Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover

IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #401  
Old 05-05-2011, 06:40 PM
philip.ed's Avatar
philip.ed philip.ed is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
By the way, that simply is not true. People have posted the CoD maps. They are an amazing match to the real photographs from 1945. No one has even attempted similar comparisons for WoP.
Actually, you are wrong. Cast your mind back about two years ago, when the BoP forum first surfaced. The Dev's posted b&w phots of dover docks from the 40's period, and showed pitcures of the terrain which perfectly matched every single field! People could see their houses! The attention to detail was extremely impressive...so impressive, that Oleg asked for this work, but they refused to give it to him, which was rather horrible.

Seriously mate, you're arguments are wearing thin. Accept that whilst CoD is overall a lot more impressive technically than WoP, there are elements of WoP which are extremely good. You're arguments are not constructive enough to offer any real credibility IMHO.

And every element we have examined is not better in CoD! Look at the layout of fields and hedges and trees in WoP. It's realistic. I know that CoD's trees look nicer, there is 3-D looking grass (which could be improved to RoF standards IMHO) the buildings are beautiful; but there are elements which make one think: "ah! This is England" and CoD just lacks that 'Englishness' to make the effect poignant.
Reply With Quote
  #402  
Old 05-05-2011, 06:51 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philip.ed View Post
Seriously mate, you're arguments are wearing thin. Accept that whilst CoD is overall a lot more impressive technically than WoP, there are elements of WoP which are extremely good. You're arguments are not constructive enough to offer any real credibility IMHO.
Look, there have been screenshots and maps posted on this very thread which show that CoD does an amazing job of simulating the countryside. It's not just my "thin arguments", it's actual side by side screenshots. No one has even attempted that for WoP. As long as no one attempts it, it's people who are arguing for WoP whose arguments are wearing thin.

If you think actual screenshots and maps are not "credible", I would like to hear your standards for credibility.
Reply With Quote
  #403  
Old 05-05-2011, 07:00 PM
philip.ed's Avatar
philip.ed philip.ed is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,766
Default

I think I made it clear that pictures have been posted showing field for field matchings in WoP (although thinking about this, I can't understand why some tiles repeat in areas...)

but yes, pictures showing this have not been posted in this topic.
But that still doesn't get past what I'm saying about the layout of the fields and the hedges and trees.
Clearly from all shots posted, this is better in WoP as it is more like England.

I think that, overall, CoD is better, but you have to understand, that areas of WoP have their merits.
Reply With Quote
  #404  
Old 05-05-2011, 07:10 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by philip.ed View Post
I think I made it clear that pictures have been posted showing field for field matchings in WoP (although thinking about this, I can't understand why some tiles repeat in areas...)
They repeat because the devs are cheating. CoD does it too, but it isn't as easy to spot. And I haven't seen any WoP screenshots showing matching fields.

Quote:
Originally Posted by philip.ed View Post
but yes, pictures showing this have not been posted in this topic.
But that still doesn't get past what I'm saying about the layout of the fields and the hedges and trees.
Clearly from all shots posted, this is better in WoP as it is more like England.
NO! It is not clear at all. You just said that "pictures showing this have not been posted in this topic". You can't follow that up by saying something is clear when PICTURES SHOWING THIS HAVE NOT BEEN POSTED.

Quote:
Originally Posted by philip.ed View Post
I think that, overall, CoD is better, but you have to understand, that areas of WoP have their merits.
What sort of merit? CoD appears to be superior in every comparable metric except bugs (and the bugs will be fixed).
Reply With Quote
  #405  
Old 05-05-2011, 08:12 PM
RocketDog RocketDog is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 134
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
Look, there have been screenshots and maps posted on this very thread which show that CoD does an amazing job of simulating the countryside.
Well, I posted photographs I have taken while flying over the South of England that show CloD actually does a pretty mediocre job of representing the real life terrain. Amazing it is not.
Reply With Quote
  #406  
Old 05-05-2011, 08:25 PM
W0ef W0ef is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 148
Default

Totally OT but the map is the UK and the music is totally in theme!

X-Plane 9.x scenery, link from SimHQ:


Last edited by W0ef; 05-05-2011 at 08:38 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #407  
Old 05-05-2011, 08:26 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RocketDog View Post
Well, I posted photographs I have taken while flying over the South of England that show CloD actually does a pretty mediocre job of representing the real life terrain. Amazing it is not.
I found your photographs and it appears that you think the CoD colors are washed out. Oddly, most of the complainers in here seem to prefer the washed out look.

In any case, I didn't seen anything about the terrain in your photographs that looked all that different from CoD. What's the difference?
Reply With Quote
  #408  
Old 05-05-2011, 08:34 PM
GuillermoZS GuillermoZS is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Vigo, Spain
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
Which is completely irrelevant when you admit that they are 2 different types of games.

Besides, every element we have examined has looked better in CoD.
What is irrelevant is the type of game when you are comparing graphics
Reply With Quote
  #409  
Old 05-05-2011, 08:42 PM
philip.ed's Avatar
philip.ed philip.ed is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,766
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post

NO! It is not clear at all. You just said that "pictures showing this have not been posted in this topic". You can't follow that up by saying something is clear when PICTURES SHOWING THIS HAVE NOT BEEN POSTED.
Pictures showing comparisons with areas of england in WoP have not been posted in this thread.
Pictures showing the representation of vegetation compared to photos of modern-day Britain have (largely, the layout is quite similar to that of the 1940's. see here:



a modern picture: similar to the above, in many respects, and again, more similar in LAYOUT to WoP than CoD



please, read everything I write, don't be selective.
Reply With Quote
  #410  
Old 05-05-2011, 08:47 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GuillermoZS View Post
What is irrelevant is the type of game when you are comparing graphics
Type of game is everything. A computer has limited resources. If you simulate more detailed engine management you have fewer resources to keep track of trees and buildings.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.