Internet Movie Firearms Database - Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games - User contributions [en]

Talk:Red Dawn (2012)

2011-01-24T20:16:06Z

Hughjefender: /* First Cast Photo Released */

WTH? Did a 3 year old write this page?
:::Well the median age of the average IMFDB user is getting lower all the time ;) [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

::I think it would be more advisable to wait until a teaser or official set photos emerge before creating this page. After all, the release date is more than nine months away. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 22:07, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

::::I fixed the page's spelling and grammar issues.

==AK as seen in promo pic==
Is that an AKM with black synthetic furniture? Should I take an inventory Movie AKM and put black AK74 style furniture on it and photograph it for this page? Or is the gun something else? [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 22:50, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

:Please do.-protoAuthor 01:28, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

:I think it may be something else. It may be something in the AK 100 series or some other varient. We need a better look at the weapons in question.[[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 01:12, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

::Can American armorers actually get AK-103s? I didn't think they could without difficulty. If I had to guess, the weapons in this movie are probably AKMs with synthetic furniture and AK-74 flash hiders. There was another picture posted on the forum which showed the guns more clearly, and they had the ribbed receiver covers (AK-103s come from the factory with smooth). Plus, why would armorers go to the trouble of getting AK-103s? Wouldn't it be more cost-effective to just vismod AKMs? -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:27, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
:::It's more cost effective to modify existing (and registered pre-86) AKMs with AK-103 parts kits ;) Doesn't mean *I* will do it, because it's a lot of work for no current reason, but I can't see a reason why others would not be able to do so. It does NOT look like a 103 but then I have not seen better pics from the production. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 02:11, 27 January 2010 (UTC) (correction) Title II manufacturers (Like CW) can build their own from the numerous AK receivers being built in this country and complete it with Parts kits. Again, I have no definitive indications of what these are, but there are tons of new types of AKs being imported (now only European style guns), which is a BIG change from the 1980s when there were only Chinese guns. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 02:13, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

::::Here are a few pictures of the rifles for ID(more than likely, these are non-firing props since the muzzle brakes and front sight appear to be filled in):
:::::Those are DEFINITELY resin/rubber castings of AKMS with synthetic furniture and AK74 style muzzle brakes. BTW: those young Asian American Airsofter Extras who look kinda young compared to the hardened look of real PLA soldiers (hahaha) are wearing fake PLA CAMO that looks REALLY GOOD! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 21:42, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
::::http://img163.imageshack.us/gal.php?g=81311432742685146627835.jpg
::::Also, an AKMSU with an interesting forearm:
::::http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/3010/reddawnset4.jpg

:::::I think those are probably AKMs (most likely Maadis) dressed up as AK-103s. The receivers look pretty worn...almost as though they've been in the armory's inventory for 25+ years. Although what MPM mentioned (built-up guns from parts kits) is also possible, the AK-103 resembles the AKM so closely externally (besides the furniture and flash hider) that vismoding the older gun seems like the easiest thing to do. I'll have to ask around and see if anyone knows who supplied the weapons for this show. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 04:21, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
::::::The Gas block on these guns look a lot like the AK74 style, which is common on a lot of the recent AK rifles being sold in this country now (a lot were built on parts kits from Europe). The straight 90 degree down gas block style of the AK74 is seen on all manner of AKs nowadays. As a note, it's a pain in the butt to remove a gas block on an existing AK only to replace it with another style of gas block for a movie, and I doubt that the production will pay for the hassle, so they may be Title II converted European style AKS (with American receivers). [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 21:44, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

:::::::Are you sure your eye didn't slip? Those guns do not look to me like they have the AK-74-style gas block. And yes, some of them are definitely rubber castings of the live-fire weapons, which is I guess what we'd expect for a production with dozens/hundreds of extras who carry weapons. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 00:29, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

:::::AKMSU forearm looks like it might be a KAC AK RAS. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:51, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

::::::: That's Quad-rail from KCI [http://img704.imageshack.us/img704/7889/2655074.jpg]

:::::::: This is cool, I hadn't heard about this remake until just now. One thing I noticed was that all these extras have good grip and trigger finger control... Except that guy with the carbine with the odd rails (all AKs with rails look weird to me), he's got his finger VERY on the trigger with with other hand OVER THE MUZZLE. Good job... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 07:58, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

==Fan Photos==

I have a few photos that show some of the weapons seen during the film's production, but they are all unofficial pictures taken by extras/bystanders on the film set. AFAIK there are no official set pictures that have been released, so would there be any problems if I post them?--[[User:Markit|Markit]] 02:48, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
::Those are still unauthorized images. Any person can take pictures on sets. I had my camera confiscated from the set of [[Back to the Future Part II|BTTF2]], because there was a lock down on ANY unauthorized images that had not been cleared through the studio. So in answer to your question: I would say not. Also undercover fan pics tend to suck in quality. But posting links to them to aid us in identifying guns is okay. But I don't want ANY movie studio lawyer seeing IMFDB as a place which holds the image on their server (which is what happens when you upload a pic). [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 03:14, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
:::Okay, parts of this movie were filmed in Royal Oak, MI, and I still have lots of college friends who live there. Lots of them took photos. Theoretically, let's say they were filming on their street, right in front of their house. If they stood on their front lawn, or just opened a window and snapped a photo, is it still an unauthorized image? It's one thing if you go to a set, but what happens when a set comes to you? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 23:50, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

:::In that case, Image:Red dawn photos 008.jpg in the main page should be removed because it is an unauthorized picture. I will also post some links on the talk page if anyone is interested. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 03:36, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
[[Image:Red dawn photos 008.jpg|thumb|none|500px|Production still of extras posing as PLAGF soldiers armed with an unknown AKM variant.]]

Airsoft rifles guys, they just didn't bother to use the correct 5.45mm magazines.

http://www.airsoftgi.com/product_info.php?cPath=139_24_91&products_id=1258

::::Oh, great, not the old "movies always use airsoft guns and CGI muzzle flashes" rumors again... -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 05:13, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
:::::Who is the anonymous poster who wrote that? Also movies have and DO use Airsoft for non firing scenes, but I saw shaky, blurry, crappy bootleg video of a shootout and they were DEFINITELY rocking and rolling with blanks during one sequence. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:39, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
::::::I believe I've seen that footage, too. Those definitely aren't airsoft. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 11:55, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

::::::I wish they kill these occupants in most brutal ways. Like burning, decapitating, riding over with a tank etc.
:::::::WTF? User:178.92.110.168, you been drinking too much coffee or popping pills or something? [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 08:37, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
Is this movie low budget or something? Because I can't find any trailers for it other than fake crap on youtube using PLA parade footage and GI Joe footage.
I can see why they'd use AK-103s though, the airsoft or dummy QBZ-95s are very expensive. Gotta give them credit, at least they used more asians than Last Airbender.
:::Are asians expensive too nowadays?

Actually these guys are wearing the latest PLA digital camo, that itself cannot be cheap, and they obviously done their research. Don't know why they got AKs...maybe it's suppose to represent Type-03 or something.--[[User:Wildcards|Wildcards]] 21:18, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

:They've AKs because Norinco guns, like the PLA's standard service rifle the QBZ-95, can't be imported into the United States. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:32, 28 May 2010 (UTC)

To the guy who posted below the pic, you can't put an airsoft 7.62 magazine in an airsoft 5.45 AK any more than you could with a real one. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 07:58, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Regarding some other pics of the vehicles that are supposedly going to be in the movie, are they at least based on Chinese vehicles or just US Army vehicles with the Chinese flag painted on them?
[[User:BigD|BigD]] 18:09, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

The Hummer H1's could be a stand-in for the Brave Warrior, which is basically a knockoff of the H1. Try wrapping that around your head --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 22:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

With airsoft, you can stick the 7.62 mags in a 5.45 gun and vice versa. looks od, but still works fine--[[User:Mandolin|Mandolin]] 23:54, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

China has its own version of the HMMWV, look up the Dongfeng EQ2050-[[User:Ranger01|Ranger01]] 03:43, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

I wonder if the knowledgeable American's gonna know that the EQ2050 is a bona-fied LICENSED clone instead of bashing it as a knock-off? --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 02:29, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

== Remaking a great movie is a bad idea ==

Why is Hollywood making remakes of all the good movies? What's next? A remake of "Apocalypse Now"? - [[User:Kilgore|Kilgore]] 04:07, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
:It's debatable whether Red Dawn is really a great movie, so a better question might be why a movie that is so reflective of a particular era and its cultural landscape was remade when perceptions and fears about the world have changed. Regardless, I am still interested in seeing how this film turns out, if it ever gets a theatrical release. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 05:13, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Agreed. It seems like 80's movie are always difficult to remake. Movies like Ferris Bueller, Teen Wolf, and Weird Science simply cannot work now. The same applies to horror movies.
I'm gonna go see this movie, but my expectations ain't too high.
R.I.P Patrick Swayze.

I just know when a movie is going to suck and this is not looking good. - [[User:Kilgore|Kilgore]] 17:22, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Of course it'll suck, the only trailers I've seen are mockups and fan photos. Was this even mentioned at this year's Comic-Con?

== Movie Release ==
The bad news, if you can call it that, is that the release of the flick may be delayed indefinitely. Since it seems MGM is in the midst of possible bankruptcy proceedings and since they are the parent studio of the makers of the movie it may be some time before it sees the light of day. If at all. --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 23:22, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

http://www.themovieinsider.com/m4854/red-dawn/
:There are two shots of armored vehicles on that site. One looks like a fake M1 Abrams, and the other is some Red Chinese armored car. The M1 looks like it might be the same fake M1 from Courage Under Fire, or at least is also based on the Centurion. (Notice the number of wheels, and the gap between the second and third wheels.) As for the armored car, I have no idea, although the turret looks really fake. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 23:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

[http://i0.tmi.tc/images/p/600/13498.jpg]

[http://i0.tmi.tc/images/p/600/13497.jpg]

The Abrams is definitly a fake. However, it looks more like it is based on a Cheiftain chassis, mainly due to the curvature of the front hull/glassis plate, the placement of the six roadwheels, and the height of it. The armoured car...your guess is as good as mine, because unlike the Abrams, this isn't a former peice of Brit kit reconditioned.
:Now that you mention it, yes, I agree. The Chieftain has the same gap between the second and third wheels, and the Chieftain turret is flatter as well, which would make it easier to adapt into an Abrams. But I had always heard that Chieftains were a pain in the butt mechanically, and you'd think productions would prefer something that was easier and thus cheaper to maintain over something that looked more right for the part. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 18:48, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
::IIRC, the "Abrams" is actually a modified Centurion tank, one of several ex-Australian examples which were originally created for use in ''[[Courage Under Fire]]''. The armored car is made by General Purpose Vehicles of Michigan (who usually build armored vehicles for law enforcement use) and is only lightly modified with the addition of a turret. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 23:16, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Man, I would have thought you guys would have been cheesed more that the movie may not see the light of day any time soon!!! --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 23:00, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
:I have to admit I'm not terribly excited by this movie. I'm against remakes in general, I really can't understand how you can remake Red Dawn, considering the Cold War has been over for about twenty years now. Back in the eighties, the Soviets were waist deep in Afghanistan, we were slinging Olympic boycotts back and forth, and the president actually referred to them as the Evil Empire. To the kids growing up back then, the Soviets WERE evil. They oppressed the freedom loving mujahadeen of Afghanistan, they shot down our airliners, they teamed up with the Iron Sheik against Hulk Hogan, they held our POWS in Vietnam, and dammit, they killed Apollo Creed (IT WAS ONLY SUPPOSED TO BE AN EXHIBITION! THROW THE GODDAMN TOWEL!) And that was just the eighties. The Berlin Airlift, Korea, Vietnam, Prague Spring, the Cuban missile crisis, Khrushchev promising to bury us, duck and cover drills, those were just chapters in our history books. Now, I'm the last man to defend Red China (the fact that I still refer to them as Red China should tell you something.) But let's face it, what's the worst thing they've done to us? Cheat in women's gymnastics? Sell us lead-laden toys? Give the Houston Rockets false hope? They downed one of our planes, sure, but the only person who actually died was one of their guys. Tiananmen square was twenty years ago, and they've been oppressing Tibet since before anyone here was born. They need us and we need them. Like it or not, we are economically dependent on them, and they are on us. As much as I'd like to see American troops roll into Beijing and tear down that red flag, war makes absolutely no sense, from an economic, political, or security standpoint. The only ally that they're threatening is Taiwan, and we're such a good ally, we won't even recognize them as a country. In summary, the perceived threat of a Soviet invasion was real, as Soviet aggression was real. Our government and the media, backed with forty years of history, fed our hysteria over the Soviet Union. There's no perceived threat from Red China. That same government and media are bending over backwards to accommodate the reds. They might as well remade Red Dawn with us being invaded by Belgium. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 23:38, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Coincidentally, I ran across this article today. Apparently I'm not the only one who feels this way. Twenty years after the Cold War ended, Russians are still the boogeymen! [http://kotaku.com/5616543/americans-get-russia-fighting-the-us] --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 14:52, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
::Um...tell us how you really feel?!?--[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 00:18, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
:::I would've been excited if the remake was still set in the 80's, and all the politics were the same. You can update the cast, crew, film technology, but you can't update the politics. Another film that can't be remade today: The Day After. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:39, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
::::You know, to be fair, the last Jack Ryan book by Tom Clancy did have China as the main military villain with a credible nuclear threat. Granted the possibility of a Chinese/Russian alliance is slim to none but the original movie was a stretch in and of itself --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 00:44, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
:::::Well, Clancy also had a novel that had us going to war with Japan, so yeah. The original was a stretch, but the threat of Central America falling to the reds was very real back then, or at least we were made to believe it was. Whether is was truly realistic or not is not relevant, it was our believe that it was realistic that counted, and it's that culture of fear and antagonism that can't be reproduced by replacing the Soviets with Red China. Not only would a remake set in the 80's work better, I think it would be more popular. There's a lot of 80's nostalgia. I think people would rather relive the good old days rather than face the fact that the Red Chinese are a power to be reckoned with. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 01:00, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

::::::The problem with that though is the Chinese were not as big a threat in the 80s as they are today. Their military was less advanced then, as was their economy, and we still had our massive Cold War arsenel. -[[User:Anonymous|Anonymous]]
:::::::No, I meant using the Soviet Union of the eighties rather than the Red Chinese of today. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:04, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
::::::::Oh, nevermind. -[[User:Anonymous|Anonymous]]

:::Well having been a teenager in the 80's (born 1968) and enlisting the first time in 86 (when the Soviets seemed like or were still a very real threat to the U.S.A.) I have to admit that I miss the old U.S.S.R. Hell I and many others were actually happy in the late 70's and early 80's when the U.S. and Red China began to have a thaw in their relationship. Gave us a nice counterweight to the Soviets. Anybody remember that? sure there was that whole nuclear armageddon hangin over our heads, but now I realize that there was more clarity in the world. Now it's just a fucking muddled mess. Oh well. I'm going to watch my Chinese made television. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 20:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

== Movie Release Update ==
Was just checking out a web site for movie trailers and the release date for this is now listed as April 2011. --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 14:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

So the title should be changed to 2011 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:33, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

:Agreed. Even the IMDB page now refers to it as Red Dawn (2011). --[[User:Charon68|Charon68]] 06:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

== First Cast Photo Released ==
[[Image:Red_Dawn_2011.jpg|thumb|none|400px|The new Wolverines in a promotional image from Red Dawn (2011).]]

I wish I had that kind of trigger discipline in high school. On other notes, it looks like they're using the generic airsoft AKs that the Chinese extras are using, and who the hell is that third female? --[[User:ZeoRanger5|ZeoRanger5]] 18:32, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
::The girl on the left is Julie, who is played by Alyssa Diaz. It also looks as though Chris Hemsworth is holding an AKMSU and Josh Hutcherson (kneeling on the right) is holding a M249 SAW. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 23:47, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Hey! It's the rejects from the cast auditions for Firefly! Hughjefender.

Talk:Kane & Lynch 2: Dog Days

2011-01-18T17:05:19Z

Hughjefender: /* Police revolver */

First game was unshiny at all, why would they make another one.

It was a financial success. Poeple liked the story and the characters but the gameplay was bad ...

AFAIR, game had 6.5 - 7.5 scores on major review sites. And plot was overfilled with cliches. AK74 was the only good thing about the game.

As much as I like to say otherwise, Kane & Lynch was pretty flawed game. I'm still looking forward the sequel, fingers crossed. --[[User:AlkoTanko|AlkoTanko]] 13:47, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey, who the hell took my picture of the track pants wearing loser out? [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 20:19, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

==Mystery pistol==
Would someone mind identifying this? I think it is the Beretta. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 19:00, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
[[Image:MysteryPistol_KLDD.jpg|500px|thumb|none|A thug with his ???? before getting his face fried.]]

Definitely a Beretta.

== Kane & Lynch ==

For those who've played this game. Which one is Kane, and which is Lynch?

I'm confused about this new movie Adaptation with Bruce Willis as Kane and

can't help think he should be playing Lynch. Michael Biehn should play Kane.

Lynch is the balding fellow with shotgun, other one is Kane (who looks like he has grown some hair since first game, odd).

Clearly, the case he stole from Retomoto was filled with Rogaine.

In the screenshot of Lynch holding a hostage, i have my doubts that the gun is a beretta, does anybody have any suggestions what it is? [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 01:17, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

It's a Norinco model 77B, you can tell on account of the unusual shaped trigger guard, which doubles as a one handed slide-cycling mechanism, you depress the front of the trigger guard and it causes the slide to cycle back. Doesn't exactly seem useful under stress, it would take a lot of force from just your trigger finger to manipulate the thing, even if you could reach it without adjusting your grip, but whaddya gonna do. --[[User:Toadvine|Toadvine]] 23:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

whos decision was it to cast jamie foxx as lynch?

The unknown SMG is a Steyr MPi 69 or 81

==Beta Access==
Hey, I will have a beta of Dog Days tomorrow. I will confirm most of the weapons

Could someone identify the shotgun in the limited edition picture [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 04:48, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Looks like some sort of 870 to me/ ShootingLiberal

I could've swore the tan framed handgun in the game was one of those Smith and Wesson M&P's in .45, not a Springfield XD. --[[User:Toadvine|Toadvine]] 18:26, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

== Thoughts of the game ==

You get used to the very grainy film style and the shaky camera angle. It does annoy the hell out of you, but there is something about these characters and what resembles a plot that hooks you. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 01:55, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

I agree man, the story is damn short but the plot is a frantic one that doesn't let up over it's short lenght. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 01:57, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

The plot DOES feel very rushed, but it's fast paced. It keeps you hooked and it's very simple. But the ending <strike> was a bit off. All you do is run for a plane and there's no closure or ending scene.</strike> [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the spoilers, dude. [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 13:59, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

Just preparing you for the blank ending [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 19:08, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

There's also been some complaints in reviews about the poor accuracy of the guns, coupled with low damage. I'm playing at normal difficulty and I have no trouble taking down enemies even with handguns. And as for the accuracy, well, some of the guns aren't exactly known for their pinpoint accuracy, nevermind that it's Lynch you're playing with: the nutjob with a gun whos entire idea of "tactics" is to draw his weapon and start rapidly pulling the trigger.--[[User:AlkoTanko|AlkoTanko]] 14:09, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I think IGN managed to sum up Dog Days nicely
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/112/1123129p1.html
[[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 11:21, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

== The Tokarev TT-33 might be a Type 54 ==

[[Image:Russain ww2.jpg|thumb|none|300px]]

Look at the little lump near the rear, it looks like there would be a manual safety on the other side.

:Well, this takes place in Shanghai, so it's not only possible, it's probable. It would make sense. I'm guessing its inclusion is more of "The Developers liked Hard Boiled" than "It makes sense to be here", but even if the former is true, so is the latter. To quote Pappy from Gen Kill, "Even a broken-ass clock is right twice a day". Also, isn't the star on the grip covers only on the Type 54?-protoAuthor 16:03, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

The star can be on Soviet Tokarevs too. You have to look carefully at the markings to tell. Hughjefender

== Police revolver ==

Does anyone else like this revolver for some reason? I do and I don't really know why. I know Chinese weapons are (no offense) not exactly known for their quality and worksmanship, but this 9mm revolver just seems cool to me. --[[User:ColonelTomb|ColonelTomb]] 18:04, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

I don't like it. I always pictured revolvers as big powerful weapons in .38, .357, or .44. A 9mm wheelgun, while effective I'm sure, just seems sorta wimpy to me. [[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 20:53, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

I think it's pretty cool, although I always go for the SW .45 in Fragile Alliance. Wouldn't it need a moon clip to load though?

Well, that's what I thought but I think it actually uses a different type of 9mm. I'm not sure but I'll post the link to the world.guns page (they have a lot of info about it)http://world.guns.ru/handguns/hg199-e.htm --[[User:ColonelTomb|ColonelTomb]] 20:01, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Hmm...apparently it uses a .38 S&W-like 9mm, not quite sure what that means. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 23:56, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

It's only used by Chinese Police apparently, kinda strange that they haven't exported it like a lot of other stuff Norinco makes. Hughjefender

It looks like a piece of crap, and besides most people are buying semos so i doubt it will be used as an export.

I'm not sure why the Chinese police don't just use Tokarevs. A 9mm revolver seems a bit dumb. Hughjefender
Actually from what I read about this thing, the Chinese specifically designed it so that it doesn't do as much damage to suspects and that in case of capture by criminals, the gun can't easily kill people. Hughjefender.

== Beretta 92FS ==

The ingame gun has a 12 round magazine capacity, so wouldn't that make it a .40 caliber? --[[User:ColonelTomb|ColonelTomb]] 01:03, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

:Not necessarily. Kane and Lynch could just be loading all their mags with 12 rounds. I mean, you can't really identify an movie or game gun by its capacity, what with people not knowing things and game balance issues. Also, I'm gonna be putting up some more "glamour" shots from trailers. I wish I owned this game, because I love the demo so much, but my PS3 won't accept Blu-Rays anymore. and my laptop can't run it.-protoAuthor 16:00, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Well, I suppose that's true. However, the ingame gun seems to pack quite a bit of punch, as in mostly achieving 1-shot-kills if you aim for the center of mass, whereas some of the other pistols (i.e. the N77) take 2 or 3 center of mass shots to take someone down. --[[User:ColonelTomb|ColonelTomb]] 16:14, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

So, its rather a reduced capacity for balance (like we need more needless balancing) or a 96.

Talk:ArmaLite AR-18

2011-01-14T07:02:25Z

Hughjefender:

==Additional Images==
[[Image:Terminator-AR18.png|thumb|none|400px|A transferable fully automatic Armalite AR-18 - 5.56mm was used in ''[[The Terminator]]'' and ''[[Terminator 2: Judgment Day]]''.]]

==Talk==

The best AR18 close ups are [http://www.deactivated-guns.co.uk/detail/Ar180.htm HERE!]

[[User:Cutaway]]

:I really want one of these rifles.-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 04:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Sadly, the AR-180s are no longer made by Armalite as of 2009. They still sell parts on their website but no full rifles. I guess they didn't sell well. It's a shame though, they were very competitive with the Kel-tec and the Mini-14. They did have a cracking problem on the aluminum recievers though from what I hear. Hughjefender.

One of the most aesthetically pleasing rifles out there, shame they stopped making them :( --[[User:Chrausis|Chrausis]] 21:25, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Can AR-18s accept M203 grenade launcher attachments like the M16 & M4A1?

Good news and bad news for AR-18 fans: One, some small companies still make them. Bad news, the only ones that are made in large enough numbers are made by Vulcan Arms. Vulcan's track record is not so stellar from what I hear. They also reuse parts from FAL kits for them too, so it looks weird as hell. I can't remember the other small shops that make them.
As for mounting a grenade launcher, I'm not sure. I wrote a story at one point where one of the characters uses a AR-18 with a GP-30 mounted, but that's just creative license. Hughjefender

Talk:Bushmaster ACR

2011-01-14T06:49:56Z

Hughjefender: /* ACR fragility */

=ACR fragility=

News about this gun folks. The ACR has been reported to have several problems with the gas system. The piston seems to be very prone to breakdowns.
The quality is also really lousy and the plastic cracks easily. It looks like Remington's quality control no longer exists. Hughjefender
:Source? [[User:Acora|Acora]] 14:08, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
::Sounds more like a design flaw than bad QC.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 20:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
That, and the fact that it's being recalled for randomly emptying the mag, leads me to believe that this is only the first of many problems. -SasquatchJim

Yeah, I'll try to ask my friend about the source of his info. He gets a lot of info from Highroad, Calguns, Arf-Com, and even K. I get skeptical about his stuff sometimes. Hughjefender.

Talk:Bushmaster ACR

2011-01-01T04:33:54Z

Hughjefender:

2010-09-13T07:25:56Z

Hughjefender:

What exactly is this handgun ?
[[Image:Mp2colt.jpg|thumb|none|400px|An unknown handgun is seen in the hands of a character in the extreme right]]

Given where the scope's mounted and the look of the thing, I think it's a scoped Desert Eagle; the part you're seeing as a revolver cylinder is actually the gripped area around the safety lever. [[User:Vangelis|Vangelis]] 10:22, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
:That's a picture of the game when it was still in development. Hence the Colt M733 instead of the M4 and the scope on the Desert Eagle.-[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 17:30, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

==REDO==
I have no idea if anyone cares at this point, but I might redo this page. I have the PC version, which has high quality screenshots from things that actually are in the game. So we can stop using those Gamespot pictures of questionable legality and relevance. Lemme know what you think if you care. --[[User:ManiacallyChallenged|ManiacallyChallenged]]
:Work in progress, will finish it after getting the rest of the needed screenshots. --[[User:ManiacallyChallenged|ManiacallyChallenged]]

==Custom Desert Eagle XIX==
How about that? Just don't zoom in. :P --[[User:ManiacallyChallenged|ManiacallyChallenged]]
[[Image:MP2customEagle.jpg|thumb|none|400px|An inexpertly crafted Pshop of the MP2 Desert Eagle.]]

:It's not too bad. Someone with more photoshop experience could help you make better grips. I've noticed that Vlad keeps one as his signature pistol as well. During the "That old familiar feeling" level Vlad drops it when both he and Max crash through the floor. Vlad curses his bad luck at not having a gun when Max is vulnerable and flees, not knowing that Max has landed on top of Vlad's gun, swearing he'll "give it back to [Vlad], one bullet at a time!".--[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 04:12, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
::Yeah, I couldn't copy paste the grips so I just smeared 'em on! I had a marathon gaming session the other day, and took a huge load of screen caps from the second half of the game, only to find out that my screen shot button wasn't working. Major drag. I'll get around to finishing the rest of the page. --[[User:ManiacallyChallenged|ManiacallyChallenged]]

:::As you can see, I have replaced ManiacallyChallenged's Photoshopped Desert Eagle with what I believe to have been the exact same Desert Eagle that inspired the texture artists and 3D modelers who worked on ''Max Payne 2''. This one belongs to Rick Washburn's Weapons Specialists, Ltd. in New York and was originally used in ''[[The Sopranos]]''.

:::Also, I wonder if the artists who did this game actually went to Weapons Specialists and rented weapons from their inventory to use as references and for texture photographing? The fact that their Desert Eagle looks just like the one that Washburn provided for ''[[The Sopranos]]'' is a pretty big hint, and so is the fact that the game's MP5 is actually a partially-converted HK94A3. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]]

:::Hmm, when did this gun first appear in the Sopranos? Were the developers of Max Payne 2 fans of the show? The game was released in 2003 and the Sopranos first aired in 1999. Maybe if you contacted that specific armourer you could verify whether Rockstar approached them for weapons they could reference from way back in 2003. Sadly it looks like they couldn't actually get anyone in the know to show them the proper method of reloading some of them, like how the Striker Shotgun's reload method isn't accurately portrayed. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 23:14, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

::::The "Pine Barrens" episode in The Sopranos aired in '01. That's my favorite episode from the series.--[[User:Predator20|Predator20]] 23:24, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

:::::I've never seen that episode of ''The Sopranos'' (I've only seen a few episodes of the show). But it seems quite likely to me that they must have gone to Weapons Specialists and photographed the Desert Eagle used in ''The Sopranos''. Rockstar is based in New York City, and so is Weapons Specialists (they are pretty much ''the'' armory that caters to all of the productions done in the Northeast - NYC, Boston, etc.) Plus, again, the use of the partially-converted HK94A3 is a big clue. Before MPM took the picture of the gun we have on our site, there were no pictures of the partial HK94-to-MP5 conversions anywhere on the 'Net (believe me, I checked). The only place you'd find a gun like that to photograph would be in a movie armory. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 23:41, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

:::::That's interesting. Still, I think at least a few people here (MPM2008 among them) could just place a phone call to those people and confirm once and for all whether Rockstar used their weapons. Would be nice to have around on this wiki. --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 00:19, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

::::::They have a web site, which is where I found the picture. They may or not respond to emails. I'm also not sure if they'll be OK with us using any of their gun pictures. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 01:39, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

== Desert Eagle caliber ==
So which caliber is the Deagle exactly ? Two shot kills and 9+1 capacity indicate .357 Magnum but the model suggests .50 AE

:- The caliber isn't explicit, possibly because of those reasons. It's partly assumed to be .357 because of the magazine capacity. But it's also assumed to be .50AE because of the model and it's markings, though I personally think that's an oversight.I myself would say it's .357 and as for it looking like the .50AE variant, including markings, that is most probably just because the designers modeled the weapon off a .50AE variant - Game weapon models aren't known to be excessively precise to the exact weapons they represent. In any case, again, the game isn't explicit about what caliber the game weapon actually is, so I'm afraid you might not get an answer. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] 16:12, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

== The Kalashnikov ==
While the AK in the game looks like a Type 56 it could just as easily be a Hungarian model judging by the color of the wood on the grips. Plus, it has the standard AKM slant compensator. I could be wrong about this, so feel free to clarify. Hughjefender

Talk:Red Dawn (2012)

2010-09-05T04:12:00Z

Hughjefender: /* Remaking a great movie is a bad idea */

Talk:Strike Witches

2010-09-03T07:48:16Z

Hughjefender: /* Is it just me or... */

i have just finished watching this anime (with english subtitles) and think it is an AWESOME anime!!!

Does Anyone have a favourite witch in the series?

== Type 99 ==

Is not that gun. I may not know much about firearms, but the 99 has a curved magazine on the top, and this has a drum on the bottom. Its much different. [[Special:Contributions/70.108.146.60|70.108.146.60]] 20:00, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

The weapon you refer to, the Type 99 machine gun, is essentially a Type 96 light machine gun modified to accept the more powerful 7.7x58mm Type 99 ammunition. The weapon depicted in Strike Witches looks like a Japanese Navy Type 99 "machine cannon," which is indeed fed from a drum as depicted and fires a far larger round (note that in the image of the assorted characters, Yoshika Miyafuji and Mio Sakumoto are noted as carrying "13mm Type 99"). However, I think the weapon being used in this anime is a fabrication; my research indicates the Type 99 cannon fired 20mm rounds, not 13mm. [[User:Hexslinger|Hexslinger]] 11:26, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

== Is it just me or... ==

Is this anime just an excuse to look at huge guns and little girls panties? No offense. Besides it's not like it's uncommon in Anime. besides, who am I to judge really? Just throwin' it out there. Discuss, don't discuss, I dont really care.
:You are 100% right. Another thing the series does is to shame about every WW2 flying Ace in history. It sucks, really.--[[User:Oliveira|Oliveira]] 15:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

::Lolicon + WWII = Bad idea, except for basement-dwellers and sick fucks [[User:Markost|Markost]] 16:58, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

:::Never had taste for anime, and shit like this is why. --[[User:ConditionNone|ConditionNone]] 04:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Amen to that. Hughjefender

:Damn pedo's ruin everything. They ought to kneecap the bastards when they are released from prison-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 05:31, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

:Paedos don't go to prison, sexual predators do. Learn the difference. Paedos haven't acted yet, quite a few are voluntarily castrated, I've heard. Just so you know. Other than that, I heard someone suggest to go to a gunstore with a strike witches jacket, and try to convince people that they're a veteran from the unit. With no pants on. 'Twas hilarious.-protoAuthor 15:25, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
:That's a pretty good way to get an ass whuppin' by the police-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 18:06, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
:I'd pay to see that. XD. But, at any rate, I have to agree with the OP. I love anime, but things like Black Lagoon, Bubblegum Crisis Tokyo 2040, and Ghost in the Shell are more my style. This definitely doesn't fit in that category. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:08, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

:If you liked Black Lagoon and Ghost in the Shell, I would recommended Darker then black and cowboy bebop. Rex095

:Shows like these are called "fanservice shows," pretty much made to titillate the fans first and foremost, and sell DVDs. This sort of show isn't that uncommon in anime, and exists for the same reason why car ads and facial hair razor ads in North America frequently feature "model-quality" women. Stuff like this sells everywhere!

:Sadly it seems that Gonzo, its former animation studio, couldn't achieve the latter objective of shows like this, since it just got shot in the head once their backers announced they were having another animation studio produce it. Gonzo was already shot in both feet already, having already fired 75% of their staff earlier to try and keep their head above water. Sure wish they didn't have to resort to making stuff like this to stay alive . . . --[[User:Mazryonh|Mazryonh]] 23:44, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

== MG... 42? ==

The saddle drums on the MG42 resemble MG15 mags, although the weapon otherwise appears to be an MG42. I don't think the 42 could feed from a mag like that, as it only took belts from the left side. Should a note of that be made in the article?

==Revamp==

I hope nobody minds, but I plan on doing some heavy editing to this article. I'll keep the images, but I'll be adding text, page links, and stock images of the weapons so the article complies with IMFDB standards. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 15:17, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks to whoever corrected me and provided the image for the Type 99! :) -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 22:59, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Mafia II

2010-09-03T07:37:56Z

Hughjefender: /* anachronisms and questions */

==.38 Special==
It's a Colt Detective Special Nickel 3rd Gen model - [[User:SmithandWesson36|SmthandWesson36]]

I doubt that its a Taurus. I don't even think they were around back then? The picture in the Demo isn't very detailed but it looks like a Colt/S&W and maybe even a Ruger blend... Since its a 5 shot I would have to say it would be a Smith J-frame. Perhaps a S&W Chiefs Special (I'm not sure the year this game takes place) ---Furious Oyster

The revolver is a six shot gun in-game. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 19:47, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Well it's not exactly the most accurate game out there. Look at how everyone uses a weaver stance when shooting. That wasn't common till the late 70s/early 80s.

Well, maybe that's the stance they all felt comfortable shooting with. Just because it wasn't common hardly means it DIDN'T EXIST! Remember, Vito has a military background, he could have started shooting that way and the rest of the guys picked up on it. Use your head! [[Special:Contributions/173.62.58.210|173.62.58.210]] 19:19, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

According to the Mafia wiki site, they said it is a S&W Model 12.

Judging by the cylinder release it is definitely NOT Colt.

Where do you see the cylinder release on the revolver?

In the demo, here's a screenshot I made: http://img810.imageshack.us/f/mafia22010082116541241.jpg/

== Smith And Wesson Model 19 ==

[[Image:Dirty Harry2.jpg‎|thumb|350px|none|]]
This does not look like a Model 19 to me. --[[User:Milkovich|Milkovich]] 23:49, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

It's possibly a Model 27/28.

in-game it's called a Magnum and takes .357 rounds, so it probably is a model 27 from the previous game [[User:jackbel|jackbel]]

== C96 Broomhandle ==
using a weapon unlock cheat on the demo you can get the Broomhandle Mauser as a handgun as well so im 100% sure its in the full game.[[User:Dutch Oven|Dutch Oven]] 04:26, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

you can buy it at Harry's gun shop in Riverside [[User:jackbel|jackbel]]

== 32 round 1911 magazine? ==

"From the gameplay I saw, it shows Joe giving himself and Vito a Colt M1911A1 but with a 32 round magazine."

I have never heard of a 32 round magazine for the M1911 series... and those mags in the pics don't look nearly that large, the look like a 8-10 round mag. What gives with that description on the page? For that matter, why is the Thompson's mag listed as a "30-round drum"? Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe 30-round magazines for the Thompson is a stick.

In the DEMO the 1911 has a standard 7 round magazine.. I'm assuming there are 2 in-game versions of the 1911. The first with a 7 round mag and the second with an extended mag. There seems to be 2 versions of the Thompson so i don't see how there cant be 2 different 1911's.

It may be a machine pistol based off Dillengers 1911 machine pistol in .38 Super.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Okey just played a bit of the game. So major SPOILER ALERT!! During the hotel job, Joe hands Vito the custom made 1911. According to Joe there's only two in the world and they have them. It has a 23 round magazine. It's a shame i can't screenprint on this computer, just goes all black. It's a ordinary stainless silver 1911 with a little longer magazine.
A little update, if you visit Guiseppies he has 3 of these custom 1911 on his shelf for a mere 270$. Weird since there should only be two in the world according to Joe. :)
:: Well then someone who made the game didn't do much research, as the magazines shown in the screencaps are nowhere near big enough to hold 23 rounds. Even if it was a custom 1911 chambered in .38 they'd have to be double-stacked, even then I doubt the mag is big enough. I don't recall there being any 1911 variants designed to accommodate a double stack mag that far back. Even Dillinger's custom .38 machine pistol had a much longer mag than that.

==1911a1==

i think the 1911 in the gun shop looks more like a 1911a1 than just a 1911, it has the 1911a1 checkerd grips and also the cut outs in the frame right behind the trigger which the 1911 doesnt have, also the colour is more grey, like the 1911a1

thanks for the great page

==anachronisms and questions==
SPOILER ALERT!
One thing that's been bugging me is that the game begins in 1945 and the Remington 870 shotgun appears during that time period, Isn't that an anachronism? Though the model could be mistaken for a Winchester 1912. Another thing that bugs me is that during that 1945 segment, they use an MG42 that they get from the guy with the eye patch. I wanna know how they managed to acquire a German weapon during the war.

Hughjefender

The first bit is an anachronism. However, the MG-42 is easier to explain, as they probably just brought it back with them. Vito was a war veteran, so there can assumed to be other veterans like him in the mob who may have smuggled the gun back using their criminal connections. Lugers were often brought back by US soldiers as trophies of war, so the MG-42 isn't as big of a stretch. -- K [[Special:Contributions/98.118.59.151|98.118.59.151]] 21:23, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Couldn't the same thing be said about the Garands? And I'd imagine getting ammo for MG42 and the Kar98 (Didn't they share ammo?) would be a bit more difficult [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 17:16, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Not really, 8mm Mauser ammo was a common hunting cartridge back then. Hughjefender.

