| Error creating thumbnail: File missing Join our Discord! |
| If you have been locked out of your account you can request a password reset here. |
Talk:Spec Ops: The Line: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| (43 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown) | |||
| Line 89: | Line 89: | ||
Anybody else frustrated with that blue tape on the handguard of the AK?I know i saw it before in some other game, but have no luck finding it. | Anybody else frustrated with that blue tape on the handguard of the AK?I know i saw it before in some other game, but have no luck finding it. | ||
Here's a image of it in Spec Ops | Here's a image of it in Spec Ops | ||
[[Image:SpecOpsTheLine 2012-06-14 09-22-36-10.jpg| | [[Image:SpecOpsTheLine 2012-06-14 09-22-36-10.jpg|none|400px|thumb|Walker ponders how the rope is going though his skin while looking at the landscape]] | ||
| Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
:There is no AK-74 in [[Mercenaries 2]], at least in the PC version. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 06:24, 23 June 2012 (CDT) | :There is no AK-74 in [[Mercenaries 2]], at least in the PC version. - [[User:Bozitojugg3rn4ut|bozitojugg3rn4ut]] 06:24, 23 June 2012 (CDT) | ||
:: Hmm, I had it for the Xbox, but I could sworn there was a 74 in there. It had the same name and stats as the AKM, but it mighta been a AK-47 with the synthetic furniture and the 74 muzzle break. [[User:BeardedHoplite|BeardedHoplite]] 16:43, 23 June 2012 (CDT) | |||
::: Looks like it might be Mercenaries 2, a little disappointed that the blue tape isn't on the hand-guard like in Spec Ops, but thanks anyway.Isn't blue tape around a mag to show that they are blanks? | |||
Also according to Mercs2 page, AK47 is nowhere in any version of the game, AK-47 is just a silhouette for images.--[[User:Mercury|Mercury]] 17:09, 24 June 2012 (CDT) | |||
::::He's referring to the AKM, which ''is'' present in Mercs 2. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:37, 27 August 2012 (CDT) | |||
::::: Hey guys, Russian here, born and raised. This blue tape is the standard household/electrician's tape from the Soviet times. Quite shitty adhesion, but it was meant to elastically bond, like plumber's tape. Anyway, most likely the designers used reference photos taken in USSR or satellite countries, where this tape was available. It is rubbery to the touch, and elastic, so it's good for making grips less slippery - or making small repairs, of course, being basically duct tape. This info is absolutely reliable, 'cause I've both used this tape for many years as a kid, and seen it repeatedly on photos of AKs (used both for grips and to double-tape magazines). Oh, and it's called "izolenta", meaning (electrically)-insulating tape. --[[User:Tushan|Tushan]] ([[User talk:Tushan|talk]]) 00:58, 17 August 2013 (EDT) | |||
::::: On a related note, soldiers in Afghan and both Chechen wars have also wound their brown rubber tourniquettes around their buttstocks, especially on AKMS, AKS-74 and AKSU-74U folding stock rifles with skeleton stocks. Some say it was to have a tourniquet handy (though it would lose it properties quite quickly this way), but probably it mostly helped to cheek-weld in case of metal skeleton stocks. Of course, during winter this was crucial to prevent the cheek freezing to the buttstock.--[[User:Tushan|Tushan]] ([[User talk:Tushan|talk]]) 00:58, 17 August 2013 (EDT) | |||
== Tired of the Desert Eagle == | |||
I am actually getting tired of seeing the Desert Eagle in the hands of military characters. When are game developers going to learn that the Desert Eagle stopped being cool after Arnold stopped making movies? [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 19:50, 25 June 2012 (CDT) | |||
Desert Eagle is 'gangsta'. Doubt its going to go away any time soon. --[[User:DeltaOne|DeltaOne]] 00:32, 26 June 2012 (CDT) | |||
:If by "gangsta", you mean "perfect compensation for an exceptionally small penis", then yes, it is quite "gangsta". [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 19:06, 19 July 2012 (CDT) | |||
::Well, clearly Walker's ability to pull a Deagle out of his ass when injured is because he's Delta. You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] 04:46, 27 August 2012 (CDT) | |||
:::Given the fact that Walker isn't all there in the head, it could be possible that's he's actually using his standard issue M9 and hallucinating it as a Desert Eagle. It certainly fits with the central theme of the story-Walker thinking that he's some badass action hero coming to save the day.--[[User:Jake Stuckey|Jake Stuckey]] ([[User talk:Jake Stuckey|talk]]) 14:13, 29 December 2019 (EST) | |||
:::Yes, I am, my phone number is 0 and people call me when they can't find a phone number, yet I still don't understand. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] 15:35, 27 August 2012 (CDT) | |||
