Why are people so conservative?

[-GR-Operative 10]

@[GR]Operative:

You should have read the rest of my post mate. :)

I just said that for the sake of saying it :p

It was not directed at you, of course. It's just that some people welcome some drastic changes that may not please most of the customers (after all, we are not only fans, we pay for it).

EDIT: Oh my god, what I typed previously made no sense!

Edited May 19, 2011 by [GR]Operative

[Iroquois Pliskin 0]

Sad but true coming from a Metal Gear fan, but it is still set in the past and near future too. Also only the Metal Gears themselves were actually fictional, almost all the tech featured had been a prototype or in service at some point.

The same with the gear shown so far in the A3 screenshots with exception of the attack heli.

Commanche was canceled for those who needed to think it got canceled. The public.

Then, fast forward to 2011 and you see a stealth (transport?) helo crash in Pakistan, with the hull being subsequently incinerated by US SOF, leaving the tail section for the Chinese auction market.

[birtuma 28]

Looks like there will be CWR3 for all of us who likes the good old stuff. AK-47,M-16, T-80, Abrams. :D

But seeing where ArmA 3 is going, ArmA 4 will have Ka-50 spaceship....

Arma 4 will be Star Wars...

[Splintert 10]

It's not like they're dumping ballistics or realism. I welcome new tools of war, so long as it is balanced in a way that makes it psuedo-realistic.

[nodunit 397]

Arma 4 will be Star Wars...

Nah, more like BF2142 but hey that'd be neat too, fully functional mechs.

I don't think they'd ever push Arma to the point of being THAT futuristic, just enough to be futuristic but still relateable.

[Colossus 2]

I have to say I'm a tad skeptic to this, but this is one community I know we can count on to create some beautiful modern units too.

I'm sure, looking at the pics, porting shouldn't be much of a problem either.

I wouldn't worry about it. ArmA 3 will be great :)

[granQ 293]

I'm all up for the changes. People are buthurt because they didn't see their abrams or m16....

wrong, I want something new.. this doesn't feel new at all. ArmA3, the falklands war.. now that would be perfect for me.

There is however 3 reasons why I am conservative and boring:

1) "are you scared they trying to win COD kids".. yes, i am, they have COD, i have/had arma.

2) The setting doesn't feel fresh, call it europe, i still call it dry, desert like place.

3) Realism.. i don't care if its a ww1 simulator, or fictional but realistic jungle warfare against druglords.. but I don't want to see the Rah 66 that stretch my fantasy too much

[aradesh 10]

i'm not conservative but ARMA3 must look like the old Amiga500 Game MIDWINTER.

Winter Island, almost no sound, great explosions, 5 FPS, best story etc.

F*** the hell !

What is wrong with humans?:banghead:

[instagoat 133]

Arma will never be like COD, no matter the equipment that is used.

I wouldn´t even mind a far future scifi scenario, as long as the tactical nature of the gameplay is preserved. That is the essence of Arma, and not the correct amount of sewing-lines on your mag pouch.

Sometimes it seems to me as if CoD Kiddies and the hardcore realism guys are essentially the same. I may take flak for saying this, but it feels as if the one faction gets upset about this gun being nerfed and that camouflage pattern being uber, while the other complains about the mild-dot reticule on the gun being wrong and the camouflage being slightly too green.

As long as you can still execute a proper infantry assault, hopefully with a revamped and more efficient command system, have combined arms ops and have a proper moddable platform, what´s there to be worried/complain about?

[aradesh 10]

Arma will never be like COD, no matter the equipment that is used.

I wouldn´t even mind a far future scifi scenario, as long as the tactical nature of the gameplay is preserved. That is the essence of Arma, and not the correct amount of sewing-lines on your mag pouch.

Sometimes it seems to me as if CoD Kiddies and the hardcore realism guys are essentially the same. I may take flak for saying this, but it feels as if the one faction gets upset about this gun being nerfed and that camouflage pattern being uber, while the other complains about the mild-dot reticule on the gun being wrong and the camouflage being slightly too green.

