Reality Check

[Brain 12]

Great another one of these threads. At least my ignore list is getting a workout....

You put someone on your ignore list for creating a thread in which he states that he is disappointed (like at least 50% of the community)?

Really putting a bright shine on you (and the community displayed in your signature).

[instagoat 133]

~ What I'm saying is that everything should have its own unique standout points and drawbacks, but the way the game currently plays is that everything and its counterpart is the exact same thing but looking different. The MX is the same as the Katiba, the M2A1 is the same as the T-100. They look different but are pretty much exactly the same once you get past the looks.

Which is no different from previous iterations of the game.

M4 = Scar = M16 = Tavor = all other rifles with that magazine type. With tanks, ditto. Right now the M2 is different from the T-100 because it doesn't have independent machineguns for the commander, and it can carry 6 Infantrymen aboard. That alone is a tactical difference.

[spanishsurfer 58]

I agree with everything you've pointed out and I want more unique assets, I'm just not happy with the community making out that BIS are worse than hitler over all this. They've allowed people to work on AiA which is a hugely awesome gesture and they've promised more content in the coming months, all for a game that cost me $30. They haven't stopped working on the game and they never will, for people who claim to have played since OFP you all sure have a short term memory. When I bought Arma 2, I immediately stopped playing after a week, I picked it up again over a year later and it had improved dramatically.

The price is right for what is on offer and what BIS are promising, they support the game, they support the community, they do more than a lot of other devs in this regard. We all wish we could have more and what's more is we will get it and probably a lot sooner than a lot of you think.

BOOM, right on the money. Perfectly normal to critique the game but don't disrespect BIS or anyone else over the game.

[cross888 10]

I have to say as it stands I wouldn't pay full price for ARMA 3's Fantasy war.

Should have stuck with the forcible future like you did with ARMA2/OA.

If you wanted to fight Iranians then we should be fighting them with equipment that exists today.

Also who were your military advisers? Because you have counter insurgency vehicles with a general warfare game, fail.

All honestly like I said in the Alpha the hole futuristic nonsense has really not worked out for you and you've shot you're self in the foot.

[mistyronin 1181]

If you wanted to fight Iranians then we should be fighting them with equipment that exists today.

Most of A3 equipment exist today, and the ones that not are closesly based on existent.

[cross888 10]

Most of A3 equipment exist today, and the ones that not are closely based on existent.

Yeah Roger that but its mostly prototype nonsense and counter insurgency gear.

It has no place in general warfare. General warfare you would be using hummvee's and other light role assets over MRAP's Russian equivalent.

WW3 Scenarios 80% casualty rates so why waste all this high tech rubbish.

Also, its set in 2035 all the UK's fighting vehicles have been extended to 2035 which means all this nonsense units that "Exist" today wouldn't be about, if it isn't broken don't fix it.

Its stupid scifi nonsense.

[Smurf 12]

Of course it's Sci-Fi! It is not the real world, it's ARMAVERSE!

Everything before was just a coincidence.....

Dwarden, I meant that in a very positive way. You will survive the nuclear holocaust, make your way to the Bohemia HQ, and live out the rest of your days cackling in a triumphant yet evil yet depressed manner, while training mutant rats to go out and bring you food and training a dog to search for surviving women. The day the world ends will be the day I lose faith in BIS. (I'm disappointed though. You guys should have a giant underground complex where all your community can ride out a nuclear holocaust while hooked up to VR sets with ArmA 17.)

This GIF.

[dale0404 5]

Also, its set in 2035 all the UK's fighting vehicles have been extended to 2035 which means all this nonsense units that "Exist" today wouldn't be about, if it isn't broken don't fix it.

Its stupid scifi nonsense.

Err, no its not mate. The British Military are releasing new vehicles on a yearly basis. Look at the new vehicles that have been deployed for Afghanistan. That's just one example. Also, the British Military have a unit called TDU, Trials and Development Unit.

[Azzur33 1]

I have to say as it stands I wouldn't pay full price for ARMA 3's Fantasy war.

