Dcopymope

And all that "adaptability" really doesn't mean much to me when that "adaptable PC's" longevity ain’t worth two cents. How much would it cost to get a custom PC that can play every game on its highest settings for the next five to nine years?

Well, here is how I see this, the lifespan of the original Xbox was five years, the Xbox 360 is about eight to nine. Give me a good PC that will last for at least five years where I can play every game on the highest settings as its meant to be and than I'll think about it, three years isn't going to cut it. If these computer companies really wanted to give you a CPU & GPU that would last for the next five to nine years they would do it, but they are making too much money in ripping you off. The only thing that would at least make me think about getting a new PC depends on how the next Rainbow Six turns out and how it will turn out on the Xbox 360.

Well, if they supposedly can barely run on a two to three year old PC (this is not what I'm seeing on YouTube though), after spending thousands of buck's on a good PC to able to play it, to me that is a waste of time and money. It seems like a really bad design choice by the developers to make a game that no one can hardly play even to this day, in my mind, this is a pure rip off. You might as well save up and by a super computer, because you will most likely need it for Arma 3 to play it as it’s meant to be played, if Arma 2 is any indication. This is why I’ve been stalling on upgrading my PC or getting a new one, there is no common sense in spending a fortune on a high end PC just to play one game only for that PC to become obsolete three years later, unless you're rich then I can understand.

Iv'e done it myself with a glitch on the first mission, but it got boring after a while because there was no battles going on as perceived by sound. Dragon Rising Skira Island Just Cause 2 's map is reportedly 400 square miles, the same size of the map in the first Arma, so Arma 2's map is even smaller. It has unscripted A.I, but not necessarily the same amount of content, but graphical detail, well, that's subjective, it looked great in my opinion. Well, there are plenty of people on YouTube claiming they are playing Arma 2 with everything maxed out, unless all those people are bullshitting me, I don't know what you are talking about.

What I meant by the words "complex gameplay features", I meant just that, its gameplay. Beyond Arma 2's gameplay, can it done on a console? If it can't be done from a technical standpoint as far as graphics and CPU usage, then how does that explain Dragon Rising, whose Island map takes nine hours to walk from one end of the map to the other? As far as scale is concerned, it sounds pretty damn close to Arma 2, and there are games on the consoles with even bigger maps than the maps in Arma 2, with lots of carnage going on to boot. This is obviously what many PC gamers mean when they claim that consoles, particularly the Xbox 360 and PS3 would “shit themselves†trying to run Arma 2. Beyond gameplay, of what merit is this statement from a technical standpoint?

I see a lot of talk from almost every PC gamer saying that Arma 2 can't be done on the Xbox 360 and PS3, claiming that the consoles would "shit themselves" trying to run it, yet never explain exactly why they would. I would like to hear from the developers whether or not Arma 2 can be done on the consoles, beyond typical reasons like the games complexity in its gameplay features.