What weapons/vehicles would you like to see in ArmA 3?

[KurtG85 10]

And even after you have drawn the line in the sand on quality goals, there is still the issue of just how many guns it would take to create a 'Gran Tourismo' of guns. All that is time taken away from other assets for stuff that will probably be available after the community has filled a few blanks and BIS have released an expansion or 2.

Well I think quality modeling as many weapons as they can while not sacrificing more important areas of gameplay should be the goal. As I've mentioned every gun basically allows you to completely re-examine the gameplay. The guns are the most important toys of the sandbox so the more toys the better IMO.

[chortles 263]

Well I think quality modeling as many weapons as they can while not sacrificing more important areas of gameplay should be the goal.

At this rate, there's not much room to have both :p and Vespa made it clear in a thread on weapon accessories that no, they're not going to go as deep with guns:

http://kotaku.com/5920572/the-trouble-with-the-never+satisfied-gamer :p

We can't make all the things, or we'd end up in developer hell - together with Duke Nukem Forever.

As I've mentioned every gun basically allows you to completely re-examine the gameplay. The guns are the most important toys of the sandbox so the more toys the better IMO.

Vespa rebutted this as well:

RobertHammer - such games as Ground Branch are usually specialized, with narrow focus and scale. Arma3 is massive in every aspect, and people forget that. If we are to manage such project, we need to be ruthlessly effective with our time and resources.

The reason there is no daytime laser with flashlight, or "only" 3 slots on weapons, is that the cost would be too high - and that, in the end, would harm the project. It's easy to get carried away, obsess about small things and lose grip with reality - I saw it happen many times, always ending up badly. So even if it may seem twisted to an outsider, I actually am proud of dropping/not doing some features - because it means the team is healthy and focused on target.

Considering that he appears to still be a dev, that's the closest I've seen to an official position on the matter.

[KurtG85 10]

At this rate, there's not much room to have both :p and Vespa made it clear in a thread on weapon accessories that no, they're not going to go as deep with guns:Vespa rebutted this as well:Considering that he appears to still be a dev, that's the closest I've seen to an official position on the matter.

I don't know the specifics of development time and cost but my instinct would be to call BUSINESS-minded BS on that if he was referring to guns; an opportunity to sell more guns later on in an update. So the devs model something like a thousand square miles of land, shrubbery, geological architecture etc. and yet the time it takes to model a small number of objects with very simple animations is what would break the bank and push the devs into losing touch with reality? Thats a hard one to buy.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

Well I think quality modeling as many weapons as they can while not sacrificing more important areas of gameplay should be the goal. As I've mentioned every gun basically allows you to completely re-examine the gameplay. The guns are the most important toys of the sandbox so the more toys the better IMO.

Well ArmA’s appeal has always been its toys and sandbox nature and I don’t think that is about to change much. Though a few developers have said that there will probably be fewer toys out of the box this time around because they wanted to focus on stuff like game play mechanics and story lines. Also I don’t believe that EVERY gun would allow you to completely re-examine the game play, many of them would in fact feel kind of generic and you could probably clump many of them into groups, but that is getting a bit OT.

I don't know the specifics of development time and cost but my instinct would be to call BUSINESS-minded BS on that if he was referring to guns; an opportunity to sell more guns later on in an update. So the devs model something like a thousand square miles of land, shrubbery, geological architecture etc. and yet the time it takes to model a small number of objects with very simple animations is what would break the bank and push the devs into losing touch with reality? Thats a hard one to buy.

All I can say to that is download the tools and give them a try

[chortles 263]

Well ArmA’s appeal has always been its toys and sandbox nature and I don’t think that is about to change much. Though a few developers have said that there will probably be fewer toys out of the box this time around because they wanted to focus on stuff like game play mechanics and story lines.

Actually read an interesting rebuttal elsewhere about the value of the 'sandbox'...

The difference, I think, between the original Flashpoint and their games now, it's the focus. I think the focus of Ofp was the single player experience/campaign (even if it had lots of extra functionality), while now the focus it's on making a "toolbox game" with editor, modules, custom content, multiplayer, etc, and the campaign is more a (relative) footnote.