== Mauser C96 ==

I just went into Harry's and bought the Mauser C96 and I noticed that it takes .45 ACP ammo. Wouldn't that make it a Shansi Type 17?
[[User:ShootingLiberal|ShootingLiberal]] 22:29, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

: Could be, but Shansi has the integral magazine slightly longer, protruding from the bottom. --[[User:AlPachinko|AlPachinko]] 22:45, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

::Only if it looks like a Shansi Type 17.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 02:12, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Thompson Submachine Gun

2010-09-03T07:14:36Z

Hughjefender: /* A Scope on a Thompson submachine gun? */

==A Scope on a Thompson submachine gun?==
[[Image:Wallace beery the big house 2 edit b.jpg|thumb|right]]This is from the MGM film 'The Big House'. Has anyone ever seen a Thompson with this kind of scope in real life? Does anyone know anything about them? I've only seen it in the one film[[User:Foofbun|Foofbun]] 11:10, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

A scope on a Tommy gun sub machine gun seem impractical back then.
:I imagine a scope could be attached, but like the above poster said, totally impractical. --[[Special:Contributions/24.63.181.248|24.63.181.248]] 00:39, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

How come the military do not use the drum magazine that much? Isn't a large 50 round clip good?
: First off its MAGAZINE not clip. Secondly there is a very good reason why Thompson owners prefer the 20 and 30 round stick MAGAZINES to the 50 or 100 round drum MAGAZINES. The Thompson Submachinegun is frigging heavy at nearly ten pounds of wood and steel. This means that while it is a good submachinegun people don'tr like to have to carry all those drums around. Plus the drums are less than reliable compaired to the stick magazines.[[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 04:27, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Those fifty and one hundred round drum magazines are also a real bear to load up and they're noisy if you need to be moving silently. The British found that out in the earl days of World War Two. All those cartridges have a tendency to move around and slap against the container. Oh and did I mention that with those drug mags reloading is a real chore. You really need a third hand to change them out. The stick mags are faster. Much faster. Watch ''[[Public Enemies]]''.Almost none of those guys use the drum mags. Only the stick mags. Which I understand was historically correct. --[[User:Jcordell|Jcordell]] 04:48, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

The drum mags weren't very reliable. Turns out drum mags don't work too well. The design is just too complex to be practical and that's the reason you don't see much drum mags on SMGs and rifles. Plus after you loaded the Thompson's drum, you had to wind the bastard and it would come unspung and it wouldn't feed properly. Hughjefender

it look like the just use the drum in the start of attacks. once that dry, the use stick mags.
:That's like how the Soviets used to handle mags with the PPSh, one drum mag, and then all box mags. And while we're here, is the guy in the photo Curly from the Three Stooges? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] 06:18, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Some people have no sense of history. That's Wallace Beery!
I met a guy once that said that his Grandfather used to use a Thompson with a scope. He was a guard at a factory, and they used to place him on the roof during strikes. He said that his Grandfather claimed that the Thompson was very accurate on single fire. David.
:The crew cut threw me off. All the pictures I've ever seen of Wallace Beery had him with a full head of hair. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:03, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

== well.. ==

I'm not saying it would ever be practical for a scope to be mounted on a Thompson, but it might be a slightly better idea to slap one on the Thompson M1A1. considering it has a lower firing rate than the "original" 1917 Thompson, and (in theory) a bit easier to control.

When SWAT was introduced did they ever used this gun or did they prefer the M3 "Grease" Gun?

Talk:Hayate the Combat Butler

2010-08-27T03:43:04Z

Hughjefender:

Hey, this page is very weak. Either fix it up per IMFDB minimum standards or it gets deleted! [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 07:28, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

==pic==

Any particular reason why there's a cat-girl hentai pic on this page?
I hate to talk like a mod but I really don't see why a firearm identification page needs to have something dirty like that on there.

Talk:ArmaLite AR-18

2010-07-25T22:17:53Z

Hughjefender:

The best AR18 close ups are [http://www.deactivated-guns.co.uk/detail/Ar180.htm HERE!]

[[User:Cutaway]]

:I really want one of these rifles.-[[User:S&Wshooter|S&Wshooter]] 04:44, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Sadly, the AR-180s are no longer made by Armalite as of 2009. They still sell parts on their website but no full rifles. I guess they didn't sell well. It's a shame though, they were very competitive with the Kel-tec and the Mini-14. They did have a cracking problem on the aluminum recievers though from what I hear. Hughjefender.

Talk:Call of Duty: Black Ops

2010-07-22T04:21:59Z

Hughjefender: /* OXM article */

This game has a cold war look to it

==zombie mode==

will they have it? It is treyarch, but i havent heard anything solid yet.
:The article that I read (and summarized below) seemed to indicate that they had something other than zombies. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully not copying spec ops.....

Maybe it's aliens.

==add m16 to page==

It was delted since there was no in game footage, but then there is a m16 slung to the main guy's back on the cover. i say add it. I know theres no in ge screenshot yet, but look, theres no in game shots of 1911s either.

Buddy, that stuff has been added already-[[User:SargeOverkill]]

m16 has been removed, only "ar-15 carbine" is there.

==='''M16 is in.'''===

I am not sure which version is that, but i added it as A1.

It have been confirmed in '''Call of Duty:Black ops INSIGHT''' trailer.

Oh crap, they mentioned Sonny Puzikas, I remember that name from the spetsnaz episode of Deadliest Warrior.

==Weapons that would make sense==
M72, M60, M14, Stoner 63, M40A1, M16A1, MAC-10, Remington 1100, Smith & Wesson M76, Browning Hi-Power, Hawk MM1, Smith & Wesson 39

AK-47, AK-74, Mosin-Nagant, PM Makarov, Steckin APS, SKS, Dragnnov, PKM

-Add any other weapons that would make sense
:M3A1 "Grease Gun"/Suppressed M3A1, Carl Gustav M/45/Suppressed M/45, suppressed Uzi, CAR-15 w/CGL or M203, Ithaca 37, Remington 870, Remington 7188 Automatic Shotgun, SOG modified RPD, M-60 "Death Machine"(M-60 w/ cut down barrel and ammo pack), HK-33(Harrington and Richardson T223).
:RPD, MAT-49/suppressed MAT-49--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 13:08, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Dirty Harry's Smith & Wesson Model 29 and Tony Montana's "Little Friend"
:What the hell do you have with those movie guns ? Why should they be in ?

It would be amazing to see Sa. Vz. 58 there. It was frequently used by vietcong fighters as USSR´s help.

''''''Some good proofs''' :'''

http://nam64-75.hill.cz/download/file.php?id=691&sid=c3ccbd4348543db02c420df186cb428c ('' '''NVA training''''' )

http://www.quansuvn.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=41.0;attach=4972;image

http://nam64-75.hill.cz/download/file.php?id=1169 ('' '''SSG Patrick Tadina with his Vz. 58''''' )

http://www.psywarrior.com/rewardforguns.gif ( '''''Vietcong fighters firearms info poster, left side, third from down''''' )

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/1164/biethaisamopal9wq.jpg ( '''''Captured Vz. 58 on left''''' )

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff164/joshuadowdle/Dad.jpg ( '''''In hands of SSG Patrick Tadina''''' )

''SSG Patrick Tadina - Legendary, five-tour Vietnam ranger. He is in rangers´s hall of fame.''

==Should be==
There should be M72 LAWs, M60s and M14s. cause this is Vietnam baby!

Nah. They just arent cool enough for Treyarch. And if they will add those weapons - They will all have RIS rails, scopes, lasers, GL attachemnts, silencers.... --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 11:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)No need for your cheap sarcasm here. This game doesn't seems to pursue that Nam atmosphere with rocknroll, massive chopper assaults, jungle patrols and "smell of napalm in the morning"

I'm sure you will also be able to pick up laser weapons and crap like that. [[User:SargeOverkill]]

==E3==

Added E3 screens - .357 Python and AR15 .

== Not an AK-47 ==
Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that the mag isn't curved enough to be a 7.62x39 mag? It could be a -74 prototype, without the flash hider. Given the time frame, this may make sense.

Thanks for that, I also didn't note it before. It looks to be a WASR-2/3.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 16:19, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

:This game seems to have a lot of rendering issues when it comes to the guns [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:40, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
OMG it is damn videogame for god's sake, the guns aren't real and are nothing more than 3d drawings -of course they aren't going to be exactly like such and such gun. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 17:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

'''3D drawning''' ? Hell, that would be interesting. And GTFO, this is '''firearms site''' and ''YES'', we care about reality. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 17:44, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

:Thanks for pointing that out. We are a gun site and we pay attention to details. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:24, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Well guess what, THESE ARENT GUNS!!! They aren't effing real they are nothing more than 3d models that someone threw together in 3DS MAX or whatever the hell they use so of course its not going to be up to every detail, That's why I don't do VG pages anymore--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 19:47, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

::You appear to have missed the point of this website...

AsAstra, the point that I don't think you're understanding, is that even if they're merely three dimensional renderings of the guns, and not the guns themselves, we should try to be as correct as possible. If something says that it's an Ak-74, but actually looks more like a different gun, we should call it the different gun, so as not to confuse anyone new to the site. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 15:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

On the topic of the AK, knowing video game developers the AK being used by the Vietcong will most likely be the same one in those snow picks. I don't think we can call it a 47 right of the bat.[[User:ShaDow XPS|ShaDow XPS]]

== Degtyarov ==
It just cant be DPM. Lok - It totally doesnt have ironsights - And MAG isnt on top. + Its very unlikely some guy will cary Spas12 and Degtyarev. I just think its some AK type - Or it may be some different gun, but it isnt Degtyarev.
You may keep it there, but it will be false information.

==ummmm==
This page really needs a cleanup or a deletion.
There is also too much informal talk on the page itself, infact all of it is. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 04:47, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

===Moved from main page--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 04:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)===
== AR-10 ==

Another unknown M16 family gun. But this one seems more like [[Armalite AR-10]] A4

[[Image:AR10-4.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Armalite AR-10 A4 7.62x51mm.]]
[[Image:AR10.JPG|thumb|none|400px|M16 Family unknown gun as appeared in Black Ops teaser.]]

:The magazine seems too long to be an AR-10

Also the AR10 is a civilian gun right? So why would special forces like that guy above be holding it? I personally think its an M16(either A1 or A2) with a scope attached to its carrying handle/iron sight.

:It's a strange AR-15 Carbine with a flat top [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

AR-10 is not necessarily civilian. It is entirely possible that SOF would use one.

I think is not AR10.AR10 use .308 or 7.62x51mm round and the magazine large and short than AR15.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

: Its uselles to keep AR-10 discussion here. We all know its that ankward AR-15 or XM177 or whatever.

== Un-identified guns ==

[[Image:MP5G3.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''1''' : Possibly [[MP5]] or [[G3]].]]
[[Image:UNKNOWNLOL.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''2''' : I totally dont know.But it may be some russian one.]]
It seems to look like a [[MAC-10]] or an [[Uzi]] with the stock extended-[[User:SargeOverkill]]
[[Image:UNKNOWN THE MOST.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''4''' : Its hard to tell which gun this one is, but it looks like [[Beretta AR-70/223]] or Daewoo K2. I think that this gun could be any gun I see and AK there but it could be a siper rifle for all we know]]
As to the first unknown gun, it's too short to be a G3, so I believe it's an MP5. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 01:50, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

== RPK ==

From the looks of it, it might be an RPK-74. Note the 45-round banana mag and the flash suppressor.

The "RPK" and the "Valmet" are the same guns - look carefully at the screenshot. Given that the 7.62mm AK-47 appears in game and the timeline, I'm gonna say that it's not an RPK-74, but a 7.62x39mm RPK or one made to look like a Valmet for some reason. Maybe Treyarch modelers are using 80's action movies as a reference for their RPK model. *shakes head*

No. Look on that "RPK" an you will see typical RPK stock. Look on "Valmet" and you will see it doesnt look like Valmet :)--[[User:Werc|Werc]] 03:53, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Look at the front of the Valmet trigger guard. Now look at that same exact place on the "Valmet" in the game picture. Different. There is no Valmet, it's an RPK.

Moved "Unknown LMG" stuff to the RPK-74 section. Whoever posted those images under there originally failed to notice the way the RPK-74 front sight is canted compared to the Valmet. --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 14:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

==M1911==

In the title screen there is a soldier holding a 1911 i believe it also says something on the side.

It says "Sally" on the slide.

The 1911 looks more like the first and not the A1, look at the ejection port.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Here's to hoping it's 1911s will be in the arsenal in multi-player, and not the tease in MW2 --[[Special:Contributions/67.181.114.114|67.181.114.114]] 07:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)JanG

== Wait... ==
Upcoming CoD,what what what?!
--[[Special:Contributions/76.235.34.31|76.235.34.31]] 02:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

== good decision ==

As well as Weapon customization there will also be a character customization feature.
- That game is gonna be just awesome. Character customization ? Damn, just in R6:V style (ha-ha)

* Custom characters? hell yeah --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 00:38, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
i agree with that customization policy, i liked how in R6V2 they did that, and i can only hope they bring back CoD4s M4A1 Grenadier back, and i also completely agree with the historic battle/ war thing as compared to a (***Spoiler) nuclear warfare and a domestic terrorist plot, i would much rather see Black Hawk Down pop up in a newer game as opposed to Vietnam, but i would settle for a Operation Acid Gambit type game also.

Customizable characters in a game where... you can't actually ''see'' the character? FAIL.
* Customizable characters in game where will be 3rd person mode, and where other players can see it ? Your post '''fail'''.
:When did Black Ops become third person? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

It isn't. He's saying that other characters will see your 3rd person form. Also, it's noteworthy that MW2 DID have third person mode.
:So then I've gotta agree. Character customization in a game where you can't actually see your guy seems like a fail to me, too. It's not like anybody in MP is really gonna stop shooting at you to say "hey, cool guy, what kind of vest is that?" And how do I activate this third person mode in MW2? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:50, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

:: Well, i dont know. But what about trying "3RD PERSON" in "Play" screen ?

I think it's hilarious how people are whinig about the customization... Go play R6. Custom characters work in FPS games.
:Yeah, i bought R6:V2 not so long ago and its amazing. I think that game has best character customization ever. Its only pity you cant do anything with your teammates.
:R6V also has a cover system where you can actually ''see'' the guy/girl you're playing as, a third person mode cheat, and player characters who actually have voices and speak rather than being mutes with no form of personality whatsoever, none of which Black Ops has. I simply think character customization is unnecessary. That's not whining, it's called ''having an opinion". [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

How does the post fail it was an update its not like i'm wrong. its not like i said there would be some sort of Grizzly Bear cannon. it was a NEWS UPDATE!!! THINK next time a stupid comment is thought by yourself.
Also heres the ANSWER the other players can see you just like AVP. so thats how customization comes in handy. [[user:moviemaster1993|moviemaster1993]]
:First off, I never said ''your post'' failed. That was ''your'' response to ''me'', smart ass. I was commenting on a feature of the game I think is unnecessary, something I'm fully allowed to do. You aren't the lord of opinions around here. Second, comparing Rainbow Six to Call of Duty is about as much of a failure as one can accomplish. Lastly, who the hell cares if another player can see you? I wouldn't be customizing my character for other people, just like other people aren't going to be customizing their characters for me. It's not like everybody's gonna stop shooting and comment on every other player's individual character, is it? The only stupid comments on here are coming from ''you''. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:30, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

== MP5k ==

You think they're putting that in there to copy MW2?
:No I think they're doing it to fulfill their MP5 quota. MW2 wasn't the first game to feature the MP5K, broski.-protoAuthor 00:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about that. They also have an AUG in the game and a SPAS-12. Not a coincidence that MW2 also has these. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

- Heh. Spas and AUG were in tons of other games. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 05:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

But THIS game is directly part of the COD franchise. It's a bit repetitive to show guns that has been in previous games. Well ok WWII games don't count because they cant help having the same guns, but this is supposed to be Treyarch's turn at making a new game, but so far, none of the weapons are new. What about instead of the SPAS-12, we get an 870, or instead of the AUG, we get...any other bullpup rifle of the time. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I derinitely think they're putting the MP5k in to copy MW2. They could have put in any other variant of the MP5, variants that weren't in prototype stage and would probably be more combat effective, but they went with the k variant. That said I don't think it's any coincidence the SPAS-12 and AUG is in there either.

Well, Treyarch apparently didnt start copying first. MW2´s specops get idea fairly sure from WaW´s coop system :D
:The latest issue of the official xbox magazine says that they originally had planned on having co-op throughout the entire campaign in MW2, but cut it because it messed with the narrative. Or, it would've been way too fun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
the AUG was stupid in the game, no1 in USSOCOM uses that gun
* Would you mind telling what do you have against bullpup designs, beside "the looks"?--[[User:WhiteSlift|WhiteSlift]] 11:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
* Heh. MP5k get into service 20 years after Vietnam war. There was only prototype in latest parts pf Vietnam war. MAC10 or UZI would be much more realistic in hands of US soldiers. Atleast much more than prototype gun. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 06:49, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
*"MP5K get into service 20 years after Vietnam war"...the MP5K isn't that new. Considering that the war ended in 1975, and the MP5K was introduced in 1976, you are way off.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 01:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

true why would they be carrying a Prototype in to combat

Well how much differently could essentially just a shortened MP5 with a foregrip work from the regular MP5?

Because it's a video game that doesn't care about accuracy and realism. I mean what loser actually waits until Picatinny rails to be invented? Go ahead and put them on your rifle in Nam, it's the new trend.

Why are you complaining about the AUG in particular, I mean USSOCOM doesn't use it? Yeah, well they sure as hell don't use the deagle or the AA12 or the FAMAS but I don't see you complaining

"I mean what loser actually waits until Picatinny rails to be invented?" Picatinny rails have been around since 1913, broski.
:Not in their modern version, Broseph Stalin.

You all are forgetting..this is SOG, not SOCOM. SOG could carry into battle whatever they wanted to. Could they have carried a prototype MP5K? Sure! Keep in mind..they had access to stuff that NOBODY ELSE in the military had access to at that time. Hell..one time they brought an airhorn with them and scared the crap out of an entire NVA division with it.

== What the hell is up with this AR-15 Carbine? ==

It looks like a 733, but at the same time, not since it also has a flat top, but the scenes in the trailer that showed this rifle is assumed to be Vietnam era, so a flat top AR-15 shouldn't exist at the time much less a rail system for it. Also the same AR also has a rear iron sight on the flat top. This doesn't make sense [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

- I think its XM177, but customized way to much. Its mucb more possible that Treyarch just failed. I think they just added rail system/flat top just because MP. You know, attachments. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 05:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

::It cannot be an XM177 if it has a flattop receiver. Those did not exist when the XM177s were introduced. The flash hider is also Vortex, not the XM177-type. The game's 3D artists might have been ignorant about what AR carbines existed at the time. But that is not an XM177. Not by a long shot. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 05:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I think the game's 3D rendering tech was mostly like stone because it's the 60s and 70s, but the trailer animation is horrible! I could barely tell what was going on and the weapon details are no where like MW2. Say what you want about MW2 when it comes to consistencies, but at least they can render their weapons correctly. My first upload of that funky AR-15 shows the handguard as this polygon like thing. And did flat top receivers exist during Nam? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:34, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

:::''And did flat top receivers exist during Nam?''

:::No, not at all. My recollection is that the Colt ACR (introduced in the 1980s) was the first AR-type rifle to feature a flattop receiver. Even though the ACR was a bust, flattops were subsequently carried over into future AR generations. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 05:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

With these seemingly anachronistic flat top recievers and flip up sights I think this game is headed towards failure. Seems like they're taking the MW2 route and making their "balanced" and cosmetically changed multiplayer weapons also appear in single player. I hope by some miracle they don't or else they don't get my money.

:And here I remember talking to my brother about how they can fuck up the M16 by either putting A2s or burst A1s, but this is WAY over there in the incorrect area. Haven't they seen any Nam movies? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

: Excalibur01 - or use five minutes just f-i-v-e f**king minutes of their time and try to google some Vietnam-era photos. Or they could hire someone with at least basic knowledge of era background and weaponery. You know, they spent money on countless other things. But I guess that Call of Duty is now like B-rated action movies. Make as many as you can and don't worry about the quality. Nobody gives a s*it about how it looks like or if it is correct as far as it would look cool and geek teen age kiddos would pay the money so they could play multiplayer on their lagging net servers. [Ragnar - 22:25, 19 May 2010]

Hopefully they at least have the M16 have full auto instead of burst, would make it more fun that way. I did read that this isn't taking place in vietnam on yahoo news which probably is incorrect but this is ridulous of the weapons they are putting in.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 22:48, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

:I read an IGN article that it'll take place throughout the Cold War, from the end of Nam to Cuba and also Princess Gates London [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:17, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I researched the history of picatinny rails, turns out Treyarch may have actually done very good research. This is what I found: "The MIL-STD-1913 standard was developed out of efforts during the M16A1 Product Improvement Program which eventually resulted in the M16A2. One of the abandoned ideas was a receiver with a built-in rail. In the 1970s, Rock Island Arsenal experimented with a sniper AR-10 with a Weaver rail. In Vietnam, the Model 656 had a built-in rail." Source:http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-18737.html
I don't know about you guys, but I'm now willing to believe the rails on this AR (Model 656?) isn't a goof at all.
:Well, its always good to know new thing :) But i think it still wasnt regular Vietnam equipment. And i also think there wont be even M16 or M16A1 ingame.--[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
::True, it wasn't regular Vietnam equipment. But these aren't regular soldiers either. These guys are top secret black ops, higher than tier one operators. They can use any weapon in the world, even ones that are in secret development. And you're probably right, I doubt there'll be an M16, simply because these experimental ARs look cooler, have a bit of mystery around them, and can accept multiple attachments. But I wouldn't be surprised if they name the rifles M16.

The model 656 looked like this:

[[Image:model 656.jpg]]

It was just an early M16 with an early style rail system. So far, I have not found images of a Carbine with these types of rails, experimental or not. Rails were not on the forefront of military minds before the 90s. The military didn't even decided to put rails on the M16 until a decade after the M4 came out. And even the Model 656 rails were not on a flat top receiver like the ones on an M4. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 13:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
:Aw crap, there goes my theory. Looks like it's back to just being a Treyarch fail.

I'm not one to justify inaccuracy in videogames but, the upper receiver on the 656 could easily be swapped with that of an AR-15 carbine. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 00:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure...but the one we see in the game is not the same rail receiver as the one the 656 has. It has a flat top like an M4 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed that the front sight isn't removed when an optic attachment is present, an improvement over other COD games. Maybe Treyarch realized an AR would be bolt-action if the gas block was removed.
:Low-profile gas block is not visible from first-person perspective. And 3-d person gun models were made as low-poly as possible to minimise system loads(this was crucial because games was intended for Xbox in first place)

Who know CAR-15 with rear flip up sight use in vietnam war? I see a south vietnam flag in picture.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]
: No. Though, prototype flat-top receiver and flip-up like on your screen could be possible, but it just doesn't look authentic to the time period. I wouldn't mind if they put in something like Model 656(pictured above). But they really need to get rid of that modern-looking AR.
[[Image:CODBOAR-15b.jpg|thumb|none|500px|]]

It's just like the Aperature sight in W@W, but no where near as bad. I don't see why people are making such a big deal out of it, sure it's not exactly authentic, but it's far from game ruining like what a lot of people here are saying.

== Complaints ==
Hey, it's a game, not a history lesson. It's all about fun and style and so. I do like a realistic movie or game, but I don't hate a game just because the artists created something they think it's better this way. Nobody complains when a director sums up a car ride that would take 1 hour in real life in one scene in the movie, or when he puts the light where the sun can never be just to make it look good, but when someone puts a cool looking AUG in a game set before 1977, because it looks cool, or creates his own creative vision of an AR-15 everyone freaks out. All the time you hear people say "They should have done better research!" or "They don't know anything about history!", but maybe the did research, and they know history, and they discussed it and decided that they want to create something own, because they feel it fits better in their creative work than what real life history can give them.

*Yeah, you are right. Now we need M1 Abrahams tank in some Napoleonic Wars strategy. Cause that tank is just cool - right ? Or maybe M4 Carbine in WW2 shooter ?--[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:28, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

::Treyarch is legally obligated to keep the timeline from going beyond Vietnam. [http://gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2010/03/04/the-activision-lawsuit-what-it-means-and-where-it-s-going.aspx] If that means they have to cheat a bit regarding the weapons, I'm willing to give them some leeway. Let's face it, we're probably the only people who truly care anyway. None of these inaccuracies are going to keep any of us from buying this game when it comes out and playing the heck out of it. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

They're not legally obligated to keep it from going beyond Vietnam. As that article says..all they need is full approval from West and Zampella. Considering those two aren't rampant assholes..it's a total possibility.
:That's a bit like saying other people can write Harry Potter novels as long as JK Rowling is okay with it, or other studios can make Star Wars movies as long as George Lucas is okay with it. Have you looked at the games IW has made? Have you noticed a pattern? (For those who don't want to look, all they make are CoD games. That is literally all they have going for them.) Sure, they COULD give away their golden goose and let someone develop else something Activision has given them exclusivity with, but I can't imagine a single scenario where they would. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 10:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

* Well, msot of CoD players wont even recognize M16 and M4 or HK416. So yep - We are maybe only ones who care about it :/ --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
::And mind you, Treyarch is the same developer that had Japanese troops using suppressed MP40s with reflex sights in WaW. Oh, and a RAY GUN TO SHOOT ZOMBIES. That being said, I was devastated when I found out that MW2 wouldn't have zombies, and I'll be even more devastated if BO doesn't have them. IMHO, zombies was the best part of WaW. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 17:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
* And IW had OMOH with FN2000´s and IMI Tavor´s - So whats the difference :D Hope zombies will be includeProxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0

too.

:Ok the Zombie thing in WaW was a side game. It's not part of the "story". If the zombies and the ray gun appeared in the actual missions, then we'd called bullshit but with a smile cause zombies are awesome to fight. The suppressors and red dot sights were for multiplayer to compete with COD4 at the time, so those don't count. We're talking historically accurate, period piece weapons. It's like we do a game taking place during the Civil War but we all got 1911s as handguns and M1 Garands as rifles. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
::You're telling me you wouldn't play a Civil War game where you can use an M1 Garand? ;)True, they tried that with Darkest of Days, but it was terribly done. And second, you CAN get the ray gun for one of the campaign missions, and it is awesome. (You can take down a tank with two shots.) But I know what you're getting at. I'm just saying we shouldn't let the nitty gritty get in the way of good gameplay, especially since Treyarch already has one hand legally tied behind their backs. Would they want to make a Modern Warfare-like game set in present day or the near future? Sure, but they can't, they're legally handcuffed to inflexible historical fact. Besides, no game has ever gotten its weapons exactly right. We have an entire generation of kids who believe an M1 Garand can't be reloaded without firing the entire clip, or it has less stopping power than a K98K. I won't lose any sleep if BO has AR-15s with flat top receivers, but I will if the game sucks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 06:34, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
You know if there gonna screw this game why don't the just add a bunch of laser guns or crap. I mean i could understand if the weapons in the game where off, but i have a feeling this game is going to be a cluster F***
::We're basing a lot on two trailers and some scanned images from a magazine 5.5 months from release. I'm going to reserve judgment until I actually play it or at least hear from people who have actually played it. Treyarch has little to lose here. If it's great, people will praise them, if it's not, people already think they're the Fredo Corleone to IW's Michael Corleone in the Activision family. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
:::And while we're here, we've been talking about how the angle of the AK mag is slightly off, but is anyone else annoyed that if you do a tactical reload and drop half a mag, those rounds in the discarded mag magically go back into your ammo stockpile and you don't lose them? This has been true in 99.7% of all FPS's I've ever played. Gamers have accepted the idea of the consequence-free tactical reload for over a decade now. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::::You're right it's a crying shame. Not only because it's more accurate when the game keeps track of ammo in specific mags but it also adds another challenge and element of strategy. I also enjoy the one game I've played that keeps track of the +1 round in your gun when you reload. I wish more games were like that. Sad thing is I don't see COD heading in the right direction ever again.
:::::The one time I saw them do the tactical reload correctly was... Navy SEALs Quake, a mod for Quake II. Yes, it was a mod made by amateurs over ten years ago. The big game companies aren't doing it right because they don't want to. I remember the first time I played a game that had different animations for reloading with a round in the chamber and one without. Operation Winback on the N64, also ten years ago. It was a nice touch. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

* But we arent complaining here about animation and bullet system, damn. We are critising look of those guns ! That stramge XM177/AR15 hybrid was seen many times in reveal trailer, so we can judge it. And it failed. Its still better when you have realistic gun without realistic ammo system than crazy-unrealistic looking gun with realistic ammo system. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:06, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::I don't think it'd be that hard to replace the skin. [[Black]] didn't give a damn about realism, but it was still enjoyable as hell. The way I see it, ultimately, it's just a game, to be played because it's fun, not as an interactive history lesson. If you want accuracy, watch the Military Channel or actually go out to the range. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::: Well, it doesnt have to be "interactive history lesson" but atleast a bit of realism would be nice. '''''BTW''': I visit shooting range once or twice in month :)''

As pointed out, we don't want TOTAL realism. Otherwise, one bullet hit to the chest is enough to kill you. At least head shots are instant kills in the game. But we're doing a game based on a particular period and it has to be accurate. I mean, if you were watching a WWI movie and see soldiers with M16s. That's a bit jarring right? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
:: Now he will answer it isnt jarring. If the movie has cool effects and famous actors.
:::Jarring, maybe, but I don't know if it'd ruin it for me. (Is it a sci-fi film? Surrealism? A film by Uwe Boll?) It'd be one thing to have blatant mistakes, like M16s in WWI, but would it have ruined [[Saving Private Ryan]] if Sgt Horvath had a post war M1 Carbine with a bayonet lug and adjustable rear sights instead? Did the fact that the officers had Webley Mark VI's instead of Adams Mark III's ruin [[Zulu]]? Did the fake M72 LAW in [[Ronin]] take you out of the movie? If it didn't, it's because you chalked it up as a goof, moved on, and enjoyed the rest of an otherwise good movie. If it did, then I don't know what to tell you. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:52, 25 May 2010
(UTC)

Here's a hypothetical question: This game is called Black Ops, so theoretically, they can make up whatever they want, what do we know, it's a black op, and thus classified. What if all the weapons in the game were all fake, either outright, or fictional modifications of real weapons? Would we still be up in arms? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:14, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
: I hate to say it but you might be onto something. I've heard rumors that Black Ops will rewrite history and take place in an alternate past. This is probably how Treyarch can get around the legal restrictions of not being able to make post-Vietnam games and explain these BS weapons. Personally I think it's pretty weak but it explains it.
:: Well, if it does... Wait-It doesnt! I read some article with one of Treyarch members which strictly denied possibility of alternate reality. Ill repat it again : its just some Treyarch modeller fail. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
It's not rewriting history at all basically it's saying that during the Cold War what if there were some Black Ops that went down to keep the whole thing from escalating into an actual official war. Which is completely possible.
:::It doesn't have to be alternate history, just a secret history. It's implied that the JFK assassination will be in the game. Is the player the second gunman on the grassy knoll? Is he supposed to stop the second gunman on the grassy knoll? Does he successfully stop a possible third gunman? They can make up anything they want in that scenario. A mission can have the player equipped with a prototype laser rifle, but it's scripted so the rifle is damaged or lost along the way, and the technology is lost forever. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:53, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

It would be great if they do include Dirty Harry's gun and Tony Montana's "Little Friend".

The Steyr AUG (Armee Universal Gewehr - Universal Army Rifle) had been in development since the late 1960s, as a replacement for venerable but obsolete Stg.58 (FN FAL) battle rifles for Austrian army. It was developed by the Austrian Steyr-Daimler-Puch company (now the Steyr-Mannlicher AG & Co KG) in close conjunction with Austrian Army.See? It's not that wrong. Got it from http://world.guns.ru/assault/as20-e.htm
:It's still wrong. Just because the AUG was in development doesn't mean a working prototype existed. And if it's supposed to be the prototype, why does the AUG in the game look like the production version, only without the grip, and not as depicted in the prototype drawing shown on the World Guns page? I think the whole prototype explanation is a lame excuse in order to include more modern weapons in the game. I would much rather see the weapons that SOG actually used included in Black Ops, instead of an assault rifle that we've seen about 5 billion times in other shooters. I already posted below how Treyarch could have used the Remington 7188 full auto shotgun in the game. This weapon was actually used in Vietnam, and as far as i know has never been used in a video game, but instead they chose the SPAS-12, which didn't exist at the time and has been used in dozens of other shooters.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 22:50, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

== Unknown ==
The rocket launcher under unknown is an M202 FLASH rocket launcher. Ashdude01 20:20 19 May 2010

Yes there is i added it to the guns page but some moron removed it

moviemaster1993 11:58 may 2010

== Carcano M91/38? ==

The images provided doesn't shot much and it is said that it can't be a mosin Nagant because the barrel is too short. Well it could be the carbine length variant or any other short barrel bolt action rifle. I can't see anything in the picture. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:26, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

It seems like its picture of that gun. Remember that game has to do something with JFK asassination and there can be barelly seen "Lee Harvey Oswald" on paper under that gun. So i think it have to be that gun - As some reference. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 03:48, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Ever heard of the Mosin Nagant M44 carbine or the finnish retooled M38?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 11:56, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

== M16 and XM177 ==

[[Image:Colts.JPG|thumb|none|500px|]]

Looks like the guy here has either an M16 as you can tell by the barrel pointing to the left and the barrel on the right looks like an XM177 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:26, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a M16A1 to me..which makes sense..since the A2 didn't come around until the early to mid 80's.

== Embargo lifts tomarrow, the 28th ==

Ones the embargo lifts we will be flooded with info, especially about guns

What embargo? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:45, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

There was an embargo for some journalist who previewed the game(they also could have played it too)and tomarrow it ends and info will get flooded all over the web

* It ended and only few informations and no new guns appeared. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 07:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

== Valment m78 ==
:The M78 does have its own page here, separate from the RPK. But yeah, I don't think the designers are gun-savvy enough to have both of these guns in this game.--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 19:55, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

What the year of Valmet M78 build? I think is not use in vietnam war the NVA don't have a finnish weapons during the war.And i think in the picture the gun is not Valmet M78.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

: And Spas-12 was in vietnam ? It may not be Valmet, but it fairly sure isnt RPK. Or another Treyarch modeller fail ? --[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 11:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Anyone notice that the picture of the unknown AK-type LMG has a front sight that upright on the front side and canted forward on the back side like the RPK-74's front sight? --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 17:11, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:The Valmet M78 was invented after the production of the M76 in 1976, which is another weapon considered anachronistic for the Vietnam War era if there's any in the game. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 01:45, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

== Time travel (well that would explain it) ==

[http://pc.ign.com/articles/109/1093572p1.html Another preview]
--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

The page doesn't exist [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
* Fixed that link. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Launching an SR-71 from an aircraft carrier? Is that even possible? O_o [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
:They were able to operate a U-2 from a carrier, but that wouldn't be nearly as sexy as flying an SR-71, now would it? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:32, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it is, You know how these game designers do ALL of their research. (Man I'm sarcastic tonight)--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
::It's pretty obvious that since MW2, the main source of research is action movies and Futureweapons reruns.

Damn straight.

[[Special:Contributions/72.189.150.170|72.189.150.170]]

Not that I have anything against the SPAS-12, AUG, or AK47s, but we need to see different types of weapons. What about an 870, or the AK-74? What about other types of Bullpup? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

: You think 12-year old child knows difference between AK-74, AK-47 and AKs-74u ? That wont make sence..... Why making more weapons when you can add only those "cool" and overused ones ? --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 15:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

My 11 year old brother can, just saying-[[User:SargeOverkill]]

== Prototypes ==

Just to let you know: German games magazine ''PC Games'' had an interview with the developers. In the latest issue, they write, that the black special ops team can get any equipment they want, including non-standard weapons, brand new prototypes and even customized and special built single pieces, <quote>which no one outside the team will ever get to see</quote>. So that is the official in-game explanation for every crude weapon you can see in the hands of the player.
:That's what I figured their reasoning would be. It makes sense but it's still a pretty weak explanation if you ask me.
:So super elite 1337 black ops delta teams can even get weapons ''that don't yet exist''? WTF? Why didn't our SF and SEALs in 'Nam have M4A1s with KAC rail systems, lasers, ACOGs, EOTechs, and bullets that can home in on enemy soldiers from 50 miles away, then??? It's a conspiracy to disarm the public, I tell you! But in all seriousness, I think it's an explanation that doesn't hold water. That mentality might work in 2016 during MW2, but not in a past setting like Vietnam where small arms development has been chronicled and we know where and to what it led. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
::I think it does hold water. Of course these finalized weapons weren't around in the late '60s to mid '70s. But how do you know their prototypes weren't? Most of the weapons in-game will either be early prototypes or in the case of the AR custom-built weapons made by the SOG operatives.
::Ok, they could at least make it look like prototypes, not like modern weapons.
::Okay, then how about when the next WWII game comes out, they give all the troops M16s, M60s, Mark 48s, G36s, AKMs, XM29s, and XM8s because, you know, super secret black ops teams can get any piece of kit they want, even if it doesn't exist yet. All they have to do is jump in Doc Brown's time machine, travel through time and grab the latest kit, then head back. 1.21 gigawatts! [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:03, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:::I've said it once before, if it's done well, I will absolutely play it. Most people play game as a means of escape, so would it really make a difference if I shot a Nazi with an M16 or an M1 Garand? He's not REALLY dead. He's not even real, and we've contributed nothing to the winning of WWII, or any war. In fact, we've contributed nothing but to our own satisfaction. They're called video GAMES. Playing games is about having fun. I'm sure many if us here loved Nazi Zombies from WaW. Why? Because we love shooting Nazis, and we love shooting zombies, and Treyarch did us a favor by combining the two activities. And we love it even more if we can shoot them with a ray gun that comes out of a magic box. Was it historically accurate? No, but believe me, the history major in me learned to live with it. (Hell, now you've got me all worked up, because as I'm typing this, I can't wait to get the chance to catch Hitler and bin Laden in a meeting and spray the room with a minigun.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:02, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok i get your point, it's a video game, and fun or not it should have realism, i mean c'mon!-[[User:sargeOverkill]]
::::BTW, they already sort of did that with the Time Splitters series. And those games were awesome. (At least 2 and Future Perfect were. I never played 1.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:30, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::I quite frequently have lots and lots and lots and lots of fun playing games, especially shooters, that adhere to reality. The reason I play a Vietnam or WWII shooter is because I want to immerse myself in the environment. That includes having weapons accurate to the period. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::I guess that depends if you consider these games historical or not. I just lump it in with Halo and GoW now, as CoD flew off the historical rails about two or three games ago, straight into "anything goes" territory, which was good from a story telling perspective. Even when it tried to be historical (up to CoD 2) you were still one or two men who personally killed half the German army. That's why I thought releasing WaW on Veterans Day was a backhanded tribute, because nothing honors veterans like a game that allows you to win WWII singlehandedly. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 14:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

==M14==

What with this being a Vietnam War game, I'm gonna be pretty pissed if you can't use a normal M14 rifle, without all the rails and crap.
[[Image:M14Rifle.jpg|thumb|none|500px|I want to use an M14 like this in-game]]

Well, it doesnt look cool enough. Expect it with scope, silencer, thousands of rails and plastic stock. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 18:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

1. They'll Probably put it in.
2. the rails are the modern demands of a soldier including the ability to easily mount optics and other accessories easily. theres nothing wrong with it.

:I'd like a regular wood stocked M14, and if you want optics, they did make a scope riser mount for M14s before rail systems. As for silencers, well that's easy, and heartbeat sensors shouldn't bother to return. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::If they want to be accurate with attachments, then they should have a sniper scope and a suppressor (suppressors were available at that time).

