Am I the only one who disliked the futuristic approach?

[lNTRUDER 26]

I think the futuristic style is a breath of fresh air for the OFP/ArmA series. For a decade now these games have ruled when it comes to realism as well as down-to-earth weaponry. In short, the stuff we see on CNN everyday.

I think BIS are entitled to try something new in ArmA 3 and I also believe that most people will embrace it come release day.

To repeat what others have said there will be mods released soon enough, for the ones who want to take a step back to current era with its equipment..

Go ArmA 3 ! :bounce3:

[AnimalMother92 10]

The futuristic approach is disappointing to me. What drew me to the series originally was the good amount of authenticity and realism. Oh well. WW3 and imaginary vehicles seems silly, but to each their own.

[ricnunes 0]

No, you're not the only one to dislike this futuristic aproach by BIS regarding ArmA3!

WTF are BIS thinking of!? Comanches and Mi-28s with Co-Axial main rotor?? Things that not exist!

A BTW, a campaign that's not co-op playable is also a not very good sign.

If it wasn't for the frogmen this ArmA3 annoucement would definitly be a total and complete disapointment!

I guess this seems to be the end of a (all) REALISTIC wargame simulator(s)!

[Steakslim 1]

A BTW, a campaign that's not co-op playable is also a not very good sign.

Where was this mentioned?

[Daniel 0]

Yep, next thing you know they'll have stealth Blackhawks. STEALTH BLACKHAWKS?! I tells ya. World's gone mad.

Where was this mentioned?

It can be assumed by the fact that you play Cpt Scott Miller, the sole survivor of the Task Force.

[sv5000 127]

Yep, next thing you know they'll have stealth Blackhawks. STEALTH BLACKHAWKS?! I tells ya. World's gone mad.

Seriously, you need to stop talking now

:D

[dingyisun 10]

Personally, I think it's a good idea to put in a single player campaign that sets things SLIGHTLY in the future, but not so much that it becomes like a Star Wars simulator. Admittedly, the one place the community HASN'T really gone with missions is a futuristic setting (there are plenty of ones set in contemporary Middle-Eastern locations or back in World War II, etc.) and I think BIS is doing the right thing by making a small and very reasonable push in that direction.

Besides, if the physics engine is really going to be as nice as one of those "hacks" suggested, then this game will be well worth the price. You can ALWAYS depend on the community to come up with addons after release to bring you back to the modern day setting.

---------- Post added at 11:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:17 PM ----------

Yep, next thing you know they'll have stealth Blackhawks. STEALTH BLACKHAWKS?! I tells ya. World's gone mad.

Also, is it just me, or weren't "stealth"/modified Blackhawks just used in the Osama raid?

[Daniel 0]

Also, is it just me, or weren't "stealth"/modified Blackhawks just used in the Osama raid?

...bingo.

Edited May 19, 2011 by Daniel

[sv5000 127]

Not having ago mate, just wanted you to stop suggesting omgfuterz stuff that bis may add :)

[-Paladin- 10]

It would appear you have a severe case of PTSD. Killing people is not fun in real life, you want murder simulator, or a fun, genuine simulator-game, covering all bases, the future included?.

A great we are finely at the insulting part.

No shit no fun in killing?This is a simulation or it try’s to be one and killing is part of it.

If it is so disgusting why we don’t get miles or paintball weapons instead of blood. Why you are still around here and why do you have a COD:MW avatar the game where you play a terrorist on killing spree on civilians.

That’s not gross?

Who was talking about battleships and destroyers? How about helo carriers, subs with SDV. Dude, inflatable Zodiacs down some mountain-valley terrain.

You.

Naval Warfare is a very far fetch t.

So according to you we have naval warfare in Arma 2 why are you not satisfied?

You have helo carriers, zodiacs. on podagrosk you have a river.

In a sub you see nothing and in a sdv too.

So be more precise.

Naval warfare starts at 8.000 km ranges up to close 20 km.

No Captain Jack sparrow boarding of Kirov cruisers or carriers.

Monochrome 2d monitors all the way.

[Daniel 0]

Not having ago mate, just wanted you to stop suggesting omgfuterz stuff that bis may add :)

Haha, yeah I guess they've caused enough of a stir as is.

-Paladin-, take everything Iroquois Pliskin says with a pinch of salt, if you get my meaning.

[nodunit 397]

Yeap, just because we don't know it exists would mean it doesn't or gets used more than once right?

[sv5000 127]

they are probably all having a good laugh and thinking "Wait till they see the future nvg/thermal/seethru Oakley's for the deltas"

[Steakslim 1]

or the "Wait till they see that Kamov/Havoc hybrid sprout legs and become a part helicopter, part battle mech."

[nodunit 397]

Probably thinking more "Damn you just can't please these guys, you post a few screenshots and it's like a bomb got dropped on someones house."

