Talk:Call of Duty: Black Ops: Difference between revisions
Talk:Call of Duty: Black Ops: Difference between revisions - Internet Movie Firearms Database - Guns in Movies, TV and Video Games
Talk:Call of Duty: Black Ops: Difference between revisions
See [[Talk:Call of Duty: Black Ops/Archive 1]] and [[Talk:Call of Duty: Black Ops/Archive 2]] for older discussions.
==zombie mode==
= Weapons only found in game files =
Many of these weapon models were tested or based on ''[[Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare]]'' models.
will they have it? It is treyarch, but i havent heard anything solid yet.
==Colt AR-15A3==
: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)
An AR-15A3 model, use in ''[[Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare]]'', was used to test the "Commando". It was incorrectly referred to as the M4A1 Carbine, just like the previous Call of Duty game. The Commando was referred to as the "M4A1 Carbine" in the game files.
[[File:AR15A3BO1.jpg|thumb|none|600px|An AR-15A3 appears in the menu icon referred to as the M4A1 Carbine]]
Hopefully not copying spec ops.....
==HK MP5N==
An MP5N model, used in ''[[Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare]]'', was used to test the MP5K. The MP5K was referred to as the "MP5" in the game files.
[[File:Hk-mp5n.jpg|thumb|none|450px|HK MP5A3 with Navy trigger group - 9x19mm]]
[[File:Mp5 ingame CoD BO.jpg|thumb|none|600px|An MP5N appears in the game]]
Maybe it's aliens.
= Live Action Commercial=
Area 51 anyone? Eh? Eh? [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 22:17, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
==M1911A1==
==add m16 to page==
[[File:CODBOLiveActComM1911.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A chef fires two [[M1911A1]]s in different directions, an action that is impossible in game.]]
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.
==Mossberg 500==
Buddy, that stuff has been added already-[[User:SargeOverkill]]
[[File:CODBOLiveActComRemington870.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The [[Mossberg 500]] being fired. This weapon is not ever available in the game but judging by the heatshield slapped attached, it may be standing in for the [[Ithaca 37|Ithaca 37 Stakeout]].]]
[[File:CODBOLiveActComRemington870FPS.jpg|thumb|none|600px|If you ever see yourself in a similar situation just remember, they're right behind you.]]
[[File:CODBOLiveActComAUG&PumpShotgun.jpg|thumb|none|600px|See girls do play COD.]]
m16 has been removed, only "ar-15 carbine" is there.
==Mini Uzi==
[[File:CODBOLiveActComMiniUzi.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A player firing his [[Mini Uzi]], which appears to be standing in for it's full sized counterpart actually seen in game.]]
==='''M16 is in.'''===
==AUG==
I am not sure which version is that, but i added it as A1.
[[File:CODBOLiveActComAUG&PumpShotgun.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The [[AUG]] in the background. Note the black finish, where the one in game is olive drab.]]
[[File:CODBOLiveActComAUG.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]]
It have been confirmed in '''Call of Duty:Black ops INSIGHT''' trailer.
==Colt M4A1==
[[File:CODBOLiveActComM733.jpg|thumb|none|600px|"My emblem is bigger than yours".]]
[[File:CODBOLiveActComAR15&M203.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Kobe Bryant of the NBA's Los Angeles Lakers with an [[M4A1]] with an [[M203]]. The "Mamba" emblem refers to his nickname, The Black Mamba.]]
Oh crap, they mentioned Sonny Puzikas, I remember that name from the spetsnaz episode of Deadliest Warrior.
==WASR-2==
==Weapons that would make sense==
[[File:CODBOLiveActComWASR2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Hotel employee somehow gets into a shootout. Still not as crazy as spring break.]]
[[File:CODBOLiveActComRPG7.jpg|thumb|none|600px|A player about to fire his [[RPG-7]] as he gives a sneak peak at a faction that did not make it into the final game. The all powerful Best Buy faction.]]
: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).
[[File:CODBOLiveActComRPG7Kimmel.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Jimmy Kimmel (yes that Jimmy Kimmel) is about to fire the RPG-7. He humorously falls on his ass due to the back blast.]]
: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"
==GE M134==
: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.
[[File:CODBOLiveActComM134Huey.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The [[M134]] being fired from an UH-1 Huey.]]
[[File:CODBOLiveActComM134Huey2.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Thats... one way to do your job in the demolition business.]]
==Crossbow==
''''''Some good proofs''' :'''
[[File:CODBOLiveActComCrossbow.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The Crossbow about to be fired.]]
http://nam64-75.hill.cz/download/file.php?id=1169 ('' '''SSG Patrick Tadina with his Vz. 58''''' )
==Decoy Grenades==
What appears to be improvised grenades made out of rifle rounds can be used to create a decoy on enemy radars.
http://www.psywarrior.com/rewardforguns.gif ( '''''Vietcong fighters firearms info poster, left side, third from down''''' )
== Tomahawk (Strider Hatchet) ==
The Tomahawk is a thrown weapon occupying the lethal grenade slot, serving the same role as the throwing knife from ''[[Modern Warfare 2]]'' in multiplayer. In singleplayer, it's only available on the mission "Rebirth" after obtaining it from a Russian harbor worker and killing him with it. It is based on the medium variant of the Strider Hatchet and is anachronistic. An M-1910 hand axe would have been more appropriate.
http://img159.imageshack.us/img159/1164/biethaisamopal9wq.jpg ( '''''Captured Vz. 58 on left''''' )
[[Image:Tomahawk-BO.jpg|thumb|none|600px|Tomahawk in Create-a-Class.]]
[[Image:Tomahawk-BOthrow.jpg|thumb|none|400px|A Tomahawk being thrown.]]
http://i238.photobucket.com/albums/ff164/joshuadowdle/Dad.jpg ( '''''In hands of SSG Patrick Tadina''''' )
== Ballistic Knife ==
The ballistic knife is a powerful melee weapon that available only in multiplayer and zombie modes. The knife is firing blades with a spring inside the body. Even though the ballistic knife does not appear in single player, its appearance in multiplayer could be seen as anachronistic, as the ballistic knife was not developed until the early 1980's. A weird choice could have been a some type of VC spring pointed stick (VC uses stick to create weapons, including crossbows).
The ballistic knife in game also has an unrealistically long range, the real ballistic knife has a maximum range of only twenty to thirty feet while the blades in game travels near infinitely in an arc.
''SSG Patrick Tadina - Legendary, five-tour Vietnam ranger. He is in rangers´s hall of fame.''
[[Image:BK-BO.jpg|thumb|none|600px|The ballistic knife being reloaded.]]
==Should be==
== Knife ==
There should be M72 LAWs, M60s and M14s. cause this is Vietnam baby!
The Rambo II inspired knife returns in ''Black Ops''. It is still a one-hit kill, but unlike the previous versions, seems to cause a very large fountain of blood to appear after knifing an enemy.
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"
Even if the fact that this particular knife wasn't actually used by the military is ignored, its appearance in the 60s would be technically anachronistic since it was developed for the 1985 movie ''[[Rambo: First Blood Part II]]''.
I'm sure you will also be able to pick up laser weapons and crap like that. [[User:SargeOverkill]]
[[Image:Rambo_knife_2.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Rambo II Survival Knife]]
The Prison Knife is a melee weapon used in the mission "Vorkuta". It appears to be a jagged piece of scrap metal, similar to a 'shank' or 'shiv'. After Mason acquires another weapon, the prison knife is no longer equipped, and is only used by pressing the melee button. Blood can be seen on the blade from stabbing the prison guard earlier, which gives some detail.
The Karambit Knife is a combat knife used in the mission "Executive Order". It is used to kill a Soviet soldier by sticking it into the soldier's spinal cord, killing him, allowing the player and Frank Woods to take their uniform and infiltrate the launch site. Though this blade is used only by US Federal Air Marshals currently, Mason and Woods could have used it instead of a normal blade to aid in the purpose of the mission. Unlike a normal blade, it is shaped like a jungle cat's claw. It is [https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/cod-black-ops-knife.791781/ based] on the Emerson Karambit Fixed Blade which makes it heavily anachronistic as Emerson Knives was founded in 1996.
The SOG Knife is a special knife used by the Mason in the mission "Victor Charlie". This is the only time the SOG Knife is used. It is [https://www.bladeforums.com/threads/cod-black-ops-knife.791781/ based] on Randall Model 14 "Attack" with sawteeth and a micarta handle.
[[Image:Shot0159.jpg|thumb|none|600px|SOG Knife in idle. Note the tally marks.]]
[[Image:Shot0167.jpg|thumb|none|600px|SOG Knife been drawn.]]
== Bowie Knife ==
The Bowie Knife is a special melee weapon which can be bought for 3000 points in Zombies maps "Der Riese", "Kino der Toten" and "Five". Gameplay-wise, it increases melee damage from 150 to 1150, making it a one-hit-kill for zombies from Round 1 to Round 11. It is a one-hit-kill to Hellhounds all the way up until the third Hellhound round.
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)
== M1942 Machete ==
The M1942 Machete is featured in the campaign. It is used by the Vietcong and is carried in a plastic sheath by US marines and MACV SOG operatives.
: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)
= Attachments =
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)
Due to ''Black Ops'' following in the footsteps of the highly successful ''Modern Warfare 2'' with its wide variety of attachments, the game features many anachronistic and out of place attachments. Back in the 1960s, even special forces weren't that much tactical and used relatively plain weapons with maybe just some optic at most. The attachment system of ''Black Ops'' is just an injection of modern tactical perceptions into the past.
== Red Dot Sight ==
The Israeli '''Elbit Falcon sight''' appears as the "Red Dot Sight" for the western weapons. Its depiction in the 1960s is anachronistic as the Falcon was produced in the 1980s. A better optic would be the Nydar Sight (1945), even though it’s only available for shotguns.
'''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)
A fictionalized depiction of the Russian '''Kobra red dot sight''' appears as the "Red Dot Sight" for the Soviet weapons. Its depiction in the 1960s is anachronistic as it was introduced in 1996 in reality.
: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)
The concept of red dot sights didn't exist in the 1960s an the closest thing were occluded eye gunsights such as the Singlepoint SP220 which was actually used by US special forces in the 1970s Son Tay raid.
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...
== Reflex Sight ==
The Swedish '''Aimpoint Electronic''' also known as '''Aimpoint MarkII''' appears as the "Reflex Sight". The Aimpoint Electronic is the first red dot sight in history. It was invented in 1974 and launched in 1975, however, that means its appearance in the 1960s is anachronistic. The Singlepoint Sight would have be the more appropriate scope as it was developed in 1968, but even then, it didn’t saw uses in Vietnam until the Son Tay Raid in November 1970.
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)
== ACOG Scope ==
The '''Colt 3×20 scope''' appears as the "ACOG Scope" for the western weapons. While the Colt scope was used in the Vietnam War, its appearance during the Bay of Pigs invasion is anachronistic considering that the earlier 3x20 version was developed around [http://www.sniperglass.com/Item/1028 1962].
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]]
The Russian '''PK-A''' appears as the "ACOG Scope" for the Soviet weapons and the Galil. However, this is heavily anachronistic considering that it was developed around 2004. The more appropriate scope could have been the PGO-7 scope (1959).
== Degtyarov ==
Equipping the AUG with an "ACOG Scope" turns it into an A1 version complete with a '''Swarovski scope''', however, the entire AUG platform is anachronistic.
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.
The XL 60 version of the '''SUSAT scope''' appears as the "ACOG Scope" for the Enfield. However, this is anachronistic considering that this iteration of the SUSAT appeared first on the XL 60 which itself was introduced after June 14, 1976. Also the left side of the scope appears to be a mirror of the right side. A slightly more appropriate scope would be the Enfield EM-2 scope (1951), though the scope itself would've be adjusted for gameplay reasons.
==ummmm==
The actual Trijicon ACOG Scope really doesn't appear in the game, but its appearance and the term "ACOG" itself would have been heavily anachronistic since it was introduced in 1987.
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)===
== Infrared Scope ==
== AR-10 ==
The '''AN/PVS-3A night vision sight''' appears as the "Infrared Scope" for the western weapons. Its depiction in the 1960s is anachronistic as it was produced circa 1970, but it was used in the Vietnam War for M16s and XM21s. It is depicted with a reticle from the AN/PVS-4 night vision scope. The older AN/PVS-2 (1967) would have been a better choice.
