New Video Games/ Movies

[Evil Tim]

On the other hand, though, people want to use cool guns with the right names (or at least what they think are the right names), which means the manufacturers have something the game designers want. Since a lot of the weapons aren't anything you'd market to civilians (especially if you're HK and too busy hating them), the money arrow ends up going in the other direction.

Edit: also he's confusing detail with realism. Game depictions of firearms are usually not realistic, just detailled. Educating yourself to operate a firearm in CoD is fine and good until you go out with an empty magazine and the safety on.

[SPEMack618]

You know, I always sorta agreed with you Evil Tim, until talking to a buddy of mine who works at a gun store and how he said he couldn't keep SCAR-Hs on the shelves.

I guess there is a segment of the Modern Warfare 2 crowd that is highly devoted, well financed, and now well armed.

[Chitoryu12]

Originally Posted by SPEMack618

You know, I always sorta agreed with you Evil Tim, until talking to a buddy of mine who works at a gun store and how he said he couldn't keep SCAR-Hs on the shelves.

I guess there is a segment of the Modern Warfare 2 crowd that is highly devoted, well financed, and now well armed.

Gander Mountain's actually made a big change (at least the big local store we have in Lake Mary) to trying to advertise the latest and greatest. I went in there to ask about Mosins and the clerk said that surplus rifles and AKs barely even get accepted by them at this point regardless of condition. The used racks are lined with AR variants and quality bolt and lever-action rifles and various shotguns, and for months the only two surplus rifles I saw on any of them were an M1 Carbine and an Arisaka Type 38 (chrysanthemum intact, in fact). Meanwhile, the entire center section of the back wall has all of the newest or most high-tech stuff: FS2000, Taurus Circuit Judge, SCAR-L, AR-50, PS90, etc.

[k9870]

i remeber the 08 election panic and a year later how all the people who couldnt actually afford those rifles sold them off, kittery trading post has this thing where "hunting" guns are on the floor and "tactical" guns behind the counter. Behind the counter they ran out of shelf space so ar15s were laying on the floor from the amount of people off loading them. Cant wait till it happens aain and i can get a cheap ebr lol

[Spartan198]

A little old, but...

http://screenrant.com/wwe-undertaker...d-pauly-33181/

I commented on the bottom as "Samedi" how I think this would make a great premise for a Red Dead game.

[Swordfish941]

I just came back from seeing Oblivion. Excellent movie, and I did enjoy the plot twists (and this is coming from a guy who hates plot twists).

[funkychinaman]

Originally Posted by Evil Tim

On the other hand, though, people want to use cool guns with the right names (or at least what they think are the right names), which means the manufacturers have something the game designers want. Since a lot of the weapons aren't anything you'd market to civilians (especially if you're HK and too busy hating them), the money arrow ends up going in the other direction.

Edit: also he's confusing detail with realism. Game depictions of firearms are usually not realistic, just detailled. Educating yourself to operate a firearm in CoD is fine and good until you go out with an empty magazine and the safety on.

It's certainly not required though. For years, shooter games were fine with phony names (I loved the RC-P90), and even Black Ops 2 gone back to making stuff up (PDW-57, B23R), and I don't think sales have suffered.

LeBron James and Tiger Woods don't pay Nike to wear Nike gear, it's the other way around, and you can argue the same should apply to CoD and Battlefield.

[Excalibur]

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

It's certainly not required though. For years, shooter games were fine with phony names (I loved the RC-P90), and even Black Ops 2 gone back to making stuff up (PDW-57, B23R), and I don't think sales have suffered.

LeBron James and Tiger Woods don't pay Nike to wear Nike gear, it's the other way around, and you can argue the same should apply to CoD and Battlefield.

The fact that game developers do pay a fee to gun companies for using the real names and logos on the guns in the game. But if you want to compare LeBron and Tiger to something, it's ISPC guys and gals like Jessie Abbate who do exactly the same thing as sports players, go around advertising products of companies when they compete and are most likely sponsored by said companies.

You don't compare a living person advertising an industry to a game. You compare say a sports game like Madden and the money they spend to get the images of real life players in their game and the same can apply to shooter games like Call of Duty and Battlefield. The vast majority of games don't use the names of the guns. Just using the image of the gun and making up a phony name is alright.

Whether or not shooter games can be used as a training tool on how to use a game is debatable. There might be a couple of games that would explain the intricacies of a gun but most are point and shoot. They don't explain to the play what the bolt release does, why you need to rack the slide to chamber a round or how to load magazines or even what kind of ammo is used somethings and of course mixing clip and mag. In Black Ops 2, they have one perk be double mags and another perk called extended clip.

It's no so far fetch that shooter games are supporting the gun industry not just by money directly from copy rights on logos and names of guns but a new generation of gun owners that have been brought up playing call of duty. I've talked to some of my Marine buddies about how they had to deal with the Call of Duty generation that have been enlisting.

[SPEMack618]

I once read on a gun blog somewhere that Call of Duty was directly responsible for Gun Culture 2.0, which I think is a good thing.

[funkychinaman]

You said it, CoD and Battlefield introduces these products to an entire generation of impressionable consumers. Companies pay for product placement and ads in games like Rainbow Six: Vegas 2, why should it be any different with guns? Why should Activision, and by extension, we the consumers, have to pay for the privilege of seeing the Remington script plastered on a few guns? Jeep pays for their product to be in CoD, why not Remington?

I'm curious though, if someone were to create a new FPS and wanted to use real names but didn't want to pay any licensing fees, how many guns could they get away with? A lot of patents have expired, and I don't think you have to license a government issued name (like M16 or M60).