They (or at least lots of their fans in the official forum) don't understand there are lots of people that don't want a freaking toolbox. They don't buy games to then make a game for themselves, they want an already done game. In fact sometimes they use it as an excuse to some of their game faults ("yes, it's true that OA campaign is short, but you can make your own missions with the editor!" "yes, we don't have feature x, but you can imitate it through scripting!") which is missing the point.

And while you can download user made missions to skip the "make it yourself", it's not exactly ideal, you have to search for it, sometimes with the addons requisites it's a pain in the ass to run them, and more important, lots of user made missions just SUCK.

Funny thing is, that description of the existing state of Arma sounds like what would happen if BF/COD/MOH were opened up to modding. :lol: Still, the direction of Arma 3 that you described sounds like, as you said, the devs seeming to "focus on stuff like game play mechanics and story lines" this time around, instead of making it more sandbox.

Also I don’t believe that EVERY gun would allow you to completely re-examine the game play, many of them would in fact feel kind of generic and you could probably clump many of them into groups, but that is getting a bit OT.

This is one of the bigger problems with shooter games or "tactical" games such as Jagged Alliance 2 (with the v1.13 mod) or 7.62 - High Calibre (with the Blue Sun Mod)... how many meaningfully different variations can you make on a 5.56 mm assault rifle? Battlefield 3 already showed one of the issues with this, what with all the majority of the ARs and carbines being 5.56 mm and thus tending towards 25 damage per hit with a 30 round magazine (plus the "PDW-R" having a 20-round magazine but also 25 damage) to say nothing of 7.62 mm weapons dealing different damage depending on whether they're semiautomatic sniper rifles, bolt-action sniper rifles or battle rifles.

KurtG85, the idea that BI would "sell guns" falls flat when the devs have talked about user-made addons and Vespa even described in that thread how weapons can mount user-made accessories... plus to me it was clear from Vespa that "what would break the bank and push the devs into losing touch with reality" is excessive attention on small arms, especially when as Pathetic_Berserker said, this game is about revising the fundamentals and attention to the SP campaign (i.e. to the point of having no co-op functionality for that campaign lest that complicate things).

[scarecrow398 43]

I don't know the specifics of development time and cost but my instinct would be to call BUSINESS-minded BS on that if he was referring to guns; an opportunity to sell more guns later on in an update. So the devs model something like a thousand square miles of land, shrubbery, geological architecture etc. and yet the time it takes to model a small number of objects with very simple animations is what would break the bank and push the devs into losing touch with reality? Thats a hard one to buy.

All I can say to that is download the tools and give them a try

Yeeeea... >_>

A friend i know who works for BI Sim said some of the dev's still model entire objects in O²... somehow...

[PuFu 4600]

I don't know the specifics of development time and cost but my instinct would be to call BUSINESS-minded BS on that if he was referring to guns; an opportunity to sell more guns later on in an update. So the devs model something like a thousand square miles of land, shrubbery, geological architecture etc. and yet the time it takes to model a small number of objects with very simple animations is what would break the bank and push the devs into losing touch with reality? Thats a hard one to buy.

is not that you don't know specifics, but it's obviously you don't have the slightest clue about this subject...

[rye1 22]

is not that you don't know specifics, but it's obviously you don't have the slightest clue about this subject...

burrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrn.

[chortles 263]

is not that you don't know specifics, but it's obviously you don't have the slightest clue about this subject...

I like to imagine that Vespa's answer about "losing touch with reality" if getting bogged down in minutiae applies to more than just Arma 3 small arms... after all, Vespa might call that (what KurtG85 seems to want) too narrow a focus. :p

[GiveMeMoMeat 1]

McMillan TAC-50

[rasdenfasden 12]

I really wanna see some "old" guns. AKs, M16s and stuff shouldn't just vanish from the surface of the earth just because this game takes place in the future.

[scarecrow398 43]

I really wanna see some "old" guns. AKs, M16s and stuff shouldn't just vanish from the surface of the earth just because this game takes place in the future.

