CoD vs some other sims that model Kent?

[Cobra8472]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

If no calculations have to be made until an impact occurs, how does the computer determine that an impact has occurred? Magic?

Instanced collision physics with proper performance is nothing new.. Please don't try to say that having colliders for each tree in CoD is impossible, because it is not, has been done before, and there are implementations and examples of this dating back tons of years.

If you take away the fancy color grading in Wings of Prey, it is quite obvious their engine is more streamlined and better with regards to rendering, performance and quality. One must also note that they're probably not using the most high-res textures possible, due to console memory overhead and managment problems.

Regarding Haze;

If you notice in every single photo you've posted, there is a fine light blue haze. This is air particles scattering light.

WoP has a better implementation of this than CoD. I'd actually venture and say that CoD viewdistance is too far as it is right now. Usually there is more haze.

Once again, distance based exponential height fog is nothing new, nothing complicated, and nothing performance taxing.

The green tint of the haze you see in WoP, is simply the post-processing colour grading being done on the fly. If you took it off and tweaked some of the Haze shader RGB values,. you can turn it light blue and 100% realistic.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by Cobra8472

Instanced collision physics with proper performance is nothing new.. Please don't try to say that having colliders for each tree in CoD is impossible, because it is not, has been done before, and there are implementations and examples of this dating back tons of years.

I never said it was impossible. I have no idea how you got that from anything I have posted. All I asked is how the computer can detect a collision without doing any calculations (as Helicon described).

If you take away the fancy color grading in Wings of Prey, it is quite obvious their engine is more streamlined and better with regards to rendering, performance and quality. One must also note that they're probably not using the most high-res textures possible, due to console memory overhead and managment problems.

None of which changes the fact that WoP looks like green puke.

Regarding Haze;

If you notice in every single photo you've posted, there is a fine light blue haze. This is air particles scattering light.

WoP has a better implementation of this than CoD. I'd actually venture and say that CoD viewdistance is too far as it is right now. Usually there is more haze.

No, it doesn't. That isn't even a close call. The horizon in the photographs I posted looks very similar to CoD. It looks NOTHING like WoPuke.

[philip.ed]

David, can you show us this 'puke' on every-map in the game? Whilst filters are used, you're being quite extreme in your descriptions.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

David, can you show us this 'puke' on every-map in the game? Whilst filters are used, you're being quite extreme in your descriptions.

Of course I'm being extreme. There's no actual puke in the screenshots. But they all have an overwhelming puke green hue. Just look through this thread.

Even if you get rid of the puke green hue the problem is not completely fixed. WoP simulates extremely hazy conditions. Southern England during the BoB was not that hazy. From everything I have read the weather during the battle was unusually nice.

[philip.ed]

That is true. But my point is that the green filter isn't used on every map in the game, and some maps are quite stunning.

Previously, I posted a link to windlight-an application which adds realistic lighting conditions to games.
Check it out, IMHO it looks realistic, and would work great with CoD if the two could be merged.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

That is true. But my point is that the green filter isn't used on every map in the game, and some maps are quite stunning.

I checked out several maps. They were all very hazy.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Dave, I usually stay well clear of this topic as it comes up time after time after.....ad nauseum.

Whilst I described WoP as 'viewing the world through cheap sunglasses', I agree with you. It looks like green puke.

And I admire your tenacity on this forum. I'd've given up long ago.

I also agree with phillip (hello mate), that the lack of hedgerows in CoD is disappointing.

But I've just got back from the CoD 'Cross Country' mission from Netheravon to Montdidier, with the time for startup set at 5.00am, and the realism I experienced was far better than any flight sim (or console game) I've previously 'flown' over the last twenty-odd years.

I'd go as far as to say 'a different league'.

Yes I have RoF, yes I have FSX with UK Real Scenery and GEX, yes I have various versions of IL2.

Whether on take-off, at 10000 ft, or on the let-down into Montdidier, I could almost smell the air. (I just had to have the cockpit canopy open all the way).

I wouldn't go near WoP simply because every shot I've seen looks like it was washed along with the baby's nappie, and because I've read the reviews.

So good luck Dave, I've a feeling this comparison of apples and pears will continue for some time yet!

Cheers!

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by Dutch_851

Dave, I usually stay well clear of this topic as it comes up time after time after.....ad nauseum.

Whilst I described WoP as 'viewing the world through cheap sunglasses', I agree with you. It looks like green puke.

And I admire your tenacity on this forum. I'd've given up long ago.

I also agree with phillip (hello mate), that the lack of hedgerows in CoD is disappointing.

But I've just got back from the CoD 'Cross Country' mission from Netheravon to Montdidier, with the time for startup set at 5.00am, and the realism I experienced was far better than any flight sim (or console game) I've previously 'flown' over the last twenty-odd years.

I'd go as far as to say 'a different league'.

Yes I have RoF, yes I have FSX with UK Real Scenery and GEX, yes I have various versions of IL2.

Whether on take-off, at 10000 ft, or on the let-down into Montdidier, I could almost smell the air. (I just had to have the cockpit canopy open all the way).

I wouldn't go near WoP simply because every shot I've seen looks like it was washed along with the baby's nappie, and because I've read the reviews.

So good luck Dave, I've a feeling this comparison of apples and pears will continue for some time yet!

Cheers!

None of this is relevant, we are not comparing the games, we are comparing what they display and how much that display effects performance. With some polishing COD will look great, but currently in general it looks mediocre and performes horribly. Also cities are a disaster.

Selective pov ftw right? Echo chamber..........

[ATAG_Dutch]

Originally Posted by Heliocon

None of this is relevant.

Erm, no offence but the original post was a comparison of screenshots for realism.

I posted my comments based on an assessment of realism, together with an agreement with Dave that WoP looks like 'Green Puke'.

I didn't post anything connected with the technicalities of programming or collision models because I know nothing about those topics.

I know what I like though.

[warbirds]

Ok what we have is a pro photographer with a good eye for detail and color saying WOP is baby dudu and I agree with him. Now if you are looking at WOP on a small monitor that most likely has not been color corrected than it might look good to you.

As a graphic artist I can say that COD looks better to me than WOP and yes I have used both sims. The haze and green tint is, of course, used by the developers to look like old photos of the period. It works for some and for others it does not. I personally like the textures in COD and find them more like the real textures I see when flying.

Not really a matter of which is better, just a matter of taste.