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.

I read everything, and I haven't been selective at all.

The bottom image LAYOUT looks just like CoD. In fact, the LAYOUT in BOTH images looks like CoD. Where is the WoP image so we can compare them?

You wont see many pics of field to field comparisons in here because this is the CoD forum, why dont you pop over to the WoP forum and have a look?
Dude I still cant belive you are still here 42 pages later banging on about how shit WoP is, your argument now hinges on something you said you havent seen, so go look.

I agree Phil that WoP terrain is extremely detailed and does have the English feel way more over CoD. To be honest i think at the moment it looks more like Russia or Ukrane in the summer, with UK factories and some houses and Windmills from Holland :)
I also think that if CoD works for some then when its improved they will be very happy but at the moment the skies are a bit lonely because not everyone who has bought the game can run it because of the coding issues they are trying to solve.
Hopefully when they get it sorted they will look at improving the terrain model somewhat but i think our hedges are a loong way off.

Is this summer ?, because the Battle over Britain was in summer.

Dont looks like that photo was taken in summer, the grass is not yellowed by the hot of the summer, it looks like in spring.

Just like in WOP, the England map in WOP looks like spring or autumn.

Pretty green and grass to eye-candy players instead do an historical accurate environment.

Dead grass goes yellow, maybe in the height of summer after no rain some fields might fade a bit but not all. Grass gets its green colour from the sun through photosynthasis, if the grass moved away from green to much it wouldnt be able to process the sunlight and would die. Then turn yellow.

Buchon: looks like spring to me pal.
I wasn't focusing on colours when posting that; just the composition of the landscape. To me, this is England how I have seen it from the air (colours are objective) but yes, I'd imagine this to be spring-time :cool:

I'm not talking about how shit WoP is. I removed it from my computer. I don't care how shit it is. I'm talking about how great CoD looks. The WoP fanboys don't seem to agree with me. Maybe they should head over to the WoP boards, eh?

The photographer used a circular polarizer to take that photo, so the colors are not what you would actually see with your eyes.

I think you might feel a little different if you bought CoD, one of the first things your realise when you pause the game and you can still move the camera and all the lighting and shadows still move etc is how easy it is to set up high quality screen shots, I mean you can even turn up the graphics while paused, take your screen and turn it down again.
So honestly its not that hard to focus on the bits that do look good granted, but when you play it I have to agree with philip that the terrain just doesnt feel like a country but more like a mixture of different countries, feels odd, cant really explain it.

True they would be paler, but then the colours in photos are never what you really see i guess

I largely agree with philip.ed's opinion, we've made similar comments long before CloD was released.
What's noticeable about the WoP pictures is the obvious object budget and hence limited detail in the distance and the use of haze. But actually, CloD could do with MORE haze, because that's what it's like in SE England almost all the time. philip.ed's posted view of the countryside looks unusually clear.
Where I think Oleg might have a point is the lack of colour saturation in the middle of the day. If you remember he challenged some critic to send him a RAW format photo, presumably on the grounds that jpeg etc may have hyped contrast. Certainly, when the sun is low, CloD looks a lot more how I experience Kent, but there's a fair bit of human perception involved as the eye darts around the scene, with the brain adjusting contrast continually. I've photographed landscapes specifically to compare with, supposedly realistic, paintings - you wouldn't believe the difference!
As philip.ed and others say, the lack of hedgerows is a real immersion killer. I suspect that's because they'd have to be tailored for the bumpy ground, but I don't know a great deal about modern graphics.

This is a good discussion, nobody here is trying to damage CloD, I think we all want it to succeed. But I also want to give pointers about how it could be better.

56RAF_phoenix

Sorry, but you need a little more than "it doesn't feel right" to describe CoD if you're going to be pimping for WoP, because WoP feels like complete and total S H I T E.

And I really am not trying to convince you that WoP sucks. Feel free to enjoy it. I love playing RoF. But don't start talking about how WoP is better than CoD when the best you can come up with to back that up is "it just feels better". I own WoP. I know how it "feels", and I have no problem explaining it.