Another unknown M16 family gun. But this one seems more like [[Armalite AR-10]] A4
The '''NSPU 1PN34''' appears as the "Infrared Scope" for the Soviet weapons. Its depiction in the 1960s is anachronistic as it was developed in the 1970s. It is depicted with its proper reticle. The NSP-2 (1957) would have been a better choice.
Both the AN/PVS-3A and NSPU 1PN34 are depicted as dual band thermal/night vision optics, which is inaccurate to the real devices which are solely night vision devices; the concept of such dual band optics is also very anachronistic, appearing in the late 2000s at the earliest with fusion devices such as the AN/PSQ-20. Weirdly enough, the night vision sight appears to be a pale blue color, resembling the image from white phosphor image intensifiers; this is also anachronistic as white phosphor image intensifiers did not exist in the 1960s, and would not come into major use until the 1990s (in applications such as the AN/AVS-9's MX-10160 intensifiers). Both the PVS-3A and 1PN34 used green phosphor intensifiers and should produce a monochrome green image accordingly.
[[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
The M41 ITAS sight on the BGM-71 TOW possesses a similar pale blue image but with no passive illumination of heat sources, which is also incorrect as TOW missile systems specifically used thermal optics (the M41 ITAS in particular is supposed to use second-generation FLIR).
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.
== Grip ==
The '''Knight's Armament vertical grip''' appears as the "Grip" attachment, though some SMGs use their stocks to represent the grip attachment instead. The appearance of the KAC vertical grip in the 1960s is heavily anachronistic as the KAC rail adapter system and presumably foregrip became available in 1997.
:It's a strange AR-15 Carbine with a flat top [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:20, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
=Discussion=
AR-10 is not necessarily civilian. It is entirely possible that SOF would use one.
I just realize that the BUISs on the Commando looked kinda like Troy Industry sights and they they are...backwards. They are supposed to fold back down towards you and not forward [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] ([[User talk:Excalibur01|talk]]) 23:49, 1 April 2013 (EDT)
I think is not AR10.AR10 use .308 or 7.62x51mm round and the magazine large and short than AR15.[[User:Tanarmy|Tanarmy]]
== Regarding the HK21... ==
: Its uselles to keep AR-10 discussion here. We all know its that ankward AR-15 or XM177 or whatever.
Shouldn't an HK21E that feeds from magazines be referred to as an HK11E?
As I understand the numbers: 21 = 7.62x51mm belt fed, 11 = 7.62x51mm magazine fed, 23 = 5.56x45mm belt fed and 13 = 5.56x45mm magazine fed.
The original HK21 could be adapted to feed from G3 mags or drums but I don't know if the "E" for Export models could be modded in the same way.
Is there an obvious visual difference between an HK21E with an adaptor kit and an HK11E? If so, which one is it that's in the game? [[User:Stickie|Stickie]] ([[User talk:Stickie|talk]]) 19:11, 10 April 2013 (EDT)
== Un-identified guns ==
: According to HKPro.com I was right - an HK21E adapted to fire from G3 mags or drums *is* an HK11E. I'll change the entry now. [[User:Stickie|Stickie]] ([[User talk:Stickie|talk]]) 20:33, 10 April 2013 (EDT)
[[Image:MP5G3.JPG|thumb|none|400px|Un-identified gun '''1''' : Possibly [[MP5]] or [[G3]].]]
::From the images I get of the HK11, it has a G3-style magwell with no facility for a belt feed. If you look carefully at the in-game model of the HK21, it has a magwell but it ''also'' has a belt feed opening, so it's not right for an HK11. It also doesn't have the magazine adaptor on it that an HK21 would need to use G3 mags, so it's just wrong. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 02:26, 11 April 2013 (EDT)
[[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 ==
::On looking at it the HK21E in this game is a bodge job. Firstly, it has the belt feed from and HK21 not an HK21E. On the original HK21 the gun had a rectangular magazine well with an open side into which was inserted either a belt feed or a flat sided mag adapter (see [http://www.hkparts.net/shop/pc/HK21-Factory-Magazine-Adapter-RARE-p233.htm here], the fuller grey part in the middle is the adapter). On an HK21E the whole thing is replaced with a G3 style well, and in this case the gun does become an HK11E as this is the only difference. However the belt feed on the HK21E looks different, protruding much further out the left side of the gun and isn't as "tall" as this feed system. It uses some HK21E parts though like the stock, so it is a mess. Not to mention, as Evil Tim said, it is impossible on either gun to insert a magazine if there is a belt feed. However it is ''more'' possible on a regular HK21 as that always has a magazine well of a sort that is just blocked by the belt feed, as opposed to the HK21E where the whole thing is swapped out. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 06:04, 11 April 2013 (EDT)
From the looks of it, it might be an RPK-74. Note the 45-round banana mag and the flash suppressor.
== Legacy zombie maps ==
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*
Should we have to include the weapons from the legacy zombie maps? --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 14:26, 29 August 2013 (EDT)
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)
:I can only add that the WWII-guns, used in the Zombie maps, clearly taken from '''Wolrd at War'''. --[[User:Slon95|Slon95]] ([[User talk:Slon95|talk]]) 08:42, 9 February 2016 (EST)
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.
The square shape of the baseplate allows to identify the in-game weapon as BM-36, the predecessor of BM-37. The "PM" in the name is also incorrect because "PM" means "polkovoy minomet" ("regimental mortar"), and it was used for 120mm mortars while 82mm mortars were "BM"s ("batalyonny minomet" - "battalion mortar"). So my question: is "82-PM-37" the name used for this weapon in the game? If so, at least a clarification will be useful that the in-game image is of a different weapon. In case if the weapon is called in game with some generic name (like "a Soviet mortar"), it would be better to rename this entry. Thanks. [[User:Greg-Z|Greg-Z]] ([[User talk:Greg-Z|talk]]) 16:59, 26 October 2013 (EDT)
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)
==Enfield XL64E5==
Since [[List of firearms used by British Armed Forces#Experimental|this page]] states that the weapon was produced from 1964 to 1970, then how come the weapon is described as "anachronistic" in the main article? --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 11:53, 5 October 2014 (EDT)
:Firstly, this was just a prototype weapon that never went into full production. Those dates are the period over which it was developed, so the prototype in this form would not be available until into the 70s whilst the level it appears in is set in 1968. Secondly, I think these dates might actually be wrong, but not sure as it is incredibly hard to come by solid data for these experimental weapons. I think that although earlier versions of the XL64 were finished in the early 70s, the final version (which was used in the NATO trials) which is depicted here, the XL64E5, was not finalised until 1976 or thereabouts. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 19:30, 5 October 2014 (EDT)
::Uh okay, thanks for the info. I've added to the main page that the EM-2 would be more accurate to the game. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 05:04, 6 October 2014 (EDT)
==M1911==
== Multiplayer set in the 1970s? ==
In the title screen there is a soldier holding a 1911 i believe it also says something on the side.
I'm playing against the bots on Berlin Wall. One of the buildings is a music store, some of the albums are labeled, "Sounds of the '70s". So, I'm assuming the multiplayer portion takes place between 1970-1975 which would make some of the anachronistic weapons unanachronistic (excluding the campaign of course.) - [[User:1morey]] November 5, 2014 1:25 PM (EST)
:If they were advertising "Sounds of the '70's," I would think that's definitely proof it's NOT in the seventies. If you listen to the radio, they never refer to the current decade ("Greatest hits of the seventies, eighties, nineties, and today!"). Given the DDR flag, I'm guessing eighties. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 15:33, 5 November 2014 (EST)
::On Stadium, there are also references to the year 1972, so it can be assumed some multiplayer maps may take place further than 1968.[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 00:53, 6 November 2014 (EST)
It says "Sally" on the slide.
== SVD ==
Is it worth mentioning that the SVD has a safety lever of an AK and that the safety is on? --[[User:CnC Fin|CnC Fin]] ([[User talk:CnC Fin|talk]]) 04:31, 27 March 2015 (EDT)
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)
==Vz 58==
I really wonder why(thinking about the time when the action takes place)they didn't included a Sa. Vz. 58 used by NVA.It is pretty modern and accurate compared to an Ak 47. [[User:VLAD M|VLAD M]] ([[User talk:VLAD M|talk]]) 05:48, 14 July 2015 (EDT)
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
Pretty sure they didn't start using Vz 58s until after the Vietnam War. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 06:37, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
== Wait... ==
== GP ==
Upcoming CoD,what what what?!
--[[Special:Contributions/76.235.34.31|76.235.34.31]] 02:31, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
The GP grenade launcher doesn't have any quadrant sight in BO, unlike other CoD games. I will fix the info, but first, is it actually a GP-30? Probably yes, due to lack of support frame behind it; otherwise, we could assume that it is an actual GP-25, just like the game labels it. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 07:43, 16 July 2015 (EDT)
:Have you checked the third person model? In Blops 2 there's no sight in first person but there is one in third. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 08:25, 16 July 2015 (EDT)
::Yeah, I checked it, and unlike BO2 the third-person model lacks the quadrant sight as well. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 10:13, 16 July 2015 (EDT)
:::I've changed the info on the page to GP-25. If there's anything that proves otherwise, such as the support frame stuff or something like that let us know. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 06:03, 15 August 2015 (EDT)
::::EDIT (three years later) : in addition to that component, the in-game launcher has four ribs around the barrel, in the same setup as a GP-30 (while a GP-25 has three). Therefore, I'll edit it back to GP-30. On another note, the version in CoD4, MW2, MW3, and BO2 only has two ribs, for some weird reason. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 14:05, 28 July 2018 (EDT)
== good decision ==
== XM21 with IR Scope ==
As well as Weapon customization there will also be a character customization feature.
If you put the IR Scope on the M14, it becomes the XM21. [http://imageevent.com/willyp/firearmsalbums/usspringfieldxm21sniper;jsessionid=gef3ol6hr1.camel_s?p=55&n=1&m=-1&c=3&l=0&w=4&s=0&z=9 Look at the link right here.]
- That game is gonna be just awesome. Character customization ? Damn, just in R6:V style (ha-ha)
:XM21 doesn't have a pistol grip and the IR scope in Blops isn't a PVS-2. Also IIRC the PVS-2 isn't an IR scope anyway, it's an image intensifier. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 08:17, 21 November 2015 (EST)
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.
Considering that this game takes place in the 1960s, wouldn't it be anachronistic for red dot sights and mid-ranged optics (is the ACOG anachronistic as well?) to appear in the game? Did they really exist back in the 1960s or this game, as with most of the guns, adopt the "screw the rules, they had prototypes" attitude? - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] ([[User talk:Kenny99|talk]]) 19:54, 27 January 2016 (EST)
:I believe most of them are anachronistic with the exception of the Colt "ACOG" 4x32 scope. The reflex sight appears to be the first Aimpoint from 1975, and I don't think the western red dot sight is even modeled on a real optic.[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 22:58, 27 January 2016 (EST)
::I looked into the concept of red dot sights more closely and came across the idea of reflector sights. They apparently existed since WW2 (although they were more commonly used on machine guns, AA cannons, and ship weaponry). I read that after WW2, custom and detachable weapon sights started appearing, but most likely very obscure and not so widespread. As for Infrared scopes and such, I think Germany made detachable scopes for the StG44 during WW2, including a prototype Infrared scope called the "Vampire". Then again, I'm not so certain about the plausibility of red dot sights, "reflex sights", and Infrared scopes as well as attachable weapon mounts (such as rails) for optics. - [[User:Kenny99|Kenny99]] ([[User talk:Kenny99|talk]]) 22:29, 27 January 2016 (EST)
Customizable characters in a game where... you can't actually ''see'' the character? FAIL.
:::The STG44's setup was nicknamed the "Vampyr" because Germans. The same set-up was used by the US Military in the M3 Carbine. Any rail or scope mount would have to be a custom make because Weaver Rails were still a while away. I always got the vibe with Black Ops that they intended it to be set in the 1980's, what with all the more 80's equipment, but the higher ups made them go to the Vietnam era because the Nam era is a reasonably untapped genre, like WWI or the Spanish-American War. -- [[User:PaperCake|PaperCake]] 22:47, 27 January 2016 (EST)
* Customizable characters in game where will be 3rd person mode, and where other players can see it ? Your post '''fail'''.