As long as you can still execute a proper infantry assault, hopefully with a revamped and more efficient command system, have combined arms ops and have a proper moddable platform, what´s there to be worried/complain about?

EXACTLY!!! 100% true, thanks.:)

[-Paladin- 10]

Sometimes it seems to me as if CoD Kiddies and the hardcore realism guys are essentially the same. I may take flak for saying this, but it feels as if the one faction gets upset about this gun being nerfed and that camouflage pattern being uber, while the other complains about the mild-dot reticule on the gun being wrong and the camouflage being slightly too green.

because arma try s to be military simulation and replaying the realty has first priority, if not arma dose have no sens and it is a anther piss like arcade game.

Realty has nothing to do with

A)Fun

B)Fairness

A simulation is work and no "I jump for a few minuets in" and pawn all things.

The Fun Part is to master one thing perfect after lots of training, to be better than some one that did the same.

TO Survive against all odds.

THIS SUPOSD to be a sim and not Supermario arcade deluxe.

[Daniel 0]

-Paladin-, you completely missed his point.

[smookie 11]

@-Paladin- :)

[Defunkt 431]

I think it's great, a new ArmA needs to progress its setting be it forwards or backwards and I think this is a good choice providing a dash of futuristic but in no way making it such that you can't also play in a contemporary setting.

I'm more wondering how much of the existing 2009-era content will also be included/compatible/easily-portable, if ArmA II content could be used without modification then everybody's happy. In fact though it wouldn't work on a marketing level I'd have preferred this to be (hope it might in practical respects still be) another Arrowhead-like expansion with engine updates and backwards compatibility. Either way, within six months of release there'll be a raft of realistic/contemporary units released so it's all good.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

^^ +1 to all that defunkt said.

At the end of the day BIS had to make a maketing/business decision that would allow the faranchise to continue. So I understand that the setting had to change somewhat to attract new players, and keep the interest of some of the current.

I have no concern with the futristic feel. The community will be capable of making era specific mod packges without too much difficulty (I hope)

[LANCERZz 10]

It's baffling that people really expected ArmA 3 to be just like the last 2 (and 1 standalone) games. It baffles me just as much as how on most games the 24/7 "one map" servers are the most populated ones.

Why would anyone pay 6 bucks for more of the same? ArmA 2 will still be there ones A3 comes out. If you hate the new game that much, no one is forcing you to leave the old one.

Also, there are a total of 9 screenshots for this game and a vague, 6 sentence plot that was probably written more to reveal the background than depict the entire single player. If you're already making predictions for how bad this game is going to be, not only can you not call yourself a BI fan, but you're also a raving pessimist.

[BigMorgan 11]

Personally I would have loved to see a Cold War scenario taking place in the early-to-mid 1960's.

But that's just me. No matter what, I am hooked on this series, and will be getting Arma 3.

Even if Israel is the "good guys." :p

[nodunit 397]

The story is what I care more about, if it can mesh well with the futuristic or dare I say "Possibly modern test units" then I'm for it all the more, the content while nice to have can be adjusted and past timelines revisited.

With all of the things that has been done and dedication shown do you honestly believe we won't see an abrams, leclerc, challenger etc in A3?

And there is no harm in having something truley new, hell I'd love to pilot the commanche especially if they made the flight model have its unique flight characteristics. And the mix of Kamov and Havoc helicopter is intriguing and not exactly impossible.. You get the tight controls the kamov had but the dedicated attack helicopter the havoc had, best of both worlds. Arma3 isn't cleaming to be an accurate portrayal of the current times and we should expand our minds to think "What could be possible.." rather than limiting ourselves to the now.

Edited May 20, 2011 by NodUnit

[instagoat 133]

What I mostly care about is improvements in the command interface. It´s not been changed since OFP times, and it´s in dire need of an overhaul.

And I agree, while it´s sci-fi, the equipment depicted isn´t exactly completely unrealistic. As for the lasers, for example, China has been experimenting with battlefield laser dazzle weaponery since the 70s or 80s. The kamov-mil collab is probably not a likely one, but not impossible either.

