CoD vs some other sims that model Kent?

[philip.ed]

David, they are comparing elements. We were told CoD would have photo-realistic terrain to beat anything ever done before.
The terrain in the video above (WoP) looks beautiful, and a lot more natural that CoD. I can't see any argument against this, because the transition of textures to villages is smooth, the location of trees and other vegation is historically accurate and extremely natural.

I'm not bashing CoD, but pointing out that there are areas of improvement. Areas of the terrain in CoD are outstanding, but does it look like England? Not really. It's like calling a chicken burger a beef burger. It's still a burger, but just not quite beef, is it?

Now I know that WoP has postage sized maps, but the elements of the terrain could all be incorporated into CoD. The textures in CoD probably need a fair amount of improvement, and so does the location of vegetation. Indeed, just cutting down the number of trees to a realistic amount would improve fps!

Do you see what I'm saying? At the end of the day, the team are doing a brilliant job, but they're Russian! They know nothing of England compared to people who have lived here all their lives. That may sound harsh, and I don't mean to sound rude, but it is true.
Obviously, this is all constructive criticism for the team to take on board.

Everything in CoD would look better if it could have the sprinkling of tiny crystals removed from it. I don't know if it's the lack of FSAA or anisotropic filtering or what, but the grainy harshness, even at 2560 x 1600, looks bloody aweful.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

David, they are comparing elements.

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.

[GuillermoZS]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

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

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by GuillermoZS

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.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

The terrain in the video above (WoP) looks beautiful, and a lot more natural that CoD. I can't see any argument against this, because the transition of textures to villages is smooth, the location of trees and other vegation is historically accurate and extremely natural.

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.

[philip.ed]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

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.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

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.

[philip.ed]

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.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

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.

Originally Posted by philip.ed

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.

Originally Posted by philip.ed

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).