== Double iron sights == | |||
I could be wrong, but while I am playing this I swear the M4 has 2 rear iron sights. It's got an A2 type that's positioned forward and a flip up one towards the rear. This is by far the most stupid sight configuration I've seen for this system. I mean, these guys are Delta, no optics on any of their guns at all [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 11:50, 27 June 2012 (CDT) | |||
:They seem rather unprepared all over; I mean, no helmets is pretty standard for a game, but Walker's character model only has the PMAG on his chest he never uses with no other ammo and nowhere he could be carrying any, and they don't seem to have bought packs, night vision gear, sunglasses, grenades or really anything much of anything. Nevermind a three-man team having a spotterless bolt-action sniper rifle rather than a DMR and a guy lugging around a SAW and a shotgun for no clear reason. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 12:16, 7 August 2013 (EDT) | |||
While looking up things for a video series on this I'm planning, I found something rather odd: | |||
[[Image:SpecOpsEarlyRifle.jpg|thumb|none|600px]] | |||
Originally it actually ''did'' have a reflex optic and a flip-up front sight, but for some reason they changed it to a standard front sight and second rear sight. Though in that trailer the M4 has a reciprocating charging handle (!) so it's not like it was right then either. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 15:22, 11 August 2013 (EDT) | |||
== M4 suppressors == | |||
I took out the comment of removing the flash hider before adding the suppressor for the M4, since there are flash hiders, or muzzle attachments that are threaded outside for QD suppressors [[User:Excalibur01|Excalibur01]] 13:35, 24 July 2012 (CDT) | |||
== Mortar scene == | |||
So I've been recording this game, and I noticed that the mortar sequence is impossible in at least four different ways. | |||
*The mortar has a milder version of the magic TARDIS rounds from ''Homefront''. The M722 smoke round for the M224 weighs a mighty 3.7 rounds, and when you take into account the tail, fuze, bursting charge, propelling charge and so on, that's probably all of 1 pound of WP per round. | |||
*Which doesn't matter, because it has an impact fuze and so the only way to hurt someone with it would be to land a round on top of them, in which case they'd be more worried about the bursting charge blowing their head off. | |||
*Which doesn't matter either, because the minimum range of the mortar is 70 metres, which is close to the ''maximum'' range Walker fires it at. | |||
*Which ''also'' doesn't matter, because there's only one round shown in the vicinity of the mortar, and it's the camera round. | |||
So the central plot event of the game is caused by the team firing rounds they don't have to somewhere they couldn't hit, detonating in a way they can't and doing damage they couldn't possibly do. Thus, um, showing the...true...horror...um... [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 08:48, 31 July 2013 (EDT) | |||
Wow. I thought this game was just a generic cover-based TPS hiding behind it's plot and messages, but THAT is just laughable. Did they even bother to research for that scene? [[User:Gunmaster2011|Gunmaster2011]] 1:52AM, 08/08/2013 | |||
:I doubt it. It seems they based the detonations on 155mm artillery rounds and the burned bodies are based on images of people who were killed in massive building fires ignited by WP, not on people who had direct impact burns (which are very nasty, but not the all-over burns you see in the game). Nevermind that if you try to hit something you're not supposed to in that sequence (the fuel tanks to the top left, the tent to the top right or any moving vehicle) the game completely ignores it because they want the camp to look a certain way when you walk through it. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 03:07, 8 August 2013 (EDT) | |||
:: Well, [SPOILERS] given that everything we see in the game is either completely made up or altered to a degree by increasingly insane Walker, it's possible that the effects of the WP are heavily altered in his eyes either/or by his guilt for what he had done, or somehow demonizing Konrad even more for "forcing" Walker to use the WP. | |||
::It would also explain several other implausible things like constantly appearing Desert Eagle, heavily armored troopers who can eat rockets for breakfast, and one-handed loading of the grenade launcher during the water run. --[[User:AlkoTanko|AlkoTanko]] ([[User talk:AlkoTanko|talk]]) 15:23, 16 August 2013 (EDT) | |||
