Pentium 4 3.0Mhz , 2 Gb ram 800 Mhz ,Video card whit 500 Mb ram

[Avala]

It is the truth that flight simulation are somewhat different than FPS games. But technology behind them is the same. Differences are not that big at all. Both are made for the PC, and must use similar technologies. It is not like steam powered versus jet engine.

One of the names in that technology is for example Microsoft DirectX. Clod runs on that, and yes Crysis2 too.

So, can someone tell me why the same technology works in Crysis, for example, and not in Clod?

Or can anyone really believe that computing two planes in the flight above Dover really eats more processor power ("under the hood") than Boeing's factory 747 simulator, with all planes systems, and subsystems (google is your friend)

Differences are just as in new BMW and a kit car (with the engine that you must "do-it-yourself")

[hunter1]

Originally Posted by Avala

It is the truth that flight simulation are somewhat different than FPS games. But technology behind them is the same. Differences are not that big at all. Both are made for the PC, and must use similar technologies. It is not like steam powered versus jet engine.

One of the names in that technology is for example Microsoft DirectX. Clod runs on that, and yes Crysis2 too.

So, can someone tell me why the same technology works in Crysis, for example, and not in Clod?

Or can anyone really believe that computing two planes in the flight above Dover really eats more processor power ("under the hood") than Boeing's factory 747 simulator, with all planes systems, and subsystems (google is your friend)

Differences are just as in new BMW and a kit car (with the engine that you must "do-it-yourself")

Avala , Thank you , you have understand what i want said : for me this game have the engine too old , too many time to release it.

[waffen-79]

Originally Posted by carguy_

How about another fact then?
IL2 : Cliffs of Dover is not programmed for consoles .

Fact #2 : Your PC is a PoS.

Whoa! chillax, that struck a nerve ain't it, you guys need to lower the fanboi dial a notch or two

if 1C Maddox were a rock band you need to be the guys with drink in hand thinking, "that song it's pretty damn good" not the girls infront throwing your panties at them

I had that same PC and I can vouch for those games running, except ArmA2, I had to lower the settings to be able to run it and that's exactly what 1C is asking for COD

[hunter1]

Originally Posted by Triggaaar

What is your source for that nonsense? It was released a couple of weeks ago, and developed with today's PCs in mind.

Sorry , Triggaaar , I'm Italian and not know very well the english , but i'm old , before i play il2 forgotten battles and all sequence of this game , now il2 1946 , VISIT many sites of combat flight sims , reads only , many time , becouse my english is very poor and not permit to reply many time , i " know " this game is in mind of Oleg from many time ago , the time of pentium 4 , but not the last pentium 4 , a little before .
[/QUOTE]
That's not correct. You are new to this forum, so I understand that you may not be fully informed on the details of this sim. IL2 was written by the same people. CoD is more detailed in every way. None of these other titles provide the historical accuracy and detail, flight and damage model that CoD provides. If you are interested in the best combat flight sim ever produced, stick around, there's a lot for you to learn here. If not, don't waste your time here, it's not for you.[/QUOTE] Triggaaar , my register is new on this forum , you too , and i think this game has need too many time to developed , only . Example , i hope you understand , is a Volkswagen beatle engine in a Ferrari car. Too informations for this engine software and now move whit an elephant . And , again , sorry for my poor english , but i love the combat flight sim ...... [/QUOTE]

You clearly haven't got a clue what computations the game is making to model all the AI planes etc.

So in Crisis you can move around a map (without pausing to load as you move) that covers about 100 thousand cubic miles? And the AI are in historically accurate planes flying around that space? You might as well use Avitar as your basis for graphical comparison.[/QUOTE]

[hunter1]

And for Triggaaar and Charvel ...........When i read on this forum , this game run FINE on i2 core quad Q 6600 , i buy it , before .......NO. Check your graphic of copy sold ......before and after the optimized.

[CharveL]

Sims are more demanding and VERY different from games like Crysis because games like Crysis have very primitive damage modeling, for instance, as compared to the calculations required to register a hit to hundreds of specific components in a bomber among many other things you don't see but emulate reality. That stuff doesn't happen for free.

You are right in the sense that unfortunately CoD should still be able to perform a lot of those visual effects you like and better utilize the resources available.

The simple fact is 1C simply doesn't have a fraction of the budget for this flight sim that a game like Crysis has and it shows by how long it has taken to get to this point and how disturbingly unoptimized it currently is) so even when the technical aspects get fixed, I doubt we'll see much imagination and creativity in the implementation (interface, mission cohesiveness, etc.).

The good news is there is a very creative community out there that will offer these things better than 1C can ever hope to so it depends on whether you bought CoD as a flashy but relatively short-lived game or as a simulator with a great deal of potential and longevity.

[hunter1]

I think this is becouse CoD isn't release on DVD , becouse is a very small user .

[Rainmaker]

Originally Posted by ColdfireTrilogy

I think your grammar needs optimized. And pentium 4s were phased out what ... 7 years ago? New CPUs and a new motherboard are literally .... 200$ for something that would be more powerful than a Pentium 4 lol.

That is all fine but you don't have to be idiot do you remember? We are not talking about unrealistic spitfire FM so don't start comments like this, it raises pulse

[kubanskiloewe]

same old P4 3gig here with 2GB old slow 333MHz ram and old AGP slot but newer and one of the latest Cards for AGP ; HIS ATI 4670 IceQ (perfect low noise)
DirectX 9

with all graphics settings on low or out except modell (high), effects (middle) and damage (middle) I reach over sea which is better than in IL2/FB about 17-25fps in cockpit; but not more than 10 planes in game.

the graphics is optimized for high resolutions but it would be perfect when all textures has a second or third resolution f.e. 1280x800 or for good old 1024x768...than this game would run like IL2 and look better too.

ok a P4 is outdated but why should´nt it be possible to run this game in settings like IL2 where those PC´s run very good day for day Online on HL with 30fps on high settings (thats enough)

as others postet earlier it´s bad programmed or they really don´t care and produce low compressed eye candy textures and useless groundvehicles instead of a good flightmodellbased Simulation with original Enginesounds http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/images/icons/icon9.gif

think the times of good simulations like SSI,Microprose or Janes are gone for ever.

I installed the old Battle of Britain from Empire again and noticed the same rolling soundbug in CoD when standing on ground engine shut off.....BoB was not bad and had a full stratetic part of the BoB !...hundreds of Bombers in Formation was very nice to look at

[jibo]

of course with a 10 years old computer you should stick with 10 years old games