The only thing that makes me raise an eyebrow is the Opfor using Israeli weaponery... but we´ll see what that´s about.

Also lol, I get back, and there´s indeed new threads with people panicking. Aren´t there better things to do, rather than complain about a problem that´s nonexistent?

[NuclearBanane 10]

Only a few threads are up here now, and I´m already noticing a trend here. A lot of concern seems to be about the near-future scifi setting BI has to go on, with the KA-52/Mi-28 hybrid, the merkavas in digicam and the general future setting, as well as some features like the customizeable loadouts.

Ok so a futuristic setting that isn't 30 years ahead is fine.

Its the semi-plausible side of the future.

I do agree that making weapons that make non-nonsensical moves from the army to use primary weapons like the scar in OA which is very very limited in terms or adoption.

Its a stunt to appeal to CoD fishys

And helis are actually cool to have High tech stuff. I mean I love flying classics but those will come in mods or Exp ( Hint : MAKE a Cold war and modern Pack PLEASE, modders or Devs )

Now I´m wondering, why are people so conservative about this, instead of embracing the change and the fresh air that´s being breathed into Arma as a franchise with this?

Because Arma is the best starting platform to build off of to created a military shooter that feels realistic.

Un like PR, you can make sure your scenario is what your want.

( I love PR however )

This " fresh air " destroyed OFP, and it might be a dif dev.

The point still stands, fresh air is unrealistic soldier. Your to sick and tired to enjoy the countryside and when you do get that chance your in a trap.

Are you guys seeing the community threatened by a possible new influx of "COD-Kiddies"? Is it the anniversary of OFP that had you expect a similar setting and now leaves you disappointed? And why do so many people mind that it is a future setting anyway?

Because COD kiddies will demand a diminish in the TIME/REALISM/IMMERSION fun factor of the game.

Realism players or the specific market that we are require :

ALOT of time in game

Realism to the bones

which makes immersion on a " whole other level " of games

Then it will be fun for us

CoD fishys :

No immersion

therefore little play time

and realism mode is simply a 1 hit mode.

So its a preteen way of saying oh I'm better then you cuz I head shot 99 times out of a 100.

For us, we don't care about head shots, we care about those awesome moments when your behind enemy lines and an enemy patrol is walking right on top of you and you blow them away or when your 100% suppressed and you need to call in air support which is another player and confusion hits the both of you.

Those awesome movie like moments which will never happen in COD because everything is done for you and combat lasts 1.2 seconds or less!

there fore cod fishy are LITTERALY the opposite side of the market from where we stand. were like the grammar nazi and them the leet speakers.

Actually, their the type of people who love fast food like its gourmet and we are like the sticklers for extreme quality.

[Zipper5 74]

were like the grammar nazi and them the leet speakers.

Definitely not, looking at your post. Or even the bolded part.

All these people registering and proclaiming their ideas and opinions as if they know the game...

Ah well, guess it's the same with every game announcement.

[Devil Dogs SF 13]

People will never be happy I guess. I for one look forward to the future aspects, it's not like the realistic gameplay is going to be changed in favour of CoD like FPS, and ArmA 2 will not cease to exist once ArmA 3 comes out anyway, so if you don't like ArmA 3 because it isn't ArmA 2 with prettier graphics, fuck off and play ArmA 2.

Edited May 21, 2011 by Devil Dogs SF

[celery 8]

IMHO the first priority regarding equipment and units is the ability to create scenarios that have some kind of connection with the real world, past or present. If there are too many prototype systems at the expense of ones currently or historically in service, it means we can't make contemporary or historic missions that were simple as cakes in OFP, Armed Assault and Arma 2.

Edited May 21, 2011 by Celery

[dysta 10]

I think those kiddies will shut up when ARMA 3 is price of greens (hundred US dollars), because they won't bother Multiplaying without credit for it.

[Brute Force 10]

God, some people are so insecure.

I like COD, there, I said it. I also like ArmA2.

There is no reason to have to choose one or the other when we can have both. I like sometimes just casually going in and shooting shit up, other times I like to crawl around for a half hour to get that one good shot in.