Randy Shughart a delta force sniper never had anything fancy on his. as stated in BlackHawk down he had a vietnam era M14, with a scope. nothing fancy there. besides in vietnam there really wasnt a need for anything fancy. silencer, hell the vietcong already knew they were there because of the helo. Lam- hadn't been invented. and a tac light is slightly useless seeing how they were in a jungle 95% of the time. [[Special:Contributions/71.194.219.9|71.194.219.9]] 01:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

: All of these attachments really ''WONT'' make sence. '''But its Treyarch'''.

== AUG sans grip ==

What the hell is up with the AUG without a foregrip? I don't mind the fact the AUG is anachronistic, but come on...why take off something central to firing the gun. Maybe the gun is semi-automatic in the game, because our character has to plunge his hand into a bucket of ice to stop the burning after each shot.
:Yeah, I don't understand that decision. The only possible explanation I can come up with is that they used the AUG with a grenade launcher as a model, like this one [http://www.steyr-aug.com/240.jpg], and then just deleted the grenade launcher. But this would mean that no one working on the project A) ever saw a movie with an AUG, including [[Die Hard]], which I would think every male between the ages of 21-49 in the english speaking world has seen, or B) could put two and two together and figure out that putting your hand directly on a barrel is not practical. That, or the plot involves that character severely burning his hand. If not, it's an utterly indefensible and boneheaded decision by the Treyarch staff. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 22:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
::And to be absolutely fair, the character is wearing heavy gloves while holding the barrel. But it still doesn't make sense. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:21, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

::What doesn't make sense to me is that they have a military advisor on staff. How come, at no point in the development, did this man point out that holding a gun barrel while firing is a bad idea, and has he not seen an AUG before? - Opening Poster.

::Doesn't the grip fold up?-protoAuthor
:::Yes, but you'd still be able to see it. [http://www.murdoconline.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/NEW-STEYR-AUG-right.jpg]--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:I wrote that without seeing the image. Sorry.-protoAuthor
::::I agree with the grenade launcher theory, especially since multiplayer was done first. Who knows, they might actually change the standard AUG model before the game actually comes out.

The AUG without vertical grip.I think a gun barrel is very hot.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

In third person it's just a character model fail. In first person you grip I guess what you could call the "finger guard."

I've seen pics of the Austrian Army holding their AUGs by the trigger guard like a P90 but not the barrel itself, that's stupid. Plus, who the hell in 1968 would even take a design like the AUG seriously. The M16 was just starting to be taken seriously by military brass around 1968.

......Why the hell wouldn't they take it seriously? You do know that the British had actually adopted a bullpup design in 1951 for a very short time. Search Em-2 Rifle. It even had a built in optical sight on the
carrying handle. We Yanks then bossed everybody into adopting the 7.62 and the EM-2 was abandoned because it was in the .280 round so they went with the FAL which could be much more easily changed to use the 7.62
Actually, the EM-2 would be a better choice for this game or the SA80 prototype that appeared in The Professionals. I am aware of the EM-2.
=== Bullpup guns ===

If they want bulpup gun in game why didnt they coice Em-2 ? Or Famas ? WHY THAT ANACHRONISTIC AUG, damn.
The FAMAS is even more anachronistic than the AUG. The FAMAS was adopted in the early eighties and it used a different type of 5.56 ammo than the NATO standard.

: Yeah. It get into service in eighties. But atleast there '''WERE''' first prototypes in 1968. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 06:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

ummm...the prototypes of both the FAMAS and AUG were developed in the seventies. A better choice might be the Stoner 63 which had a history of use by the Navy SEALs and other clandestine units

== OXM article ==

Official XBox Magazine did a feature on Black Ops (July 2010, issue 111,) and I figure I'd share some highlights:

- It was inspired by the book "SOG: The Secret Wars of America's Commandos," by Major John Plaster. [http://www.amazon.com/SOG-Secret-Americas-Commandos-Vietnam/dp/1581606761/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275440842&sr=8-1]

- The SPAS-12 you use during the Tet Offensive uses Dragon's Breath rounds.

- At least from their description, the "WMD" level sound suspiciously like the airfield level in MW2.

The whole game looks suspiciously like MW2, just my opinion though. Hughjefender

- The M202 FLASH is confirmed.

- The M1911s with "Sally" etched on them also have tally marks on them.

- They mention a co-op feature that "appears to be a successor" to zombies, which seems to me would indicate no zombies. Bummer.

- Multiplayer was ready before the campaign, so some of the campaign levels are based on the multiplayer maps.

- Regarding anachronistic guns, "'In this world, anything was possible' for these soldiers, [Treyarch head Mark] Lamia explains. All equipment requests were granted by their superiors. Cost, apparently, was no object."

- And finally, a quote from the military advisor, Lt. Col. Hank Keirsey (ret) (and something I've been trying to point out for a while now) "The Historical Advisor fights to get every last bit of accuracy, but always has to concede to the need for excitement." Keirsey appears to be the military advisor for the whole franchise, not just this game or for Treyarch.

--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

:Money is no object is one thing, but designing a different rifle system like you would design a James Bond car is a different thing. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

: So, basically they said those soldiers can have any gun. Come on, Treyarch ! Give them FN2000´s , Plasma Rifles and Gravity Guns !
No, really. Off course they can have special weapons. But only those which were designated before 1968. Not those which were designated 10 years after.--[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
::Yes, but since everything is secret, how do we know the CIA DIDN'T develop the AUG, or the SPAS-12, and cover it up by giving it to Steyr and Franchi, respectively? How can we be sure we DIDN'T capture any energy-based weapons from crashed UFOs? (Mind you, I don't work for Treyarch or owe them anything, but I have to give them credit for giving themselves such a clever out.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:51, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:::It seems like all these SOG's have custom-made pieces. And since Weaver rails did exist in Vietnam it would have been totally possible to make these weird AR's we keep seeing. Not saying I agree with this decision, but this is probably how Treyarch is getting away with it.

You guys are so wrong, My friend the NAVY SEAL told me something not to tell anyone else but I don't care. They are issued laser rifles just like the ones in Fallout 3 but have a disntegration setting meant for vaporizing. At least thats Treyarches logic. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:Calm down. I don't think any of us know when these weapons were in their first stages of prototypes and what they looked like in the prototype stage. Prototype weapons are definitely a recurring theme in Black Ops. Since these guys are above top-secret they can have experimental weapons that are also above top-secret. In the GKnova6 files, it specifically states the AUG in-game will be a prototype version. I wouldn't be surprised if the SPAS is also experimental and the weird AR is completely custom.
:::Cool

RC planes instead of predator missiles?

== Document from viral site ==

Over at the CoD wiki I found this "document" from an viral site connected to Black Ops: [http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100601175649/callofduty/images/3/3d/Doc10.jpg]. It describes the AUG as "very early prototype weapon; not in production". It also mentions the [[G11]]

and also the delicious China Lake Launcher
-Double Agent M

:It would be better if they included more of these prototype weapons. I would love to see weapons like BRG-15, H&K CAWS, Ster ACR, Colt SCAMP,etc. Even better would be a underwater level with the H&K P11! After all the inclusion of such weapons in the game will be better than the monotonous selection of Cold War-rea weapons like M1911,M21,G3,FN FAL,AK-74,etc.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 09:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

:I'll shit bricks of joy if the G11 is in there. I've wanted that gun in a Call of Duty game for as far as I remember. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

G11 eh?? im guessing its going to turn into the MP40 from WaW except in speed instead of power

== M202 FLASH ==
I made a couple of changes in this section including adding of screencaps. I rechanged it back to FLASH because everything is anachronic in this came and it can't be the more rarer XM191. Plus I added a M202 FLASH image, which is actually from Far Cry Instincts Predeator, since I could not find a single good picture of it in the web.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 15:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
:There's not anachronism, Treyarch keeps saying that all these weapons are prototypes. I'm not sure what people aren't getting about that. I'm pretty sure every weapon we've seen in American hands so far are a prototype of some sort. I think that the FLASH is the prototype version; why can't it be?
::The reference specifically said "M202." We're not going solely by the picture, but by what was actually written by someone who either played it or watched the game be played. And since I doubt the average game journalist is an ordnance expert, he only knew because it was probably labeled "M202" in the game itself. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 23:00, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You know just as well as I do video games often mislabel their guns either by mistake or just to give the public who don't know much about guns an idea of what that gun is instead of confusing them with specifics. I don't argue that it's going to be labeled M202, but I guarantee you Treyarch is intending it to be the prototype XM191.

:: XM191 was M202 prototype, just for your information. --[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
:::Yes, I'm aware of that. But given the shall we say, unique, circumstances of the game, wouldn't it make more sense to go with what the game says, rather than what's historically correct? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes XM191 is a M202 prototype.American send to test during late 1970s in vietnam.And i see a picture of XM191 in vietnam war museum. info from http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl50-e.htm [[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]
Here is what it shoots

[[IMAGE:Treyasuckers.png]]

Wow look like a RPG7 rocket.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

==Not being able to go past vietnam?==

What is this crap I hear about treyarch LEGALLy not being able to go past vietnam in game? A comapny can do whatever the hell they want.

[[User:k9870]]

:I know, I was about to make this same post.-protoAuthor 20:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
::From the article posted above (emphasis mine)
::"-Activision eventually convinced West and Zampella to stay with them by offering up a Memorandum of Understanding. In addition to extending their contracts through to October 2011, this legally-binding document gave West and Zampella some major financial bonuses as well as a couple other hefty promises. Chiefly, it gave the two "creative authority over the development of any games under the Modern Warfare brand (or any Call of Duty game set in the post-Vietnam era, the near future, or the distant future) including complete control over the Infinity Ward studio." '''In other words, Activision could not publish a Modern Warfare-branded game (or a Call of Duty game set any time later than Vietnam) without West and Zampella's full approval."'''
::West and Zampella were the two heads at IW who were fired in April. Now that they're no longer with the company, this might open the door for Treyarch's next CoD game to be Modern Warfare-esque, but there's a lot of litigation right now. The firing was way too late to affect BO, so they operated under the restrictions above. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I am still waiting for a WWI CoD with single- and multiplayer featuring France, the UK, the German Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, Russia, Japan, Italy and the USA. Unfortunately this would be too expensive and only few people would buy it. Thus such a CoD will never be made. Sorry for half offtopic. --[[Special:Contributions/84.181.247.180|84.181.247.180]] 20:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Paul_Baeumer
:I would love to play a CoD WWI game. (CoD: Great War? CoD: Over the Top?) I'd like to see them change it so you can change out your melee weapon, so instead of a knife, you can equip yourself with an e-tool, brass knuckles, or a spiked club. (Sorry to continue the off-topic.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 21:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
::And to stay on topic, how would they define "distant future?" Why not a CoD game set in 2110? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 21:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

== Why did someone add possible weapons? ==

Someone added possible weapon prototypes like the G11 and the Pump 40mm? I am removing them tomarrow if no one says anything about why they should be left on. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 02:22, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

: This document (http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100601175649/callofduty/images/3/3d/Doc10.jpg) from the Black Ops viral site could be the reason --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 03:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

:There aren't possible anymore, it has been '''confirmed''' that they will be in the game, with other sites like Call of Duty wikia including them in their weapons list.

[[Image:DOC10.jpg]] 
--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 04:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

:Yeah, and the Call of Duty wiki is a beacon of truth... [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

The AUG and M202 have see in game trailer.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

== Still a little chance ==

Well, they are gonna include dedicated servers. So they apparently release modtools - So it seems like its gonna be possible change guns models, just like in CoD4. --[[Special:Contributions/88.208.103.46|88.208.103.46]] 09:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

== M16 on magazine cover ==
It should be removed for now, seeing as there's currently no evidence to support its inclusion in the game. IMFDB chronicles weapons appearing in movies, television, and video games, not on magazine covers. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:12, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Game mags are a great source of weapons, thats where half the screenshots we see come from, game informer and the such.
:Screenshots are one thing, but there's no evidence that the image is actually from the game, it might just be an illustration the magazine drew up. I would heap the image of the guy sitting cross-legged with the two .45s in there as well. It wouldn't be the first time that weapons on cover art don't actually appear in the game itself. ([[Medal of Honor: European Assault]] comes to mind.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
:Is it bothering you that much?
::Well, considering the site has rules against printed media, yes it does bug me. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
:90% possibility that's a box-art. Don't be nerdy.

The game sure went into a lot of detail on the 1911 not to use it, and besides, what else would they have, they cant screw up history enough to throw in deegs and berettas.......oh wait, never mind, they can....

vietcong with a spas 12, damn at this rate my dream of marching into the reichstag waist firing an aa12 may come true
:That could be multiplayer screens

== SPAS 12 Folded Stock ==

All i can say is: FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!!!
--[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 15:17, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Its more tacticaler and badassish to keep it folded, only noobs use a stock, not hardcore 1337 operators! (video game maker logic))
[[User:k9870]]

At least thay didn't put a goddamn XM8 in the game, if they do, i'll throw my goddamn PC outta the window, 'nuff said --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 03:04, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:'''nerd'''

At least the developers weren't stupid enough to put a rifle concept weapon into a game that takes place during the cold war. At least we can forgive them with the inaccurate AR-15s. And has any game developer ever fired a shotgun without a stock? It's a pain and you can slap yourself in the face if you don't brace yourself. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:I can only think of two possibilities, 1) you're firing Dragon's Breath rounds with the SPAS-12, and using it as small flamethrower, so you can get away with firing it from the hip, and 2)more importantly, WHEN HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A SPAS-12 FIRED FROM THE SHOULDER WITH THE STOCK EXTENDED? The only time I ever saw it was briefly in [[Jurassic Park]]. Even that famous scene in [[Miami Vice - Season 1#Franchi SPAS-12|Miami Vice]], a show that did guns pretty well, with [[Jim Zubiena]], a professional shooter would presumably knows guns pretty well, had him firing a SPAS-12 from the hip. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q2Il86-38A] Do you think most people even realize that thing on top is a folding stock? Yes, you, me, and everyone who's ever fired a shotgun ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgptDs_Nncw| and now this guy]) knows it's stupid to fire a shotgun without the stock extended. But I don't think the general public knows. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:It's not stupid. You don't really have to aim at point-blank range. I'm curious how aiming down the sights of SPAS with folded stock will work.

I'd love to know the reasoning behind including the SPAS-12 in this game. It didn't exist at the time, and I don't buy the "it's supposed to be a prototype" line. If it's a prototype, why does it look exactly like the production model?(I could make the same argument about the AUG)
Most likely this is Treyarch just being lazy, or including a weapon simply because it has been popular in video games, or both. They could have included an automatic shotgun that really was used in Vietnam, the Remington 7188. It was basically a Remington 1100 with an extended tube magazine, modified to fire full auto. It was used mostly by the Navy SEALS, but I believe SOG made some use of it as well. It's a weapon, as far as I know, that has never been used in a video game. Instead we get the anachronistic SPAS-12 that has appeared in about 5 million games. If anyone is interested in the weapons SOG really did use in Vietnam, get a copy of "SOG: A Photo History of the Secret Wars" by John Plaster. It includes a chapter that specifically covers weapons, and there are ton of great photos. It's expensive, but worth the price.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 02:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:[[Image:MV-FSP-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Ludovici Armstrong ([[Jim Zubiena]]) fires his SPAS-12 at two drug dealers, while posing as a chauffeur.]]

I thought it was supposed to be a homage to 80's action movies. Or at least that's why I'm accepting it, because then I'll feel like I'm in an 80's action movie whenever I play this game. And what would an 80's action movie be without the SPAS-12 or the AUG? [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:22, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== Snake ==
The guy with the AR-15 and the USMC and MACVSOG tattoo the guy looks bad ass, I'm pumped for this dude.

== .357 ==

A .357, in a tunnel? I hope the game makes it so you won't be able to hear anything for a few minutes after you fire it, so you'd have to make the choice between shooting the bad guy or just meleeing him. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 19:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

:Anyone noticed reloading animation ? He just throwed out shells ( ''STILL HOLDING FLASLIGHT IN LEFT HAND - VISIBLE'' ) And then moved .357 out of screen ('' STILL HOLDING FLASLIGHT IN LEFT HAND - VISIBLE'' ) and than returned .357 to screen. Fully loaded. So it means he reloads revolver in few seconds with one hand ? ...... I just hope BF:BC2:VIïetnam will be much better.

== Need the ingame footage please ==

I want to see the footage but i'm to lazy to search for it, linky please.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:19, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
:[suckit.com]

== Grenade Launcher ==

Can anyone identify the grenade launcher used in-game? Here's the link to the video where you can find it. http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2010-call-of/101273 The game labels it "Grenade launcher." It looks like an M203 but that didn't exist in Vietnam...
Also, here's some breaching footage: http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2010-call-of/101260

Yeah they did, they went into service around 1969 I think
:Can't believe I got caught without doing my research. My bad.

== SPAS-12 ==

Anyone noticed (In first gameplay video) that EVEN RUSSIANS are equipped with SPAS-12 ? Can be seen around 2:53 lying on the ground next to russian guy....
:Yeah... This is turning out to be pretty fail...

Guys who cares, achronisms don't kill a game. Does it really matter if the guns are slightly innaccurate, all that matters to me is gamplay, good and fair online and ZOMBIES!!
:Call of Duty has always been accurate in the kinds of guns they present to you in single player, with the exception of Modern Warfare 2. So I think I can speak for many fans of the franchise, it matters to us.

Again..it is a pre-release trailer...game is still 5 months from release...

At least it's European, the Russians in MW2 carried Vectors and TAR-21s. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:24, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== "AR" Sling ==
I'm not one to complain too much about the achronisms, but I do care when things don't make funtional sense, like that the AR's sling, which for some reason is wrapped all around the gun, is stuck UNDER THE BOLT CATCH. It's not like they don't understand it's a funtional part of the gun, cause every AR varient in every COD that's had them has the empty reload where you press the catch... Also I noticed on the non-empty reloads the AR just kinda dips out of the screen and moves a bit then comes back up loaded, you don't see the mag, same goes for the .357; THAT'S lazy... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I liked the AR-15 reload, it looked real. He pressed the mag release, he let the magazine fall to the ground, and he held it there until he put the new mag in. It's alot more realistic as opposed to the MW2 reloads, were you wave your gun around the screen while reloading either to look cool or to makeit obvious that you are, in fact, reloading your weapon. Most of the time though, people don't do that when they reload in real life, unless they're an idiot. The .357 reload was kinda lazy though, but I let it slide because he actually whips the cylinder back in instead of the light tilt that's all it takes to swing the cylinder back in in MW2 and most other video games. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:35, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I love reading these things to see how much constant griping there is..considering the game is still 5 months from release.

[sarcasm] You don't need to reload your guns if you are black ops, just lower them and they will be full again![/sarcasm] seriously thought, this game is REALLY start to be a dissapoint, and it haven't even been released yet --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 22:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I have noticed weapons in game have muzzle jump. MW2 and COD4 had none the guns stayed on target and took no skill to use. In this even the ar-15s rose. I like it.
:It's just cosmetic rise up, the sights will come back right on target after each shot.

Actually WAW some guns would go off target, like an mp40 or DP machine gun. More oticeable at range. Treyarch has recoil effects, which i like.

:It could just be that modern weapons were designed with a better understanding of reducing recoil. Most modern automatic weapons have straight-line stocks, which reduces recoil, as opposed to bent stocks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually look at mw2 ak, fal, m4, whatever, no recoil. WAW, mp40s would be shooting high after half a mag. I like recoil effects means you need more skill to shoot.

== M16 ==
Unknown [[M16]] ( Seems to be A1 ) covered with some kind of cloth or tape appeared in hands of soldier on one of BO´s artworks.

[[Image:M16-SP1.jpg|thumb|none|400px|M16A1 - 5.56x45mm]]
[[Image:BLACKOPSM16.JPG|thumb|none|500px|M16 on cover of French Xbox 360 magazine.]]

I moved it from the main page because like we discussed earlier, it's just a magazine cover with nothing to back it up. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 11:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
: Yeah, that was nice turn. I added it on the page just because it ''HAD SOMETHING TO DO'' with game :) There arent any proofs that M16 will be featured (''unofrtunately'') --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:15, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
::Let's be honest fellas, it's hard to have a game that has much to do with Vietnam without having the old three pronged, triangular handguarded M16. My bet is that it will show up, armed with full auto and 20 round mags. Also, I'm pumped for the G11, that thing is gonna be epicly epic. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:Is it me or is the picture in the magazine a reverse shot? Because I see the forward assist on this A1 as well as the ejection on the right side. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:07, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

== Bad Feeling ==

After realizing all the goofs that are popping up and watching more gameplay footage, I'm getting the feeling I got before Modern Warfare 2 released. Like they're throwing what was once a pretty legitimate game out the window for the coolness effect. And with MW2 that feeling turned out to be correct. Anyone else sensing the same thing?

Yeah, I've got the same bad feeling, except a lot sooner than I got it with MW2, maybe just cause I'm not really expecting much better after the disaster that MW2 was. Oh and COD4 is still fun ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

MW2 sucked..but MW2 was IW..CoD:BO is Treyarch. Are they perfect? No..but now a days they're better than IW.

I must say i really enjoyed MW2, and, in my opinion, Infinity Ward is still better than Treyarch, oh well, games can't please everybody, can they? --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 11:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully multiplayer is a bit different, mw2 multiplayer was old when it started since it was just like cod 4, at least WAW had vehicles.

-k9870

With luck they'll fix the problems '''before''' the game ships this time. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 16:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
:I hope you're right but I doubt it. I've never seen a game change much of anything five months before release.

Everyone here talking shit about IW? You're a bunch of idiots. IW makes far better games. I don't know why you don't like MW2, but it's one of the best of the series so far. This game, on the other hand, looks like it'll be a disaster (as nearly all of Treyarch's iterations are).
:Fuckin right.--[[User:Pølaris|Pølaris]] 03:47, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say I hated MW2. Doesn't stop it being loaded with bugs that make the game seem like it was rushed out to meet the deadline. Now, if you're done fanboying... [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 07:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::I don't think it's entirely fanboyish. I'm pretty sure the general consensus of CoD fans is that IW games are better than Treyarch games. IW started the franchise, and CoD games are the only games they make. Treyarch is just along for the ride. But now that IW has lost almost a third of their employees in the last month, that dynamic may change. I have a lot of hope for BO, and I think it's silly to write it off based on a few trailers and three minutes of gameplay footage. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 12:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::: My point was that MW2 was ruined by Acitvision trying to force IW to meet the due date, meaning they had to ship it with a whole range of bugs. However, some of the above poster's comments do seem to boil down to "It's gonna be shit cos it's not an IW game."[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 07:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I personally think that this game looks awesome, and i dont see what the problem is

IW gets the cred since they made the modern games, which people wanted. WW2 was old that siad Treyarch couldve done just as good making mw1 and 2. They had better fire lighting, recoil effects, etc.

:Bottom line is this. IW failed to have MW2 be better than CoD: 4, and this is why they've been put on hold. Treyarch's WaW was a brilliant game, and I still love to play it to this day. Treyarch has shown more promise then IW lately, and I'm sure they won't disapoint with Black Ops, as they plan to remove and fix all the shit MW2 got wrong. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:: Let's replace your opinion with some fact. MW2 was better than CoD 4 based on the storyline and sales alone, without going into all the new multiplayer features. Was multiplayer a bit buggy? Yeah, for around a month. Treyarch's installments are considered, by those who have played the series, crap in comparison. WaW? That game was garbage. It was basically a recycling of levels from other games in the series that were reskinned. The game was a knockoff of CoD4 that took place in WWII.
:::I'm going to have to call BS on the better storyline in MW2. It's the first CoD game where you get to not only gun down civilians, but also kill American servicemen. That's better? Are you and your buddies playing MW2 in a cave in Kandahar? Big Red One was disappointing, but then again, it wasn't supposed to be a "real" CoD game. CoD3 did suck, I certainly won't argue that. I hated the idea of WaW at first, because WWII was so overdone, but I liked it once I actually played it. (There might be a lesson in there.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Now let's talk about Treyarch. Aside from their lameass 'cash-in' port of CoD4 for the wii (which was garbage), what did they do in the series? Call of Duty 3, Big Red One, World at War, and the current work in progress Black Ops. I don't know if you played any of those, but they were all terrible entries in the series. CoD3 was a gimmick game. 'Oooooh motion control and button mashing'. Big Red One was garbage, and WaW was a hack-job. What does that record suggest their next game will be like?

: Big Red One was awesome, shut up.-protoAuthor 18:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and Treyarch couldn't have made MW1 or 2. They lack originality; every game they released was a knockoff of either IW's designs and ideas or of another developer. The only reason Treyarch is getting to make more CoD's is because IW's execs left because they were being denied their contractually obligated bonuses. --[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 11:33, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
::Your timeline is off. Development of BO started well before the recent upheaval at IW. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

:Also, World at War is a superb game. Sure you have the god like MP40, but that's nowhere near as bad as OMA danger close noob tubes in MW2, and to anybody who's into WWII and it's weapons it's a hell of a game. It's no CoD: 4, but thank fuck it's no MW2. Treyarch shows promise, and if IW was doing Black Ops I would hold no hope at all. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

No offense but what your saying is that WAW was great in comparison. Thats not good logic at all, CoD4 is the best out of the three. No clue on BO but I have a feeling that since they wanted to justify cool guns that are anchoristic with that they are prototypes is just half-assed which may relate to the rest of the game. Also have you seen the reload animations?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
:When WaW was first announced, I was appalled. I couldn't believe they were staying in WWII, even after CoD4 skipped ahead to modern day. Looking back though, the fact that it's a WWII game is the only flaw I can think of. (Although, yes, it's a big one.) It restricted the plot, and WWII has been done to death. It was otherwise a pretty good game. I really liked the co-op campaign missions, the vehicle missions were well done, the voice acting was superb, and Zombies takes the game to a whole new level. Aside from the setting, is CoD4 really that much better? Is it time to give Treyarch the benefit of the doubt? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:48, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

:I agree with all of your points chinaman, and you're right, CoD 4 wasn't really all that better. Besides the modern warfare setting, it lacked many of the cool features and such that WaW introduced, and while everyone including me loves it, it wasn't overly better than WaW. I always applauded Treyarch for making WaW not so noob friendly, something IW did massively with MW2. Now the guys at Arch have been watching people complain everywhere about the shit in MW2, and so they know what to do to fix it. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

== Goofs and screw-ups ==
Alright no offense but SHUT UP!!! You guys are complaining about the anachroistic guns in it but it's supposed to be that way. The freaking name is BLACK-OPS which means no one knows about it. What they are doing are saying what Cpt. Price said: History is full of lies. So, what they're saying is that this is not what they thought really happened but they are using their imagination to come with these historical ideas that fall in to the game. But like I said everything in it is supposed to TOP SECRET, so it's going to be anachroistic. But that's how it's supposed to be. It's TOP SECRET so none of us would even know about it.

and P.S. For all butt-holes who said MW2 sucks, Opinions are like butt-holes every body's got one, and nobody wants to hear the other one. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 12:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

: Yeah. You act like 12-years old. But we all know you are 10 years old.
::For your information I am actually 12.

Look up mw2 bad spawns on youtube and you'll see how its flawed. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 16:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

::I take it that you don't want fans of the COD series to actually question the developers for making questionable (or stupid) weapons choices for the sake of a compelling narrative. Unfortunately, that only works if we didn't have already have lots of knowledge of the 1960s-1970s era of covert operations from the military and numerous books, which only makes the anachronisms more glaring to anyone who isn't 12 years old.Just like movie watchers, people playing games set in a particular historical era have a certain set of expectations of what ought to be present and what shouldn't. To dismiss all those concerns with a "TOP SECRET" excuse is ridiculous, since Call of Duty 1-3 all managed to be interesting without adding things that didn't exist in the same timeframe. Cursing at people because they disagree doesn't make your defence of Treyarch seem anything more than juvenile. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 16:52, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

No, I just wanted everybody to shut up about saying crap about the guns. So they maybe think that a AUG without a foregrip looks stupid, I think it looks cool. The graphics look good and it looks realistic. I am 12 so I don't care about anachrosism, but I know a heck of alot about guns and Call of Duty so yeah, I was a little mad but because alot of you guys are like in your thirties they are targeting this for people in the younger phase and are not expecting people to go Hey! The AR-15 wasn't introduced then and neither was the Grenade Launcher. I don't think Treyarch are expecting a Riot of AUG foregrip lovers to burn down their studio but come on guys, seriously. Do you have to take this that seriously, your calling me juvenile while your sitting in your chair going hey that trigger guard is rounde then it can't be a M9 so it has be a 92SB therefore they lied! I'm going to kill them! etc. etc. so hey try to be a little compassionate and maybe think about going outside your mom's basement. Ha Ha just joking. (not sarcasm) So what i'm saying is can you not be so depndive on every little detail. Would you like to make a Call of Duty game. Just please voice your honest opinions and not go on about gun mixups because it's really not about the guns it's more about the plot and story. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 18:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I think that you people are taking these things too seriously. Since cod 4, these games are like action movies, rather than historical war role-playing type shit. Yes the anachronisms are disappointing, but I'm not really bothered by it and they were done for the sake of making the game cooler (and in my opinion any game set in Vietnam AND including a spas-12 is badass). If you want realism, than check out the new Medal of Honor. If you want Hollywood type action, buy cod games, because thats the direction the franchise is going in, which isnt a bad thing.

:Alright kiddies, let's sit down and have a nice list of what's wrong with Modern Warfare 2.
-One Man Army
-Danger Close M203s
-Commando
-The Spawn system
-Deathstreaks (especially Painkiller)
-Overpowered and unbalanced guns (ACR, FAMAS, UMP)
-Overpriced map packs
-non-dedicated servers, which leads to lag and host migration up you yin yang
-the OMA/Danger Close noob tube combo
-boosters galore
-10 Prestige hack lobbies
-The F2000 is a pile of garbage

So all said and done, that's a pretty big list of whats wrong with the game. You're free to disagree, but let it be known anyone claiming noob tubes are legit will be lynched. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The new Metal of Honor is just trying to cash in on the whole Modern Warfare craze we got going. Modern Warfare is the new WWII game of this generation. And because this IS a site that points out specific weapons, whether or not it should exist in the time period is our jobs on this site. Those of us who do take this site serious has an obligation to point out the holes and inconsistencies. That's what we do here. Call it bitching or whining, but that's what this site is solely for, nitpicking, pointing out obvious holes when we see guns in a movie, game, etc. We're looked up all sorts of history involving the AR-15 and just saying it's "Black ops" doesn't mean they defy the laws of historical consistency. In some of the Indiana Jones movies that takes place before WWII, we do point out MP40s and 98Ks should not exist as a fact. Even black ops of today would use the latest technology, not weapons that haven't been field tested or even made yet. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

: You, Excalibur, look like one of those very few inteligent people in this discussion. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 09:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

:I agree. Also, I've seen Beta footage and Medal of Honor just looks a lot like Bad Company 2. And to be honest, I could care less if the AUG or AR-15 or what have you is an anachronism in this game, as long as we're not talking lasers I'm fine. We're here to point out weapons in film, give pictures and descriptions of them, and talk about them, not bitch that a gun being in a game set 2 days before it was produced makes it a failure [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:: Those guns arent 2 days befor prouction. Its ''8 years''. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 09:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Pointing out achronistic guns is part of what we do here, that said, for me it won't kill the game, unless there's a Modern Warfare 2-like pile of other stuff wrong with it too. Oh and yes the Russians & Vietnamese wouldn't use SPAS-12s but you're forgetting the only guns they've REALLY intended to show off so far are the AUG, SPAS-12, AK-47, M202, Python, and Crossbow, that's only what, six? I think they only picked these few guns to go in the trailers, and then reveal more later, so maybe the guns will be more where they should in the final version... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, God forbid we talk about firearm mistakes in TV/Movies/Video Games on a website DEDICATED TO DISCUSSING FIREARMS IN TV/MOVIES/VIDEOGAMES! I will continue to make comments on what, in my opinion, are idiotic firearm choices for this game. If anyone disagrees, feel free to reply, but don't tell me to shut up. Some of the comments above just prove my theory that weapons, such as the SPAS-12, were simply included because they are popular in video games, with Treyarch using the whole "prototype" B.S. as justification for their presence.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 05:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:Yes, how DARE they try to give players what they want?! You'd think they were in this to make money or something. What a bunch of whores! --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
::Really? So the only way for this game to make money is to include a SPAS-12? Is there that much demand for a SPAS-12 it has to be inluded to make gamers happy? Would the game be a financial failure if it wasn't there, and weapons more appropriate to the time period were included instead?--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 06:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You said it yourself, it's what players want. And like you also said, it's minor. Games are made for the general public, not gun dorks like us. As a gun dork, I'm a bit bothered, but as a gamer, I'm thrilled that I can light people on fire with a shotgun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 09:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC) (gun dork and gamer)
:::: Does the success of the game depend that much on specific weapons that appear in it? You said yourself that as long as a game is fun, accurate/inaccurate depictions of weapons doesn't matter that much. If that's the case, weapons more correct to the time period can be included, and the game will still be a success ''as long as it's fun''. And I highly doubt Treyarch polled gamers and asked them what weapons they wanted to see in Black Ops. I think they were just acting on their ''perception'' of what weapons are popular in video games. So I don't know if I can say this is a case of "what players want", more a case of Treyarch saying "we think we know what players want". This is just a theory I came up with as to why certain weapons were included, I don't have any idea if it's true(although some comments from other posts seem to confirm it). For all I know, Treyarch is just being lazy and it's easier for them to include the well known weapons rather than do real research. At any rate, I can't see the inclusion/exclusion of specific weapons making or breaking a game.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 01:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::"At any rate, I can't see the inclusion/exclusion of specific weapons making or breaking a game." My thoughts exactly. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You know, those that find it stupid that we are pointing out the anachronisms in this game should really just go to the treyarch forums, not post on a website dedicated to firearm identification. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:32, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:Ok, if those anachronistic weapons supposed to be '''early''' prototypes then they at least could make it look '''different''' from production models! That would be much more believable. Tryesuckarch is just being f-ing lazy. I don't mind flat-top AR, but they could make it not look like a modern one. And also if there is no simple M16A1 then it's a total fck-up in the Vietnam themed game.
::If they made it look different5 from the final gun, you guys would be even more pissed! You'd be like "How can they call that a M16A1! Look at it it looks nothing like the original!" Plus. how could Treynot-suckarch know what they would like? You guys wouldn't be pissed if this was a modern warfare game. In fact I bet that Treyarch probably wanted to do that but they couldn't(breathes deeply)you know what this is my last comment. I'm done arguing with all the stupid people on this site. If you have anything else to say you can take it up with me on my talk page. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 13:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You don't know what you're talking about. Photos or drawings of the prototypes can easily be found on the internet. A drawing of the AUG prototype is on the World Guns page, and the prototype SPAS-12(along with a photo of the SPAS-11) is shown on the SPAS-12 webpage: [http://spas12.com/spas12not.htm] And if Treyarch clearly states a weapon is supposed to represent a prototype and it actually looks like the prototype, no one is going to complain.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 00:09, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

:Are these mistakes any worse than some of MW2s fuck ups? Like the L86 with a made up drum magazine and iron sights that wouldn't be usable as it has a straight stock, the AUG cosmetically having a 30 round mag when it says 42? The MP5K having a rail system only seen on an airsoft gun in real life and so on. Let's remember Black Ops isn't set only in 1968, and so they have a bit of play when it comes to weapons. The M16 is confirmed (I have a friend doing beta testing) and is Vietnam styled. Now if anyone wants to instantly write off the game because it has a few anachronisms and shit in it, then your missing the point. So what if your using an AUG in 1968? It's not like lasers in WWI, and it's still fun to do. Don't focus on the hate, try and just enjoy it for what it is, a video game. If you want reality, go join the army and head off to Iraq or something, cause in video game land, reality will be broken. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]
:So you're trying to justify Treyarch fuckups comparing it to MW2? Fuckup is fuckup

One, I tottaly agree. Two, did your friend say if there is an M14?

:Yes, the M14 should be in there. Also, I hardly see mild anachronisms as "fuck ups" in a game that pretty much goes on alternate reality anyways. Treyarch has created a game all about the operations we don't know about, the cover ups, and the spec ops weaponry we don't see for years, so having an AUG earlier then it's commercial release can be forgiven. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]\

::Treyarch has the right to depict an alternate Cold War for all they desire, but as long as they try to play it off as the historical "truth" that no one knows about while maintaining all sorts of obvious (and IMO not minor at all) anachronisms, they are only leaving themselves open to criticism. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 23:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

:They aren't trying to play it off as historical truth, they're trying to go with an alternate truth, which makes perfect sense. Also, if I hear another person commenting on how rails are anachronistic, I'm going to snap. It's fucking rails on a gun in a video game, get over it. Black Ops will be an awesome game, and despite these possible anachronisms, I'll be gladly killing Russians in 1968 with my AUG thank you [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

I don't think I'm going to get this game. I'm getting a vibe that it's filled with silly crap much like Modern Warfail 2. I'll be playing the next Medal of Honor instead. -Frank T

:Medal of Honor looks like Bad Company 2 with Taliban, so that's the game I won't be getting. Treyarch impressed me with World at War, and they're aiming to please this time, removing and modifying all the bullshit Modern Warfare 2 bestowed on us. From deathstreaks to Commando, they're out to fix it all! [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

I never really got that mindset "It's BFBC2 but slightly different so I'm not getting it". Well, if you don't like Bad Company 2 to begin with that's fine, but there's more of a difference between Bad Company 2 and Medal Of Honor than between COD4 and World At War, most of the difference was the setting so it seemed like a bigger difference, but the core gameplay was very close, and they were made by two DIFFERENT companys while BFBC2 and MOH are made by the SAME ONE. I'm not saying anything bad about them, I like the first three and the MOH Beta. And yes, Modern Warfare 2 failed in two ways: First, it was WAY too noob-friendly, like, before it came out I would've never thought it possible for a game to be that noob-friendly, and second, it traded realism for coolness in pretty much every way, while COD4, the game they'd JUST MADE, had a believable story, weapons that were almost perfect in terms of appearance and who used them, and the only real nooby stratagy was the M16 Red Dot, but oh well, there was almost only that one. I know Treyarch has said they're trying to get rid of the cheap MW2 stuff, and that's good, but I'm really not liking the direction this is going, picking the guns because they're cool and not because they make sense, even a little bit, the exploding crossbow bolts, how almost every weapon we've identified so far is either achronistic or has something wrong with it (go look), the Hind A with tandam seating, and when you get in you go through the long cool animation of getting in and starting up, but then it takes off in 2 seconds flat, and the lazy, lazy reloads... I'm not saying it's going to suck, I'm saying my hopes aren't high, sure it'll be better than MW2, but that's not saying much. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:36, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

:Arguably Black Ops has issues, but don't forget that E3 footage comes months before the final product. So what if the Hind has tandem seating, does that make it any less cool to blast VC with it? So what if the reload isn't uber detailed, does that detract from you shooting people? So what if there's minor anachronisms, isn't this both a video game and an alternate reality? I'll agree the crossbow is kind of odd, but this game should be nowhere near as noob friendly as the god awful MW2. Modern Warfare 2 was built on the idea of helping bad players, but it only resulted in much rage for good players such as myself. Call of Duty 4 was made to break the mold on FPs games of the time, and it did and still does kick ass. MW2 was built to top it, and instead of that, they gave us an over dramatic, noob friendly game that overall makes me just want to buy a copy of CoD 4 again. And on MOH, I've seen some footage, and now I actually like it, sure it looks BC2 like, but thats no biggy, and overall that looks ready to rock too! [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Okay, sorry, that came off as too bad against Black Ops, I know it's months away from coming out and no, the Hind's seating isn't really a problem, I was just pointing out that it was wrong, same with a lot of the stuff we've seen so far. My point was there's a lot of incorrect things in the game, not neccecarily game-breaking, just pointing out that COD4 and WAW were better in that regard, though so far the game overall looks pretty good :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:29, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

:To be really honest, it won't matter if there's minor issues and anachronisms, cause as long as Black Ops isn't as noob friendly and shitty as MW2, I'll be fine and dandy [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Exactly, but we still do need to point them out though. ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 08:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I dont see MW2 as "noob friendly", just as balanced. It tried too hard to make no gun any better than another. It also felt like cod4, like the core gameplay mechanics were all old when you started playing.