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

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/1467/codtest6.jpg

True RoF is very good, but i think the dev team was bigger and the game was generally coded better at the beginning.
~The photos above show what CoD needs, closer tree spacing for sure and small low bushes round the field boundaries, amongst other small things that add to the greater picture.
Like the fields are very scattered, British farm land fields are usually in groups, several of wheat, then several grazing land in a group for example, if you look at the screenshot above it looks too patchwork like, and compare it too the real photo you can see exactly what I mean.
Hope that clears that up David, Cheers for the aid W0ef :)

This is a great comparison between spring and summer (BoB time line), you can see how in IL2COD the grass is more yellowed by the hot of the summer, but some cultivated zone.

But WOP :

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/9...arerepeats.jpg

It is just wrong and not only for the repetition but for the environment that looks spring or autumn.

That is not summer !

The screenshots I see confirm that CoD does an amazing job of replicating British farmland. It's far better than any WW2 air sim I have ever seen. I could probably convince someone that the CoD screenshot is a photo. I have no idea what you are looking at.

It also doesn't get anywhere close to looking like a sunny day, in fact I don't recall ever seeing a sunny day that didn't look overcast and grey (green?) in WoP but then it's been a while since I spent any time with it.

[QUOTE=Buchon;279043]Is this summer ?, because the Battle over Britain was in summer.

Dont looks like that photo was taken in summer, the grass is not yellowed by the hot of the summer, it looks like in spring.

Just like in WOP, the England map in WOP looks like spring or autumn.

Pretty green and grass to eye-candy players instead do an historical accurate environment.[/QUOTE

This is certainly summer, probably July.

If it were anytime in spring (March, April, May) then the wheat fields would be green not yellow or gold. UK wheat harvest is August - that crop looks pretty ripe to me (camera filters etc taken into account).

Also the trees would have much sparser leaf cover of a much paler shade.

The colour of grass pastureland is affected by the rainfall and direct sunlight, not temperature - in a very dry summer it might start to go yellow in July, but in a wet, cloudy summer you might see very little discolouration. (Anyway, calling UK summers "hot" is a slight exaggeration - at least it was before GW boosted the temperatures).

One of the problems we have with getting the colours "right" is that the BoB ran from 10th July to 7th September which covers the harvest period - the countryside in a damp July would look very different to the same in the middle of an unusually clear September.

+1

Field boundaries poorly defined. Trees too sparse. Not enough trees. Trees not dark enough, highlights too bright. No hedgerows. Yellow fields too yellow. Green fields too lime color. Not enough haze. No distant color desaturation.

very well put.
+1

haze is not mandatory, it depends of the weather/visibility
Trees have to be partially removed (because trees are real trees in cod)
regarding the brightness the team is aware of the problem
wop is ok if you like colorized movies

was talking to a commercial pilot yesterday who flys regularly over Kent,he said he normally only sees haze from the sky around this time of the year,he said he used to hate training pilots this time of the year foir this reasonotherwise he said he saw very little of it other times

Agree, except for the haze part - as others have pointed out, this entirely depends on the weather in RL, and in COD should depend on the cloud setting in the mission builder. Additionally I would add too few golden-yellow wheat fields.

Yep - that's about it. I'll post up some more photos taken while flying over Wiltshire in August, but they will only just reinforce this point.

I should also add that CloD's problems are worse with lighting around noon and less noticeable around dawn/dusk.

Well all these other guys who live in England seem to know what I'm on about David.
I'll say it again incase you missed it ~ The photos above show what CoD needs, closer tree spacing for sure and small low bushes round the field boundaries, amongst other small things that add to the greater picture.
Like the fields are very scattered, British farm land fields are usually in groups, several of wheat, then several grazing land in a group for example, if you look at the screenshot above it looks too patchwork like, and compare it too the real photo you can see exactly what I mean.
I can also add that there is no darkening in colour over distance, being a trained observer I know that is one of the first things you learn that over distance colours are darker.
I think the only reason your WoP screen dont look like summer is because of the filter you dont like.
I dont think you could convince anyone that that is a real photo both WoP and CoD are a long way off real life but i think WoP is closer to simulating the realistic horticultural model of English countryside.
The closest i have seen to real life in a screen shot was a RoF screen.

Considering graphics, IMHO, COD does not seem a 2011 game... :(

nah i think it does, it just needs tuning because at the moment most systems can only run on normal video settings and there is a spectaular leap in quality between normal and high or very high.