:::Yeah, but since the game is all TRUE HORRORS OF WAR over that moment, the fact that it's literally impossible does undermine it a great deal. I can't see how, no matter how insane he is, Walker would suddenly think a portable mortar would have non-conservation-of-mass rounds with the effects of divisional artillery fire. Or why the mortar itself would play along with it. | |||
:::I mean, I know the whole "Walker is dead" thing Walt Williams rolled out, but that just means Walker never did anything or hurt anyone, which breaks the plot even more while trying to fix it. I can't really buy the idea that the errors are supposed to be representative of some sort of plot point; they were going for ''something'' with the appearing Deagles but I'm not sure even they knew what, but the rest seems more like straightforward errors. You should always be suspicious of any story rationalisation which can include anything but explains nothing. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 10:52, 17 August 2013 (EDT) | |||
::: I think you're missing the point behind the game. There's basically nothing about "DA HORRORS OF WAR" in the message, though it uses a lot of "reality ensues" moments to try and emphasize its point. The game is a deconstruction of the use of video games as a power fantasy, with Walker acting as an expy of the player: he does morally questionable things, often without thinking, in a vain effort to feel powerful and heroic and emulate typical action heroes, all while growing steadily more delusional. The lack of realism is an important part of the game. [[User:Chitoryu12|Chitoryu12]] ([[User talk:Chitoryu12|talk]]) 11:33, 21 July 2014 (EDT) | |||
::: I think this was just a terrible, generic third person shooter desperately trying to be special by pretending it has a message. If the idea was truly to deconstruct the gaming genre, they'd give you the choice to fire the Willie Pete rounds, so a clever player isn't forced to be a monster, but they don't. Add to that the general lack of research into this game (when ''Call of Duty 4'' is more realistic than your title, something's gone wrong). I wasn't impressed with the guns, the entemies have all waltzed out of ''Modern Warfare 2'' without bothering to change their clothes, and the political heavy handidness was just upsetting. Not impressed; I can't figure out why it got so much acclaim. I mean, it's not even a ''good'' third person shooter. --[[User:Godzillafan93|That's the Way It's Done]] ([[User talk:Godzillafan93|talk]]) 20:41, 4 August 2014 (EDT) | |||
:::::Originally, there ''was'' going to be an option to use the WP, because I remember a preview talking about it, but the devs changed it at some point because who knows. [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 11:14, 22 November 2015 (EST) | |||
::::I don't think you really understand the point of deconstructing the game genre. We play shooting games as entertainment. We are entertained by shooting these because we have the justification that these are truly evil and bad people. Just as Walker uses Konrad as justification for his actions. The game forces you to do the mortar scene because that is typical of a shooter game. "Here is this cool destructive weapon, use it to kill bad guys." Then it shows you the horrible thing you have just done and you feel bad for being entertained by doing it. Then you try to distance yourself from Walker, and you justify it by saying that you were forced to, but then they give you the important choice to prove you're not like Walker. Lugo is surrounded by unarmed civilians who are justifiably angry at the Delta operators after all the destruction they caused. I, like most other players I'm sure, opened fire on these civilians to avenge Lugo. While the gameplay was average, I loved the narrative of this game because it was one of those rare games that made me feel terrible at the end for enjoying it. It made me feel bad for finding it entertaining before knowing the full cost of my actions, and it forces you to fight enemies that aren't necessarily bad guys or good guys. They are just people trying to survive just like you. It basically tells you that there is no good and bad, unlike other shooters, and it forces you to think about who you are killing and why you are killing them and it causes you to almost distance yourself from Walker unlike most games where you are happy to play as the badass protagonist. --[[User:SmithandWesson36|SmithandWesson36]] ([[User talk:SmithandWesson36|talk]]) 00:26, 5 August 2014 (EDT) | |||
:::::See, I can't buy that because the scenarios are so stupid and manufactured. The crowd ''is'' armed, Lugo had four weapons (his rifle, his Tavor, his pistol and the Desert Eagle he pulls out of his ass at the end of act 1 when you breach the cockpit) and he doesn't have them anymore. Even if you ignore that, they're hitting you with rocks which are about the same in mechanical terms as shots from an assault rifle. And if you just shove the guy in front of you back, they run away like frightened rabbits, clearly having not planned for you to escalate to bilateral shoving. | |||
