Gamespot Review for CoD - Score: 4.0

[utu]

Originally Posted by Flanker35M

S!

Utu, if you read what I wrote carefully. Oleg & Team were not building a flight sim for the first time. They had already made IL-2 that has been a huge success.

Yours is not a valid argument from my point of view. Microsoft after 10 (ten) years made Vista, one of the crappiest operative systems ever, but they had experience on XP, Millennium, 98 and 95. But Seven works good. The problem with Cod is not a supposed lack of experience from the devs, because now it is showing all its potential, in 15 days (yes, the classical 2 weeks), they made 2 patches and the sim can run on older machines without problems at a very acceptable visual candies. Do you know A2A Simulations and their Accusim for fsx? They made a P47 Razorback, a B17 and recently a Spitfire mk1 and mk2, all "accusim" technology. You know that fsx is not a combat flight simulator, well, every one of those "accusimmed" planes required a huge amount of time to be finished. And our Cod planes are working with a concept very close to the concept of an "accurate flight simulator", and in Cod there so many planes to make accurate and precise. In my opinion the responsibility of this bad picture is only Ubisoft: bad marketing, bad logic, bad customer care, bad dev's care, etc.