landscape of official storm of war trailer
 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GtsNqaE1yU

yesterday i saw this trailer for the first time, and i have to confess, i was really impressed by the landscape storm of war had back then.
i was told that the trailer was made in 2007 and used the old il2 engine.
what i really dont understand, how is it possible that the landscape in this trailer is sooo much superiour to the one we have now.

i dont want to citizise the devs with this thread.and i dont want to start another compare thread.thats not my intention.
what i would like to know is, how long would it take for the devs, to change the current landscape, so that it would resemble the one of the trailer.
in my opinion the former landscape looks way more natural and convincing, at least for me.
especially the colours and the placement of trees and hedgegrows are in my focus.

is it possible, with this amount of staff, to make such huge changes to the landscape?is it plausible that we will see something like that one day?or is it an unrealistic expectation?
i dont have no glue about programing so i thought i would ask.

ps: i know there are far more important things right now.

All i want from that landscape is the colors and trees.
The colors are spot on perfect. Luthier who ever made the colors on that vid, get him back please.

Im sure the topography and other things are much better on our new landscape but please the colors and tree placement are perfect for England.

If you like that vid, you might want to look up the Mysticpuma vid too.(il have a look round for it)

here it is...


http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?...44906641648934

Something, somewhere went horribly wrong.

RedToo.

yes it looks good, reminds me of WOP:)

Jesus Christ almighty you guys should campaign for a whinging sport to be added to the Olympics I am sure we would have the bronze, silver, and gold medal winners on this forum... Surely you have something better to do than constantly bitching....

I never saw the point in crying over something that don't exist. This has been beaten to death a hundred times.

You don't have it, you won't have it, you'll never get it!!!!

The thing is, it did exist that's the point.

I've given up with expectation for this sim for at least another 12-18 months. I'm sure by then it will be absolutely brilliant or it won't be here at all. I sure do hope it is the earlier.

Here hoping.

CS. :)

The thing is;it DID exist,that trailer based on the il-2 engine,(is it?)somehow looked better than CoD,especially the terrain,so yeah what happened?

I'm curious to know what happened to the German locos and railway vehicles all I can find in the FMB objects are British tank engines, unless someone knows better, I wanted to make missions attacking German supply trains etc:confused:

As developing progress and new things are added like physics and other things, stuff has to be balanced. Add some and remove some. It's the way games are built. We just can't have it all and everyone want something different. It's been said a hundred times that the engine is built for the future. In i a few years we might have it all and be able to run it with good FPS. As of now there's no point bringing up all these things as we probably won't be able to have it playable with reasonable FPS with all the goodies.
I rather have great plane physics and models than trees blowing in the wind or water splashing on the beaches. The colors is another matter which is a matter of taste, more or less.

I'm not bashing heads here. It's just how it's done.

The bolded part make me gives me a bone chill.

Using "new" technlogies like WPF and WCF doesn't mean the game is made for the future: Multithreading, PhysX, DX11 and 64bit are. Modular applications (with SDK) are the future, where you add planes, tanks, ships and buildings to a WORKING physic/graphic/sound engine.
Not adding a incomplete physic/graphic/sound engine to a pair of well made planes.

We can only wait, but this was not designed as a game for the future.. sure it wasn't at the Euro release.

The leading video example most certainly did not imply that purchasers of this sim should expect to wait years to see in game examples of what was demonstrated in the video!!

I personally appreciate seeing this video again because it reminds me of why I was so excited about this (then pending) release and why I had such high expectations. I'm curious now, are you a member of the 1C development team? or have you at least had some experience in the process of programming and game development? You certainly imply authority and understanding of the process in your last reply.

Unless you are a member of the development team or are close to them your words are simply opinion at best, as are the rest in this forum, good, bad or indifferent!

Personally I believe this is one of the best threads in recent weeks that actually brings the point home for a lot of fans. Where the hell did all this promise go???

Jesus, I and many others parted with our hard earned coin based on this level of promise, when the bloody hell am I going to get what I paid for!!

Yep, I get it... apparently it's a year or so from now.

