CoD vs BoP.........graphics?
 

I know these can't be compared,but still they managed to show a simular level of grounddetail without any framerate loss(except up close i guess),even better i can run it on an AMD Athlon,Nvidia 7900 and 2 gigs of memory,ancient specs!
So they run on different engines?
Did the BoP dev's create their own,and did the CoD dev's another?
They are both Russian right?

They are completely different engines. Wings of Prey is based on the old IL-2 engine from what I understand, or at least borrows its flight model.

Cliffs of Dover is a completely new beast from the ground up. It's also about a million times more complex than either WoP or IL-2.

Yes, Gaigin created their own GFX engine but there are no moving ground units in WOP which I guess simplifies the coding. Cockpit shadows are there though.

From the graphical aspect WOP wipes out IL2 COD. Have you seen the berlin map in WOP?. Simply amazing.
The downside of Wings of Prey is that flight model and damage model are way much simpler than in IL2 COD.

It's really disappointing how poorly IL2 COD performs graphically even in highend machines. I think if we could have the graphical engine of Wings of Prey with the damage model and flight model of IL2 COD it'd be great.

They released the game in an Alpha stage and now we'll have to wait at least half a year before the game becomes playable enough for most of us.

I agree but watch what you say round these parts, the WHINER police may report yea. Shhhh..... there coming

That's actually a fairly balanced assessment from what i've been able to gather. I'll fire it up in a little while to get my personal opinion as well, since i just got it today and i'm waiting for Steam to do its thing.

I haven't played WoP so i can't comment on the technical aspects, what i can easily say is the graphics look good but it's too hollywood-ish for lack of a better word. I wouldn't exactly call them realistic but pretty.

As for CoD, i've been with Il2 since the beginning in 2001 and i remember how much simpler it was than what we have now with the 1946 version, so i can definitely wait until CoD can finally come into its own as well.

Like you, i think that comparing graphics alone is a bit of a skewed perspective. WoP maps are tiny compared to IL2 and CoD and the overall complexity in physics/FM/DM is totally different, something that leaves a lot of resources available to use for pretty visuals at fast frame rates.

There's no denying that CoD has its share of problems currently, but i'm overall optimistic for the near future. If i can fly around in medium-low settings, learning the aircraft and engaging in small skirmishes, i'll be happy enough for the first few months until they manage to improve performance.

I think the bet is how quickly they can come up with optimizations that will guarantee a steady 30 FPS on most systems on appropriate detail settings. After that happens it will be a much smoother ride overall and we'll move from "the game is unplayable" technical worries to actual gameplay related discussions like FM debates, posting performance charts and the rest of the fun stuff that's part and parcel of the flight sim community. As long as we have something to keep us busy with the gameplay, the devs will be able to work on ironing out the rest of the issues in relative peace ;)