So, You Think B for M looks like IL2 46?

[ElAurens]

Originally Posted by Ataros

BoM map is not ready yet. It is a place-holder. No landscape variations, no houses, etc.

And yet it is still better looking than the original IL2 Russian maps.

[Mysticpuma]

Originally Posted by Ataros

BoM map is not ready yet. It is a place-holder.

Oh this made me laugh, it really did....do I have a feeling of Deja Vu?

[Peaveywolf]

Originally Posted by csThor

If you look closely you'll notice that the houses are still the european town houses and not the russian rural buildings we've been shown. To me that indicates that the map is in its infancy, actually it has just wailed for the first time. Lots of things to do for the map makers.

I agree, I think its an unfinished map for purposes to show the aircraft models off on.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

And yet it is still better looking than the original IL2 Russian maps.

Not really, original had snow on roofs

[rga]

I also heard a lot of complaining about CloD terrain before release, based purely on a handful of pictures Oleg gave us. Banana forum turned into the most active site of scientific debate about England's botanics and ecology. What's the situation now. I haven't seen a hate thread about CloD terrain for quite a while.
IMO, the combination of light, colour and models in CloD reach almost the photorealistic level. That's why I barely fly 1946 now, despite tons of interesting features made by TD and modders. Well, sometimes I do fly night mission in modded 1946, since the feeling hunting in the darkness is priceless.

Short version of my post: developers do not know how to make an aristic-touched screenshot )

[furbs]

No arguments about the terrain now because some people told them it didn't look enough like England, so they changed it.

See sig.

[kestrel79]

Yes the CloD screenshot looks better. But it's the stuff you can't see that make Clod better. It's the awesome engine sounds, the insanely detailed damage model, the very deep CEM, flames coming from the engine exhaust (this still blows my mind). Add up all these things together and this is why that 2nd screenshot is the best

[slm]

Agree. When planes are moving fast, you don't necessarily notice 3d model details the same way you do from static screenshots. But the improved damage model, new effects like smoke from MGs when a plane is firing etc. clearly improve the game.

Still, it's advances that make AI planes fly better etc. that I appreciate most. If planes and ground units behave more realistically (as if a human player was controlling them), those mean more to me than more and more polygons. And of course playability features that allow creating better missions.

[carguy_]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

If you can't see the differences you are either blind or have an agenda.

Thank you for pointing that out. Some people seem to love to raise problems out of vacuum.

[Jaws2002]

While it does look better than the old Il-2, the changes in the graphics engine introduced in the last patch was a huge step back in how the lighting is used in the game.