[mach2infinity 12]

I'm not excited by the propsect of the game using a futuristic setting with its assorted weapons and so forth. Because even though the locales in the ArmA series thus far have been set in fictional settings, the weapons, kit, military services etc is what grounded the game in a modern reality and made it feel as if it could conceivably happen elsewhere. If they make things too futuristic or fantastical then there is a danger they'll peel away a layer of reality or the versimilitude of it from the game. So in a sense you're left feeling a little detached as if you're playing a game like "Frontline: Fuel of War" or even "Homefront".

It's highly unlikely that Europe or America would be attacked because of the energy markets. We live in a globalised world where everyone trades with each other in one sector or industry and this conceit that we'll be invaded doesn't make sense to me. I think an African setting would've been interesting because it's where I see the next flashpoints being. I'm tired of the middle east setting and I in fact prefer somewhere like Chernarus because it's more familiar and warfare conducted over woodland terrain is much more interesting than one fought over some god forsaken and uninteresting desert. In Africa, particularly the central states such as the Congo, Chad, Rwanda and the Central African Republic. These latter countries are ones that have major problems and will continue to do so for a long time. There's one humanitarian crisis after another and quite often, these locations are rich in natural resources too. China has a major stake in countries such as Sudan due to oil contracts, mining, technical advisers and so forth. Makes sense to me. :)

[NeZz_DK 1]

If I know BIS right, then they will include a bunch of weapons, so all the "I WANT REALISM" guys will be satisfied aswell, and if the screens we have seen are some of the most futuristic stuff we will see ingame, than I dont see it as far fetched.

I really hope they will put some focus into other NATO forces, so we can get some of all the nice european gear into the base game aswell :-)

I cant wait to try out the scuba gear and the submarine! ;-)

[Darky88 0]

I'm one of those that support the choice in setting. I'm glad they are not giving us more of the same, that would be boring.

Looking at that gear and vehicles, I find what we are seeing believable enough to enjoy. What was shown so far seems to have a basis in reality, be it currently in operation, cancelled, in production, or just experimental. It doesn't make stuff up or turned into CoD (which I'm not a fan of myself) or went so far ahead in the future that we suddenly shoot with Lasers or go to our Mission Objectives in flying Cars. No, it's still the same tactical fun we had before. In fact the chosen setting adds a whole new layer of danger to me and makes it all the more intense and scary to me with such complicated technology involved. Already the thought of those new Helicopters looking for me hypes me all up and thanks to the new physics all that driving will now actually be fun too!

Go for it BIS! I'm sure many of those who are complaining right now will change there mind eventually once they play it! It'll probably be like those Boycott groups on Steam, where everyone ends up buying and playing the game for hundred of hours anyway ;) Same here, alot of flaming, but in the end, most of us will love BIS for it - with a few exceptions, but that's what Mods are for or not ;)

[no use for a name 0]

Personally I'm tired of seeing the same old weapons/vehicles recycled over and over and over...If you've shot an M4 then you've shot them all

It's not like there's going to be lasers and "sci-fi" weapons... Chances are that the weapons they're modeling are weapons being developed that are very likely going to be "the future"

Stop whining!

[mach2infinity 12]

Stop whining!

No-one's whinging, they're just voicing their concerns. The futuristic setting may very well work. I just think there's certain caveats that they ought to be aware of. Perfectly reasonable.

so all the "I WANT REALISM" guys will be satisfied aswell

One has to ask why else would you bother with the ArmA games if realism wasn't a priority? The immersive experience of the ArmA games is what does it for me.

Edited May 20, 2011 by Mach2Infinity

[dcal 16]

Not too concerned about the theme or setting becuase this game is so highly moddable. Where else could you have stormtroopers, nazi soldiers, & 20' tall robots fighting against a WW2 US soldiers, Stargate Atlantis Cast, Vietnam era soldiers while Zetaborn aliens and Zombies are running around trying to kill everyone?

Once again the very talented people that play this game will open it up beyond its limits.

Edited May 20, 2011 by dcal

[Ish 11]

I'm sorry if im slow on the pick up here but.. Where does it say it's the future? The Commache isn't even in active service. What am i missing?

[-GR-Operative 10]

i don't care when its set, as long as its ArmA 3!

I remember people saying: I don't care about this, that, as long as it's Operation Flashpoint.

Then, you know the rest :rolleyes:

[LJF 0]

I would've preferred a 1980s Fulda Gap soviet invasion.

Hell yes! :) I'm kind of disappointed with the futuristic approach they're taking, before long we'll be playing 40k :p

Multiplayer is the problem though, it's almost impossible to play MP with any mods these days, though PR will likely solve that. I would have liked an authentic game from the start is all.

[-GR-Operative 10]

Who really believes the US Military is going to adopt the F2000, that will be 24 years old by 2025?