the game itself looks exactly like those screen shots. So i dont know what your talking about. Going into a forest in this game is by far a million times more realistic than Battlefield or call of duty . It actually looks and feels like a real farmland. I know so many places outside my city that looks exactly like this. Almost identical. Go to your nearest lake forest and then go play Arma 2 editor mode and look at chenaurusand you wont notice much difference from tha to real life. theyve captured a very realistic landscape so much better than any other game ive ever played. Company of heroes does a pretty good job on realistic environments.
When i first walked throughthe chenerus forest, i was shocked athow realistic it was and how right it felt over any other game ive efer played that has a forest. No other game has ever created a forest environment like Arma 2 has done. But i agree the textures on the people arent 2011 . But the environment itself more than makes up for the lack of textures on peoples faces and bla bla bla. The game itself feels like your walking through real country towns and thats all i care about.
The people that think the graphics in this game are crap, should get thier eyes checked. BUT, i do agree with you that the performance is crap. However in the editor mode the performance is fine. Arma 2 is the Most underrated game of all time. HOWEVER i completey agree with the performance issues. They should of focused on performance over graphics and the game would of been so much better.
but then look at grand theft auto 4 on PC, that also ran like a pile of sht tooon alot of mid-high end systems.Even starcraft 2 has soem wierd performanceissues on Mid range systems.But thats no excuse, If I pay for the game and the recommended specs meets my computer specs, i expect much better performance than what is in Arma 2 or Arma for that matter. At least on low -medium settings.
Log in to comment