ArmA II compared to other games ...

[Bernard_t 10]

Call of Juarez : Bound in blood is out and have way better graphics than Arma II plus run fully maxed a 60 FPS when ArmA II run at 15 FPS

No excuses for the poor optimisation :j:

[datter 0]

Please go play Call of Juarez : Bound in Blood. Also, please find a Call of Juarez : Bound in Blood forum, and post there a lot. Thank you.

[Bernard_t 10]

Please go play Call of Juarez : Bound in Blood. Also, please find a Call of Juarez : Bound in Blood forum, and post there a lot. Thank you.

I just took that game as a reference

[derk yall 0]

Whah, whaw, when people will stop compare grafics from coridor shooters with mil-sim grafics with large open world.:cool:

[Master gamawa 0]

Call of Juarez : Bound in blood is out and have way better graphics than Arma II plus run fully maxed a 60 FPS when ArmA II run at 15 FPS

No excuses for the poor optimisation :j:

yeah... I don't know much about this game but does it feature huge 500 km maps, the majority of modern arsenal, tanks, cars, real time day/night cycles, moon phases, boats, squad control a huge modding community, huge 1000vs1000 AI battles, artillery, mission editor and the freedom to deal with each mission in almost any way you want?

No?

OF COURSE NOT!

I mean, what's next? Are you gonna compare Arma to Bubble Bobble?

[Mafiozo 10]

Obvious Troll is Obvious.

[sidhellfire 0]

Ohh, Have you seen that Bubble Bobble hd resolution mod running smooth on 460fps? Man that is fantastic. You can Bubble and bobble and all that kind of stuff. And it comes with more colors than Arma 2!

[datter 0]

Does anyone know how to get your bubbles to get out of the HUMV properly in Bubble Bobble? The command structure is complicated, and whenever I issue the "disembark" command the bubbles just float around and don't do anything. Any help appreciated.

[Squigibo 10]

Arma2 vs. Pong

Pong has WAY WAY WAY more FPS than arma2. Pong must be better.

[kremator 1065]

Call of Juarez : Bound in blood is out and have way better graphics than Arma II plus run fully maxed a 60 FPS when ArmA II run at 15 FPS

No excuses for the poor optimisation :j:

Some people you just want to reach out to AND SLAP !

Bye troll. Can I have your stuff ?

[Scrub 0]

Ok, ok.. I'm sure he gets it that the comparison was cabbage vs apples. :p :D (really tasty apples with a worm or two for protein, makes you grow stronger)

The virtual blood floweth.

[von_paulus 0]

He is not a troll. He's just a kid. Probably with a historical background filled with violence, neglected traumas and who knows maybe some abusing.

[Rogue_Trooper 10]

The way i look at it is this ARMA 2 is a good game with a few glitches. Any one who expects a new released game to be perfect on day of release needs to take stronger meds.

Come back in 6 months time and you will have found A2 has became everything that was expected of it. As the saying goes if in doubt patch,patch and patch some more. So sit back and enjoy it and maybe some constructive critcism instead of whinning.

[Sneak69 0]

with everything maxed arma 2 has better much better grahpics then that game.

and you can not compare a Military sandbox simulator to a Western shooter

anyway you wont like Arma I can tell it will be too much of a learning curve for you... it took me almost 3 months to learn everything in OFP 1 and im still learning in Arma 2 today

[Master gamawa 0]

I didn't mean to be harsh on the little guy. It's just weird. If he picked Crysis 2 for a comparison he would probably have a semi-valid agrument to start with (with all the plants and streaming graphics of huge areas).

Still nothing compares with Arma when you get into it and realize what you can do with it.

I agree the single player experience in Arma was dissapointing and than in that perspective, Call of Juarez can be better. But unless they somehow manage to create photorealistic enormous maps of the wild west, provide access to use everything in that era, an editor that allows you to create your own missions, mod new items and play Cowboys vs Indians with huge armies on the internet, the comparison doesn't make sense.

I am not even going to analyze the fact that we are talking about a whole different game type.

[Xindar 10]

Call of Juarez : Bound in blood is out and have way better graphics than Arma II plus run fully maxed a 60 FPS when ArmA II run at 15 FPS

No excuses for the poor optimisation :j:

Call Of Juarez: BiB = Call of Duty from western ages. Its scripted like hell and big corridor action!

You can't compare Arma with this.

[echo1 0]

Call of Juarez : Bound in blood is out and have way better graphics than Arma II plus run fully maxed a 60 FPS when ArmA II run at 15 FPS

No excuses for the poor optimisation :j:

BIS needs to hire this man. Now.

[manberries 0]

Well, BIB's fps cannot be compared to arma's fps because of BIBs lack of giant open world, physics objects, number of AI, non scripted AI, and number of effects. A 220km world with 1,000 ai running at one time full of pretty graphics combined with effects explosions cannot be made to run with high fps with "optimization". Though BIB was fun as hell.

[Amuro 10]

LOL, Call of Juarez : Bound in blood has way worse graphics, 7/10:

While it is much sharper than the original, the poor texture work, loads of technical glitches and stiff facial animations holds the game back. Also, what's up with limited enemy faces?

ArmA2's is 9/10:

Amazing visuals at nearly every level of this game with just a few small rough spots. Performance is an issue.

Edited July 13, 2009 by Amuro

[Squigibo 10]

I didn't mean to be harsh on the little guy. It's just weird. If he picked Crysis 2 for a comparison he would probably have a semi-valid agrument to start with (with all the plants and streaming graphics of huge areas).

I am not even going to analyze the fact that we are talking about a whole different game type.

But he posts a troll message about two games that don't compare in the slightest in depth and game play, he deserves the backlash. It's like comparing a Dodge to a Harley.

[THEBLITZ6794 10]

ok, many people dont realise this:

arma 2 is based off of arma (who wouldve guessed) which is based off of operation flashpoint

ofp's who deal was fuck graphics and focus on gameplay.

we have a 225km2 map with some quite good graphics when u set them on high. there are tons of units (one guy got 30 fps with 1700 ai). of course he overclocked but thats not the point. the point is arma 2 is about massive battles and roleplaying. its about gameplay. if u want shiney details, go play call of juarez and leave. now. we dont need people who want to derail armas purpose.

---------- Post added at 02:42 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:41 AM ----------

oh, and if the game runs that slow, give 1987 its comp back or lower ur graphics.

[Macadam Cow 1]

Call of Juarez : Bound in blood is out and have way better graphics than Arma II plus run fully maxed a 60 FPS when ArmA II run at 15 FPS

No excuses for the poor optimisation :j:

It's a bit too late for april fools, try next year ;)

[GoOB 0]

..oh, and if the game runs that slow, give 1987 its comp back or lower ur graphics..

Tell that to the fellas with 3,6ghz i7's and SLi'd GTX295's :j: However I agree that to compare ARMAII with any other game out there is really quite unfair, but noone can deny the fact that there are things that need to be sorted in ARMA II. Performance issues, AI issues, campaign issues, netcode issues and so on and so forth. Not all complaints are from <insert whatever eloquent name old flashpointers have deigned fit to assign to the OP>.

In spite of the issues however, I am having a smashing time with ARMA II. And as always, I have faith in BI and their ability to please us, the OFP/ARMA community. It hasn't failed yet.

[franze 196]

How about we lock this thread and those of you with feedback use one of the stickied threads?