CoD vs some other sims that model Kent?

[GnigruH]

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.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by GnigruH

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.

[slick118]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

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.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by slick118

It does.

Not here on planet Earth.

[GloDark7]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

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.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by GloDark7

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.

[sigur_ros]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

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.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yunSRfnsVck

[philip.ed]

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.

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

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)

Philip, I hate to break it to you, but you do not speak for all the people in England. I have seen plenty of people from England who think that CoD does a pretty good job of simulating England's landscape.

And your clams that WoPuke does a better job are utterly ridiculous because YOU HAVE NO F-ING SCREENSHOTS WHICH SUPPORT YOUR VIEWS. IF WINGS OF PUKE DID A BETTER JOB YOU WOULD POST SCREENSHOTS WHICH SUPPORT THAT CLAIM. YOU HAVEN'T, SO PLEASE STOP PRETENDING THAT IT IS AN ACCEPTED FACT. IT ISN'T.

[Heliocon]

Not reading all this crap haywards posts because it doesnt seem to end - but keep in mind even if WOP looks worse than cod (I think its situational atm) the fact is that wop performes super smooth maxed out on really mediocre systems. COD does not.

Also the pic of wop is taken with low graphics settings (I notice a lack of decent AA).