CoD vs some other sims that model Kent?

[Dano]

Originally Posted by Blue Scorpion

I will ignore the fact that the screen shots were deliberately chosen to put both fsx and wop at a disadvantage right from the get go.

And in exchange we'll ignore the fact that your shots are clearly chosen to show WOP in it's very best light and do not show any reasonable representation on how it looks while playing

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Letum

CloD should be many times better than this. It certainly uses more resources.

CoD IS many times better than that. That is a green hazy mess. It looks like crap.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Dano

And in exchange we'll ignore the fact that your shots are clearly chosen to show WOP in it's very best light and do not show any reasonable representation on how it looks while playing

WoP at it's very best is worse than CoD at it's worst.

[ParaB]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

CoD IS head and shoulders above the other two. I have no idea why you think it isn't. This isn't even a close call.

Quite a few people, myself included, disagree. Some things in CoD look simply outstanding, others look merely "ok-ish". I have recently re-installed WoP and while it does indeed get boring quickly I thought the environment grafics were indeed at least on par with CoD. I admit I have less of a problem with the "cinematic" filters in WoP than with the strange colour palette in CoD.

But then the fact that CoD isn't the grafical leap forward I had hoped for after all this time isn't even remotely the sim's biggest problem at the moment.

But then CoD will improve, I don't doubt it. And until then I'm back to flying DCS:A-10C.

[Blue Scorpion]

Originally Posted by Dano

And in exchange we'll ignore the fact that your shots are clearly chosen to show WOP in it's very best light and do not show any reasonable representation on how it looks while playing

Those shots were taken when the game was released, on my first day with it ,during play and are unaltered; if you would like I have far more dramatic shots that I deliberately avoided posting.

Originally Posted by David Hayward

CoD IS many times better than that. That is a green hazy mess. It looks like crap.

Your hazy green mess is actually far more natural and realistic; not only does this planet's atmosphere contain particles that disperse and diffuse light. At altitude water in the atmosphere often causes a haze, which you would know if you had ever flown anything but a desk, but no mater, it's an option that can be turned off if you don't like it.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by ParaB

Quite a few people, myself included, disagree.

I know. And I find that amazing, because it is so obviously wrong. WoP is a green hazy mess. If you think it looks better than CoD it is because you are really desperately looking for problems in CoD.

I bought WoP. I know what it looks like. It looks like crap.

Like I said. This is not even a close call.

[Dano]

Originally Posted by Blue Scorpion

Those shots were taken when the game was released, on my first day with it ,during play and are unaltered; if you would like I have far more dramatic shots that I deliberately avoided posting.

You play from external view points do you and always looking at areas that haven't been washed out by the ridiculous amount of bloom/hdr that wop uses then?

I'm not arguing here, WoP does look incredible in the immediate vicinity but after that it looks downright awful and the overuse of bloom/hdr knocking visibility down to virtually nothing at times is downright criminal, drama has nothing to do with it.

Your hazy green mess is actually far more natural and realistic; not only does this planet's atmosphere contain particles that disperse and diffuse light. At altitude water in the atmosphere often causes a haze, which you would know if you had ever flown anything but a desk, but no mater, it's an option that can be turned off if you don't like it.

I've never seen any atmosphere remotely like wop's in all my years of living in southern england, I have seen plenty of like cod's representation though.

[ctec1]

"If you think it looks better than CoD it is because you are really desperately looking for problems in CoD."


Actually, dont have to look hard at all. Thats freakin hilarious

[ATAG_Bliss]

From what I've seen and played. Nothing compares to CoD down low. The problem is, of course, is having the hardware to show off all those details down low

[Blue Scorpion]

Originally Posted by Dano

You play from external view points do you and always looking at areas that haven't been washed out by the ridiculous amount of bloom/hdr that wop uses then?


I've never seen any atmosphere remotely like wop's in all my years of living in southern england, I have seen plenty of like cod's representation though.

I fly frequently irl I hold an PPL/ir with NQ, and often see atmospheric haze, it is quite different from the air than on the ground, particularly near cities when you add industrial output and traffic smog into the mix, seasons too have an effect, around harvest for example the atmosphere can take on a distinct yellow hue. However, I never claimed wop was totally realistic, I said it was more realistic than no haze at all.

As for the shots, yes, on cranking up the game and being amazed at how it looked, I used playback to get screen shots just like most other gamers do to take screen shots from different perspectives. Every shot I posted was taken directly in mission or directly after; or have you never used an external view in a flight sim, when you have been impressed with what you have seen, as for the shots themselves, I have not had the game installed for nearly a year as the fm was too arcade for me.