🛈 Announcement
Greetings! Ghost-Recon forums are now archived and accessible in read-only mode, please go to the new platform to discuss the game.
  1. #21
    Originally Posted by Ghost416 Go to original post
    It's an 1891 action set in an Archangel OPFOR series stock.

    https://www.archangelmanufacturing.c...130mosinnagant
    Thanks, so it's an after market modification from Archangel. I've never heard of that company before.
    Share this post

  2. #22
    GiveMeTactical's Avatar Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    4,501
    Originally Posted by Megalodon26 Go to original post
    I could maybe understand asking for these things, IF, and it's a big IF, all the modern gear that has been requested, has already been added to the game. But until that happens, I want any and all resources UBI is wiling to put into Wildlands's customization options, to be used creating real world tactical gear and clothing.
    And you think they are bringing anything else to the already packed, yet flawed, weapons the game already has? I wish I had your faith.
    Share this post

  3. #23
    Ghost416's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,451
    Originally Posted by GiveMeTactical Go to original post
    And you think they are bringing anything else to the already packed, yet flawed, weapons the game already has? I wish I had your faith.
    We all thought AI customization and animated night vision goggles wouldn't happen, but they did.
    Share this post

  4. #24
    The point of this pack is add weapons and options that are a departure from the black polymer currently in the game.
    Share this post

  5. #25
    Ghost416's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,451
    Originally Posted by LTJasonWolfe Go to original post
    The point of this pack is add weapons and options that are a departure from the black polymer currently in the game.
    Be that as it may, the majority of us have had enough of the gimmicky stuff now and want Ubisoft to focus on more serious content that fits what GRW actually is.
    Share this post

  6. #26
    Kean_1's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    So. CA
    Posts
    6,220
    Originally Posted by Ghost416 Go to original post
    Be that as it may, the majority of us have had enough of the gimmicky stuff now and want Ubisoft to focus on more serious content that fits what GRW actually is.
    I agree. ......and before he brings it up again...


    Originally Posted by Kean_1 Go to original post
    I love these "go play a milsim" retorts. As if there can't possibly be a genre, title or anything that exists in between. ......they always take it to the extreme which is a little ironic since the OP is telling others to go play something else but at the same time trying to make the game into something that it's not. ....or at least what it wasn't originally.
    Share this post

  7. #27
    Originally Posted by Ghost416 Go to original post
    Be that as it may, the majority of us have had enough of the gimmicky stuff now and want Ubisoft to focus on more serious content that fits what GRW actually is.
    These days, most live games have multiple dev teams responsible for different aspects of the game. For example, one team develops story content, from concept to modeling to patching, while another develops microtransactions.

    As far as developing content that "actually fits," Ubisoft determines the content that "fits" what Ghost Recon actually is, not the players. As far as what fits GRW, I'll refer you to the various packs that are already available in-game. Yes, packs like the Civil War GP are pretty gimmicky (I myself found the Peacemaker to be a useful sidearm), the Great War pack would be no more or less useful than any other pack currently in the game.
    Share this post

  8. #28
    Ghost416's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    3,451
    Originally Posted by LTJasonWolfe Go to original post
    These days, most live games have multiple dev teams responsible for different aspects of the game. For example, one team develops story content, from concept to modeling to patching, while another develops microtransactions.
    True, but they won't have multiple departments that work on the same thing. The same people that would create your WWI pack would be the same ones creating new plate carriers and such that would get far more use than anything

    As far as developing content that "actually fits," Ubisoft determines the content that "fits" what Ghost Recon actually is, not the players. As far as what fits GRW, I'll refer you to the various packs that are already available in-game. Yes, packs like the Civil War GP are pretty gimmicky (I myself found the Peacemaker to be a useful sidearm), the Great War pack would be no more or less useful than any other pack currently in the game.
    No, the setting and themes of an IP determines what content fits it. Muskets and flintlock pistols don't belong in a game centered around a modern special operations unit just like speedboats and aircraft carriers don't belong in a game about 18th century pirates.
    Share this post

  9. #29
    First, how much "use" an item gets is irrelevant in a video game. Second, we do not need anymore plate carriers. Third, Ubisoft added the Predator to the game, as well as Civil War pack and Assassin's Creed pack. Whether or not these things BELONG in the game is likewise irrelevant, as they exist. Fourth, those packs exist for the people that want something different, something against the grain - and that is fine, as GRW is a video game, not real life, thus practicality is meaningless. Suspension of disbelief is a HUGE factor in video gaming. You have no problem accepting an elite military unit being sent to a foreign country to topple the local government, using weapons and accessories they have to find in the field, while gathering resources to gain abilities and equipment they should have had from the start, and assisting a rebellion that is effectively useless and ineffective. Yet somehow this fantasy is completely ruined by the mere fact that anachronistic weapons somehow even exist in the game's code, to the assumed detriment of other possible weapons or cosmetic items. Lastly, If I were on the development team, this pack is only one of MANY that I'd be pushing for. Personally, I'd like to see the MR-C, XM-8, XM109, XM-29, Mateba Model 6 Unica, M1 Garand, M1 Carbine, Stg-44, G36, SAR 21, SVU-AS, VSS, EM-2, FAL, F2000, BR18, MSBS-5.56, OTs-14, WA-2000, and a whole host of others, including the Great War Pack. However, from a novelty standpoint, the Great War Pack offers a lot more than just another polymer AR clone or useless plate carrier, it offers the chance to change up the gameplay, and encourage new ways to enjoy the game. I'm sure there are plenty of people that bought the Civil War pack, just so they could use a muzzleloader on sicarios armed with assailt rifles. And I'm sure there is someone out there that uses the Jackdaw pistol for the fun of it. It's a video game, it doesn't have to be realistic or believable 100% of the time.
    Share this post

  10. #30
    It's just not going to happen. There have been countless requests since launch, for weapons and gear, that are actually being used by special forces worldwide, that have yet to be added. So I highly doubt the dev team are going to invest time and money to create a bunch of items that only a handful of players even want.
    Share this post