't make any sense. read more carefully, you don't seem to have a way at manipulating meanings.
just a word about the devs doing what they want: plainly right and ok with, as long as we're told the truth. which wasn't the case. again read carefully at the end of 1st paragraph (not to mention the vid, where features where advertised, which were re-stated in later stages of development)

anyway, i read a whole lot more then i write in here, what drove me in here were incredibly intolerant comments towards legit criticism, triggered by the devs former promises, and if everything i (or others) write can be used as fuel for war, well, makes me not want to.

as a final word, i just can't understand this attitude where you're supposed to not just notice but appreciate inertia effects on spinning wheels you forgot to retract after take off, but then you have to pretend major visual aspects are ok when clearly they're not. sounds kinda schizophrenic to me. after all this is a simulation; its users are known for being perfectionist and demanding. something cultivated by the 1C founder himself. some go about physics, some go about visual fidelity, some go for everything. to each he's own i say

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

bravo

[Das Attorney]

I've got X-Plane 9 installed with photoscenery of the UK assembled from Google Maps. (G2XPL plugin - zoom level 17).

It compares favourably with the IL2 textures. Granted, one represents England 70 years ago and one is for present day, but it seems logical that the colours of plants/crops haven't changed that much in the years between.

COD is missing a decent weather system though. IMO, this would make much more difference to perception of the colours than what there is at the moment (permanent dry, sunny day at the moment in COD).

The map is a work of genius though. I live in Brighton and frequently travel between home and London. The whole surrounding area is easily recognisable. The South Downs are accurate and the towns and villages are in the right place. It's very easy to navigate around based on the scenery, which I think is far more important than the colours. Good work 1C!

[philip.ed]

Baron, have you played BoB2? It's a five/six year old game and still has the best campaign/AI/speech-pack of any current sim modelling WW2/BoB. CloD should have nocked it out of the water in this aspect, but it didn't.
Yes with regards to the terrain, BoB2's is largely poor, but when you're flying at angels-20, it's not too far from CloD's, and definitely doesn't detract from the immersion.
In any case, I can see what you're saying, but you seem to have gone off at a massive tangent from Jatta's original post. Yes, the devs can do whatever they like, but I think you have forgotten what Luthier wrote a while back (maybe because he spoke in traditional English, and not text language):

"If we didn't listen to criticism, Il-2 would never in a million years get to where it did back in 2001. So please keep it coming. " That speaks ten-folds for what is useful to the Dev team, and IMHO, constructive criticism for those familiar with England's terrain is useful for them to take on board. Indeed, it also shows a great approach to CloD as well; in that the team is willing to take our criticism on board. Obviously many people's views may conflict, but it is possible to see that there are areas of the terrain which most people predominantly agree on: the trees-placing, the lack of hedge-rows, and the style of the trees in relation to the landscape. Colours and the like are another matter entirely; but the actual geometry of the landscape could clearly be improved (maybe with drastic results).

[RCAF_FB_Orville]

it is possible to see that there are areas of the terrain which most people predominantly agree on: the trees-placing, the lack of hedge-rows, and the style of the trees in relation to the landscape.

Hear, Hear. It's very important to the majority of posters on this issue, whether they be Britons or not. Those who are know for a fact that CoD's landscape is sadly in no way a convincing representation of England. Even people from overseas know that something is badly awry, and they are correct.

Pointing this out is not going to make Luthier and Co cry or get upset and wound their feelings as long as its done in a respectful manner (which by and large it is). They are professional sim devs and constructive criticism is their meat and drink. Criticism is important in any endevour, because like anyone else Devs are human and are not always right, or things can be improved. It is an ongoing process. Luthier is wise enough to know this.