No, they don't. They're forgetting that they're looking at a screenshot from a GAME. They're acting like they're comparing 2 photographs.

Try the same comparison between CoD and WoP. CoD blows WoP away.

It's too bad that you kind find any screenshots supporting that view.

As much as I like RoF, it's not closer to real live than CoD. The colors are too washed out. It's better than WoP, but not CoD.

Okay, for the last time before putting you on my 'ignore list' I shall give you a clear example of what I've been talking about.

I said CloDo graphic is not good as it could be, right? Now..
Let's say anti-aliasing..
2x looks good
8x looks better
in Clodo 8x doesn't work like it should
therefore...
THE GRAPHICS DOESN'T LOOK AS GOOD AS IT COULD!

Yeah, that's it... and I hope you won't ask me for a proof that 8x doesn't work, and you won't be stating that it in fact works. Don't care anyway, cos' now you are ignored.

Do you actually think I care if you ignore me? That's pretty funny.

In any case, no one is arguing that CoD could not look better. Of course it could look better. The issue is that lots of people are claiming that WoP looks better than CoD, and that is absurd.

It does.

Not here on planet Earth.

You do realise that you can set saturation in RoF to any value you like just by editting the startup.cfg file?

I should not have to. I judge the game based on how the devs set it up.

Don't get me wrong. RoF is a fantastic game. The graphics are amazing. But, if you judge the graphics by the same standards that some people are judging CoD graphics, RoF does no better.

From the blueness of the sky the photo was taken with a polarising lens. Colours in the photo do not match what the eye would see unless you were weaing polarising sun glasses.

WoP clearly does look better than CoD. Cockpits no, but all other graphical elements yes.

Not here in the real world. CoD is clearly closer to real world color, lighting, and terrain. The screenshots posted on this thread are pretty definitive. If there are screenshots showing that WoP is better, they haven't been posted here.

David, for the last time, people in England (I'll put this in caps just so you take note) ARE EXPLAINING TO YOU THE FACT THAT COD HAS A DISTINCT LACK OF:
-CLOSE TREE SPACINGS
-HEDGEROWS
-DARKERS TREES WHICH IS WHAT WOULD BE SEEN FROM ALTITUDE (OR, INDEED, ANY DISTANCES)

Colour is another matter, but these are all features of the English landscape which make it look like England, rather than another country.
And, in this sense, WoP largely does a better job! The evidence is clear in these topics. There are no randomly placed trees in RoF, or long lines of sparcely spaced trees which is rarely seen in the English landscape.

The Colours in CoD are largely good, as are the lovely landscape objects. But these features are poorly modelled in CoD's current state and need improving.

I don't understand what you can't understand about this?
You are not English, I take it? So have you ever flown over England, or experienced its landscape on a regular basis? Because clearly you are just blindly stating your faith in CoD, without really expressing how, although CoD has many great areas, it is far from perfect in showing the English landscape.

FSX through the eyes of the thread starter.... (1st image) followed by 3 of mine from a kent fly-around last night.

It's my opinion that FSX is always going to be far superior out of the 3 (FSX, WOP & COD) because of its sheer volume of 3rd party payware (although the only addons I am currently using are Horizon's Generation X VFR scenery & the A2A Spit).
Having said that, COD does what it does very, very well. It's a deeply immersive combat sim & very ambitious with its environment. WOP can look good at times but the maps are miniscule; COD is loading up a huge theatre each time we play.
Sorry if this has already been said; I haven't fully read the entire thread.

COD
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c9...n/images-2.jpg

WOP
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c93/spritzen/WOP.jpg

Don't you?? But you shoud know what u missed!!! I suggest it to u, a very edifying lecture... but don't fall asleep after page 40!;)
Cheers

lol!!

Philip, I hate to break it to you, but you do not speak for all the people in England. I have seen plenty of people from England who think that CoD does a pretty good job of simulating England's landscape.

And your clams that WoPuke does a better job are utterly ridiculous because YOU HAVE NO F-ING SCREENSHOTS WHICH SUPPORT YOUR VIEWS. IF WINGS OF PUKE DID A BETTER JOB YOU WOULD POST SCREENSHOTS WHICH SUPPORT THAT CLAIM. YOU HAVEN'T, SO PLEASE STOP PRETENDING THAT IT IS AN ACCEPTED FACT. IT ISN'T.