Agreed, seeing AKM's, though considering its 2020ish AK100's, M16's, ect in the hands of guerrillas would be great.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Most likely all the old stuff will be somehow upgraded, modernized or replaced - that's how development and progress works. Everyone wants to have an advantage over his opponent/rival/enemy.... ;)

[Armotekma 1]

I enjoy using otherwise useless firearms in ACE, guns with incredibly limited purpose other than to use for fun. I'd like to see "fun" weapons: bolt actions (K98, Swiss K31, Mosin Nagant), SMGs (MP40, Sten, PPSh-41) and other things, like the StG44, MG42, PzB 39, SVT-40, and G43.

Don't know why, but for me it's more fun to do an op with low-tech things than it is to have the latest "future weapon" with an ACOG, 2 red dots, a grenade launcher, etc.

[kot1k 13]

All that I can find in ARMA2. I don't give a f**k about all this futuristic nonsense, won't use it for more than couple of hours. At least, I want to play my old good 80s-90s-200x years warfare with all new features and graphics.

[Itsarclight 1]

All different kinds of Bell UH-1s!!!

The gunship, the ARA, slicks...

I seriously hope they add older weapons aswell, not just these hightech german weapons with laser pointers and climate control.

[pathetic_berserker 4]

Undreground factories making 6 shot guerilla guns

http://dvice.com/archives/2012/12/3d-printed-gun.php

Well maybe not exactly like the example shown , but you get the idea.

[slatts 1978]

Please...the IRA made RPG's outta plumbing parts and mortars from gas canisters that lasted longer :p

[dragon01 903]

Please...the IRA made RPG's outta plumbing parts and mortars from gas canisters that lasted longer :p

RPGs are a different thing though. It's basically a tube, it just needs to guide the rocket in the general direction of the target, so it isn't under a lot of stress. A gun is a different matter, as the gases exercise pressure on the chamber instead of flying out of the back.

OT: I'd like to see the AH-1Z and a next-gen AAV. And of course, an LCS for them to base on (sinkable, of course, or it wouldn't be an LCS:)).

[zaksle75 1]

Seems like the Americans are riding French VABs in the videos. So I'd like a RG- whatever number it is, MRAPS.

http://media.defenseindustrydaily.com/images/LAND_MRAP_MaxxPro_CAT-I_Camp_Liberty_Iraq_lg.jpg

Edited December 7, 2012 by Zaksle75
Couldnt post the image in a first post.

[Dr_feelgood 1]

barrett m107

m40a5

m24

barrett mrad system

sv89

svu

vss

chey tac 50

Remington msr

svd

L96

ksvk

m16a3

m4a1

scar 308

m21

m39 emr

sr25

modern mosin nagant sniper/vz-54

and a wide range of optics and attachments

i would really like a big weapon customization option in terms of attachments

let me know what you think

[Kristian 47]

barrett m107

m40a5

m24

barrett mrad system

sv89

svu

vss

chey tac 50

Remington msr

svd

L96

ksvk

m16a3

m4a1

scar 308

m21

m39 emr

sr25

modern mosin nagant sniper/vz-54

and a wide range of optics and attachments

i would really like a big weapon customization option in terms of attachments

let me know what you think

You just listed all the weapons you like, right?

I think weapons in ArmA 3 should somewhat make sense on why they are there. Civillian rifles and captured enemy rifles for Resistance, some modern new rifle for OpFor and Blufor. I think BIS Should

simply make all new guns, instead of taking guns of 2000 and still making people use them in 2035 (sure, some old rifles and classics should obviously be there, but BIS needs to actually make new guns aswel)

[call_911 10]

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=m4%2050%20cal%20future%20weapons&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCwQtwIwAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D0CrUARlmqso&ei=DQTGUJyCNcGO2gWZ1YDIBg&usg=AFQjCNHu1DQdiMwGBJQ7G_hvpGPJTf6I5g

[slatts 1978]

Seems like the Americans are riding French VABs in the videos.

Actually..go a little bit more to the east

[Kamov 1]

What is game without AK-47?