The idea, above all "immersion" intentions, is, as i see it, to simulate reality as perfect as possible, not a movie!

:grin: Laugh, had I not, angry would I be.


But I'm not whining; last week I said the landscape looked perfect, so I agree with Winny. Monitor tweaking should easily sort any brightness out (hopefully). It must be the CRT monitors the team are apparently using, because otherwise it makes more sense for the team to aim for complete consensus in terms of colour qualities on most monitor types. obviously this is near-on impossible.
My problem is I have exhausted myself here. The game looks perfect to me. I just felt the 'whiners' were getting too much harsh critique for posting their personal views (which is all relevent to the team, in one way) So it was my job to take this load on myself :P

Although if you want a scapegoat, call me.

You bring up good points, but what Oleg is trying to do (might be the photographer background there) is recreate the lighting and colours your eye sees in real life as opposed to a colour-corrected/altered version you'd see in the movies or other games.

The point of him taking that direction (I'm guessing) is that if you have a somewhat realistic starting point or "base" then you can more easily move from there. If he created COD with all the settings and tricks that WOP has then it would be much harder for someone to get it to look like FSX or X-Plane, or any other "non-styled/colour-corrected" sim. It's a lot eaiser to add in the vingette or the heavy-handed colour-correction, or the fog seen in WOP than it is to try and remove it.

It's all up to people's preferences, and it seems that most people like what Oleg is going for rather than what WOP already has. I'm not knocking WOP. It does what it wants to really well, but I'm guessing most simmers interested in the type of sim COD is shaping up to be want what Oleg has in mind for the visuals.

As for the visuals/style/colour-corrections found in WOP and Saving Private Ryan, that was just a rough comparison. After SPR was released a lot of people probably thought that real-life colour wasn't as vibrant as it is today. When I look out the window of a small aircraft I don't usually see a "pea-soup" film over everything like I do when playing WOP or watching a SPR.

You're entitled to your opinion, and so am I. But it looks like Oleg and I are on the same page given the direction the screen shots have been/are going.

The problem is that immersion is completely subjective, and what works for one person can be a deal breaker for someone else. And that's where things get complicated.

For example, here are some opinions that I personally don't agree with:

- Il2 lacked "soul" and thus immersion
- dynamic campaigns are more immersive
- all WW2 sims should have EAW-style menus for increased immersion
- plane skins should have lots of weathering
- tracers should show a zig-zag pattern like in gun cam footage
- multiplayer is more immersive

DEAR OLEG MADDOX I REQUEST FOR CoD one expecial option for mission builder.
include traces of planes are not drawn on the map using the mouse, but .....

tracks recorded on a flight that is not realistic in the game in the map.

example: I fly from the coast to the island track is recorded and entered in the mission builder can also shoot in the air but still the track is recorded and included in the mission builder.

ie instead of using the mouse manually insert a track I use a piece of tracks recorded in the mission builder.

I used google translator to translate Mr. Oleg Maddox now I am writing in Italian and you try to translate myself.



Signor Oleg MADDOX richiedo una speciale opzione nel mission builder.
Precisamente richiedo di avere un opzione che inserisce anche le tracce registrate in tempo reale di volo oltre che le tracce inserite manualmente tramite il mouse nel mission builder.
ESEMPIO:
1)TRACCIA registrata in tempo reale : io effetuo un volo dalla costa all'isola posso sparare nel vuoto posso schiantarmi o posso atterrare il tutto viene registrato e inserito nel mission builder.
2)TRACCIA inserita manulmente con il mouse con dati di velocita' armamento carburante altitudine e vettore.

Problem here is you two are arguing over what immersion is when you have two different opinions as it applies to COD.
Immersion as a emotional response that draws you into the enviroment/battle and makes it feel engrossing + incredible.
VS
Immersion that draws you into the game with the feeling off: so now I know how these pilots felt when they looked down and saw the landscape below. This is as close as I can get to flying a spitfire without actually physically flying one...

Two different definitions and I would argue "genres".

Also the CRT monitor comment is probably right, I noticed RT (russia today) did a segment on COD awhile back, dont know if other saw it or when it was from. Anyway the whole team were using what looked like 19/17 inch CRT monitors...

Exactly!

Immersion is something that is different for every individual. The way Oleg is doing it allows for the easiest path to customizing it for the individual since he is trying to accomplish "real world accuracy" instead of "cinema accuracy" like WOP.

Firstly I'm not doing this as a 'I think it should be this way' thing.

It's purley to illustrate a point.

All I've done to the bottom pic is increase the contrast.

http://i822.photobucket.com/albums/z...e/Contrast.jpg

My point is that all of the CoD screenshots have felt slightly 'lightweight'. The reason for this is that they contain very little true black, and the eye sees a lot of black in shadows in RL.
The effect you end up with is a slightly super-real look where you can see details in shadows that you wouldn't be able to in RL.

Speculum

Everytime I read one of your posting I have the visual picture of speculum in use. I recently thought as I read one of your postings... I wonder how he learned that looking up a tailpipe.

Your last post where you mentioned immersion.... " Immersion is something that is different for every individual."

I guess I'm too visual

Ewwww..