How's this for you:
nice and neat layout, just like in the photos posted before hand.
It's far from an absolutely perfect representation, but it's a damn site better than CoD. And that is the opinion of both an English person, and someone who has compared these shots to photos. Show me a picture of CoD with a border layout of fields and trees similar to England....you won't find one.

I'm only advocating layouts here, just to say, not colours. And similar pictures of WoP have been posted in this thread...

Oh, and would those English people who mention, please stand up?

I mean, if this won't cinvince you, I'm wasting my time. because I'm not slamming CoD, just saying that it is far from perfect.

Other than the fact that it looks like complete shit, what about it?

Wings of Puke? Bloody hell mate how old are you?

47

OK, new picture added (from the demo)
And please, be analytical in your answers. You wouldn't get an E grade in a history essay by saying 'it's shit.'

Owwwwwwww

But, it's more like:

COD
http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/g...1/images-2.jpg


WOP
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c93/spritzen/WOP.jpg

I think this is what I meant. Colours are rather pathetic at showing summer-time Britain. But all of that aside, the layout is a lot closer to England that CoD...

Touché

Wings of Prey ... Better than COD visually but only that. COD far supercedes it in all other areas as an overall experience (WOP has little to no immersion qualities atall) & yes, speaking as a Brit, COD doesn't do a particularly great job at portraying the realism of the South Eastern English environment.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ73F...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_dtw6I_M20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qdv485Vnah4

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...3&d=1304697864

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

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/1467/codtest6.jpg


It isn't even a close call. The WoP screenshot looks like garbage. The CoD shot looks like the photo. WoP may have more trees, but that doesn't make it look more like the landscape in the photo.

Seriously, it is not possible to look at those 3 shots and not say that WoP looks more real unless you are on the graphic arts staff for WoP, and even they would probably admit that CoD looks better.

God help us if David Hayward and Wolf Rider ever get into a debate!

@ David Hayward

But your pics highlight beautifully the very point that is painstakingly trying to be put across to you. The fact that the trees are so isolated & apart gives it an extremely un-uk feel, more akin to the mediterranean etc.

[QUOTE=David Hayward;279326]No, they don't. They're forgetting that they're looking at a screenshot from a GAME. They're acting like they're comparing 2 photographs.QUOTE]

Mate your arrogance is staggering at times, now your gonna tell me that you know people and how they think, all because it dont suite your view?

Absurd to you and you cant stand people having views other than your own clearly. Besides NO ONE HAS SAID WOP IS BETTER JUST THE LANSCAPE MODEL LOOKS AND FEELS MORE LIKE ENGLAND.

Oh and some people are agreeing with my opinion and I am agreeing with theirs because we think the landscape model is WoP looks better than CoD, No green filter, no high contrast just the landscape model.
I've never thought of it in a way too whos on whos side so I'm afraid your on your own their I just used your example to demonstrate my point.

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/1467/codtest6.jpg

Im the only one that are aware that in this screenshot the trees are not set at Very High, that is why there spacing between them :rolleyes:

Mate your arrogance is staggering at times, now your gonna tell me that you know people and how they think, all because it dont suite your view?

Absurd to you and you cant stand people having views other than your own clearly.
Besides NO ONE HAS SAID WOP IS BETTER JUST THE LANSCAPE MODEL LOOKS AND FEELS MORE LIKE ENGLAND.

Some people are agreeing with my opinion and I am agreeing with theirs because we think the landscape model is WoP looks better than CoD, No green filter, no high contrast just the landscape model.
I've never thought of it in a way too whos on whos side so I'm afraid your on your own their I just used your example to demonstrate my point.

@ Buchon - Valid point but I even at roof top level collections of trees branches blend together, like in a tree line or woods for example, if you stand in a tree line or small coppice you will see limited visiblity upwards, now imagine just 100ft up in the air it looks even harder to see through them.

It does nothing of the sort. The CoD screenshot is virtually identical to the photo. The CoD "isolated trees" are blind WoP fanboyism. The same "isolated trees" exist in the WoP shot.

yes but its the branches dave, look you cant ignore it lol cos its true. Go outside your house and look at how the trees braches knit with trees close together creating a dense look, no how do you think its gonna look at height?

WOP FANBOYISM?????????? :rolleyes: Read some my previous posts & you'll soon get a picture of my feelings toward the highly arcade, flat-as-a pancake WOP but the fact remains ... it looks better as a BoB sim environmentally. This is largely down to the fact that COD has to cope with such a huge theatre whereas the console-like arcade feel of WOP means it only has to draw miniscule theatres each time.

I live in and have travelled all over England and also own and play WOP,COD and ROF and it was the colour and lack of realistic English countryside hedgerows and Trees that spoilt the COD experience for me,otherwise its got the makings of a good game.

http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/1467/codtest6.jpg

That looks a damn sight more like England than WoP does. The problem with CoD's overall look has everything to do with lack of FSAA and AF and nothing to do with design and layout. Digital Vibrance has sorted the colour for me too.

+1

LOL :-P Dude i so nearly posted a picture of a black & white graveyard photo with the title 'Real Life'

That would have been wrong right.:???:

@Langnasen digital vibrance??

Are you now complaining that CoD trees don't have enough branches?

Look, I have had enough. The post with the WoP screenshot, CoD screenshot, and actual photo pretty much says it all. If you expect the CoD devs to make that game look more like WoP in any way, you are not going to be happy. WoP looks like crap. If you like it, that's great, but anyone looking at that post realizes immediately that CoD is closer to the real photo. If you are counting tree branches, then you are just desperate, and there is no point to responding to you. If you have any other points you'd like to make, just look at page 47 of this thread. It is my response to anything further you have to say on this subject.

Erm, as far as I'm aware I'm running all settings maxed out, that includes the trees :)

What makes the difference here is the hedgerows.

But there hedgerows in the FMB :rolleyes:

So I guess that hedgerows was canned from the map in the release cause the performance problems.

You guys should not forget that when IL2COD was launched it faced performance issues related the trees, and basically managing the objects in the map.

No dave im not complaining about about trees not having enough branches, your complaining about me thinking thats what I'm saying.
I'm saying that the trees are two sparcely placed so increase the branches or place them closer together to make it look more dense.

Oh and nearly forgot :
As quoted by you.

As quoted by Alan Partridge

OK David, that's fine. I mean, you really are in a minority here. It's clear in the CoD pictures that there is a lack of hedgerows, there are too many randomly placed trees than is necessary, and also the trees should be neatly arranged in patches of wood-land and forest.

WoP models the neat look of the countryside very well. COlours and such are another matter entirely.

Cod models the fields and colours nicely (maybe the textures could be slightly better in quality).

That's all from me. I mean, personally, I wouldn't ask an American to explain my country, so really your posts don't hold a lot of water to me. I'm not being rude, just honest.

Page 47.

I think with all our expectations being raised over time that we do forget it is primarly a COMBAT sim, which it does exceptionally well, if we can get smooth game/flight play I can live with whatever the ground looks like tbh.

Oh so you are flying a low dense trees zone, I guess you should fly a forest zone the next time :rolleyes:

Then some naysayers will be angry and jump to another guess ;)

"Crap", "Puke", "Shit".
Maybe a good thing you're going to refrain from the debate.
I think the other poster (the one, like everyone else, not using spoilt-kid playground descriptions) has a very fair point though in that the FSAA & general unoptimization of COD is more to blame than the game design. Things are only going to get better.

Hear hear, I said something along those lines 20 odd pages back...but then i got drunk and let his arrogance annoy me into retaliating.
High road well taken Hawk buddy.

BigPickle, I'm not ignoring you. I care deeply about every post you make. Deeply. It's just that my response to every one of your posts on this subject will not be changing. If you have anything further to say on this subject you will see my response on page 47 of this thread. I would never ignore you.

Spot on in my opinion, and out of the two I prefer the look of CoD by a long way.

Like WOP?:)

@ Dave - Wow thanks mate I'm so glad you care so deeply, I can finally rest at night in my bed knowing that you value my opinions so much you just have to tell me publicly.

C'mon i've probably got about 30 years more experience at sarcasam than you.

Why cant you understand no-one is trying to force you to change your opinion?
They, myself included just want the chance to talk about our own opinions without listening to childish insults because you dissagree.
I mean think about it, how would the Wings Of Prey devs feel hearing you trash their hard work? and yet you started this thread denouncing people who you think are doing the same to CoD, its just opinions mate, and everyone has em, being cross or vindictive because some peoples are different is a waste of effort.

