Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Sub-Human

What do you think of ArmA3's futuristic setting?

How do you feel about ArmA3's futuristic setting?  

220 members have voted

  1. 1. How do you feel about ArmA3's futuristic setting?

    • I'd rather have a modern or historic (Cold War) setting
      101
    • I prefer it to the modern setting of previous games
      44
    • I don't care about the setting as long as the game is a realistic simulation
      47
    • I'd like to see a new and improved futuristic setting (no CSAT bug helmets)
      27


Recommended Posts

With the influx of modern-era mods, I think it's time to ask the community how they feel about 2035.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

absolute trash in my opinion.

Not only do many of the designs for "future weapons" suck and are uninspired.

The whole setting sucks.

Arma 2 did it right.

Woods and slavs

thats all you need.

---------- Post added at 19:40 ---------- Previous post was at 19:35 ----------

the next game should be based on a ukraine like scenario

where one strategic buffer country is being fought over by 2 world powers who never actually militarily intervene. But instead send mercs and prop up "protest" groups to create a civil war that the actual countrymen didnt want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2035 feels awfully close to right now. I mean the other day I was admiring pictures of the Hunter being used in Iraq/Afghanistan. And then and then, I saw a video of Russian Spetznaz using the Ifrit in all black to raid a buiding held by Opfor as training. Pretty intense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not first thread about that topic, so I gonna repeat, what someone said earlier - A3 setting is hardly futuristic. Not at all from functional side, except VR, and only a bit as for design (shapes, non-functional hud glasses). More - in real world we can see in development or even in use more fancy stuff, than in A3.

What we tend to call "modern" is in fact the past, we used to.

My vote is - I don't care about the setting as long game provides me fun and is moddable. My all concerns regarding A3 are focused around engine and functionalities, not the particular setting.

Edited by Rydygier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like the setting. Its give's usefull thoughts for PMC like groups. and for the next game..... Lets make it a political game. instead of going in the field you stay at a desk and swear allot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not first thread about that topic, so I gonna repeat, what someone said earlier - A3 setting is hardly futuristic. Not at all from functional side, except VR, and only a bit as for design (shapes, non-functional hud glasses). More - in real world we can see in development or even in use more fancy stuff, than in A3.

What we tend to call "modern" is in fact the past, we used to.

My vote is - I don't care about the setting as long game provides me fun and is moddable. My all concerns regardfing A3 are focused around engine and functionalities, not the particular setting.

I can sign this or just go quoting myself from two other threads. I'll stick with signing this.^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Didn't like Opfor at first due to helmets but it's now grown on me. Ive played 85 Cold War type units for years now so change is nice for variety's sake. Needs moar woods tho..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Woods and slavs

thats all you need.

I can agree with this, also why the next game should be based in ancient times and feature cold weapon combat. :p

Here's a fitting soundtrack to it:

Or bit more 'modern' ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These threads usually end up bashing it but IMO it was a great decision. Why?

Because modders will eventually make current era equipment (since there is community demand for it, references can be found easily, and modders might even have existing models already).

If BIS chosen to go along with the usual current era theme we'd have another HMMWV, more AK variants etc. along with the mod content which is also mostly modern era.

We'd miss out on all these interesting concepts which we have. Sure there are some oddities but it still feels realistic to me.

Also having a unique theme is kinda necessary since it helps the game stand out from other FPS games at first glance.

Remaking ArmA2 on a new engine is not really exciting for non-hardcore fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
These threads usually end up bashing it but IMO it was a great decision. Why?

Because modders will eventually make current era equipment (since there is community demand for it, references can be found easily, and modders might even have existing models already).

If BIS chosen to go along with the usual current era theme we'd have another HMMWV, more AK variants etc. along with the mod content which is also mostly modern era.

We'd miss out on all these interesting concepts which we have. Sure there are some oddities but it still feels realistic to me.

Also having a unique theme is kinda necessary since it helps the game stand out from other FPS games at first glance.

Remaking ArmA2 on a new engine is not really exciting for non-hardcore fans.

The setting is pretty great, I like the idea. Yet it feels not really thought through. Game mechanics can't live up to the setting. Still, Arma 3 is the best part of the series for me and some future tech can be simulated with some scripting effort or by the community. Would love to hear why BI chose this particular setting and if they had some ideas on how to lift the mechanics to the 2030s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Futuristic? Hehehehe...

Almost all of this stuff is on duty ;)

m-atv_oshksoh_mrap_all_terrain_wheeled_armoured_vehicle_personnel_carrier_United_states_US-Army_019.jpg

http://www.clarksvilleonline.com/wp-content/gallery/101st-sustainment-brigade-success-through-partnership/993189.jpg (404 kB)

http://www.panzerbaer.de/archiv/pix/ISAF%20715.JPG (145 kB)

Sure, some of that stuff is experimental and/or concept, but it was actually build. I love that stuff!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then it's even worse! :D

But to be fair, if they'd inplement every single feature of modern or future tech we probably would never walk the ground as simple infantry guy. CSAT would just have disabled Altis' infrastructure and power grid with some sort of digital attack and then bombed NATO forces back to the stone age (or vice versa).^^

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good but underdeveloped, I really like missions that take advantage of the setting (like IndeedPete's M.E.R.C.S) or Doln's Poltergeist (I still play the showcase every now and then, the Defender OS is just that good).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terrible design decision (and poor implementation) resulting in awfully unimmersive game.

Futuristic? Hehehehe...

Almost all of this stuff is on duty ;)

Yeah. For example, take a look at this FN FAL from 50's with giant suppressor brand-new elite black ops sniper rifle from latest STH.

This is another problem with so-called futuristic setting — you can't take a vehicle or rifle from the beginning of Cold War era, paint it black, make all its angles sharp and call it "futuristic".

Concerning functionality: future MBTs, for example, are worse than MBTs from 80's — no FCS whatsoever and a $3 pixelated display instead of optical sight. And so on.

Edited by Semiconductor

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I almost laugh when people say A3 is too futuristic,I'm actually one of the people that wanted a really futuristic game.I don't mean "pew pew,Skynet,lasers and starships" but gear reimagined for a 2035 setting.

With a few exceptions like Kajman(great design btw),MX,Katiba,VR,CSAT uniforms and a few others,I would say that 90% of A3 content is used today or comes for cancelled projects like Comanche and the MULE ugv.

What the heck is so futuristic about Kamaz&HEMTT trucks,Merkava,M-ATV,Fennek,Pandur II,Patria,Leo 2,Tavor,F2000 and so on??Some designs are actually old and probably will be long phased out by 2035.A friend of mine has a Parrot drone(Darter) since two years ago so yeah nothing out of the ordinary on the drone field either.

Or dunno maybe the island is too futuristic with those solar panels and "high tech" windmills.

A3 doesn't even have a slim or tiny cyberwarfare component which is a big part even today,not to mention by 2035.

So what exactly is so futuristic about this game?The Chinook or those karts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The setting is pretty great, I like the idea. Yet it feels not really thought through. Game mechanics can't live up to the setting.

Probably because the game was originally designed to be very sci-fi with rail-gun tanks and fighting aliens (seriously, depbo characters_f.pbo and take a look - characters_f\Common\Data\reticulan_co.paa).

I'd have preferred a modern setting, basically a direct sequel to the Arrowhead direction ArmA2 went in.

Edited by Jackal326

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With a few exceptions like Kajman(great design btw),MX,Katiba,VR,CSAT uniforms and a few others,I would say that 90% of A3 content is used today or comes for cancelled projects like Comanche and the MULE ugv.
Well Mi-48 Kajman is a mix between Mi-28, Mi-24 and Ka-52 so nothing new here either. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Damn, that black MRAP with the shielded dudes on top looks badass. Someone needs to make a config with cargo spots up there ASAP. Going to be funny with FFV. Oh, and we need tactical shields! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bored with it.

Been hoping BI would go to a more historical setting since OFP (where I thought the Cold War setting was brilliant).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy the setting. I accepted that Arma plays in an alternate Universe, and that it's one of the most advanced and authentic Wargames/Shooters/Action Games of our time, and not a Simulator.

I rather play ArmA3 in the Setting it is meant to be, with not-so-widely known Weapons and Vehicles, then playing essentially what was Arma 2 - just with better graphics and a newer engine. Because, if we get what most people rant about (Modern-Age Content, Maps etc.), it'll just be what we had in Arma 2 and OA. Wheres the sense in that? Sure, the graphics would look better than in A2, but aren't those the guys who claim that graphics don't matter? *sighs*

I like the setting and the content as-is, though i would not mind getting a bit more content. I like the DLC policy, i like the engine, and i look especially forward to the Marksman DLC, anticipating that we will get weapon resting and bipods, which, along with the sway, fatigue, and weapon inertia, customization and 3D scopes will make for the best weapon handling ever present in a game. (By the way - is there a discussion topic for todays Dev blog regarding screenshots of the new Marksman DLC weapons and so on? Sorry for the off-topic here.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I hate it, I'm like the majority of other gamers that just simply prefer either modern or historic. I don't mind some futuristic setting or even sifi so long as it is done right and ARMA 3 just doesn't do it right for me. Sorry Bohemia but 6.5 caseless is not the future.

That's all I'm going to say about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've always been utterly convinced that this Arma should have kept the modern day setting. Instead of Altis and bug headed Iranians they should have created a scaled Fallujah map with modern day marines, Navy Seals and SAS units. BIS would have made a fortune in sales and welcomed DLC. Not bug headed Iranian but civilian clothed terrorist.

But again, I'm bias as I personally like CQC. Having enemy snipers located on rooftops and suicide bombers amongst seemingly innocent civilians would be an adrenaline kicker. Of course, there's potential for more open combat too in more open environments.

The bottom lone is if BIS recreated modern day combat and historical battle scenarios they could do no wrong and I sincerely believe sales would have gone though the roof as IMO every first-person/tactical gamer would want that kind of experience and realism. As gamers we can only imagine what those guys were up against. Simulate that and you have hot cakes for sale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The bottom lone is if BIS recreated modern day combat and historical battle scenarios they could do no wrong and I sincerely believe sales would have gone though the roof as IMO every first-person/tactical gamer would want that kind of experience and realism. As gamers we can only imagine what those guys were up against. Simulate that and you have hot cakes for sale.

I think they may have got sick over rivet counters constantly moaning about how their modern day stuff wasn't accurate. (You can check out the 12 years of posts like that on this forum if you want to read some of them). Plus, by making everything up, they don't have to pay out money to companies (trijicon etc) as they did in Arma 2. Also, I suspect a benefit of having weird futuristic stuff is that it's not as attractive for people to steal and post up on turbosquid.

Personally, I'm massively bored by the proliferation of desert/middle east themed games. It's very bland and often is a bunch of tier-one-elite-eddieprice people with obligatory C-130 and thermal sights vs some generic middle eastern guys with AK's. When you say "what those guys were up against", really, we're talking about some of the most advanced armies in the world vs poorly trained and equipped infantry/militia.

I'd like a more contemporary setting as well, but not another middle east themed one please.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×