Be nice when our landscape looks like this... :)
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=ajg_yRNJli4

Not bad graphics really... :)

V

unfortunately is an arcade game
but it has good graphics
why the hell they make games and not sims since they do games for planes:(

The terrain in the video isn't bad, and its always good to have competition for the new IL-2 series. Time will tell if the maps are large enough, sim is complex enough, and has an FMB to build decent missions.

There certainly alot of room for improvement in new IL-2 series terrain, especially how the docks at Dover connect with the land. I'm sure we will see many advancements in the water, object placement, and terrain by the developers and modders, just as we seen with the original IL-2 series.

.
No interest, aracade, nearly ugly :evil:

Yeah, I actually prefer the look we have in COD right now to that.... plane models look terrible...

Check out those last rocket runs from the end of the video. Textures are MUCH worse, trees are 2D cutouts... Everything about this game just looks like a worse version of RiseofFlight graphics, plus a smearing of PP effects that look absolutely terrible.

I don't wanna bash CloD or anything and I didn't play Wings of Prey, so close up it might not be as good looking, but the atmosphere, that the landscape, paired with the clouds and the colours of the terrain, delivers, looks really immersive to me. At least from what I can tell, watching this video for example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnE7SfEgCn8

I'm not talking about the aircraft models or the cockpit details (those are much better in CloD), just the scenery.
I don't know, but CloD feels different somehow. Can't really put my finger on it!

The environment in those games is obscured by a layer of haze, and is desaturated to look like Saving Private Ryan.

Although it may look good from an artistic standpoint, I can't call it "immersive".

CloD attempts to model reality with proper levels of contrast, brightness, and color saturation. This is really hard to do well.

Even though CloD may look bland in some situations, it more closely matches reality than the examples posted in these videos. Let's face it, sometimes real life is boring. And, maybe it's just fallen victim to the principle of the "Uncanny Valley".

In any case, I'm sure the environment in CloD will improve, once more serious issues are resolved.

You are complety right skouras. :evil:

Have to take into account the size of these maps compared to COD's channel map... they are quite a bit smaller. Makes a big difference otherwise COD could just use the Frostbite Engine for its terrain :D

Yes I pointed this out before! WOP graphics are ALOT nicer and much closer to reality! GRAPHICS only though! Wish Clod had this graphic.. Real life environment is more greenish/blueish like WOP... CLOD is too yellowish.. well ONe can only dream..

LMAO at the P-47 and B-17G's and Zeros with HVAR's at Pearl Harbor.

STOP being sheepishly stupid and START using your brains!!!

I'm SOOO tired hearing this reasoning on this forum, again and again.. the fact that a game is arcade, or sim, has NOTHING to do with it being a sim!!!

Most of the graphics computations are on the GPU using VRAM, with some help from the processor, while most of the AI/simulation systems code are held on the processor's core(s)

Also, the fact that the landscape map is huge in CoD can not be held as reason for dumbed down graphics.. there's a simple programming concept already implemented years ago in games which is called terrain/assets streaming

MG simply doesn't have good render engine programmers / world builder artists in there. that's all. the game screams from all its hinges for optimizations..

so, next time you want to post that stupid argument again, please back it up with something (facts/proofs).. otherwise just refrain from making it again!

Facts are out there... look at the size of those maps, or for that batter games like BF3, etc. And then look at games like CoD and DCS, and the size of their maps.... or one step further... look at FSX.

But you have it figured out, I eagerly await your flight sim...

in fact i had play Wings of Prey for one week
then i just unistall it
its clearly an arcade but fun to play
also the multiplayer had some good moments too

aaa.. you understand that what you're implying is actually a matter of humn resources vs limited time.. right? ie manpower needed to fill map with those kind of details..

yet, the debate in here was that CoD is a sim, and sims can not have good maps because they have an incredibly complex code which would prevent computers running maps with those kind of details..

so, if you do not have anything pertinent to say, Sith, beside mockery, just sit down and shut your mouth or Lord Vader will get angry :)

So this looks crap to you!


http://s5.postimage.org/kyfx2g5h3/sh...512_223248.png

http://s5.postimage.org/k9s3eb1rr/2011_10_25_00003.jpg

I am sorry Adonys but you are wrong, the game would take a huge hit in performance if they tried to model an extremely detailed map when they are using a map this size...

