Quote:
Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES
Depends really..
What I am referring to is the time it takes to dream up and script those 'other worlds', and as you know time is money. With regards to flight sims, they don't have to dream up a world, just implement the one we have.
Well there is still physics math involved, the only difference between HALO and IL2 is you don't have a death star top speed to compare to, to say how well the model of it is.  |
I agree in a sense; the art direction on these games is pretty insane - there are some very talented people in this world with some amazing imaginations. I'm often astounded at the believeable worlds these devs conjure up.
But look at this another way...if, for instance, they're busy modelling a spaceship but find that it's taking too much time to realise that ship they way they originally intended, the devs can cut back on the detail and/or the physics and nobody would know. There is nothing to compare it to, after all.
Game worlds can be made as intricate or as basic as their needs determine, because there is no point of reference for it. The end user would be non the wiser either way.
In a sim, you're bound by historical aspects that allow for very little leeway, if at all.
As I'm sure you've noticed from this board, hardcore flight sim fans will
very quickly point out even very minor mistakes or errors in 3D models, flight models and other aspects. The devs can't get away with anything other than exacting detail.
It may sound rather simple in theory to 'simply' recreate something, but given the choice, I would much rather start with a clean slate so to speak that isn't bound by anything, rather than have to recreate history in the finest detail.