Custom Rifles | Forums

[Compassghost]

Random idea. What if players who purchased all 3 rifles were allowed to purchase a 4th, the Custom variant, that would allow barrel and stock and other integrated parts switching?

For example, let's say I'm working on the Mk 16.

I take the CQC barrel, attach a full stock from the SV variant, and I get a Short Mk 16 with higher accuracy than a standard CQC but a bit lower handling. Or if I put the sling plug on the mid-size for a better handling, lower accuracy rifle?

Or, let's say we we want an MP5K with the A2 stock. We can create that.

If we want a stock on a CQC LMG, we can do that, and the stats will trade off.

Etc., etc., etc.

Basically, a reason to own the full set = more customization beyond the stock custom.

The variant would simply be called:

RifleName Custom

[Freelancer852]

If they did that they might as well just give us one variant of each weapon and give us a full gunsmith like in Future Soldier.

[JDCAce]

I'm all for fully customizable weapons, but I disagree with the need to purchase all three variants in order to unlock the option. The best way I can image implementing this feature is, like Freelancer852 said, implementing the gunsmith feature from Ghost Recon Future Soldier. However, Gunsmith is a major part of GRFS's identity, and implementing the feature in a different game, even in the same series, would detract from the original, in my opinion. As much as I hate to say it, I do not foresee fully customizable weapons in Ghost Recon Online's future.

[Freelancer852]

I agree, if they make GRO overly similar to GRFS then GRFS won't sell on PC as well as it should. Then again, Ubisoft originally planned GRFS to be console exclusive due to the perceived "piracy issues" surrounding PC gaming. GRO was supposed to be the free-to-play alternative for PC players; and Ubisoft was hoping that since it was free-to-play the "pirates" would give it a shot and maybe even fork over a few micro-payments.

Now that GRFS is coming to PC though, making GRO overly similar could have some issues. Hopefully they remain separate enough (especially in how they play) that GRFS sales won't be effected. The best case scenario is that people who play GRO go buy GRFS on PC after seeing how good GRO is.

There's a vicious circle when it comes to publishers/developers and pirates. The publishers see lower sales on PC and blame it on pirates, so they add in more and more intrusive DRM. Legitimate players then get fed up and pirate the game instead of purchasing it, thus increasing the pirate player-base and negatively impacting sales. One of the two groups (players or publishers/developers) needs to make the first step to stop piracy. Players either need to stop pirating and buying a lot more PC games to show publishers/developers that the interest is there, or publishers/developers need to actually create the best ever PC game we have ever seen, with non-intrusive DRM, updates and DLC based on player feedback, and features that make PC gaming what it SHOULD BE (like dedicated servers, Steam integration, etc).

[K1llnYou]

I agree, if they make GRO overly similar to GRFS then GRFS won't sell on PC as well as it should. Then again, Ubisoft originally planned GRFS to be console exclusive due to the perceived "piracy issues" surrounding PC gaming. GRO was supposed to be the free-to-play alternative for PC players; and Ubisoft was hoping that since it was free-to-play the "pirates" would give it a shot and maybe even fork over a few micro-payments.

Now that GRFS is coming to PC though, making GRO overly similar could have some issues. Hopefully they remain separate enough (especially in how they play) that GRFS sales won't be effected. The best case scenario is that people who play GRO go buy GRFS on PC after seeing how good GRO is.

There's a vicious circle when it comes to publishers/developers and pirates. The publishers see lower sales on PC and blame it on pirates, so they add in more and more intrusive DRM. Legitimate players then get fed up and pirate the game instead of purchasing it, thus increasing the pirate player-base and negatively impacting sales. One of the two groups (players or publishers/developers) needs to make the first step to stop piracy. Players either need to stop pirating and buying a lot more PC games to show publishers/developers that the interest is there, or publishers/developers need to actually create the best ever PC game we have ever seen, with non-intrusive DRM, updates and DLC based on player feedback, and features that make PC gaming what it SHOULD BE (like dedicated servers, Steam integration, etc).

^^^THIS RIGHT HERE! On the money man! I couldn't have agreed more with a stranger on the internet lol. But for the "Mega" game idea...I'd have to say that what they could do (And I would be all for this btw) Is make a 100$ game. Hear me out, it has all your ideas and values but since it's on PC when the graphics and what not start getting better they can release a free client to upgrade their Graphics for those who payed 100$ and the DLC would be around 10..and have ACTUAL meaning on them. Not 4 maps for 15$?! Anywho, You have made a GREAT statement to the game world's cause, something I'd like to see. XD