Arma 2 Who? One Console Game Stands Neck to Neck Graphically

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzWmW0JQzlI&feature=relmfu

Photorealistic King on Consoles

Watch this video please

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nI-gqL4vjmg :lol:

I never thought Arma 2 was much of a graphics king though. Sure it looks nice, but the animations are kinda meh, the foliage isn't too impressive and for some reason character models look like dummies to me.

Very fun game, but its not a huge graphics king or anything. It has its visual flaws.

The Hunter looks better than that and it´s free lol.

The Hunter looks better than that and it´s free lol.

Arach666

Isn't Cabela on the PC as well? Also... Since when did ARMA 2 ever qualify for the graphics king race? For me, its real power (aside from its sim aspect) is the editor.

Personally I don't think ARMA 2 maxed looks quite as good as, say, Killzone 3, but ARMA 2 (like I mentioned) never really tried to be a big graphics king, and considering the size of the game I imagine the developers had a focus outside of jaw dropping Crysis beating graphics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzWmW0JQzlI&feature=relmfu

Photorealistic King on Consoles

killu-later

I seemed to have missed where it says that footage is from the console version.

As for ARMA 2. For a sim, the graphics isn't too bad:

ARMA2 is the scale king in FPS genre :)

The issue with Arma 2 is that it can go from looking amazing to looking rather bad depending on where you go. As was said, the characters look rather sloppy. On the overall, though, it's a great-looking game.

Arma 2 has tons of stuff on screen and has HUGE maps

and pulls it off with decent graphics

Arma 2/3 would be impossible to do on consoles without gimping everything, see operation flashpoint

Arma 2 is no graphics king but it looks a lot better than that game.

Running Arma 2 in 1080p - Running Hunting game on console in most likely 720p (half as many pixels, half as sharp)

The reality is that most console users have no idea the size of the disparity in graphics because their only comparison comes through youtube videos with low resolutions and images posted on websites at low resolutions. The gap is huge, comparing the best console game graphically to even a game with mediocre graphics on the PC is a joke. Resolution/FPS, blah blah. Consoles aren't even in the same league at the moment.

Aside from graphics;

Arma 2 - huge open areas, completely non linear. combat AI

Hunting Game - linear, limited areas, running animals AI

Yet Arma 2 still has superior graphics. So...

I seemed to have missed where it says that footage is from the console version.

jun_aka_pekto

The button prompts.

Silly comparison anyway, don't really know what I'm doing in this thread.

Arma 2 isn't photorealistic. It's too bloomy and blurry.

Arma 2/3 would be impossible to do on consoles without gimping everything, see operation flashpoint

HaloinventedFPS

Operation Flashpoint was on the first Xbox but I agree that the current consoles have too little RAM for Arma 2 or 3.

Arma 2 never was known for its graphics, still, that game doesn't beat it.

Personally I don't think ARMA 2 maxed looks quite as good as, say, Killzone 3, but ARMA 2 (like I mentioned) never really tried to be a big graphics king, and considering the size of the game I imagine the developers had a focus outside of jaw dropping Crysis beating graphics.

SPYDER0416