I support everyone in this forum bringing up their gripes over and over again, because it is what the developers need until they come back with a suitable solution for everyone that has purchased this.

CS. :)

+1, nicely worded buddy and just as I feel.

We may well be able to run it in the future, but it already looks outdated 'the landscape that is'. The idea that this game was built for 2013 or whatever Luthier said was just rhetoric, if they ever do apply DX11 to this game which i think again is never going to happen then we might start seeing something that is on a parallel to what can be done with modern day software coding and hardware.

Because it had too many limitations, rivers were all wide, vertical cliffs were not possible, definition was low, etc etc.

At some point you have to understand that the IL2 engine is old and cannot continue to be upgraded efficiently, thus they built a new one.

You should be able to mod the il2 engine to look like that, but I suspect you'll come to the same conclusions as Oleg's team did, that it was time to start over with the ability to look forward again, it's probably not coincidence that RoF dropped the IL2 engine.

Yes but something, somewhere went horribly wrong. The existence of Spitgirl is evidence of this.

RedToo.

In the campaign department yes, personally I think CoD's landscape looks great, it just needs some tweaks so that it gels together better.

lol!!

Is she real... I heard she only appeared in your nightmares just like Freddy!

???I see a complete coastline with cliffs,complete villages packed with houses,very detailed fields bordered with treelines...

It is annoying to see the obvious superiority of the earlier terrain. I'd never seen the MysticPuma vid before, so thanks for posting - look at the terrain around the 15:50 mark - looks good.

I don't think this is valid at all - the current COD has as many or even more trees than the earlier version - number and resource usage isn't the point. 'Artistic' use of the elements is where they have screwed up so royally.

The early version demonstrates conclusively that they knew HOW to make a realistic, believable representation of the terrain. My guess is that when the early version was binned they either didn't have enough time (or maybe the services of a talented enough graphical artist) to recreate the authentic look.
The current map has for me all the indications of a rushed job.

I'm aware that different people have different opinions and that some feel the terrain issue is comparatively unimportant. But, I'm definitely not one of them. I've tried to get into the game and give it a chance, but the poor terrain is too much of a turn-off. It's the main reason why I've shelved the game for now. I can also say that unless it is fixed and improved in the future i don't think I will have the desire to get back into the game.

Hopefully it will be, by the community using the SDK if not the devs.

Cliffs aren't vertical was the issue I beleive we were told, by definition I mean the mesh, ie we now have a high resolution mesh that allows for fine elevation changes rather than the actual textures applied.

Hell, did you spot that as well? I was starting to think it was just me...

Look from 14.30 to 16.30 = perfect English landscape right there...nice FPS...no flickering shadows..lots and lots of trees placed to look organic and natural.

I think if modern lighting system is removed from CloD the colours would look the same as in the video, i.e. darker.

We do not have enough clouds or high-altitude overcast ingame to reproduce normal weather and therefore have colours more natural for rare bright sunny days in mid summer when atmosphere is absolutely transparent for sunlight.

When we have hardware to run the weather system or it is optimised enough the lighting would not be as bright and landscape colours would change naturally.

On sunny days colours become very acid. Just Google it
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/--kt3jjW13s...inKurogane.jpg

http://www.wallcoo.net/nature/sz194-...A094_photo.jpg

http://www.wallcoo.net/nature/sz194-...A089_photo.jpg

Open in separate tabs and compare to this or any other CloD screenshot https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-r...5-12_00061.jpg

Thus, I would not dramatize current state of landscape colours based on personal perceptions. Perception depends on what you compare the colours with. Older games just do not have as advanced lighting system and may look darker even without high-alt clouds\overcast which is wrong.

You guys take the biscuit, never ever have I met such a bunch moaning speculating buffoons.

There are countless games that had tech videos that have looked much much better than the final product and if you think the landscape looks bad then you clearly have not spent much time playing. I agree that the colours at certain times are too bright but it's a flying sim not a sodding 1940 Britain sim GROW UP.

The Internet everyone is apparently an expert :rolleyes:

Thats what i keep saying, there will always be: "but, but, but"!!! from people who are never ever satisfied, always.