I wonder if the forum would be full of "Lazy BIS, you just ported everything from A2/OA/DLC's, only retexturing stuff and adding physics. Shame on you! Where's you creativity?! Why should I pay full price for just a little more polished Arma 2?!" -angryposting if the year was "2014".

There are still bullets and metal flying around. Not lasers. Soldiers are still "humans" not "mechs".

[mistyronin 1181]

Yeah Roger that but its mostly prototype nonsense and counter insurgency gear.

What is supposed to be counter-insurgency gear? The MRAP ATV is already been produced in big numbers as a replacement for the HUMMVE.

Patria is following the same path to replace the Stryker and AAV ( the USMC have already 2000 ). The Namer is being studied as replacement for the Bradley ( an btw is having good results in Israel ).

I don't think you consider the Merkava and its other variants a counter-insurgency gear. Neither the Comanche or the Ghost hawk,

I didn't get your mention about UK's fighting vehicles, theoretically UK only will be present in the releas as Spec Ops.

[novemberist 2]

Personally, I do like the "futuristic" weapons and vehicles in Arma 3 and couldn't care less if it's a realistic prediction of how warfare might look like in 2035. Who can tell anyway? Technical developement is by no means linear, so looking back 20 years doesn't neccesarily give any hints on how things develop in the next 20 years.

One could also argue that even the "copy and paste" vehicle parts, that many people complain about, are not all that unrealistic (or a sign of the BI's laziness) given the problems many countries have with their military budget and ongoing efforts to economize warfare. So why produce 10 different tank chassis/trucks/turrets, when it is much more economical to produce one standard version and customize it for different purposes?

The only thing that in my eyes seems really anachronistic is Altis. It looks and feels like an island that is stuck somewhere in the 1970's and really makes it hard to believe you are supposed to be in the year 2035.

[mistyronin 1181]

The only thing that in my eyes seems really anachronistic is Altis. It looks and feels like an island that is stuck somewhere in the 1970's and really makes it hard to believe you are supposed to be in the year 2035.

Uhm, to me it looks like a perfect mediterranean place nowadays ( I had lived there, in the mediterranean coast, for lots of years ). But with some "futuristic" scientist buildings.

But I'm agree with some chassis / truck sharing. It is a real fact, just look the Merkava has even more variants in real rife. Though the turrets, uav, and ships sharing...tend to be quite particular in every country.

[krycek 349]

@novemberist,regarding Altis I think it's alright,parts of the world are advancing at different stages,a village now won't get transformed into a town full of skyscrapers in 40 years or even more.I think even 100 years from now large parts of the world won't change in architecture much.The most high tech advancement in infrastructure&architecture would be in large cities where economy boom is concentrated.

Still with all of this I must say a medium 2035 modern city would have been nice around there.

[Bouben 3]

So why produce 10 different tank chassis/trucks/turrets, when it is much more economical to produce one standard version and customize it for different purposes?

I agree with you. There are real world examples of various normal/armored vehicles coming from the same basic parts with only slight modifications. I have no problem with it at all.

I would rather have 2 similar tanks with perfect physics and believable gameplay than 20 tanks that are only different in terms of visuals and behave like toys.

[novemberist 2]

Uhm, to me it looks like a perfect mediterranean place nowadays ( I had lived there, in the mediterranean coast, for lots of years ). But with some "futuristic" scientist buildings.

I'm not saying that a mediterranean island in 2035 would not be likely to look like Altis, but all the modern weaponry and stuff looks so out of place I think. Even the more modern office and hospital buildings look like soviet architecture from the 70s...

[derdoe 10]

Content wise the community should not really be disappointed except for missing transport and fighter aircraft.

But BIS normally was providing the sandbox environment that we need to play around, and the community steps in by creating addons. So in my eyes i can only say, well done BIS for an awesome implementation of PhysX, the awesome underwater world and 2 great islands to drive around!