Check out the landscape at certain times of day, the lighting is what is off because sometimes it can look AMAZING...

http://s5.postimage.org/h8qffeunr/sh...106_142336.png

up-high looks much better then down low.

and no, it can be down without huge performance hit, IF you know real render engine programming. that's why LOD's, texture MipMaps, terrain & assets streaming, tesselation and so on were invented and used in render engine programming..

i thank god that we don't have such grafics in clod.

:grin:
+1

Adonys has a good point. Play WoP down low and everything is seamless with hundreds of objects on the screen. The map feels 10X more organic and everything flows nicely. CloD needs to be able to render the lanscape a lot more fluidly in these situations.

And WoP can support larger maps. The devs just choose to limit their size. If a sim is optimized well enough, it can load what appears on the screen and keep what is off to a minimum level. Much like BoB2's successful A/I bubbles.

Here we go again. Last time this started we finally lost the amazing cockpits and sunsets from the original game. What is going to be next?
If you like the green / bluish stormy look in a summer sunny day, go see actual holywood movies, or yeah, console games like WoP.

Pretty sure that the engine of CoD is capable of looking as good and even better than those showings. The trick is to fix the copious amount of bugs.

:grin:

The detail wealth of CoD is incredible. Especially down low. It runs like a charm for me.

Attachment 10534

The new patch was a step in the right direction.

S!

+1 good job old chap!

Its not just about the complexity of the sim, its also about the scale of them map, how many square miles does CoD cover, or DCS, now compare that to maps in Wings of Prey or upcoming War Thunder or World of WarPlanes.

And its not about human resources, its about computer resources to handle the size of those maps, and calculating a huge channel map over a small cube.

For the first pic, I wouldn't use the word 'crap' but it's mediocre in my opinion. A lot of things are off - colours are poor, it lacks an organic natural feel. I don't think the issue is detail levels either, they could use exactly the same amount of detail but implement it a better, more natural way and it would improve hugely.

I think Adonys is right to lay the blame at poor artistic input. Previous maps (Open GL and pre-release) for COD absolutely nailed the right look and feel. Somehow in the re-make things were thrown together in a rather slapdash manner (I'd make an educated guess that the dedicated artist either got fired or quit and the rework had to be done on the hoof by other people - it's similar to a website that has been designed by the programmer or engineer rather than the graphics guy :)).

Though I hope (maybe naively) that some of the map issues may again be down to switching off and dumbing down certain settings to get the game to run, and that later it may be put right...?

Oh so its artistic input you want is it well there is already a game out for you...

http://www.vollpilot.de/wp-content/u...f-prey-360.jpg

There you go... See I want realism... I want realistic FM's, realistic DM and realistic landscapes but if you want an "artistic" input this kind of filter is what you will get...

Here is another example of artistic input...

http://www.readallaboutit.open-books...brothers-2.jpg

So there you have it, personally I would want something more in-tune with this...

http://www.bats.org.uk/data/images/r...ape_08_030.jpg

P.S. Yes Furbs hedges as well ;)

P.S.S. Yes it is wales, hence the sheep...

Very beautiful, I want that too... :D

mmm... now the reason for the 2006-like graphics of ClOD seems to be the map dimension...

but... we really need a so huge map? I do not think so, at least at this stage of sim development. Actually it is impossible to simulate a BoB day of battle, with tens of bomber and fighter, artillery etc. I can accept a bit outdated graphic if (IF) the scenario is realistic and playable (do you know BoBII: Wings of Victory?) but if I have to play with 15-20 aircarft, a handful of ground units and old graphic... :confused:

IMHO it is better the use of smaller maps with 2012 effects/filters. In the next years, when the PC's resource will be better used, a huge map will be welcome :).