-k9870

:Face it dude, MW2 basically reeks of noob friendliness. You have deathstreaks, solely designed to help shitty players, noob tubes which when coupled with OMA and danger close are the noobs cannon of choice. You have the ACR and FAMAS, both of which are overpowered, then you get stuff like the UMP which at close range does more damage then an M4 Carbine. Not to mentionthe marathon lightweight commando set up used by knife fags so they can knife you from 12 feet away. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

And the overpowered Harriers, that killed everyone all the time and you could have 2 up at once, and they always beat the helos in fights, and Chopper Gunner, and Tactical Insertions, allowing people to boost really easily for the Nuke, that ended the game, and Slight Of Hand Pro that let everyone quickscope, yeah the list keeps going... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I always find a stinger to be good against harriers and because you can have 2 on you, most of the time, you can take even 2 of them out. Not Gunner choppers are a pain to take down [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 20:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

:Chopper gunners are a pain, AC-130s are worse. Not only can they not be hit by bullets or tubes or anything of that sort, but they have TWO sets of flares that can deploy without any delay. Tact inserts mixed with cold blooded and good old FFA is great for boosting, luckily now Sandy Ravage deals some booster justice (hell, even I serve justice to them now). Either way though, MW2 was clearly IW's attempt to top CoD: 4, which was a game built to revolutionize FPS games. MW2 was built to be playable by even the noobiest kids, over the top, reference movies every two seconds, and overall be a fairly shitty game. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The problem with the Harriers is they're way too good... unless you just pull out a stinger and then they're dead, which is a little too extreme both ways. The reason the helicopter was so much better in COD4 was because there were no guided rockets, you couldn't shoot the rotor (so you couldn't just hipfire the thing to death), and UAV Jammer didn't help you against it, it killed you anyway, not to mention it never seems to manage to hit you in MW2. What I hate is hearing "Helicopter Inbound", then seeing it shot down in literally 5 seconds... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:05, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Death streaks were only like 10 seconds long and didnt bother me, no guns were eoverpowered, there all balanced, too much if you ask me. C130s were easy to hide from and rare to see and i downed tons of harries with stingers. The noob tube didnt bother me, i used a m16 with m203 and iron sights as my primary weapon. Knife noobs are easy to shoot The problem was cheap tactics, like camping spawn points and getting your friends to camp with you in free for all so you could stab them and boost your way to a nuke.

-k9870

The only streak thats ten seconds long is painkiller, and it still sucks. The ACR has no recoil and can outshoot sniper rifles, so can the FAMAS. AC-130s are easy to hide from on SOME maps, but if you get spawn trapped outside, your screwed. The fact you use a noob tube on your primary gun choice sickens me, because ANYONE who uses them, unless to get the shotgun unlocked or in a tactical, non spam way is a complete noob and should be banned for using such a cheap weapon. Knife noobs are easy to shoot at times, but if they get within ten feet, commando is your demise. MW2 is a shit game, end of story, Black Ops is doing everything to solve the problems it caused, amen. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The m203 is useful to launch through windows and take out campers, and i use iron sights so might as well have an attachment. I dont use the m203 as my primary, but have it on my primary. And the ACR has low power at range taking on snipers. I countersniper with my m16 though, love irons, they have no sway like a scope. I hate snipers the most, there like socially acceptable campers. Its funny to lay out some noob who tries to quickscope though. It seems like no matter what you get called a noob though, m4 noob, noob tuber, shotgun noob, dual wield noob, knife noob....it seems everyoned thinks if yo dont use whaty they do your a noob, and c-130s dont bother me, there rare, people need 13 kills to get them. I hated when i tried to play free for all with some friends in a party and people are just boosting to nukes each round and cheating there asses off

[[user:k9870]]

agreed. it is always considered noobing. Snipers are annoying. it takes no skill at all to snipe. however there are worse things in MW2 then Snipers. for example- the people who camp in buildings like Wasteland or Scrapyard. "noob tubers" really arent annoying at all anyway. aggravating maybe, but if someone hits you with a M203 its your fault anyway. you should have been more alert. [[Special:Contributions/71.194.219.9|71.194.219.9]] 22:48, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

People always camped hallways and alleys and just shot anyone coming around the corner. Easy to just poke in and launch 40 mil at them. Besides, the thing has an aring distance, you need to arc it at range and reload was slow. Balanced.\

-k9870

:Face it, the M203 is a noob piece of shit. the combo of an M203 with Danger Close and OMA makes you a mini artillery battery. Also, how are you supposed to dodge a tube when people are shooting them cross map to your spawn? Nothing says pro like getting hit by a 40mm grenade shot hundreds of feet over buildings into your face. The M203 has no place in MW2, and I'd be one to have it removed. If retards can't use guns well, don't give them bullshit to help them, let them suck and they'll quit the game. When I pull my FAL out, I feel like a pro, knowing everyone else has the overpowered ACR and FAMAS and the tubes out, all ready to be scrubs, while I'm using something that's balanced and yet awesome. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Well said, though I wish the G3 was still in, and the fact that the ACR does a little less damage, like 1 bullet, maybe two different, makes no difference when there's absolutly no recoil, they still can't do anything by the time you kill them across the map from one huge sustained burst... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:37, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Are you all playing hardcore or something? And i have no people launching 203s around problem, you only get 2. And i could care less about harriers and 130s, you need a lot of kills to get them. There is a call of duty cultuure to nae some guns as oaky and some as cheap. I dont give a shit personally though. i just play. No matter what somebody will bitch about your gear.

I remember back when everyone hated p90s, that thing had no range or power and overall sucked.

You only get two M203s if your not using scavenger or the more common One Man Army. I literally see two or three people on my team per game using that stupid backpack, it's complete bullshit. The ACR may not do high damage, but it's high rate of fire and zero recoil means you can full auto the damn thing at any range. I think retards who dare to say the noob tube is a legit way to play should be banned from PSN or XBL and never allowed on any Call of Duty again. It's called a first person shooter, not first person grenade launchers. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
:I wasn't aware that we can't SHOOT grenade launchers. I better go tell the guys at Activision/IW/Treyarch. -Chris_Hun7er 02:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

The problem is more that games are good and balenced when everything has a place, if people start using snipers at close range and beating shotguns (that's more of a Halo thing, but the snipers quickscope and the shotguns are rather terrible), or shooting 40mm rounds at any range for any reason, it's dumb. The launchers in BFBC2 are well balenced, because they have a purpose and they fill it, and nothing else. The assault rifles in MW2 have a purpose, fill it, and then beat SMGs and shotguns at close range, and half the time snipers at long range. And the Javelin, not that I see it too much, is good against tanks, except, there aren't any, there's infantry and helicopters. A game works when things have a purpose and fill that purpose, but not anything else's purpose, and that's half of what's screwed up in MW2. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:36, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

:Excactly Alex. Bad company 2 had 40mms that had to virtually land on the person to kill them, but with Danger Close an MW2 noob tube will kill people even if they're up to fifteen feet away from the landing. To be honest, I think noob tubes should just be plain removed from Black Ops, and the tube fanboys can suck it while us normal players use our guns. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
:Reality is fanboy the US 40mm rounds have a 5 meter kill radius. meaning that if you are 15 feet away from the blast you are dead as a doornail. the 40mm grenades in bad company are more useful as doorway makers and cover destroyers than as proper suport weapons. what is pissing off alot of us who care about little things called historic accuracy is the fact that even though they say that everyone had to read about MACV:SOG they have gotten few details right. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 18:44, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

It's true that the 40mm is not terribly powerful in BC2, but explosives need to be less powerful in games than they would in real life, imagine Claymores with realistic spread, damage, and range, without those stupid little lasers, and without bomb squad. Or frag grenades, they're overspammed as it is. Doing something like that is less realistic, but needed for the game to work. Having something like and AUG in 1968, or a SPAS-12 used by Vietcong around the same time... not so much. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

:I agree Alex, because Claymores are really designed to take out a huge radius of enemies, it could easily wipe out an eight man squad. and a frag in a 10 by 10 room would really kill everything inside. If they went for realism, all the 5.56 assault rifles in MW2 would have the same damage and virtually the same recoil, but for balance the TAR is portrayed as extremely powerful, and the ACR weak. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Yeah, it just bothered me that they were THAT different, they could have chosen different weapons if they wanted to balence them like that or something, the part that bugs me the most is that COD4 was better balenced AND made more sense, it's just such a step back... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

== Linked to World at War ==

It has been conformed that Reznov from World at War will appear in this game and even make comments about Dimitri Petrenko. This was seen on the Call of Duty Wiki

:Yes, as Reznov is more or less confirmed to be the bearded man you meet and then split from in the tunnel rat scene at E3. I'm happy to see him back, as he made World at War even better for me, maybe now he'll continuously yell "Fire the Javelin!" [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::"now he'll continuously yell "Fire the Javelin!"" What's a Javelin doing in the cold war? Oh wait I forgot, it must be a secret prototype no one knew about.

:Alright, I was thinking in an MW2 state of mind, lemme see. I know, how about him always yelling "FIRE THE LAW" in your ear every two seconds when something as small as a jeep shows up
[[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Any links to zombies?

== Has it occured to anyone that the AR-15 variant is probably custom made? ==

Treyarch has said that these guys could have guns custom built just for them, which I feel explains things much more adequately than just saying that they're prototypes of future (to them) guns. My theory is that he had a CAR-15 custom made with a flat-top reciever for tactical reasons. Maybe this caught on with the rest of the team, and whatever manufacturer they got to make these guns for them sold the idea later on. Of course this is just an excuse for the guns having the rails just to free it up for attacthments in Multiplayer, but at least there is some kind of excuse. Unfortunately this theory doesn't cover the anachronistic appearances of the SPAS-12 and the AUG, but hey, no game ever get's all of it's guns 100% correct. 

Edit: Actually it just might explain the AUG, because all it really is is a combination of ideas taken from the Enfield EM-2, 
Korobov TKB-022, and several other abandoned designs from before or shortly after World War 2. The only thing it doesn't explain is why it has the production-style built in telescopic sight, instead of the original prototypes open sights:
[[http://world.guns.ru/assault/aug_pr1.gif]]

== For those of you who may be confused about the supposed MP5/UMP hybrid ==

This is what I'm talkin about: 

[[Image:CODBO-SMG.jpg]] 

As you can see, it appears that it has the reciever and magazine housing of an MP5 or MP5K, while the barrel housing (correct me if I'm incorrect in calling it that) looks like that of a somewhat shortened UMP. If you look closely, you will note that it has the MP5Ks finger guard (I'm guessing that's what that is) directly below the muzzle that looks like a cut down version of the full handguard found in this picture: 

[[Image:MP5Kprototype.JPG]] 

My point is I don't think it's a hybrid at all, merely an MP5K missing it's forward vertical grip, for some reason or another. And seeing as every other aspect of the gun is that of an MP5Ks, I think it's safe to say that's what it is, so I'm gonna change it to that on the front page. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 16:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== G11 ==

Anyone else as excited as I am for the inclusion of the G11? [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 19:16, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
:Just another anachronistic gun. Thats all. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 04:49, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I sure as heck am. --[[User:AK-74Fan|AK-74Fanc]] 23:18, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Eh the gun itself isn't that big of a deal to me, but I definitely am excited to see something that to my knowledge hasn't been in an FPS before. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 23:29, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
: Well, it have appeared already in few other FPS games. For example [[Delta Force: Land Warrior]], [[Global Operations]], [[IGI 2: Covert Strike]] or Code of Honor: The French Foreign Legion --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 04:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
::Those games are not up to the modern standard, though. ;) [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 12:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

:Really, you could say this is the G11s first appearance in a well known game, and will finally show it off to the masses. I love the weapon itself, and to see it finally make a big appearance like this makes me quite happy.[[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

== XM214 Microgun ==

Since it's going to cover the Vietnam era, and the way these types of games like to go over the top, do you think there's a chance that the XM214 Microgun is going to make an appearance? I know it was only a prototype, and was it was made in the 70's, but I thought I read somewhere that the SF guys tried it out only to find that it was not feasable having a gun fire at 4,000 rpm.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 03:14, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

:I think putting a Minigun in the game would be kind of stupid. I mean sure they could make it heavy and awkward to carry, but that thing would simply decimate anyone in it's path, whether they're behind light cover, in a vehicle or just in the open. I'd love one, but methinks not. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

== A more plausable fictional AR-15 ==

I can understand a frankengun, like some special forces guy back then would take several kinds of AR-15 designs and mash them together until he gets an awesome gun that works. And being special forces, they can get whatever they want to suit their mission, so it would make sense for whatever they take to not be standard issue or that it is known, but I don't like the flip up iron sights since I don't know when flip up irons came about or the flat top receiver. It's like they just took a Colt Model 933 and replaced the stock with an old style stock from the CAR-15. I mean, put a telescoptic stock on an M16A1 rifle, or A2 upper reliever on the Car-15 and swap out the pistol grip or something. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:16, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

:That would make sense considering the special forces style of the game. Also, Sonny (from Deadliest warrior and such) was on as an advisor for Spetsnaz and tactics, so look for both some epic Spetsnaz moves and even a character of him in game! [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Do we even officially know yet what model AR-15 it is, aside of course from the flattop reciever and flip-up sights? [[Special:Contributions/67.187.27.89|67.187.27.89]] 02:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It pretty much is a Colt Model 933 without a brass deflector or forward assist, which actual does not exist. I have not seen a flat top reciever without the forward assist and the brass deflector. I don't even think flip up irons were invented back then. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I mean if they threw in a CAR-15 tricked out like the ones seen in Black Hawk Down, I'd have no complaints [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:04, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

== New weapons! ==

Here's [[http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/File:GunWall.png]] a pic of a bunch of airsoft guns Treyarch has on a wall in their studio which pretty much confirms that they'll be in the game. 
From left to right, starting at the top: 
-M16A2 (?) 
-MAC-10 w/ supressor 
-AUG 
-Mini-Uzi 
-L85 
-Scorpion SA Vz 61 
-AKs-74u 
-Another Skorpion 
-SPAS-12 
-MP5 (?) 

Not sure exactly what the MP5 is doing as there already is the K variant prototype, and no idea what the HELL the M16A2 is doing there as there's already an M16A1 AND a CAR-15. What do you all think?
Sorry it's a bit blurry.

It could be a very blurry M16A1 or maybe because they somehow can bullshit their way into saying they got a prototype M16A2. And I prefer us to use the full size MP5 again. Looks like they got an L85 here. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:59, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Call of Duty: Black Ops

2010-07-22T04:19:34Z

Hughjefender: /* Bullpup guns */

This game has a cold war look to it

==zombie mode==

will they have it? It is treyarch, but i havent heard anything solid yet.
:The article that I read (and summarized below) seemed to indicate that they had something other than zombies. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully not copying spec ops.....

Maybe it's aliens.

==add m16 to page==

It was delted since there was no in game footage, but then there is a m16 slung to the main guy's back on the cover. i say add it. I know theres no in ge screenshot yet, but look, theres no in game shots of 1911s either.

Buddy, that stuff has been added already-[[User:SargeOverkill]]

m16 has been removed, only "ar-15 carbine" is there.

==='''M16 is in.'''===

I am not sure which version is that, but i added it as A1.

It have been confirmed in '''Call of Duty:Black ops INSIGHT''' trailer.

Oh crap, they mentioned Sonny Puzikas, I remember that name from the spetsnaz episode of Deadliest Warrior.

==Weapons that would make sense==
M72, M60, M14, Stoner 63, M40A1, M16A1, MAC-10, Remington 1100, Smith & Wesson M76, Browning Hi-Power, Hawk MM1, Smith & Wesson 39

AK-47, AK-74, Mosin-Nagant, PM Makarov, Steckin APS, SKS, Dragnnov, PKM

-Add any other weapons that would make sense
:M3A1 "Grease Gun"/Suppressed M3A1, Carl Gustav M/45/Suppressed M/45, suppressed Uzi, CAR-15 w/CGL or M203, Ithaca 37, Remington 870, Remington 7188 Automatic Shotgun, SOG modified RPD, M-60 "Death Machine"(M-60 w/ cut down barrel and ammo pack), HK-33(Harrington and Richardson T223).
:RPD, MAT-49/suppressed MAT-49--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 13:08, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Dirty Harry's Smith & Wesson Model 29 and Tony Montana's "Little Friend"
:What the hell do you have with those movie guns ? Why should they be in ?

It would be amazing to see Sa. Vz. 58 there. It was frequently used by vietcong fighters as USSR´s help.

''''''Some good proofs''' :'''

http://nam64-75.hill.cz/download/file.php?id=691&sid=c3ccbd4348543db02c420df186cb428c ('' '''NVA training''''' )

http://www.quansuvn.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=41.0;attach=4972;image

http://nam64-75.hill.cz/download/file.php?id=1169 ('' '''SSG Patrick Tadina with his Vz. 58''''' )

http://www.psywarrior.com/rewardforguns.gif ( '''''Vietcong fighters firearms info poster, left side, third from down''''' )

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/1164/biethaisamopal9wq.jpg ( '''''Captured Vz. 58 on left''''' )

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff164/joshuadowdle/Dad.jpg ( '''''In hands of SSG Patrick Tadina''''' )

''SSG Patrick Tadina - Legendary, five-tour Vietnam ranger. He is in rangers´s hall of fame.''

==Should be==
There should be M72 LAWs, M60s and M14s. cause this is Vietnam baby!

Nah. They just arent cool enough for Treyarch. And if they will add those weapons - They will all have RIS rails, scopes, lasers, GL attachemnts, silencers.... --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 11:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)No need for your cheap sarcasm here. This game doesn't seems to pursue that Nam atmosphere with rocknroll, massive chopper assaults, jungle patrols and "smell of napalm in the morning"

I'm sure you will also be able to pick up laser weapons and crap like that. [[User:SargeOverkill]]

==E3==

Added E3 screens - .357 Python and AR15 .

== Not an AK-47 ==
Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that the mag isn't curved enough to be a 7.62x39 mag? It could be a -74 prototype, without the flash hider. Given the time frame, this may make sense.

Thanks for that, I also didn't note it before. It looks to be a WASR-2/3.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 16:19, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

:This game seems to have a lot of rendering issues when it comes to the guns [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:40, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
OMG it is damn videogame for god's sake, the guns aren't real and are nothing more than 3d drawings -of course they aren't going to be exactly like such and such gun. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 17:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

'''3D drawning''' ? Hell, that would be interesting. And GTFO, this is '''firearms site''' and ''YES'', we care about reality. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 17:44, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

:Thanks for pointing that out. We are a gun site and we pay attention to details. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:24, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Well guess what, THESE ARENT GUNS!!! They aren't effing real they are nothing more than 3d models that someone threw together in 3DS MAX or whatever the hell they use so of course its not going to be up to every detail, That's why I don't do VG pages anymore--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 19:47, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

::You appear to have missed the point of this website...

AsAstra, the point that I don't think you're understanding, is that even if they're merely three dimensional renderings of the guns, and not the guns themselves, we should try to be as correct as possible. If something says that it's an Ak-74, but actually looks more like a different gun, we should call it the different gun, so as not to confuse anyone new to the site. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 15:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

On the topic of the AK, knowing video game developers the AK being used by the Vietcong will most likely be the same one in those snow picks. I don't think we can call it a 47 right of the bat.[[User:ShaDow XPS|ShaDow XPS]]

== Degtyarov ==
It just cant be DPM. Lok - It totally doesnt have ironsights - And MAG isnt on top. + Its very unlikely some guy will cary Spas12 and Degtyarev. I just think its some AK type - Or it may be some different gun, but it isnt Degtyarev.
You may keep it there, but it will be false information.

==ummmm==
This page really needs a cleanup or a deletion.
There is also too much informal talk on the page itself, infact all of it is. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 04:47, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

===Moved from main page--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 04:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)===
== AR-10 ==

Another unknown M16 family gun. But this one seems more like [[Armalite AR-10]] A4

[[Image:AR10-4.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Armalite AR-10 A4 7.62x51mm.]]
[[Image:AR10.JPG|thumb|none|400px|M16 Family unknown gun as appeared in Black Ops teaser.]]

:The magazine seems too long to be an AR-10

Also the AR10 is a civilian gun right? So why would special forces like that guy above be holding it? I personally think its an M16(either A1 or A2) with a scope attached to its carrying handle/iron sight.

:It's a strange AR-15 Carbine with a flat top [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

AR-10 is not necessarily civilian. It is entirely possible that SOF would use one.

I think is not AR10.AR10 use .308 or 7.62x51mm round and the magazine large and short than AR15.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

: Its uselles to keep AR-10 discussion here. We all know its that ankward AR-15 or XM177 or whatever.

== Un-identified guns ==

[[Image:MP5G3.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''1''' : Possibly [[MP5]] or [[G3]].]]
[[Image:UNKNOWNLOL.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''2''' : I totally dont know.But it may be some russian one.]]
It seems to look like a [[MAC-10]] or an [[Uzi]] with the stock extended-[[User:SargeOverkill]]
[[Image:UNKNOWN THE MOST.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''4''' : Its hard to tell which gun this one is, but it looks like [[Beretta AR-70/223]] or Daewoo K2. I think that this gun could be any gun I see and AK there but it could be a siper rifle for all we know]]
As to the first unknown gun, it's too short to be a G3, so I believe it's an MP5. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 01:50, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

== RPK ==

From the looks of it, it might be an RPK-74. Note the 45-round banana mag and the flash suppressor.

The "RPK" and the "Valmet" are the same guns - look carefully at the screenshot. Given that the 7.62mm AK-47 appears in game and the timeline, I'm gonna say that it's not an RPK-74, but a 7.62x39mm RPK or one made to look like a Valmet for some reason. Maybe Treyarch modelers are using 80's action movies as a reference for their RPK model. *shakes head*

No. Look on that "RPK" an you will see typical RPK stock. Look on "Valmet" and you will see it doesnt look like Valmet :)--[[User:Werc|Werc]] 03:53, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Look at the front of the Valmet trigger guard. Now look at that same exact place on the "Valmet" in the game picture. Different. There is no Valmet, it's an RPK.

Moved "Unknown LMG" stuff to the RPK-74 section. Whoever posted those images under there originally failed to notice the way the RPK-74 front sight is canted compared to the Valmet. --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 14:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

==M1911==

In the title screen there is a soldier holding a 1911 i believe it also says something on the side.

It says "Sally" on the slide.

The 1911 looks more like the first and not the A1, look at the ejection port.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Here's to hoping it's 1911s will be in the arsenal in multi-player, and not the tease in MW2 --[[Special:Contributions/67.181.114.114|67.181.114.114]] 07:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)JanG

== Wait... ==
Upcoming CoD,what what what?!
--[[Special:Contributions/76.235.34.31|76.235.34.31]] 02:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

== good decision ==

As well as Weapon customization there will also be a character customization feature.
- That game is gonna be just awesome. Character customization ? Damn, just in R6:V style (ha-ha)

* Custom characters? hell yeah --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 00:38, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
i agree with that customization policy, i liked how in R6V2 they did that, and i can only hope they bring back CoD4s M4A1 Grenadier back, and i also completely agree with the historic battle/ war thing as compared to a (***Spoiler) nuclear warfare and a domestic terrorist plot, i would much rather see Black Hawk Down pop up in a newer game as opposed to Vietnam, but i would settle for a Operation Acid Gambit type game also.

Customizable characters in a game where... you can't actually ''see'' the character? FAIL.
* Customizable characters in game where will be 3rd person mode, and where other players can see it ? Your post '''fail'''.
:When did Black Ops become third person? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

It isn't. He's saying that other characters will see your 3rd person form. Also, it's noteworthy that MW2 DID have third person mode.
:So then I've gotta agree. Character customization in a game where you can't actually see your guy seems like a fail to me, too. It's not like anybody in MP is really gonna stop shooting at you to say "hey, cool guy, what kind of vest is that?" And how do I activate this third person mode in MW2? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:50, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

:: Well, i dont know. But what about trying "3RD PERSON" in "Play" screen ?

I think it's hilarious how people are whinig about the customization... Go play R6. Custom characters work in FPS games.
:Yeah, i bought R6:V2 not so long ago and its amazing. I think that game has best character customization ever. Its only pity you cant do anything with your teammates.
:R6V also has a cover system where you can actually ''see'' the guy/girl you're playing as, a third person mode cheat, and player characters who actually have voices and speak rather than being mutes with no form of personality whatsoever, none of which Black Ops has. I simply think character customization is unnecessary. That's not whining, it's called ''having an opinion". [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

How does the post fail it was an update its not like i'm wrong. its not like i said there would be some sort of Grizzly Bear cannon. it was a NEWS UPDATE!!! THINK next time a stupid comment is thought by yourself.
Also heres the ANSWER the other players can see you just like AVP. so thats how customization comes in handy. [[user:moviemaster1993|moviemaster1993]]
:First off, I never said ''your post'' failed. That was ''your'' response to ''me'', smart ass. I was commenting on a feature of the game I think is unnecessary, something I'm fully allowed to do. You aren't the lord of opinions around here. Second, comparing Rainbow Six to Call of Duty is about as much of a failure as one can accomplish. Lastly, who the hell cares if another player can see you? I wouldn't be customizing my character for other people, just like other people aren't going to be customizing their characters for me. It's not like everybody's gonna stop shooting and comment on every other player's individual character, is it? The only stupid comments on here are coming from ''you''. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:30, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

== MP5k ==

You think they're putting that in there to copy MW2?
:No I think they're doing it to fulfill their MP5 quota. MW2 wasn't the first game to feature the MP5K, broski.-protoAuthor 00:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about that. They also have an AUG in the game and a SPAS-12. Not a coincidence that MW2 also has these. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

- Heh. Spas and AUG were in tons of other games. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 05:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

But THIS game is directly part of the COD franchise. It's a bit repetitive to show guns that has been in previous games. Well ok WWII games don't count because they cant help having the same guns, but this is supposed to be Treyarch's turn at making a new game, but so far, none of the weapons are new. What about instead of the SPAS-12, we get an 870, or instead of the AUG, we get...any other bullpup rifle of the time. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I derinitely think they're putting the MP5k in to copy MW2. They could have put in any other variant of the MP5, variants that weren't in prototype stage and would probably be more combat effective, but they went with the k variant. That said I don't think it's any coincidence the SPAS-12 and AUG is in there either.

Well, Treyarch apparently didnt start copying first. MW2´s specops get idea fairly sure from WaW´s coop system :D
:The latest issue of the official xbox magazine says that they originally had planned on having co-op throughout the entire campaign in MW2, but cut it because it messed with the narrative. Or, it would've been way too fun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
the AUG was stupid in the game, no1 in USSOCOM uses that gun
* Would you mind telling what do you have against bullpup designs, beside "the looks"?--[[User:WhiteSlift|WhiteSlift]] 11:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
* Heh. MP5k get into service 20 years after Vietnam war. There was only prototype in latest parts pf Vietnam war. MAC10 or UZI would be much more realistic in hands of US soldiers. Atleast much more than prototype gun. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 06:49, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
*"MP5K get into service 20 years after Vietnam war"...the MP5K isn't that new. Considering that the war ended in 1975, and the MP5K was introduced in 1976, you are way off.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 01:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

true why would they be carrying a Prototype in to combat

Well how much differently could essentially just a shortened MP5 with a foregrip work from the regular MP5?

Because it's a video game that doesn't care about accuracy and realism. I mean what loser actually waits until Picatinny rails to be invented? Go ahead and put them on your rifle in Nam, it's the new trend.

Why are you complaining about the AUG in particular, I mean USSOCOM doesn't use it? Yeah, well they sure as hell don't use the deagle or the AA12 or the FAMAS but I don't see you complaining

"I mean what loser actually waits until Picatinny rails to be invented?" Picatinny rails have been around since 1913, broski.
:Not in their modern version, Broseph Stalin.

You all are forgetting..this is SOG, not SOCOM. SOG could carry into battle whatever they wanted to. Could they have carried a prototype MP5K? Sure! Keep in mind..they had access to stuff that NOBODY ELSE in the military had access to at that time. Hell..one time they brought an airhorn with them and scared the crap out of an entire NVA division with it.

== What the hell is up with this AR-15 Carbine? ==

It looks like a 733, but at the same time, not since it also has a flat top, but the scenes in the trailer that showed this rifle is assumed to be Vietnam era, so a flat top AR-15 shouldn't exist at the time much less a rail system for it. Also the same AR also has a rear iron sight on the flat top. This doesn't make sense [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

- I think its XM177, but customized way to much. Its mucb more possible that Treyarch just failed. I think they just added rail system/flat top just because MP. You know, attachments. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 05:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

::It cannot be an XM177 if it has a flattop receiver. Those did not exist when the XM177s were introduced. The flash hider is also Vortex, not the XM177-type. The game's 3D artists might have been ignorant about what AR carbines existed at the time. But that is not an XM177. Not by a long shot. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 05:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I think the game's 3D rendering tech was mostly like stone because it's the 60s and 70s, but the trailer animation is horrible! I could barely tell what was going on and the weapon details are no where like MW2. Say what you want about MW2 when it comes to consistencies, but at least they can render their weapons correctly. My first upload of that funky AR-15 shows the handguard as this polygon like thing. And did flat top receivers exist during Nam? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:34, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

:::''And did flat top receivers exist during Nam?''

:::No, not at all. My recollection is that the Colt ACR (introduced in the 1980s) was the first AR-type rifle to feature a flattop receiver. Even though the ACR was a bust, flattops were subsequently carried over into future AR generations. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 05:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

With these seemingly anachronistic flat top recievers and flip up sights I think this game is headed towards failure. Seems like they're taking the MW2 route and making their "balanced" and cosmetically changed multiplayer weapons also appear in single player. I hope by some miracle they don't or else they don't get my money.

:And here I remember talking to my brother about how they can fuck up the M16 by either putting A2s or burst A1s, but this is WAY over there in the incorrect area. Haven't they seen any Nam movies? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

: Excalibur01 - or use five minutes just f-i-v-e f**king minutes of their time and try to google some Vietnam-era photos. Or they could hire someone with at least basic knowledge of era background and weaponery. You know, they spent money on countless other things. But I guess that Call of Duty is now like B-rated action movies. Make as many as you can and don't worry about the quality. Nobody gives a s*it about how it looks like or if it is correct as far as it would look cool and geek teen age kiddos would pay the money so they could play multiplayer on their lagging net servers. [Ragnar - 22:25, 19 May 2010]

Hopefully they at least have the M16 have full auto instead of burst, would make it more fun that way. I did read that this isn't taking place in vietnam on yahoo news which probably is incorrect but this is ridulous of the weapons they are putting in.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 22:48, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

:I read an IGN article that it'll take place throughout the Cold War, from the end of Nam to Cuba and also Princess Gates London [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:17, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I researched the history of picatinny rails, turns out Treyarch may have actually done very good research. This is what I found: "The MIL-STD-1913 standard was developed out of efforts during the M16A1 Product Improvement Program which eventually resulted in the M16A2. One of the abandoned ideas was a receiver with a built-in rail. In the 1970s, Rock Island Arsenal experimented with a sniper AR-10 with a Weaver rail. In Vietnam, the Model 656 had a built-in rail." Source:http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-18737.html
I don't know about you guys, but I'm now willing to believe the rails on this AR (Model 656?) isn't a goof at all.
:Well, its always good to know new thing :) But i think it still wasnt regular Vietnam equipment. And i also think there wont be even M16 or M16A1 ingame.--[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
::True, it wasn't regular Vietnam equipment. But these aren't regular soldiers either. These guys are top secret black ops, higher than tier one operators. They can use any weapon in the world, even ones that are in secret development. And you're probably right, I doubt there'll be an M16, simply because these experimental ARs look cooler, have a bit of mystery around them, and can accept multiple attachments. But I wouldn't be surprised if they name the rifles M16.

The model 656 looked like this:

[[Image:model 656.jpg]]

It was just an early M16 with an early style rail system. So far, I have not found images of a Carbine with these types of rails, experimental or not. Rails were not on the forefront of military minds before the 90s. The military didn't even decided to put rails on the M16 until a decade after the M4 came out. And even the Model 656 rails were not on a flat top receiver like the ones on an M4. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 13:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
:Aw crap, there goes my theory. Looks like it's back to just being a Treyarch fail.

I'm not one to justify inaccuracy in videogames but, the upper receiver on the 656 could easily be swapped with that of an AR-15 carbine. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 00:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure...but the one we see in the game is not the same rail receiver as the one the 656 has. It has a flat top like an M4 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed that the front sight isn't removed when an optic attachment is present, an improvement over other COD games. Maybe Treyarch realized an AR would be bolt-action if the gas block was removed.
:Low-profile gas block is not visible from first-person perspective. And 3-d person gun models were made as low-poly as possible to minimise system loads(this was crucial because games was intended for Xbox in first place)

Who know CAR-15 with rear flip up sight use in vietnam war? I see a south vietnam flag in picture.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]
: No. Though, prototype flat-top receiver and flip-up like on your screen could be possible, but it just doesn't look authentic to the time period. I wouldn't mind if they put in something like Model 656(pictured above). But they really need to get rid of that modern-looking AR.
[[Image:CODBOAR-15b.jpg|thumb|none|500px|]]

It's just like the Aperature sight in W@W, but no where near as bad. I don't see why people are making such a big deal out of it, sure it's not exactly authentic, but it's far from game ruining like what a lot of people here are saying.

== Complaints ==
Hey, it's a game, not a history lesson. It's all about fun and style and so. I do like a realistic movie or game, but I don't hate a game just because the artists created something they think it's better this way. Nobody complains when a director sums up a car ride that would take 1 hour in real life in one scene in the movie, or when he puts the light where the sun can never be just to make it look good, but when someone puts a cool looking AUG in a game set before 1977, because it looks cool, or creates his own creative vision of an AR-15 everyone freaks out. All the time you hear people say "They should have done better research!" or "They don't know anything about history!", but maybe the did research, and they know history, and they discussed it and decided that they want to create something own, because they feel it fits better in their creative work than what real life history can give them.

*Yeah, you are right. Now we need M1 Abrahams tank in some Napoleonic Wars strategy. Cause that tank is just cool - right ? Or maybe M4 Carbine in WW2 shooter ?--[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:28, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

::Treyarch is legally obligated to keep the timeline from going beyond Vietnam. [http://gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2010/03/04/the-activision-lawsuit-what-it-means-and-where-it-s-going.aspx] If that means they have to cheat a bit regarding the weapons, I'm willing to give them some leeway. Let's face it, we're probably the only people who truly care anyway. None of these inaccuracies are going to keep any of us from buying this game when it comes out and playing the heck out of it. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

They're not legally obligated to keep it from going beyond Vietnam. As that article says..all they need is full approval from West and Zampella. Considering those two aren't rampant assholes..it's a total possibility.
:That's a bit like saying other people can write Harry Potter novels as long as JK Rowling is okay with it, or other studios can make Star Wars movies as long as George Lucas is okay with it. Have you looked at the games IW has made? Have you noticed a pattern? (For those who don't want to look, all they make are CoD games. That is literally all they have going for them.) Sure, they COULD give away their golden goose and let someone develop else something Activision has given them exclusivity with, but I can't imagine a single scenario where they would. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 10:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

* Well, msot of CoD players wont even recognize M16 and M4 or HK416. So yep - We are maybe only ones who care about it :/ --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
::And mind you, Treyarch is the same developer that had Japanese troops using suppressed MP40s with reflex sights in WaW. Oh, and a RAY GUN TO SHOOT ZOMBIES. That being said, I was devastated when I found out that MW2 wouldn't have zombies, and I'll be even more devastated if BO doesn't have them. IMHO, zombies was the best part of WaW. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 17:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
* And IW had OMOH with FN2000´s and IMI Tavor´s - So whats the difference :D Hope zombies will be includeProxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0

too.

