It's funny, I always thought the MP5 was so popular because it was an excellent weapon. Like "The Number one SMG in the world" kind of excellent. Since the MP5 dominates the media so much, I assumed it was highly favored by Tactical teams and Special Forces people. Even on the news, when they show SWAT teams, most of the time they're carrying MP5s or M4s(then again, I haven't watched the news in awhile...). I'm sure it's still a fine weapon, just not the Godly SMG that Hollywood and Video games seems to make it be.
On the topic of H&K's other weapons, for a while I really did think the 416 was superior to the M4. And this wasn't based off videogames. I remeber reading an article about a year ago, which brought into question the M4's reliability. There were a few testimonys, from US soldiers stationed in Iraq, regarding jamming and weapon malfunctions. It was mentioned those problems could be solved by daily cleanings, but sometimes soldiers don't have time to maintain their weapons. Of course, the article's solution was the HK 416, which supposedly "had the M4's excellent handling, with the durability of an AK47".
There was also a mention of Special Forces teams trying the 416 and loving it. So I assumed that the 416 was a superior weapon. After all, Special Forces are some of the toughest guys on the planet, if they like it, it has to be good, right?
Thinking back on it, I can't help but wonder if that article may have just been propaganda from HK themselves...
That also brings up the Mk. 23. Once again, I assumed it was a great weapon because it was issued to... the NAVY SEALS! The SEALs are the toughest hombres on the planet, if they're using it, then it must be awsome! Right?
See, this is my problem, I never base my opinions on guns from games, because they're always altered to keep the gameplay balanced. But when you mention "Special Forces" in the same sentence as a gun brand, I immediatly assume it has to be a superior weapon.
|