P.S Someone should alert all the monitor manufactures, there seems to be a all out epidemic bug causing the calibration feature on the screens to conk out.

Ataros, for me the issue is more about the overall believability of the landscape and specifically placement of trees, though colour could be improved too - and will probably be the easier fix.

JG52Krupi - I was waiting for the 'it's a flight-sim, not a 1940s terrain sim' line to come up. As i've already said, different people put different priorities on things. But a flight-sim has to simulate more than just the aircraft and their systems to a good standard - it has to create a believable world for them to fly in. So a flight-sim set in 1940s Britain does unavoidably have to be something of a '1940 Britain sim'.

It doesn't need to be perfect or to prioritise the terrain above the aircraft and the flying, but it should be believable. For me the early version was and the current version isn't. Personal opinion. Sorry if you disagree, but no need to start name-calling.

WTF are you talking about? Did you even bother to read the leading thread?

Speculation is something that is derived from uncertainty, there is no such uncertainty implied in the video in the leading thread, it is clearly implied that these features would be available with purchase of product.

Jesus help me, how many more of you misguided fools are out there?

CS. :)

Umm...Old sailors say " It's bad luck to change the name of a boat".Well, with the game maybe that was not all bad luck.

Personally, if i see, everyday, what some people here claims how Britain, grass on a sunny day etc look like (im pretty sure grass on a sunny day anywhere in the northern hemisphere look pretty much the same) , i would have my eyes checked asp.

The grass for ex, some people say it should look like is more how grass looks after 1 straight month of blistering sun and no rain what so ever.

And no, Britain colours isnt specially in any way what so ever compared to say Sweden.

The colours look darker and more toned down only when there is complete overcast.


The layout is another matter.


Colours in Cod.

Pic. 1 at 06.00
Pic. 2 at 12.00
Pic. 3 at 16.00


Sometime i wonder if people forgotten that CoD have Dynamic Lighting and colours change depending on time of day. But hey, maby we should go back to no Dynamic Lighting so the colours "feel" better.

I logged very few hours in a small aircraft flying most of the time at 300m (on hot summer days mostly). For me neither RoF nor DCS create as believable world as seen from this altitude as CoD. For me CoD provides more photorealistic experience i.e. not as cartoonish as some other sims. It very well reminds of experience I had in RL e.g. even rising my heart beat say when I am on my final but the runway is not clear ingame. Original IL-2 did not give this feeling for example.

Landscape will be improved further of cause.

Upd. For instance compare difference between light and shade colours on a cloudy day here
http://www.ivask.ru/content/rus/mnu/238/F3_1280.jpg

Storm of War landscape did look damn good. I've never understood why they did change it with Jurassic.

You don't have to be a pilot to now what the ground looks like from inside an aeroplane at any altitude, you just simply have to have flown and looked out the window.

I've seen it, CloD is not close.

this is the reason it doesnt look as good in your opinions. For me its exactly the same. the issue is artistry ! and solely artistry. when you have no shaders over your work your work is raw. It looks how you designed it. when you add more and more shaders over the art it distorts the art and the artist can not work in the perfect static enviroment anymore. Its a comprimise in order to incoroporate the fact that your image has to look different at different times of day and enviromental situations.

heres the Fact: 90% of the time of day the colours work as they should they are colours you see out over a landscape through direct and non direct lighting. Most of your opinions are incapable of understanding the ART has to look good over a 24 hours period and be affected by cloud cover and lighting angle. IMHO there is a period of time between 1 to 2 hours that most of you fly at that does appear incredibly wrong. thats about 20% of the day to night schedule and funnily enough the time of day your all flying. Out with those times the scenery is absolutely stunning in its presentation.

The Scenery is not going to get better because its as good as it will get. you guys must fix your conceptualisation on the matter.

If i want to get critical i would be criticising a few factors. the scale of the fields. the lack of a wild urban tile representing wild countryside. the scale of the fields affects the colours believe it or not. more smaller scaled fields with a selection of say 5 colours. when your eye sees this it affects the relationships between the colours. in not so many words its these relationships that bring you to the wrong conclusion that the colours are off. wether you believe what i say or not. it is not the colours that are wrong.