[mistyronin 1181]

I'm not saying that a mediterranean island in 2035 would not be likely to look like Altis, but all the modern weaponry and stuff looks so out of place I think. Even the more modern office and hospital buildings look like soviet architecture from the 70s...

Look, at actual photos of a village close to where I was born:

photos from flickr

And even here in Finland we have hospitals build more than 100 years ago. Architecture tends to keep for lots of years.

[KING5TON 10]

The only thing that in my eyes seems really anachronistic is Altis. It looks and feels like an island that is stuck somewhere in the 1970's and really makes it hard to believe you are supposed to be in the year 2035.

Those solar power stations, military facilities and domes don't look like something from the 70's. They look more futuristic than what you see today IMO.

Having traveled a lot I can tell you that there are plenty of places that look 50 years behind the times compared to 1st world countries, with maybe a sprinkling of modern elements.

[novemberist 2]

Those solar power stations, military facilities and domes don't look like something from the 70's. They look more futuristic than what you see today IMO.

Having traveled a lot I can tell you that there are plenty of places that look 50 years behind the times compared to 1st world countries, with maybe a sprinkling of modern elements.

It wasn't supposed to be a real criticism of Altis in regards to realism. It's a beautiful, atmospheric and believable island. I just don't know if it's the right setting to give me an immersive 2035 future warfare feeling. But then again, it maybe doesn't have to...

[KING5TON 10]

It wasn't supposed to be a real criticism of Altis in regards to realism. It's a beautiful, atmospheric and believable island. I just don't know if it's the right setting to give me an immersive 2035 future warfare feeling. But then again, it maybe doesn't have to...

I'm sure it can be all things to all men once the Mod train truely rolls into town. Woooo Wooooooooo.

Is the military hardware in this game that futuristic though? If I didn't know it was supposed to be set it 2035 I wouldn't have guessed it was.

I'm not really up on military hardware though, I know they have guns that go bang and stuff, that's about it.

[novemberist 2]

Is the military hardware in this game that futuristic though? If I didn't know it was supposed to be set it 2035 I wouldn't have guessed it was.

I'm not really up on military hardware ...

Me neither, but there are laser designators, zoomable thermal optics and all that high tech stuff attached to even the most basic static machine guns in the game. This is probably not too far from the current status quo, but it makes spotting and engaging targets kinda boring at times.

But I can live with that, It's 2035 after all ;)

[quadrono 10]

For those complaining about the tech level of Altis. Altis is a Greek island, Greece is bankrupt NOW, I think Altis looks too futuristic to be Greek.

[stilton 0]

I wonder if the forum would be full of "Lazy BIS, you just ported everything from A2/OA/DLC's, only retexturing stuff and adding physics. Shame on you! Where's you creativity?! Why should I pay full price for just a little more polished Arma 2?!"

Verily..

Personally speaking i'm quite happy with the current state of the unreleased game considering we've been told they will continue to support it over the next few months with updates..

...And considering they are still updating Arma2 with new beta builds. (probably still are, haven't patched it in a while - the point being, one of the few developers who continue to support products and implement new features / content for FREE as a COURTESY )

Are there things i'd like them to improve... sure

But am i dissapointed in the percieved value I'm going to get out of the years i will probably get out of this game? for the price of a takeaway...

Not really.

..But i guess i'm a fan boy...Now where's my bottle...

[metalcraze 290]

So BIS didn't even bother to reskin (which in itself is bad) static weapons?

I mean it's already hard telling friendly vehicles from enemies unless it's a bright day and you have binos but how are we going to tell which static weapon is friendly?

Regardless the original post is very spot on. Nice work OP, you nailed it perfectly.

Edited September 6, 2013 by metalcraze

[novemberist 2]

So BIS didn't even bother to reskin (which in itself is bad) static weapons?

I mean it's already hard telling friendly vehicles from enemies unless it's a bright day and you have binos but how are we going to tell which static weapon is friendly?

Well in that case, it's not so much the weapon itself, regardless of its camo, but the guy behind it that detemines whether a static weapon is friendly or not, is it?