:::::It's really based around the dead-centrist belief that if you take no action it has no consequences, which is the same logic as the Star Trek Prime Directive and is nonsense (if you can press a button to stop, say, Stalin's purges or the genocide in Cambodia and you don't do so, you ''are'' still partly responsible for what happens) and it can't even work out how to frame ''that'' properly since everyone would still have died when the water ran out even if Walker didn't do anything at all. Aside from the stupid framing of his "mission" (three men to search a 1,200 square mile city full of tower blocks with just camelbaks for water and no packs? And their orders are to report back if they find at least one living person?) it's just a big guilt trip by a writer who thinks he's a whole hell of a lot more insightful than he actually is. Or rather it's a rearranged story screwed around with by a hack who worked for the publisher who then tried to have the real writer's name taken off the credits (Walt Williams did not write ''Spec Ops: The Line'', Richard Pearsey did) and took refuge in being incomprehensible as an alternative to saying anything coherent about anything. | |||
:::::It's childish to expect that every action we take will necessarily translate into the outcome we desire, but it's adolescent sulking to believe that no action we take can possibly have the result we desire, or that the possibility of failure is reason enough to not act. | |||
:::::The central argument is the same one that almost kept America out of WW2, and the game is basically the same as if Spielberg stomped onto the set three minutes before the end of ''Schindler's List'' and started angrily berating the audience for being entertained by the Holocaust. If he actually thought that, ''what would it have said about him that he made the movie anyway?'' | |||
:::::Besides, who in the world honestly plays FPS games for their well-written plots? You play them to shoot dudes because shooting dudes is fun. Hell, a lot of people who play CoD and even more who play Battlefield never even touch the singleplayer. I'd happily play a game if it was good even if the bad guy was the evil US General Ulysses Flagg who'd stolen a German nuclear submarine and was threatening to nuke Riyadh unless they recognised Dubai as the Neo Confederate States of TruMerica and I was alternating between a sneaky Spetznatz team and a bunch of patriotic Iranian commandoes. [[User:Evil Tim|Evil Tim]] ([[User talk:Evil Tim|talk]]) 20:10, 20 December 2014 (EST) | |||
== Grim question == | |||
So, is the "sandboarding" torture that the 33rd uses actually a real thing? [[User:Spartan198|Spartan198]] ([[User talk:Spartan198|talk]]) 02:39, 27 January 2020 (EST) | |||
== Not quite AK-103 == | |||
In-game "AK-47" may be not an AK-103, primarily due to the lack of a butt folding mechanism (the game model shows that the butt is fixed). Most of all, the machine gun from the game resembles the TSS AK-103 self-loading carbine, the photo of which you can see below. | |||
[[Image:SOTL_AK_model.jpg|thumb|none|600px]] | |||
[[Image:TSS_AK-103.jpg|thumb|none|600px]] | |||
[[User:Andrey Karchikyan|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan|talk]]) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST) | |||
:Uh, at full size that render from the game shows the black side folding hinge along the rear of the receiver and the receiver also has the stock unlocking button and catch for a folding stock, although the wood stock doesn't look like it could fold properly anyway without the cutout for the scope rail. -[[User:AgentGumby|AgentGumby]] ([[User talk:AgentGumby|talk]]) 09:01, 6 November 2020 (EST) | |||
::Maybe you are right - indeed, on the left side of the weapon you can see the stock release button and the latch for the folding stock, but on the right side there are no signs of the presence of a button, and the stock itself seems to be held not on the hinge, but on the connecting bar, and rigidly fixed without the possibility of folding. Perhaps this is a hybrid in which a fixed butt was installed on the AK-103. - [[User:Andrey Karchikyan|Andrey Karchikyan]] ([[User talk:Andrey Karchikyan|talk]]) 21:11, 17 November 2020 (EST) | |||
Latest revision as of 02:17, 18 November 2020
Just a suggestion, but could the unknown rifle be a Steyr Scout? Jimmoy 17:04, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
i have updated with some of the guns from the closed private invite only beta which is now up --Smish34 18:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
I want to know the M4A1 rail that used in this game.
