Quote:
Originally Posted by SYN_Bliss
The only person here who's ignorant is you. Fly a ROF plane straight into the ground at 300mph and the "wood and canvas" fuselage is still there. It would be shattered into a million pieces in actuality. Also showing videos of IL2 that are from versions 5 or 6 years ago to prove your point, only further proves mine. And your "one shot in a million video" was from a guy flying on easy gunnery settings.
|
I doubt the terminal velocity of any WW1 fighter even reaches 300mph but it is true that they don't make a dramatic explosion when they go in. One small flaw there I'll concede but the overall model as it applies to actually flying the plane, rather than one piddling visual effect, is superb.
Also, Il-2 stock, the un-modded version of the game was at its' prime 5 or 6 years ago. It has not progressed at all since then in terms of DM or physics.
Quote:
|
If you've ever seen a warbird come in to fast on a landing and hit the deck, the plane 9 times out of 10 explodes.
|
Only if videos you are watching are produced by Steven Spielberg. If the aircraft explodes it's not a landing, an aircraft may explode after a bad landing if the fuel tanks are ruptured but it has to be a very hard landing to do that and most people consider landings that hard to be called crashes.
Quote:
|
But I don't think that's really much of an argument considering the DM I care about is when I'm actually in the air flying.
|
Contradict yourself much? Or do you consider nose-diving into the dirt at 300mph "flying" like you consider exploding on impact "landing"?
Quote:
|
Either way it's funny for the ROF fanboys to compare their DM to 10+ year old sim. One day they might get there.
|
What is funny is to come here and, rather than seeing the actual aspects of simulation in terms of DM and physics compared in this thread, to see instead the effects of physics and damage on the aircraft themselves when the aircraft compared are as different as chalk and cheese.
Anyway, that aside there are many things that CoD could benefit from if they took a look at RoF and there are many things which RoF benefited from by looking at Il-2.
I'm not here to laud one over the other. I have bought every release from the Il-2 series since the original game and have followed it avidly, despite it's glaring short-comings, because it was the best thing going. I guess that makes me an Il-2 "fanboy" right?
I'm becoming an avid "fanboy" of RoF as well since it has raised the bar once more and I look forward to becoming an avid "fanboy" of CloD when it nudges the bar a little higher.
The reason I'm here is that I want to see Olegs' dream realized but I know that this won't be achieved by pandering to CloDs virtues and ignoring its vices, especially when many of those vices have gone over a decade with nothing but excuses to address them. Creating a simulation is a constant compromise and I want as much as anyone here to see CloD get the balance right.