Because of its rarity no un-scalped models of it exist.
It’s impossible to make a high-resolution texture map of missing features. The aircraft itself is borderline fictional enough, do you want them to imagine and make up more than they already have?
It does look like that? 1 singular armor plate on the Maus is volumetric, and apart from that the most detailed part of the vehicle is a 12 polygon circle.
Here are the optics of a well-known system.
Here are more optics of a well-known system
Here are the optics of a WW2 prototype that was pieced together after being captured.
The Maus is hilariously undetailed. Don’t lie and say it isn’t.
It’s impossible to make a high-resolution texture map of missing features . The aircraft itself is borderline fictional enough, do you want them to imagine and make up more than they already have?
You know what does exist? Screws.
You don’t need a high resolution picture of an Ariete to have screws in a high resolution.
If only we had a high resolution model of this plane so we know what screws look like, shame.
What is stopping them from getting pictures from the Ariete?
Some of the Spitfires use the same cockpit heck some vehicles in the game are modelled quite literally based on the picture. So what happens is that you have parts that should be closed but aren’t ex: M36B2->Metal piece is just wide open. Or some German 20mm vehicles where the roof cagea is still wide open.
Or other vehicles are missing payloads and you can tell it could carry more sincit’sts modeled.
But yeah…Gaijin doesn’t bother listening to some extent. Still wish we got proper bomber cockpits. No one is gonna play them unless they are fixed.
1 - As said, an ahistorical gunsight is an ahistorical gunsight.
2 - What else do you want it to say? Again, go to Bracciano and get your own imagery of it if you’d like it to be “historical”.
3 - ^^
What else do you want it to say? Again, go to Bracciano and get your own imagery of it if you’d like it to be “historical”.
Yeah, because it is that simple, isn’t it? Why can’t Gaijin do that and get those pictures then instead of pretending they have to rely on a drunk’s picture they found on google?
Why would you attack it in the first place? It’s an arcade style aircraft fighting game. It has enough detail to be functional with the only metrics needed being in code, not visuals.
If you or I truly valued it as a plane to play in sim… Textures wouldn’t be on the list of issues.
Congratulations on outing yourself on financially immature?
It isn’t, hence why there isn’t a high-detail cockpit in-game.
Because even if they did there wouldn’t be an elevation in quality. Half of the deck is missing to begin with, as again, it’s a scalped model used for nothing more than museum displays.
Then go ahead? Whining and crying on a forum won’t contact them any faster than an email.
This isn’t a cryfest about the playability of the game… It’s pretty clear you think the game series running off of 2009 assets meant to be compatible with the Nintendo 3DS is supposed to surpass UE 5.2 levels of lifelike imagery.
is supposed to surpass UE 5.2 levels of lifelike imagery.
And what a lousy, filthy, disingenous and stupid strawman that is, thinking this isn’t acceptable for 2024 must surely mean I want it to be lifelike imagery! Jesus christ how pathetic.
The screenshot you had cherry picked to find as the “worst” of War Thunder is unironically assets from IL-2.
You know why, right…? Because they aren’t important in a free air combat game.
How is that a strawman? Your entire argument is that the fidelity of the cockpit textures isn’t high enough.
It’s a free game. You’re playing an arcade styled air combat game that spoonfeeds you metrics in a floating UI. You don’t need to count fasteners in a 1950s 1-off prototype aircraft.
If you feel the need that you do, then by all means… Create better source material. Go to the museum and take images. Contact the museum and ask for more in-depth scans of the Sagittario’s cockpit.
Making a post on a forum to cry about it without any solution whatsoever is childlike.
Specifically, Assets they own. IL2 honestly is just a name in this context. Also, it’s not an “Arcade style combat game” though you aren’t that far off. Not here to argue just wanted to point that out.
Not claiming they don’t own them, though almost all static assets used for air battles in WT are pulled straight of birds of prey.
It is an arcade styled game. Given the fact that the entire game is rooted in a point-to-fly instructor system… It simulates nothing more than physics as a secondary point of gameplay.
I can see you pointing that out, but having played since 2010… It’s the definition of an arcade game. You can argue for simulation elements, though that’s few and far between.
Because it’s free. It costs nothing to get a Rank 6 fighter.
If you mean the Ariete… Did you seriously buy a premium clone of a tech tree vehicle where the ONLY difference is it’s flight performance… Simply to complain about its cockpit?
You obviously didn’t pay for it to play the aircraft, seeing as you’re barely scraping a 1.25KPM.