fictional of course Excalibur01 17:24, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
It's fictional, yeah. Spartan198 08:33, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks a lot.but I saw it from some screen shot I think it were CAS-V from Vltor but somehow thanks very much.
- No, it's not a CAS-V. Admittedly it bears a bit of resemblance, but it isn't one. Spartan198 06:19, 15 December 2011 (CST)
Weapons list
The demo has the standard UE3 config format that holds all the weapon info.
Pistols
Deagle .50| Berreta M9A1| Glock 18| Sig P220| FNP45| Python Elite
SMGs
UMP45| P90| TDI Vector| Micro UZI| MP7
Shotguns
Mossberg 590A1| Benelli M1014| Sawn-off| AA-12
ARs
AKS-74U| OTs14 Groza| HK417| FAMAS| TAR-21| AK-47| AK-74| M4| SCAR
Snipers
Barrett M99| Steyr Elite| M110 SRSS| MSG90
LMGs
M249
Launchers
Milkor MGL| RPG
Heavy Weapons
M2E2| Minigun| Mk47 Striker
- Edited the list a bit so its more readable(Sorry if you take offence). --Mercury 16:03, 22 June 2012 (CDT)
Blue tape on handguard
Anybody else frustrated with that blue tape on the handguard of the AK?I know i saw it before in some other game, but have no luck finding it. Here's a image of it in Spec Ops
Do tell me if you know, 'cause it's been bugging me for a while now.--Mercury 16:03, 22 June 2012 (CDT)
I thing the AK-74 in Mercenaries 2 had some tape on it. BeardedHoplite 16:17, 22 June 2012 (CDT)
- There is no AK-74 in Mercenaries 2, at least in the PC version. - bozitojugg3rn4ut 06:24, 23 June 2012 (CDT)
- Hmm, I had it for the Xbox, but I could sworn there was a 74 in there. It had the same name and stats as the AKM, but it mighta been a AK-47 with the synthetic furniture and the 74 muzzle break. BeardedHoplite 16:43, 23 June 2012 (CDT)
- Looks like it might be Mercenaries 2, a little disappointed that the blue tape isn't on the hand-guard like in Spec Ops, but thanks anyway.Isn't blue tape around a mag to show that they are blanks?