Krupi, take the fingers out your ears mate,
its not our fault that the colours and layout of the SOW landscape
are better than CODs, these are just the facts as most of us see them.
What we would like to happen is that Luthier sees these threads and if its at all possible in the future he changes some things...thats all we want.

You do know that Luthier doesn't cry when somebody points out these things right?

Most of us would like to know if they can get the colours and layout right once, why did the colours and layout change in COD?

I was at the same show as Mystic,and sat at that computer.It looked better than what we have now IMO.

just to compare...

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/2121/bob1u.jpg
By furbs9999 at 2011-07-08

http://img593.imageshack.us/img593/8...7081347319.jpg
By furbs9999 at 2011-07-08

Regarding colours they already answered this question back in March and the answer was that the lighting engine is changed and became more advanced/complex. Sorry I can not find the link now it was probably at sukhoi.ru forums.

Please see my post on the previous page and Ali Fish post above.

Regarding layout they could develop some sort of algorithm for automatic tree placement as the map is to big to place all trees manually. The demo for IL-2 engine probably had trees placed by hand as area was smaller or they were not as pressed for time by UBI back then. Another thing the devs mentioned that number of trees and number of types of trees was reduced for optimisation.

The 1st one just has like 5 times more individual trees with more branches = low fps on current hardware. We will have this amount of trees in 5 years when hardware is ready. No problem.

And some of u choose the former?

Wow is all i can say.

Of course...the first shot is a screen capture of a screen @82kb

The second shot is a screenshot i just got 5 mins ago...jpeg@1.55 mb

The COD shot shows much more detail(as it should)in a computer generated landscape of don't know where.


The top shot shows a landscape with colors and layout that look like England.

I certainly would.

ROFL

The former looks like a pic of England.
The second looks like a game.

.......

There is no comparisons i think. The first one looks like the english landscape, the second......is just horrible.

A "suicide" the CoD's landscape.

Storm of War did look much better also in the tiles, but we'll never have a new landscape considering they are working on russian landscape now, and Luthier simple ignores these complains.

Really, i can't still believe we have a so horrible landscape in CoD.

Just to add...The COD shot is taken at 6am to show it in its "best" light.

like this?
 

http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/5230/bob1ucopy.jpg

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

yep...perfect Drem!

+1000

one of the dumbest things ever to be seen in here. sounds just like dictatorshi(t)p

And given the shadows in the other shot it's also taken at around the same time of day, either am or pm.

to be honest there is no possible comparison between those and what we have now; my question boils down to: if IL-2 Sturmovick engine could do that, why IL-2 Cod can't? of course it can, it's not a matter of resource usage, rather an art direction issue i think. putting the colour grading issues aside, the trees just look weird in CoD, especially from about 1000m; the former version was more natural as it didn't had that 'lollipop effect' with the trees (tree trunks oddly visible from the air even in between woods)

I just zoomed in on google maps somewhere near the channelcoast and actually it looks much more like CoD than the demo.......but i dunno if the fields were also ploughed back then(probably) also?

i fly from westhampnett (goodwood) regularly near tangmere and the image i re hashed is more realistic believe me. the clod graphics are just to sharp there is no depth of field and long haze out of fucus

ITS PURE SPECULATION BECAUSE NO ONE HERE KNOWS THE REASON WHY THEY DROPPED THE LANDSCAPE.

The only reason mentioned here was that the old engine was too limiting so if true you are asking to have the old engine back that they felt they could not get the game they wanted from.

So I am a fool ROFL, might be but at least im no hyprcrite :D

been thinking about posting that, lack of depth of field = unreal sharpness over long distance trees and clouds (though that's something the devs should be capable of enabling)

Im sure the topography and other things are much better on our new landscape but please the colors and tree placement are perfect for England

+1000 Furbs.

Don't get me wrong, COD landscape has its good points, particulary the topography/elevation and grass/field rendering at low alt.

However, pause the vid at 1.34-5, I'm telling you now, hand on heart it is pretty much bang on perfect....... it would be great if we could have something like this back. It truly is far more accurate.

I'm sure its not 'mission impossible' to do.....even short term you can make small tweaks (like darker trees) and change the landscape pallete, it would make a world of difference. If the tree placement (which is much more accurate and convincing in the vid) is too much work at present then maybe it could be done in small increments and that would be better than nothing.

Either way, once the SDK is released I'm sure the modders will sort it out anyway. It's a very valid gripe I'm afraid, and certainly not pointless whinging. It is important that when you are flying over something that purports to be England, that it....errr.....actually looks something like England. ;) As per the vid. Just saying......don't hate me for my beliefs, chaps (which just so happen to be completely correct lol ). :grin:

lol i love the way people think the SDK will do everything. I'm almost certain an SDK for this game will be quite limited, but i could be wrong of course.

Perhaps Pickle....you may be right. I have no idea what the SDK will allow, like I have no idea if working AA amongst other things will be featured. People keep asking (nicely) but the silence is deafening. ;)

+1
the new engine has its own advantages, but nobody can convince me about the tree placing,lack of hedgegrows and colours.advanced lightening system..???have you looked at the tree's colours?i flew over pink fields,which turn into dark green when you go down low.
of course the appearance of grass when you fly down low is amazing,and also that they modeled every leaf(although thats insane,they better should have positioned each tree).but as soon as you are 100meters above them,.... honestly they look funny,thats the best i can say about them.the position of them is a pain in the a..,not even to mention that you can fly through them like casper the little ghost.
improved engine?why does the game look worse in many aspects than it did with the old engine?s

fix for tree colours Close & Far. enjoy.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...99&postcount=1

thx ali!i was hoping that you would continue with your mod.will try it!

Nice one Ali, thanks a bunch it looks grand and is far more accurate. :) I have seen other attempts (and I think it is indeed possible to change aspects of the landscape too, but limited?) I think using the 'Kegetys' thingymajig? (Not a techie).

Only downside is its only for offline, don't fancy getting perma-banned from Steam lol, but excellent for offline in the meantime. Online is rubbish atm anyway, I can't even get sound. Nice one! Finally things are slightly (nah, a lot) more bearable. I'll start flying it again now. :grin:

This happens every time new technology is introduced. When first cars appeared on the market they had more flaws than advantages compared to horses: noisy, uncomfortable and broke every 10 km. Only enthusiasts purchased them. First digital cameras produced much worse photos than film ones. Stereoscopic 3D video more often gives you headache instead of enjoyment atm, etc. etc. I do not get why people pretend it is something unusual.

If you are not an enthusiast wait several years till technology is mature enough for you before purchasing the product. I never purchase the 1st product in a new series unless it is my hobby and I am ready to take risks to test new technology on myself being a "test rabbit". But this is completely conscious decision. Some people just tend to blame others for their own decisions I guess.

i dont blame nobody.and i like this sim!i really do enjoy it, because as i already said, it has some features that are way more advanced than in the old il2.like CEM.
but the colours and placement of trees really disturb the immersion.and i think its not a real problem to solve those issues.ali just released his darkertrees mod.try it!the game now looks much better with it.unfortunately the placement is the original and looks like the map has acne.

I fly gliders from Wiltshire and have been very disappointed by CloD's ghastly attempt at representing England. Some of the old IL-2 maps were much better.

The major mistake they have made seems to be in using a lighting engine that works best at sunrise and sunset but fails when it's supposed to represent bright sunlight. This is unfortunate given that the BoB was mostly fought in daylight.

are you sure the top one isnt WOP?:)

given the amount of posts that this thread has in such a short time, it seems that its not only me who is concerned about the lanscape issues.i assume that the majority of the members here is in some way dissapointed by some features of the landscape.and the few who defend COD's landscape, only argue that others are whinging, but dont actually claim that the landscape looks great in their view either.

i dont think its whinging.its dissapointment cause we expected much.may be too much.but i dont want to believe that.i still have faith that the devs will improve those issues as well as performance and bugs.
but as long as they dont even recognize those questions, i think it can only help for progress, to ask again and again.
in the end we all want improvement of COD. it can only be positive to let the devs know what we want to be improved.

Speculations, you know it. Nobody will say us if Storm of War tiles has been sent to WoP team or not.

I say them CRAZY if they did drop these tiles for the CoD textures.

Firstly, I wish you all had been this passionate about the landscape during development when I was saying how dreadful it looked, maybe something may have changed, secondly Oleg promised us that the landscape would be many many times better than WOP - he either lied or as we now know he hadn't been involved in the deveolpment for a year and a half before release he maybe hadn't seen how bad it was.

Biggest issues for me:-
Landscape is rubbish
Sounds are rubbish
MP sounds dont work
No flyby sounds
No engine start up sounds
Flickering shadows are rubbish
Not being able to end a flight in multiplayer, or refuel/rearm or press refly is simply pathetic
Servers randomly disconnecting is tiresome and rubbish
Anyone seen a windsock yet?
Flying through Trees is er rubbish
Micro stutters are still there, they are rubbish
AI Planes flying around with the landing gear down - rubbish
AI is rubbish
Big rectangle lakes in the middle of maps, rubbish
Then we got all the bugs - they are rubbish
Buildings popping up in 2011!! Rubbish
etc...

....and to add to that, after the cash that i spent on this game had been quickly trousered Luthier then announces that they had released an 'half finished' game, well 4 months later I would like to see the other half that I paid for, or at least some regular communication, Im going to put it in big letters COMMUNICATION, thats all it takes to remove a little bit of the heat Luthier, you've heard it said many times on here why dont you listen to your customers?

That pretty much sums it up.

Err, actually Tree other people did point out the crap things about it too, but cut some slack with it being beta.

Ok Tree we'll admit it. You saved the world mate. Single handedly (Christ.... lol). :grin:

Some don't see the point in banging on about things every other 5 seconds, on a daily basis though, and have better things to do. Once or twice should be enough. Have to admire your persistence though. 'Obsession', the new fragrance by TreeUk. (LMAO :grin:)

PS completely agree with all your other points and I'm just ribbing yer a bit mate. :grin: You're a Star. :grin:

lol, well I saved nothing mate as it happens, look at the state its in, to be fair during the development many people that did get passionate were quickly silenced by means of a ban, myself (many times) included, I know a lot of people were a little more subtle than myself and maybe that is the correct way of going about things, sadly its just not me.

This sim engine has much more positive points than negative. But some people here try to just focus on negative points, because maybe don't have a real life and see themselves like some "crusaders" against the evil Maddox Games, with all - let's say clear - lies about some know "issues" about the sim that the dev team always know and use an evasive approach...

Ok, we all know that Tree was right about everything. Now we can move foward? The sim is really fun, even with the flaws. It's plain obvious. Let´s try to fly the sim and let the dev team work over the problems.

Yes, we can fly this sim, MP, SP... Use FMB... It's working even withou stutters over London now with lower texture settings...

Really MP is working?? Thats odd, the most people Ive seen online at best is around 40 spread across the choices of about 8 servers - thats impressive for the greatest flight sim ever.

We only have now limited full real missions and some "airquake" servers... People need to have time to create good MP servers nad missions, and we have some bugs to devs solve, like the sound one. But now we can have some fun in MP servers without constant crashes/diconnects.

You sound like a broken record now. I like your points some months ago, but now you are just boring. Go fly this bugged sim and try to have some fun!

We cant...thats the point. SP has no campaign. MP has no sound or CO-OPs or the servers brake after a hour.

we are trying to play mp mate but it crashes on the sound and basically its poo, we want it to be brilliant but its NOT...far far from it...Rise of flight will put in ww2 planes and bingo

OK, just keep whinning... Maybe it's fun!

I'll try too!

We don't want to be bleedin moaning....we want to be flying sqd coops or taking part in online wars.
We want to take part in the "Battle of Britain" SP where you can join a sqd maybe and seem as if your fighting in the BOB and it tracks my kills and flights....and maybe even put my pilots name in!!!
and we dont want to look at fecking spitgirl. "trust me on this" Luthier said...i did...and Luthier was wrong.

trust Luthier.... its far too late for that.

:cry:

Oleg mentions in the video (around 16.00-18.00 I think ...) that the game is still Open GL at that point.

Seems that in the abandonment of that and the shift to Direct X they maybe overstretched themselves timewise??

I also have to agree completely with Tree's listing of 'things that are rubbish' about COD - would also point out that he forgot the not working AA - that's rubbish too...

Sorry folks, never thought the day would come when I would become a paid- up member of the whingers and mud-slingers club.

Just want to add that I REALLY, really want to see this sim reach its potential. I'm sure it will eventually. It is just sad that things have so obviously been snafud along the way by circumstance, bad luck or misjudgement. And - I agree with Lobisomem's point about the many really outstanding features of the game/engine (the recent review in PCPilot did a good job of listing them and I realised that we've maybe 'banked' the positives and taken them a bit for granted - number of flyables, cockpits, dm, CEM ,etc) ...but, the truth remains that for me all those good points are, at this time, overwhelmed by the faults to such a degree that I can't really enjoy them. And, foremost among the faults for me is the terrain.

Sigh..................again.

But here's a question for you old hand tech-heads.

What would prevent the devs simply taking Ali Fish's and/or Baron's mods and releasing them as part of the official patches once checked out by 1C? Or at least looking at them and doing their own version?

From the shots I've seen on the mod threads they're certainly an improvement over stock. I've not installed them though, due to paranoia regarding future online bans etc.

Come to that, if it's do-able by one bloke in his spare time, surely a team could correct many such issues in a much shorter time frame.

Makes me wonder what they are working on

Weak VGA too. If the members of "whingers and mud-slingers club" with weak VGAs just lower texture settings to reduce A LOT the stutters in actual build of CloD, or do an upgrade, the club will shrink a lot...

We just still remais with the founder Tree, with his high-end rig... :-)

I appreciate the compliment on the Forest Green mod! Regrettably, those sorts of changes are like slathering makeup on an ugly zit. It wouldn't be a good use of the 1C:MG's time to incorporate such a mod into an official update when the entire landscape is in need of surgery.

Sorry mate but your sailing close to the wind there ....... Ugly zit?? What's the colour of the sky on your planet? Comparing CLOD with FSX ................... Clod is far better

do you have an affair with your VGA?how often do you want to mention that point again?nobody here with low or mid range machines is complaining that they cannot play the game with maxed out graphics fluently.im sure most turned down their settings to be able to play.the problem is people with really high end rigs still suffer with performance issues.and even with everything maxed out, the look of the landscape in some aspects is questionable.
they are all complaining about missing,not working or bad looking features, and not their VGA.

it seems that you are not interested in others opinions and dont even care to read the posts, or you are not capable of doing so.
why do you post then in these threads?
why dont you open up a seperate "My lovely VGA"-thread.

Regarding the landscape, whilst the trees in this scrapped development video blend nicely with the scenary, mostly all of the trees look like traditional Christmas-trees in shape. These trees aren't widely seen, as the video dicates, across the English landscape.
One of my main gripes of the trees in CloD is the trunks. If you drive across the SE of England, mostly all of the trees you will see in the countryside, when grouped, have their trunks obscured by foliage. When flying, they just look like a mass of foliage which blends into the terrain. CloD's trees look like lollipops.
The same is true for hedges; I'd best my middle testicle that if you drive down a country lane, a hedge will seemlessly grow in size, creeping into neighbouring trees; again creating a huge mass of foliage. This is all missing from CloD.
Look at RoF. I know the comparisons have been done to death, but the trees there (from the air) look very similar to what I have described.

Very true - I'd noticed that myself. Expect it would have been easily fixed though.

I'm a little concerned that there has never been any comment on this whole landscape issue from Luthier.

Understandably other issues may be considered more in need of an immediate fix, but this has been complained about more than anything other than sound and MP. Both of those are receiving priority attention - they've gone so far as to bin the old sound and start again from scratch.

