Lack of content in vanilla Arma 3

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Just to clear it up. Lack of content, 110% exempts community made mods. Vanilla is the only factor at play in terms of content. Modded stuff does NOT count.

[chrisb 196]

To be frank, I'm not even sure anything is missing.

But I don't play the BI campaigns, so perhaps they are broken or something. What is this missing content, that was actually promised by the devs, is there a list ?

I'm unaware of firm promised content that didn't get in, perhaps someone can list it with links to articles where BI mention that it would be included in the game.

Genuine question and request, because I only buy these games for the sandbox side i.e. editor, adding content etc, not BI campaigns, so I may have missed something.:confused:

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

To be frank, I'm not even sure anything is missing.

But I don't play the BI campaigns, so perhaps they are broken or something. What is this missing content, that was actually promised by the devs, is there a list ?

I'm unaware of firm promised content that didn't get in, perhaps someone can list it with links to articles where BI mention that it would be included in the game.

Genuine question and request, because I only buy these games for the sandbox side i.e. editor, adding content etc, not BI campaigns, so I may have missed something.:confused:

There's no list to my knowledge, but what gets me the most, personally, is the major advertisement of water and Naval capabilities when Arma 3 was announced. For some this was a major selling point, and what we get is a short coming. With all that water, and a few thins to put in it that have rare effects on gameplay, or just impression on Naval capabilities as a whole. Take a look at the JSDG MK V. SOC, and you can tell that is probably what naval assets SHOULD look like in the vanilla game... but don't. The oceans feel naked. That's one place content lacks.

[Jackal326 1181]

There's no list to my knowledge, but what gets me the most, personally, is the major advertisement of water and Naval capabilities when Arma 3 was announced. For some this was a major selling point, and what we get is a short coming. With all that water, and a few thins to put in it that have rare effects on gameplay, or just impression on Naval capabilities as a whole. Take a look at the JSDG MK V. SOC, and you can tell that is probably what naval assets SHOULD look like in the vanilla game... but don't. The oceans feel naked. That's one place content lacks.

And if they'd poured hundreds/thousands of man hours into the naval assets, you'd complain they'd not included enough air assets. Its called compromise. I will concede the point that a lot of hype was drummed up about the improved water physics (and of course the ability to dive beneath the surface). All we got was one underwater rifle (to be fair, its one more than I expected), a mini-sub and re-breathers (as well as the usual assortment of surface craft). However, BI could have done worse and not even included those after hyping it as much as they did.

Again, I'm not defending the lack of depth to the content, but I will defend the fact they tried to add something of everything, to an extent; An extent that was limited by imprisonment and mid-cycle change of direction.

[chrisb 196]

There's no list to my knowledge, but what gets me the most, personally, is the major advertisement of water and Naval capabilities when Arma 3 was announced. For some this was a major selling point, and what we get is a short coming. With all that water, and a few thins to put in it that have rare effects on gameplay, or just impression on Naval capabilities as a whole. Take a look at the JSDG MK V. SOC, and you can tell that is probably what naval assets SHOULD look like in the vanilla game... but don't. The oceans feel naked. That's one place content lacks.

True, but didn't they only say there would be one submersible and a few boats, plus of course divers. Not sure they were planning a naval force of any type.

I understand what you mean, regards the potential that players may think could/should be in there, what with the new underwater feature. But there will probably at some stage be a full mod that goes that route. I suppose what I'm saying is the format is there ready for the sandbox players to use and make for. They didn't necessarily say they would flesh that feature out themselves.

Really here in this thread, the OP needs to put up a list of what was promised to be in the game, the content that is 'missing', if there is any. We can't talk about what is missing, until we have a list of that missing content plus the articles showing us where it stated, that the content was to be included.

I'm not taking BI's side, if there is genuinely missing content, that didn't have an alternative put in instead (equal alternative), then that needs to be corrected. But I can't remember what was or wasn't promised myself, additional to what is already in there.

[froggyluv 2136]

The reason this argument is endless is that Arma is a Jack of all trades, master of none type game. Much like the monstrosity of a vehicle, the car that can drive on land, fly like a plane and cruise in the water. It's foolish to complain how this hybrid could ever compete with a top notch f1racer, jet fighter or cigarette boat yet for those that prefer the compromise in light of diversity, is a breath of fresh air from the status quo.

The positives of this diversity allows for a much larger fanbase yet it must be understood that many complaints are extremely subjective to that user who can't or refuses to accept that their specific interest may not be the same as the next guy or devs.

Thus the range of complaints matches exponentially the vast scope of the game.

[mxmadman374 10]

Original poster said this game doesn't offer enough content for a $60 game. Best solution is to go buy another game with all that other content he's looking for with a $60 price tag.

I'd also be interested to hear what he finds. I hear call of duty is always on the cutting edge at this price point!

[devilslayersbane 28]

Original poster said this game doesn't offer enough content for a $60 game. Best solution is to go buy another game with all that other content he's looking for with a $60 price tag.

I'd also be interested to hear what he finds. I hear call of duty is always on the cutting edge at this price point!

Nor does anyone really take the time to see the depth of the content that's there. Please see my post on page 3 or 4.

[mxmadman374 10]

Hey FR4NCH3K,

we've had this exact discussion multiple times before with every answer to your concerns. Though since not everyone can be aware of everything, I'll explain a few things to you. Of course, things like mistaking a crude community-made photoshop mockup for official content could have been avoided by some research but some reasons are not directly apparent to everyone who hasn't closely followed the development of the game.

First of all, I can understand where you're coming from. Especially people who are relatively new to the community and started with Arma 2 can be quick to feel this way. Let me tell you something, Arma 2 gives you a wrong impression when it comes to amount of content. Most of the stuff that was in Arma 2 was a collection of Arma 1 models, old Game 2 concept models and naturally new assets. It was essentially the result of many, many years of collective effort across multiple development cycles.

Another of your major concerns appears that you remember content that was shown in the very early stages of the game when it wasn't released and prototypes such as the F35 or the Osprey were shown. But do you know that these were unaltered assets from Arma 2? Yes, this was no new content but just placeholders from Arma 2. Instead of simply throwing these in, the dev team decided to wait and created 2 new jets (Neophron and Wipeout). Personally, I am very happy to see that quality was valued over quantity.

Concerning assets like the railgun tank, this is a result of game design. Not many people actually know this but the game underwent a pretty radical change of design along with a new project lead. A majority of the team felt that the initial concepts of Arma 3 were heading in a too futuristic direction and predicted that a large portion of the community would not be happy with it and thus seemingly "unrealistic" weapon systems like the railgun tank were removed from the design scope. After that design change and before Arma 3 was available to any form of purchase, it was pretty clearly communicated what kind of content we can expect to see in the game.

Next up is legacy content available in the game files. You say you're paying for that content but it's not there? Well, you're speaking about it, so show us the classnames. What is stopping you from creating a small config file to enable it? (like other people already did) It is common for WIP or unused assets that were produced but don't fit into the design to be kept in the game files as legacy content.

If you are unhappy with the amount of content that is the game, you can make use of our wishlist thread, start creating content yourself, download content from the community or simply wait until the development team has finished the content they are constantly working on. What we have right now is what the dev team could achieve in the given time with the given resources. With the much higher fidelity and complexity we have in the game compared to Arma 2, don't you think it's only normal to have less quantity?

Above all, remember that Arma 3 and the dev team's vision for it isn't even near its completion. Features and content are still being worked on and will be delivered.

Additionally, I would appreciate if you and everyone else could try their best to keep the discussion civil and mature, or else I don't see this thread being open much longer.

Nor does anyone really take the time to see the depth of the content that's there. Please see my post on page 3 or 4.

I went and read it, but I think we're arguing the same thing her.

My post was sarcastic mostly as I don't think there are any games for $60 that have more depth and content (pertinent to the focus of the game at least).

If arma 3 isn't worth the $60 then I would argue no game is.

However I've been a proponent of more expensive games for a long time. You can't expect an industry like this to sell all products at or below a certain price otherwise it forces developers to compromise their vision in an effort to sell enough copies to stay viable.

[Defunkt 431]

The latest ''33 Things" trailer is a good reminder about just how much this game includes (content and functionality).

[Jackal326 1181]

I went and read it, but I think we're arguing the same thing her.

My post was sarcastic mostly as I don't think there are any games for $60 that have more depth and content (pertinent to the focus of the game at least).

If arma 3 isn't worth the $60 then I would argue no game is.

However I've been a proponent of more expensive games for a long time. You can't expect an industry like this to sell all products at or below a certain price otherwise it forces developers to compromise their vision in an effort to sell enough copies to stay viable.

On the flip side of that, you get game series like COD that are pretty much copy paste. I remember a comparison of two cut-scenes from two "different" COD games being posted that were almost frame-for-frame the exact same, I think it was Ghost and MW2 or some-such EDIT:

). These games are brought out each year, every year and very rarely do anything new or unique. I suppose we could call Advanced Warfare a different direction, even if it was Titanfall without the mechs. These games are often expensive (£40-£45 - whatever that converts to in US/AUS $$$s) on Steam/Origin/UPlay, and people buy them because they're the "new COD". They often remain at this price for some time (to keep COD:AW as my example, its been out a couple of months and is still £39.99 on STEAM in the UK). Their DLC cycle has now kicked in, the first of 4 (I think) planned DLCs will soon be released (ZOMBIES!!!), and until the cycle is complete, we can all expect the game to remain at the £35-£40 mark. This is of course without mentioning the "Personalisation packs" that go for around the £3.50 mark and will make you look like this twat. There are four such "premium packs" at this time, with cheaper (~£2) alternatives.

Anyway, the point is, add all that up (the £40 game, the £35 "season pass" < every developer and their uncle is doing these now, even BI, and the 4x£3.50 'premium packs') you're looking at nearly £90. That is for a game that to the best of my knowledge (which isn't very extensive, I'm not a big COD fan) has the modding potential of a dry turnip.

I paid ~£30 for ArmA3, ~£15 for the DLC Collection Pass thing, and nothing for a set of mod tools (and of course the freely available mods) that have allowed me to edit this game into what I want/need it to be. What other game(s), allow you to have a T80 vs M1A1 duel one minute, a helicopter insertion into enemy occupied territory the next, and then fire a god-damn chicken gun at the side of a house the next.

Sure the engine may have seen better days. Sure we may still be combating bugs that have been a part of the series since OFP. But I personally, would not swap this game for any 'AAA' rated title on the market right now (though I might be tempted when GTA5 comes out :D).

Edited January 23, 2015 by Jackal326

[I give up 152]

More Islands (preferably playable).

Maybe splitting Altis in 2 scenarios can do the job, one being open field without towns and villages and another a pure urban environment (for those who like low fps).

Also, turrets where I can see what I am shooting without being through a screen.

About the price for A3 is ok, DLCs are another subject and do not worries me.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

More Islands (preferably playable).

Maybe splitting Altis in 2 scenarios can do the job, one being open field without towns and villages and another a pure urban environment (for those who like low fps).

Also, turrets where I can see what I am shooting without being through a screen.

About the price for A3 is ok, DLCs are another subject and do not worries me.

Please, lets not turn Arma into a selective area environment with barriers blocking you from going anywhere else. I would hate maps like this. I like the fact that i can choose an area of the country and fight in it, or make a base in one part of the country, use the new logistics to help supply a battle somewhere else in the country, this is the best feeling that only a game like Arma can provide. If THATS taken away, than Arma would be the same damn thing as other games. In fact, look at Insurgency. It's doing what Arma is meant to do, but on a much smaller scale, and if Arma was brought down to that kind of scale, it would be just another Battlefield contender in the gaming world's eyes.

[roshnak 41]

I paid ~£30 for ArmA3, ~£15 for the DLC Collection Pass thing, and nothing for a set of mod tools (and of course the freely available mods) that have allowed me to edit this game into what I want/need it to be. What other game(s), allow you to have a T80 vs M1A1 duel one minute, a helicopter insertion into enemy occupied territory the next, and then fire a god-damn chicken gun at the side of a house the next..

While I agree with the general sentiment of this post, I do think you should compare Arma 3's price as it is right now ($60), not as it was in a prerelease state.

[jakerod 254]

Original poster said this game doesn't offer enough content for a $60 game. Best solution is to go buy another game with all that other content he's looking for with a $60 price tag.

I'd also be interested to hear what he finds. I hear call of duty is always on the cutting edge at this price point!

ArmA 2... OFP/ArmA:CWA

Just because other games don't deliver as much for $60 doesn't mean this one has enough to support $60. Then again for me I don't think it is about amount of content as it is amount of content that I am interested in which is very little. I would be more willing to pay the $60 for ArmA 2 with a new mainland European terrain and a few extra vehicles thrown in (BMD-1, SA-9, M60, CH-53, etc.). Not saying it is bad just that I think ArmA 2 was the better game overall. That being said if I had to pay $60 for a game I would rather it be this than COD.

[St. Jimmy 272]

While I agree with the general sentiment of this post, I do think you should compare Arma 3's price as it is right now ($60), not as it was in a prerelease state.

Well Arma 3 with DLC bundle currently costs as much as a new console game from a store (65€) so it's not bad even then either. Though seems like $ are doing really bad in Steam because $85 = 75€

I bet that many people have bought Arma 3 from the -50% sale or in alpha/beta so likely many can afford to pay the extra for the bundle if they like the series.

[Gunter Severloh 4067]

Original poster said this game doesn't offer enough content for a $60 game.

Maybe the OP lacks the imagination to use the content already available.

Ever hear the concept, its not about how much time you have but what you do with it that matters, same applies here, its not about what you have, its about

what you do with what you have, when you have nothing, then something of anything is alot, when you have alot, craving more only begets more of itself.

I remember back in early OFP days before the modding went crazy, I was excited when Bis released a new patch and it had a few new things that were added to the game,

after the Resistance Expansion, the modding community went ape shit and it was like Christmas every day!

I had such a blast playing with the little I had coming up with all sorts of scenarios.

Aside the content already ingame you got to consider the number of content you can add to the game through the community, tbh its the community's content the

sandbox and mostly the ability to create anything you want with whatever that draws me to the game, I find myself really not buying other games, or not

playing games I bought as much or at all.

Most recent game I bought was Sniper Ghost warrior 2 back in early December and had only played it twice so far and keep coming back to Arma3 and Arma2CO,

sometimes Im in Arma1 and on occasion OFP. Imo learn to appreciate what you do have, as there are some and I know a couple who are unable to play the game.

[Tonci87 163]

Original poster said this game doesn't offer enough content for a $60 game. Best solution is to go buy another game with all that other content he's looking for with a $60 price tag.

I'd also be interested to hear what he finds. I hear call of duty is always on the cutting edge at this price point!

Oh or you go and buy Battlefield. Why BF? It pains me to say this, but even fucking Battlefield has more unique vehicles in it than Arma 3 does. You know that BIS has fucked up when a mainstream FPS shooter has more unique vehicles than Arma does.

[zimms 22]

Guess that's why BF was 120€ pre-release and Arma was 25€.

[Bouben 3]

Still the same debate about not having enough model designs while ignoring their actual functions?

[jakerod 254]

So let's see:

*List of A3 Assets*

List of OA Assets - That's right I chose the Expansion to compare. The one that came with less stuff. I'm not even going to try to count the stuff added if you merge it with the ArmA 2 or the DLC.

4 Service Rifles with variants (Katiba, Mx, Mk20, TRG-20/1)

10x Service Rifles – (M16A2, M4, FN-FAL, AK74, MK16, MK17, Enfield, AK47, G36, Sa58) AK47, AK74 (plus the other AK variants), M4, M16, Mk17, and Mk16 too similar for you? Fine...

7x Service Rifles - (M16, FN-FAL, AK74, MK16, Enfield, G36, Sa58)

1 Underwater Rifle (SDAR)

None because it was a desert and underwater isn't used enough to justify making one.

2 Marksman Rifles (Mk18 ABR, Rahim)

2x Marksmen Rifles - M14, SVD

2 LMG's (Zafir, Mk200)

7x MG - M249, M60, M240, MG36, Mk48, PK, RPK

3 SMG's (Sting, Vermin, PDW)

None I guess unless you count the Uzi or shortened other weapons

5 Pistols (ACP-C2, 4-five, Zubr, P07, Rook-40)

5x Pistol - M9, Makarov, Revolver, Glock, Uzi

2 Sniper Rifles (GM6 Lynx, M320)

4x - M107, KSVK, M110, M24

4 Launchers (Titan AA, Titan AT, RPG-42, PCML)

10x - MAAWS, Javelin, Metis, RPG-7, RPG-18, Stinger/Igla, Dragon, M79, Mk13, M32

3 MRAPS (Hunter, Ifrit, Strider)

3x - Humvee, UAZ, Landrover

3 Trucks (HEMTT, Zamak, Tempest)

3x - MTVR, Ural, V3S

5 Transport helos

5x - UH60, CH-47, MH-6, Mi17, UH1

2 Gunships

2x - Apache, Hind

3 CAS Jets

3x (all of them available on release) – A10, L39, SU25

Oh and what’s this? 2x Transport planes? C-130, AN-2

4 Static weapons

13x - 2B14, AGS, DSHKM, Igla, KORD, M252, M2, Mk19, SPG9, Metis, TOW, Zu23, Stinger

1 Technical

1x - Offroad

3 Unique Wheeled APC's

4x - Stryker, BTR-60, BRDM-2, BTR40

3 Unique MBT's

4x - M1A1, T55, T72, T34

2 Unique Tracked APC's

3x - BMP-2, M2A3, M113

2 (albeit identical) Artillery Pieces

4x - M119, D30, MLRS, GRAD

2 (albeit identical) AA Guns

3x - M6 Linebacker, Shilka, Avenger

3 Unique Autonomous vehicles

?x - AH-6X, Predator, Seafox?, Chukar? (Never really used any of these)

2 Unique Underbarrel GL's

2-3x - M203, GP30 (Not sure if the SCAR is unique)

3 Unique Boats

Doesn’t make sense to have them since it is a desert

4 Unique Civilian Vehicles

10x - Bus, Pickup, Lada, Landrover, S1203, Motorcycle, Bike, SUV, Limo, Volha

1 Civilian Helo

1 Civilian Plane

270km sq Island

162km^2 plus infinite land which wasn’t updated resulting in broken user made missions

Don't get me started on the lack of diversity in useful and diverse terrain objects on Altis/Stratis.

20km sq Island

67km^2 plus infinite land, 4km^2 plus infinite land

An Arma Campaign with decent voice acting

A campaign with diverse missions that doesn’t need to shoot down a helicopter every five seconds to build tension… oh and it was released with the game.

Cooperative

12-13 showcase missions

5 Showcase missions + 7 Actual Missions + 15 Tutorial = 27 Missions

Doesn’t count the 3 new campaigns or additional missions from the DLC

A Real-time 3d editor

A real-time 3d editor

A Virtual Arsenal to see what you kit your character with

Armory

multiple suppressors, rail attachments, and optics

Multiple weapon variants for this… I will admit A3 is better in this category

Interchangeable uniforms, vests, and backpacks

A3 beats OA on this one too. 8 different factions (maybe 9) before DLC.

Extra content coming out with DLC content for free

Extra content coming out with DLC for free w/ lower res textures which I never even noticed

Adds 2x New Militaries and PMCs plus 3 new campaigns, one of which was the best one since Resistance. 4x “New†terrains. More than just 2x helicopters and a few showcase missions.

Things I didn’t get a chance to mention:

Women

ATV

Motorcycle

SCUD

OA Doesn't force you to have Steam to play

I'm having trouble finding where I'm supposed to feel shortchanged. Almost all of this content was handcrafted for ArmA 3, not just put together as remnants of a cancelled project (*cough* *game2* *cough*). But seriously, that's why Arma 2 had such an overwhelming library of content, because the models were leftovers.

As noted here or else where, I would've rather had A2 stuff with a few new vehicles than ANY of the content of ArmA 3 other than Altis and Stratis. Hell, I would've taken the exact same vehicles with no additions but it wasn't preferred. I do have a sneaking suspicion though if they suddenly switched things out for Cold War equipment and removed all the modern/sci-fi stuff on the terrains I wouldn't care about 90% of this.

Arma 3's release was by far the most stable, even if it didn't have loads of content.

This is true for three reasons:

They had the game in Alpha release so they had more people to test it than any other title.

They built off the backs of the older games.

They added so few things that there were bound to be less bugs.

I feel bad disliking this game for the record, I really do. I've even forced myself to try to like it but I can't. I know they put a lot of work into it and they all did a great job but they went the wrong direction in my opinion. There were so many, what I consider to be, poor design decisions made during the progress of the game. The first one being calling it Arma 3. I wouldn't have cared if they stuck with their sci-fi game idea and kept it out of this series. Hell, I may have even bought it and enjoyed it.

Edited January 24, 2015 by Jakerod

[roshnak 41]

This is true for three reasons:

They had the game in Alpha release so they had more people to test it than any other title.

I'll grant you this, but:

They built off the backs of the older games.

With, the exception of OFP, when has this ever not been the case?

They added so few things that there were bound to be less bugs.

Are you talking about content, or features? Becuase as far as I am aware, Arma 3 had as many as or more new game mechanics than any previous title (again, with the exception of OFP). Why would you expect there being fewer car models to cause there to be less bugs?

Edited January 24, 2015 by roshnak

[Jackal326 1181]

1 Underwater Rifle (SDAR)

None because it was a desert and underwater isn't used enough to justify making one.

A big FEATURE you brushed over there is the underwater aspect of ArmA3, when compared to ArmA2 (where swimming for too long made you drop all your kit and you were unable to swim underwater at all). I know you were too busy slagging off the lack of content, but don't miss the features, unless you're arguing a point from a biased opinion...

[jakerod 254]

With, the exception of OFP, when has this ever not been the case?

It has always been that case. The point is that each new game they get to refine and fix bugs with the last one. So for example, if they released ArmA 3 with no new features, the game would be guaranteed to be less buggy even if they only fixed one thing. So each game becomes less buggy than the last. So I guess really the point is that, being the least buggy release is pretty much a guarantee. In my experience, each game has been less buggy than the last.

Are you talking about content, or features? Becuase as far as I am aware, Arma 3 had as many as or more new game mechanics than any previous title (again, with the exception of OFP).

Yeah that might be a good point. It is possible that it does. I think a lot of them are just things I don't really care about. Although at the same time I could also make the argument that they had more people working on the game this time too. So let's knock out point 3's "less features" attribute and change it to "more people working on it".

Why would you expect there being fewer car models to cause there to be less bugs?

Because a lot of bugs, and some of the more obvious ones (although less important), are results of problems with models or something relating to models.

A big FEATURE you brushed over there is the underwater aspect of ArmA3, when compared to ArmA2 (where swimming for too long made you drop all your kit and you were unable to swim underwater at all). I know you were too busy slagging off the lack of content, but don't miss the features, unless you're arguing a point from a biased opinion...

Maybe it is a feature that I just don't care about. I've never bought an ArmA game so I could swim underwater. It is almost, not quite, but almost a useless feature to me. Not to mention I suspect it was responsible for breaking ponds and I much would've rather seen them put their efforts into non-0 water so that realistic rivers were possible. I never cared about the dropping kit into the water feature of ArmA 2. In 90% of the cases I played it was realistic.

Also keep this in mind about me; modding and playing this game has been my hobby for literally half of my life. I was 13.5 years old when I started playing and I turn 27 this year. I always stuck by BI and defended their games when the releases were buggy as hell. I enjoyed them the entire time. Sure I would get annoyed sometimes but I always found my way back. This time is different though. I don't fully understand why but I just can't enjoy this one. I think some of it is me being worried that I will never see my own personal "Perfect ArmA" because they seem to be moving further and further away from it. And as they keep moving further away from it, it will be harder and harder to mod this into that game in my head especially when factoring in the less and less time you have as you grow up. So just keep that in mind when talking to me about ArmA 3.

Plus, I really wish Marek still believed this:

“[…] today's high tech wars don't seem to have as much potential for a good game as the conventional infantry / armour / aircraft war has. No other period offers such a huge selection of military equipment […]â€

-Marek Spanel, on the topic of the Cold War in video games

Edited January 24, 2015 by Jakerod

[devilslayersbane 28]

List of OA Assets - That's right I chose the Expansion to compare. The one that came with less stuff. I'm not even going to try to count the stuff added if you merge it with the ArmA 2 or the DLC.

4 Service Rifles with variants (Katiba, Mx, Mk20, TRG-20/1)

10x Service Rifles – (M16A2, M4, FN-FAL, AK74, MK16, MK17, Enfield, AK47, G36, Sa58) AK47, AK74 (plus the other AK variants), M4, M16, Mk17, and Mk16 too similar for you? Fine...

7x Service Rifles - (M16, FN-FAL, AK74, MK16, Enfield, G36, Sa58)

1 Underwater Rifle (SDAR)

None because it was a desert and underwater isn't used enough to justify making one.

2 Marksman Rifles (Mk18 ABR, Rahim)

2x Marksmen Rifles - M14, SVD

2 LMG's (Zafir, Mk200)

7x MG - M249, M60, M240, MG36, Mk48, PK, RPK

3 SMG's (Sting, Vermin, PDW)

None I guess unless you count the Uzi or shortened other weapons

5 Pistols (ACP-C2, 4-five, Zubr, P07, Rook-40)

5x Pistol - M9, Makarov, Revolver, Glock, Uzi

2 Sniper Rifles (GM6 Lynx, M320)

4x - M107, KSVK, M110, M24

4 Launchers (Titan AA, Titan AT, RPG-42, PCML)

10x - MAAWS, Javelin, Metis, RPG-7, RPG-18, Stinger/Igla, Dragon, M79, Mk13, M32

3 MRAPS (Hunter, Ifrit, Strider)

3x - Humvee, UAZ, Landrover

3 Trucks (HEMTT, Zamak, Tempest)

3x - MTVR, Ural, V3S

5 Transport helos

5x - UH60, CH-47, MH-6, Mi17, UH1

2 Gunships

2x - Apache, Hind

3 CAS Jets

3x (all of them available on release) – A10, L39, SU25

Oh and what’s this? 2x Transport planes? C-130, AN-2

4 Static weapons

13x - 2B14, AGS, DSHKM, Igla, KORD, M252, M2, Mk19, SPG9, Metis, TOW, Zu23, Stinger

1 Technical

1x - Offroad

3 Unique Wheeled APC's

4x - Stryker, BTR-60, BRDM-2, BTR40

3 Unique MBT's

4x - M1A1, T55, T72, T34

2 Unique Tracked APC's

3x - BMP-2, M2A3, M113

2 (albeit identical) Artillery Pieces

4x - M119, D30, MLRS, GRAD

2 (albeit identical) AA Guns

3x - M6 Linebacker, Shilka, Avenger

3 Unique Autonomous vehicles

?x - AH-6X, Predator, Seafox?, Chukar? (Never really used any of these)

2 Unique Underbarrel GL's

2-3x - M203, GP30 (Not sure if the SCAR is unique)

3 Unique Boats

Doesn’t make sense to have them since it is a desert

4 Unique Civilian Vehicles

10x - Bus, Pickup, Lada, Landrover, S1203, Motorcycle, Bike, SUV, Limo, Volha

1 Civilian Helo

1 Civilian Plane

270km sq Island

162km^2 plus infinite land which wasn’t updated resulting in broken user made missions

Don't get me started on the lack of diversity in useful and diverse terrain objects on Altis/Stratis.