Also according to Mercs2 page, AK47 is nowhere in any version of the game, AK-47 is just a silhouette for images.--Mercury 17:09, 24 June 2012 (CDT)
- He's referring to the AKM, which is present in Mercs 2. Spartan198 15:37, 27 August 2012 (CDT)
- Hey guys, Russian here, born and raised. This blue tape is the standard household/electrician's tape from the Soviet times. Quite shitty adhesion, but it was meant to elastically bond, like plumber's tape. Anyway, most likely the designers used reference photos taken in USSR or satellite countries, where this tape was available. It is rubbery to the touch, and elastic, so it's good for making grips less slippery - or making small repairs, of course, being basically duct tape. This info is absolutely reliable, 'cause I've both used this tape for many years as a kid, and seen it repeatedly on photos of AKs (used both for grips and to double-tape magazines). Oh, and it's called "izolenta", meaning (electrically)-insulating tape. --Tushan (talk) 00:58, 17 August 2013 (EDT)
- On a related note, soldiers in Afghan and both Chechen wars have also wound their brown rubber tourniquettes around their buttstocks, especially on AKMS, AKS-74 and AKSU-74U folding stock rifles with skeleton stocks. Some say it was to have a tourniquet handy (though it would lose it properties quite quickly this way), but probably it mostly helped to cheek-weld in case of metal skeleton stocks. Of course, during winter this was crucial to prevent the cheek freezing to the buttstock.--Tushan (talk) 00:58, 17 August 2013 (EDT)
Tired of the Desert Eagle
I am actually getting tired of seeing the Desert Eagle in the hands of military characters. When are game developers going to learn that the Desert Eagle stopped being cool after Arnold stopped making movies? Excalibur01 19:50, 25 June 2012 (CDT)
Desert Eagle is 'gangsta'. Doubt its going to go away any time soon. --DeltaOne 00:32, 26 June 2012 (CDT)
- If by "gangsta", you mean "perfect compensation for an exceptionally small penis", then yes, it is quite "gangsta". Spartan198 19:06, 19 July 2012 (CDT)
- Well, clearly Walker's ability to pull a Deagle out of his ass when injured is because he's Delta. You're not an operator, you wouldn't understand. Evil Tim 04:46, 27 August 2012 (CDT)
- Given the fact that Walker isn't all there in the head, it could be possible that's he's actually using his standard issue M9 and hallucinating it as a Desert Eagle. It certainly fits with the central theme of the story-Walker thinking that he's some badass action hero coming to save the day.--Jake Stuckey (talk) 14:13, 29 December 2019 (EST)
- Yes, I am, my phone number is 0 and people call me when they can't find a phone number, yet I still don't understand. Spartan198 15:35, 27 August 2012 (CDT)
Double iron sights
I could be wrong, but while I am playing this I swear the M4 has 2 rear iron sights. It's got an A2 type that's positioned forward and a flip up one towards the rear. This is by far the most stupid sight configuration I've seen for this system. I mean, these guys are Delta, no optics on any of their guns at all Excalibur01 11:50, 27 June 2012 (CDT)
- They seem rather unprepared all over; I mean, no helmets is pretty standard for a game, but Walker's character model only has the PMAG on his chest he never uses with no other ammo and nowhere he could be carrying any, and they don't seem to have bought packs, night vision gear, sunglasses, grenades or really anything much of anything. Nevermind a three-man team having a spotterless bolt-action sniper rifle rather than a DMR and a guy lugging around a SAW and a shotgun for no clear reason. Evil Tim (talk) 12:16, 7 August 2013 (EDT)
While looking up things for a video series on this I'm planning, I found something rather odd:
Originally it actually did have a reflex optic and a flip-up front sight, but for some reason they changed it to a standard front sight and second rear sight. Though in that trailer the M4 has a reciprocating charging handle (!) so it's not like it was right then either. Evil Tim (talk) 15:22, 11 August 2013 (EDT)
M4 suppressors
I took out the comment of removing the flash hider before adding the suppressor for the M4, since there are flash hiders, or muzzle attachments that are threaded outside for QD suppressors Excalibur01 13:35, 24 July 2012 (CDT)
Mortar scene
So I've been recording this game, and I noticed that the mortar sequence is impossible in at least four different ways.
- The mortar has a milder version of the magic TARDIS rounds from Homefront. The M722 smoke round for the M224 weighs a mighty 3.7 rounds, and when you take into account the tail, fuze, bursting charge, propelling charge and so on, that's probably all of 1 pound of WP per round.
- Which doesn't matter, because it has an impact fuze and so the only way to hurt someone with it would be to land a round on top of them, in which case they'd be more worried about the bursting charge blowing their head off.
- Which doesn't matter either, because the minimum range of the mortar is 70 metres, which is close to the maximum range Walker fires it at.
- Which also doesn't matter, because there's only one round shown in the vicinity of the mortar, and it's the camera round.