End of discussion.


And black/darkbrown lines along fields doesnt make hedge rows in my book. Sry.

Hi Snake, and no offense intended, but I have flown with online squads using only full real, on and off for the last 5 years of il2, I did buy WOP after a break from flying (working away from home for 16 months on and off) as I thought a change would be good, Played it for half a day and never looked at it since, something I would give my 9 year old boy to play with to teach him the basics of flight dynamics. Also downloaded ROF demo and gave that a shot but couldnt get into it, though that may have been more to the limited game play with the demo than the game itself. Way things are going might have to try it again.

PS, will gladly meet up with you online one day mate to have a fly around as your wingman, you can show me the sights of Kent. S`

Not reading all this crap haywards posts because it doesnt seem to end - but keep in mind even if WOP looks worse than cod (I think its situational atm) the fact is that wop performes super smooth maxed out on really mediocre systems. COD does not.

Also the pic of wop is taken with low graphics settings (I notice a lack of decent AA).

If I thought they cared about my opinion I'd go to their message board and complain over there. I'm quite sure they don't care.

I'm equally convinced that the CoD devs don't care if you think that WoP looks better, or even if it includes hedges like WoP. I'm sure they would model the English farmland exactly if the average PC had the resources available. Since that is not the case, it still appears that they did a far better job than does WoP. It's more than just the tree spacing and hedges. See page 47.

You need to tell that to the people who continue to whine about CoD. I'm not cross or vindictive at all. I'm looking forward to when it is released in the US.

~S~ Sauf
No offence taken i wasnt trying to say WOP is a better simulator in the FM etc just that it looks more like Kent to me than does COD and I really want COD to be a good immersive game but the land colour and layout spoils the immersion whereas when im flying over kent in WOP with Trackir it looks more like the kent Countryside. thanks for the offer of winging but I think the roles should be the other way round.

That's a matter of opinion. I am of the opinion that WoP is graphically superior and with a properly calibrated screen it looks incredible. Blue Scorpion posted some very good shots right here in this thread we're posting in. Superb shots.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...2&postcount=47

Replays play back to this level of quality with high consistent fps (60fps).

I am obviously a fan. I am very impressed by it and it's level of support. FM is very good with the latest update and many aircraft are very close to historical performance test data.

It has it's short comings which the devs are aware of, but they are listening. It's a bloody good effort. A fantastic first effort. The sequel has so much potential.

I am not in a WoP loving, CoD hating camp. I have both games and want to see CoD become a success and get fixed. Presently CoD is a mess and performance is dreadful across the board. Landscapes are saturated and unnatural. It's cockpits are a thing of beauty by contrast. WoP's colours could be better than they are, but they are better than Cod.

It's only another game in a small PC genre. You like it or you don't. All this 'Wings of Puke, crap, shite'. I refuse to believe these are the utterances of an adult. What's WITH that? Your hatred of it is palpable.

Speaking of the real world, you are aware these are just games...?

Glo (with first hand experience of the English countryside)

No, it is not blind fanboyism.

I do not own WoP, I never had the time to buy it, and like you I find the green haze entirely overdone. The washed out colours too could possibly pass of as a bleak Central European winter, but never as a Britsih summer.

However, just when it comes to the trees and their placement, they do feel more natural, and is a much closer match for teh photoes. Now remember, back in the 1940ies, there were even more hedgerows than now.

What is lacking from CoD 8and which WoP has solved quite smartly by their dark lines, is bushes. There are a lot of isolated trees in CoD. As was noted, it gives the terrain a more Mediterranian look. The typical British landscape has a lot more bushes than trees really. If you want to see a decent rendering of the mid-ceentury British countryside, I'd suggest "Thomas the Tank Engine" (the original series).

With the size of the CoD map, implementing bushed the way they have with trees would likely not be practical. I'm not a programmer, but I think some large bush-objevts to fill out the forests and some long ones for the hedges would do.

This photograph has obviously been color corrected and oversaturated to look nice... it does not look as you would see that landscape in that same moment and in that position with your own eyes. Same problem with CloD colors, oversaturated IMO.