Quote:
Originally Posted by Vangelis
Orca1 9904 not only reverted all your edits to that article because they were vandalism, he also protected the page. You should probably therefore assume that those edits are not regarded as welcome rather than registering so you can make them again. As regards the other article, Gunman69 doesn't agree with you either; there's no such thing as a Serbu Super Shorty with an Ithaca 37 reciever and bolt.
|
This whole conversation is symptomatic of a larger problem on this site. That problem being a lack of consensus on how to identify poorly or improperly rendered firearms in video games.
One example that immediately comes to mind is GTA 3. The M16 was, for a while, identified as "M16A1 w/ A2 handguards". In movies, A1's are given A2 handguards because A2's are needed but A1's are all that are available. The American movie going public for the most part doesn't notice, and the illusion is succesful.
In a video game, there is no need to jury rig one weapon into another or use rubber props. If you want something, you write the code for it and it's there, and you try to the best of your ability to make it look and function how you like. The developers have an intent to create something, and then they have the final product, which, due to time and technological constraints, might not be exactly as envisioned.
the M16 in GTA3 was "intended" to be the M16A2. But because of how it was rendered, somebody here felt that the barrel wasnt thick enough to qualify it as an A2. So they called it an "A1 w/ A2 grips". Not what the developers were intending it to be, but what it ended up most closely resembling visually.
Another example; the RCP90 from Goldeneye. Not a real gun. Doesn't look like a real gun either. It shares the same basic shape as the FN P90, but the colors and proportions are all completely wrong. Still we call it a P90 because what else could it be? It's based on the P90, but is it really a P90?