So the central plot event of the game is caused by the team firing rounds they don't have to somewhere they couldn't hit, detonating in a way they can't and doing damage they couldn't possibly do. Thus, um, showing the...true...horror...um... Evil Tim (talk) 08:48, 31 July 2013 (EDT)
Wow. I thought this game was just a generic cover-based TPS hiding behind it's plot and messages, but THAT is just laughable. Did they even bother to research for that scene? Gunmaster2011 1:52AM, 08/08/2013
- I doubt it. It seems they based the detonations on 155mm artillery rounds and the burned bodies are based on images of people who were killed in massive building fires ignited by WP, not on people who had direct impact burns (which are very nasty, but not the all-over burns you see in the game). Nevermind that if you try to hit something you're not supposed to in that sequence (the fuel tanks to the top left, the tent to the top right or any moving vehicle) the game completely ignores it because they want the camp to look a certain way when you walk through it. Evil Tim (talk) 03:07, 8 August 2013 (EDT)
- Well, [SPOILERS] given that everything we see in the game is either completely made up or altered to a degree by increasingly insane Walker, it's possible that the effects of the WP are heavily altered in his eyes either/or by his guilt for what he had done, or somehow demonizing Konrad even more for "forcing" Walker to use the WP.
- Yeah, but since the game is all TRUE HORRORS OF WAR over that moment, the fact that it's literally impossible does undermine it a great deal. I can't see how, no matter how insane he is, Walker would suddenly think a portable mortar would have non-conservation-of-mass rounds with the effects of divisional artillery fire. Or why the mortar itself would play along with it.
- I mean, I know the whole "Walker is dead" thing Walt Williams rolled out, but that just means Walker never did anything or hurt anyone, which breaks the plot even more while trying to fix it. I can't really buy the idea that the errors are supposed to be representative of some sort of plot point; they were going for something with the appearing Deagles but I'm not sure even they knew what, but the rest seems more like straightforward errors. You should always be suspicious of any story rationalisation which can include anything but explains nothing. Evil Tim (talk) 10:52, 17 August 2013 (EDT)
- I think you're missing the point behind the game. There's basically nothing about "DA HORRORS OF WAR" in the message, though it uses a lot of "reality ensues" moments to try and emphasize its point. The game is a deconstruction of the use of video games as a power fantasy, with Walker acting as an expy of the player: he does morally questionable things, often without thinking, in a vain effort to feel powerful and heroic and emulate typical action heroes, all while growing steadily more delusional. The lack of realism is an important part of the game. Chitoryu12 (talk) 11:33, 21 July 2014 (EDT)
- I think this was just a terrible, generic third person shooter desperately trying to be special by pretending it has a message. If the idea was truly to deconstruct the gaming genre, they'd give you the choice to fire the Willie Pete rounds, so a clever player isn't forced to be a monster, but they don't. Add to that the general lack of research into this game (when Call of Duty 4 is more realistic than your title, something's gone wrong). I wasn't impressed with the guns, the entemies have all waltzed out of Modern Warfare 2 without bothering to change their clothes, and the political heavy handidness was just upsetting. Not impressed; I can't figure out why it got so much acclaim. I mean, it's not even a good third person shooter. --That's the Way It's Done (talk) 20:41, 4 August 2014 (EDT)
- Originally, there was going to be an option to use the WP, because I remember a preview talking about it, but the devs changed it at some point because who knows. Spartan198 (talk) 11:14, 22 November 2015 (EST)
- I don't think you really understand the point of deconstructing the game genre. We play shooting games as entertainment. We are entertained by shooting these because we have the justification that these are truly evil and bad people. Just as Walker uses Konrad as justification for his actions. The game forces you to do the mortar scene because that is typical of a shooter game. "Here is this cool destructive weapon, use it to kill bad guys." Then it shows you the horrible thing you have just done and you feel bad for being entertained by doing it. Then you try to distance yourself from Walker, and you justify it by saying that you were forced to, but then they give you the important choice to prove you're not like Walker. