- 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?
Or maybe reach out the museum and ask for them.
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.
Why would you attack it in the first place?
Because they’re selling a product with subpar quality in a game with an ever decreasing quality as it is.
They’re selling a free product…? With… Subpar quality?
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.
Hell, find me any replication of
from a free game.
you think the game series running off of 2009 assets
I wouldn’t call these 2009 assets.
When this is 2003
This is 2000
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.
That is an aircraft, not a map or in-map asset.
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.
It’s a free game.
It’s a $45 plane, just because it’s in a free game, doesn’t mean it’s free, what kind of logic is this?
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.
The Sagittario is free?
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.
Isn’t the Prem Sagitario 2 engines?
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
Yeah, hence
It’s also slightly large in dimensions.
Ah alrighty.
Deflection to deflection… Still can’t justify an argument.
That’s why you bought a plane that had a poor cockpit model, right?
Please refer to:
Deflection to deflection… Still can’t justify an argument.
Oh right, it’s a deflection to call out your attempts at a personal attack and a disingenuous representation of my actual argument to actually divert from the topic, I’m supposed to let that slide or I’m the problem.
What benefit does anyone derive from defending subpar quality surpassed by hobbyist modders developing free-to-download and use modifications for indie games developed by a mexican marketing team?
We cannot even expect quality to that level?
And why does it matter? Because horrible cockpit textures really ruin the sim experience.
Surely gaijin is capable enough to surpass this mexican marketing team?
Because it makes them feel special, it gets them attention on the internet to oppose a pretty normal opinion with the most absurd and asinine takes on the subject.
Some people think it’s cool to jump to the defense of a company that makes millions of dollars and doesn’t care about them at all on matters that go against their own best interest.
How is my representation of your argument “disingenuous”? You’re arguing on the basis of the language in the fictitious cockpit and a lack of textures in the cockpit. I argued on the basis of your expectations of graphics.
It’s called a hyperbole, maybe retake primary school english and get it down better than somebody who’s using it as their third language.
Drop the ace attorney fallacy gun-jumps while you’re at it.
