Quote:
Originally Posted by Tanner
Not to be a complete tool, but I just went back to rewatch some of my game recordings from Wings of Prey from the end of 2009 and I can't believe how amazing the game looks especially given my crappy, obsolete-when-it-was-bought PC. And this is only with the texture settings on high which is the third setting below maximum settings.
How is it that a game studio I had never heard of at the time created such an awesome-looking game, but a game studio that I have been aware of for the past ten years can't seem to produce a compelling visual experience or even a functional game?
Not my videos but still frigging amazing:
Notice no weird texture or object pop-ins. You can see buildings for miles and miles.
|
Wellllllll the thing is there that you have a game with minuscule maps for a flight sim, oh and also a 2001 flight model and no damage model at all to speak of. There are just going to be way, way more resources to put towards the graphics.
Don't get me wrong those guys put some nice visuals in that game, though they are more cinematic than realistic.
Anyway look at pictures of IL-2 in 2001 and then load it up and look at it now. Give CloD some time and some Moore's Law action and things will get nuts. Heh of course we will see the graphics improve slowly over time so it will never drop our jaws, until we look at 3 year old screenshots.
03-26-2011, 11:31 PM
Hybrid Mode
