View Single Post
  #11  
Old 05-05-2011, 06:40 PM
philip.ed's Avatar
philip.ed philip.ed is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
By the way, that simply is not true. People have posted the CoD maps. They are an amazing match to the real photographs from 1945. No one has even attempted similar comparisons for WoP.
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.
Reply With Quote