No real acknowledgement that they consider anything about the terrain to be a problem. The only news was that we can expect to get transparent water, new coastline and breaking waves. Very nice, but some comment about their take on current terrain would be welcome:

ok as it is OR
could be improved but it's too much trouble and we've better things to do OR
we actively intend to improve the landscape and will take steps as soon as resources permit

+1.a comment on this issue and the whole thread would cease to exist.

lobisomem why do you continue to say people dont have a real life because they say things are wrong with this game??

it comes down to the fact that me, and probably many others have to work about half a day to pay for this unfinished product. for me this is a hobby, playing flight sims and other games, but in between work, spending time with my son and girlfriend i want to play a game that works, not mess about with broken crap. if i knew it didnt work i wouldnt have bought it, simple. perhaps its different for you, perhaps your life is so fulfilled that in between snorting cocaine off prostitutes bottoms, hitting golf balls from the deck of your million $ yacht and going to parties with jonny depp, you can play for half an hour then go for a dump and wipe your ass on a $50 note.

and if your game works go play it a lot more instead of coming here and trolling, or is the fact that no one is in multiplayer ruining your fun??

LOL...great post!

No, it's not a "great post" at all. Just another whinner post.

You guys are simmers or gammers? You like to spend money in the last FPS franchise title, like CoD, and have some SP fun one day and spend one week more in brainless SP "Quake" style? You want that from CloD?!?!

That's what appears to me... all this CRAP about "trees don't have collision meshes, the terrain looks ugly, the SP are broken, we have MP sound bug"...

I fly in IL-2 for TEN YEARS! I fly all this time not because of some "SP campaign"... Not for some "bug free airquake" from release! I'm a simmer, I like the SIMULATION aspect of the series, like to see good FM, DM, have tools to the community create own scenarios, campaigns, etc. I DON'T NEED A PERFECT PRODUCT FROM RELEASE, I DON'T SEE CLOD AS A NEW FPS TITLE, IT'S THE NEXTGEN AIR COMBAT SIMULATOR, WITH LARGE LIFESPAM!

If you want to "play a game", go for a game. You don't understand what it's all about. It's much more than a "game", that's why a lot of fools can't see 0.1% of the capabilities of the software and talk a lot of CRAP!

Simple as that. I have a girlfriend, work, and are really glad to pay like 50 dollars for this software. I know I'll be flying in it more ten years... And I'm flying in it NOW!

Reporting bugs is one thing. What people are doing now is just brainless whinning.

you by yourself are a all new type of whiner the "Im-rich-my-game-works-soe-everyone-elses-msut-work-too-whinner"

and yes. It was a GREAT post.

I would have thought that simulating the real-life landscape was something that CloD should have aspired to. As it is now, it has an fantasy landscape.

im a simmer and a gamer, and have been since i can remember, it is my hobby, my next door neighbour plays cricket as a hobby, but he uses a fully working cricket bat, not one thats snapped in half and broken.

Next time you play the game or get on a plane try not to take LSD... What is so bad about the landscape I KNOW it would be nice to have hedges and the colours could be tweaked but in the grand scheme of things the ground does not look bad in fact its the opposite it looks very good.

Ooh, the irony. :cool:

......

Everything can be improved, and CloD is not alone. Realistic campaigns; a representative BoB scenario? This is what I want, and CloD doesn't have it. BoB2 does, and BoB2 does it beautifully. Aside from a dated DM (and dated graphics) BoB2 offers all of what you have said to the offline player, so where does CloD come into this? A long 'lifespam'? Yes, definitely, but the question is when?
Luthier himself has always advocated constructive criticism, and largely that is what this topic is made of. The landscape can be improved, for many it currently detracts from the immersion, and if it can be improved, why not tailor it to the community? Many of whom live in Blighty and can offer a lot of useful advise.

I think it's clear that the terrain is still very much WIP, but official comment on this would put a lot of minds at rest. Indeed, I'm sure many would welcome trees which are as poor as RoF's up-close if it meant they had hit-boxes, and looked awesome from any distance other than 2-metres away. Trees which have individual leaves are awesome, but most of my flying happens at altitudes above 3-metres ;)

I'm not rich. My system isn't an expensive one. I just have a brain and can build a rig that runs new titles Ok.

I can run this title in a HD 4850 512MB lowering the textures. If people can't configure settings, go buy a console.