Is this real ingame footage ?!!

[Madfish]

Yeah it's real footage and the map size isn't that much of an issue. You could build a map like this even for games like CloD. Using zoning e.g.
And of course it's not realistic - the console market just isn't meant for hardcore simmers...

But still, most of this is procedural and / or bought. The reason why most sim companies don't include such beautiful landscape is not because they couldn't technologically but because it'd add additional costs for the objects they need to buy. They don't just sit there and create models of buildings for years.

So yeah, there is no such thing as an engine limitation responsible for this. Usually it's just money.

[diveplane]

Originally Posted by kalimba

Quite impressive if so....

Salute !

arcade crap , might look good , but under the hood its all kinder garden physics . , aimed for console fanboys ..

[Madfish]

Speaking of fanboys, or boys rather. All "physics" in todays games are crap, if you didn't know that yet. Even those in CloD. They don't even remotely come close to the real thing.

Also looks is important as well. You think it's so easy to make games look good? Fine, then how about making hardcore sims look that good mh?

Both achievements are impressive. And unless there is a combination of great graphics and awesome physics (not just fake ones) it's all just crap.

Originally Posted by cheesehawk

Really? You'd trade being able to fly for over an hour and not recrossing your path for a map barely 30kmx30km?

To each his own I guess...

Fly over an hour ? Gosh..I'd like to have that luxury.....BUt seriously, when I see
cartoonish houses and building puping out at 300 meters surrounded by empty grey streets , I wish I had this kind of quality when flying over London.
And how big do you need the map to be to have fun chasing ennemy planes in a dogfight ? And why is it not possible to have both detailed and large maps ?

Salute !

Originally Posted by diveplane

arcade crap , might look good , but under the hood its all kinder garden physics . , aimed for console fanboys ..

So you are saying that COD would not be a better game with this kind of graphic quality...Interesting...

Salute

[Madfish]

Originally Posted by kalimba

Fly over an hour ? Gosh..I'd like to have that luxury.....BUt seriously, when I see
cartoonish houses and building puping out at 300 meters surrounded by empty grey streets , I wish I had this kind of quality when flying over London.
And how big do you need the map to be to have fun chasing ennemy planes in a dogfight ? And why is it not possible to have both detailed and large maps ?

Salute !

It's pointless to debate with them over such things as map size. Airbus hobby pilots would laugh at their faces and ask them if they're insane - after all what good would it do for them to have a tiny map like the one we have right now?

What they don't realize is that it's not the size that matters but the application
But without wanting to investigate further into the reasons behind their "size issues" I say we leave it at that.

For those who are actually thinking about things for just a second it is clear that: A game that provides a scenario which fits into a certain map size it's unnecessary to have a bigger map. For some games that's just a little board, others might have a city, others a part of a few countries and other games need the whole globe or a huge galaxy as the playground.
That's the reason why CloD doesn't have a world map - it doesn't need a bigger map. And if there was a game that required a bigger map the developers would make a bigger map. Simple as that. For us

[seaeye]

Got to remember this is a game, and from my memory of past Ace Combat releases, a game with a good story.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTpqgXBhNsg

Originally Posted by Madfish

It's pointless to debate with them over such things as map size. Airbus hobby pilots would laugh at their faces and ask them if they're insane - after all what good would it do for them to have a tiny map like the one we have right now?

What they don't realize is that it's not the size that matters but the application
But without wanting to investigate further into the reasons behind their "size issues" I say we leave it at that.

For those who are actually thinking about things for just a second it is clear that: A game that provides a scenario which fits into a certain map size it's unnecessary to have a bigger map. For some games that's just a little board, others might have a city, others a part of a few countries and other games need the whole globe or a huge galaxy as the playground.
That's the reason why CloD doesn't have a world map - it doesn't need a bigger map. And if there was a game that required a bigger map the developers would make a bigger map. Simple as that. For us

Well, you are right...this is always the same thing on this forum...Somebody comes up with a good exemple of a nice game production, and the first reaction is " this is crap, this is arcade, this is this and that..."
The truth is COD is quite average looking and not photorealistic at all by "outsiders" standards. And why not say : COD would be a killer with those graphics !!! That is all...

Salute!

[triumph1949]

i get slightly, only slightly perturbed, by comparisons between games and sims. particularly flight simulations. which have specific problems of theyre own..

to apply photoreal images to cliffs..would be possible, if the photos...and they have to be fit for purpose...were in fact available...recent arieal photo mapping wont do....and they cost quite a bit to obtain...

for modern photoreal, alternatives are available..but they only really are of use for small areas...modern airfields, etc...

if the right type of colour corrected photomapping, was avilable for the cliffs area..carried out in 1940...and not costing a huge sum of cash to use..it would be possible...BUT...the first question would be, what about the terrain mesh...how accurate would you like it...say 10cm....you would need a cray computer to run it on, and thats just the terrain mesh...

building a small fictional area is easy...building a high quality photoreal london is entirely possible...i have such athing on my system...a modern london...most peoples pc cant cope with it...but modelling 1940 london..it would require completely different techniques..

a simulation is not a game...a game is not a simulation...high bandwidth internet, cloud based simulations,games. will in time help to improve this..

and while ime ranting...all information, fibre,cable,etc all travels at the same speed....but have varying bandwidth....the electromagnetic wave that carries info down a copper cable, travels at pretty much the same speed as info down a fibre optic cable...its just that light has a theoretical infinite number of phase angles...hope this helps the erudite and gentlemanly discussion..jim