![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Actually I bet to differ. CloD has superior water and lighting system. The new game might have better colours, and definitiely more trees
![]() ![]() ![]() |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
Better regards graphics in sims/games are related to the balance between performance and quality. CloD have more quality in aircraft's details and water and lighting, but the performance have a giant hit. And the terrain in War Thunder is just better in all aspects... War Thunder have very good visuals, detailed aircraft, and good effects. All that with GREAT perfomance. The "trade" between quality and performance in CloD isn't so good... ![]() |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
- If it is nowhere near the real size of Southern England + the Channel + NW France then I cannot agree that it is better "in all aspects".
__________________
My Il-2 CoD video web site: www.flightsimvids.com |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Most of terrain is out of view anyway because fog of war is covering horizon to save FPS. It was easy to make similar 'optimization' in CloD btw but Oleg probably could not except such a trade-off because he was making a simulator, not an MMO game. MMO game must run well on very weak PCs. A sim must simulate realistic visibility distance.
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The flight models are probably no hell so if that's the case I might buy it but I'll never fly it online. I remember taking back CFS3 back to the Eletronics Boutique one hour after I bought it. Compared to IL-2 2001 it was complete junk in every way. What made me buy it was the trailer for it. How could they use this for a game that looks totally different?
Try flying that on a PC from 2003. By that time I had tons of jam in my computer to make IL-2 run like silk but CFS3 chugged along like tared mud. IL-2 2001 ![]() http://s158.beta.photobucket.com/use...ml?sort=3&o=38 Last edited by Richie; 11-16-2012 at 04:53 AM. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|