+1000

+1000

LOL "the maps are bigger" excuses everything wrong with CoD.

Hmmm nice to know that you are both fighter jocks and don't care about bombers and objectives... If you want a quake war find another game.

Yeah 2012 blur filters will make everything awesome LOL how incredibly pathetic...

All that for $8 a month?
 

Why didnt somebody tell me about this "XBox" technology before I built my costom pc:confused:

If we are lucky maybe they will port it for the pc:-P

Bigger map excuses all. How incredibly pathetic. If you want big maps get Just Cause 2. Forget blur filters ....shadows that aren't epileptic would be nice....but the maps are so big LOL.

The xbox forums called, the want that $8 today or you cant play!

I don't own an Xbox.

Just can't face the truth that maps don't excuse the big problems this game still has graphically. Maybe when it has better graphics it will excuse the poor content like the campaign and FM......the list goes on.

So in your mind a large map the scale of the Channel map should perform as well as a much smaller area map? Is that correct? There is no difference in demand on a computer?

No.

In my mind it is not an excuse for crappy flashing shadows and a flop of a campaign engine etc. etc. But for someone looking for a lame excuse to gloss over CoD's substantial problems this is as good as any other lame excuse.

Errr :confused: who said that the map size was the reason for those problems... yeah I thought so no one at all :rolleyes:.

So you arent even talking about what this thread is about, comparing the graphics of different flight games and sims... ok, got it.

Ah, I was agreeing with andrea78 comment. Then get swarmed by CoD Crusaders. Pathetic.:rolleyes:

If you dont like CoD, why are you here? Pathetic. :rolleyes:

Since when was it acceptable to use the term "swarm" for three people?

i agree, and the other aspect is the complex flight models and damage models having to be computed for EACH aircraft. with the arcade games used in comparison that is not an issue because it is not very detailed, but for a sim like CoD or DCS it is an issue. DCS compromised by not trying to model the low level detail at all, CoD still tries to, hence the problems we currently have.

the "good" arcade-game-look also doesnt work at low altitude (ex when on the ground or very low), when they show up as ugly large bland textures, and the objects like houses or vehicles (and trees) look like cardboard cutouts

il2/CoD on the other hand has to do it all at once, complex FM/DM, detailed low on the ground, AND look good with large number of objects moving around at various altitudes. CPU and GPU loading is obviously much more of an issue

Bombers? Bombers? Are you seriously talking about "bombers" in Clod? Without level bombing? Without good working AA? Without working searchlight?

In Il2 I play only as bomber, now it is impossible due to the fact that huge map make level bombing impossible :) ("huge map" can be changed with "FM", "DM" or other sim feature that are virtually useless due to bug/errors).

I will not discuss graphic if sim is good. But why - with this graphic - Clod do not simulate the bob as well as the very old BoBII? This game do not surprise for graphic neither for simulation. I do not need fabulous sim feature if they are not right implemented and if they compromise other aspect of the game.

Okay so I am now thinking you do not have the game... In the latest beta patch level bombing was fixed and searchlights as far as I know have always worked, certainly haven't seen anyone saying otherwise!

Right so large maps are bad for bombers, clearly you hit the smack hard last night! So by the sounds of it you want to bugger up the FM's like they do BF3 etc so that they don't fly at real speeds, okay I will chalk that up to the crack addling your brain again... please name me a few features other than AA and dynamic weathering that are useless?

So in your eye's this

http://assets2.ignimgs.com/2005/11/2...25759_640w.jpg

looks better than this!!!

http://s5.postimage.org/7iswczwzb/sh...512_223140.png


Okay, I think I am done talking with you... lay off the drugs Mmmkay!

http://r0.sgsr.us/imgs/250/hss252.gif

"In Il2 I play only as bomber, now it is impossible due to the fact that huge map make level bombing impossible" was sarcastic. It is great fly huge maps with 100 bombers over London, but now it is impossible: is it due to the map? to the FM?? to the DM? I do not know, but there is always a good answer by the Crusaders :).