:Ok the Zombie thing in WaW was a side game. It's not part of the "story". If the zombies and the ray gun appeared in the actual missions, then we'd called bullshit but with a smile cause zombies are awesome to fight. The suppressors and red dot sights were for multiplayer to compete with COD4 at the time, so those don't count. We're talking historically accurate, period piece weapons. It's like we do a game taking place during the Civil War but we all got 1911s as handguns and M1 Garands as rifles. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
::You're telling me you wouldn't play a Civil War game where you can use an M1 Garand? ;)True, they tried that with Darkest of Days, but it was terribly done. And second, you CAN get the ray gun for one of the campaign missions, and it is awesome. (You can take down a tank with two shots.) But I know what you're getting at. I'm just saying we shouldn't let the nitty gritty get in the way of good gameplay, especially since Treyarch already has one hand legally tied behind their backs. Would they want to make a Modern Warfare-like game set in present day or the near future? Sure, but they can't, they're legally handcuffed to inflexible historical fact. Besides, no game has ever gotten its weapons exactly right. We have an entire generation of kids who believe an M1 Garand can't be reloaded without firing the entire clip, or it has less stopping power than a K98K. I won't lose any sleep if BO has AR-15s with flat top receivers, but I will if the game sucks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 06:34, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
You know if there gonna screw this game why don't the just add a bunch of laser guns or crap. I mean i could understand if the weapons in the game where off, but i have a feeling this game is going to be a cluster F***
::We're basing a lot on two trailers and some scanned images from a magazine 5.5 months from release. I'm going to reserve judgment until I actually play it or at least hear from people who have actually played it. Treyarch has little to lose here. If it's great, people will praise them, if it's not, people already think they're the Fredo Corleone to IW's Michael Corleone in the Activision family. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
:::And while we're here, we've been talking about how the angle of the AK mag is slightly off, but is anyone else annoyed that if you do a tactical reload and drop half a mag, those rounds in the discarded mag magically go back into your ammo stockpile and you don't lose them? This has been true in 99.7% of all FPS's I've ever played. Gamers have accepted the idea of the consequence-free tactical reload for over a decade now. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::::You're right it's a crying shame. Not only because it's more accurate when the game keeps track of ammo in specific mags but it also adds another challenge and element of strategy. I also enjoy the one game I've played that keeps track of the +1 round in your gun when you reload. I wish more games were like that. Sad thing is I don't see COD heading in the right direction ever again.
:::::The one time I saw them do the tactical reload correctly was... Navy SEALs Quake, a mod for Quake II. Yes, it was a mod made by amateurs over ten years ago. The big game companies aren't doing it right because they don't want to. I remember the first time I played a game that had different animations for reloading with a round in the chamber and one without. Operation Winback on the N64, also ten years ago. It was a nice touch. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

* But we arent complaining here about animation and bullet system, damn. We are critising look of those guns ! That stramge XM177/AR15 hybrid was seen many times in reveal trailer, so we can judge it. And it failed. Its still better when you have realistic gun without realistic ammo system than crazy-unrealistic looking gun with realistic ammo system. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:06, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::I don't think it'd be that hard to replace the skin. [[Black]] didn't give a damn about realism, but it was still enjoyable as hell. The way I see it, ultimately, it's just a game, to be played because it's fun, not as an interactive history lesson. If you want accuracy, watch the Military Channel or actually go out to the range. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::: Well, it doesnt have to be "interactive history lesson" but atleast a bit of realism would be nice. '''''BTW''': I visit shooting range once or twice in month :)''

As pointed out, we don't want TOTAL realism. Otherwise, one bullet hit to the chest is enough to kill you. At least head shots are instant kills in the game. But we're doing a game based on a particular period and it has to be accurate. I mean, if you were watching a WWI movie and see soldiers with M16s. That's a bit jarring right? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
:: Now he will answer it isnt jarring. If the movie has cool effects and famous actors.
:::Jarring, maybe, but I don't know if it'd ruin it for me. (Is it a sci-fi film? Surrealism? A film by Uwe Boll?) It'd be one thing to have blatant mistakes, like M16s in WWI, but would it have ruined [[Saving Private Ryan]] if Sgt Horvath had a post war M1 Carbine with a bayonet lug and adjustable rear sights instead? Did the fact that the officers had Webley Mark VI's instead of Adams Mark III's ruin [[Zulu]]? Did the fake M72 LAW in [[Ronin]] take you out of the movie? If it didn't, it's because you chalked it up as a goof, moved on, and enjoyed the rest of an otherwise good movie. If it did, then I don't know what to tell you. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:52, 25 May 2010
(UTC)

Here's a hypothetical question: This game is called Black Ops, so theoretically, they can make up whatever they want, what do we know, it's a black op, and thus classified. What if all the weapons in the game were all fake, either outright, or fictional modifications of real weapons? Would we still be up in arms? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:14, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
: I hate to say it but you might be onto something. I've heard rumors that Black Ops will rewrite history and take place in an alternate past. This is probably how Treyarch can get around the legal restrictions of not being able to make post-Vietnam games and explain these BS weapons. Personally I think it's pretty weak but it explains it.
:: Well, if it does... Wait-It doesnt! I read some article with one of Treyarch members which strictly denied possibility of alternate reality. Ill repat it again : its just some Treyarch modeller fail. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
It's not rewriting history at all basically it's saying that during the Cold War what if there were some Black Ops that went down to keep the whole thing from escalating into an actual official war. Which is completely possible.
:::It doesn't have to be alternate history, just a secret history. It's implied that the JFK assassination will be in the game. Is the player the second gunman on the grassy knoll? Is he supposed to stop the second gunman on the grassy knoll? Does he successfully stop a possible third gunman? They can make up anything they want in that scenario. A mission can have the player equipped with a prototype laser rifle, but it's scripted so the rifle is damaged or lost along the way, and the technology is lost forever. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:53, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

It would be great if they do include Dirty Harry's gun and Tony Montana's "Little Friend".

The Steyr AUG (Armee Universal Gewehr - Universal Army Rifle) had been in development since the late 1960s, as a replacement for venerable but obsolete Stg.58 (FN FAL) battle rifles for Austrian army. It was developed by the Austrian Steyr-Daimler-Puch company (now the Steyr-Mannlicher AG & Co KG) in close conjunction with Austrian Army.See? It's not that wrong. Got it from http://world.guns.ru/assault/as20-e.htm
:It's still wrong. Just because the AUG was in development doesn't mean a working prototype existed. And if it's supposed to be the prototype, why does the AUG in the game look like the production version, only without the grip, and not as depicted in the prototype drawing shown on the World Guns page? I think the whole prototype explanation is a lame excuse in order to include more modern weapons in the game. I would much rather see the weapons that SOG actually used included in Black Ops, instead of an assault rifle that we've seen about 5 billion times in other shooters. I already posted below how Treyarch could have used the Remington 7188 full auto shotgun in the game. This weapon was actually used in Vietnam, and as far as i know has never been used in a video game, but instead they chose the SPAS-12, which didn't exist at the time and has been used in dozens of other shooters.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 22:50, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

== Unknown ==
The rocket launcher under unknown is an M202 FLASH rocket launcher. Ashdude01 20:20 19 May 2010

Yes there is i added it to the guns page but some moron removed it

moviemaster1993 11:58 may 2010

== Carcano M91/38? ==

The images provided doesn't shot much and it is said that it can't be a mosin Nagant because the barrel is too short. Well it could be the carbine length variant or any other short barrel bolt action rifle. I can't see anything in the picture. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:26, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

It seems like its picture of that gun. Remember that game has to do something with JFK asassination and there can be barelly seen "Lee Harvey Oswald" on paper under that gun. So i think it have to be that gun - As some reference. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 03:48, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Ever heard of the Mosin Nagant M44 carbine or the finnish retooled M38?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 11:56, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

== M16 and XM177 ==

[[Image:Colts.JPG|thumb|none|500px|]]

Looks like the guy here has either an M16 as you can tell by the barrel pointing to the left and the barrel on the right looks like an XM177 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:26, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a M16A1 to me..which makes sense..since the A2 didn't come around until the early to mid 80's.

== Embargo lifts tomarrow, the 28th ==

Ones the embargo lifts we will be flooded with info, especially about guns

What embargo? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:45, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

There was an embargo for some journalist who previewed the game(they also could have played it too)and tomarrow it ends and info will get flooded all over the web

* It ended and only few informations and no new guns appeared. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 07:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

== Valment m78 ==
:The M78 does have its own page here, separate from the RPK. But yeah, I don't think the designers are gun-savvy enough to have both of these guns in this game.--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 19:55, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

What the year of Valmet M78 build? I think is not use in vietnam war the NVA don't have a finnish weapons during the war.And i think in the picture the gun is not Valmet M78.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

: And Spas-12 was in vietnam ? It may not be Valmet, but it fairly sure isnt RPK. Or another Treyarch modeller fail ? --[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 11:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Anyone notice that the picture of the unknown AK-type LMG has a front sight that upright on the front side and canted forward on the back side like the RPK-74's front sight? --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 17:11, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:The Valmet M78 was invented after the production of the M76 in 1976, which is another weapon considered anachronistic for the Vietnam War era if there's any in the game. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 01:45, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

== Time travel (well that would explain it) ==

[http://pc.ign.com/articles/109/1093572p1.html Another preview]
--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

The page doesn't exist [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
* Fixed that link. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Launching an SR-71 from an aircraft carrier? Is that even possible? O_o [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
:They were able to operate a U-2 from a carrier, but that wouldn't be nearly as sexy as flying an SR-71, now would it? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:32, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it is, You know how these game designers do ALL of their research. (Man I'm sarcastic tonight)--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
::It's pretty obvious that since MW2, the main source of research is action movies and Futureweapons reruns.

Damn straight.

[[Special:Contributions/72.189.150.170|72.189.150.170]]

Not that I have anything against the SPAS-12, AUG, or AK47s, but we need to see different types of weapons. What about an 870, or the AK-74? What about other types of Bullpup? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

: You think 12-year old child knows difference between AK-74, AK-47 and AKs-74u ? That wont make sence..... Why making more weapons when you can add only those "cool" and overused ones ? --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 15:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

My 11 year old brother can, just saying-[[User:SargeOverkill]]

== Prototypes ==

Just to let you know: German games magazine ''PC Games'' had an interview with the developers. In the latest issue, they write, that the black special ops team can get any equipment they want, including non-standard weapons, brand new prototypes and even customized and special built single pieces, <quote>which no one outside the team will ever get to see</quote>. So that is the official in-game explanation for every crude weapon you can see in the hands of the player.
:That's what I figured their reasoning would be. It makes sense but it's still a pretty weak explanation if you ask me.
:So super elite 1337 black ops delta teams can even get weapons ''that don't yet exist''? WTF? Why didn't our SF and SEALs in 'Nam have M4A1s with KAC rail systems, lasers, ACOGs, EOTechs, and bullets that can home in on enemy soldiers from 50 miles away, then??? It's a conspiracy to disarm the public, I tell you! But in all seriousness, I think it's an explanation that doesn't hold water. That mentality might work in 2016 during MW2, but not in a past setting like Vietnam where small arms development has been chronicled and we know where and to what it led. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
::I think it does hold water. Of course these finalized weapons weren't around in the late '60s to mid '70s. But how do you know their prototypes weren't? Most of the weapons in-game will either be early prototypes or in the case of the AR custom-built weapons made by the SOG operatives.
::Ok, they could at least make it look like prototypes, not like modern weapons.
::Okay, then how about when the next WWII game comes out, they give all the troops M16s, M60s, Mark 48s, G36s, AKMs, XM29s, and XM8s because, you know, super secret black ops teams can get any piece of kit they want, even if it doesn't exist yet. All they have to do is jump in Doc Brown's time machine, travel through time and grab the latest kit, then head back. 1.21 gigawatts! [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:03, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:::I've said it once before, if it's done well, I will absolutely play it. Most people play game as a means of escape, so would it really make a difference if I shot a Nazi with an M16 or an M1 Garand? He's not REALLY dead. He's not even real, and we've contributed nothing to the winning of WWII, or any war. In fact, we've contributed nothing but to our own satisfaction. They're called video GAMES. Playing games is about having fun. I'm sure many if us here loved Nazi Zombies from WaW. Why? Because we love shooting Nazis, and we love shooting zombies, and Treyarch did us a favor by combining the two activities. And we love it even more if we can shoot them with a ray gun that comes out of a magic box. Was it historically accurate? No, but believe me, the history major in me learned to live with it. (Hell, now you've got me all worked up, because as I'm typing this, I can't wait to get the chance to catch Hitler and bin Laden in a meeting and spray the room with a minigun.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:02, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok i get your point, it's a video game, and fun or not it should have realism, i mean c'mon!-[[User:sargeOverkill]]
::::BTW, they already sort of did that with the Time Splitters series. And those games were awesome. (At least 2 and Future Perfect were. I never played 1.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:30, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::I quite frequently have lots and lots and lots and lots of fun playing games, especially shooters, that adhere to reality. The reason I play a Vietnam or WWII shooter is because I want to immerse myself in the environment. That includes having weapons accurate to the period. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::I guess that depends if you consider these games historical or not. I just lump it in with Halo and GoW now, as CoD flew off the historical rails about two or three games ago, straight into "anything goes" territory, which was good from a story telling perspective. Even when it tried to be historical (up to CoD 2) you were still one or two men who personally killed half the German army. That's why I thought releasing WaW on Veterans Day was a backhanded tribute, because nothing honors veterans like a game that allows you to win WWII singlehandedly. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 14:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

==M14==

What with this being a Vietnam War game, I'm gonna be pretty pissed if you can't use a normal M14 rifle, without all the rails and crap.
[[Image:M14Rifle.jpg|thumb|none|500px|I want to use an M14 like this in-game]]

Well, it doesnt look cool enough. Expect it with scope, silencer, thousands of rails and plastic stock. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 18:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

1. They'll Probably put it in.
2. the rails are the modern demands of a soldier including the ability to easily mount optics and other accessories easily. theres nothing wrong with it.

:I'd like a regular wood stocked M14, and if you want optics, they did make a scope riser mount for M14s before rail systems. As for silencers, well that's easy, and heartbeat sensors shouldn't bother to return. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::If they want to be accurate with attachments, then they should have a sniper scope and a suppressor (suppressors were available at that time).

Randy Shughart a delta force sniper never had anything fancy on his. as stated in BlackHawk down he had a vietnam era M14, with a scope. nothing fancy there. besides in vietnam there really wasnt a need for anything fancy. silencer, hell the vietcong already knew they were there because of the helo. Lam- hadn't been invented. and a tac light is slightly useless seeing how they were in a jungle 95% of the time. [[Special:Contributions/71.194.219.9|71.194.219.9]] 01:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

: All of these attachments really ''WONT'' make sence. '''But its Treyarch'''.

== AUG sans grip ==

What the hell is up with the AUG without a foregrip? I don't mind the fact the AUG is anachronistic, but come on...why take off something central to firing the gun. Maybe the gun is semi-automatic in the game, because our character has to plunge his hand into a bucket of ice to stop the burning after each shot.
:Yeah, I don't understand that decision. The only possible explanation I can come up with is that they used the AUG with a grenade launcher as a model, like this one [http://www.steyr-aug.com/240.jpg], and then just deleted the grenade launcher. But this would mean that no one working on the project A) ever saw a movie with an AUG, including [[Die Hard]], which I would think every male between the ages of 21-49 in the english speaking world has seen, or B) could put two and two together and figure out that putting your hand directly on a barrel is not practical. That, or the plot involves that character severely burning his hand. If not, it's an utterly indefensible and boneheaded decision by the Treyarch staff. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 22:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
::And to be absolutely fair, the character is wearing heavy gloves while holding the barrel. But it still doesn't make sense. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:21, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

::What doesn't make sense to me is that they have a military advisor on staff. How come, at no point in the development, did this man point out that holding a gun barrel while firing is a bad idea, and has he not seen an AUG before? - Opening Poster.

::Doesn't the grip fold up?-protoAuthor
:::Yes, but you'd still be able to see it. [http://www.murdoconline.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/NEW-STEYR-AUG-right.jpg]--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:I wrote that without seeing the image. Sorry.-protoAuthor
::::I agree with the grenade launcher theory, especially since multiplayer was done first. Who knows, they might actually change the standard AUG model before the game actually comes out.

The AUG without vertical grip.I think a gun barrel is very hot.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

In third person it's just a character model fail. In first person you grip I guess what you could call the "finger guard."

I've seen pics of the Austrian Army holding their AUGs by the trigger guard like a P90 but not the barrel itself, that's stupid. Plus, who the hell in 1968 would even take a design like the AUG seriously. The M16 was just starting to be taken seriously by military brass around 1968.

......Why the hell wouldn't they take it seriously? You do know that the British had actually adopted a bullpup design in 1951 for a very short time. Search Em-2 Rifle. It even had a built in optical sight on the
carrying handle. We Yanks then bossed everybody into adopting the 7.62 and the EM-2 was abandoned because it was in the .280 round so they went with the FAL which could be much more easily changed to use the 7.62
Actually, the EM-2 would be a better choice for this game or the SA80 prototype that appeared in The Professionals. I am aware of the EM-2.
=== Bullpup guns ===

If they want bulpup gun in game why didnt they coice Em-2 ? Or Famas ? WHY THAT ANACHRONISTIC AUG, damn.
The FAMAS is even more anachronistic than the AUG. The FAMAS was adopted in the early eighties and it used a different type of 5.56 ammo than the NATO standard.

: Yeah. It get into service in eighties. But atleast there '''WERE''' first prototypes in 1968. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 06:04, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

ummm...the prototypes of both the FAMAS and AUG were developed in the seventies. A better choice might be the Stoner 63 which had a history of use by the Navy SEALs and other clandestine units

== OXM article ==

Official XBox Magazine did a feature on Black Ops (July 2010, issue 111,) and I figure I'd share some highlights:

- It was inspired by the book "SOG: The Secret Wars of America's Commandos," by Major John Plaster. [http://www.amazon.com/SOG-Secret-Americas-Commandos-Vietnam/dp/1581606761/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275440842&sr=8-1]

- The SPAS-12 you use during the Tet Offensive uses Dragon's Breath rounds.

- At least from their description, the "WMD" level sound suspiciously like the airfield level in MW2.

- The M202 FLASH is confirmed.

- The M1911s with "Sally" etched on them also have tally marks on them.

- They mention a co-op feature that "appears to be a successor" to zombies, which seems to me would indicate no zombies. Bummer.

- Multiplayer was ready before the campaign, so some of the campaign levels are based on the multiplayer maps.

- Regarding anachronistic guns, "'In this world, anything was possible' for these soldiers, [Treyarch head Mark] Lamia explains. All equipment requests were granted by their superiors. Cost, apparently, was no object."

- And finally, a quote from the military advisor, Lt. Col. Hank Keirsey (ret) (and something I've been trying to point out for a while now) "The Historical Advisor fights to get every last bit of accuracy, but always has to concede to the need for excitement." Keirsey appears to be the military advisor for the whole franchise, not just this game or for Treyarch.

--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

:Money is no object is one thing, but designing a different rifle system like you would design a James Bond car is a different thing. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

: So, basically they said those soldiers can have any gun. Come on, Treyarch ! Give them FN2000´s , Plasma Rifles and Gravity Guns !
No, really. Off course they can have special weapons. But only those which were designated before 1968. Not those which were designated 10 years after.--[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
::Yes, but since everything is secret, how do we know the CIA DIDN'T develop the AUG, or the SPAS-12, and cover it up by giving it to Steyr and Franchi, respectively? How can we be sure we DIDN'T capture any energy-based weapons from crashed UFOs? (Mind you, I don't work for Treyarch or owe them anything, but I have to give them credit for giving themselves such a clever out.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:51, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:::It seems like all these SOG's have custom-made pieces. And since Weaver rails did exist in Vietnam it would have been totally possible to make these weird AR's we keep seeing. Not saying I agree with this decision, but this is probably how Treyarch is getting away with it.

You guys are so wrong, My friend the NAVY SEAL told me something not to tell anyone else but I don't care. They are issued laser rifles just like the ones in Fallout 3 but have a disntegration setting meant for vaporizing. At least thats Treyarches logic. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:Calm down. I don't think any of us know when these weapons were in their first stages of prototypes and what they looked like in the prototype stage. Prototype weapons are definitely a recurring theme in Black Ops. Since these guys are above top-secret they can have experimental weapons that are also above top-secret. In the GKnova6 files, it specifically states the AUG in-game will be a prototype version. I wouldn't be surprised if the SPAS is also experimental and the weird AR is completely custom.
:::Cool

RC planes instead of predator missiles?

== Document from viral site ==

Over at the CoD wiki I found this "document" from an viral site connected to Black Ops: [http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100601175649/callofduty/images/3/3d/Doc10.jpg]. It describes the AUG as "very early prototype weapon; not in production". It also mentions the [[G11]]

and also the delicious China Lake Launcher
-Double Agent M

:It would be better if they included more of these prototype weapons. I would love to see weapons like BRG-15, H&K CAWS, Ster ACR, Colt SCAMP,etc. Even better would be a underwater level with the H&K P11! After all the inclusion of such weapons in the game will be better than the monotonous selection of Cold War-rea weapons like M1911,M21,G3,FN FAL,AK-74,etc.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 09:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

:I'll shit bricks of joy if the G11 is in there. I've wanted that gun in a Call of Duty game for as far as I remember. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

G11 eh?? im guessing its going to turn into the MP40 from WaW except in speed instead of power

== M202 FLASH ==
I made a couple of changes in this section including adding of screencaps. I rechanged it back to FLASH because everything is anachronic in this came and it can't be the more rarer XM191. Plus I added a M202 FLASH image, which is actually from Far Cry Instincts Predeator, since I could not find a single good picture of it in the web.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 15:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
:There's not anachronism, Treyarch keeps saying that all these weapons are prototypes. I'm not sure what people aren't getting about that. I'm pretty sure every weapon we've seen in American hands so far are a prototype of some sort. I think that the FLASH is the prototype version; why can't it be?
::The reference specifically said "M202." We're not going solely by the picture, but by what was actually written by someone who either played it or watched the game be played. And since I doubt the average game journalist is an ordnance expert, he only knew because it was probably labeled "M202" in the game itself. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 23:00, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You know just as well as I do video games often mislabel their guns either by mistake or just to give the public who don't know much about guns an idea of what that gun is instead of confusing them with specifics. I don't argue that it's going to be labeled M202, but I guarantee you Treyarch is intending it to be the prototype XM191.

:: XM191 was M202 prototype, just for your information. --[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
:::Yes, I'm aware of that. But given the shall we say, unique, circumstances of the game, wouldn't it make more sense to go with what the game says, rather than what's historically correct? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes XM191 is a M202 prototype.American send to test during late 1970s in vietnam.And i see a picture of XM191 in vietnam war museum. info from http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl50-e.htm [[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]
Here is what it shoots

[[IMAGE:Treyasuckers.png]]

Wow look like a RPG7 rocket.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

==Not being able to go past vietnam?==

What is this crap I hear about treyarch LEGALLy not being able to go past vietnam in game? A comapny can do whatever the hell they want.

[[User:k9870]]

:I know, I was about to make this same post.-protoAuthor 20:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
::From the article posted above (emphasis mine)
::"-Activision eventually convinced West and Zampella to stay with them by offering up a Memorandum of Understanding. In addition to extending their contracts through to October 2011, this legally-binding document gave West and Zampella some major financial bonuses as well as a couple other hefty promises. Chiefly, it gave the two "creative authority over the development of any games under the Modern Warfare brand (or any Call of Duty game set in the post-Vietnam era, the near future, or the distant future) including complete control over the Infinity Ward studio." '''In other words, Activision could not publish a Modern Warfare-branded game (or a Call of Duty game set any time later than Vietnam) without West and Zampella's full approval."'''
::West and Zampella were the two heads at IW who were fired in April. Now that they're no longer with the company, this might open the door for Treyarch's next CoD game to be Modern Warfare-esque, but there's a lot of litigation right now. The firing was way too late to affect BO, so they operated under the restrictions above. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I am still waiting for a WWI CoD with single- and multiplayer featuring France, the UK, the German Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, Russia, Japan, Italy and the USA. Unfortunately this would be too expensive and only few people would buy it. Thus such a CoD will never be made. Sorry for half offtopic. --[[Special:Contributions/84.181.247.180|84.181.247.180]] 20:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Paul_Baeumer
:I would love to play a CoD WWI game. (CoD: Great War? CoD: Over the Top?) I'd like to see them change it so you can change out your melee weapon, so instead of a knife, you can equip yourself with an e-tool, brass knuckles, or a spiked club. (Sorry to continue the off-topic.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 21:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
::And to stay on topic, how would they define "distant future?" Why not a CoD game set in 2110? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 21:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

== Why did someone add possible weapons? ==

Someone added possible weapon prototypes like the G11 and the Pump 40mm? I am removing them tomarrow if no one says anything about why they should be left on. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 02:22, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

: This document (http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100601175649/callofduty/images/3/3d/Doc10.jpg) from the Black Ops viral site could be the reason --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 03:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

:There aren't possible anymore, it has been '''confirmed''' that they will be in the game, with other sites like Call of Duty wikia including them in their weapons list.

[[Image:DOC10.jpg]] 
--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 04:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

:Yeah, and the Call of Duty wiki is a beacon of truth... [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

The AUG and M202 have see in game trailer.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

== Still a little chance ==

Well, they are gonna include dedicated servers. So they apparently release modtools - So it seems like its gonna be possible change guns models, just like in CoD4. --[[Special:Contributions/88.208.103.46|88.208.103.46]] 09:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

== M16 on magazine cover ==
It should be removed for now, seeing as there's currently no evidence to support its inclusion in the game. IMFDB chronicles weapons appearing in movies, television, and video games, not on magazine covers. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:12, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Game mags are a great source of weapons, thats where half the screenshots we see come from, game informer and the such.
:Screenshots are one thing, but there's no evidence that the image is actually from the game, it might just be an illustration the magazine drew up. I would heap the image of the guy sitting cross-legged with the two .45s in there as well. It wouldn't be the first time that weapons on cover art don't actually appear in the game itself. ([[Medal of Honor: European Assault]] comes to mind.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
:Is it bothering you that much?
::Well, considering the site has rules against printed media, yes it does bug me. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
:90% possibility that's a box-art. Don't be nerdy.

The game sure went into a lot of detail on the 1911 not to use it, and besides, what else would they have, they cant screw up history enough to throw in deegs and berettas.......oh wait, never mind, they can....

vietcong with a spas 12, damn at this rate my dream of marching into the reichstag waist firing an aa12 may come true
:That could be multiplayer screens

== SPAS 12 Folded Stock ==

All i can say is: FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!!!
--[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 15:17, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Its more tacticaler and badassish to keep it folded, only noobs use a stock, not hardcore 1337 operators! (video game maker logic))
[[User:k9870]]

At least thay didn't put a goddamn XM8 in the game, if they do, i'll throw my goddamn PC outta the window, 'nuff said --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 03:04, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:'''nerd'''

At least the developers weren't stupid enough to put a rifle concept weapon into a game that takes place during the cold war. At least we can forgive them with the inaccurate AR-15s. And has any game developer ever fired a shotgun without a stock? It's a pain and you can slap yourself in the face if you don't brace yourself. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:I can only think of two possibilities, 1) you're firing Dragon's Breath rounds with the SPAS-12, and using it as small flamethrower, so you can get away with firing it from the hip, and 2)more importantly, WHEN HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A SPAS-12 FIRED FROM THE SHOULDER WITH THE STOCK EXTENDED? The only time I ever saw it was briefly in [[Jurassic Park]]. Even that famous scene in [[Miami Vice - Season 1#Franchi SPAS-12|Miami Vice]], a show that did guns pretty well, with [[Jim Zubiena]], a professional shooter would presumably knows guns pretty well, had him firing a SPAS-12 from the hip. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q2Il86-38A] Do you think most people even realize that thing on top is a folding stock? Yes, you, me, and everyone who's ever fired a shotgun ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgptDs_Nncw| and now this guy]) knows it's stupid to fire a shotgun without the stock extended. But I don't think the general public knows. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:It's not stupid. You don't really have to aim at point-blank range. I'm curious how aiming down the sights of SPAS with folded stock will work.

I'd love to know the reasoning behind including the SPAS-12 in this game. It didn't exist at the time, and I don't buy the "it's supposed to be a prototype" line. If it's a prototype, why does it look exactly like the production model?(I could make the same argument about the AUG)
Most likely this is Treyarch just being lazy, or including a weapon simply because it has been popular in video games, or both. They could have included an automatic shotgun that really was used in Vietnam, the Remington 7188. It was basically a Remington 1100 with an extended tube magazine, modified to fire full auto. It was used mostly by the Navy SEALS, but I believe SOG made some use of it as well. It's a weapon, as far as I know, that has never been used in a video game. Instead we get the anachronistic SPAS-12 that has appeared in about 5 million games. If anyone is interested in the weapons SOG really did use in Vietnam, get a copy of "SOG: A Photo History of the Secret Wars" by John Plaster. It includes a chapter that specifically covers weapons, and there are ton of great photos. It's expensive, but worth the price.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 02:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:[[Image:MV-FSP-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Ludovici Armstrong ([[Jim Zubiena]]) fires his SPAS-12 at two drug dealers, while posing as a chauffeur.]]

I thought it was supposed to be a homage to 80's action movies. Or at least that's why I'm accepting it, because then I'll feel like I'm in an 80's action movie whenever I play this game. And what would an 80's action movie be without the SPAS-12 or the AUG? [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:22, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== Snake ==
The guy with the AR-15 and the USMC and MACVSOG tattoo the guy looks bad ass, I'm pumped for this dude.

== .357 ==

A .357, in a tunnel? I hope the game makes it so you won't be able to hear anything for a few minutes after you fire it, so you'd have to make the choice between shooting the bad guy or just meleeing him. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 19:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

:Anyone noticed reloading animation ? He just throwed out shells ( ''STILL HOLDING FLASLIGHT IN LEFT HAND - VISIBLE'' ) And then moved .357 out of screen ('' STILL HOLDING FLASLIGHT IN LEFT HAND - VISIBLE'' ) and than returned .357 to screen. Fully loaded. So it means he reloads revolver in few seconds with one hand ? ...... I just hope BF:BC2:VIïetnam will be much better.

== Need the ingame footage please ==

I want to see the footage but i'm to lazy to search for it, linky please.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:19, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
:[suckit.com]

== Grenade Launcher ==

Can anyone identify the grenade launcher used in-game? Here's the link to the video where you can find it. http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2010-call-of/101273 The game labels it "Grenade launcher." It looks like an M203 but that didn't exist in Vietnam...
Also, here's some breaching footage: http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2010-call-of/101260

Yeah they did, they went into service around 1969 I think
:Can't believe I got caught without doing my research. My bad.

== SPAS-12 ==

Anyone noticed (In first gameplay video) that EVEN RUSSIANS are equipped with SPAS-12 ? Can be seen around 2:53 lying on the ground next to russian guy....
:Yeah... This is turning out to be pretty fail...

Guys who cares, achronisms don't kill a game. Does it really matter if the guns are slightly innaccurate, all that matters to me is gamplay, good and fair online and ZOMBIES!!
:Call of Duty has always been accurate in the kinds of guns they present to you in single player, with the exception of Modern Warfare 2. So I think I can speak for many fans of the franchise, it matters to us.

Again..it is a pre-release trailer...game is still 5 months from release...

At least it's European, the Russians in MW2 carried Vectors and TAR-21s. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:24, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== "AR" Sling ==
I'm not one to complain too much about the achronisms, but I do care when things don't make funtional sense, like that the AR's sling, which for some reason is wrapped all around the gun, is stuck UNDER THE BOLT CATCH. It's not like they don't understand it's a funtional part of the gun, cause every AR varient in every COD that's had them has the empty reload where you press the catch... Also I noticed on the non-empty reloads the AR just kinda dips out of the screen and moves a bit then comes back up loaded, you don't see the mag, same goes for the .357; THAT'S lazy... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I liked the AR-15 reload, it looked real. He pressed the mag release, he let the magazine fall to the ground, and he held it there until he put the new mag in. It's alot more realistic as opposed to the MW2 reloads, were you wave your gun around the screen while reloading either to look cool or to makeit obvious that you are, in fact, reloading your weapon. Most of the time though, people don't do that when they reload in real life, unless they're an idiot. The .357 reload was kinda lazy though, but I let it slide because he actually whips the cylinder back in instead of the light tilt that's all it takes to swing the cylinder back in in MW2 and most other video games. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:35, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I love reading these things to see how much constant griping there is..considering the game is still 5 months from release.

[sarcasm] You don't need to reload your guns if you are black ops, just lower them and they will be full again![/sarcasm] seriously thought, this game is REALLY start to be a dissapoint, and it haven't even been released yet --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 22:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I have noticed weapons in game have muzzle jump. MW2 and COD4 had none the guns stayed on target and took no skill to use. In this even the ar-15s rose. I like it.
:It's just cosmetic rise up, the sights will come back right on target after each shot.

Actually WAW some guns would go off target, like an mp40 or DP machine gun. More oticeable at range. Treyarch has recoil effects, which i like.

:It could just be that modern weapons were designed with a better understanding of reducing recoil. Most modern automatic weapons have straight-line stocks, which reduces recoil, as opposed to bent stocks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually look at mw2 ak, fal, m4, whatever, no recoil. WAW, mp40s would be shooting high after half a mag. I like recoil effects means you need more skill to shoot.

== M16 ==
Unknown [[M16]] ( Seems to be A1 ) covered with some kind of cloth or tape appeared in hands of soldier on one of BO´s artworks.

[[Image:M16-SP1.jpg|thumb|none|400px|M16A1 - 5.56x45mm]]
[[Image:BLACKOPSM16.JPG|thumb|none|500px|M16 on cover of French Xbox 360 magazine.]]

I moved it from the main page because like we discussed earlier, it's just a magazine cover with nothing to back it up. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 11:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
: Yeah, that was nice turn. I added it on the page just because it ''HAD SOMETHING TO DO'' with game :) There arent any proofs that M16 will be featured (''unofrtunately'') --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:15, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
::Let's be honest fellas, it's hard to have a game that has much to do with Vietnam without having the old three pronged, triangular handguarded M16. My bet is that it will show up, armed with full auto and 20 round mags. Also, I'm pumped for the G11, that thing is gonna be epicly epic. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:Is it me or is the picture in the magazine a reverse shot? Because I see the forward assist on this A1 as well as the ejection on the right side. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:07, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

== Bad Feeling ==

After realizing all the goofs that are popping up and watching more gameplay footage, I'm getting the feeling I got before Modern Warfare 2 released. Like they're throwing what was once a pretty legitimate game out the window for the coolness effect. And with MW2 that feeling turned out to be correct. Anyone else sensing the same thing?

Yeah, I've got the same bad feeling, except a lot sooner than I got it with MW2, maybe just cause I'm not really expecting much better after the disaster that MW2 was. Oh and COD4 is still fun ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

MW2 sucked..but MW2 was IW..CoD:BO is Treyarch. Are they perfect? No..but now a days they're better than IW.

I must say i really enjoyed MW2, and, in my opinion, Infinity Ward is still better than Treyarch, oh well, games can't please everybody, can they? --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 11:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully multiplayer is a bit different, mw2 multiplayer was old when it started since it was just like cod 4, at least WAW had vehicles.

-k9870

With luck they'll fix the problems '''before''' the game ships this time. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 16:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
:I hope you're right but I doubt it. I've never seen a game change much of anything five months before release.

Everyone here talking shit about IW? You're a bunch of idiots. IW makes far better games. I don't know why you don't like MW2, but it's one of the best of the series so far. This game, on the other hand, looks like it'll be a disaster (as nearly all of Treyarch's iterations are).
:Fuckin right.--[[User:Pølaris|Pølaris]] 03:47, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say I hated MW2. Doesn't stop it being loaded with bugs that make the game seem like it was rushed out to meet the deadline. Now, if you're done fanboying... [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 07:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::I don't think it's entirely fanboyish. I'm pretty sure the general consensus of CoD fans is that IW games are better than Treyarch games. IW started the franchise, and CoD games are the only games they make. Treyarch is just along for the ride. But now that IW has lost almost a third of their employees in the last month, that dynamic may change. I have a lot of hope for BO, and I think it's silly to write it off based on a few trailers and three minutes of gameplay footage. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 12:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::: My point was that MW2 was ruined by Acitvision trying to force IW to meet the due date, meaning they had to ship it with a whole range of bugs. However, some of the above poster's comments do seem to boil down to "It's gonna be shit cos it's not an IW game."[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 07:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I personally think that this game looks awesome, and i dont see what the problem is

IW gets the cred since they made the modern games, which people wanted. WW2 was old that siad Treyarch couldve done just as good making mw1 and 2. They had better fire lighting, recoil effects, etc.

:Bottom line is this. IW failed to have MW2 be better than CoD: 4, and this is why they've been put on hold. Treyarch's WaW was a brilliant game, and I still love to play it to this day. Treyarch has shown more promise then IW lately, and I'm sure they won't disapoint with Black Ops, as they plan to remove and fix all the shit MW2 got wrong. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:: Let's replace your opinion with some fact. MW2 was better than CoD 4 based on the storyline and sales alone, without going into all the new multiplayer features. Was multiplayer a bit buggy? Yeah, for around a month. Treyarch's installments are considered, by those who have played the series, crap in comparison. WaW? That game was garbage. It was basically a recycling of levels from other games in the series that were reskinned. The game was a knockoff of CoD4 that took place in WWII.
:::I'm going to have to call BS on the better storyline in MW2. It's the first CoD game where you get to not only gun down civilians, but also kill American servicemen. That's better? Are you and your buddies playing MW2 in a cave in Kandahar? Big Red One was disappointing, but then again, it wasn't supposed to be a "real" CoD game. CoD3 did suck, I certainly won't argue that. I hated the idea of WaW at first, because WWII was so overdone, but I liked it once I actually played it. (There might be a lesson in there.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Now let's talk about Treyarch. Aside from their lameass 'cash-in' port of CoD4 for the wii (which was garbage), what did they do in the series? Call of Duty 3, Big Red One, World at War, and the current work in progress Black Ops. I don't know if you played any of those, but they were all terrible entries in the series. CoD3 was a gimmick game. 'Oooooh motion control and button mashing'. Big Red One was garbage, and WaW was a hack-job. What does that record suggest their next game will be like?

: Big Red One was awesome, shut up.-protoAuthor 18:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and Treyarch couldn't have made MW1 or 2. They lack originality; every game they released was a knockoff of either IW's designs and ideas or of another developer. The only reason Treyarch is getting to make more CoD's is because IW's execs left because they were being denied their contractually obligated bonuses. --[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 11:33, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
::Your timeline is off. Development of BO started well before the recent upheaval at IW. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

:Also, World at War is a superb game. Sure you have the god like MP40, but that's nowhere near as bad as OMA danger close noob tubes in MW2, and to anybody who's into WWII and it's weapons it's a hell of a game. It's no CoD: 4, but thank fuck it's no MW2. Treyarch shows promise, and if IW was doing Black Ops I would hold no hope at all. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

No offense but what your saying is that WAW was great in comparison. Thats not good logic at all, CoD4 is the best out of the three. No clue on BO but I have a feeling that since they wanted to justify cool guns that are anchoristic with that they are prototypes is just half-assed which may relate to the rest of the game. Also have you seen the reload animations?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
:When WaW was first announced, I was appalled. I couldn't believe they were staying in WWII, even after CoD4 skipped ahead to modern day. Looking back though, the fact that it's a WWII game is the only flaw I can think of. (Although, yes, it's a big one.) It restricted the plot, and WWII has been done to death. It was otherwise a pretty good game. I really liked the co-op campaign missions, the vehicle missions were well done, the voice acting was superb, and Zombies takes the game to a whole new level. Aside from the setting, is CoD4 really that much better? Is it time to give Treyarch the benefit of the doubt? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:48, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

:I agree with all of your points chinaman, and you're right, CoD 4 wasn't really all that better. Besides the modern warfare setting, it lacked many of the cool features and such that WaW introduced, and while everyone including me loves it, it wasn't overly better than WaW. I always applauded Treyarch for making WaW not so noob friendly, something IW did massively with MW2. Now the guys at Arch have been watching people complain everywhere about the shit in MW2, and so they know what to do to fix it. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

== Goofs and screw-ups ==
Alright no offense but SHUT UP!!! You guys are complaining about the anachroistic guns in it but it's supposed to be that way. The freaking name is BLACK-OPS which means no one knows about it. What they are doing are saying what Cpt. Price said: History is full of lies. So, what they're saying is that this is not what they thought really happened but they are using their imagination to come with these historical ideas that fall in to the game. But like I said everything in it is supposed to TOP SECRET, so it's going to be anachroistic. But that's how it's supposed to be. It's TOP SECRET so none of us would even know about it.

and P.S. For all butt-holes who said MW2 sucks, Opinions are like butt-holes every body's got one, and nobody wants to hear the other one. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 12:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

: Yeah. You act like 12-years old. But we all know you are 10 years old.
::For your information I am actually 12.