::::Don't forget this sight, it's mounted on a BAR--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 01:01, 28 January 2016 (EST)
:When did Black Ops become third person? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 00:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
[[File:OM-BARa.jpg|thumb|600px|none|This movie came out in 1971, no idea how long this sight been around at that point. Nice suit.]]
::::::That's just the scope from an M3 mounted on a BAR. --[[User:Funkychinaman|Funkychinaman]] ([[User talk:Funkychinaman|talk]]) 08:05, 28 January 2016 (EST)
:::::Was the PK-A that can be mounted on the AK around in the 60's? [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] ([[User talk:Mr. Wolf|talk]]) 01:57, 28 January 2016 (EST)
::::::I stand corrected....?--[[User:AnActualAK47|AnActualAK47]] ([[User talk:AnActualAK47|talk]]) 10:48, 28 January 2016 (EST)
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.
The Red Dot Sight was first introduced in 1970, when Singlepiont appears in the Vietnam War. --[[User:Treliazz777|Treliazz777]] ([[User talk:Treliazz777|talk]]) 12:33, 15 April 2016 (EDT)
: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 ?
== Commando in Black Ops ==
I think it's hilarious how people are whinig about the customization... Go play R6. Custom characters work in FPS games.
I think the Commando is an Colt 733 With a Flattop (Colt M4 Commando)?
: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)
[[File:Colt_M733_with_Flattop.jpeg|thumb|450px|none|Colt Model 933 with Fiberlite stock, A1 profile barrel, slim handguards, and no bayonet lug - 5.56x45mm]]
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.
It looks similar to the Colt M933, but is an M733 with Flattop. The Commando has an Flip Up Iron Sight in the game.--[[User:Treliazz777|Treliazz777]] ([[User talk:Treliazz777|talk]]) 12:40, 15 April 2016 (EDT)
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 ==
:Firstly, as far as I know there is no such thing as a Model 733 with a flat top, that is just a Model 933. What do you think the difference is? The gun in the game isn't a Model 933 or a 733 though, as regardless of the different design of rail, it also has a slickside upper receiver without a FA or BD. The closest match I can come up with would be a GAU-5A/A with a flash hider rather than the moderator (which was actually done) with a fictional/custom upper with a sight rail. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 17:37, 15 April 2016 (EDT)
:: c552 is right about the Model 733/Model 933 remarks. I also concur with him about the game gun most closely resembling a GAU-5/A variant. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 01:24, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
You think they're putting that in there to copy MW2?
:::What it really is, is a gun model made by people that don't actually know anything about guns. In video games a gun can be a whole slew of things do to a dev team's poor gun modeling skills/lack of knowledge. As evidenced by the sling that blocks the bolt release that's used in the reload animation. The main problem is that Treyarch felt the need to make it a flattop AR-15 even though they were never used or made in numbers in the 60s, why would mounting optics on a XM177 carrying handle be so bad? I agree that it seems to be a GAU-5/A with a made-up flattop upper and "filled in" flash hider, I also noticed it has partial magazine fencing too. [[User:Mr. Wolf|Mr. Wolf]] ([[User talk:Mr. Wolf|talk]]) 01:43, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
: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)
:::: There were experimental flat-top carbines back then, but as you said they were never actually used or issued. That said, I agree there's nothing wrong with actually having optics on the carry handle - indeed that was the case for the longest time. But it evidently doesn't follow their own rigidly self-imposed aesthetic for the game weapons. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 17:32, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
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)
The AR pictured above isn't ''exactly'' an M933, it looks like someone built themselves a lookalike. It has an A1 profile barrel, older slimline handguards, and no bayonet lug. A ''true'' M933 is simply an M4A1 with an 11.5" barrel, retaining the thicker barrel width, double heat shield handguards, and FSP with bayonet lug. That said, however, the Commando in this game is pure fictional franken gun, simply a way for Treyarch to include a "SOPMOD" AR long before the M4 was ever invented and justifying it with the weak excuse that "SOG can get whatever they want". [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 06:34, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
:The Colt carbines are kind of a crap-shoot in regards to what features they have, with the 933 being available with or without a bayonet lug, A1 or A2 profile barrel, and either handguard. [http://www.autoweapons.com/photos10/apr/3240m16j.jpg Here] is another 933 with no lug, an A1 barrel, slim handguards and the M4 style stock, and [http://www.autoweapons.com/photos14/sep/vk340m16a.jpg here] is one to the same spec but with the wide handguards. From what I have seen it seems that the thin barrel and no bayonet lug is the most common option (which makes the most sense as this features are pretty useless on a barrel of this length). I believe that all of these images (including the original posted above) are real Colt weapons advertised on Autoweapons. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]])
So I think it could be an GAU-5/A with Flash Hider.--[[User:Treliazz777|Treliazz777]] ([[User talk:Treliazz777|talk]]) 10:25, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
[[File:GAU-5AA with A1 flash hider.jpg|thumb|450px|none|GAU-5A/A with A1 flash hider - 5.56x45mm]]
:No, the GAU-5/A is a different gun with a 10" barrel, the game gun has a longer barrel more like the 11.5" barrel of the GAU-5A/A. This is the gun that you pictured above (which I have properly renamed as the image name was totally nonsensical). Also, when posting images use the code that I have changed it to above so that it is a thumbnail that can have a descriptive caption. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 12:29, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
::I've rewritten the Commando section to try and have it make some sort of sense, and I noticed that there is an image where it is fitted with optics and has the front sight present (albeit vertically stunted) and the caption reads "Suppressed Colt Commando with Kobra sight. Note clan tag engraved on the charging handle. Also note that, unlike in the released game, the front sight is still present". Anybody know where this is from? Is it early promotional footage or from a beta or what? --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 13:06, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
- Heh. Spas and AUG were in tons of other games. --[[User:Werc|Werc]] 05:18, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I think the reason why it has a removable carry handle because Treyarch do the same Flip up sights to the Enfield, Famas, G11, Aug, and M60. So if these Iron Sight were not in the game, than the Commando would have the M16's Iron sights.--[[User:Treliazz777|Treliazz777]] ([[User talk:Treliazz777|talk]]) 13:32, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
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)
Someone who's not on IMFDB told me that he believes that the Commando is exactly the GAU-5A/A configuration about the USAF flash hider in place of the moderator) "''and the flat-topped receiver is not fictional but what appears to be a chopped off carry handle with a bolted on rail. According to [http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_3_118/573301_History_of_flattop_uppers____.html this discussion], this was done in the late 80s and early 90s before the introduction of actual flat-topped receivers. That is also the case with the M16 when mounted with sight attachments apparently. While the article mentions the Model 656 receiver as some kind of justification for the flat-topped receiver actually that's not the case as the BO version is just a chopped off version and this is yet another anachronism''". Ideas? --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 13:17, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
I'm thinkin' maybe they showed off the MW2 guns first to get MW2 fans interested in this game. Then maybe later they'll show off some new guns. Here's to hopin'. [[User:That's One Angry Duck|That's One Angry Duck]] 22:29, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I swear that everything in this game makes me think they intended it to be set in the 1980's rather than the 1960's. The story about brain-washing and rogue Soviet soldiers feels like a cheesy Cannon Films B movie rather than a 1960's set story. The inclusion of several 80's guns over the more proper arsenal that has already been established by previous games like Vietcong seem to back that theory up. Even the Vietnam elements feel more like 1980's CIA shittery than 1960's. I have no leads on the development team, but it feels like the game was intended to be in the 1980's and was just shifted over to the 60's last minute, which could explain how almost every gun is an anachronism. --[[User:PaperCake|PaperCake]] 14:26, 15 July 2017 (EST)
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.
Or the 1990's. Plus missions like "Executive Order" takes place in 1963, but in realism, it takes place in 1988. The mission "Rebirth" takes place in 1968, but it suppose to takes place in 1989. The mission "Numbers" takes place in 1968, but for realism, it takes place in 1990, and the mission "WMD" take place in 1968, but it should take place in 1997, which is 6 years after the cold war. Back to the Commando, I just figure out about the model. Treyarch wanted to make this gun like a combination with the older CAR-15s and the M4. The flattop rail was based on the MIL-STD-1913 scope rail, which never used in CAR-15s. When you look at the Commando on the E3 Demo, you can see the MIL-STD-1913 scope rail. The Troy Battle Sights was a modern 2000's sight, and the M203 was model after the M203A1. Black Ops was not suppose to go realism, but it was suppose to be more wacky unlike the Modern Warfare Series. Now, I heard rumors saying that the next Black Ops game was going to be a Vietnam Setting, but not as a wacky game, but focus on realism.--[[User:Treliazz|Treliazz]] ([[User talk:Treliazz|talk]]) 10:05, 30 July 2019 (EDT)
You don't get the fans back with the same old guns. You draw interests with NEW guns that hasn't been used before. Variety and distinctions. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:19, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
== Red Dot Sights ==
Originally the RDS were Korba Sights, but on the AK47, AK-74U, and on the RPK, the RDS looks different. I trying to figure what kind of RDS it is.--[[User:Treliazz|Treliazz]] ([[User talk:Treliazz|talk]]) 16:23, 10 July 2016 (EDT)
== Commando Discussion ==
Well, Treyarch apparently didnt start copying first. MW2´s specops get idea fairly sure from WaW´s coop system :D
I read the Topic, and I'm kinda want to search up some Variants of the Commando:
: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
XM177 Shorty (XM177 Short Barrel with A1 Flash Hider)
Well how much differently could essentially just a shortened MP5 with a foregrip work from the regular MP5?
GAU-5AA (On Topic)
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.
Colt 733 (M16A2/M4 Commando)
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
Colt 933 (M4 Commando)
"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.
Crossfire has the same gun (But a XM177 Flash Hider), and it's based on the Commando in Black Ops, and it was refer as M4 Commando (Also they have an XM177 with flattop).
:Look, I can understand having access to weapons no one has ever heard of at the time, but you can't have access to weapons if it doesnt EXIST in the world yet. I mean just because they are SOG doesn't mean they have their own special gunsmith to factory make new parts and designs for weapons that haven't been thought up yet. [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 04:21, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
== What the hell is up with this AR-15 Carbine? ==
The M60, Enfield, G11, AUG, Famas has the same iron sights. So Colt 933 can't count (Plus the optics on the M16 has a flattop, so that could be like the commando).
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)
Honestly, I don't think this is a GAU-5AA, because I don't see why is it this gun.
In my theory, this might be a Fictional XM177 with A1 Flash Hider.--[[User:Treliazz777|Treliazz777]] ([[User talk:Treliazz777|talk]]) 02:49, 22 July 2017 (EDT)
- 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)
:XM177 is just the name used for the CAR-15 in US military use in Vietnam, a "fiction XM177 variant" ''is'' a CAR-15 variant.
:Also, it would not be remotely realistic for the CIA to be using MP40s in the 1960s, or the Soviet Union to be using PPShs in the 1960s, and the AKMS doesn't fit as a substitute for a shortened AK because it's full-length. The RPG-7, meanwhile, entered service in 1958, which was before the Cuban Missile Crisis: it just didn't see ''combat'' until Vietnam in real life. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 04:18, 22 July 2017 (EDT)
::Okay, I could agree with you, The RPG-7 was started in 1958, but it was in service in 1961 by the Soviets. In Cuba, the weapons were the FAL and some WW2 and Korean War Weapons. The RPG-7 first war was the Vietnam War, and it was use by the North Vietnamese and the VC in 1967. I was going to remove the WAW Gun, because it's not like realistic. I don't know the Commando is close to the GAU-5AA, I had to be honest.--[[User:Treliazz777|Treliazz777]] ([[User talk:Treliazz777|talk]]) 05:19, 22 July 2017 (EDT)
:::To clarify why the GAU-5A/A is stated as the closest match, the reason is that it has the combination of a slickside upper and an 11.5" barrel. The XM177 has a shorter 10" barrel, whilst the XM177E2 has an A1 upper with a forward assist. If you don't know what I mean by this, check out the [[Colt AR-15 Identification Guide]]. --[[User:Commando552|commando552]] ([[User talk:Commando552|talk]]) 21:23, 22 July 2017 (EDT)
::::The in-game gun also appears to have a partial fence on the lower receiver (not a full one), which indeed matches the GAU-5A/A reference image that we have on the main page. By the way, the majority of the GAU-5A/A images that I found online have full fence lowers, while our reference image (with the moderator replaced) is an exception; are there any other images out there with partial fence lowers? --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 13:30, 6 October 2020 (EDT)
::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)
== Models ==
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?''
I was looking though some models for the AUG, M14, WA2000, and M60. I don't know if it's based on the models from 007 QoS.--[[User:Treliazz777|Treliazz777]] ([[User talk:Treliazz777|talk]]) 23:45, 12 April 2018 (EDT)
:::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)
== ray gun ==
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.
Where are the wonder weapons like the ray gun
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Ray_Gun
[[User:IRMacGuyver|IRMacGuyver]] ([[User talk:IRMacGuyver|talk]]) 08:27, 14 August 2018 (EDT)
:The silly ray gun doesn't really qualify for inclusion. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 14:28, 14 August 2018 (EDT)
: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)
== Two-handed pistol shooting ==
: 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]
Is it period accurate to see the two-handed technique being used by almost all characters between 1961 and 1968 in the game? I'm reading that it was invented in 1959 (in this specific case the Weaver stance), but I wonder how much time it took for the technique to have become widespread enough. I suppose that if it became quickly popular, this would have been reflected in the movies of that era, which is not the case, as in a significant number of 1960s-1970s movies the handguns are still held with one hand (well, not all filmmakers must have automatically become familiar with the new stance, but still). There are some exceptions, but in these specific cases it's because the character is practice firing and not participating in actual combat; [[Last Adventure, The#Luger P08|here's]] an example (that's one of the earliest media appearances that I know regarding two-handed firing). --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 12:37, 27 October 2018 (EDT)
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)
:Now let's start with a brief overview. The earliest pistol grip technique is the one-handed or "bullseye". As we know for certain, this was common up until at least WW2. Some believe that this stance [https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/26hcyv/why_were_soldiers_and_policemen_originally/ originated in the 18-19th century duels when it made sense to present as narrow a figure as possible to your opponent by standing sideways and firing one-handed]. As for the [https://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/File:Delta_Force_Five_Seven_MW3.jpg grip featured in CoD games], it is not actually a weaver but a [https://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_topics/m9/grip-techniques-used-with.shtml "palm-supported grip" also known as "cup and saucer grip"] or "teacup grip". The saucer grip appears to be [https://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=https%3A%2F%2Fi.chzbgr.com%2Ffull%2F3197724928%2Fh8C2F490E%2F&imgrefurl=https%3A%2F%2Fcheezburger.com%2F3197724928&docid=p365NpQm3Y9W4M&tbnid=NVV7JAALiZ7G5M%3A&vet=10ahUKEwis5sii1qfeAhXyp4sKHWsKDlEQMwhaKBIwEg..i&w=492&h=488&bih=609&biw=1366&q=cup%20and%20saucer%20grip&ved=0ahUKEwis5sii1qfeAhXyp4sKHWsKDlEQMwhaKBIwEg&iact=mrc&uact=8 mocked and dismissed as impractical hollywoodism]. It is believed that it can be [http://firearmshistory.blogspot.com/2012/05/handgun-shooting-positions-bad-stances.html traced back to the revolver era of the Wild West and for a number of reasons it is ineffective with modern guns]. In spite of this, however, in [https://youtu.be/jP7J-JNSUu4?t=283 this video] we can clearly see that the saucer grip was taught back in WW2. In summary, the bullseye and saucer grips were both used in WW2 and I believe that was also the case in Vietnam. As for the actual weaver, I don't think I have ever seen a movie or archival footage of it being used back then, I suppose it was just a novelty in the first few decades. --[[User:Nanomat|Nanomat]] ([[User talk:Nanomat|talk]]) 18:48, 27 October 2018 (EDT)
::So, the Weaver stance is not the first two-handed technique. But then my original question still stands, being whether the two-handed grip in general (not necessarily the Weaver) was used frequently enough in combat during the 1960s or not (as in, not merely for training purposes), and if it would have been more appropriate to see one-handed shooting for most part. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 07:21, 28 October 2018 (EDT)
:::I think we can't say if one technique was used more or less back then, all we can do is acknowledge if the given method existed. You see, it's a personal preference, as we can see in the WW2 training video, the two handed stance is more useful when crouching while one handed might have its benefits when standing so really it is a very situational thing. Also bear in mind that COD doesn't even try to portray such details in a realistic manner, I'm pretty sure that their inspiration comes from movies like Platoon or Full Metal Jacket. Considering that BO actually shows both grips (the ASP is one handed) I say that they should at least get credit for portraying both techniques. On another note, I'm just rewatching Terminator 2 and noticed how the T1000 was firing his gun one handed and that made sense since having a mechanical arm would have enough strength and this takes me back to BO3 where it is quite funny how your character uses two handed grip despite having cyborg arms. --[[User:Nanomat|Nanomat]] ([[User talk:Nanomat|talk]]) 18:42, 29 October 2018 (EDT)
: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)
::::"''bear in mind that COD doesn't even try to portray such details in a realistic manner''"
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
::::[http://youtu.be/Ep85AkCkk-U?t=59 No shit!]
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:
::::<nowiki>:P</nowiki> Now on a more serious note, that's the thing, the two-handed technique is shown as the most widespread in the game, even when standing. Mind you, the ASP is the only pistol shown fired one-handed during normal gameplay (as in, not during some scripted campaign sequences) - except when a player is downed and his third-person model also does this on all handguns, but that's another story. The thing with the ASP is that it only occurs in first-person view; heck, [http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/File:National_Revolutionary_Police_Force_member_Operation_40_BO.JPG just see] how the Cuban police officers are seen firing their ASPs in a level set in 1961; seems a bit far-fetched, don't ya think? --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 06:47, 4 November 2018 (EST)
[[Image:model 656.jpg]]
On another note, just talking about all these things in the game:
''"We use a lot of gun reference materials and spend a lot of time researching pre-production weapons. We basically make a list of every gun even remotely near our time period, some before some after – '''because if it's a prototype weapon you don't know what year it was introduced'''. And if you're an SOG officer, you're the perfect person to test these weapons."''
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)
Bravo. Seriously, I even like it. These guys say that "oh, how we explore all this", but they don't even know when this or that weapon was created. On their spot, I would just honestly admit: "well, we just go to the Google Pictures, typing "weapons prototypes", and chose those we liked without thinking about anything," rather than trying to make a good face over a bad game. --[[User:Slon95|Slon95]] ([[User talk:Slon95|talk]]) 10:41, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
: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)
== Quality Image Dump Part 2: Electric Boogaloo ==
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'm about to upload some new images for this page, anyone is free to start putting them onto the page as they wish.--[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 14:09, 9 January 2019 (EST)
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]]
I'll start putting them on soon. --[[User:Wuzh|Wuzh]] ([[User talk:Wuzh|talk]]) 18:37, 9 January 2019 (EST)
: 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.
:[[File:CODBO BrowningMG.jpg|thumb|none|600px|]] What is this machine gun? I know I've seen Browning M2 style machine guns with that barrel stabilizer but I can't figure out which one it is for the life of me.--[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 21:51, 9 January 2019 (EST)
== Complaints ==
::I also stumbled upon the same strange gun when researching the vehicle it's mounted on but didn't find anything. The vehicle is a Vietnam War gun truck and these appear to have been armed with pretty standard weaponry, M60 and M2s, nothing out of the ordinary. I don't know why but I have the feeling it's some kind of water cannon maybe modeled after something used in anti war protests of the period. --[[User:Nanomat|Nanomat]] ([[User talk:Nanomat|talk]]) 14:05, 10 January 2019 (EST)
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)
OK. I did the image replacements for the lower-quality sections. For the rest though, sometimes I will find an image that I don't know how to caption, and other times I feel like you've missed some important images (like the idle state image for the one-handed ASP), so I don't feel that confident going through the edit just yet. Can you help with adding some of the sections and maybe check if I missed any important images? Thanks. (and maybe check if I missed any images for your MW2 uploads too)
::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)
In the end though I do expect all of the old images and the old non 16:9 images to be completely replaced. (the TT-33 images for example are 1,440 × 900, which is 16:10)--[[User:Wuzh|Wuzh]] ([[User talk:Wuzh|talk]]) 20:03, 11 January 2019 (EST)
:OK, I have a little trouble figuring out which of those images are 16:10 so let me know which others need replacement. I'll be going through a lot of the uploads though, thanks for your help.--[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 22:33, 12 January 2019 (EST)
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.
A suggestion: when screencapping scope reticles, you should aim at bright areas to make the reticle contrast more strongly with the background. Currently some of your scope images (SVD, PSG-1) have very dark or confusing backgrounds that makes it harder to see the reticle. --[[User:Wuzh|Wuzh]] ([[User talk:Wuzh|talk]]) 23:40, 12 January 2019 (EST)
: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)
:Yeah I'll get better versions for those two, I usually try to do that with ADS images so every detail is easy to make out.--[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 23:53, 12 January 2019 (EST)
* 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.
Apparently the page had received an overhaul, as there were some gaps in the page. That's fine and much appreciated, but oddly the fact that the Ithaca 37 "Stakeout" is anachronistic has been removed. Well, in case it was due to a lack of information on production dates, I found this site that provides information (with a source) on the serial number ranges for all shotguns made by the Ithaca Gun Co, and apparently the Stakeout was made from 1981 starting in the 371xxxxxxHG** range, to 1993, with the last serial number ending around 372000533. Just though this might be useful. As such, a sawn off Remington Model 870, sawn off Stevens 620A or a Model 37 S-Prefix "Trench gun" would probably suit the 1960s timeline better.
: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)
https://ithacagun.com/serial-numbers/
::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)
:Thanks for the info; such input is much appreciated. One thing, though: make sure to sign your talk page posts, by typing "<nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>" without the quotes, or by hitting the pencil icon at the top-left of the editing box. Just a heads-up. [[User:Pyr0m4n14c|Pyr0m4n14c]] ([[User talk:Pyr0m4n14c|talk]]) 15:50, 25 April 2019 (EDT)
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)
::::::'''Operation Flashpoint''', '''Rainbow Six: Raven Shield''' and '''Insurgency''' all did tactical reloads properly (ammunition is a number of magazines, not bullets, and if you reload a partially-empty mag it goes back in the pool), and the latter two also simulated +1 capacity. Insurgency is a mod but the other two are retail games. --[[User:MattyDienhoff|MattyDienhoff]] 20:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
== AR-18 ==
* 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)
Just started work on a video project centering around this game, and while taking a close look at the intro cutscene to the "Operation 40" level, I noticed there's a brief glimpse of a guy [https://i.imgur.com/fOqXPRY.jpg training with an AR-18]. The guy to his right looks to be using an M1 Carbine with the post-war upgrades as well. Didn't know whether to put it on the main page or in the misc section here. [[User:Kadorhal|Kadorhal]] ([[User talk:Kadorhal|talk]]) 16:36, 8 May 2019 (EDT)
::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)
:Absolutely, it deserves a spot on the main page - the ''BOII'' page has a section for [[L85A2]]s that only appear in a cutscene, after all. Nice find. [[User:Pyr0m4n14c|Pyr0m4n14c]] ([[User talk:Pyr0m4n14c|talk]]) 17:45, 8 May 2019 (EDT)
::: 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 :)''
::IMO I think images of stock footage weapons should have their own section, like what I did with the RPD and M79 down at the bottom. It looks kind of misleading to see the AR-18 listed in the Table of Contents at the top of the page when it is not actually a usable weapon in the game. Also, the Crossbow also listed on the bottom is apparently made from an AR-18 lower receiver anyway, so we could merge the entries. That's my two cents --[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 14:39, 17 May 2019 (EDT)
:::I support merging the stock footage weapons into their own section. However, I don't support merging the AR-18 with the Crossbow, due to their vastly different mechanisms. What do you think, Kadorhal? --[[User:Wuzh|Wuzh]] ([[User talk:Wuzh|talk]]) 17:33, 17 May 2019 (EDT)
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)
== M1911 one handed rack ==
:: 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'm curious about the way the character racks the slide with one hand. According to some random dudes that's "[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkwhTTwKmJg Physically impossible]" so my question is, are they right? --[[User:Nanomat|Nanomat]] ([[User talk:Nanomat|talk]]) 21:53, 14 May 2019 (EDT)
: 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, [http://youtu.be/-E-FxtDJLAk?t=75 at least with a single pistol] it's possible. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 01:57, 15 May 2019 (EDT)
:: 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)
::Very nice! Even though I'm pretty sure actual operators wouldn't employ it in an actual combat yet it's still cool. Interestingly, the character in BO3 also does it with his cybernetic arms which I suppose would be even more easier and efficient. --[[User:Nanomat|Nanomat]] ([[User talk:Nanomat|talk]]) 19:58, 15 May 2019 (EDT)
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.
:::I've read somewhere that soldiers have been trained to do it that way in case of injury, and Treyarch took the inspiration from this, although I don't know if it's exactly the case. On another note, you also have the [http://youtu.be/fOrYM-nuBO4 one-handed press check]. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 16:42, 19 May 2019 (EDT)
:::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)
::::On other videos I've also seen them recommend in case of injury to press the front of the slide against a wall or something or to clutch it between your thighs. But I gotta give props to Treyarch, they somehow managed to find the tacticoolest and rarest one handed reload haha the video you provided is literally the only place I've seen it IRL. --[[User:Nanomat|Nanomat]] ([[User talk:Nanomat|talk]]) 19:19, 19 May 2019 (EDT)
:::::In fairness though (I should have mentioned it much earlier but I forgot), the guy in the video was just releasing the slide with that technique, and not pulling it back from its original position as in BO1 and BO3. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the latter were possible IRL. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 07:22, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
It would be great if they do include Dirty Harry's gun and Tony Montana's "Little Friend".
== Question about Spetnatz's Guns ==
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
I was wondering, if there proofs that Soviet Armed Forces used Warsaw Pact guns like [[PM-63]], [[Vz. 61 Skorpion]],AMD-63, etc? --[[User:Dannyguns|Dannyguns]] ([[User talk:Dannyguns|talk]]) 04:30, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
: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)
::I doubt it. Firstly, they were brand new weapons when BO takes place and as we know, it takes some time before a new weapon goes into widespread use. Secondly, the Soviets had a very strong arms industry on their own so it wouldn't make sense for them to use Warsaw Pact guns even though I presume they could have obtained them easily. But we must also take into account that in BO they even use NATO weaponry from the future so this makes it an alternate reality anyway. --[[User:Nanomat|Nanomat]] ([[User talk:Nanomat|talk]]) 18:21, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
== Unknown ==
What do you mean by spetsnaz? Ordinary troops, of course not. But the Alpha antiterror group used Scorpion, although they did not exist until 1974. If we mean the special OGPU/NKVD/KGB units, then they used everything they wanted, including American submachine guns, sniper rifles, etc., without worrying about their origin (the USSR in general was extremely double-minded in this regard, not hesitating to buy anything from its "enemies", if they don't have it yourself; and this tendency, I will tell you in confidence, is still relevant), just in the best spirit of these very video games. --[[User:Slon95|Slon95]] ([[User talk:Slon95|talk]]) 19:34, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
The rocket launcher under unknown is an M202 FLASH rocket launcher. Ashdude01 20:20 19 May 2010
:Kiparis, by the way, was developed under the direct impression by the Scorpion, but was not put into use, as it was replaced by the AKS-74U for the unification of ammo and spare parts. --[[User:Slon95|Slon95]] ([[User talk:Slon95|talk]]) 12:55, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
Yes there is i added it to the guns page but some moron removed it
==Do we really need all the alternative options?==
While these alternative options provide some interesting historical context, do we really need all of them? Some of the alternatives are becoming more and more fringe and are degenerating into speculation on what the developers intended a weapon to be, and some of the suggestions I just find are plain unnecessary, like suggesting alternatives for the Minigun. --[[User:Wuzh|Wuzh]] ([[User talk:Wuzh|talk]]) 16:01, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
:While I certainly agree that stuff like the minigun is kinda beyond saving, I think that the alternatives should definitely stay. There are a few that are a bit... out there, sure, but for the most part, they provide interesting historical and technical information, introduce people to guns they might not've been familiar with, and makes the page seem more constructive. If anything, I'd been thinking about adding these sorts of notes to other pages; it lets us teach not only what's wrong, but what's right. [[User:Pyr0m4n14c|Pyr0m4n14c]] ([[User talk:Pyr0m4n14c|talk]]) 16:27, 28 May 2019 (EDT) P.S.: Man, did that last bit sound pretentious. I'm sorry to everybody that had to read that, but the point still stands.
:: The point is to ID the weapons used - that means describing what's there, not rambling about what isn't. Anything that is speculation or supposition should be done away with. As for any (actually accurate) technical or historical info, some is fine but at a certain point it's too much and comes off as overly encyclopedic.. and we're not supposed to be a gun encyclopedia. At the very least keep any factual 'should be' details simple and again factual; leave out anything along the lines of 'it could be..'. [[User:StanTheMan|StanTheMan]] ([[User talk:StanTheMan|talk]]) 22:41, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
:::Yeah, some recent additions were pushing it a bit, but notable/accurate alternatives (such as the Stechkin APS, S&W Model 39, Sa vz. 23, Ithaca 37 Trench Gun, Remington 1100, SA-7 Grail, XM191, etc.) should definitely be kept. --[[User:Ultimate94ninja|Ultimate94ninja]] ([[User talk:Ultimate94ninja|talk]]) 09:59, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
::::In addition, I think that for Vietnam, Stevens 77E would be an even more suitable choice (and some of them - this is interesting - subsequently ended up in the USSR). However, I am afraid to once again clutter up the article, so I will leave it at your discretion. --[[User:Slon95|Slon95]] ([[User talk:Slon95|talk]]) 18:54, 27 June 2020 (EDT)
== PK-AV ==
moviemaster1993 11:58 may 2010
I think this designation refers to the PK-A Venezuela contract variant, which has an Aimpoint-looking battery slot along the bottom left side of the optic that isn't present on the in-game model; I think it should probably just be listed as "PK-A."--[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 11:15, 4 December 2020 (EST) EDIT - nevermind, "PK-AV" must be the translation of "ПK-AB," but the sight still looks more like the basic PK-A or whatever it is rather than that variant.
:Done. --[[User:Nanomat|Nanomat]] ([[User talk:Nanomat|talk]]) 20:57, 17 August 2022 (EDT)
== 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.
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]]<br>
--[[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.
Hey, I'll take that over reloading ''two'' double barrel shotguns at the same time without dropping one anyday. [[Special:Contributions/67.187.27.89|67.187.27.89]] 04:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
== 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: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.<br />
Edit: Actually it just might explain the AUG, because all it really is is a combination of ideas taken from the Enfield EM-2,<br />
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:<br />
[[Image:CODBO-SMG.jpg]]<br />
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:<br />
[[Image:MP5Kprototype.JPG]]<br />
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. <br />
From left to right, starting at the top:<br ?>
-M16A2 (?)<br />
-MAC-10 w/ supressor<br />
-AUG<br />
-Mini-Uzi<br />
-L85<br />
-Scorpion SA Vz 61<br />
-AKs-74u<br />
-Another Skorpion<br />
-SPAS-12<br />
-MP5 (?)<br />
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)
: That pic is here too :) Check out "extras" section in article :D
:The L85 got my gun-boner up, been wanting that since the MW2 L86 LSDisapointment. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::Dude, put that away. :P [[User:Dannysaysnoo|Dannysaysnoo]] 12:23, 22 July 2010 (UTC)
We might also see the Browning HP because of the rumored "Iranian Hostage Situation" level. [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]
:I wouldn't be surprised, but if I see another Desert Eagle, then I'll have to wtf. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
::Deagle prototype and AA12 prototype + level is moved to Buckingham Pallace to add more drama to the game. [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]
:::Sorry, Buck Palace? Explain this? I assume this is a rumour, since so far Operation Nimrod has yet to be confirmed aswell. Sounds interesting though (if a little rediculous and implausible)
::::just kidding. I just jumped on the Black Ops bandwagon [[User:Orita Md.41|Orita Md.41]]
Im guessing the a2 is used since its more availible and when they do motion capture it would look the same. showing how someone moves with a m16 s what they're looking for,
:Also, the footage showing the Spetsnaz game models doing rolls shows the player holding and firing a clearly Vietnam era M16A1, so that's there for sure. Also, I do believe the Iranian Embassy raid will be tacked on much like Mile high Club in CoD 4, simple as a fun epilogue style bonus mission. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
I really hope there's a Browning HP, cause it's cool and cause I'm Canadian lol. It might be in to be honest because in COD4 the Overkill and Last Stand pics had a Glock and then it was added in MW2, and the Overkill pic in WAW was a Browning HP :) [[User:Alex T Snow|Alex T Snow]] 21:56, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
I hope its just "iranian embassy raid inspired", not the real thing, i want more than 6 guys to shoot.
:This is Call of Duty, so you'll always have plenty of enemies to shoot. And yeah Alex, as a fellow Canadian, a Hi-Power would be a nice handgun to have in the game, and period correct. [[User:M14fanboy|M14fanboy]]
As much as I love the Hi Power and actually owning one, I don't want to see one in a game such as call of duty just because of the attention it will recieve from nerds spamming videos on youtube "HEY THIS GUN IS IN CALL OF DUTY!!!!1" It gets really annoying and that kind of attention seems negative to those that actually collect guns. --[[User:FIVETWOSEVEN|FIVETWOSEVEN]] 19:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
:Partially agree with you there. I hate the attention guns get from these games (and suddenly every 12 year old becoming a firearms expert [yes, obviously the M16 is better than the AUG just because CoD says so]) but, I enjoy being able to play with them. Win some, loose some. Well, one or two firearms forums have noticed a HUGE increase in the number of people looking for the 'ACR'. As have a few rifle stores in the 'States that I know of have been plagued by idiot teens looking for hi-tech military grade gear...
I hope there is a HP, they need a 9mm gun for MP (more ammo, less recoil, but less damage) and Id rather see a cool gun then a lame generic beretta coming in.
An AR-15A3 model, use in Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, was used to test the "Commando". It was incorrectly referred to as the M4A1 Carbine, just like the previous Call of Duty game. The Commando was referred to as the "M4A1 Carbine" in the game files.
Error creating thumbnail: File missingA player about to fire his RPG-7 as he gives a sneak peak at a faction that did not make it into the final game. The all powerful Best Buy faction.Error creating thumbnail: File missingJimmy Kimmel (yes that Jimmy Kimmel) is about to fire the RPG-7. He humorously falls on his ass due to the back blast.
This section covers other throwables and melee weapons.
Semtex Grenades
Semtex Grenades return from Modern Warfare 2.
Decoy Grenades
What appears to be improvised grenades made out of rifle rounds can be used to create a decoy on enemy radars.
Tomahawk (Strider Hatchet)
The Tomahawk is a thrown weapon occupying the lethal grenade slot, serving the same role as the throwing knife from Modern Warfare 2 in multiplayer. In singleplayer, it's only available on the mission "Rebirth" after obtaining it from a Russian harbor worker and killing him with it. It is based on the medium variant of the Strider Hatchet and is anachronistic. An M-1910 hand axe would have been more appropriate.
The ballistic knife is a powerful melee weapon that available only in multiplayer and zombie modes. The knife is firing blades with a spring inside the body. Even though the ballistic knife does not appear in single player, its appearance in multiplayer could be seen as anachronistic, as the ballistic knife was not developed until the early 1980's. A weird choice could have been a some type of VC spring pointed stick (VC uses stick to create weapons, including crossbows).
The ballistic knife in game also has an unrealistically long range, the real ballistic knife has a maximum range of only twenty to thirty feet while the blades in game travels near infinitely in an arc.
The Rambo II inspired knife returns in Black Ops. It is still a one-hit kill, but unlike the previous versions, seems to cause a very large fountain of blood to appear after knifing an enemy.
Even if the fact that this particular knife wasn't actually used by the military is ignored, its appearance in the 60s would be technically anachronistic since it was developed for the 1985 movie Rambo: First Blood Part II.
The Prison Knife is a melee weapon used in the mission "Vorkuta". It appears to be a jagged piece of scrap metal, similar to a 'shank' or 'shiv'. After Mason acquires another weapon, the prison knife is no longer equipped, and is only used by pressing the melee button. Blood can be seen on the blade from stabbing the prison guard earlier, which gives some detail.
The Karambit Knife is a combat knife used in the mission "Executive Order". It is used to kill a Soviet soldier by sticking it into the soldier's spinal cord, killing him, allowing the player and Frank Woods to take their uniform and infiltrate the launch site. Though this blade is used only by US Federal Air Marshals currently, Mason and Woods could have used it instead of a normal blade to aid in the purpose of the mission. Unlike a normal blade, it is shaped like a jungle cat's claw. It is based on the Emerson Karambit Fixed Blade which makes it heavily anachronistic as Emerson Knives was founded in 1996.
The SOG Knife is a special knife used by the Mason in the mission "Victor Charlie". This is the only time the SOG Knife is used. It is based on Randall Model 14 "Attack" with sawteeth and a micarta handle.
The Bowie Knife is a special melee weapon which can be bought for 3000 points in Zombies maps "Der Riese", "Kino der Toten" and "Five". Gameplay-wise, it increases melee damage from 150 to 1150, making it a one-hit-kill for zombies from Round 1 to Round 11. It is a one-hit-kill to Hellhounds all the way up until the third Hellhound round.
The M1942 Machete is featured in the campaign. It is used by the Vietcong and is carried in a plastic sheath by US marines and MACV SOG operatives.
Attachments
Due to Black Ops following in the footsteps of the highly successful Modern Warfare 2 with its wide variety of attachments, the game features many anachronistic and out of place attachments. Back in the 1960s, even special forces weren't that much tactical and used relatively plain weapons with maybe just some optic at most. The attachment system of Black Ops is just an injection of modern tactical perceptions into the past.
Red Dot Sight
The Israeli Elbit Falcon sight appears as the "Red Dot Sight" for the western weapons. Its depiction in the 1960s is anachronistic as the Falcon was produced in the 1980s. A better optic would be the Nydar Sight (1945), even though it’s only available for shotguns.
A fictionalized depiction of the Russian Kobra red dot sight appears as the "Red Dot Sight" for the Soviet weapons. Its depiction in the 1960s is anachronistic as it was introduced in 1996 in reality.
The concept of red dot sights didn't exist in the 1960s an the closest thing were occluded eye gunsights such as the Singlepoint SP220 which was actually used by US special forces in the 1970s Son Tay raid.
Reflex Sight
The Swedish Aimpoint Electronic also known as Aimpoint MarkII appears as the "Reflex Sight". The Aimpoint Electronic is the first red dot sight in history. It was invented in 1974 and launched in 1975, however, that means its appearance in the 1960s is anachronistic. The Singlepoint Sight would have be the more appropriate scope as it was developed in 1968, but even then, it didn’t saw uses in Vietnam until the Son Tay Raid in November 1970.
ACOG Scope
The Colt 3×20 scope appears as the "ACOG Scope" for the western weapons. While the Colt scope was used in the Vietnam War, its appearance during the Bay of Pigs invasion is anachronistic considering that the earlier 3x20 version was developed around 1962.
The Russian PK-A appears as the "ACOG Scope" for the Soviet weapons and the Galil. However, this is heavily anachronistic considering that it was developed around 2004. The more appropriate scope could have been the PGO-7 scope (1959).
Equipping the AUG with an "ACOG Scope" turns it into an A1 version complete with a Swarovski scope, however, the entire AUG platform is anachronistic.
The XL 60 version of the SUSAT scope appears as the "ACOG Scope" for the Enfield. However, this is anachronistic considering that this iteration of the SUSAT appeared first on the XL 60 which itself was introduced after June 14, 1976. Also the left side of the scope appears to be a mirror of the right side. A slightly more appropriate scope would be the Enfield EM-2 scope (1951), though the scope itself would've be adjusted for gameplay reasons.
The actual Trijicon ACOG Scope really doesn't appear in the game, but its appearance and the term "ACOG" itself would have been heavily anachronistic since it was introduced in 1987.
Infrared Scope
The AN/PVS-3A night vision sight appears as the "Infrared Scope" for the western weapons. Its depiction in the 1960s is anachronistic as it was produced circa 1970, but it was used in the Vietnam War for M16s and XM21s. It is depicted with a reticle from the AN/PVS-4 night vision scope. The older AN/PVS-2 (1967) would have been a better choice.
The NSPU 1PN34 appears as the "Infrared Scope" for the Soviet weapons. Its depiction in the 1960s is anachronistic as it was developed in the 1970s. It is depicted with its proper reticle. The NSP-2 (1957) would have been a better choice.
Both the AN/PVS-3A and NSPU 1PN34 are depicted as dual band thermal/night vision optics, which is inaccurate to the real devices which are solely night vision devices; the concept of such dual band optics is also very anachronistic, appearing in the late 2000s at the earliest with fusion devices such as the AN/PSQ-20. Weirdly enough, the night vision sight appears to be a pale blue color, resembling the image from white phosphor image intensifiers; this is also anachronistic as white phosphor image intensifiers did not exist in the 1960s, and would not come into major use until the 1990s (in applications such as the AN/AVS-9's MX-10160 intensifiers). Both the PVS-3A and 1PN34 used green phosphor intensifiers and should produce a monochrome green image accordingly.
The M41 ITAS sight on the BGM-71 TOW possesses a similar pale blue image but with no passive illumination of heat sources, which is also incorrect as TOW missile systems specifically used thermal optics (the M41 ITAS in particular is supposed to use second-generation FLIR).
Grip
The Knight's Armament vertical grip appears as the "Grip" attachment, though some SMGs use their stocks to represent the grip attachment instead. The appearance of the KAC vertical grip in the 1960s is heavily anachronistic as the KAC rail adapter system and presumably foregrip became available in 1997.
Discussion
I just realize that the BUISs on the Commando looked kinda like Troy Industry sights and they they are...backwards. They are supposed to fold back down towards you and not forward Excalibur01 (talk) 23:49, 1 April 2013 (EDT)
Regarding the HK21...
Shouldn't an HK21E that feeds from magazines be referred to as an HK11E?
As I understand the numbers: 21 = 7.62x51mm belt fed, 11 = 7.62x51mm magazine fed, 23 = 5.56x45mm belt fed and 13 = 5.56x45mm magazine fed.
The original HK21 could be adapted to feed from G3 mags or drums but I don't know if the "E" for Export models could be modded in the same way.
Is there an obvious visual difference between an HK21E with an adaptor kit and an HK11E? If so, which one is it that's in the game? Stickie (talk) 19:11, 10 April 2013 (EDT)
According to HKPro.com I was right - an HK21E adapted to fire from G3 mags or drums *is* an HK11E. I'll change the entry now. Stickie (talk) 20:33, 10 April 2013 (EDT)
From the images I get of the HK11, it has a G3-style magwell with no facility for a belt feed. If you look carefully at the in-game model of the HK21, it has a magwell but it also has a belt feed opening, so it's not right for an HK11. It also doesn't have the magazine adaptor on it that an HK21 would need to use G3 mags, so it's just wrong. Evil Tim (talk) 02:26, 11 April 2013 (EDT)
On looking at it the HK21E in this game is a bodge job. Firstly, it has the belt feed from and HK21 not an HK21E. On the original HK21 the gun had a rectangular magazine well with an open side into which was inserted either a belt feed or a flat sided mag adapter (see here, the fuller grey part in the middle is the adapter). On an HK21E the whole thing is replaced with a G3 style well, and in this case the gun does become an HK11E as this is the only difference. However the belt feed on the HK21E looks different, protruding much further out the left side of the gun and isn't as "tall" as this feed system. It uses some HK21E parts though like the stock, so it is a mess. Not to mention, as Evil Tim said, it is impossible on either gun to insert a magazine if there is a belt feed. However it is more possible on a regular HK21 as that always has a magazine well of a sort that is just blocked by the belt feed, as opposed to the HK21E where the whole thing is swapped out. --commando552 (talk) 06:04, 11 April 2013 (EDT)
Legacy zombie maps
Should we have to include the weapons from the legacy zombie maps? --Funkychinaman (talk) 14:26, 29 August 2013 (EDT)
I can only add that the WWII-guns, used in the Zombie maps, clearly taken from Wolrd at War. --Slon95 (talk) 08:42, 9 February 2016 (EST)
The square shape of the baseplate allows to identify the in-game weapon as BM-36, the predecessor of BM-37. The "PM" in the name is also incorrect because "PM" means "polkovoy minomet" ("regimental mortar"), and it was used for 120mm mortars while 82mm mortars were "BM"s ("batalyonny minomet" - "battalion mortar"). So my question: is "82-PM-37" the name used for this weapon in the game? If so, at least a clarification will be useful that the in-game image is of a different weapon. In case if the weapon is called in game with some generic name (like "a Soviet mortar"), it would be better to rename this entry. Thanks. Greg-Z (talk) 16:59, 26 October 2013 (EDT)
Enfield XL64E5
Since this page states that the weapon was produced from 1964 to 1970, then how come the weapon is described as "anachronistic" in the main article? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 11:53, 5 October 2014 (EDT)
Firstly, this was just a prototype weapon that never went into full production. Those dates are the period over which it was developed, so the prototype in this form would not be available until into the 70s whilst the level it appears in is set in 1968. Secondly, I think these dates might actually be wrong, but not sure as it is incredibly hard to come by solid data for these experimental weapons. I think that although earlier versions of the XL64 were finished in the early 70s, the final version (which was used in the NATO trials) which is depicted here, the XL64E5, was not finalised until 1976 or thereabouts. --commando552 (talk) 19:30, 5 October 2014 (EDT)
Uh okay, thanks for the info. I've added to the main page that the EM-2 would be more accurate to the game. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 05:04, 6 October 2014 (EDT)
Multiplayer set in the 1970s?
I'm playing against the bots on Berlin Wall. One of the buildings is a music store, some of the albums are labeled, "Sounds of the '70s". So, I'm assuming the multiplayer portion takes place between 1970-1975 which would make some of the anachronistic weapons unanachronistic (excluding the campaign of course.) - User:1morey November 5, 2014 1:25 PM (EST)
If they were advertising "Sounds of the '70's," I would think that's definitely proof it's NOT in the seventies. If you listen to the radio, they never refer to the current decade ("Greatest hits of the seventies, eighties, nineties, and today!"). Given the DDR flag, I'm guessing eighties. --Funkychinaman (talk) 15:33, 5 November 2014 (EST)
On Stadium, there are also references to the year 1972, so it can be assumed some multiplayer maps may take place further than 1968.AgentGumby (talk) 00:53, 6 November 2014 (EST)
SVD
Is it worth mentioning that the SVD has a safety lever of an AK and that the safety is on? --CnC Fin (talk) 04:31, 27 March 2015 (EDT)
Vz 58
I really wonder why(thinking about the time when the action takes place)they didn't included a Sa. Vz. 58 used by NVA.It is pretty modern and accurate compared to an Ak 47. VLAD M (talk) 05:48, 14 July 2015 (EDT)
Pretty sure they didn't start using Vz 58s until after the Vietnam War. Spartan198 (talk) 06:37, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
GP
The GP grenade launcher doesn't have any quadrant sight in BO, unlike other CoD games. I will fix the info, but first, is it actually a GP-30? Probably yes, due to lack of support frame behind it; otherwise, we could assume that it is an actual GP-25, just like the game labels it. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 07:43, 16 July 2015 (EDT)
Have you checked the third person model? In Blops 2 there's no sight in first person but there is one in third. Evil Tim (talk) 08:25, 16 July 2015 (EDT)
Yeah, I checked it, and unlike BO2 the third-person model lacks the quadrant sight as well. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 10:13, 16 July 2015 (EDT)
I've changed the info on the page to GP-25. If there's anything that proves otherwise, such as the support frame stuff or something like that let us know. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 06:03, 15 August 2015 (EDT)
EDIT (three years later) : in addition to that component, the in-game launcher has four ribs around the barrel, in the same setup as a GP-30 (while a GP-25 has three). Therefore, I'll edit it back to GP-30. On another note, the version in CoD4, MW2, MW3, and BO2 only has two ribs, for some weird reason. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 14:05, 28 July 2018 (EDT)
XM21 doesn't have a pistol grip and the IR scope in Blops isn't a PVS-2. Also IIRC the PVS-2 isn't an IR scope anyway, it's an image intensifier. Evil Tim (talk) 08:17, 21 November 2015 (EST)
Weapon Sights
Considering that this game takes place in the 1960s, wouldn't it be anachronistic for red dot sights and mid-ranged optics (is the ACOG anachronistic as well?) to appear in the game? Did they really exist back in the 1960s or this game, as with most of the guns, adopt the "screw the rules, they had prototypes" attitude? - Kenny99 (talk) 19:54, 27 January 2016 (EST)
I believe most of them are anachronistic with the exception of the Colt "ACOG" 4x32 scope. The reflex sight appears to be the first Aimpoint from 1975, and I don't think the western red dot sight is even modeled on a real optic.AgentGumby (talk) 22:58, 27 January 2016 (EST)
I looked into the concept of red dot sights more closely and came across the idea of reflector sights. They apparently existed since WW2 (although they were more commonly used on machine guns, AA cannons, and ship weaponry). I read that after WW2, custom and detachable weapon sights started appearing, but most likely very obscure and not so widespread. As for Infrared scopes and such, I think Germany made detachable scopes for the StG44 during WW2, including a prototype Infrared scope called the "Vampire". Then again, I'm not so certain about the plausibility of red dot sights, "reflex sights", and Infrared scopes as well as attachable weapon mounts (such as rails) for optics. - Kenny99 (talk) 22:29, 27 January 2016 (EST)
The STG44's setup was nicknamed the "Vampyr" because Germans. The same set-up was used by the US Military in the M3 Carbine. Any rail or scope mount would have to be a custom make because Weaver Rails were still a while away. I always got the vibe with Black Ops that they intended it to be set in the 1980's, what with all the more 80's equipment, but the higher ups made them go to the Vietnam era because the Nam era is a reasonably untapped genre, like WWI or the Spanish-American War. -- PaperCake 22:47, 27 January 2016 (EST)
Don't forget this sight, it's mounted on a BAR--AnActualAK47 (talk) 01:01, 28 January 2016 (EST)
It looks similar to the Colt M933, but is an M733 with Flattop. The Commando has an Flip Up Iron Sight in the game.--Treliazz777 (talk) 12:40, 15 April 2016 (EDT)
Firstly, as far as I know there is no such thing as a Model 733 with a flat top, that is just a Model 933. What do you think the difference is? The gun in the game isn't a Model 933 or a 733 though, as regardless of the different design of rail, it also has a slickside upper receiver without a FA or BD. The closest match I can come up with would be a GAU-5A/A with a flash hider rather than the moderator (which was actually done) with a fictional/custom upper with a sight rail. --commando552 (talk) 17:37, 15 April 2016 (EDT)
c552 is right about the Model 733/Model 933 remarks. I also concur with him about the game gun most closely resembling a GAU-5/A variant. StanTheMan (talk) 01:24, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
What it really is, is a gun model made by people that don't actually know anything about guns. In video games a gun can be a whole slew of things do to a dev team's poor gun modeling skills/lack of knowledge. As evidenced by the sling that blocks the bolt release that's used in the reload animation. The main problem is that Treyarch felt the need to make it a flattop AR-15 even though they were never used or made in numbers in the 60s, why would mounting optics on a XM177 carrying handle be so bad? I agree that it seems to be a GAU-5/A with a made-up flattop upper and "filled in" flash hider, I also noticed it has partial magazine fencing too. Mr. Wolf (talk) 01:43, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
There were experimental flat-top carbines back then, but as you said they were never actually used or issued. That said, I agree there's nothing wrong with actually having optics on the carry handle - indeed that was the case for the longest time. But it evidently doesn't follow their own rigidly self-imposed aesthetic for the game weapons. StanTheMan (talk) 17:32, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
The AR pictured above isn't exactly an M933, it looks like someone built themselves a lookalike. It has an A1 profile barrel, older slimline handguards, and no bayonet lug. A true M933 is simply an M4A1 with an 11.5" barrel, retaining the thicker barrel width, double heat shield handguards, and FSP with bayonet lug. That said, however, the Commando in this game is pure fictional franken gun, simply a way for Treyarch to include a "SOPMOD" AR long before the M4 was ever invented and justifying it with the weak excuse that "SOG can get whatever they want". Spartan198 (talk) 06:34, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
The Colt carbines are kind of a crap-shoot in regards to what features they have, with the 933 being available with or without a bayonet lug, A1 or A2 profile barrel, and either handguard. Here is another 933 with no lug, an A1 barrel, slim handguards and the M4 style stock, and here is one to the same spec but with the wide handguards. From what I have seen it seems that the thin barrel and no bayonet lug is the most common option (which makes the most sense as this features are pretty useless on a barrel of this length). I believe that all of these images (including the original posted above) are real Colt weapons advertised on Autoweapons. --commando552 (talk)
So I think it could be an GAU-5/A with Flash Hider.--Treliazz777 (talk) 10:25, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
No, the GAU-5/A is a different gun with a 10" barrel, the game gun has a longer barrel more like the 11.5" barrel of the GAU-5A/A. This is the gun that you pictured above (which I have properly renamed as the image name was totally nonsensical). Also, when posting images use the code that I have changed it to above so that it is a thumbnail that can have a descriptive caption. --commando552 (talk) 12:29, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
I've rewritten the Commando section to try and have it make some sort of sense, and I noticed that there is an image where it is fitted with optics and has the front sight present (albeit vertically stunted) and the caption reads "Suppressed Colt Commando with Kobra sight. Note clan tag engraved on the charging handle. Also note that, unlike in the released game, the front sight is still present". Anybody know where this is from? Is it early promotional footage or from a beta or what? --commando552 (talk) 13:06, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
I think the reason why it has a removable carry handle because Treyarch do the same Flip up sights to the Enfield, Famas, G11, Aug, and M60. So if these Iron Sight were not in the game, than the Commando would have the M16's Iron sights.--Treliazz777 (talk) 13:32, 16 April 2016 (EDT)
Someone who's not on IMFDB told me that he believes that the Commando is exactly the GAU-5A/A configuration about the USAF flash hider in place of the moderator) "and the flat-topped receiver is not fictional but what appears to be a chopped off carry handle with a bolted on rail. According to this discussion, this was done in the late 80s and early 90s before the introduction of actual flat-topped receivers. That is also the case with the M16 when mounted with sight attachments apparently. While the article mentions the Model 656 receiver as some kind of justification for the flat-topped receiver actually that's not the case as the BO version is just a chopped off version and this is yet another anachronism". Ideas? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 13:17, 15 July 2017 (EDT)
I swear that everything in this game makes me think they intended it to be set in the 1980's rather than the 1960's. The story about brain-washing and rogue Soviet soldiers feels like a cheesy Cannon Films B movie rather than a 1960's set story. The inclusion of several 80's guns over the more proper arsenal that has already been established by previous games like Vietcong seem to back that theory up. Even the Vietnam elements feel more like 1980's CIA shittery than 1960's. I have no leads on the development team, but it feels like the game was intended to be in the 1980's and was just shifted over to the 60's last minute, which could explain how almost every gun is an anachronism. --PaperCake 14:26, 15 July 2017 (EST)
Or the 1990's. Plus missions like "Executive Order" takes place in 1963, but in realism, it takes place in 1988. The mission "Rebirth" takes place in 1968, but it suppose to takes place in 1989. The mission "Numbers" takes place in 1968, but for realism, it takes place in 1990, and the mission "WMD" take place in 1968, but it should take place in 1997, which is 6 years after the cold war. Back to the Commando, I just figure out about the model. Treyarch wanted to make this gun like a combination with the older CAR-15s and the M4. The flattop rail was based on the MIL-STD-1913 scope rail, which never used in CAR-15s. When you look at the Commando on the E3 Demo, you can see the MIL-STD-1913 scope rail. The Troy Battle Sights was a modern 2000's sight, and the M203 was model after the M203A1. Black Ops was not suppose to go realism, but it was suppose to be more wacky unlike the Modern Warfare Series. Now, I heard rumors saying that the next Black Ops game was going to be a Vietnam Setting, but not as a wacky game, but focus on realism.--Treliazz (talk) 10:05, 30 July 2019 (EDT)
Red Dot Sights
Originally the RDS were Korba Sights, but on the AK47, AK-74U, and on the RPK, the RDS looks different. I trying to figure what kind of RDS it is.--Treliazz (talk) 16:23, 10 July 2016 (EDT)
Commando Discussion
I read the Topic, and I'm kinda want to search up some Variants of the Commando:
XM177 Shorty (XM177 Short Barrel with A1 Flash Hider)
GAU-5AA (On Topic)
Colt 733 (M16A2/M4 Commando)
Colt 933 (M4 Commando)
Crossfire has the same gun (But a XM177 Flash Hider), and it's based on the Commando in Black Ops, and it was refer as M4 Commando (Also they have an XM177 with flattop).
The M60, Enfield, G11, AUG, Famas has the same iron sights. So Colt 933 can't count (Plus the optics on the M16 has a flattop, so that could be like the commando).
Honestly, I don't think this is a GAU-5AA, because I don't see why is it this gun.
In my theory, this might be a Fictional XM177 with A1 Flash Hider.--Treliazz777 (talk) 02:49, 22 July 2017 (EDT)
XM177 is just the name used for the CAR-15 in US military use in Vietnam, a "fiction XM177 variant" is a CAR-15 variant.
Also, it would not be remotely realistic for the CIA to be using MP40s in the 1960s, or the Soviet Union to be using PPShs in the 1960s, and the AKMS doesn't fit as a substitute for a shortened AK because it's full-length. The RPG-7, meanwhile, entered service in 1958, which was before the Cuban Missile Crisis: it just didn't see combat until Vietnam in real life. Evil Tim (talk) 04:18, 22 July 2017 (EDT)
Okay, I could agree with you, The RPG-7 was started in 1958, but it was in service in 1961 by the Soviets. In Cuba, the weapons were the FAL and some WW2 and Korean War Weapons. The RPG-7 first war was the Vietnam War, and it was use by the North Vietnamese and the VC in 1967. I was going to remove the WAW Gun, because it's not like realistic. I don't know the Commando is close to the GAU-5AA, I had to be honest.--Treliazz777 (talk) 05:19, 22 July 2017 (EDT)
To clarify why the GAU-5A/A is stated as the closest match, the reason is that it has the combination of a slickside upper and an 11.5" barrel. The XM177 has a shorter 10" barrel, whilst the XM177E2 has an A1 upper with a forward assist. If you don't know what I mean by this, check out the Colt AR-15 Identification Guide. --commando552 (talk) 21:23, 22 July 2017 (EDT)
The in-game gun also appears to have a partial fence on the lower receiver (not a full one), which indeed matches the GAU-5A/A reference image that we have on the main page. By the way, the majority of the GAU-5A/A images that I found online have full fence lowers, while our reference image (with the moderator replaced) is an exception; are there any other images out there with partial fence lowers? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 13:30, 6 October 2020 (EDT)
Models
I was looking though some models for the AUG, M14, WA2000, and M60. I don't know if it's based on the models from 007 QoS.--Treliazz777 (talk) 23:45, 12 April 2018 (EDT)
The silly ray gun doesn't really qualify for inclusion. Evil Tim (talk) 14:28, 14 August 2018 (EDT)
Two-handed pistol shooting
Is it period accurate to see the two-handed technique being used by almost all characters between 1961 and 1968 in the game? I'm reading that it was invented in 1959 (in this specific case the Weaver stance), but I wonder how much time it took for the technique to have become widespread enough. I suppose that if it became quickly popular, this would have been reflected in the movies of that era, which is not the case, as in a significant number of 1960s-1970s movies the handguns are still held with one hand (well, not all filmmakers must have automatically become familiar with the new stance, but still). There are some exceptions, but in these specific cases it's because the character is practice firing and not participating in actual combat; here's an example (that's one of the earliest media appearances that I know regarding two-handed firing). --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 12:37, 27 October 2018 (EDT)
So, the Weaver stance is not the first two-handed technique. But then my original question still stands, being whether the two-handed grip in general (not necessarily the Weaver) was used frequently enough in combat during the 1960s or not (as in, not merely for training purposes), and if it would have been more appropriate to see one-handed shooting for most part. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 07:21, 28 October 2018 (EDT)
I think we can't say if one technique was used more or less back then, all we can do is acknowledge if the given method existed. You see, it's a personal preference, as we can see in the WW2 training video, the two handed stance is more useful when crouching while one handed might have its benefits when standing so really it is a very situational thing. Also bear in mind that COD doesn't even try to portray such details in a realistic manner, I'm pretty sure that their inspiration comes from movies like Platoon or Full Metal Jacket. Considering that BO actually shows both grips (the ASP is one handed) I say that they should at least get credit for portraying both techniques. On another note, I'm just rewatching Terminator 2 and noticed how the T1000 was firing his gun one handed and that made sense since having a mechanical arm would have enough strength and this takes me back to BO3 where it is quite funny how your character uses two handed grip despite having cyborg arms. --Nanomat (talk) 18:42, 29 October 2018 (EDT)
"bear in mind that COD doesn't even try to portray such details in a realistic manner"
:P Now on a more serious note, that's the thing, the two-handed technique is shown as the most widespread in the game, even when standing. Mind you, the ASP is the only pistol shown fired one-handed during normal gameplay (as in, not during some scripted campaign sequences) - except when a player is downed and his third-person model also does this on all handguns, but that's another story. The thing with the ASP is that it only occurs in first-person view; heck, just see how the Cuban police officers are seen firing their ASPs in a level set in 1961; seems a bit far-fetched, don't ya think? --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 06:47, 4 November 2018 (EST)
On another note, just talking about all these things in the game:
"We use a lot of gun reference materials and spend a lot of time researching pre-production weapons. We basically make a list of every gun even remotely near our time period, some before some after – because if it's a prototype weapon you don't know what year it was introduced. And if you're an SOG officer, you're the perfect person to test these weapons."
Bravo. Seriously, I even like it. These guys say that "oh, how we explore all this", but they don't even know when this or that weapon was created. On their spot, I would just honestly admit: "well, we just go to the Google Pictures, typing "weapons prototypes", and chose those we liked without thinking about anything," rather than trying to make a good face over a bad game. --Slon95 (talk) 10:41, 22 May 2019 (EDT)
Quality Image Dump Part 2: Electric Boogaloo
I'm about to upload some new images for this page, anyone is free to start putting them onto the page as they wish.--AgentGumby (talk) 14:09, 9 January 2019 (EST)
I'll start putting them on soon. --Wuzh (talk) 18:37, 9 January 2019 (EST)
Error creating thumbnail: File missing What is this machine gun? I know I've seen Browning M2 style machine guns with that barrel stabilizer but I can't figure out which one it is for the life of me.--AgentGumby (talk) 21:51, 9 January 2019 (EST)
I also stumbled upon the same strange gun when researching the vehicle it's mounted on but didn't find anything. The vehicle is a Vietnam War gun truck and these appear to have been armed with pretty standard weaponry, M60 and M2s, nothing out of the ordinary. I don't know why but I have the feeling it's some kind of water cannon maybe modeled after something used in anti war protests of the period. --Nanomat (talk) 14:05, 10 January 2019 (EST)
OK. I did the image replacements for the lower-quality sections. For the rest though, sometimes I will find an image that I don't know how to caption, and other times I feel like you've missed some important images (like the idle state image for the one-handed ASP), so I don't feel that confident going through the edit just yet. Can you help with adding some of the sections and maybe check if I missed any important images? Thanks. (and maybe check if I missed any images for your MW2 uploads too)
In the end though I do expect all of the old images and the old non 16:9 images to be completely replaced. (the TT-33 images for example are 1,440 × 900, which is 16:10)--Wuzh (talk) 20:03, 11 January 2019 (EST)
OK, I have a little trouble figuring out which of those images are 16:10 so let me know which others need replacement. I'll be going through a lot of the uploads though, thanks for your help.--AgentGumby (talk) 22:33, 12 January 2019 (EST)
A suggestion: when screencapping scope reticles, you should aim at bright areas to make the reticle contrast more strongly with the background. Currently some of your scope images (SVD, PSG-1) have very dark or confusing backgrounds that makes it harder to see the reticle. --Wuzh (talk) 23:40, 12 January 2019 (EST)
Yeah I'll get better versions for those two, I usually try to do that with ADS images so every detail is easy to make out.--AgentGumby (talk) 23:53, 12 January 2019 (EST)
Apparently the page had received an overhaul, as there were some gaps in the page. That's fine and much appreciated, but oddly the fact that the Ithaca 37 "Stakeout" is anachronistic has been removed. Well, in case it was due to a lack of information on production dates, I found this site that provides information (with a source) on the serial number ranges for all shotguns made by the Ithaca Gun Co, and apparently the Stakeout was made from 1981 starting in the 371xxxxxxHG** range, to 1993, with the last serial number ending around 372000533. Just though this might be useful. As such, a sawn off Remington Model 870, sawn off Stevens 620A or a Model 37 S-Prefix "Trench gun" would probably suit the 1960s timeline better.
Thanks for the info; such input is much appreciated. One thing, though: make sure to sign your talk page posts, by typing "~~~~" without the quotes, or by hitting the pencil icon at the top-left of the editing box. Just a heads-up. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 15:50, 25 April 2019 (EDT)
AR-18
Just started work on a video project centering around this game, and while taking a close look at the intro cutscene to the "Operation 40" level, I noticed there's a brief glimpse of a guy training with an AR-18. The guy to his right looks to be using an M1 Carbine with the post-war upgrades as well. Didn't know whether to put it on the main page or in the misc section here. Kadorhal (talk) 16:36, 8 May 2019 (EDT)
Absolutely, it deserves a spot on the main page - the BOII page has a section for L85A2s that only appear in a cutscene, after all. Nice find. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 17:45, 8 May 2019 (EDT)
IMO I think images of stock footage weapons should have their own section, like what I did with the RPD and M79 down at the bottom. It looks kind of misleading to see the AR-18 listed in the Table of Contents at the top of the page when it is not actually a usable weapon in the game. Also, the Crossbow also listed on the bottom is apparently made from an AR-18 lower receiver anyway, so we could merge the entries. That's my two cents --AgentGumby (talk) 14:39, 17 May 2019 (EDT)
I support merging the stock footage weapons into their own section. However, I don't support merging the AR-18 with the Crossbow, due to their vastly different mechanisms. What do you think, Kadorhal? --Wuzh (talk) 17:33, 17 May 2019 (EDT)
M1911 one handed rack
I'm curious about the way the character racks the slide with one hand. According to some random dudes that's "Physically impossible" so my question is, are they right? --Nanomat (talk) 21:53, 14 May 2019 (EDT)
Very nice! Even though I'm pretty sure actual operators wouldn't employ it in an actual combat yet it's still cool. Interestingly, the character in BO3 also does it with his cybernetic arms which I suppose would be even more easier and efficient. --Nanomat (talk) 19:58, 15 May 2019 (EDT)
I've read somewhere that soldiers have been trained to do it that way in case of injury, and Treyarch took the inspiration from this, although I don't know if it's exactly the case. On another note, you also have the one-handed press check. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 16:42, 19 May 2019 (EDT)
On other videos I've also seen them recommend in case of injury to press the front of the slide against a wall or something or to clutch it between your thighs. But I gotta give props to Treyarch, they somehow managed to find the tacticoolest and rarest one handed reload haha the video you provided is literally the only place I've seen it IRL. --Nanomat (talk) 19:19, 19 May 2019 (EDT)
In fairness though (I should have mentioned it much earlier but I forgot), the guy in the video was just releasing the slide with that technique, and not pulling it back from its original position as in BO1 and BO3. Though I wouldn't be surprised if the latter were possible IRL. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 07:22, 30 May 2019 (EDT)
Question about Spetnatz's Guns
I was wondering, if there proofs that Soviet Armed Forces used Warsaw Pact guns like PM-63, Vz. 61 Skorpion,AMD-63, etc? --Dannyguns (talk) 04:30, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
I doubt it. Firstly, they were brand new weapons when BO takes place and as we know, it takes some time before a new weapon goes into widespread use. Secondly, the Soviets had a very strong arms industry on their own so it wouldn't make sense for them to use Warsaw Pact guns even though I presume they could have obtained them easily. But we must also take into account that in BO they even use NATO weaponry from the future so this makes it an alternate reality anyway. --Nanomat (talk) 18:21, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
What do you mean by spetsnaz? Ordinary troops, of course not. But the Alpha antiterror group used Scorpion, although they did not exist until 1974. If we mean the special OGPU/NKVD/KGB units, then they used everything they wanted, including American submachine guns, sniper rifles, etc., without worrying about their origin (the USSR in general was extremely double-minded in this regard, not hesitating to buy anything from its "enemies", if they don't have it yourself; and this tendency, I will tell you in confidence, is still relevant), just in the best spirit of these very video games. --Slon95 (talk) 19:34, 23 May 2019 (EDT)
Kiparis, by the way, was developed under the direct impression by the Scorpion, but was not put into use, as it was replaced by the AKS-74U for the unification of ammo and spare parts. --Slon95 (talk) 12:55, 24 May 2019 (EDT)
Do we really need all the alternative options?
While these alternative options provide some interesting historical context, do we really need all of them? Some of the alternatives are becoming more and more fringe and are degenerating into speculation on what the developers intended a weapon to be, and some of the suggestions I just find are plain unnecessary, like suggesting alternatives for the Minigun. --Wuzh (talk) 16:01, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
While I certainly agree that stuff like the minigun is kinda beyond saving, I think that the alternatives should definitely stay. There are a few that are a bit... out there, sure, but for the most part, they provide interesting historical and technical information, introduce people to guns they might not've been familiar with, and makes the page seem more constructive. If anything, I'd been thinking about adding these sorts of notes to other pages; it lets us teach not only what's wrong, but what's right. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 16:27, 28 May 2019 (EDT) P.S.: Man, did that last bit sound pretentious. I'm sorry to everybody that had to read that, but the point still stands.
The point is to ID the weapons used - that means describing what's there, not rambling about what isn't. Anything that is speculation or supposition should be done away with. As for any (actually accurate) technical or historical info, some is fine but at a certain point it's too much and comes off as overly encyclopedic.. and we're not supposed to be a gun encyclopedia. At the very least keep any factual 'should be' details simple and again factual; leave out anything along the lines of 'it could be..'. StanTheMan (talk) 22:41, 28 May 2019 (EDT)
Yeah, some recent additions were pushing it a bit, but notable/accurate alternatives (such as the Stechkin APS, S&W Model 39, Sa vz. 23, Ithaca 37 Trench Gun, Remington 1100, SA-7 Grail, XM191, etc.) should definitely be kept. --Ultimate94ninja (talk) 09:59, 29 May 2019 (EDT)
In addition, I think that for Vietnam, Stevens 77E would be an even more suitable choice (and some of them - this is interesting - subsequently ended up in the USSR). However, I am afraid to once again clutter up the article, so I will leave it at your discretion. --Slon95 (talk) 18:54, 27 June 2020 (EDT)
PK-AV
I think this designation refers to the PK-A Venezuela contract variant, which has an Aimpoint-looking battery slot along the bottom left side of the optic that isn't present on the in-game model; I think it should probably just be listed as "PK-A."--AgentGumby (talk) 11:15, 4 December 2020 (EST) EDIT - nevermind, "PK-AV" must be the translation of "ПK-AB," but the sight still looks more like the basic PK-A or whatever it is rather than that variant.
Done. --Nanomat (talk) 20:57, 17 August 2022 (EDT)
.jpg){kind=link}
