Compare with "this" with this

[carguy_]

Originally Posted by esmiol

personally for me there are no competition between ROF and COD. ROF is a sim of WW1 plane and COD WW2 plane.

if you want go on on this line... why not compare to lock on or DCS A10?

Well, I`d play ROF some more if it had some more insight to it but right now it is quite shallow. Nothing like the coops in IL2. For the same reason my time with CloD is also limited. It gets stale after 2-3 hours. If we ever got two of those games perform coops just like in IL2, I might share the time between two of them. Now managing jest and helicopters is a whole different experience, and one I have no knowledge of whatsoever. I saw few ppl make comparisons to DCS, mainly for the reason of optimisation - since both games supposedly have a full blown physics model attached to them.

For the same reason I don`t play DCS type sims, I can`t yet manage to do the advanced CEM well. Really hard to operate it if you don`t have a spare axis.

[Blackdog_kt]

I got RoF's free, unlimited demo installed and started up the beta dynamic campaign. It's nice but to be honest, i haven't fired it up more than twice, flying a total of 5-6 sorties in two days.

It looks cool but i have a feeling i'm flying in an artist's drawing and for some reason i get the idea it's a bit shallow, like something's missing, and its engine severely limited.

CoD has more content right out of the box and a lot of tools and features to experiment with, so i spend more time on that despite the bugs because there's more to explore.

For me the biggest thing for the future is that you can't currently get a realistic amount of ground objects in RoF without bogging the sim down, but it's possible in CoD. A guy on SimHQ forums was building a map template to be used for mission building, what he did was just add objects in the FMB to populate the map but he added a whole lot of them.

Covering both sides of the channel with road blocks in villages, static objects, functional flak batteries and so on, then saving the mission without adding any aircraft to keep it as a template. He did a few test runs and said that despite having hundreds upon hundreds of objects, when he took a Tiger Moth for a short flight over his map the mission not only loaded, but it was also performing the same as when flying a QMB mission on an unpopulated map.

I think a reviewer in SimHQ said it best when he said that RoF is not for flying in WWI, but it's perfect for flying the WWI aircraft: the difference is in the amount of environment and AI/static objects and units it can comfortably load, RoF uses most of its resources for aircraft vs aircraft combat and then has invisible guns firing flak over the trenches.

[Rattlehead]

It looks good but I don't know how much fun it is really to fly a plane with less horsepower than my car.

On a side note, I installed DCS Black Shark on my PC again last night and was quite surprised to see how dated it looked compared to Clod, and I can't run Clod on full detail. (I can on Black Shark.)

Maybe it's not a fair comparison (Black Shark came out a while back) but it did make me appreciate Clod all over again. Maybe DCS A-10 would be a fairer comparison, but I don't own that yet.

[ATAG_Dutch]

That's a nice clip, but it's quite heavily post-processed as are biltongbru's for Cliffs.
RoF doesn't look as good as that on my PC at any rate.

The Bristol Fighter is a superb bit of kit though, went online with it the other night with my brother as rear gunner, communicating on skype, and had a real hoot!

I also have DCS A-10, and the landscape and water graphics do look dated to me. Not much better than Il2 in fact, if at all. It's also hellishly complex to simply get off the ground and fire a weapon!

I think it's quite healthy to discuss other game/sims on this forum and don't consider them to be 'in competition' as such. Flight sim fans will more than likely have more than one on their hard drives. I have five, seven if you count modded versions. So where's the harm?

Thanks for posting the clip!

[Thee_oddball]

people keep talking about 777 doing a ww2 sim but no one mentions the I16 you see ALL the time in ROF ...

S!

[Baron]

Originally Posted by Thee_oddball

people keep talking about 777 doing a ww2 sim but no one mentions the I16 you see ALL the time in ROF ...

S!

It has been explained why the I-16 is there. The hangar is suppose to look like a Aviation museum and RoF is of course the WWI section. The I-16 stands in the WWII section.

Has nothing to do with 777 implying a WWII sim is on the way.


And yes, the vid looks cool but it doesnt looke even close to that on my pc, and i have an up to date one. Personally i find alot of the textures, especially in the cockpit to be quite "poor" or "bland".

Not slagging RoF but they are 2 different eras etc, etc, etc.

[cre8tive Delay]

starting an Rof thread here is like starting a ManU Thread on a ManCity Forum.

I can only say: I bought ROF 2 Month after release and it was a bit of a mess. But in no way it was in a condition like CLOD is. I don't know why people here keep saying this. oh wait ... yes: this is a City forum.

Get over it people. Someone else did a better Job with another sim. IL2 is not untouchable and has to compete other sims nowadays. That said: competition is good for us simmers and the market.

Edit: oh one more thing. Q6600 @2,4 GHz Oced to 3,2. GF: 460 Gt 4 GB of Ram. ROF nearly maxed out at 1920 x 1200 4x Anti Aliasing. View Range (of forests and objects) set to medium (tht's like max before 1.019). Saying that CLOD could come anywhere near this eyecandy with a system like mine or ROF wouldn't be able to look TOP on a system like mine, is either ignoring the truth or pure and simple frustrated rof bashing. TRUTH & FACT

[JG14_Jagr]

Before we get into dead horse beating, did ANYNE who is saying "See, See, Compare it to this!" actually play, or try to play RoF when it was actually released A YEAR AGO????

[Ze-Jamz]

*Yawn*

[Derinahon]

"Compare with "this" with this"

What?