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
  #1  
Old 05-06-2011, 01:51 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigPickle View Post
i think WoP is closer to simulating the realistic horticultural model of English countryside.
The closest i have seen to real life in a screen shot was a RoF screen.
It's too bad that you kind find any screenshots supporting that view.

As much as I like RoF, it's not closer to real live than CoD. The colors are too washed out. It's better than WoP, but not CoD.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-06-2011, 01:59 PM
GnigruH GnigruH is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Poland
Posts: 129
Default

Quote:
Could you post some screenshots of the WW2 flight sim that you think CoD's graphics are "not as good as it could be"? Thanks!
Okay, for the last time before putting you on my 'ignore list' I shall give you a clear example of what I've been talking about.

I said CloDo graphic is not good as it could be, right? Now..
Let's say anti-aliasing..
2x looks good
8x looks better
in Clodo 8x doesn't work like it should
therefore...
THE GRAPHICS DOESN'T LOOK AS GOOD AS IT COULD!

Yeah, that's it... and I hope you won't ask me for a proof that 8x doesn't work, and you won't be stating that it in fact works. Don't care anyway, cos' now you are ignored.

Last edited by GnigruH; 05-06-2011 at 02:09 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-06-2011, 02:03 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GnigruH View Post
Okay, for the last time before putting you on my ignore list I shall give you a clear example of what I've been talking about.

I said CloDo graphic is not good as it could be, right? Now..
Let's say anti-aliasing..
2x looks good
8x looks better
in Clodo 8x doesn't work like it should
therefore...
THE GRAPHICS DOESN'T LOOK AS GOOD AS IT COULD!

Yeah, that's it... and I hope you won't ask me for a proof that 8x doesn't work, and you won't be stating that it in fact works. Won't see that anyway, cos' now you are ignored.
Do you actually think I care if you ignore me? That's pretty funny.

In any case, no one is arguing that CoD could not look better. Of course it could look better. The issue is that lots of people are claiming that WoP looks better than CoD, and that is absurd.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-06-2011, 02:28 PM
slick118 slick118 is offline
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
Do you actually think I care if you ignore me? That's pretty funny.

In any case, no one is arguing that CoD could not look better. Of course it could look better. The issue is that lots of people are claiming that WoP looks better than CoD, and that is absurd.
It does.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 05-06-2011, 02:29 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by slick118 View Post
It does.
Not here on planet Earth.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 05-06-2011, 03:32 PM
GloDark7 GloDark7 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 32
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
The issue is that lots of people are claiming that WoP looks better than CoD, and that is absurd.
WoP clearly does look better than CoD. Cockpits no, but all other graphical elements yes.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 05-06-2011, 03:36 PM
David Hayward David Hayward is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 1,183
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GloDark7 View Post
WoP clearly does look better than CoD. Cockpits no, but all other graphical elements yes.
Not here in the real world. CoD is clearly closer to real world color, lighting, and terrain. The screenshots posted on this thread are pretty definitive. If there are screenshots showing that WoP is better, they haven't been posted here.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 05-06-2011, 04:26 PM
sigur_ros sigur_ros is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 74
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward View Post
Not here in the real world. CoD is clearly closer to real world color, lighting, and terrain. The screenshots posted on this thread are pretty definitive. If there are screenshots showing that WoP is better, they haven't been posted here.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 05-06-2011, 04:45 PM
philip.ed's Avatar
philip.ed philip.ed is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,766
Default

David, for the last time, people in England (I'll put this in caps just so you take note) ARE EXPLAINING TO YOU THE FACT THAT COD HAS A DISTINCT LACK OF:
-CLOSE TREE SPACINGS
-HEDGEROWS
-DARKERS TREES WHICH IS WHAT WOULD BE SEEN FROM ALTITUDE (OR, INDEED, ANY DISTANCES)

Colour is another matter, but these are all features of the English landscape which make it look like England, rather than another country.
And, in this sense, WoP largely does a better job! The evidence is clear in these topics. There are no randomly placed trees in RoF, or long lines of sparcely spaced trees which is rarely seen in the English landscape.

The Colours in CoD are largely good, as are the lovely landscape objects. But these features are poorly modelled in CoD's current state and need improving.

I don't understand what you can't understand about this?
You are not English, I take it? So have you ever flown over England, or experienced its landscape on a regular basis? Because clearly you are just blindly stating your faith in CoD, without really expressing how, although CoD has many great areas, it is far from perfect in showing the English landscape.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 05-06-2011, 04:46 PM
Houndstone Hawk Houndstone Hawk is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Sat in front the PC
Posts: 272
Default

FSX through the eyes of the thread starter.... (1st image) followed by 3 of mine from a kent fly-around last night.

It's my opinion that FSX is always going to be far superior out of the 3 (FSX, WOP & COD) because of its sheer volume of 3rd party payware (although the only addons I am currently using are Horizon's Generation X VFR scenery & the A2A Spit).
Having said that, COD does what it does very, very well. It's a deeply immersive combat sim & very ambitious with its environment. WOP can look good at times but the maps are miniscule; COD is loading up a huge theatre each time we play.
Sorry if this has already been said; I haven't fully read the entire thread.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg cliffsofdoverfsx[1].jpg (543.3 KB, 25 views)
File Type: jpg fsx-kent-01.jpg (122.0 KB, 26 views)
File Type: jpg fsx-kent-02.jpg (187.3 KB, 25 views)
File Type: jpg fsx-kent-03.jpg (198.5 KB, 27 views)
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 06:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.