Arma 3 is too futuristic

[goaz 11]

We poor "idiots" paid 50 euro for ARMA3 which is a futuristic crap shit, with a stupid nonsense island and with "fantasy" factions such as iranian and bullshit like that....the ARMA series have been completely ruinned, and out there we have this SUPERB VB3 ENGINE with all these beatiful helicopeters, airplanes, vehicles ad and weapons!!! HONESTLY ARMA3 is the worst ever created game of all series since the lovely Operation flashpoint.

Altis is just a ridiculouse terrain with all due respect, we need a real MILSIM .

I will not give to BI one more single euro untill they change the game with all all REALISTIC vehicles/weapons name!!!

[Chairborne 2594]

Who needs to attach it when you can the new tacti00l landing?

http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121226021524/starshiptroopers/images/f/f1/Image1.jpg (270 kB)

Join up now!! Service grants citizenship!! ;)

[Maio 293]

We poor "idiots" paid 50 euro for ARMA3 which is a futuristic crap shit, with a stupid nonsense island and with "fantasy" factions such as iranian and bullshit like that....the ARMA series have been completely ruinned, and out there we have this SUPERB VB3 ENGINE with all these beatiful helicopeters, airplanes, vehicles ad and weapons!!! HONESTLY ARMA3 is the worst ever created game of all series since the lovely Operation flashpoint.

Altis is just a ridiculouse terrain with all due respect, we need a real MILSIM .

I will not give to BI one more single euro untill they change the game with all all REALISTIC vehicles/weapons name!!!

Hey Goaz,

You are free to express your opinion on the game, but if you were trying to gather sympathy from other players or convince the developers to switch their focus to present day conflicts/tech, using words like " futuristic crap shit" and "bullshit" will most likely have the opposite effect.

The developers are aware that a portion of the community prefers present day technology, but at this point in time they have to stick to their current design direction.

I'll be honest with you, there are moments when I wish A3 kept the "present day" theme as well, specifically when it comes to vehicles like the Humvee or Uaz for that vulnerability factor they gave when you drove them.

As for the VBS series, it costs several thousand dollars :D

[goaz 11]

Hi Maio,

I am sorry for the bad words used, I didn't intend to offend anyone of the developers or of this great community, I am very convincted that with the choice they made to switch to "futuristic era gameplay" BI has lost thousands of gamers and buyers and potential buyers as well.

The game in my opinion need to be totally changed by switching back to actual/present era, without this there cannot be a milsim nor bohemia interactive can pretend to call this game a "the best military simulator available" , this is not a simulator at all, it's just a concept/fantasy game that has nothing to do at all with the previous great games such as OFP and ARMA2.

Not to mention the choice of the terrain and of the faction: it's not going to happen at all in the next 500 years to have IRANIAN army on an European island, it's just ridiculous.

All in the game looks so ugly, the vehicles and helicopters seem to be just TOYS.

Just a question for you as I couldn't find any info about it but it has certainly been widely discussed over the time: Why BI changed their path with this futuristic/conecpt art game rather than continue with the "tradition"? Was it a matter of royalties regarding the usage of present weaponary or what else?

Thanks in advance.

[nodunit 397]

Just gotta chime in pertaining to the tangent about "futuristic" military equipment shown ingame when the majority of it is either actual present day stuff or dropped experiments of the past. If anything Arma 3's arsenal is for the most part more up to date than arma 2 would be at this time, check this thread out if you don't believe me. http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?132745-Is-Arma-3-authentic

Granted there are some things that don't exist such as the kajiman and a few others but you'll find the vast majority either is real equipment or is based on real concepts.

[Chairborne 2594]

Yet it's just a mashup of prototypes and concepts that are not emplyed by any real world army in this current setup, let alone OPFOR look like aliens and have a ridiculous camo that works only on mars and maybe altis, so you end up always playing with NATO or AAF vs Aggressors or some other random community made faction.

You don't want to give us the Marines or British Army or whatever? Fine, I'd rather play with a proper Israeli army with correct uniforms and hardware, and with proper Iranian army, than having to constantly play pretend with a mixture of things taken here and there around the world with an 8bit camo applied.

A very wide part of the hardcore arma gamers come from milsim communities that enjoy this kind of stuff, the random casual altis life/breaking point/epoch gamers don't really care about this.

So why taking away one of the most important features that kept the hardcore community alive?

After all the complaints you'd think maybe BI learned its lesson, instead they come up with more concept vehicles. Blah.

[13islucky 10]

http://img1.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20121226021524/starshiptroopers/images/f/f1/Image1.jpg (270 kB)

Join up now!! Service grants citizenship!! ;)

Holy shit I hadn't realized how similar they were haha

[AveryTheKitty 2626]

IMO I like the setting of A3. But for the next game, I wouldn't mind if it was modern time stuff (which will be futuristic by the time it comes out, say, around 2016/2017 or something). I just hope I get a solid game with good amounts of content and the core game play is good. I don't milsim (I prefer casual), but there always will be mods to make these games more realistic.

[maddogx 13]

I don't mind the futuristic setting too much, but I will agree that it was an unexpected break from the OFP/Arma tradition of realism and it's understandable that some people are disappointed with it. Speaking as a big fan of the Arma series but also of all things sci-fi, I think if anything they should have gone all out and made a full sci-fi game (like what BF2142 was to BF2), rather than this in-between, "kind or realistic but with different names" stuff. It just seems weird.

Assuming they decide to make an Arma 4, my vote would be on realistic modern day equipment (with real weapon/vehicles names) first, or full blown BF2142-style sci-fi second. One way or the other, not in-between.

If anyone is expecting them to "change it back" in Arma3 or even the expansion, I think you'll be disappointed. Whatever reasons they had for going down this path, it's almost certainly too late to go back during this iteration of the game.

[warlord554 2065]

the game isn't complete either, as I'm pretty sure they have another terrain planned. I personally have never bought any arma game for the vanilla content, its what the community can do with it that has my full attention. I thank the devs for allowing ppl to add to/modify an already great platform

[Harzach 2505]

We poor "idiots" paid 50 euro for ARMA3 which is a futuristic crap shit, with a stupid nonsense island...!

Why would you buy a game that you knew you weren't going to like? And how exactly is Altis "stupid nonsense"?

And are we really going to do this topic again?

[Rydygier 1302]

this SUPERB VB3 ENGINE with all these beatiful helicopeters, airplanes, vehicles ad and weapons!!!

Did you really launched at least once VBS3, or it is based only on youtube promos? Did you saw these models? I have strange feeling, so majority of players talking about "playing" VBS like about perfect dream of realism fans would be heavily disappointed. VBS isn't a game, its goal is not to entertain the user nor provide him a fun and user can see and feel that truth at every step inside VBS. Therefore it isn't good idea at all to take Arma towards VBS. Some things from VBS could be nice to see here, but that's it. Also, if someone thinks, the software as expensive as VBS is has to be nearly perfect as for performance, lack of bugs/issues etc. Would be disappointed too.

And yes, futurism (or maybe modernism?) of A3 was risky decision IMO, and can be disliked, especially if one (and I think many are) is accustomed to modern (or as for today rather close past) entourage.

Edited October 21, 2014 by Rydygier

[nikiforos 450]

Thanks to the mods this game survives the futuristic cataclysm. I'm not a fan of futuristic games except , maybe, Star Citizen in the future.

Altis for me is totally OK and when I create missions through the editor I always choose places that are good for combat.

[ProfTournesol 956]

And how exactly is Altis "stupid nonsense"?

No clue either. Even if i don't find the settings very appealing too, I'm glad not to have to play another iteration of Irak or Astan and US/Taliban or US/RF again.

[Greenfist 1863]

Futuristic? All the tech in the game is from the 80s in terms of functionality.

Oh, right; CSAT helmet isn't a WW2 model I like to see in modern games. And where's the almost 70 year old AK-47? The marvel of modern warfare! ;)

[Chairborne 2594]

Futuristic? All the tech in the game is from the 80s in terms of functionality.

Oh, right; CSAT helmet isn't a WW2 model I like to see in modern games. And where's the almost 70 year old AK-47? The marvel of modern warfare! ;)

Still more immersive than what we have right now. :rolleyes:

[Maio 293]

Hi Maio,

I am sorry for the bad words used, I didn't intend to offend anyone of the developers or of this great community, I am very convincted that with the choice they made to switch to "futuristic era gameplay" BI has lost thousands of gamers and buyers and potential buyers as well.

The game in my opinion need to be totally changed by switching back to actual/present era, without this there cannot be a milsim nor bohemia interactive can pretend to call this game a "the best military simulator available" , this is not a simulator at all, it's just a concept/fantasy game that has nothing to do at all with the previous great games such as OFP and ARMA2.

Not to mention the choice of the terrain and of the faction: it's not going to happen at all in the next 500 years to have IRANIAN army on an European island, it's just ridiculous.

All in the game looks so ugly, the vehicles and helicopters seem to be just TOYS.

Just a question for you as I couldn't find any info about it but it has certainly been widely discussed over the time: Why BI changed their path with this futuristic/conecpt art game rather than continue with the "tradition"? Was it a matter of royalties regarding the usage of present weaponary or what else?

Thanks in advance.

Goaz if I recall correctly, BI's official position on their current design direction was that they wanted to do a Sci-Fi version of Arma which (due to unknown reasons) was later "downgraded" to a more down to earth near future setting. Understandably, creative freedom was also a factor.

I have no idea if royalties played a major role in influencing the above, as they have never commented (as far as I know) on the subject.

[Greenfist 1863]

Still more immersive than what we have right now. :rolleyes:

I'm sure it is, because that's what we're used to. Anything familiar becomes immersive more easily. But I for one, have seen enough of the same equipment in my last 25 years of gaming. Arma 3 is refreshing. And as long as the mechanics and technology is realistic and existing, I really don't mind what the weapons look like.

[Harzach 2505]

Still more immersive than what we have right now. :rolleyes:

Rolleyes indeed. I see this comment often, and it is essentially an admission by the commenter that they have no imagination. Which is odd for someone who is ostensibly a fan of make-believe.

I'm writing this as a life-long gamer who has been fully immersed in computer games games from Zork to Planetside 2, not to mention tabletop games such as D&D and Traveller.

[goaz 11]

Yet it's just a mashup of prototypes and concepts that are not emplyed by any real world army in this current setup, let alone OPFOR look like aliens and have a ridiculous camo that works only on mars and maybe altis, so you end up always playing with NATO or AAF vs Aggressors or some other random community made faction.

You don't want to give us the Marines or British Army or whatever? Fine, I'd rather play with a proper Israeli army with correct uniforms and hardware, and with proper Iranian army, than having to constantly play pretend with a mixture of things taken here and there around the world with an 8bit camo applied.

A very wide part of the hardcore arma gamers come from milsim communities that enjoy this kind of stuff, the random casual altis life/breaking point/epoch gamers don't really care about this.

So why taking away one of the most important features that kept the hardcore community alive?

After all the complaints you'd think maybe BI learned its lesson, instead they come up with more concept vehicles. Blah.

Hi Chairborne, thanks for your comments, I am glad to not be the only one who don't like arma3 at all, you have expressed much better than me the toughts about the so called "futuristic" choice made by BI.

If BI is not going to remake this game in a proper way, it's gonna die very soon.

[Kerc Kasha 102]

Hi Chairborne, thanks for your comments, I am glad to not be the only one who don't like arma3 at all, you have expressed much better than me the toughts about the so called "futuristic" choice made by BI.

If BI is not going to remake this game in a proper way, it's gonna die very soon.

Who could ever take complaints like this seriously? 'Remake the game' like anyone sane would pay attention to comments like that

[Harzach 2505]

If BI is not going to remake this game in a proper way, it's gonna die very soon.

I'm sorry, but you are delusional.

[mistyronin 1181]

If BI is not going to remake this game in a proper way, it's gonna die very soon.

I'd say that you should wait a week, nothing more, nothing less... and you will have at least a few mods high quality ( probably better than vanilla ) with tons of awesome content based in modern settings, for example RHS Escalation ( you could support the project BTW ).

Keep calm, and wait a week :)

Check their Facebook while you wait.

[goaz 11]

Can't wait to play with that , but I think a proper colder and snowy scenario is necessary for this mod :)

[slatts 1978]

Was it realistic that in OFP the Russians had a KA-50/V-80 which was only a prototype in 1985? That the Americans were using M16A2 and AH-64 when they weren't in service yet?

Arma 1. The SLA had a SU-34 and KA-50 yet only Russia uses them.

Arma 2. The Russians use the AK-107 as their primary assault rifle. The US Army uses the SCAR-L as their primary AR. Neither country does in real life. USMC uses M1A2 TUSK. They really don't.

OFP and Arma 1 are set on a fictional set of islands that don't exist, Arma 2 is set in 2 or 3 fictional countries that don't exist. Altis does exist and was going to be named it's proper name and set in its proper country till Greece bitched and moaned and arrested two devs. The setting had to be changed.

Altis/Lemnos is the most realistic conflict zone in the series to date. Greece and Turkey have kicked off numerous times over islands in the Aegean sea.

You mention "fantasy" factions. (Sure I'd agree with the look of CSAT being too.. you know) But we've always had "fantasy" factions. FIA, RACS, SLA, Takistan Army, CDF. So why's CSAT "Bullshit"?

So again, The Arma series is littered with *mistakes* or "Arma-verse" design choices. Previous Armas and Arma 3 are no different.