![]() |
|
|||||||
| IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover Latest instalment in the acclaimed IL-2 Sturmovik series from award-winning developer Maddox Games. |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
![]()
__________________
---------------------------------------- Asus Sabertooth Z77 i7 3770k@4.3GHz+ Noctua NH D14 cooler EVGA GTX 780 Superclocked+ACX cooler. 8GB G.Skill ripjaws DDR3-1600 Crucial M4 128GB SSD+Crucial M4 256GB SSD Seagate 750GB HDD CH Fighterstick+CH Pro pedals+Saitek X45 Win7 64bit Last edited by Jaws2002; 11-19-2012 at 01:04 AM. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
What do ya mean, " it was"???
Some people like to revel in bad predictions, it seems.
__________________
Win 7/64 Ult.; Phenom II X6 1100T; ASUS Crosshair IV; 16 GB DDR3/1600 Corsair; ASUS EAH6950/2GB; Logitech G940 & the usual suspects ![]() |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
So many negative people out there. you have bought the game already. You ain't getting a refund. One day it will be sorted out. Until then, get on with your lives.
|
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
EDIT: in fact try to get both...
__________________
![]() Gigabyte X58A-UD5 | Intel i7 930 | Corsair H70 | ATI 5970 | 6GB Kingston DDR3 | Intel 160GB G2 | Win 7 Ultimate 64 Bit |
MONITOR: Acer S243HL. CASE: Thermaltake LEVEL 10. INPUTS: KG13 Warthog, Saitek Pedals, Track IR 4. |
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
.
__________________
. ======================================== . .....--oOo-- --oOo-- HE-111 --oOo-- --oOo--..... . ======================================== -oOo- Intel i7-2600K (non-clocked) -oOo- GA-P67A -oOo- DF 85 full tower -oOo- 1000W corsair -oOo- 8 GB 1600Hz -oOo- 2 x GTX 580 1.5M (295.73) -oOo- 240 SSD -oOo- W7 64bit -oOo- PB2700 LED 2560 x 1440 6ms 60Hz -oOo- ======================================== |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Comparing CloD and RoF IMO is quite pointless to be honest.
Yes RoF runs better. But CloD visually got much better ground details, plane details, lights shadows etc etc. Plus the flight models and all the other stuff that we don't actually see working on the background. (They are still working on it) People shout stop pointing only to the down points, and actually watch the good ones. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
When the same amount of money and time has been poured into the project, it could very well do run that well. Honest question, where you around for the launch of that one? I was and i didn't buy it because of the online requirement, but kept following it in case they dropped it. They didn't and i moved on with other things, but i have a very clear memory of how things went during the first year or so after its release because i was following the news. So, do you know how long it took to get RoF to the standard you are familiar with now? 18 months. That's for a sim with a constant revenue stream due to the business model chosen and much lower demands on behalf of the engine: -planes not rendering further than 2km from you (no, not even dots, they were simply invisible outside that range to conserve resources) -an empty frontline where artillery shells explode on non-existent targets after being fired from non-existent guns (in other words, scripted events to spice things up) -an inability to handle more than 200 or so objects in a single mission...trying to run a mission on a ROF server similar to the CoD ones used on ATAG was simply no go, the whole thing crashed -all aircraft mounted guns having the same ballistic characteristics, it made no difference if you were firing spandaus or Lewis guns, the bullets, muzzle velocities, effect on DM were all the same. and so on. I remember all the complaints about the long distance ground textures turning low detail, the bad multi-core optimization, anti-aliasing not working, crashed to desktop, slow progress of updates and patches, etc etc etc. Does it sound familiar? Quote:
Also, to everyone else, keep the thread on topic. This thread is to discuss what you like about CoD and give some examples (stories/after action reports, screenshots, etc). If you want to talk about the things you don't like, open a new thread. It's not like someone is preventing you from creating new topics. If you keep derailing this one, posts will be moved/deleted. |
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Why does it look like crafp now. Aliasing, pop up trees, dumbed down textures, streaky sky, rubic's cube textures. Every "improvement" since the first release has made the graphics worse. I was really happy two releases ago. As soon as I praised it in this forum, the screwed around with the graphics quality in two successive patches that not only made it look like hell it actually slowed my FR down.
There are video options settings for people who won't upgrade their crummy machines. Why does the rest of the world have to suffer for their poor performance? Quit yer Bi chin and go mow lawns or something for a new vid card. |
![]() |
|
|