20km sq Island

67km^2 plus infinite land, 4km^2 plus infinite land

An Arma Campaign with decent voice acting

A campaign with diverse missions that doesn’t need to shoot down a helicopter every five seconds to build tension… oh and it was released with the game.

Cooperative

12-13 showcase missions

5 Showcase missions + 7 Actual Missions + 15 Tutorial = 27 Missions

Doesn’t count the 3 new campaigns or additional missions from the DLC

A Real-time 3d editor

A real-time 3d editor

A Virtual Arsenal to see what you kit your character with

Armory

multiple suppressors, rail attachments, and optics

Multiple weapon variants for this… I will admit A3 is better in this category

Interchangeable uniforms, vests, and backpacks

A3 beats OA on this one too. 8 different factions (maybe 9) before DLC.

Extra content coming out with DLC content for free

Extra content coming out with DLC for free w/ lower res textures which I never even noticed

Adds 2x New Militaries and PMCs plus 3 new campaigns, one of which was the best one since Resistance. 4x “New†terrains. More than just 2x helicopters and a few showcase missions.

Things I didn’t get a chance to mention:

Women

ATV

Motorcycle

SCUD

OA Doesn't force you to have Steam to play

As noted here or else where, I would've rather had A2 stuff with a few new vehicles than ANY of the content of ArmA 3 other than Altis and Stratis. Hell, I would've taken the exact same vehicles with no additions but it wasn't preferred. I do have a sneaking suspicion though if they suddenly switched things out for Cold War equipment and removed all the modern/sci-fi stuff on the terrains I wouldn't care about 90% of this.

This is true for three reasons:

They had the game in Alpha release so they had more people to test it than any other title.

They built off the backs of the older games.

They added so few things that there were bound to be less bugs.

I feel bad disliking this game for the record, I really do. I've even forced myself to try to like it but I can't. I know they put a lot of work into it and they all did a great job but they went the wrong direction in my opinion. There were so many, what I consider to be, poor design decisions made during the progress of the game. The first one being calling it Arma 3. I wouldn't have cared if they stuck with their sci-fi game idea and kept it out of this series. Hell, I may have even bought it and enjoyed it.

I'd like you to do a couple of things:

Take out Reskin's from Arma 2 (including guns, vehicles, etc)

Look at the Focus of ArmA 3's development (has been stated numerous times that stability/features have been at the heart of A3)

Take another look at the "futuristic" content of A3 (because most of it isn't. There are companies even developing power armor on the HALO-esque level)

Also take out models from OA that were made from their "Game 2" project.

Here's my point: almost every bit of content in Arma 2 (and even OA) was recycled from previous projects. That's not to say that A3 doesn't do so at certain points (I'm looking at you L-159. You can't hide just because you have A-143 in your name now.) but most of the A3 models are fresh and new and actually look good compared to other games. That being said, Arma 3's gameplay is not solely about how the content looks, but I'm willing to bet that people didn't buy Arma 2 CO because the models look great. Arma 3 does exactly what it's supposed to. It provides a good, (mostly) stable base for the community to build on. Not only that but it also does what a game is supposed to do and provide vanilla content that (with proper attention to detail) provides for gameplay of multiple styles. I'm aware that Arma 2 and OA had a lot of content; however, when looking at it from a development standpoint, it stands to reason that the library of content in Arma 2 was enormous compared to many development cycles. Plus, had many of these assets been used in Arma 3, it would have (and don't tell me it wouldn't, because you're lying) brought down the visual immersion of the game which is the most direct form immersion the game has to offer.