Actually, you are wrong. Cast your mind back about two years ago, when the BoP forum first surfaced. The Dev's posted b&w phots of dover docks from the 40's period, and showed pitcures of the terrain which perfectly matched every single field! People could see their houses! The attention to detail was extremely impressive...so impressive, that Oleg asked for this work, but they refused to give it to him, which was rather horrible.

Seriously mate, you're arguments are wearing thin. Accept that whilst CoD is overall a lot more impressive technically than WoP, there are elements of WoP which are extremely good. You're arguments are not constructive enough to offer any real credibility IMHO.

And every element we have examined is not better in CoD! Look at the layout of fields and hedges and trees in WoP. It's realistic. I know that CoD's trees look nicer, there is 3-D looking grass (which could be improved to RoF standards IMHO) the buildings are beautiful; but there are elements which make one think: "ah! This is England" and CoD just lacks that 'Englishness' to make the effect poignant.

Look, there have been screenshots and maps posted on this very thread which show that CoD does an amazing job of simulating the countryside. It's not just my "thin arguments", it's actual side by side screenshots. No one has even attempted that for WoP. As long as no one attempts it, it's people who are arguing for WoP whose arguments are wearing thin.

If you think actual screenshots and maps are not "credible", I would like to hear your standards for credibility.

I think I made it clear that pictures have been posted showing field for field matchings in WoP (although thinking about this, I can't understand why some tiles repeat in areas...)

but yes, pictures showing this have not been posted in this topic.
But that still doesn't get past what I'm saying about the layout of the fields and the hedges and trees.
Clearly from all shots posted, this is better in WoP as it is more like England.

I think that, overall, CoD is better, but you have to understand, that areas of WoP have their merits.

They repeat because the devs are cheating. CoD does it too, but it isn't as easy to spot. And I haven't seen any WoP screenshots showing matching fields.

NO! It is not clear at all. You just said that "pictures showing this have not been posted in this topic". You can't follow that up by saying something is clear when PICTURES SHOWING THIS HAVE NOT BEEN POSTED.

What sort of merit? CoD appears to be superior in every comparable metric except bugs (and the bugs will be fixed).

Well, I posted photographs I have taken while flying over the South of England that show CloD actually does a pretty mediocre job of representing the real life terrain. Amazing it is not.

Totally OT but the map is the UK and the music is totally in theme! :P

X-Plane 9.x scenery, link from SimHQ:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=liDPL...mbedded#at=164

I found your photographs and it appears that you think the CoD colors are washed out. Oddly, most of the complainers in here seem to prefer the washed out look.

In any case, I didn't seen anything about the terrain in your photographs that looked all that different from CoD. What's the difference?

What is irrelevant is the type of game when you are comparing graphics

Pictures showing comparisons with areas of england in WoP have not been posted in this thread.
Pictures showing the representation of vegetation compared to photos of modern-day Britain have (largely, the layout is quite similar to that of the 1940's. see here:

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_AJStbONVqQ...fire_banks.jpg

a modern picture: similar to the above, in many respects, and again, more similar in LAYOUT to WoP than CoD

http://www.bugbog.com/images/galleri...ds_airview.jpg

please, read everything I write, don't be selective.

Type of game is everything. A computer has limited resources. If you simulate more detailed engine management you have fewer resources to keep track of trees and buildings.