![]() |
|
IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games. |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Lasts ones, please don't hate me.
I really hope IL2 COD really becomes a great sim but it really needs a lot of work at least in the graphical terrain aspect. I hope this thread will help people and developers to see what IL2 COD is lacking of. [IMG] ![]() [IMG] ![]() The real thing. ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Thanks for this effort Jt-medina: I think it gives some good substance to this thread
![]() ![]() Last edited by biltongbru; 05-22-2011 at 07:30 PM. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
![]() You are so right and like your picture examples clearly show, CloD has some serious gfx problems, that hopefully will be solved within reasonable time. The immersion has to be there (Am I the only one to find landscape graphics of CloD equal or just slightly better than the original il-2 gfx's?). By the way, I flew over Berlin last week (in RL, that is) and did the same in WoP this morning. I have to say, I was baffled and astonished by how real and authentic that map seemed. The light settings and colors are almost perfect and from certain angles, it almost seem photorealistic - like being there again (and for real). Also, the smoke colomns in WoP are far better and more realistic than those in CloD (hopefully something Luthier and team will change over time)... |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
*gasp* the vegetation in WoP looks strikingly realistic from medium-far range...
all in all i just hope the 1C team picks up some ideas to improve CoD on what can be done about the issues raised in this thread, it has become better already, i really noticed the better lightning in roads with the last fix, as their lack of definition was something i wasn't particularly pleased with... so with the potential CoD has shown, upgrading or tuning some graphics options is a must-be effort. i know there's a lot of features not seen waiting to be activated, like seashore waves, transparent water, flocks of seagulls, clouds and weather system, effective night light and so on... i see a long road ahead, i'm hoping the team takes this as constructive criticism and don't drop the ball on us (as not everyone come here to flood the threads with smileys) Last edited by Jatta Raso; 05-22-2011 at 07:44 PM. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
A huge improvement would come from simply replacing the lime-green trees with darker ones. Better still if a decent atmospheric haze could be introduced that made them look even darker in the distance. A further improvement would be to make the tree foliage come down a bit closer to the ground and hide the silver-grey tree trunks. In the photos of the real world (and in WoP, for that matter) tree trunks are hardly visible from the air and look very dark if they can be seen. Field colours should be fixable too, but it may need a texture artist to go over the terrain almost field by field. I'm still rather surprised that they could have got such basic features of a real-world landscape so wrong. We've ended up with very nice 3D models (as good as RoF's) flying over a landscape that is arguably worse than many found in IL-2 1946. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Another aspect in the quest for realism with Clod is that vegetation is a dynamic entity and display movement with windy conditions. I can just imagine the enormous computing power needed for this; every tree leaf and every blade of grass; maybe not necessary at this stage?
![]() |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
I saw some pictures from 6 months ago and they looked way better than it looks right now. I'll give you a few examples. Shots I kept on my harddrive. [IMG] ![]() [IMG] ![]() ![]() ![]() People can say they look cartonish but I loved them. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Hi guys,
in recent past I followed up for 50 pages an analogue discussion and I promised to myself to not get involved in wop_vs_Clod_landscape cause at the end its just matter of personal taste, judgement, it is difficult to bring someone else on your thinking or just share a minimum of objectivity...and so on....but I admit CloD landscape is the more intriguing key of this sim. And I pretend to be get 'involved' by a 2011 Sim...The overall looking 4me must be heavily tuned I like so much WoP, especially the way WoP represent the landscape and how natural elements are merged together...(let go green filter issue and bla bla...).. Having said that... Me too I don't like too much the overall lime-green looking of CloD...it is not convincing but...I looked in my archive and I would like to share some picts taken in july 2008 at Duxford...lime-green is not so fanciful I say..look DSC_0306.JPG DSC_0665.JPG The pict are for sure overexposed but hues are there! I well remember how much the grass green was reflected on the under surfaces of Airplanes; specially the spit with sky belly; even when they come at landing, at 5-6 meters of altitude, this green was so violent to enlight the under surfaces. Look at the spit flyby..it was at 15 mt height..and look at the medium sea grey how much is influenced by the grass! Cheers Last edited by pupaxx; 05-22-2011 at 09:10 PM. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#10
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
The thing which people are forgetting is the difference between the CloD and WoP terrains.
CloD has realistic 3-D trees (which look amazing up close, and not too bad from a distance (not focusing on colour here) whereas WoP uses trees which have a 2-D image which revolves as you move around them (very similar if not identical to Il-2's trees). Indeed, WoP doesn't model 3-D/2-D grass, or indeed realisticall created buildings. But this is one of the reasons why WoP is so easy to play over and FPS friendly. Indeed, RoF uses similar tree models to Il-2, and they work very well for flying. So maybe, CloD was just being too ambitious, or the right intentions were there, it just wasn't pulled off correctly. I think the latter. |
![]() |
|
|