Look up mw2 bad spawns on youtube and you'll see how its flawed. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 16:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

::I take it that you don't want fans of the COD series to actually question the developers for making questionable (or stupid) weapons choices for the sake of a compelling narrative. Unfortunately, that only works if we didn't have already have lots of knowledge of the 1960s-1970s era of covert operations from the military and numerous books, which only makes the anachronisms more glaring to anyone who isn't 12 years old.Just like movie watchers, people playing games set in a particular historical era have a certain set of expectations of what ought to be present and what shouldn't. To dismiss all those concerns with a "TOP SECRET" excuse is ridiculous, since Call of Duty 1-3 all managed to be interesting without adding things that didn't exist in the same timeframe. Cursing at people because they disagree doesn't make your defence of Treyarch seem anything more than juvenile. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 16:52, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

No, I just wanted everybody to shut up about saying crap about the guns. So they maybe think that a AUG without a foregrip looks stupid, I think it looks cool. The graphics look good and it looks realistic. I am 12 so I don't care about anachrosism, but I know a heck of alot about guns and Call of Duty so yeah, I was a little mad but because alot of you guys are like in your thirties they are targeting this for people in the younger phase and are not expecting people to go Hey! The AR-15 wasn't introduced then and neither was the Grenade Launcher. I don't think Treyarch are expecting a Riot of AUG foregrip lovers to burn down their studio but come on guys, seriously. Do you have to take this that seriously, your calling me juvenile while your sitting in your chair going hey that trigger guard is rounde then it can't be a M9 so it has be a 92SB therefore they lied! I'm going to kill them! etc. etc. so hey try to be a little compassionate and maybe think about going outside your mom's basement. Ha Ha just joking. (not sarcasm) So what i'm saying is can you not be so depndive on every little detail. Would you like to make a Call of Duty game. Just please voice your honest opinions and not go on about gun mixups because it's really not about the guns it's more about the plot and story. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 18:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I think that you people are taking these things too seriously. Since cod 4, these games are like action movies, rather than historical war role-playing type shit. Yes the anachronisms are disappointing, but I'm not really bothered by it and they were done for the sake of making the game cooler (and in my opinion any game set in Vietnam AND including a spas-12 is badass). If you want realism, than check out the new Medal of Honor. If you want Hollywood type action, buy cod games, because thats the direction the franchise is going in, which isnt a bad thing.

:Alright kiddies, let's sit down and have a nice list of what's wrong with Modern Warfare 2.
-One Man Army
-Danger Close M203s
-Commando
-The Spawn system
-Deathstreaks (especially Painkiller)
-Overpowered and unbalanced guns (ACR, FAMAS, UMP)
-Overpriced map packs
-non-dedicated servers, which leads to lag and host migration up you yin yang
-the OMA/Danger Close noob tube combo
-boosters galore
-10 Prestige hack lobbies
-The F2000 is a pile of garbage

So all said and done, that's a pretty big list of whats wrong with the game. You're free to disagree, but let it be known anyone claiming noob tubes are legit will be lynched. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The new Metal of Honor is just trying to cash in on the whole Modern Warfare craze we got going. Modern Warfare is the new WWII game of this generation. And because this IS a site that points out specific weapons, whether or not it should exist in the time period is our jobs on this site. Those of us who do take this site serious has an obligation to point out the holes and inconsistencies. That's what we do here. Call it bitching or whining, but that's what this site is solely for, nitpicking, pointing out obvious holes when we see guns in a movie, game, etc. We're looked up all sorts of history involving the AR-15 and just saying it's "Black ops" doesn't mean they defy the laws of historical consistency. In some of the Indiana Jones movies that takes place before WWII, we do point out MP40s and 98Ks should not exist as a fact. Even black ops of today would use the latest technology, not weapons that haven't been field tested or even made yet. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

: You, Excalibur, look like one of those very few inteligent people in this discussion. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 09:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

:I agree. Also, I've seen Beta footage and Medal of Honor just looks a lot like Bad Company 2. And to be honest, I could care less if the AUG or AR-15 or what have you is an anachronism in this game, as long as we're not talking lasers I'm fine. We're here to point out weapons in film, give pictures and descriptions of them, and talk about them, not bitch that a gun being in a game set 2 days before it was produced makes it a failure [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:: Those guns arent 2 days befor prouction. Its ''8 years''. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 09:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Pointing out achronistic guns is part of what we do here, that said, for me it won't kill the game, unless there's a Modern Warfare 2-like pile of other stuff wrong with it too. Oh and yes the Russians & Vietnamese wouldn't use SPAS-12s but you're forgetting the only guns they've REALLY intended to show off so far are the AUG, SPAS-12, AK-47, M202, Python, and Crossbow, that's only what, six? I think they only picked these few guns to go in the trailers, and then reveal more later, so maybe the guns will be more where they should in the final version... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, God forbid we talk about firearm mistakes in TV/Movies/Video Games on a website DEDICATED TO DISCUSSING FIREARMS IN TV/MOVIES/VIDEOGAMES! I will continue to make comments on what, in my opinion, are idiotic firearm choices for this game. If anyone disagrees, feel free to reply, but don't tell me to shut up. Some of the comments above just prove my theory that weapons, such as the SPAS-12, were simply included because they are popular in video games, with Treyarch using the whole "prototype" B.S. as justification for their presence.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 05:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:Yes, how DARE they try to give players what they want?! You'd think they were in this to make money or something. What a bunch of whores! --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
::Really? So the only way for this game to make money is to include a SPAS-12? Is there that much demand for a SPAS-12 it has to be inluded to make gamers happy? Would the game be a financial failure if it wasn't there, and weapons more appropriate to the time period were included instead?--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 06:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You said it yourself, it's what players want. And like you also said, it's minor. Games are made for the general public, not gun dorks like us. As a gun dork, I'm a bit bothered, but as a gamer, I'm thrilled that I can light people on fire with a shotgun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 09:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC) (gun dork and gamer)
:::: Does the success of the game depend that much on specific weapons that appear in it? You said yourself that as long as a game is fun, accurate/inaccurate depictions of weapons doesn't matter that much. If that's the case, weapons more correct to the time period can be included, and the game will still be a success ''as long as it's fun''. And I highly doubt Treyarch polled gamers and asked them what weapons they wanted to see in Black Ops. I think they were just acting on their ''perception'' of what weapons are popular in video games. So I don't know if I can say this is a case of "what players want", more a case of Treyarch saying "we think we know what players want". This is just a theory I came up with as to why certain weapons were included, I don't have any idea if it's true(although some comments from other posts seem to confirm it). For all I know, Treyarch is just being lazy and it's easier for them to include the well known weapons rather than do real research. At any rate, I can't see the inclusion/exclusion of specific weapons making or breaking a game.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 01:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::"At any rate, I can't see the inclusion/exclusion of specific weapons making or breaking a game." My thoughts exactly. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You know, those that find it stupid that we are pointing out the anachronisms in this game should really just go to the treyarch forums, not post on a website dedicated to firearm identification. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:32, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:Ok, if those anachronistic weapons supposed to be '''early''' prototypes then they at least could make it look '''different''' from production models! That would be much more believable. Tryesuckarch is just being f-ing lazy. I don't mind flat-top AR, but they could make it not look like a modern one. And also if there is no simple M16A1 then it's a total fck-up in the Vietnam themed game.
::If they made it look different5 from the final gun, you guys would be even more pissed! You'd be like "How can they call that a M16A1! Look at it it looks nothing like the original!" Plus. how could Treynot-suckarch know what they would like? You guys wouldn't be pissed if this was a modern warfare game. In fact I bet that Treyarch probably wanted to do that but they couldn't(breathes deeply)you know what this is my last comment. I'm done arguing with all the stupid people on this site. If you have anything else to say you can take it up with me on my talk page. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 13:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You don't know what you're talking about. Photos or drawings of the prototypes can easily be found on the internet. A drawing of the AUG prototype is on the World Guns page, and the prototype SPAS-12(along with a photo of the SPAS-11) is shown on the SPAS-12 webpage: [http://spas12.com/spas12not.htm] And if Treyarch clearly states a weapon is supposed to represent a prototype and it actually looks like the prototype, no one is going to complain.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 00:09, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

:Are these mistakes any worse than some of MW2s fuck ups? Like the L86 with a made up drum magazine and iron sights that wouldn't be usable as it has a straight stock, the AUG cosmetically having a 30 round mag when it says 42? The MP5K having a rail system only seen on an airsoft gun in real life and so on. Let's remember Black Ops isn't set only in 1968, and so they have a bit of play when it comes to weapons. The M16 is confirmed (I have a friend doing beta testing) and is Vietnam styled. Now if anyone wants to instantly write off the game because it has a few anachronisms and shit in it, then your missing the point. So what if your using an AUG in 1968? It's not like lasers in WWI, and it's still fun to do. Don't focus on the hate, try and just enjoy it for what it is, a video game. If you want reality, go join the army and head off to Iraq or something, cause in video game land, reality will be broken. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]
:So you're trying to justify Treyarch fuckups comparing it to MW2? Fuckup is fuckup

One, I tottaly agree. Two, did your friend say if there is an M14?

:Yes, the M14 should be in there. Also, I hardly see mild anachronisms as "fuck ups" in a game that pretty much goes on alternate reality anyways. Treyarch has created a game all about the operations we don't know about, the cover ups, and the spec ops weaponry we don't see for years, so having an AUG earlier then it's commercial release can be forgiven. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]\

::Treyarch has the right to depict an alternate Cold War for all they desire, but as long as they try to play it off as the historical "truth" that no one knows about while maintaining all sorts of obvious (and IMO not minor at all) anachronisms, they are only leaving themselves open to criticism. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 23:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

:They aren't trying to play it off as historical truth, they're trying to go with an alternate truth, which makes perfect sense. Also, if I hear another person commenting on how rails are anachronistic, I'm going to snap. It's fucking rails on a gun in a video game, get over it. Black Ops will be an awesome game, and despite these possible anachronisms, I'll be gladly killing Russians in 1968 with my AUG thank you [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

I don't think I'm going to get this game. I'm getting a vibe that it's filled with silly crap much like Modern Warfail 2. I'll be playing the next Medal of Honor instead. -Frank T

:Medal of Honor looks like Bad Company 2 with Taliban, so that's the game I won't be getting. Treyarch impressed me with World at War, and they're aiming to please this time, removing and modifying all the bullshit Modern Warfare 2 bestowed on us. From deathstreaks to Commando, they're out to fix it all! [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

I never really got that mindset "It's BFBC2 but slightly different so I'm not getting it". Well, if you don't like Bad Company 2 to begin with that's fine, but there's more of a difference between Bad Company 2 and Medal Of Honor than between COD4 and World At War, most of the difference was the setting so it seemed like a bigger difference, but the core gameplay was very close, and they were made by two DIFFERENT companys while BFBC2 and MOH are made by the SAME ONE. I'm not saying anything bad about them, I like the first three and the MOH Beta. And yes, Modern Warfare 2 failed in two ways: First, it was WAY too noob-friendly, like, before it came out I would've never thought it possible for a game to be that noob-friendly, and second, it traded realism for coolness in pretty much every way, while COD4, the game they'd JUST MADE, had a believable story, weapons that were almost perfect in terms of appearance and who used them, and the only real nooby stratagy was the M16 Red Dot, but oh well, there was almost only that one. I know Treyarch has said they're trying to get rid of the cheap MW2 stuff, and that's good, but I'm really not liking the direction this is going, picking the guns because they're cool and not because they make sense, even a little bit, the exploding crossbow bolts, how almost every weapon we've identified so far is either achronistic or has something wrong with it (go look), the Hind A with tandam seating, and when you get in you go through the long cool animation of getting in and starting up, but then it takes off in 2 seconds flat, and the lazy, lazy reloads... I'm not saying it's going to suck, I'm saying my hopes aren't high, sure it'll be better than MW2, but that's not saying much. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:36, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

:Arguably Black Ops has issues, but don't forget that E3 footage comes months before the final product. So what if the Hind has tandem seating, does that make it any less cool to blast VC with it? So what if the reload isn't uber detailed, does that detract from you shooting people? So what if there's minor anachronisms, isn't this both a video game and an alternate reality? I'll agree the crossbow is kind of odd, but this game should be nowhere near as noob friendly as the god awful MW2. Modern Warfare 2 was built on the idea of helping bad players, but it only resulted in much rage for good players such as myself. Call of Duty 4 was made to break the mold on FPs games of the time, and it did and still does kick ass. MW2 was built to top it, and instead of that, they gave us an over dramatic, noob friendly game that overall makes me just want to buy a copy of CoD 4 again. And on MOH, I've seen some footage, and now I actually like it, sure it looks BC2 like, but thats no biggy, and overall that looks ready to rock too! [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Okay, sorry, that came off as too bad against Black Ops, I know it's months away from coming out and no, the Hind's seating isn't really a problem, I was just pointing out that it was wrong, same with a lot of the stuff we've seen so far. My point was there's a lot of incorrect things in the game, not neccecarily game-breaking, just pointing out that COD4 and WAW were better in that regard, though so far the game overall looks pretty good :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:29, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

:To be really honest, it won't matter if there's minor issues and anachronisms, cause as long as Black Ops isn't as noob friendly and shitty as MW2, I'll be fine and dandy [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Exactly, but we still do need to point them out though. ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 08:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I dont see MW2 as "noob friendly", just as balanced. It tried too hard to make no gun any better than another. It also felt like cod4, like the core gameplay mechanics were all old when you started playing.

-k9870

:Face it dude, MW2 basically reeks of noob friendliness. You have deathstreaks, solely designed to help shitty players, noob tubes which when coupled with OMA and danger close are the noobs cannon of choice. You have the ACR and FAMAS, both of which are overpowered, then you get stuff like the UMP which at close range does more damage then an M4 Carbine. Not to mentionthe marathon lightweight commando set up used by knife fags so they can knife you from 12 feet away. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

And the overpowered Harriers, that killed everyone all the time and you could have 2 up at once, and they always beat the helos in fights, and Chopper Gunner, and Tactical Insertions, allowing people to boost really easily for the Nuke, that ended the game, and Slight Of Hand Pro that let everyone quickscope, yeah the list keeps going... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I always find a stinger to be good against harriers and because you can have 2 on you, most of the time, you can take even 2 of them out. Not Gunner choppers are a pain to take down [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 20:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

:Chopper gunners are a pain, AC-130s are worse. Not only can they not be hit by bullets or tubes or anything of that sort, but they have TWO sets of flares that can deploy without any delay. Tact inserts mixed with cold blooded and good old FFA is great for boosting, luckily now Sandy Ravage deals some booster justice (hell, even I serve justice to them now). Either way though, MW2 was clearly IW's attempt to top CoD: 4, which was a game built to revolutionize FPS games. MW2 was built to be playable by even the noobiest kids, over the top, reference movies every two seconds, and overall be a fairly shitty game. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The problem with the Harriers is they're way too good... unless you just pull out a stinger and then they're dead, which is a little too extreme both ways. The reason the helicopter was so much better in COD4 was because there were no guided rockets, you couldn't shoot the rotor (so you couldn't just hipfire the thing to death), and UAV Jammer didn't help you against it, it killed you anyway, not to mention it never seems to manage to hit you in MW2. What I hate is hearing "Helicopter Inbound", then seeing it shot down in literally 5 seconds... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:05, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Death streaks were only like 10 seconds long and didnt bother me, no guns were eoverpowered, there all balanced, too much if you ask me. C130s were easy to hide from and rare to see and i downed tons of harries with stingers. The noob tube didnt bother me, i used a m16 with m203 and iron sights as my primary weapon. Knife noobs are easy to shoot The problem was cheap tactics, like camping spawn points and getting your friends to camp with you in free for all so you could stab them and boost your way to a nuke.

-k9870

The only streak thats ten seconds long is painkiller, and it still sucks. The ACR has no recoil and can outshoot sniper rifles, so can the FAMAS. AC-130s are easy to hide from on SOME maps, but if you get spawn trapped outside, your screwed. The fact you use a noob tube on your primary gun choice sickens me, because ANYONE who uses them, unless to get the shotgun unlocked or in a tactical, non spam way is a complete noob and should be banned for using such a cheap weapon. Knife noobs are easy to shoot at times, but if they get within ten feet, commando is your demise. MW2 is a shit game, end of story, Black Ops is doing everything to solve the problems it caused, amen. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The m203 is useful to launch through windows and take out campers, and i use iron sights so might as well have an attachment. I dont use the m203 as my primary, but have it on my primary. And the ACR has low power at range taking on snipers. I countersniper with my m16 though, love irons, they have no sway like a scope. I hate snipers the most, there like socially acceptable campers. Its funny to lay out some noob who tries to quickscope though. It seems like no matter what you get called a noob though, m4 noob, noob tuber, shotgun noob, dual wield noob, knife noob....it seems everyoned thinks if yo dont use whaty they do your a noob, and c-130s dont bother me, there rare, people need 13 kills to get them. I hated when i tried to play free for all with some friends in a party and people are just boosting to nukes each round and cheating there asses off

[[user:k9870]]

agreed. it is always considered noobing. Snipers are annoying. it takes no skill at all to snipe. however there are worse things in MW2 then Snipers. for example- the people who camp in buildings like Wasteland or Scrapyard. "noob tubers" really arent annoying at all anyway. aggravating maybe, but if someone hits you with a M203 its your fault anyway. you should have been more alert. [[Special:Contributions/71.194.219.9|71.194.219.9]] 22:48, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

People always camped hallways and alleys and just shot anyone coming around the corner. Easy to just poke in and launch 40 mil at them. Besides, the thing has an aring distance, you need to arc it at range and reload was slow. Balanced.\

-k9870

:Face it, the M203 is a noob piece of shit. the combo of an M203 with Danger Close and OMA makes you a mini artillery battery. Also, how are you supposed to dodge a tube when people are shooting them cross map to your spawn? Nothing says pro like getting hit by a 40mm grenade shot hundreds of feet over buildings into your face. The M203 has no place in MW2, and I'd be one to have it removed. If retards can't use guns well, don't give them bullshit to help them, let them suck and they'll quit the game. When I pull my FAL out, I feel like a pro, knowing everyone else has the overpowered ACR and FAMAS and the tubes out, all ready to be scrubs, while I'm using something that's balanced and yet awesome. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Well said, though I wish the G3 was still in, and the fact that the ACR does a little less damage, like 1 bullet, maybe two different, makes no difference when there's absolutly no recoil, they still can't do anything by the time you kill them across the map from one huge sustained burst... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:37, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Are you all playing hardcore or something? And i have no people launching 203s around problem, you only get 2. And i could care less about harriers and 130s, you need a lot of kills to get them. There is a call of duty cultuure to nae some guns as oaky and some as cheap. I dont give a shit personally though. i just play. No matter what somebody will bitch about your gear.

I remember back when everyone hated p90s, that thing had no range or power and overall sucked.

You only get two M203s if your not using scavenger or the more common One Man Army. I literally see two or three people on my team per game using that stupid backpack, it's complete bullshit. The ACR may not do high damage, but it's high rate of fire and zero recoil means you can full auto the damn thing at any range. I think retards who dare to say the noob tube is a legit way to play should be banned from PSN or XBL and never allowed on any Call of Duty again. It's called a first person shooter, not first person grenade launchers. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
:I wasn't aware that we can't SHOOT grenade launchers. I better go tell the guys at Activision/IW/Treyarch. -Chris_Hun7er 02:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

The problem is more that games are good and balenced when everything has a place, if people start using snipers at close range and beating shotguns (that's more of a Halo thing, but the snipers quickscope and the shotguns are rather terrible), or shooting 40mm rounds at any range for any reason, it's dumb. The launchers in BFBC2 are well balenced, because they have a purpose and they fill it, and nothing else. The assault rifles in MW2 have a purpose, fill it, and then beat SMGs and shotguns at close range, and half the time snipers at long range. And the Javelin, not that I see it too much, is good against tanks, except, there aren't any, there's infantry and helicopters. A game works when things have a purpose and fill that purpose, but not anything else's purpose, and that's half of what's screwed up in MW2. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:36, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

:Excactly Alex. Bad company 2 had 40mms that had to virtually land on the person to kill them, but with Danger Close an MW2 noob tube will kill people even if they're up to fifteen feet away from the landing. To be honest, I think noob tubes should just be plain removed from Black Ops, and the tube fanboys can suck it while us normal players use our guns. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
:Reality is fanboy the US 40mm rounds have a 5 meter kill radius. meaning that if you are 15 feet away from the blast you are dead as a doornail. the 40mm grenades in bad company are more useful as doorway makers and cover destroyers than as proper suport weapons. what is pissing off alot of us who care about little things called historic accuracy is the fact that even though they say that everyone had to read about MACV:SOG they have gotten few details right. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 18:44, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

It's true that the 40mm is not terribly powerful in BC2, but explosives need to be less powerful in games than they would in real life, imagine Claymores with realistic spread, damage, and range, without those stupid little lasers, and without bomb squad. Or frag grenades, they're overspammed as it is. Doing something like that is less realistic, but needed for the game to work. Having something like and AUG in 1968, or a SPAS-12 used by Vietcong around the same time... not so much. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

:I agree Alex, because Claymores are really designed to take out a huge radius of enemies, it could easily wipe out an eight man squad. and a frag in a 10 by 10 room would really kill everything inside. If they went for realism, all the 5.56 assault rifles in MW2 would have the same damage and virtually the same recoil, but for balance the TAR is portrayed as extremely powerful, and the ACR weak. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Yeah, it just bothered me that they were THAT different, they could have chosen different weapons if they wanted to balence them like that or something, the part that bugs me the most is that COD4 was better balenced AND made more sense, it's just such a step back... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

== Linked to World at War ==

It has been conformed that Reznov from World at War will appear in this game and even make comments about Dimitri Petrenko. This was seen on the Call of Duty Wiki

:Yes, as Reznov is more or less confirmed to be the bearded man you meet and then split from in the tunnel rat scene at E3. I'm happy to see him back, as he made World at War even better for me, maybe now he'll continuously yell "Fire the Javelin!" [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::"now he'll continuously yell "Fire the Javelin!"" What's a Javelin doing in the cold war? Oh wait I forgot, it must be a secret prototype no one knew about.

:Alright, I was thinking in an MW2 state of mind, lemme see. I know, how about him always yelling "FIRE THE LAW" in your ear every two seconds when something as small as a jeep shows up
[[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Any links to zombies?

== Has it occured to anyone that the AR-15 variant is probably custom made? ==

Treyarch has said that these guys could have guns custom built just for them, which I feel explains things much more adequately than just saying that they're prototypes of future (to them) guns. My theory is that he had a CAR-15 custom made with a flat-top reciever for tactical reasons. Maybe this caught on with the rest of the team, and whatever manufacturer they got to make these guns for them sold the idea later on. Of course this is just an excuse for the guns having the rails just to free it up for attacthments in Multiplayer, but at least there is some kind of excuse. Unfortunately this theory doesn't cover the anachronistic appearances of the SPAS-12 and the AUG, but hey, no game ever get's all of it's guns 100% correct. 

Edit: Actually it just might explain the AUG, because all it really is is a combination of ideas taken from the Enfield EM-2, 
Korobov TKB-022, and several other abandoned designs from before or shortly after World War 2. The only thing it doesn't explain is why it has the production-style built in telescopic sight, instead of the original prototypes open sights:
[[http://world.guns.ru/assault/aug_pr1.gif]]

== For those of you who may be confused about the supposed MP5/UMP hybrid ==

This is what I'm talkin about: 

[[Image:CODBO-SMG.jpg]] 

As you can see, it appears that it has the reciever and magazine housing of an MP5 or MP5K, while the barrel housing (correct me if I'm incorrect in calling it that) looks like that of a somewhat shortened UMP. If you look closely, you will note that it has the MP5Ks finger guard (I'm guessing that's what that is) directly below the muzzle that looks like a cut down version of the full handguard found in this picture: 

[[Image:MP5Kprototype.JPG]] 

My point is I don't think it's a hybrid at all, merely an MP5K missing it's forward vertical grip, for some reason or another. And seeing as every other aspect of the gun is that of an MP5Ks, I think it's safe to say that's what it is, so I'm gonna change it to that on the front page. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 16:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== G11 ==

Anyone else as excited as I am for the inclusion of the G11? [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 19:16, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
:Just another anachronistic gun. Thats all. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 04:49, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I sure as heck am. --[[User:AK-74Fan|AK-74Fanc]] 23:18, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Eh the gun itself isn't that big of a deal to me, but I definitely am excited to see something that to my knowledge hasn't been in an FPS before. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 23:29, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
: Well, it have appeared already in few other FPS games. For example [[Delta Force: Land Warrior]], [[Global Operations]], [[IGI 2: Covert Strike]] or Code of Honor: The French Foreign Legion --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 04:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
::Those games are not up to the modern standard, though. ;) [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 12:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

:Really, you could say this is the G11s first appearance in a well known game, and will finally show it off to the masses. I love the weapon itself, and to see it finally make a big appearance like this makes me quite happy.[[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

== XM214 Microgun ==

Since it's going to cover the Vietnam era, and the way these types of games like to go over the top, do you think there's a chance that the XM214 Microgun is going to make an appearance? I know it was only a prototype, and was it was made in the 70's, but I thought I read somewhere that the SF guys tried it out only to find that it was not feasable having a gun fire at 4,000 rpm.--[[User:Gunkatas|Gunkatas]] 03:14, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

:I think putting a Minigun in the game would be kind of stupid. I mean sure they could make it heavy and awkward to carry, but that thing would simply decimate anyone in it's path, whether they're behind light cover, in a vehicle or just in the open. I'd love one, but methinks not. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

== A more plausable fictional AR-15 ==

I can understand a frankengun, like some special forces guy back then would take several kinds of AR-15 designs and mash them together until he gets an awesome gun that works. And being special forces, they can get whatever they want to suit their mission, so it would make sense for whatever they take to not be standard issue or that it is known, but I don't like the flip up iron sights since I don't know when flip up irons came about or the flat top receiver. It's like they just took a Colt Model 933 and replaced the stock with an old style stock from the CAR-15. I mean, put a telescoptic stock on an M16A1 rifle, or A2 upper reliever on the Car-15 and swap out the pistol grip or something. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 22:16, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

:That would make sense considering the special forces style of the game. Also, Sonny (from Deadliest warrior and such) was on as an advisor for Spetsnaz and tactics, so look for both some epic Spetsnaz moves and even a character of him in game! [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Do we even officially know yet what model AR-15 it is, aside of course from the flattop reciever and flip-up sights? [[Special:Contributions/67.187.27.89|67.187.27.89]] 02:31, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

It pretty much is a Colt Model 933 without a brass deflector or forward assist, which actual does not exist. I have not seen a flat top reciever without the forward assist and the brass deflector. I don't even think flip up irons were invented back then. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:58, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

I mean if they threw in a CAR-15 tricked out like the ones seen in Black Hawk Down, I'd have no complaints [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:04, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

== New weapons! ==

Here's [[http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/File:GunWall.png]] a pic of a bunch of airsoft guns Treyarch has on a wall in their studio which pretty much confirms that they'll be in the game. 
From left to right, starting at the top: 
-M16A2 (?) 
-MAC-10 w/ supressor 
-AUG 
-Mini-Uzi 
-L85 
-Scorpion SA Vz 61 
-AKs-74u 
-Another Skorpion 
-SPAS-12 
-MP5 (?) 

Not sure exactly what the MP5 is doing as there already is the K variant prototype, and no idea what the HELL the M16A2 is doing there as there's already an M16A1 AND a CAR-15. What do you all think?
Sorry it's a bit blurry.

It could be a very blurry M16A1 or maybe because they somehow can bullshit their way into saying they got a prototype M16A2. And I prefer us to use the full size MP5 again. Looks like they got an L85 here. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:59, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Call of Duty: Black Ops

2010-07-21T03:13:30Z

Hughjefender: /* AUG sans grip */

This game has a cold war look to it

==zombie mode==

will they have it? It is treyarch, but i havent heard anything solid yet.
:The article that I read (and summarized below) seemed to indicate that they had something other than zombies. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:22, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully not copying spec ops.....

Maybe it's aliens.

==add m16 to page==

It was delted since there was no in game footage, but then there is a m16 slung to the main guy's back on the cover. i say add it. I know theres no in ge screenshot yet, but look, theres no in game shots of 1911s either.

Buddy, that stuff has been added already-[[User:SargeOverkill]]

m16 has been removed, only "ar-15 carbine" is there.

==='''M16 is in.'''===

I am not sure which version is that, but i added it as A1.

It have been confirmed in '''Call of Duty:Black ops INSIGHT''' trailer.

Oh crap, they mentioned Sonny Puzikas, I remember that name from the spetsnaz episode of Deadliest Warrior.

==Weapons that would make sense==
M72, M60, M14, Stoner 63, M40A1, M16A1, MAC-10, Remington 1100, Smith & Wesson M76, Browning Hi-Power, Hawk MM1, Smith & Wesson 39

AK-47, AK-74, Mosin-Nagant, PM Makarov, Steckin APS, SKS, Dragnnov, PKM

-Add any other weapons that would make sense
:M3A1 "Grease Gun"/Suppressed M3A1, Carl Gustav M/45/Suppressed M/45, suppressed Uzi, CAR-15 w/CGL or M203, Ithaca 37, Remington 870, Remington 7188 Automatic Shotgun, SOG modified RPD, M-60 "Death Machine"(M-60 w/ cut down barrel and ammo pack), HK-33(Harrington and Richardson T223).
:RPD, MAT-49/suppressed MAT-49--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 13:08, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Dirty Harry's Smith & Wesson Model 29 and Tony Montana's "Little Friend"
:What the hell do you have with those movie guns ? Why should they be in ?

It would be amazing to see Sa. Vz. 58 there. It was frequently used by vietcong fighters as USSR´s help.

''''''Some good proofs''' :'''

http://nam64-75.hill.cz/download/file.php?id=691&sid=c3ccbd4348543db02c420df186cb428c ('' '''NVA training''''' )

http://www.quansuvn.net/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=41.0;attach=4972;image

http://nam64-75.hill.cz/download/file.php?id=1169 ('' '''SSG Patrick Tadina with his Vz. 58''''' )

http://www.psywarrior.com/rewardforguns.gif ( '''''Vietcong fighters firearms info poster, left side, third from down''''' )

http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/1164/biethaisamopal9wq.jpg ( '''''Captured Vz. 58 on left''''' )

http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff164/joshuadowdle/Dad.jpg ( '''''In hands of SSG Patrick Tadina''''' )

''SSG Patrick Tadina - Legendary, five-tour Vietnam ranger. He is in rangers´s hall of fame.''

==Should be==
There should be M72 LAWs, M60s and M14s. cause this is Vietnam baby!

Nah. They just arent cool enough for Treyarch. And if they will add those weapons - They will all have RIS rails, scopes, lasers, GL attachemnts, silencers.... --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 11:16, 15 June 2010 (UTC)No need for your cheap sarcasm here. This game doesn't seems to pursue that Nam atmosphere with rocknroll, massive chopper assaults, jungle patrols and "smell of napalm in the morning"

I'm sure you will also be able to pick up laser weapons and crap like that. [[User:SargeOverkill]]

==E3==

Added E3 screens - .357 Python and AR15 .

== Not an AK-47 ==
Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that the mag isn't curved enough to be a 7.62x39 mag? It could be a -74 prototype, without the flash hider. Given the time frame, this may make sense.

Thanks for that, I also didn't note it before. It looks to be a WASR-2/3.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 16:19, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

:This game seems to have a lot of rendering issues when it comes to the guns [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:40, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
OMG it is damn videogame for god's sake, the guns aren't real and are nothing more than 3d drawings -of course they aren't going to be exactly like such and such gun. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 17:08, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

'''3D drawning''' ? Hell, that would be interesting. And GTFO, this is '''firearms site''' and ''YES'', we care about reality. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 17:44, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

:Thanks for pointing that out. We are a gun site and we pay attention to details. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:24, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Well guess what, THESE ARENT GUNS!!! They aren't effing real they are nothing more than 3d models that someone threw together in 3DS MAX or whatever the hell they use so of course its not going to be up to every detail, That's why I don't do VG pages anymore--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 19:47, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

::You appear to have missed the point of this website...

AsAstra, the point that I don't think you're understanding, is that even if they're merely three dimensional renderings of the guns, and not the guns themselves, we should try to be as correct as possible. If something says that it's an Ak-74, but actually looks more like a different gun, we should call it the different gun, so as not to confuse anyone new to the site. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 15:53, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

On the topic of the AK, knowing video game developers the AK being used by the Vietcong will most likely be the same one in those snow picks. I don't think we can call it a 47 right of the bat.[[User:ShaDow XPS|ShaDow XPS]]

== Degtyarov ==
It just cant be DPM. Lok - It totally doesnt have ironsights - And MAG isnt on top. + Its very unlikely some guy will cary Spas12 and Degtyarev. I just think its some AK type - Or it may be some different gun, but it isnt Degtyarev.
You may keep it there, but it will be false information.

==ummmm==
This page really needs a cleanup or a deletion.
There is also too much informal talk on the page itself, infact all of it is. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 04:47, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

===Moved from main page--[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 04:49, 2 May 2010 (UTC)===
== AR-10 ==

Another unknown M16 family gun. But this one seems more like [[Armalite AR-10]] A4

[[Image:AR10-4.jpg|thumb|none|400px|Armalite AR-10 A4 7.62x51mm.]]
[[Image:AR10.JPG|thumb|none|400px|M16 Family unknown gun as appeared in Black Ops teaser.]]

:The magazine seems too long to be an AR-10

Also the AR10 is a civilian gun right? So why would special forces like that guy above be holding it? I personally think its an M16(either A1 or A2) with a scope attached to its carrying handle/iron sight.

:It's a strange AR-15 Carbine with a flat top [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

AR-10 is not necessarily civilian. It is entirely possible that SOF would use one.

I think is not AR10.AR10 use .308 or 7.62x51mm round and the magazine large and short than AR15.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

: Its uselles to keep AR-10 discussion here. We all know its that ankward AR-15 or XM177 or whatever.

== Un-identified guns ==

[[Image:MP5G3.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''1''' : Possibly [[MP5]] or [[G3]].]]
[[Image:UNKNOWNLOL.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''2''' : I totally dont know.But it may be some russian one.]]
It seems to look like a [[MAC-10]] or an [[Uzi]] with the stock extended-[[User:SargeOverkill]]
[[Image:UNKNOWN THE MOST.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''4''' : Its hard to tell which gun this one is, but it looks like [[Beretta AR-70/223]] or Daewoo K2. I think that this gun could be any gun I see and AK there but it could be a siper rifle for all we know]]
As to the first unknown gun, it's too short to be a G3, so I believe it's an MP5. [[User:Acora|Acora]] 01:50, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

== RPK ==

From the looks of it, it might be an RPK-74. Note the 45-round banana mag and the flash suppressor.

The "RPK" and the "Valmet" are the same guns - look carefully at the screenshot. Given that the 7.62mm AK-47 appears in game and the timeline, I'm gonna say that it's not an RPK-74, but a 7.62x39mm RPK or one made to look like a Valmet for some reason. Maybe Treyarch modelers are using 80's action movies as a reference for their RPK model. *shakes head*

No. Look on that "RPK" an you will see typical RPK stock. Look on "Valmet" and you will see it doesnt look like Valmet :)--[[User:Werc|Werc]] 03:53, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Look at the front of the Valmet trigger guard. Now look at that same exact place on the "Valmet" in the game picture. Different. There is no Valmet, it's an RPK.

Moved "Unknown LMG" stuff to the RPK-74 section. Whoever posted those images under there originally failed to notice the way the RPK-74 front sight is canted compared to the Valmet. --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 14:18, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

==M1911==

In the title screen there is a soldier holding a 1911 i believe it also says something on the side.

It says "Sally" on the slide.

The 1911 looks more like the first and not the A1, look at the ejection port.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:17, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Here's to hoping it's 1911s will be in the arsenal in multi-player, and not the tease in MW2 --[[Special:Contributions/67.181.114.114|67.181.114.114]] 07:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)JanG

== Wait... ==
Upcoming CoD,what what what?!
--[[Special:Contributions/76.235.34.31|76.235.34.31]] 02:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

== good decision ==

As well as Weapon customization there will also be a character customization feature.
- That game is gonna be just awesome. Character customization ? Damn, just in R6:V style (ha-ha)

* Custom characters? hell yeah --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 00:38, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
i agree with that customization policy, i liked how in R6V2 they did that, and i can only hope they bring back CoD4s M4A1 Grenadier back, and i also completely agree with the historic battle/ war thing as compared to a (***Spoiler) nuclear warfare and a domestic terrorist plot, i would much rather see Black Hawk Down pop up in a newer game as opposed to Vietnam, but i would settle for a Operation Acid Gambit type game also.

Customizable characters in a game where... you can't actually ''see'' the character? FAIL.
* Customizable characters in game where will be 3rd person mode, and where other players can see it ? Your post '''fail'''.
:When did Black Ops become third person? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

It isn't. He's saying that other characters will see your 3rd person form. Also, it's noteworthy that MW2 DID have third person mode.
:So then I've gotta agree. Character customization in a game where you can't actually see your guy seems like a fail to me, too. It's not like anybody in MP is really gonna stop shooting at you to say "hey, cool guy, what kind of vest is that?" And how do I activate this third person mode in MW2? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:50, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

:: Well, i dont know. But what about trying "3RD PERSON" in "Play" screen ?

I think it's hilarious how people are whinig about the customization... Go play R6. Custom characters work in FPS games.
:Yeah, i bought R6:V2 not so long ago and its amazing. I think that game has best character customization ever. Its only pity you cant do anything with your teammates.
:R6V also has a cover system where you can actually ''see'' the guy/girl you're playing as, a third person mode cheat, and player characters who actually have voices and speak rather than being mutes with no form of personality whatsoever, none of which Black Ops has. I simply think character customization is unnecessary. That's not whining, it's called ''having an opinion". [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 06:09, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

How does the post fail it was an update its not like i'm wrong. its not like i said there would be some sort of Grizzly Bear cannon. it was a NEWS UPDATE!!! THINK next time a stupid comment is thought by yourself.
Also heres the ANSWER the other players can see you just like AVP. so thats how customization comes in handy. [[user:moviemaster1993|moviemaster1993]]
:First off, I never said ''your post'' failed. That was ''your'' response to ''me'', smart ass. I was commenting on a feature of the game I think is unnecessary, something I'm fully allowed to do. You aren't the lord of opinions around here. Second, comparing Rainbow Six to Call of Duty is about as much of a failure as one can accomplish. Lastly, who the hell cares if another player can see you? I wouldn't be customizing my character for other people, just like other people aren't going to be customizing their characters for me. It's not like everybody's gonna stop shooting and comment on every other player's individual character, is it? The only stupid comments on here are coming from ''you''. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:30, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

== MP5k ==

You think they're putting that in there to copy MW2?
:No I think they're doing it to fulfill their MP5 quota. MW2 wasn't the first game to feature the MP5K, broski.-protoAuthor 00:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't know about that. They also have an AUG in the game and a SPAS-12. Not a coincidence that MW2 also has these. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:19, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

- Heh. Spas and AUG were in tons of other games. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 05:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

But THIS game is directly part of the COD franchise. It's a bit repetitive to show guns that has been in previous games. Well ok WWII games don't count because they cant help having the same guns, but this is supposed to be Treyarch's turn at making a new game, but so far, none of the weapons are new. What about instead of the SPAS-12, we get an 870, or instead of the AUG, we get...any other bullpup rifle of the time. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:36, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I derinitely think they're putting the MP5k in to copy MW2. They could have put in any other variant of the MP5, variants that weren't in prototype stage and would probably be more combat effective, but they went with the k variant. That said I don't think it's any coincidence the SPAS-12 and AUG is in there either.

Well, Treyarch apparently didnt start copying first. MW2´s specops get idea fairly sure from WaW´s coop system :D
:The latest issue of the official xbox magazine says that they originally had planned on having co-op throughout the entire campaign in MW2, but cut it because it messed with the narrative. Or, it would've been way too fun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:06, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
the AUG was stupid in the game, no1 in USSOCOM uses that gun
* Would you mind telling what do you have against bullpup designs, beside "the looks"?--[[User:WhiteSlift|WhiteSlift]] 11:58, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
* Heh. MP5k get into service 20 years after Vietnam war. There was only prototype in latest parts pf Vietnam war. MAC10 or UZI would be much more realistic in hands of US soldiers. Atleast much more than prototype gun. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 06:49, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
*"MP5K get into service 20 years after Vietnam war"...the MP5K isn't that new. Considering that the war ended in 1975, and the MP5K was introduced in 1976, you are way off.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 01:30, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

true why would they be carrying a Prototype in to combat

Well how much differently could essentially just a shortened MP5 with a foregrip work from the regular MP5?

Because it's a video game that doesn't care about accuracy and realism. I mean what loser actually waits until Picatinny rails to be invented? Go ahead and put them on your rifle in Nam, it's the new trend.

Why are you complaining about the AUG in particular, I mean USSOCOM doesn't use it? Yeah, well they sure as hell don't use the deagle or the AA12 or the FAMAS but I don't see you complaining

"I mean what loser actually waits until Picatinny rails to be invented?" Picatinny rails have been around since 1913, broski.
:Not in their modern version, Broseph Stalin.

You all are forgetting..this is SOG, not SOCOM. SOG could carry into battle whatever they wanted to. Could they have carried a prototype MP5K? Sure! Keep in mind..they had access to stuff that NOBODY ELSE in the military had access to at that time. Hell..one time they brought an airhorn with them and scared the crap out of an entire NVA division with it.

== What the hell is up with this AR-15 Carbine? ==

It looks like a 733, but at the same time, not since it also has a flat top, but the scenes in the trailer that showed this rifle is assumed to be Vietnam era, so a flat top AR-15 shouldn't exist at the time much less a rail system for it. Also the same AR also has a rear iron sight on the flat top. This doesn't make sense [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

- I think its XM177, but customized way to much. Its mucb more possible that Treyarch just failed. I think they just added rail system/flat top just because MP. You know, attachments. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 05:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

::It cannot be an XM177 if it has a flattop receiver. Those did not exist when the XM177s were introduced. The flash hider is also Vortex, not the XM177-type. The game's 3D artists might have been ignorant about what AR carbines existed at the time. But that is not an XM177. Not by a long shot. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 05:23, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

I think the game's 3D rendering tech was mostly like stone because it's the 60s and 70s, but the trailer animation is horrible! I could barely tell what was going on and the weapon details are no where like MW2. Say what you want about MW2 when it comes to consistencies, but at least they can render their weapons correctly. My first upload of that funky AR-15 shows the handguard as this polygon like thing. And did flat top receivers exist during Nam? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 05:34, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

:::''And did flat top receivers exist during Nam?''

:::No, not at all. My recollection is that the Colt ACR (introduced in the 1980s) was the first AR-type rifle to feature a flattop receiver. Even though the ACR was a bust, flattops were subsequently carried over into future AR generations. -[[User:MT2008|MT2008]] 05:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

With these seemingly anachronistic flat top recievers and flip up sights I think this game is headed towards failure. Seems like they're taking the MW2 route and making their "balanced" and cosmetically changed multiplayer weapons also appear in single player. I hope by some miracle they don't or else they don't get my money.

:And here I remember talking to my brother about how they can fuck up the M16 by either putting A2s or burst A1s, but this is WAY over there in the incorrect area. Haven't they seen any Nam movies? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:03, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

: Excalibur01 - or use five minutes just f-i-v-e f**king minutes of their time and try to google some Vietnam-era photos. Or they could hire someone with at least basic knowledge of era background and weaponery. You know, they spent money on countless other things. But I guess that Call of Duty is now like B-rated action movies. Make as many as you can and don't worry about the quality. Nobody gives a s*it about how it looks like or if it is correct as far as it would look cool and geek teen age kiddos would pay the money so they could play multiplayer on their lagging net servers. [Ragnar - 22:25, 19 May 2010]

Hopefully they at least have the M16 have full auto instead of burst, would make it more fun that way. I did read that this isn't taking place in vietnam on yahoo news which probably is incorrect but this is ridulous of the weapons they are putting in.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 22:48, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

:I read an IGN article that it'll take place throughout the Cold War, from the end of Nam to Cuba and also Princess Gates London [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:17, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I researched the history of picatinny rails, turns out Treyarch may have actually done very good research. This is what I found: "The MIL-STD-1913 standard was developed out of efforts during the M16A1 Product Improvement Program which eventually resulted in the M16A2. One of the abandoned ideas was a receiver with a built-in rail. In the 1970s, Rock Island Arsenal experimented with a sniper AR-10 with a Weaver rail. In Vietnam, the Model 656 had a built-in rail." Source:http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/archive/index.php/t-18737.html
I don't know about you guys, but I'm now willing to believe the rails on this AR (Model 656?) isn't a goof at all.
:Well, its always good to know new thing :) But i think it still wasnt regular Vietnam equipment. And i also think there wont be even M16 or M16A1 ingame.--[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:35, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
::True, it wasn't regular Vietnam equipment. But these aren't regular soldiers either. These guys are top secret black ops, higher than tier one operators. They can use any weapon in the world, even ones that are in secret development. And you're probably right, I doubt there'll be an M16, simply because these experimental ARs look cooler, have a bit of mystery around them, and can accept multiple attachments. But I wouldn't be surprised if they name the rifles M16.

The model 656 looked like this:

[[Image:model 656.jpg]]

It was just an early M16 with an early style rail system. So far, I have not found images of a Carbine with these types of rails, experimental or not. Rails were not on the forefront of military minds before the 90s. The military didn't even decided to put rails on the M16 until a decade after the M4 came out. And even the Model 656 rails were not on a flat top receiver like the ones on an M4. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 13:57, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
:Aw crap, there goes my theory. Looks like it's back to just being a Treyarch fail.

I'm not one to justify inaccuracy in videogames but, the upper receiver on the 656 could easily be swapped with that of an AR-15 carbine. --[[User:AdAstra2009|AdAstra2009]] 00:50, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Sure...but the one we see in the game is not the same rail receiver as the one the 656 has. It has a flat top like an M4 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:22, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

I just noticed that the front sight isn't removed when an optic attachment is present, an improvement over other COD games. Maybe Treyarch realized an AR would be bolt-action if the gas block was removed.
:Low-profile gas block is not visible from first-person perspective. And 3-d person gun models were made as low-poly as possible to minimise system loads(this was crucial because games was intended for Xbox in first place)

Who know CAR-15 with rear flip up sight use in vietnam war? I see a south vietnam flag in picture.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]
: No. Though, prototype flat-top receiver and flip-up like on your screen could be possible, but it just doesn't look authentic to the time period. I wouldn't mind if they put in something like Model 656(pictured above). But they really need to get rid of that modern-looking AR.
[[Image:CODBOAR-15b.jpg|thumb|none|500px|]]

It's just like the Aperature sight in W@W, but no where near as bad. I don't see why people are making such a big deal out of it, sure it's not exactly authentic, but it's far from game ruining like what a lot of people here are saying.

== Complaints ==
Hey, it's a game, not a history lesson. It's all about fun and style and so. I do like a realistic movie or game, but I don't hate a game just because the artists created something they think it's better this way. Nobody complains when a director sums up a car ride that would take 1 hour in real life in one scene in the movie, or when he puts the light where the sun can never be just to make it look good, but when someone puts a cool looking AUG in a game set before 1977, because it looks cool, or creates his own creative vision of an AR-15 everyone freaks out. All the time you hear people say "They should have done better research!" or "They don't know anything about history!", but maybe the did research, and they know history, and they discussed it and decided that they want to create something own, because they feel it fits better in their creative work than what real life history can give them.

*Yeah, you are right. Now we need M1 Abrahams tank in some Napoleonic Wars strategy. Cause that tank is just cool - right ? Or maybe M4 Carbine in WW2 shooter ?--[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:28, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

::Treyarch is legally obligated to keep the timeline from going beyond Vietnam. [http://gameinformer.com/b/news/archive/2010/03/04/the-activision-lawsuit-what-it-means-and-where-it-s-going.aspx] If that means they have to cheat a bit regarding the weapons, I'm willing to give them some leeway. Let's face it, we're probably the only people who truly care anyway. None of these inaccuracies are going to keep any of us from buying this game when it comes out and playing the heck out of it. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:41, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

They're not legally obligated to keep it from going beyond Vietnam. As that article says..all they need is full approval from West and Zampella. Considering those two aren't rampant assholes..it's a total possibility.
:That's a bit like saying other people can write Harry Potter novels as long as JK Rowling is okay with it, or other studios can make Star Wars movies as long as George Lucas is okay with it. Have you looked at the games IW has made? Have you noticed a pattern? (For those who don't want to look, all they make are CoD games. That is literally all they have going for them.) Sure, they COULD give away their golden goose and let someone develop else something Activision has given them exclusivity with, but I can't imagine a single scenario where they would. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 10:45, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

* Well, msot of CoD players wont even recognize M16 and M4 or HK416. So yep - We are maybe only ones who care about it :/ --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:44, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
::And mind you, Treyarch is the same developer that had Japanese troops using suppressed MP40s with reflex sights in WaW. Oh, and a RAY GUN TO SHOOT ZOMBIES. That being said, I was devastated when I found out that MW2 wouldn't have zombies, and I'll be even more devastated if BO doesn't have them. IMHO, zombies was the best part of WaW. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 17:39, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
* And IW had OMOH with FN2000´s and IMI Tavor´s - So whats the difference :D Hope zombies will be includeProxy-Connection: keep-alive
Cache-Control: max-age=0

too.

:Ok the Zombie thing in WaW was a side game. It's not part of the "story". If the zombies and the ray gun appeared in the actual missions, then we'd called bullshit but with a smile cause zombies are awesome to fight. The suppressors and red dot sights were for multiplayer to compete with COD4 at the time, so those don't count. We're talking historically accurate, period piece weapons. It's like we do a game taking place during the Civil War but we all got 1911s as handguns and M1 Garands as rifles. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:22, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
::You're telling me you wouldn't play a Civil War game where you can use an M1 Garand? ;)True, they tried that with Darkest of Days, but it was terribly done. And second, you CAN get the ray gun for one of the campaign missions, and it is awesome. (You can take down a tank with two shots.) But I know what you're getting at. I'm just saying we shouldn't let the nitty gritty get in the way of good gameplay, especially since Treyarch already has one hand legally tied behind their backs. Would they want to make a Modern Warfare-like game set in present day or the near future? Sure, but they can't, they're legally handcuffed to inflexible historical fact. Besides, no game has ever gotten its weapons exactly right. We have an entire generation of kids who believe an M1 Garand can't be reloaded without firing the entire clip, or it has less stopping power than a K98K. I won't lose any sleep if BO has AR-15s with flat top receivers, but I will if the game sucks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 06:34, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
You know if there gonna screw this game why don't the just add a bunch of laser guns or crap. I mean i could understand if the weapons in the game where off, but i have a feeling this game is going to be a cluster F***
::We're basing a lot on two trailers and some scanned images from a magazine 5.5 months from release. I'm going to reserve judgment until I actually play it or at least hear from people who have actually played it. Treyarch has little to lose here. If it's great, people will praise them, if it's not, people already think they're the Fredo Corleone to IW's Michael Corleone in the Activision family. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
:::And while we're here, we've been talking about how the angle of the AK mag is slightly off, but is anyone else annoyed that if you do a tactical reload and drop half a mag, those rounds in the discarded mag magically go back into your ammo stockpile and you don't lose them? This has been true in 99.7% of all FPS's I've ever played. Gamers have accepted the idea of the consequence-free tactical reload for over a decade now. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:40, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::::You're right it's a crying shame. Not only because it's more accurate when the game keeps track of ammo in specific mags but it also adds another challenge and element of strategy. I also enjoy the one game I've played that keeps track of the +1 round in your gun when you reload. I wish more games were like that. Sad thing is I don't see COD heading in the right direction ever again.
:::::The one time I saw them do the tactical reload correctly was... Navy SEALs Quake, a mod for Quake II. Yes, it was a mod made by amateurs over ten years ago. The big game companies aren't doing it right because they don't want to. I remember the first time I played a game that had different animations for reloading with a round in the chamber and one without. Operation Winback on the N64, also ten years ago. It was a nice touch. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

* But we arent complaining here about animation and bullet system, damn. We are critising look of those guns ! That stramge XM177/AR15 hybrid was seen many times in reveal trailer, so we can judge it. And it failed. Its still better when you have realistic gun without realistic ammo system than crazy-unrealistic looking gun with realistic ammo system. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:06, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::I don't think it'd be that hard to replace the skin. [[Black]] didn't give a damn about realism, but it was still enjoyable as hell. The way I see it, ultimately, it's just a game, to be played because it's fun, not as an interactive history lesson. If you want accuracy, watch the Military Channel or actually go out to the range. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:48, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
::: Well, it doesnt have to be "interactive history lesson" but atleast a bit of realism would be nice. '''''BTW''': I visit shooting range once or twice in month :)''

As pointed out, we don't want TOTAL realism. Otherwise, one bullet hit to the chest is enough to kill you. At least head shots are instant kills in the game. But we're doing a game based on a particular period and it has to be accurate. I mean, if you were watching a WWI movie and see soldiers with M16s. That's a bit jarring right? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 15:03, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
:: Now he will answer it isnt jarring. If the movie has cool effects and famous actors.
:::Jarring, maybe, but I don't know if it'd ruin it for me. (Is it a sci-fi film? Surrealism? A film by Uwe Boll?) It'd be one thing to have blatant mistakes, like M16s in WWI, but would it have ruined [[Saving Private Ryan]] if Sgt Horvath had a post war M1 Carbine with a bayonet lug and adjustable rear sights instead? Did the fact that the officers had Webley Mark VI's instead of Adams Mark III's ruin [[Zulu]]? Did the fake M72 LAW in [[Ronin]] take you out of the movie? If it didn't, it's because you chalked it up as a goof, moved on, and enjoyed the rest of an otherwise good movie. If it did, then I don't know what to tell you. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:52, 25 May 2010
(UTC)

Here's a hypothetical question: This game is called Black Ops, so theoretically, they can make up whatever they want, what do we know, it's a black op, and thus classified. What if all the weapons in the game were all fake, either outright, or fictional modifications of real weapons? Would we still be up in arms? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:14, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
: I hate to say it but you might be onto something. I've heard rumors that Black Ops will rewrite history and take place in an alternate past. This is probably how Treyarch can get around the legal restrictions of not being able to make post-Vietnam games and explain these BS weapons. Personally I think it's pretty weak but it explains it.
:: Well, if it does... Wait-It doesnt! I read some article with one of Treyarch members which strictly denied possibility of alternate reality. Ill repat it again : its just some Treyarch modeller fail. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:39, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
It's not rewriting history at all basically it's saying that during the Cold War what if there were some Black Ops that went down to keep the whole thing from escalating into an actual official war. Which is completely possible.
:::It doesn't have to be alternate history, just a secret history. It's implied that the JFK assassination will be in the game. Is the player the second gunman on the grassy knoll? Is he supposed to stop the second gunman on the grassy knoll? Does he successfully stop a possible third gunman? They can make up anything they want in that scenario. A mission can have the player equipped with a prototype laser rifle, but it's scripted so the rifle is damaged or lost along the way, and the technology is lost forever. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:53, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

It would be great if they do include Dirty Harry's gun and Tony Montana's "Little Friend".

The Steyr AUG (Armee Universal Gewehr - Universal Army Rifle) had been in development since the late 1960s, as a replacement for venerable but obsolete Stg.58 (FN FAL) battle rifles for Austrian army. It was developed by the Austrian Steyr-Daimler-Puch company (now the Steyr-Mannlicher AG & Co KG) in close conjunction with Austrian Army.See? It's not that wrong. Got it from http://world.guns.ru/assault/as20-e.htm
:It's still wrong. Just because the AUG was in development doesn't mean a working prototype existed. And if it's supposed to be the prototype, why does the AUG in the game look like the production version, only without the grip, and not as depicted in the prototype drawing shown on the World Guns page? I think the whole prototype explanation is a lame excuse in order to include more modern weapons in the game. I would much rather see the weapons that SOG actually used included in Black Ops, instead of an assault rifle that we've seen about 5 billion times in other shooters. I already posted below how Treyarch could have used the Remington 7188 full auto shotgun in the game. This weapon was actually used in Vietnam, and as far as i know has never been used in a video game, but instead they chose the SPAS-12, which didn't exist at the time and has been used in dozens of other shooters.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 22:50, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

== Unknown ==
The rocket launcher under unknown is an M202 FLASH rocket launcher. Ashdude01 20:20 19 May 2010

Yes there is i added it to the guns page but some moron removed it

moviemaster1993 11:58 may 2010

== Carcano M91/38? ==

The images provided doesn't shot much and it is said that it can't be a mosin Nagant because the barrel is too short. Well it could be the carbine length variant or any other short barrel bolt action rifle. I can't see anything in the picture. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 03:26, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

It seems like its picture of that gun. Remember that game has to do something with JFK asassination and there can be barelly seen "Lee Harvey Oswald" on paper under that gun. So i think it have to be that gun - As some reference. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 03:48, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Ever heard of the Mosin Nagant M44 carbine or the finnish retooled M38?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 11:56, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

== M16 and XM177 ==

[[Image:Colts.JPG|thumb|none|500px|]]

Looks like the guy here has either an M16 as you can tell by the barrel pointing to the left and the barrel on the right looks like an XM177 [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 21:26, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a M16A1 to me..which makes sense..since the A2 didn't come around until the early to mid 80's.

== Embargo lifts tomarrow, the 28th ==

Ones the embargo lifts we will be flooded with info, especially about guns

What embargo? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:45, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

There was an embargo for some journalist who previewed the game(they also could have played it too)and tomarrow it ends and info will get flooded all over the web

* It ended and only few informations and no new guns appeared. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 07:24, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

== Valment m78 ==
:The M78 does have its own page here, separate from the RPK. But yeah, I don't think the designers are gun-savvy enough to have both of these guns in this game.--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 19:55, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

What the year of Valmet M78 build? I think is not use in vietnam war the NVA don't have a finnish weapons during the war.And i think in the picture the gun is not Valmet M78.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

: And Spas-12 was in vietnam ? It may not be Valmet, but it fairly sure isnt RPK. Or another Treyarch modeller fail ? --[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 11:40, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Anyone notice that the picture of the unknown AK-type LMG has a front sight that upright on the front side and canted forward on the back side like the RPK-74's front sight? --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 17:11, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:The Valmet M78 was invented after the production of the M76 in 1976, which is another weapon considered anachronistic for the Vietnam War era if there's any in the game. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] 01:45, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

== Time travel (well that would explain it) ==

[http://pc.ign.com/articles/109/1093572p1.html Another preview]
--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:22, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

The page doesn't exist [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 16:48, 29 May 2010 (UTC)
* Fixed that link. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 16:49, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Launching an SR-71 from an aircraft carrier? Is that even possible? O_o [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 21:04, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
:They were able to operate a U-2 from a carrier, but that wouldn't be nearly as sexy as flying an SR-71, now would it? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:32, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it is, You know how these game designers do ALL of their research. (Man I'm sarcastic tonight)--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:11, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
::It's pretty obvious that since MW2, the main source of research is action movies and Futureweapons reruns.

Damn straight.

[[Special:Contributions/72.189.150.170|72.189.150.170]]

Not that I have anything against the SPAS-12, AUG, or AK47s, but we need to see different types of weapons. What about an 870, or the AK-74? What about other types of Bullpup? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

: You think 12-year old child knows difference between AK-74, AK-47 and AKs-74u ? That wont make sence..... Why making more weapons when you can add only those "cool" and overused ones ? --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 15:14, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

My 11 year old brother can, just saying-[[User:SargeOverkill]]

== Prototypes ==

Just to let you know: German games magazine ''PC Games'' had an interview with the developers. In the latest issue, they write, that the black special ops team can get any equipment they want, including non-standard weapons, brand new prototypes and even customized and special built single pieces, <quote>which no one outside the team will ever get to see</quote>. So that is the official in-game explanation for every crude weapon you can see in the hands of the player.
:That's what I figured their reasoning would be. It makes sense but it's still a pretty weak explanation if you ask me.
:So super elite 1337 black ops delta teams can even get weapons ''that don't yet exist''? WTF? Why didn't our SF and SEALs in 'Nam have M4A1s with KAC rail systems, lasers, ACOGs, EOTechs, and bullets that can home in on enemy soldiers from 50 miles away, then??? It's a conspiracy to disarm the public, I tell you! But in all seriousness, I think it's an explanation that doesn't hold water. That mentality might work in 2016 during MW2, but not in a past setting like Vietnam where small arms development has been chronicled and we know where and to what it led. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:29, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
::I think it does hold water. Of course these finalized weapons weren't around in the late '60s to mid '70s. But how do you know their prototypes weren't? Most of the weapons in-game will either be early prototypes or in the case of the AR custom-built weapons made by the SOG operatives.
::Ok, they could at least make it look like prototypes, not like modern weapons.
::Okay, then how about when the next WWII game comes out, they give all the troops M16s, M60s, Mark 48s, G36s, AKMs, XM29s, and XM8s because, you know, super secret black ops teams can get any piece of kit they want, even if it doesn't exist yet. All they have to do is jump in Doc Brown's time machine, travel through time and grab the latest kit, then head back. 1.21 gigawatts! [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 02:03, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:::I've said it once before, if it's done well, I will absolutely play it. Most people play game as a means of escape, so would it really make a difference if I shot a Nazi with an M16 or an M1 Garand? He's not REALLY dead. He's not even real, and we've contributed nothing to the winning of WWII, or any war. In fact, we've contributed nothing but to our own satisfaction. They're called video GAMES. Playing games is about having fun. I'm sure many if us here loved Nazi Zombies from WaW. Why? Because we love shooting Nazis, and we love shooting zombies, and Treyarch did us a favor by combining the two activities. And we love it even more if we can shoot them with a ray gun that comes out of a magic box. Was it historically accurate? No, but believe me, the history major in me learned to live with it. (Hell, now you've got me all worked up, because as I'm typing this, I can't wait to get the chance to catch Hitler and bin Laden in a meeting and spray the room with a minigun.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 03:02, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Ok i get your point, it's a video game, and fun or not it should have realism, i mean c'mon!-[[User:sargeOverkill]]
::::BTW, they already sort of did that with the Time Splitters series. And those games were awesome. (At least 2 and Future Perfect were. I never played 1.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 16:30, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::I quite frequently have lots and lots and lots and lots of fun playing games, especially shooters, that adhere to reality. The reason I play a Vietnam or WWII shooter is because I want to immerse myself in the environment. That includes having weapons accurate to the period. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:07, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
::::::I guess that depends if you consider these games historical or not. I just lump it in with Halo and GoW now, as CoD flew off the historical rails about two or three games ago, straight into "anything goes" territory, which was good from a story telling perspective. Even when it tried to be historical (up to CoD 2) you were still one or two men who personally killed half the German army. That's why I thought releasing WaW on Veterans Day was a backhanded tribute, because nothing honors veterans like a game that allows you to win WWII singlehandedly. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 14:31, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

==M14==

What with this being a Vietnam War game, I'm gonna be pretty pissed if you can't use a normal M14 rifle, without all the rails and crap.
[[Image:M14Rifle.jpg|thumb|none|500px|I want to use an M14 like this in-game]]

Well, it doesnt look cool enough. Expect it with scope, silencer, thousands of rails and plastic stock. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 18:04, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

1. They'll Probably put it in.
2. the rails are the modern demands of a soldier including the ability to easily mount optics and other accessories easily. theres nothing wrong with it.

:I'd like a regular wood stocked M14, and if you want optics, they did make a scope riser mount for M14s before rail systems. As for silencers, well that's easy, and heartbeat sensors shouldn't bother to return. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::If they want to be accurate with attachments, then they should have a sniper scope and a suppressor (suppressors were available at that time).

Randy Shughart a delta force sniper never had anything fancy on his. as stated in BlackHawk down he had a vietnam era M14, with a scope. nothing fancy there. besides in vietnam there really wasnt a need for anything fancy. silencer, hell the vietcong already knew they were there because of the helo. Lam- hadn't been invented. and a tac light is slightly useless seeing how they were in a jungle 95% of the time. [[Special:Contributions/71.194.219.9|71.194.219.9]] 01:46, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

: All of these attachments really ''WONT'' make sence. '''But its Treyarch'''.

== AUG sans grip ==

What the hell is up with the AUG without a foregrip? I don't mind the fact the AUG is anachronistic, but come on...why take off something central to firing the gun. Maybe the gun is semi-automatic in the game, because our character has to plunge his hand into a bucket of ice to stop the burning after each shot.
:Yeah, I don't understand that decision. The only possible explanation I can come up with is that they used the AUG with a grenade launcher as a model, like this one [http://www.steyr-aug.com/240.jpg], and then just deleted the grenade launcher. But this would mean that no one working on the project A) ever saw a movie with an AUG, including [[Die Hard]], which I would think every male between the ages of 21-49 in the english speaking world has seen, or B) could put two and two together and figure out that putting your hand directly on a barrel is not practical. That, or the plot involves that character severely burning his hand. If not, it's an utterly indefensible and boneheaded decision by the Treyarch staff. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 22:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
::And to be absolutely fair, the character is wearing heavy gloves while holding the barrel. But it still doesn't make sense. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:21, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

::What doesn't make sense to me is that they have a military advisor on staff. How come, at no point in the development, did this man point out that holding a gun barrel while firing is a bad idea, and has he not seen an AUG before? - Opening Poster.

::Doesn't the grip fold up?-protoAuthor
:::Yes, but you'd still be able to see it. [http://www.murdoconline.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/NEW-STEYR-AUG-right.jpg]--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:12, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:I wrote that without seeing the image. Sorry.-protoAuthor
::::I agree with the grenade launcher theory, especially since multiplayer was done first. Who knows, they might actually change the standard AUG model before the game actually comes out.

The AUG without vertical grip.I think a gun barrel is very hot.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

In third person it's just a character model fail. In first person you grip I guess what you could call the "finger guard."

I've seen pics of the Austrian Army holding their AUGs by the trigger guard like a P90 but not the barrel itself, that's stupid. Plus, who the hell in 1968 would even take a design like the AUG seriously. The M16 was just starting to be taken seriously by military brass around 1968.

......Why the hell wouldn't they take it seriously? You do know that the British had actually adopted a bullpup design in 1951 for a very short time. Search Em-2 Rifle. It even had a built in optical sight on the
carrying handle. We Yanks then bossed everybody into adopting the 7.62 and the EM-2 was abandoned because it was in the .280 round so they went with the FAL which could be much more easily changed to use the 7.62
Actually, the EM-2 would be a better choice for this game or the SA80 prototype that appeared in The Professionals. I am aware of the EM-2.
=== Bullpup guns ===

If they want bulpup gun in game why didnt they coice Em-2 ? Or Famas ? WHY THAT ANACHRONISTIC AUG, damn.
The FAMAS is even more anachronistic than the AUG. The FAMAS was adopted in the early eighties and it used a different type of 5.56 ammo than the NATO standard.

== OXM article ==

Official XBox Magazine did a feature on Black Ops (July 2010, issue 111,) and I figure I'd share some highlights:

- It was inspired by the book "SOG: The Secret Wars of America's Commandos," by Major John Plaster. [http://www.amazon.com/SOG-Secret-Americas-Commandos-Vietnam/dp/1581606761/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1275440842&sr=8-1]

- The SPAS-12 you use during the Tet Offensive uses Dragon's Breath rounds.

- At least from their description, the "WMD" level sound suspiciously like the airfield level in MW2.

- The M202 FLASH is confirmed.

- The M1911s with "Sally" etched on them also have tally marks on them.

- They mention a co-op feature that "appears to be a successor" to zombies, which seems to me would indicate no zombies. Bummer.

- Multiplayer was ready before the campaign, so some of the campaign levels are based on the multiplayer maps.

- Regarding anachronistic guns, "'In this world, anything was possible' for these soldiers, [Treyarch head Mark] Lamia explains. All equipment requests were granted by their superiors. Cost, apparently, was no object."

- And finally, a quote from the military advisor, Lt. Col. Hank Keirsey (ret) (and something I've been trying to point out for a while now) "The Historical Advisor fights to get every last bit of accuracy, but always has to concede to the need for excitement." Keirsey appears to be the military advisor for the whole franchise, not just this game or for Treyarch.

--[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 00:18, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

:Money is no object is one thing, but designing a different rifle system like you would design a James Bond car is a different thing. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 02:20, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

: So, basically they said those soldiers can have any gun. Come on, Treyarch ! Give them FN2000´s , Plasma Rifles and Gravity Guns !
No, really. Off course they can have special weapons. But only those which were designated before 1968. Not those which were designated 10 years after.--[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:30, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
::Yes, but since everything is secret, how do we know the CIA DIDN'T develop the AUG, or the SPAS-12, and cover it up by giving it to Steyr and Franchi, respectively? How can we be sure we DIDN'T capture any energy-based weapons from crashed UFOs? (Mind you, I don't work for Treyarch or owe them anything, but I have to give them credit for giving themselves such a clever out.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:51, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:::It seems like all these SOG's have custom-made pieces. And since Weaver rails did exist in Vietnam it would have been totally possible to make these weird AR's we keep seeing. Not saying I agree with this decision, but this is probably how Treyarch is getting away with it.

You guys are so wrong, My friend the NAVY SEAL told me something not to tell anyone else but I don't care. They are issued laser rifles just like the ones in Fallout 3 but have a disntegration setting meant for vaporizing. At least thats Treyarches logic. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 21:55, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
:Calm down. I don't think any of us know when these weapons were in their first stages of prototypes and what they looked like in the prototype stage. Prototype weapons are definitely a recurring theme in Black Ops. Since these guys are above top-secret they can have experimental weapons that are also above top-secret. In the GKnova6 files, it specifically states the AUG in-game will be a prototype version. I wouldn't be surprised if the SPAS is also experimental and the weird AR is completely custom.
:::Cool

RC planes instead of predator missiles?

== Document from viral site ==

Over at the CoD wiki I found this "document" from an viral site connected to Black Ops: [http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100601175649/callofduty/images/3/3d/Doc10.jpg]. It describes the AUG as "very early prototype weapon; not in production". It also mentions the [[G11]]

and also the delicious China Lake Launcher
-Double Agent M

:It would be better if they included more of these prototype weapons. I would love to see weapons like BRG-15, H&K CAWS, Ster ACR, Colt SCAMP,etc. Even better would be a underwater level with the H&K P11! After all the inclusion of such weapons in the game will be better than the monotonous selection of Cold War-rea weapons like M1911,M21,G3,FN FAL,AK-74,etc.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 09:37, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

:I'll shit bricks of joy if the G11 is in there. I've wanted that gun in a Call of Duty game for as far as I remember. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

G11 eh?? im guessing its going to turn into the MP40 from WaW except in speed instead of power

== M202 FLASH ==
I made a couple of changes in this section including adding of screencaps. I rechanged it back to FLASH because everything is anachronic in this came and it can't be the more rarer XM191. Plus I added a M202 FLASH image, which is actually from Far Cry Instincts Predeator, since I could not find a single good picture of it in the web.--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 15:43, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
:There's not anachronism, Treyarch keeps saying that all these weapons are prototypes. I'm not sure what people aren't getting about that. I'm pretty sure every weapon we've seen in American hands so far are a prototype of some sort. I think that the FLASH is the prototype version; why can't it be?
::The reference specifically said "M202." We're not going solely by the picture, but by what was actually written by someone who either played it or watched the game be played. And since I doubt the average game journalist is an ordnance expert, he only knew because it was probably labeled "M202" in the game itself. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 23:00, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You know just as well as I do video games often mislabel their guns either by mistake or just to give the public who don't know much about guns an idea of what that gun is instead of confusing them with specifics. I don't argue that it's going to be labeled M202, but I guarantee you Treyarch is intending it to be the prototype XM191.

:: XM191 was M202 prototype, just for your information. --[[Special:Contributions/85.71.49.215|85.71.49.215]] 04:34, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
:::Yes, I'm aware of that. But given the shall we say, unique, circumstances of the game, wouldn't it make more sense to go with what the game says, rather than what's historically correct? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:10, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes XM191 is a M202 prototype.American send to test during late 1970s in vietnam.And i see a picture of XM191 in vietnam war museum. info from http://world.guns.ru/grenade/gl50-e.htm [[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]
Here is what it shoots

[[IMAGE:Treyasuckers.png]]

Wow look like a RPG7 rocket.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

==Not being able to go past vietnam?==

What is this crap I hear about treyarch LEGALLy not being able to go past vietnam in game? A comapny can do whatever the hell they want.

[[User:k9870]]

:I know, I was about to make this same post.-protoAuthor 20:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
::From the article posted above (emphasis mine)
::"-Activision eventually convinced West and Zampella to stay with them by offering up a Memorandum of Understanding. In addition to extending their contracts through to October 2011, this legally-binding document gave West and Zampella some major financial bonuses as well as a couple other hefty promises. Chiefly, it gave the two "creative authority over the development of any games under the Modern Warfare brand (or any Call of Duty game set in the post-Vietnam era, the near future, or the distant future) including complete control over the Infinity Ward studio." '''In other words, Activision could not publish a Modern Warfare-branded game (or a Call of Duty game set any time later than Vietnam) without West and Zampella's full approval."'''
::West and Zampella were the two heads at IW who were fired in April. Now that they're no longer with the company, this might open the door for Treyarch's next CoD game to be Modern Warfare-esque, but there's a lot of litigation right now. The firing was way too late to affect BO, so they operated under the restrictions above. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 20:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I am still waiting for a WWI CoD with single- and multiplayer featuring France, the UK, the German Empire, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, the Ottoman Empire, Russia, Japan, Italy and the USA. Unfortunately this would be too expensive and only few people would buy it. Thus such a CoD will never be made. Sorry for half offtopic. --[[Special:Contributions/84.181.247.180|84.181.247.180]] 20:31, 9 June 2010 (UTC)Paul_Baeumer
:I would love to play a CoD WWI game. (CoD: Great War? CoD: Over the Top?) I'd like to see them change it so you can change out your melee weapon, so instead of a knife, you can equip yourself with an e-tool, brass knuckles, or a spiked club. (Sorry to continue the off-topic.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 21:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
::And to stay on topic, how would they define "distant future?" Why not a CoD game set in 2110? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 21:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

== Why did someone add possible weapons? ==

Someone added possible weapon prototypes like the G11 and the Pump 40mm? I am removing them tomarrow if no one says anything about why they should be left on. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 02:22, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

: This document (http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20100601175649/callofduty/images/3/3d/Doc10.jpg) from the Black Ops viral site could be the reason --[[User:HashiriyaR32|HashiriyaR32]] 03:34, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

:There aren't possible anymore, it has been '''confirmed''' that they will be in the game, with other sites like Call of Duty wikia including them in their weapons list.

[[Image:DOC10.jpg]] 
--[[User:SB2296|SB2296]] 04:28, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

:Yeah, and the Call of Duty wiki is a beacon of truth... [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 13:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

The AUG and M202 have see in game trailer.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]

== Still a little chance ==

Well, they are gonna include dedicated servers. So they apparently release modtools - So it seems like its gonna be possible change guns models, just like in CoD4. --[[Special:Contributions/88.208.103.46|88.208.103.46]] 09:09, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

== M16 on magazine cover ==
It should be removed for now, seeing as there's currently no evidence to support its inclusion in the game. IMFDB chronicles weapons appearing in movies, television, and video games, not on magazine covers. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 14:12, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

Game mags are a great source of weapons, thats where half the screenshots we see come from, game informer and the such.
:Screenshots are one thing, but there's no evidence that the image is actually from the game, it might just be an illustration the magazine drew up. I would heap the image of the guy sitting cross-legged with the two .45s in there as well. It wouldn't be the first time that weapons on cover art don't actually appear in the game itself. ([[Medal of Honor: European Assault]] comes to mind.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 15:01, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
:Is it bothering you that much?
::Well, considering the site has rules against printed media, yes it does bug me. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 10:44, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
:90% possibility that's a box-art. Don't be nerdy.

The game sure went into a lot of detail on the 1911 not to use it, and besides, what else would they have, they cant screw up history enough to throw in deegs and berettas.......oh wait, never mind, they can....

vietcong with a spas 12, damn at this rate my dream of marching into the reichstag waist firing an aa12 may come true
:That could be multiplayer screens

== SPAS 12 Folded Stock ==

All i can say is: FUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUCK!!!!
--[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 15:17, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Its more tacticaler and badassish to keep it folded, only noobs use a stock, not hardcore 1337 operators! (video game maker logic))
[[User:k9870]]

At least thay didn't put a goddamn XM8 in the game, if they do, i'll throw my goddamn PC outta the window, 'nuff said --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 03:04, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:'''nerd'''

At least the developers weren't stupid enough to put a rifle concept weapon into a game that takes place during the cold war. At least we can forgive them with the inaccurate AR-15s. And has any game developer ever fired a shotgun without a stock? It's a pain and you can slap yourself in the face if you don't brace yourself. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:19, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:I can only think of two possibilities, 1) you're firing Dragon's Breath rounds with the SPAS-12, and using it as small flamethrower, so you can get away with firing it from the hip, and 2)more importantly, WHEN HAVE YOU EVER SEEN A SPAS-12 FIRED FROM THE SHOULDER WITH THE STOCK EXTENDED? The only time I ever saw it was briefly in [[Jurassic Park]]. Even that famous scene in [[Miami Vice - Season 1#Franchi SPAS-12|Miami Vice]], a show that did guns pretty well, with [[Jim Zubiena]], a professional shooter would presumably knows guns pretty well, had him firing a SPAS-12 from the hip. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q2Il86-38A] Do you think most people even realize that thing on top is a folding stock? Yes, you, me, and everyone who's ever fired a shotgun ([http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mgptDs_Nncw| and now this guy]) knows it's stupid to fire a shotgun without the stock extended. But I don't think the general public knows. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:45, 13 June 2010 (UTC)
:It's not stupid. You don't really have to aim at point-blank range. I'm curious how aiming down the sights of SPAS with folded stock will work.

I'd love to know the reasoning behind including the SPAS-12 in this game. It didn't exist at the time, and I don't buy the "it's supposed to be a prototype" line. If it's a prototype, why does it look exactly like the production model?(I could make the same argument about the AUG)
Most likely this is Treyarch just being lazy, or including a weapon simply because it has been popular in video games, or both. They could have included an automatic shotgun that really was used in Vietnam, the Remington 7188. It was basically a Remington 1100 with an extended tube magazine, modified to fire full auto. It was used mostly by the Navy SEALS, but I believe SOG made some use of it as well. It's a weapon, as far as I know, that has never been used in a video game. Instead we get the anachronistic SPAS-12 that has appeared in about 5 million games. If anyone is interested in the weapons SOG really did use in Vietnam, get a copy of "SOG: A Photo History of the Secret Wars" by John Plaster. It includes a chapter that specifically covers weapons, and there are ton of great photos. It's expensive, but worth the price.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 02:01, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

:[[Image:MV-FSP-3.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Ludovici Armstrong ([[Jim Zubiena]]) fires his SPAS-12 at two drug dealers, while posing as a chauffeur.]]

I thought it was supposed to be a homage to 80's action movies. Or at least that's why I'm accepting it, because then I'll feel like I'm in an 80's action movie whenever I play this game. And what would an 80's action movie be without the SPAS-12 or the AUG? [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:22, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== Snake ==
The guy with the AR-15 and the USMC and MACVSOG tattoo the guy looks bad ass, I'm pumped for this dude.