If I wanted an opinion as to the veracity of a computer recreation of France for example, who would I ask? A Mongolian? No, that would be daft. I think I'd ask the Frenchman, and I think I would take his opinion and evaluation quite seriously. That is not to say that overseas people do not know what England looks like (in fact reading these posts most definitely do)

Please forgive me, but it does get a bit tiresome when people try to tell me what my own blinking country looks like. :grin: I think I and others would know. :grin: We don't need to recalibrate our monitors or any such nonsense. We have the trusty MkI eyeball with which we see it everyday. We know its not right, and that it is in need of pretty big improvement. Finito. End of story. :grin:

Constant 'OMG I LOVE YOU 1C!!!!' posts, while very nice to read for 1c I'm sure.....Actually contribute nothing whatsoever of value or utility. Pointing out things that can be improved actually do.

These are the facts of the case, M'lud. :grin:

Cheers.

[philip.ed]

Well said Orville.

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

+1 Orville.by the way how is Keith ?:)

[RCAF_FB_Orville]

Thanks chaps. Keith's in the trunk of my car, Snake.....having outlived his usefulness. I told him I could fly....but he wouldn't let me. Bad mistake.

His family can have him back as soon as they give me a new TV show *quack quack*. I think that's fair enough. :grin:

[SsSsSsSsSnake]

lol nice 1 M8:)

[Baron]

pal why do you quote me if you CHOOSE not to address anything i said?? what have i said specifically about colours?? when was i implying demands to devs?? nowhere i think. you just lack concentration when reading. and your BTW end paragraph, i can't answer that, it just doesn't make any sense. read more carefully, you don't seem to have a way at manipulating meanings.
just a word about the devs doing what they want: plainly right and ok with, as long as we're told the truth. which wasn't the case. again read carefully at the end of 1st paragraph (not to mention the vid, where features where advertised, which were re-stated in later stages of development)

anyway, i read a whole lot more then i write in here, what drove me in here were incredibly intolerant comments towards legit criticism, triggered by the devs former promises, and if everything i (or others) write can be used as fuel for war, well, makes me not want to.

as a final word, i just can't understand this attitude where you're supposed to not just notice but appreciate inertia effects on spinning wheels you forgot to retract after take off, but then you have to pretend major visual aspects are ok when clearly they're not. sounds kinda schizophrenic to me. after all this is a simulation; its users are known for being perfectionist and demanding. something cultivated by the 1C founder himself. some go about physics, some go about visual fidelity, some go for everything. to each he's own i say


Seriously, i think u are the one who needs to reread your first post and then my awnser, who by the way wasn't directed entirely towards u alone. I for one hevent the energy to point u towards the specific line or word i was addressing. Using a bit of "reading in between the lines" is something u need to do.

I was addressing the topic and some of what u said in one go, my misstake.



Never mind, i edited out your entire quote.

Happy now?

[Jatta Raso]

no one's playing online. nothing interesting to do offline. broken AI, inoperative basic features, major graphical glitches, monster recommended specs, generalized criticism from the community. promises of unmatched and unmatchable quality (the devs words). oh well... love is blind and so is fanboism. leave them be i say, fanaticism hasn't been banned after all...

[Baron]

Baron, have you played BoB2? It's a five/six year old game and still has the best campaign/AI/speech-pack of any current sim modelling WW2/BoB. CloD should have nocked it out of the water in this aspect, but it didn't.
Yes with regards to the terrain, BoB2's is largely poor, but when you're flying at angels-20, it's not too far from CloD's, and definitely doesn't detract from the immersion.
In any case, I can see what you're saying, but you seem to have gone off at a massive tangent from Jatta's original post. Yes, the devs can do whatever they like, but I think you have forgotten what Luthier wrote a while back (maybe because he spoke in traditional English, and not text language):

"If we didn't listen to criticism, Il-2 would never in a million years get to where it did back in 2001. So please keep it coming. " That speaks ten-folds for what is useful to the Dev team, and IMHO, constructive criticism for those familiar with England's terrain is useful for them to take on board. Indeed, it also shows a great approach to CloD as well; in that the team is willing to take our criticism on board. Obviously many people's views may conflict, but it is possible to see that there are areas of the terrain which most people predominantly agree on: the trees-placing, the lack of hedge-rows, and the style of the trees in relation to the landscape. Colours and the like are another matter entirely; but the actual geometry of the landscape could clearly be improved (maybe with drastic results).

