New Video Games/ Movies

[Spartan198]

Originally Posted by Excalibur

I'd even have been ok with them going Platoon and having you carry around a Model 653P because it sorta existed and didn't have a funky faux rail on top for optics that also didn't exist.

The whole point was to have the rail to attach optics to, so that would have put them back at square one.

[commando552]

Originally Posted by Spartan198

The whole point was to have the rail to attach optics to, so that would have put them back at square one.

They could have picked anything really and just fitted it with a weaver rail on the carry handle when optics were fitted. This was period correct and done for both telescopic sights on M16s and for red dots on carbines.

[Excalibur]

Originally Posted by Spartan198

The whole point was to have the rail to attach optics to, so that would have put them back at square one.

Not square one. Just period appropriate. I'd go with if they took the early almost flat top like upper and merge it with a carbine length handguard for looks and that'll be acceptable because it existed.

Also, square one of what? Before optics were used by every gamer and tacticool kids under the sun. People just forget that not too long ago, optics were a luxury item and untested on a mass scale. I know Marines coming out now that wondered what it was like before the ACOG was current issue.

I know lining up iron sights on a 2D plain that's giving you the illusion of 3D view with faux depth perception is unusual but to be historically accurate or at least to not be anachronistic, I think game developers need to rethink making games based in a time line before certain tech is the norm. I don't even want to begin talking about how the small arms weapons tech of Metal Gear Solid 5 is stupid

[commando552]

Originally Posted by Excalibur

Not square one. Just period appropriate. I'd go with if they took the early almost flat top like upper and merge it with a carbine length handguard for looks and that'll be acceptable because it existed.

That would annoy me almost as much though, as it would be them totally making up a variant that didn't exist by using the receiver from a prototype weapon that I'm not sure was ever actually used anyway. There is a lot of photo evidence of M16s and carbines in Vietnam with a variety of optics fitted to the carry handle either directly or through a weaver base, so I don't know why they didn't just do that. Even without making stuff up or being anachronistic they could have still used Delfts, Colt scopes, Starlights, Oxford Lightnings, Armson OEGs or various commercial hunting sights. There is photographic evidence of all of them being used by the US military in this time period.

[Spartan198]

Originally Posted by Excalibur

Not square one. Just period appropriate. I'd go with if they took the early almost flat top like upper and merge it with a carbine length handguard for looks and that'll be acceptable because it existed.

Also, square one of what? Before optics were used by every gamer and tacticool kids under the sun. People just forget that not too long ago, optics were a luxury item and untested on a mass scale. I know Marines coming out now that wondered what it was like before the ACOG was current issue.

Square one of not having an M4. Like I said, the whole point was to have a flat top upper for mounting optics. Besides, the fact that the game has a FAMAS Felin 30 years before it ever came into being throws any arguments of period accuracy out the window.

This is Call of Duty we're talking about. Accuracy isn't even on the radar.

[Excalibur]

Originally Posted by Spartan198

Square one of not having an M4. Like I said, the whole point was to have a flat top upper for mounting optics. Besides, the fact that the game has a FAMAS Felin 30 years before it ever came into being throws any arguments of period accuracy out the window.

This is Call of Duty we're talking about. Accuracy isn't even on the radar.

This is COD NOW. It used to be a little bit better before Modern Warfare made it into something else. Would you not nitpick a little bit if they made another WWII game and suddenly all the guns got weird optics on them? And the excuse is that it's a COD game. MW game have the excuse of the guns existing in the near future but Black Ops wants to put us in the mood that it takes place in the late 60s, so, as gun guys, we should experience late 60s era weapons. At least in Battlefield one, all the guns used in the campaign and accessories existed in the correct time period, save for maybe 1 or 2 that was perhaps used just barely after the war ended. I wouldn't have been surprised if they had you use a Tommy gun, but they had good restraint on that part.

I didn't mention the FAMAS and the AUG and the fucking G11 being in Black Ops because those were just blatant and you'd have to have noticed how stupid their placement is here and did I mention the SPAS-12

[Spartan198]

Originally Posted by Excalibur

This is COD NOW. It used to be a little bit better before Modern Warfare made it into something else. Would you not nitpick a little bit if they made another WWII game and suddenly all the guns got weird optics on them? And the excuse is that it's a COD game. MW game have the excuse of the guns existing in the near future but Black Ops wants to put us in the mood that it takes place in the late 60s, so, as gun guys, we should experience late 60s era weapons. At least in Battlefield one, all the guns used in the campaign and accessories existed in the correct time period, save for maybe 1 or 2 that was perhaps used just barely after the war ended. I wouldn't have been surprised if they had you use a Tommy gun, but they had good restraint on that part.

I didn't mention the FAMAS and the AUG and the fucking G11 being in Black Ops because those were just blatant and you'd have to have noticed how stupid their placement is here and did I mention the SPAS-12

Yeah, the point is, period accuracy wasn't even on Treyarch's radar. If they were intent on having designs from 30+ years in the future, they certainly weren't going to bother with a period accurate XM177.

[Excalibur]

Originally Posted by Spartan198

Yeah, the point is, period accuracy wasn't even on Treyarch's radar. If they were intent on having designs from 30+ years in the future, they certainly weren't going to bother with a period accurate XM177.

Which is weird because a lot of their game posters actually has an accurate XM177 with a correct Colt scope on top of the carrying handle.


Anyway, I just started playing Ghost Recon Wildlands and....the first thing that annoys me is all guns that you know should come standard with 30 round mags starts off with 20 round mags as "standard" and 30 round mags are called extended mags. Thankfully they call them mags but really...you drop special forces guys deep into Bolivia with cool clothes but poorly equipped guns?

[funkychinaman]

I borrowed Titanfall 2 from the local library, and I have to say, the campaign is one of the best I've ever played. I've been really impressed by the level design, and the campaign does a great job of showing off the game's unique features. I haven't beaten it yet, and it'll take a few weeks since I can't renew it right now.

[BlackHawk510]

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

I borrowed Titanfall 2 from the local library, and I have to say, the campaign is one of the best I've ever played. I've been really impressed by the level design, and the campaign does a great job of showing off the game's unique features. I haven't beaten it yet, and it'll take a few weeks since I can't renew it right now.

Speaking of Titanfall 2, the new weapons which weren't in the first game are animated by the guy most well known for making this:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRm-BSukPds

That's one hell of an accomplishment for a guy who started out by making CS:S reskins.