Quote:
Originally Posted by speculum jockey
How do you fit so much retardation into a single post?
1. Oleg and crew made the WOP engine (it's the IL-2 Engine), the WOP team made a few alterations, that about it.
2. WOP looks like crap when you get low. It's looks like crap when you're on the ground, and it looks like a stylized cartoon when you are in the air.
3. Maps are postage-stamp sized.
4. Wings of Prey is a console game with a lot of shortcuts and tricks to make you think it's realistic looking. The realism (FM/Damage) is really simplified, and . .. .
I don't know why I am bothering to type this. If you're daft enough to type what you did then you're not going to listen to reason.
Cliffs of Dover for the most part runs like crap. It's essentially still in a beta stage, and it's designed for tomorrow's hardware. Sucks for trying to play it now on a budget, but there is pretty much no feature (besides system specs that allow you to play the game) that WOP even begins to approach COD.
|
I think you've included some mistakes in your post:
1.) I am pretty sure that WoP uses its own rendering engine. Only flight modeling was borrowed from Il-2.
2.) It looks pretty damn good for the resources it needs. The whole package is coherent, the art direction is clear - I can't say that about CloD currently. WoP is not going for realism, but movie-ism. It's not IL-2 style, but it's lot of people's style. It certainly doesn't look like crap. Do you say that Band of Brothers or The Pacific look like crap because directors decided to run a bleach-by-pass on the frames?
3.) Map size doesn't affect performance, rendering distance matters more.
4.) If it looks good, and tricks you to think that it's good, then it's good. For what it's worth, given the resources it needs, it runs as a pretty damn good polished package.