As i already pointed out, i addressed the topic and some of his post in one go, is it really that hard to understand without thinking im ripping him (specifically) a new one?

I didnt swear, call him, or anyone for that matter any names, nothing. What is it with the sudden sensitivity?

I know what Luthier said etc. Still doesn't mean what i said doesn't apply. It does. I commented (o gosh, amongst other things) on this, something HE wrote in his orginal post btw, new notion that criticism, however put forward, is valid , and thinking something is ok, or the horror, even very good, is not. Etc. etc.

Exactly where do i tell HIM to sod of or thinking his opinion sucks, or whatever u and he seem to think i did, somehow?

[Jatta Raso]

I didnt swear, call him, or anyone for that matter any names, nothing. What is it with the sudden sensitivity?
...
Exactly where do i tell HIM to sod of or thinking his opinion sucks, or whatever u and he seem to think i did, somehow?

well isn't this folk the one who just recommended "reading in between the lines" ? maybe he should take he's own advice on he's own posts. not all contempt is explicit, but when it's there, it's there

[Baron]

U really are picking a fight aint you.

[JG52Krupi]

no one's playing online. nothing interesting to do offline. broken AI, inoperative basic features, major graphical glitches, monster recommended specs, generalized criticism from the community. promises of unmatched and unmatchable quality (the devs words). oh well... love is blind and so is fanboism. leave them be i say, fanaticism hasn't been banned after all...

Well I have been flying with 25 people on repka 1 the other day so your clearly not looking hard enough and repka 2 had 40-50 players but was password protected :( think the ruskis had enough of pl telling them to speak English on Russian servers :| :D

[Jatta Raso]

wanna settle it at sunset?:rolleyes: seriously no i'm not.. and even if i were then we both would have a share in it.. anyway i had a break this afternoon. i'm thinking to myself "what the heck am i doing here instead online with CoD?" well this turned out to be funnier.. that's the reason we're saying what we're saying. anyway i am in no way convinced you're bad ppl. this is really getting beyond reason. time to get outside for a while.. sun has come up

[philip.ed]

Baron, your whole post seemed as though it was aggressively aimed towards Jatta, and you did go off at a tangent from what he was suggesting. I wasn't sensitive to what you wrote; I just didn't agree with the comment about how you were happy that the terrain was there (effectively what you were suggesting) and that it was rather unnecessary to be critical of it (again, I'm sorry if there is a misunderstanding on this issue). I have already said why I disagreed with this view above, so I won't regurgitate it again. Just remember though, it is extremely easy to misunderstand people on the internet, and that may be the case here. I wasn't trying to be aggressive towards you in particular, so I'm sorry if it appeared to be this way.

[ATAG_Dutch]

I've got X-Plane 9 installed with photoscenery of the UK assembled from Google Maps. It compares favourably with the IL2 textures.
COD is missing a decent weather system though.

Hmmm.................., ok I wasn't going to post this, as I'm not a fan of photo scenery, but as I don't have a real aeroplane, or a licence to fly one, photo scenery is the next best thing to look at.

Yes I know the light conditions are hugely different and photo scenery has no ground detail or shadows, but as a comparison of Cliffs to 'reality'?

I actually like the landscape in Cliffs if the colours were a little closer, the trees looked English, and the roads had hedgerows. In fact I don't really understand why hedgerows couldn't be added to the roads/field - models/textures as a matter of course. But I know nothing of 3D programming. On the ground, and close to it, Cliffs looks superb. It's only when you climb it starts to look 'wrong'.

I also can't wait for a weather system to be implemented successfully, you'll see from the clip what I mean, (and before anyone jumps on my neck, I know REX are only 2D clouds).

