Talk:Ghost Recon: Future Soldier

Sorry guys

My computer is running slowly so there is a marked delay in what I type and what page shows up. I did a boo boo because I was on the main VG page and then clicked on the discussion page and my PC took so long to click over I thought the Discussion page WAS the main page. That's what I get for trying to edit quickly when I'm multi-tasking. Apologies. MoviePropMaster2008 21:55, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Fictional Weaponry

MR-B Assault Rifle

The bullpup assault rifle has a built-in shotgun under the barrel, and the overall design has a faint resemblance with IMI Tavor TAR-21. It is used by Ghost Recon operatives.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Fiction Bullpup Assault Rifle, 5.56 Uranium

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

These look a little like Magpul PDR's to me.--Jackie.45Cal 16:01, 3 October 2011 (CDT)

[[1]]

Fictional Assault Rifle #2

Seems to be based on the OTs-14 Groza with a AR-15 carry handle. Used by the Ultranationalists and their leader Ivan Illitch Kerenski.

==But Groza has AR-15 style carry handle? So why it's fictional? ripp

==Agreed, aside from a few attachments those are perfectly normal Grozas; which makes sense being in the hands of riot police, as it was designed as a close combat weapon, and the ultranationalists that now own the police. I support this being moved to the main page unless its confirmed it will not appear in the game but only the trailer. - Anon

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

These just ook like AN-91's to me. Not sure they're fictional. --Jackie.45Cal 16:03, 3 October 2011 (CDT)

Fictional Grenade Launcher

It used by Russian Ultranationalist Forces to fire tear gas shells at the mob. Seems to have been inspired by the Brügger & Thomet GL-06.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Backpack Rocket Launcher

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

Plot and set-up of this game?

Is Scott Mitchell, the player character from Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter, making a comeback in this game? Will there be a different version for the PC players this time too, as was the case for GRAW2? I like those kinds of "enhanced PC ports" that take full advantage of mouse and keyboard and possibly better hardware as well.--Mazryonh 17:59, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Not looking good so far...

It's not the Sci-Fi..ness that gets to me, I mean it bothers me but I could get past it. They could be Jedis and I might still like this(might, but probably not), but what I can't get past is that these designs are just UGLY! DX Leadback

I've been a big fan of Ghost Recon ever since I played the original back in the day (and even liked both Advanced Warfighters, despite the largely mixed reviews they got), but this one is beginning to look too much like Halo for my comfort. Fictional weapons, optic camouflage, backpack-mounted rocket pods? What's next, Master Chief armored suits? Spartan198 06:23, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Well it's in the discussion section, so it's not too much of a problem Excalibur01 06:45, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Good point. Why does the "future" always involve wildly complex electronics, invisibility, and stupid-looking weapons? Maybe the developers started thinking the whole "Future warrior" project and thought it might actually work. In GRAW2, I usually go for the SCAR-L or HK416, with MP5SD secondary and the Mk46 for my support. I don't want or need super-weapons like the melting Xm8 and the doesn't-actualy-exist MR-C. I just hope there's a mission with the enemy sets of an EMP, leaving you with whatever doesn't use electricity. Seriously, optic camo is just dumb. --Mandolin 13:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I think optic camo is the way of the future when it comes to camo. You are invisible to the enemy. Literally invisible. Don't you think that is much more advantageous than just blending in with camo colors? Excalibur01

Another thing - the game is set in "near future" in late 2020's or early 2030's but in my opinion presented technologies are just too modern. Optical camouflage? Miniature "box-of--chocolate-chip-cookies-sized" rocket launchers capable of taking down a MBT in one shot? Oh, come on. Those things are not even in prototype stage yet. And I strongly doubt they would be in 10-15 years. As someone said, this looks much more like HALO than hard-core military FPS. Probably the best was the first "trilogy" - original Ghost Recon + Desert Siege and Island Thunder expansion packs. Plot line was not so shitty (well yeah, we still got the ultranationalists in Russia but ethnic cleansing in Sudan or collapse of Cuban regime were in my opinion quite realistic), you did not have any super cool hi-tech stuff (like AI driven battle robots, predator-like camouflage or laser guided beer can openers) and one 7,62x39mm round from an AK was capable of killing or incapacitating you. It was Advanced Warfighter, which started this "modern technologies" trend. The game was also set in "near future" (in 2014 to be precise) but it was much more "believable". You know, RC controlled drones/recon UAVs - why not? Military uses UAVs extensively even on todays battlefields and there are plans for further development. And speaking about weapons, "Ghost" were still using HK-416s, SCARs, MP-5s, MK-46s and other good "old fashioned" weapons (ok, there were few oversights like MR-C) rather than bullpup carbines firing "uranium" 5,56 rounds. W-T-F is that? What's next - Ghost Recon going Star Wars style aka Attack of mutant Jedi Clones firing lightsabers from their rocket launchers? My point is - Modern technologies? Fine, but at least make it believable. Is there anyone else who would like to see e.g. 6,5x39 or 6,8x43 based weapons and other non-sci-fi stuff rather than railguns, lasers and plasma carbines? [Ragnar]

Unfortunately, highly realistic FPS games like SWAT 4 are at best a niche market now, and less realistic "futuristic" stuff is wildly popular thanks to the success of shooter series like Halo and Gears of War. Nobody likes getting killed in one shot in a game.

That said, I did like GRAW2 (though not as much as SWAT 4), and I did like using the XM8 and HK416, as well as the MR-C (HK was working on getting the G11 to work until the Berlin Wall fell, and the other two would be in more general use if it weren't for bureaucratic inertia). Besides, I was thinking that modern military body armour was supposed to stop several 7.62x39mm rounds now.--Mazryonh 16:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Modern combat vests with ceramic SAPI (Small Arms Protective Insert) plates and soft kevlar inserts are supposed to stop 7,62x39 or even 7,62x54R but they are more like to lower the possibility of life threatening wound/protecting you from getting killed than making you invincible Terminator-like war machine from which bullets just bounce off. Usually, when you are hit you don't rush back into combat (even if the SAPI have stopped the bullet) ... of course when the situation requires you are still able to participate in combat or fight back but it is not like in CoD games (or any other similar FPS with "self healing system") - whoa I was hit into my vest ... lets wait five seconds in cover and we're good to go. [Ragnar - 20:06, 12 May 2010]

No, I'm not saying I prefer a quick-healing system. I'm just tired of the tendency in certain more realistic games to kill you instantly without telling you where you got shot (which would be believable in places such as through the tactical goggles, or through the face, neck, groin, etc.) when your character are wearing body armour. Many's the time I've been shot dead with one bullet in SWAT 4 by a thug with a 9x19mm pistol, without having been previously injured. Maybe a better system might be to have armour just reduce damage or inflict "consciousness damage" (take too much of that and you are knocked out rather than killed) rather than be treated as health against rounds that are stopped and don't pierce it outright, while each piece of armour is tracked for its "integrity" (or likelihood of stopping/reducing health damage from rounds). That could be more be more realistic and more fun to play with. --Mazryonh 00:20, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

Depleted uranium bullets are a real thing, actually they are THROUGH the prototype phase. Its use lies not in the radioactivity, but in its density. DU is used to make both vehicle armour and armour-piercing bullets by the US military already. Optical camo, while not 100% working right now, has been making HUGE steps forward in Japan. You wear it like a raincoat and you look like a strange shadow. Still noticeable, but nearly there. If it was through prototyping RIGHT NOW, they'd probably already be using it. It's not Halo, it's just the future. It's gonna happen, look out. Anyways, the gun makes sense to me, what doesn't is the idea that the US would have changed its main assault rifle again. The M8 outperformed the SCAR and the M4 by a stunning amount in terms of reliability and ease of use, and it still wasn't adopted. If anything, they should have just standardized the MCR from the last game, made it the mainstay weapon and done some variants of it. Or, realistically, they would probably just keep flogging the mp5-m16/m4 horse. Because everyone wants to just play every war game ever made and to ever BE made with the same weapons again and again. Even in the future, when an assault rifle with possibly equal range, more stopping power and a built in breaching shotgun is invented, all taking up half the space of the M4 it is attempting to replace. Progress on the battlefield? Heaven forbid. That said, aesthetically I'm not really a fan of the grips on the gun. Too ergonomic-looking to go with the rest of the rifle's look. [Erk - 05:46, 24 May 2010]

DU would be pointless in a smallarm because the main advantage of DU is being pyrophoric; it's self-sharpening when it impacts at extremely high velocity, and will usually spontaneously ignite once inside a vehicle. It's just added here because like nuclear bullets are awesome, man (or because they're like really evil and stuff, depending on how the plot goes). In an infantry weapon you'd be better off using tungsten carbide, or just switching back to battle rifles as standard infantry arms for the additional penetration of a fullsize rifle round. The XM8 barely outperformed the SCAR (127 stoppages versus 226, and apparently most of that was due to the STANAG magazine of the SCAR being less reliable than the XM8's proprietary one, not the rifles themselves) and from what I've heard the ridiculous numbers of stoppages from the M4 were in no small part due to deliberate use of unapproved maintenance techniques during testing (in other words, it was about as fair a test as the M14 trials). Regardless, this thing is another OICW: a fat gun trying to cram everything the company thinks a soldier needs into it (in this case seemingly even a can opener), resulting in something nobody in their right mind would carry onto the field. Vangelis 11:14, 6 March 2011 (MSK)

I'm not liking the look of the new assault rifle. It looks like a frankin gun. Too much thrown into one thing to be practical. The bipod is so far from the center that to use it would simply be exposing one self and a built in hook? Seriously it just looks ridiculous. Even if it were built of all polymer which it isn't it would weigh like 20 something pounds. No one would be able to handle this weapon effectively. It looks like they're only a few steps off of throwing the chainsaw bayonet on there for good measure. It all just looks too dumb for me.ShaDow XPS

Yep, that's the problem of most of the fictional/futuristic "cool-looking" weapons. They are not designed for functionality but for looks (also majority of game designers does not have any experience with fire arms ... [sarcasm] if you are lucky they only know that weapons do "boom"[end of sarcasm]). And again, I'm not criticizing all game designers or all fictional firearms - there are few nice (it-looks-it-might-actually-work) examples. If I were designing a fictional firearm for such "near-future" FPS I would base it at least on some current weaponry (like in CRYSIS where they took XM-8 or MP-7 and refitted them a bit) - e.g. something like FN 2000 with prolonged barrel, RIS handguard, EGLM (in my opinion better construction than bulky AG36/M320), AN/PEQ 16 style IR designator, EOTech style holographic sight with magnifier and chambered to 6,5x39 or 6,8x43 ... It would look cool but also believable/functional - far more than that uranium rounds firing peice of crap with "hook" in front of the barrel. [Ragnar - 09:46, 14 May 2010]

My only problem is that those helmets are fucking ugly and an invitation to catching frag to the brainpan. Why couldn't they use the designs from EndWar? 75.51.147.40 05:10, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Seriously. Those helmets are just ridiculously designed. It's not a huge aesthetic thing to have ear covers on helmets. It's almost like they're going out of their way to make things look dumb and practically retarded at the same time. This is I guess the fate that awaits all future settings games. Shame really.ShaDow XPS

LoL those are not ear covers those are sky masks or however they're called worn under the helmet they're just white so it looks stupid but they are not ear covers.

The main weapon defiantly looks retarded IMO: Biggest fault for me is the P90-style pistol grip on a weapon that big. That grip works with a lightweight weapon like the P90, not with a fuck-off big gun like that. And a titanium hook? What the hell would you use that for? Also, am I the only one who noticed how far back the mag is? There is no room for a conventional bolt in there, as far as I can tell. It sure as hell doesn't look like it's caseless, considering the cocking handle halfway up the weapon. And oh god the holosight looks stupid, at least give it something it projects onto or into, not just magically hovering in the air. If they removed the stupid hook and grip at the front and went with a F2000-style stock, with a conventional magazine and a something that looked like a compact digital sight (think Eotech mixed with the F2000's grenade sight), I might buy its a futuristic OICW... it wouldn't look good but at least kind of plausible. As is it looks like something out of Gears of War. *edit* I just noticed the shotgun's magazine is directly under the side rails, making the rails more or less useless as you can't fit anything to them without getting in the way of the shotgun's mag.

The game has exoskeletons as a dues ex machina answer to the weight of the gear and comm'on DU bullets quick fact A gallon of milk weighs about 8 lbs. A chunk of uranium metal the size of a gallon milk jug weighs over 150 lbs! plz switch to 6.5 ammo a helpful guy

Well, I have to admit, the E3 demos of being able to fully customize the gun down to the gas tubes were rather impressive, lets hope that the weapons now act if they would correctly. However that's the only aspect of the game I'm impressed by so far tho, what the heck was up with that kinect? Sure as hell didn't look like shooting a rifle :P -Kangabox

M249 Para

So am I the first one to catch it hiding in the background of the weapon selection screen or did nobody just bother to add it? ;) Spartan198 02:44, 10 July 2011 (CDT)

In the latest kinect trailer they are calling it "LMG MK48", so I think it's an MK48 with a Para stock if that is possible. Or since there will be an option to customize the butt-stocks, maybe fixed ones will be available also. - bozitojugg3rn4ut 03:27, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

It's possible. Ghost Recon seems to have abandoned the 5.56mm SAWs in favor of the Mark 48 ever since the latter's introduction in GR2: Summit Strike. Spartan198 01:32, 12 August 2011 (CDT)

Plot?

Has anyone heard anything about the plot? I'm wondering if perhaps these Russian ultra-nationalists have any connection to those behind the 2008 Balkan War portrayed in the original Ghost Recon. Spartan198 06:37, 10 July 2011 (CDT)

I'll try to guess the plot.

"Oil. But then...Not oil!!!1 And so there was a war and someone probably stole a nuke / quantum computer / EMP device also. Luckily a team of elite made-up special forces led by a tough former something-or-other (cop, Marine, SEAL, hairdresser, etc) with nothing to lose just manage to maneuver the situation to the point nothing is really resolved and a sequel can be blatantly set up for next year."

This is a calculated guess from playing other videogames. Evil Tim 03:33, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

• :D - bozitojugg3rn4ut 08:04, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

Yup, sounds about right from my experience, too. XD Spartan198 01:34, 12 August 2011 (CDT)

F this game

According to E3 2011 gameplay there will be NO +1 round in the chamber nor fire-mode selection, also remaining bullets will not be lost when reloading mid-mag. :( I hope they will change it before release otherwise it won't be a real tactical shooter. - bozitojugg3rn4ut 08:04, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

Agreed, most shooters nowadays are plagued by COD Virus :( --Masterius 12:16, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

I'm sorry, but I'm happy as long as a SCAR-L doesn't shoot in tri-burst. :P - Mr. Wolf 17:07, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

I don't mind not losing bullets from mid-mag reloads (after all, it's not like reloading with retention is impossible), as long as the magical elves living in my webbing aren't consolidating my used magazines into full ones. Maybe have a display of the mags you're carrying with red / amber / green to indicate roughly how full they are (since your character, unlike you, knows how much they weigh), and perhaps the ability to cycle preference (most full or most empty). Then again, we're talking about a game with an absurd DU-shooting trouser-cannon, so realism was never really going to be on the menu. Evil Tim 17:37, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

Indicators for magazines is good. But it won't be because of knowing weight (this isn't realism-like Red Orchestra where you don't know the actual amount of bullets in magazine, there is standard ammo-in-mag counter ;) ) it will be for the sake of convenience :) --Masterius 02:19, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

Well, what I mean is rather than cluttering up the screen with ammo-in-weapon plus 7-15 other numbers, you'd have your number of bullets in the current magazine and then the colour / fill indicators for the others. To be honest, I don't think it's that realistic to have no idea at all how many bullets you have, since your character is a soldier who should know that kind of thing, and the HUD is just a way of transferring that information to the player. Evil Tim 02:25, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

And since our characters are Ghost Recon operatives with tactical gear (including helmets), for them it should be natural 8) --Masterius 02:38, 21 July 2011 (CDT)

My Sci-fi story/game has aliens, wrap drive space ships, and mechs, but the weapons, equipment, and handling of said stuff is so realistic it would make most peoples heads hurt. And their not blaster type weapons. :D - Mr. Wolf 19:27, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

Yeah, being convincing is in the details of how a weapon is handled rather than necessarily in the setting. Then again, my own FPS / story project isn't as scifi as yours, so there. :P Evil Tim 20:49, 20 July 2011 (CDT)

KAC Masterkey

I think it's not a KAC Masterkey because it seems to be a semi auto shotgun.--Flavio 18:51, 19 August 2011 (CDT)

Scarlighter Scarlight/Scarlighter/Scar-Lighter/Scar-L/... says on 21 February 2012, 14:40, Italy (UTC+01:00):

"Agree with Flavio: the one in the picture looks a Semi-Auto Underbarrel Shotgun... Anyways, since the M26 MASS has been recently issued by the US Army ([2]) as the new Underbarrel Shotgun Attachment and as a new Stand-Alone Shotgun, why would the Ghosts still use the Masterkey, in 2030? They should use a new Underbarrel Shotgun, as for the MR-B Underbarrel Shotgun named "Disputor"..."

AK-12

This is definitely not an AK-12, as that has a totally different shaped upper receiver and a different safety. It looks kind of like what was being reported as the early AK-200 prototype, but that was just a railed AK-74M. This looks more like an AKM with a AK-74 muzzle brake and Tapco folding stock and new furniture. Also, seeing as this final version of the AK-12 was only unveiled a couple of days ago, it seems very unlikely that is what this gun is based on. Also, that isn't one of the new 60 round magazines, it is a Tapco magazine that has been bulged out to look like a 60. --commando552 04:51, 29 January 2012 (CST)

I don't wish to disrespectfully argue with a more experienced member of the site, but I think the in-game render of the gun 99percently resembles the AK-200. I noted in the text that it is not the AK-12 but the 200, its prototype version. Maybe it would be wise to add an AK-200 section to the AK-12 page, and put this there. And then note how the final AK-12 looks like for future references. What do you say? - bozitojugg3rn4ut 06:28, 29 January 2012 (CST)

Granted it does look more like what was touted as the prototype AK-200 than the AK-12, but looking at the gas block and the front sight block, these are both AKM type rather than AK-74 type, which is what the AK-200 uses. This is a picture of what is supposedly the AK-200 prototype, which I believe is just either a AK-74M, AK-101 or AK-103 depending on caliber, fitted with a railed handguard and a railed top cover that is hinged and secured with a side mounted lever rather than the button on the rear. This gun might actually have this last point but can't be sure from this screenshot, but as it has the wrong stock,magazine, gas block and front sight, at best this is an AKM/AK-200 hybrid. I imagine the reason for this is that there are not many photos of the AK-200 and they wouldn't have been able to get their hands on one, so they had to base the majority of the modelling on something else. Either way, ID'ing it as an AK-12 and using an AK-12 photo is inaccurate as, if anything, it is an AK-200. --commando552 11:54, 29 January 2012 (CST)

True. We could use a good pic of the 200 though. Anyways I will add an AK-200 section to the AK-12 page and move it there, ok? (And let's not forget that this is a video game, every small detail on a gun cannot be correct, right? Just scroll through the Soldier of Fortune: Payback page, and you will see what I am talking about. XD) - bozitojugg3rn4ut 12:05, 29 January 2012 (CST)

Normally I'd think that if there are details wrong that mean it is actually based on another gun then it should be listed as the gun it actually is. However, I'd imagine that in this case they were genuinely trying to make an AK-200, and got tripped up on a couple of minor details due to the fact that there isn't much good reference material for it, so suppose it is fine leaving it as AK-200 for now. If it turns out with better screenshots that the the top cover of this gun is the same as on a traditional gun and it doesn't have the thumb safety on the left side, then it should be changed, as in that case there will be nothing that matches the AK-200. As for the picture, you could put in the AK-103, as that is close to being the same gun as the 7.62x39mm AK-200 (which I'm assuming this is from the magazine curve), just without the rails and new top cover. I wonder if the devs are pissed off that they put in a gun that was being touted by Russia as their future AK, and then when the gun is already made not only do they change the name of it, but it looks totally different to the earlier rifles. --commando552 16:49, 29 January 2012 (CST)