For me it's not about the graphics so much. The aircraft are better looking than IL2, the terrain depends on time of day but i don't mind it that much because it does have multiple times the objects IL2 had. I run mostly medium settings on two year old hardware and it plays fine in any case.
What does it for me is operating the aircraft.
Flying IL2 after flying CoD is like having a co-pilot in the 109 squeezed behind the cockpit, making sure i don't have to do a bunch of stuff that needed to be done, or at the very least hold my hand through it and mitigate any possible negative consequences from my mishandling. And after sampling what little CoD currently has to offer, that is a giant step back for me.
I want the aircraft modeling to reflect some of the individual quirks and nuances of each type, compared to that IL2 currently feels like some accurate numbers (FM) strapped onto a 3d model and not a complete piece of wartime machinery.
There's no feel for what lurks under the hood and how it might come back to bite me in the behind if i'm not careful with it, the workload is highly diminished to the benefit of situational awareness and improved ability to focus on maneuvering and the pretty artificial CEM limitations combined with the small maps make it possible to run around at top performance all day long (reduced fuel and almost constant WEP use).
This doesn't just completely skew tactical considerations and limitations further away from reality, it also influences immersion because there's no feel of having a complex machine around you.
Don't get me wrong, i loved IL2 and have every single title since 2001, but after giving CoD a try it doesn't do much for me anymore.
For me it's the CEM, the detailed autopilots and bombsights, the ability and requirement to properly balance my fuel load in a twin engined aircraft and so on. I wanted IL2 with a bit of FSX thrown in and i got it, so i'm perfectly happy. In other words, it's a matter of taste and priorities.
|
06-14-2011, 11:35 PM
Threaded Mode