== .357 ==

A .357, in a tunnel? I hope the game makes it so you won't be able to hear anything for a few minutes after you fire it, so you'd have to make the choice between shooting the bad guy or just meleeing him. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 19:27, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

:Anyone noticed reloading animation ? He just throwed out shells ( ''STILL HOLDING FLASLIGHT IN LEFT HAND - VISIBLE'' ) And then moved .357 out of screen ('' STILL HOLDING FLASLIGHT IN LEFT HAND - VISIBLE'' ) and than returned .357 to screen. Fully loaded. So it means he reloads revolver in few seconds with one hand ? ...... I just hope BF:BC2:VIïetnam will be much better.

== Need the ingame footage please ==

I want to see the footage but i'm to lazy to search for it, linky please.--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:19, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
:[suckit.com]

== Grenade Launcher ==

Can anyone identify the grenade launcher used in-game? Here's the link to the video where you can find it. http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2010-call-of/101273 The game labels it "Grenade launcher." It looks like an M203 but that didn't exist in Vietnam...
Also, here's some breaching footage: http://www.gametrailers.com/video/e3-2010-call-of/101260

Yeah they did, they went into service around 1969 I think
:Can't believe I got caught without doing my research. My bad.

== SPAS-12 ==

Anyone noticed (In first gameplay video) that EVEN RUSSIANS are equipped with SPAS-12 ? Can be seen around 2:53 lying on the ground next to russian guy....
:Yeah... This is turning out to be pretty fail...

Guys who cares, achronisms don't kill a game. Does it really matter if the guns are slightly innaccurate, all that matters to me is gamplay, good and fair online and ZOMBIES!!
:Call of Duty has always been accurate in the kinds of guns they present to you in single player, with the exception of Modern Warfare 2. So I think I can speak for many fans of the franchise, it matters to us.

Again..it is a pre-release trailer...game is still 5 months from release...

At least it's European, the Russians in MW2 carried Vectors and TAR-21s. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:24, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== "AR" Sling ==
I'm not one to complain too much about the achronisms, but I do care when things don't make funtional sense, like that the AR's sling, which for some reason is wrapped all around the gun, is stuck UNDER THE BOLT CATCH. It's not like they don't understand it's a funtional part of the gun, cause every AR varient in every COD that's had them has the empty reload where you press the catch... Also I noticed on the non-empty reloads the AR just kinda dips out of the screen and moves a bit then comes back up loaded, you don't see the mag, same goes for the .357; THAT'S lazy... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I liked the AR-15 reload, it looked real. He pressed the mag release, he let the magazine fall to the ground, and he held it there until he put the new mag in. It's alot more realistic as opposed to the MW2 reloads, were you wave your gun around the screen while reloading either to look cool or to makeit obvious that you are, in fact, reloading your weapon. Most of the time though, people don't do that when they reload in real life, unless they're an idiot. The .357 reload was kinda lazy though, but I let it slide because he actually whips the cylinder back in instead of the light tilt that's all it takes to swing the cylinder back in in MW2 and most other video games. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 01:35, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

I love reading these things to see how much constant griping there is..considering the game is still 5 months from release.

[sarcasm] You don't need to reload your guns if you are black ops, just lower them and they will be full again![/sarcasm] seriously thought, this game is REALLY start to be a dissapoint, and it haven't even been released yet --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 22:58, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

I have noticed weapons in game have muzzle jump. MW2 and COD4 had none the guns stayed on target and took no skill to use. In this even the ar-15s rose. I like it.
:It's just cosmetic rise up, the sights will come back right on target after each shot.

Actually WAW some guns would go off target, like an mp40 or DP machine gun. More oticeable at range. Treyarch has recoil effects, which i like.

:It could just be that modern weapons were designed with a better understanding of reducing recoil. Most modern automatic weapons have straight-line stocks, which reduces recoil, as opposed to bent stocks. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 13:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Actually look at mw2 ak, fal, m4, whatever, no recoil. WAW, mp40s would be shooting high after half a mag. I like recoil effects means you need more skill to shoot.

== M16 ==
Unknown [[M16]] ( Seems to be A1 ) covered with some kind of cloth or tape appeared in hands of soldier on one of BO´s artworks.

[[Image:M16-SP1.jpg|thumb|none|400px|M16A1 - 5.56x45mm]]
[[Image:BLACKOPSM16.JPG|thumb|none|500px|M16 on cover of French Xbox 360 magazine.]]

I moved it from the main page because like we discussed earlier, it's just a magazine cover with nothing to back it up. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 11:58, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
: Yeah, that was nice turn. I added it on the page just because it ''HAD SOMETHING TO DO'' with game :) There arent any proofs that M16 will be featured (''unofrtunately'') --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 12:15, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
::Let's be honest fellas, it's hard to have a game that has much to do with Vietnam without having the old three pronged, triangular handguarded M16. My bet is that it will show up, armed with full auto and 20 round mags. Also, I'm pumped for the G11, that thing is gonna be epicly epic. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:Is it me or is the picture in the magazine a reverse shot? Because I see the forward assist on this A1 as well as the ejection on the right side. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:07, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

== Bad Feeling ==

After realizing all the goofs that are popping up and watching more gameplay footage, I'm getting the feeling I got before Modern Warfare 2 released. Like they're throwing what was once a pretty legitimate game out the window for the coolness effect. And with MW2 that feeling turned out to be correct. Anyone else sensing the same thing?

Yeah, I've got the same bad feeling, except a lot sooner than I got it with MW2, maybe just cause I'm not really expecting much better after the disaster that MW2 was. Oh and COD4 is still fun ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

MW2 sucked..but MW2 was IW..CoD:BO is Treyarch. Are they perfect? No..but now a days they're better than IW.

I must say i really enjoyed MW2, and, in my opinion, Infinity Ward is still better than Treyarch, oh well, games can't please everybody, can they? --[[User:Yocapo32|Yocapo32]] 11:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully multiplayer is a bit different, mw2 multiplayer was old when it started since it was just like cod 4, at least WAW had vehicles.

-k9870

With luck they'll fix the problems '''before''' the game ships this time. [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 16:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
:I hope you're right but I doubt it. I've never seen a game change much of anything five months before release.

Everyone here talking shit about IW? You're a bunch of idiots. IW makes far better games. I don't know why you don't like MW2, but it's one of the best of the series so far. This game, on the other hand, looks like it'll be a disaster (as nearly all of Treyarch's iterations are).
:Fuckin right.--[[User:Pølaris|Pølaris]] 03:47, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say I hated MW2. Doesn't stop it being loaded with bugs that make the game seem like it was rushed out to meet the deadline. Now, if you're done fanboying... [[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 07:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::I don't think it's entirely fanboyish. I'm pretty sure the general consensus of CoD fans is that IW games are better than Treyarch games. IW started the franchise, and CoD games are the only games they make. Treyarch is just along for the ride. But now that IW has lost almost a third of their employees in the last month, that dynamic may change. I have a lot of hope for BO, and I think it's silly to write it off based on a few trailers and three minutes of gameplay footage. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 12:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
::: My point was that MW2 was ruined by Acitvision trying to force IW to meet the due date, meaning they had to ship it with a whole range of bugs. However, some of the above poster's comments do seem to boil down to "It's gonna be shit cos it's not an IW game."[[User:The Wierd It|The Wierd It]] 07:04, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I personally think that this game looks awesome, and i dont see what the problem is

IW gets the cred since they made the modern games, which people wanted. WW2 was old that siad Treyarch couldve done just as good making mw1 and 2. They had better fire lighting, recoil effects, etc.

:Bottom line is this. IW failed to have MW2 be better than CoD: 4, and this is why they've been put on hold. Treyarch's WaW was a brilliant game, and I still love to play it to this day. Treyarch has shown more promise then IW lately, and I'm sure they won't disapoint with Black Ops, as they plan to remove and fix all the shit MW2 got wrong. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:: Let's replace your opinion with some fact. MW2 was better than CoD 4 based on the storyline and sales alone, without going into all the new multiplayer features. Was multiplayer a bit buggy? Yeah, for around a month. Treyarch's installments are considered, by those who have played the series, crap in comparison. WaW? That game was garbage. It was basically a recycling of levels from other games in the series that were reskinned. The game was a knockoff of CoD4 that took place in WWII.
:::I'm going to have to call BS on the better storyline in MW2. It's the first CoD game where you get to not only gun down civilians, but also kill American servicemen. That's better? Are you and your buddies playing MW2 in a cave in Kandahar? Big Red One was disappointing, but then again, it wasn't supposed to be a "real" CoD game. CoD3 did suck, I certainly won't argue that. I hated the idea of WaW at first, because WWII was so overdone, but I liked it once I actually played it. (There might be a lesson in there.) --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Now let's talk about Treyarch. Aside from their lameass 'cash-in' port of CoD4 for the wii (which was garbage), what did they do in the series? Call of Duty 3, Big Red One, World at War, and the current work in progress Black Ops. I don't know if you played any of those, but they were all terrible entries in the series. CoD3 was a gimmick game. 'Oooooh motion control and button mashing'. Big Red One was garbage, and WaW was a hack-job. What does that record suggest their next game will be like?

: Big Red One was awesome, shut up.-protoAuthor 18:54, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and Treyarch couldn't have made MW1 or 2. They lack originality; every game they released was a knockoff of either IW's designs and ideas or of another developer. The only reason Treyarch is getting to make more CoD's is because IW's execs left because they were being denied their contractually obligated bonuses. --[[User:Asmkillr323|Asmkillr323]] 11:33, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
::Your timeline is off. Development of BO started well before the recent upheaval at IW. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

:Also, World at War is a superb game. Sure you have the god like MP40, but that's nowhere near as bad as OMA danger close noob tubes in MW2, and to anybody who's into WWII and it's weapons it's a hell of a game. It's no CoD: 4, but thank fuck it's no MW2. Treyarch shows promise, and if IW was doing Black Ops I would hold no hope at all. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

No offense but what your saying is that WAW was great in comparison. Thats not good logic at all, CoD4 is the best out of the three. No clue on BO but I have a feeling that since they wanted to justify cool guns that are anchoristic with that they are prototypes is just half-assed which may relate to the rest of the game. Also have you seen the reload animations?--[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 04:24, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
:When WaW was first announced, I was appalled. I couldn't believe they were staying in WWII, even after CoD4 skipped ahead to modern day. Looking back though, the fact that it's a WWII game is the only flaw I can think of. (Although, yes, it's a big one.) It restricted the plot, and WWII has been done to death. It was otherwise a pretty good game. I really liked the co-op campaign missions, the vehicle missions were well done, the voice acting was superb, and Zombies takes the game to a whole new level. Aside from the setting, is CoD4 really that much better? Is it time to give Treyarch the benefit of the doubt? --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 04:48, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

:I agree with all of your points chinaman, and you're right, CoD 4 wasn't really all that better. Besides the modern warfare setting, it lacked many of the cool features and such that WaW introduced, and while everyone including me loves it, it wasn't overly better than WaW. I always applauded Treyarch for making WaW not so noob friendly, something IW did massively with MW2. Now the guys at Arch have been watching people complain everywhere about the shit in MW2, and so they know what to do to fix it. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

== Goofs and screw-ups ==
Alright no offense but SHUT UP!!! You guys are complaining about the anachroistic guns in it but it's supposed to be that way. The freaking name is BLACK-OPS which means no one knows about it. What they are doing are saying what Cpt. Price said: History is full of lies. So, what they're saying is that this is not what they thought really happened but they are using their imagination to come with these historical ideas that fall in to the game. But like I said everything in it is supposed to TOP SECRET, so it's going to be anachroistic. But that's how it's supposed to be. It's TOP SECRET so none of us would even know about it.

and P.S. For all butt-holes who said MW2 sucks, Opinions are like butt-holes every body's got one, and nobody wants to hear the other one. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 12:14, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

: Yeah. You act like 12-years old. But we all know you are 10 years old.
::For your information I am actually 12.

Look up mw2 bad spawns on youtube and you'll see how its flawed. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 16:28, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

::I take it that you don't want fans of the COD series to actually question the developers for making questionable (or stupid) weapons choices for the sake of a compelling narrative. Unfortunately, that only works if we didn't have already have lots of knowledge of the 1960s-1970s era of covert operations from the military and numerous books, which only makes the anachronisms more glaring to anyone who isn't 12 years old.Just like movie watchers, people playing games set in a particular historical era have a certain set of expectations of what ought to be present and what shouldn't. To dismiss all those concerns with a "TOP SECRET" excuse is ridiculous, since Call of Duty 1-3 all managed to be interesting without adding things that didn't exist in the same timeframe. Cursing at people because they disagree doesn't make your defence of Treyarch seem anything more than juvenile. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 16:52, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

No, I just wanted everybody to shut up about saying crap about the guns. So they maybe think that a AUG without a foregrip looks stupid, I think it looks cool. The graphics look good and it looks realistic. I am 12 so I don't care about anachrosism, but I know a heck of alot about guns and Call of Duty so yeah, I was a little mad but because alot of you guys are like in your thirties they are targeting this for people in the younger phase and are not expecting people to go Hey! The AR-15 wasn't introduced then and neither was the Grenade Launcher. I don't think Treyarch are expecting a Riot of AUG foregrip lovers to burn down their studio but come on guys, seriously. Do you have to take this that seriously, your calling me juvenile while your sitting in your chair going hey that trigger guard is rounde then it can't be a M9 so it has be a 92SB therefore they lied! I'm going to kill them! etc. etc. so hey try to be a little compassionate and maybe think about going outside your mom's basement. Ha Ha just joking. (not sarcasm) So what i'm saying is can you not be so depndive on every little detail. Would you like to make a Call of Duty game. Just please voice your honest opinions and not go on about gun mixups because it's really not about the guns it's more about the plot and story. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 18:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I think that you people are taking these things too seriously. Since cod 4, these games are like action movies, rather than historical war role-playing type shit. Yes the anachronisms are disappointing, but I'm not really bothered by it and they were done for the sake of making the game cooler (and in my opinion any game set in Vietnam AND including a spas-12 is badass). If you want realism, than check out the new Medal of Honor. If you want Hollywood type action, buy cod games, because thats the direction the franchise is going in, which isnt a bad thing.

:Alright kiddies, let's sit down and have a nice list of what's wrong with Modern Warfare 2.
-One Man Army
-Danger Close M203s
-Commando
-The Spawn system
-Deathstreaks (especially Painkiller)
-Overpowered and unbalanced guns (ACR, FAMAS, UMP)
-Overpriced map packs
-non-dedicated servers, which leads to lag and host migration up you yin yang
-the OMA/Danger Close noob tube combo
-boosters galore
-10 Prestige hack lobbies
-The F2000 is a pile of garbage

So all said and done, that's a pretty big list of whats wrong with the game. You're free to disagree, but let it be known anyone claiming noob tubes are legit will be lynched. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The new Metal of Honor is just trying to cash in on the whole Modern Warfare craze we got going. Modern Warfare is the new WWII game of this generation. And because this IS a site that points out specific weapons, whether or not it should exist in the time period is our jobs on this site. Those of us who do take this site serious has an obligation to point out the holes and inconsistencies. That's what we do here. Call it bitching or whining, but that's what this site is solely for, nitpicking, pointing out obvious holes when we see guns in a movie, game, etc. We're looked up all sorts of history involving the AR-15 and just saying it's "Black ops" doesn't mean they defy the laws of historical consistency. In some of the Indiana Jones movies that takes place before WWII, we do point out MP40s and 98Ks should not exist as a fact. Even black ops of today would use the latest technology, not weapons that haven't been field tested or even made yet. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 18:12, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

: You, Excalibur, look like one of those very few inteligent people in this discussion. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 09:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

:I agree. Also, I've seen Beta footage and Medal of Honor just looks a lot like Bad Company 2. And to be honest, I could care less if the AUG or AR-15 or what have you is an anachronism in this game, as long as we're not talking lasers I'm fine. We're here to point out weapons in film, give pictures and descriptions of them, and talk about them, not bitch that a gun being in a game set 2 days before it was produced makes it a failure [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

:: Those guns arent 2 days befor prouction. Its ''8 years''. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 09:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Pointing out achronistic guns is part of what we do here, that said, for me it won't kill the game, unless there's a Modern Warfare 2-like pile of other stuff wrong with it too. Oh and yes the Russians & Vietnamese wouldn't use SPAS-12s but you're forgetting the only guns they've REALLY intended to show off so far are the AUG, SPAS-12, AK-47, M202, Python, and Crossbow, that's only what, six? I think they only picked these few guns to go in the trailers, and then reveal more later, so maybe the guns will be more where they should in the final version... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, God forbid we talk about firearm mistakes in TV/Movies/Video Games on a website DEDICATED TO DISCUSSING FIREARMS IN TV/MOVIES/VIDEOGAMES! I will continue to make comments on what, in my opinion, are idiotic firearm choices for this game. If anyone disagrees, feel free to reply, but don't tell me to shut up. Some of the comments above just prove my theory that weapons, such as the SPAS-12, were simply included because they are popular in video games, with Treyarch using the whole "prototype" B.S. as justification for their presence.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 05:08, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:Yes, how DARE they try to give players what they want?! You'd think they were in this to make money or something. What a bunch of whores! --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:27, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
::Really? So the only way for this game to make money is to include a SPAS-12? Is there that much demand for a SPAS-12 it has to be inluded to make gamers happy? Would the game be a financial failure if it wasn't there, and weapons more appropriate to the time period were included instead?--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 06:12, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You said it yourself, it's what players want. And like you also said, it's minor. Games are made for the general public, not gun dorks like us. As a gun dork, I'm a bit bothered, but as a gamer, I'm thrilled that I can light people on fire with a shotgun. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 09:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC) (gun dork and gamer)
:::: Does the success of the game depend that much on specific weapons that appear in it? You said yourself that as long as a game is fun, accurate/inaccurate depictions of weapons doesn't matter that much. If that's the case, weapons more correct to the time period can be included, and the game will still be a success ''as long as it's fun''. And I highly doubt Treyarch polled gamers and asked them what weapons they wanted to see in Black Ops. I think they were just acting on their ''perception'' of what weapons are popular in video games. So I don't know if I can say this is a case of "what players want", more a case of Treyarch saying "we think we know what players want". This is just a theory I came up with as to why certain weapons were included, I don't have any idea if it's true(although some comments from other posts seem to confirm it). For all I know, Treyarch is just being lazy and it's easier for them to include the well known weapons rather than do real research. At any rate, I can't see the inclusion/exclusion of specific weapons making or breaking a game.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 01:17, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:::::"At any rate, I can't see the inclusion/exclusion of specific weapons making or breaking a game." My thoughts exactly. --[[User:Funkychinaman|funkychinaman]] 05:53, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

You know, those that find it stupid that we are pointing out the anachronisms in this game should really just go to the treyarch forums, not post on a website dedicated to firearm identification. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 01:32, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
:Ok, if those anachronistic weapons supposed to be '''early''' prototypes then they at least could make it look '''different''' from production models! That would be much more believable. Tryesuckarch is just being f-ing lazy. I don't mind flat-top AR, but they could make it not look like a modern one. And also if there is no simple M16A1 then it's a total fck-up in the Vietnam themed game.
::If they made it look different5 from the final gun, you guys would be even more pissed! You'd be like "How can they call that a M16A1! Look at it it looks nothing like the original!" Plus. how could Treynot-suckarch know what they would like? You guys wouldn't be pissed if this was a modern warfare game. In fact I bet that Treyarch probably wanted to do that but they couldn't(breathes deeply)you know what this is my last comment. I'm done arguing with all the stupid people on this site. If you have anything else to say you can take it up with me on my talk page. [[User:Drjuki|Drjuki]] 13:44, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
:::You don't know what you're talking about. Photos or drawings of the prototypes can easily be found on the internet. A drawing of the AUG prototype is on the World Guns page, and the prototype SPAS-12(along with a photo of the SPAS-11) is shown on the SPAS-12 webpage: [http://spas12.com/spas12not.htm] And if Treyarch clearly states a weapon is supposed to represent a prototype and it actually looks like the prototype, no one is going to complain.--[[User:Phillb36|Phillb36]] 00:09, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

:Are these mistakes any worse than some of MW2s fuck ups? Like the L86 with a made up drum magazine and iron sights that wouldn't be usable as it has a straight stock, the AUG cosmetically having a 30 round mag when it says 42? The MP5K having a rail system only seen on an airsoft gun in real life and so on. Let's remember Black Ops isn't set only in 1968, and so they have a bit of play when it comes to weapons. The M16 is confirmed (I have a friend doing beta testing) and is Vietnam styled. Now if anyone wants to instantly write off the game because it has a few anachronisms and shit in it, then your missing the point. So what if your using an AUG in 1968? It's not like lasers in WWI, and it's still fun to do. Don't focus on the hate, try and just enjoy it for what it is, a video game. If you want reality, go join the army and head off to Iraq or something, cause in video game land, reality will be broken. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]
:So you're trying to justify Treyarch fuckups comparing it to MW2? Fuckup is fuckup

One, I tottaly agree. Two, did your friend say if there is an M14?

:Yes, the M14 should be in there. Also, I hardly see mild anachronisms as "fuck ups" in a game that pretty much goes on alternate reality anyways. Treyarch has created a game all about the operations we don't know about, the cover ups, and the spec ops weaponry we don't see for years, so having an AUG earlier then it's commercial release can be forgiven. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]\

::Treyarch has the right to depict an alternate Cold War for all they desire, but as long as they try to play it off as the historical "truth" that no one knows about while maintaining all sorts of obvious (and IMO not minor at all) anachronisms, they are only leaving themselves open to criticism. --[[User:Markit|Markit]] 23:41, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

:They aren't trying to play it off as historical truth, they're trying to go with an alternate truth, which makes perfect sense. Also, if I hear another person commenting on how rails are anachronistic, I'm going to snap. It's fucking rails on a gun in a video game, get over it. Black Ops will be an awesome game, and despite these possible anachronisms, I'll be gladly killing Russians in 1968 with my AUG thank you [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

I don't think I'm going to get this game. I'm getting a vibe that it's filled with silly crap much like Modern Warfail 2. I'll be playing the next Medal of Honor instead. -Frank T

:Medal of Honor looks like Bad Company 2 with Taliban, so that's the game I won't be getting. Treyarch impressed me with World at War, and they're aiming to please this time, removing and modifying all the bullshit Modern Warfare 2 bestowed on us. From deathstreaks to Commando, they're out to fix it all! [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

I never really got that mindset "It's BFBC2 but slightly different so I'm not getting it". Well, if you don't like Bad Company 2 to begin with that's fine, but there's more of a difference between Bad Company 2 and Medal Of Honor than between COD4 and World At War, most of the difference was the setting so it seemed like a bigger difference, but the core gameplay was very close, and they were made by two DIFFERENT companys while BFBC2 and MOH are made by the SAME ONE. I'm not saying anything bad about them, I like the first three and the MOH Beta. And yes, Modern Warfare 2 failed in two ways: First, it was WAY too noob-friendly, like, before it came out I would've never thought it possible for a game to be that noob-friendly, and second, it traded realism for coolness in pretty much every way, while COD4, the game they'd JUST MADE, had a believable story, weapons that were almost perfect in terms of appearance and who used them, and the only real nooby stratagy was the M16 Red Dot, but oh well, there was almost only that one. I know Treyarch has said they're trying to get rid of the cheap MW2 stuff, and that's good, but I'm really not liking the direction this is going, picking the guns because they're cool and not because they make sense, even a little bit, the exploding crossbow bolts, how almost every weapon we've identified so far is either achronistic or has something wrong with it (go look), the Hind A with tandam seating, and when you get in you go through the long cool animation of getting in and starting up, but then it takes off in 2 seconds flat, and the lazy, lazy reloads... I'm not saying it's going to suck, I'm saying my hopes aren't high, sure it'll be better than MW2, but that's not saying much. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 23:36, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

:Arguably Black Ops has issues, but don't forget that E3 footage comes months before the final product. So what if the Hind has tandem seating, does that make it any less cool to blast VC with it? So what if the reload isn't uber detailed, does that detract from you shooting people? So what if there's minor anachronisms, isn't this both a video game and an alternate reality? I'll agree the crossbow is kind of odd, but this game should be nowhere near as noob friendly as the god awful MW2. Modern Warfare 2 was built on the idea of helping bad players, but it only resulted in much rage for good players such as myself. Call of Duty 4 was made to break the mold on FPs games of the time, and it did and still does kick ass. MW2 was built to top it, and instead of that, they gave us an over dramatic, noob friendly game that overall makes me just want to buy a copy of CoD 4 again. And on MOH, I've seen some footage, and now I actually like it, sure it looks BC2 like, but thats no biggy, and overall that looks ready to rock too! [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Okay, sorry, that came off as too bad against Black Ops, I know it's months away from coming out and no, the Hind's seating isn't really a problem, I was just pointing out that it was wrong, same with a lot of the stuff we've seen so far. My point was there's a lot of incorrect things in the game, not neccecarily game-breaking, just pointing out that COD4 and WAW were better in that regard, though so far the game overall looks pretty good :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 05:29, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

:To be really honest, it won't matter if there's minor issues and anachronisms, cause as long as Black Ops isn't as noob friendly and shitty as MW2, I'll be fine and dandy [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Exactly, but we still do need to point them out though. ;) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 08:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I dont see MW2 as "noob friendly", just as balanced. It tried too hard to make no gun any better than another. It also felt like cod4, like the core gameplay mechanics were all old when you started playing.

-k9870

:Face it dude, MW2 basically reeks of noob friendliness. You have deathstreaks, solely designed to help shitty players, noob tubes which when coupled with OMA and danger close are the noobs cannon of choice. You have the ACR and FAMAS, both of which are overpowered, then you get stuff like the UMP which at close range does more damage then an M4 Carbine. Not to mentionthe marathon lightweight commando set up used by knife fags so they can knife you from 12 feet away. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

And the overpowered Harriers, that killed everyone all the time and you could have 2 up at once, and they always beat the helos in fights, and Chopper Gunner, and Tactical Insertions, allowing people to boost really easily for the Nuke, that ended the game, and Slight Of Hand Pro that let everyone quickscope, yeah the list keeps going... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 19:49, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I always find a stinger to be good against harriers and because you can have 2 on you, most of the time, you can take even 2 of them out. Not Gunner choppers are a pain to take down [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 20:01, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

:Chopper gunners are a pain, AC-130s are worse. Not only can they not be hit by bullets or tubes or anything of that sort, but they have TWO sets of flares that can deploy without any delay. Tact inserts mixed with cold blooded and good old FFA is great for boosting, luckily now Sandy Ravage deals some booster justice (hell, even I serve justice to them now). Either way though, MW2 was clearly IW's attempt to top CoD: 4, which was a game built to revolutionize FPS games. MW2 was built to be playable by even the noobiest kids, over the top, reference movies every two seconds, and overall be a fairly shitty game. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The problem with the Harriers is they're way too good... unless you just pull out a stinger and then they're dead, which is a little too extreme both ways. The reason the helicopter was so much better in COD4 was because there were no guided rockets, you couldn't shoot the rotor (so you couldn't just hipfire the thing to death), and UAV Jammer didn't help you against it, it killed you anyway, not to mention it never seems to manage to hit you in MW2. What I hate is hearing "Helicopter Inbound", then seeing it shot down in literally 5 seconds... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 17:05, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Death streaks were only like 10 seconds long and didnt bother me, no guns were eoverpowered, there all balanced, too much if you ask me. C130s were easy to hide from and rare to see and i downed tons of harries with stingers. The noob tube didnt bother me, i used a m16 with m203 and iron sights as my primary weapon. Knife noobs are easy to shoot The problem was cheap tactics, like camping spawn points and getting your friends to camp with you in free for all so you could stab them and boost your way to a nuke.

-k9870

The only streak thats ten seconds long is painkiller, and it still sucks. The ACR has no recoil and can outshoot sniper rifles, so can the FAMAS. AC-130s are easy to hide from on SOME maps, but if you get spawn trapped outside, your screwed. The fact you use a noob tube on your primary gun choice sickens me, because ANYONE who uses them, unless to get the shotgun unlocked or in a tactical, non spam way is a complete noob and should be banned for using such a cheap weapon. Knife noobs are easy to shoot at times, but if they get within ten feet, commando is your demise. MW2 is a shit game, end of story, Black Ops is doing everything to solve the problems it caused, amen. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

The m203 is useful to launch through windows and take out campers, and i use iron sights so might as well have an attachment. I dont use the m203 as my primary, but have it on my primary. And the ACR has low power at range taking on snipers. I countersniper with my m16 though, love irons, they have no sway like a scope. I hate snipers the most, there like socially acceptable campers. Its funny to lay out some noob who tries to quickscope though. It seems like no matter what you get called a noob though, m4 noob, noob tuber, shotgun noob, dual wield noob, knife noob....it seems everyoned thinks if yo dont use whaty they do your a noob, and c-130s dont bother me, there rare, people need 13 kills to get them. I hated when i tried to play free for all with some friends in a party and people are just boosting to nukes each round and cheating there asses off

[[user:k9870]]

agreed. it is always considered noobing. Snipers are annoying. it takes no skill at all to snipe. however there are worse things in MW2 then Snipers. for example- the people who camp in buildings like Wasteland or Scrapyard. "noob tubers" really arent annoying at all anyway. aggravating maybe, but if someone hits you with a M203 its your fault anyway. you should have been more alert. [[Special:Contributions/71.194.219.9|71.194.219.9]] 22:48, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

People always camped hallways and alleys and just shot anyone coming around the corner. Easy to just poke in and launch 40 mil at them. Besides, the thing has an aring distance, you need to arc it at range and reload was slow. Balanced.\

-k9870

:Face it, the M203 is a noob piece of shit. the combo of an M203 with Danger Close and OMA makes you a mini artillery battery. Also, how are you supposed to dodge a tube when people are shooting them cross map to your spawn? Nothing says pro like getting hit by a 40mm grenade shot hundreds of feet over buildings into your face. The M203 has no place in MW2, and I'd be one to have it removed. If retards can't use guns well, don't give them bullshit to help them, let them suck and they'll quit the game. When I pull my FAL out, I feel like a pro, knowing everyone else has the overpowered ACR and FAMAS and the tubes out, all ready to be scrubs, while I'm using something that's balanced and yet awesome. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Well said, though I wish the G3 was still in, and the fact that the ACR does a little less damage, like 1 bullet, maybe two different, makes no difference when there's absolutly no recoil, they still can't do anything by the time you kill them across the map from one huge sustained burst... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:37, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

Are you all playing hardcore or something? And i have no people launching 203s around problem, you only get 2. And i could care less about harriers and 130s, you need a lot of kills to get them. There is a call of duty cultuure to nae some guns as oaky and some as cheap. I dont give a shit personally though. i just play. No matter what somebody will bitch about your gear.

I remember back when everyone hated p90s, that thing had no range or power and overall sucked.

You only get two M203s if your not using scavenger or the more common One Man Army. I literally see two or three people on my team per game using that stupid backpack, it's complete bullshit. The ACR may not do high damage, but it's high rate of fire and zero recoil means you can full auto the damn thing at any range. I think retards who dare to say the noob tube is a legit way to play should be banned from PSN or XBL and never allowed on any Call of Duty again. It's called a first person shooter, not first person grenade launchers. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
:I wasn't aware that we can't SHOOT grenade launchers. I better go tell the guys at Activision/IW/Treyarch. -Chris_Hun7er 02:05, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

The problem is more that games are good and balenced when everything has a place, if people start using snipers at close range and beating shotguns (that's more of a Halo thing, but the snipers quickscope and the shotguns are rather terrible), or shooting 40mm rounds at any range for any reason, it's dumb. The launchers in BFBC2 are well balenced, because they have a purpose and they fill it, and nothing else. The assault rifles in MW2 have a purpose, fill it, and then beat SMGs and shotguns at close range, and half the time snipers at long range. And the Javelin, not that I see it too much, is good against tanks, except, there aren't any, there's infantry and helicopters. A game works when things have a purpose and fill that purpose, but not anything else's purpose, and that's half of what's screwed up in MW2. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 06:36, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

:Excactly Alex. Bad company 2 had 40mms that had to virtually land on the person to kill them, but with Danger Close an MW2 noob tube will kill people even if they're up to fifteen feet away from the landing. To be honest, I think noob tubes should just be plain removed from Black Ops, and the tube fanboys can suck it while us normal players use our guns. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
:Reality is fanboy the US 40mm rounds have a 5 meter kill radius. meaning that if you are 15 feet away from the blast you are dead as a doornail. the 40mm grenades in bad company are more useful as doorway makers and cover destroyers than as proper suport weapons. what is pissing off alot of us who care about little things called historic accuracy is the fact that even though they say that everyone had to read about MACV:SOG they have gotten few details right. [[User:Rockwolf66|Rockwolf66]] 18:44, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

It's true that the 40mm is not terribly powerful in BC2, but explosives need to be less powerful in games than they would in real life, imagine Claymores with realistic spread, damage, and range, without those stupid little lasers, and without bomb squad. Or frag grenades, they're overspammed as it is. Doing something like that is less realistic, but needed for the game to work. Having something like and AUG in 1968, or a SPAS-12 used by Vietcong around the same time... not so much. [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

:I agree Alex, because Claymores are really designed to take out a huge radius of enemies, it could easily wipe out an eight man squad. and a frag in a 10 by 10 room would really kill everything inside. If they went for realism, all the 5.56 assault rifles in MW2 would have the same damage and virtually the same recoil, but for balance the TAR is portrayed as extremely powerful, and the ACR weak. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Yeah, it just bothered me that they were THAT different, they could have chosen different weapons if they wanted to balence them like that or something, the part that bugs me the most is that COD4 was better balenced AND made more sense, it's just such a step back... [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 22:05, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

== Linked to World at War ==

It has been conformed that Reznov from World at War will appear in this game and even make comments about Dimitri Petrenko. This was seen on the Call of Duty Wiki

:Yes, as Reznov is more or less confirmed to be the bearded man you meet and then split from in the tunnel rat scene at E3. I'm happy to see him back, as he made World at War even better for me, maybe now he'll continuously yell "Fire the Javelin!" [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::"now he'll continuously yell "Fire the Javelin!"" What's a Javelin doing in the cold war? Oh wait I forgot, it must be a secret prototype no one knew about.

:Alright, I was thinking in an MW2 state of mind, lemme see. I know, how about him always yelling "FIRE THE LAW" in your ear every two seconds when something as small as a jeep shows up
[[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]

Any links to zombies?

== Has it occured to anyone that the AR-15 variant is probably custom made? ==

Treyarch has said that these guys could have guns custom built just for them, which I feel explains things much more adequately than just saying that they're prototypes of future (to them) guns. My theory is that he had a CAR-15 custom made with a flat-top reciever for tactical reasons. Maybe this caught on with the rest of the team, and whatever manufacturer they got to make these guns for them sold the idea later on. Of course this is just an excuse for the guns having the rails just to free it up for attacthments in Multiplayer, but at least there is some kind of excuse. Unfortunately this theory doesn't cover the anachronistic appearances of the SPAS-12 and the AUG, but hey, no game ever get's all of it's guns 100% correct. 

Edit: Actually it just might explain the AUG, because all it really is is a combination of ideas taken from the Enfield EM-2, 
Korobov TKB-022, and several other abandoned designs from before or shortly after World War 2. The only thing it doesn't explain is why it has the production-style built in telescopic sight, instead of the original prototypes open sights:
[[http://world.guns.ru/assault/aug_pr1.gif]]

== For those of you who may be confused about the supposed MP5/UMP hybrid ==

This is what I'm talkin about: 

[[Image:CODBO-SMG.jpg]] 

As you can see, it appears that it has the reciever and magazine housing of an MP5 or MP5K, while the barrel housing (correct me if I'm incorrect in calling it that) looks like that of a somewhat shortened UMP. If you look closely, you will note that it has the MP5Ks finger guard (I'm guessing that's what that is) directly below the muzzle that looks like a cut down version of the full handguard found in this picture: 

[[Image:MP5Kprototype.JPG]] 

My point is I don't think it's a hybrid at all, merely an MP5K missing it's forward vertical grip, for some reason or another. And seeing as every other aspect of the gun is that of an MP5Ks, I think it's safe to say that's what it is, so I'm gonna change it to that on the front page. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 16:38, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

== G11 ==

Anyone else as excited as I am for the inclusion of the G11? [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 19:16, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
:Just another anachronistic gun. Thats all. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 04:49, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

I sure as heck am. --[[User:AK-74Fan|AK-74Fanc]] 23:18, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Eh the gun itself isn't that big of a deal to me, but I definitely am excited to see something that to my knowledge hasn't been in an FPS before. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 23:29, 19 July 2010 (UTC)
: Well, it have appeared already in few other FPS games. For example [[Delta Force: Land Warrior]], [[Global Operations]], [[IGI 2: Covert Strike]] or Code of Honor: The French Foreign Legion --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 04:58, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
::Those games are not up to the modern standard, though. ;) [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 12:11, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Just Cause 2

2010-07-15T00:07:03Z

Hughjefender: /* first article! */

== first article!==

Yeah, I know it looks like crap
anybody can feel free to edit it as they see fit.

It's my first article, so yeah...

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1632-Just-Cause-2

::Good start, now start separating the weapons into distinct sections, put in images from the gun pages, try to find as many screenshots as possible. If you can't do it yourself, at least search on Google for some as placeholders. Do your best to make it not look like crap. I did you a favor and uploaded the cover poster art. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 21:08, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Hopefully, it looks better, I'm having issues getting the proper images, so I'll have to link screenshots.

== DLC guns==
The SIG 540 is dressed up like a Ghost In The shell rifle
http://www.thatvideogameblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/just-cause-2-le.jpg
I'm not sure what Rico's DLC revolver is. I guessed it was a Performance Center based on how modded up it is.

Talk:Just Cause 2

2010-07-14T23:57:24Z

Hughjefender: /* first article! */

== first article!==

Yeah, I know it looks like crap
anybody can feel free to edit it as they see fit.

It's my first article, so yeah...

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1632-Just-Cause-2

::Good start, now start separating the weapons into distinct sections, put in images from the gun pages, try to find as many screenshots as possible. If you can't do it yourself, at least search on Google for some as placeholders. Do your best to make it not look like crap. I did you a favor and uploaded the cover poster art. [[User:MoviePropMaster2008|MoviePropMaster2008]] 21:08, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

== DLC guns==
The SIG 540 is dressed up like a Ghost In The shell rifle
http://www.thatvideogameblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/just-cause-2-le.jpg
I'm not sure what Rico's DLC revolver is. I guessed it was a Performance Center based on how modded up it is.

User:Hughjefender

2010-07-14T09:04:15Z

Hughjefender: New page: If you've clicked on this, you've fallen into my trap! Alright, that was gay. Name: None of your business Age:21 Country: USA State: California, please don't kill me Interests: Guns,...

If you've clicked on this, you've fallen into my trap!

Alright, that was gay.

Name: None of your business

Age:21

Country: USA

State: California, please don't kill me

Interests: Guns, comics, lots of stuff

Talk:Just Cause 2

2010-07-14T08:53:43Z

Hughjefender: New page: == first article!== Yeah, I know it looks like crap anybody can feel free to edit it as they see fit. It's my first article, so yeah...

== first article!==

Yeah, I know it looks like crap
anybody can feel free to edit it as they see fit.

It's my first article, so yeah...

Talk:Type 100 Submachine Gun

2010-03-19T03:44:38Z

Hughjefender: