It's not worth adding new weapons unless they add something new and interesting to the gameplay.
I'd argue with that, personally I like to have as many alternatives as possible. "1 gun for 1 playstyle" sounds boring af for me, if developers always ever included 100% necessary stuff in their games, the industry would never develop at all. Variety is never pointless.
@redkap I like your way of thinking, but I must point out some things regarding those.
Sig 552: would be certainly awesome, but rather on the security side. Those Swiss beauties are quite rare and not cheap; not something a middle-eastern insurgent can easily (or at all) get hold of.
AN-94: another interesting candidate, but on the insurgent side? That's far-fetched to say the least. We're talking about an extremely expensive gun that's made in very limited numbers, in fact they're only issued to a few Russian special units. As much as I'd like seeing it in the game, it wouldn't be realistic at all, not even on the security side.
AS VAL: similar case to the AN-94, I don't think these were ever sold or given to any army/military unit apart from Russian and Georgian special forces. Maybe its DMR variant, the VSK-94, as those are used in limited numbers by some Syrian troops.
The VZ-61 certainly fits the narrative. As for the CZ-805, HK416 and MPX, I doubt you could encounter security units carrying those nowadays, but they're plausible enough if we say the game takes place in the near future.
Totally agree with your points. For people freaking out about "muh realism": this is Insurgency people, not ArmA or Squad. Insurgency has always been a semi realistic shooter, not a hardcore milsim game, and as such we can sacrifice some amount of realism in favor of gameplay. Leaning is totally awkward to use atm, and I quickly got discouraged from using it after a few hours of trying. It's just not worth it, it pretty much feels like a useless feature as of now. Also focusing just gets you killed most of the time, as you need to stand still for seconds to actually be able take advantage of it.
@amurka Uum, no, they don't. In fact they handle absolutely differently, since they have nearly 30 years of development and change in military mentality between them. Furthermore dunno what kind of exotic weapons would you like to see, but these fit the setting of the game, and could provide a brand new weapon handling pattern. Also unless you don't know anything about these weapons, they don't look the same at all, in fact the 47 and the 74 have distinctively different silhuettes. They're about as different as an M4 and an MK18, and I don't see anybody complaining about those.
So if you take a look at the top of the page, you can see the I:SS promo picture you've probably seen a million times before. The guy on the left carries something that looks to be an MK18, the guy on the right a G3 with a late model wide handguard, and the woman in the back an AK-47.
It kinda gave me the idea to ask about these weapons. The devs could add the AK-47 as an alternative to the AKM on the insurgency side. To stay realistic and diverse, it could be slightly cheaper than the AKM, while having a higher rate of fire but more difficult to control recoil. I think it could make for a nice high skill weapon, and one that doesn't take a lot of effort and time for the devs to model, as they could just make it by modifying the existing AKM model.
As of the G3's wide handguard, I would love to see it in game as I much prefer it over the slim handguard currently in game. I'm thinking maybe the devs could add it as a foregrip option that costs only 1 point, but only offers a very slight recoil improvement over the basic one. Whaddaya think?