Anyway Boss :cool: I never said than "this" is better than "that". I simply tried to say that graphic is old, run bad and thus I hoped that at least the sim features were great. I do not like WoP, BoBII or others: IMHO IL2 is still the best sim considering all the aspect of a game.
Anyway this game is really becoming Crusaders of Cliffs of Dover ;).

Ops! Sorry! More than 2.500 post! Now I understand your tone! Peace&Love! :grin:

:D fair enough, but don't get me wrong there is plenty of things that need to be improved upon in CLOD

I am by no means saying it is the best, far from it! I just don't like it when people try and say something is very bad when it isn't, at the end of the day we there are plenty of other aspects of the sim that need to be corrected before they start working on the landscaping I think we can at least agree on that :o

Just to reiterate, I am not a crusader I am not covering my eyes to the obvious failures of this sim it just needs time to mature!

You are right Krupi, and I agree with you with what you are saying in the last post.

I think that most of who criticize this game (like me!) do it becouse we "love" Il2: if we do not care about this brand, we did not spend our time in forums "whining" :).

I played IL2 since the 2001 demo. In my experience, I am not able to play CloD since its release. I tried a lot of time, every time I exit frustated and a week later I tried again... there are simply too many things (some serious, others minimal) that, put togheter, made my experience frustating.

I know that it is not the case of all players, lots are happy with Clod and I "envy" them becouse I regret the Il2 days.

I don't think I know anyone who is particularly happy with the game, yes the last beta has ushered a few back into the fold but the red pilots are not very happy (when are they ever :P) with the FM's.

Personally I will only be "happy" with COD when we can get a online moving fronts campaign up and running like back in the good old days :D, unfortunately that is going to take sometime.

Sorry Krupi, and I'm probably going to get scorched by the majority here, but what the heck, for me the landscape is the thing I'd probably like to see redone most - right now. I haven't liked it right from the start. It really grates on me. Sets my teeth on edge. It is the biggest issue that puts me off firing the game up. I've set up a few missions in the FMB over the Channel purely so that I don't have to look at the landscape.

I don't expect anyone will pause in their criticism and scorn as they point out the relative lack of importance of this issue in their opinion. Well fine.

Also, once again, the fixes to terrain really do not need to consume any more PC resources than currently. It's more a matter of rearranging and tweaking the presentation.

I'm prepared to bet that in a year or two when the game has been tweaked, repaired, reworked and had features reinstated, that most people will look back at how it is now and agree with much of what the critics are saying.

I think the landscape we have at present is awful too. As you can see from Krupi's picture and if you fly into the UK the immediate, overwhelming impression is how green everything is. The technicolour dream coat landscape we have now is a let down compared to the sometimes jaw-dropping impression of flying and fighting that this sim can deliver when it all comes together. However, there is a lot more that needs working on at present than the landscape.
For the moment, I just don't look down!

You have to remember that the British landscape has changed since the 1940 in terms of what the farmers cultivate.

Agree totally. They have got a lot of things right in that respect, especially things like field sizes but nevertheless the colour scheme we have at present is only remotely applicable to a couple of weeks in late August - imho of course!

trouble is fields in Clod look nothing like what was grown then.

speaking from someone who has just done 21 days straight in said modern day fields.

actually, one of the major differences between today and back then, is we harvest earlier now and much quicker, i look at the fields in Clod, and i can't tell you what they are supposed to represent, it looks more like spring than anything else, but even thats not a good match.

it isn't summer 1940, thats for sure, no wheat, barley, rye.........

Jolly inconsiderate of those Luftwaffe blighters to attack in summer don't you think chaps. Spring would have been much more convenient.