Don't blink, the comparisons are very short. Anyway, enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LubLOo2en0k

[Baron]

Baron, your whole post seemed as though it was aggressively aimed towards Jatta, and you did go off at a tangent from what he was suggesting. I wasn't sensitive to what you wrote; I just didn't agree with the comment about how you were happy that the terrain was there (effectively what you were suggesting) and that it was rather unnecessary to be critical of it (again, I'm sorry if there is a misunderstanding on this issue). I have already said why I disagreed with this view above, so I won't regurgitate it again. Just remember though, it is extremely easy to misunderstand people on the internet, and that may be the case here. I wasn't trying to be aggressive towards you in particular, so I'm sorry if it appeared to be this way.

NP.

Wasnt trying to be aggressive at all, anyone can think what ever they like, just as anyone can disagree and as far as how the terrain looks now, of course i wont scream bloody murder if they would change it. I just feel there are a few much more important things that needs fixing first.

How the terrain looks is an est-ethic argument and i think most would agree that it has a fairly "low" priority at the moment and bringing it up all the time wont make it happen any faster.

Lumping est-ethic issues with actual bugs and playability issues only makes everything look worse than it is for no reason or gain for anyone. (just promotes a lot of bickering)

Imo there's a time and place for everything. The terrain issue isn't going anywhere, it will still be there when the "real" bugs is fixed. ;)

[Baron]

Hmmm.................., ok I wasn't going to post this, as I'm not a fan of photo scenery, but as I don't have a real aeroplane, or a licence to fly one, photo scenery is the next best thing to look at.

Yes I know the light conditions are hugely different and photo scenery has no ground detail or shadows, but as a comparison of Cliffs to 'reality'?

I actually like the landscape in Cliffs if the colours were a little closer, the trees looked English, and the roads had hedgerows. In fact I don't really understand why hedgerows couldn't be added to the roads/field - models/textures as a matter of course. But I know nothing of 3D programming. On the ground, and close to it, Cliffs looks superb. It's only when you climb it starts to look 'wrong'.

I also can't wait for a weather system to be implemented successfully, you'll see from the clip what I mean, (and before anyone jumps on my neck, I know REX are only 2D clouds).

Don't blink, the comparisons are very short. Anyway, enjoy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LubLOo2en0k


I dont know how far of i am, but the REX scenery does not mach up my vision (in my head) of how England looks like from above. At least not the colours. Maby looks to "modern"? Almost like industrial farming areas (if there is such a thing) Lighting, time of day and weather probably have something to do with it to.

Anyways, and i dont know if i recall this correctly, but i think Oleg did mention that miles and miles of hedge rows would become very hardware intensive, dont ask me why. And "knowing" Oleg he was probably talking about actual hedges in 3D.

[furbs]

What would help a little with the terrain is replacing those white paths that seem to be everywhere with dark green paths that would from above look like the hedgerows that are so badly missing.

[BigPickle]

Its the terrain i believe that causes the stutters, i think maybe if they look into how the textures are loaded maybe they can reduce stutters more.

[JG52Krupi]

Its the terrain i believe that causes the stutters, i think maybe if they look into how the textures are loaded maybe they can reduce stutters more.

:rolleyes: they have already done that...

[LoBiSoMeM]

Its the terrain i believe that causes the stutters, i think maybe if they look into how the textures are loaded maybe they can reduce stutters more.

No, it's all textures streaming: ground texture+objects textures.

[ATAG_Dutch]

I dont know how far of i am, but the REX scenery does not mach up my vision (in my head) of how England looks like from above.

I should've also pointed out that REX is just the sky, water and clouds @ £45 or so. The landscape is VFR real scenery also @ £45 or so. It cost me the same (roughly) for two collector's editions of Cliffs of Dover as it did for these two 'add-ons'..

Oh, the Spit was about £20 aswell. I must be barmy or summat.

I reckon that given time we'll see improvements to the landscape generally, but when the weather engine gets going, the landscape colours will start to make more sense. Try to concentrate on the area of shadow under a cloud as it is at the moment and you'll get an idea. I didn't manage to catch this in the clip.:)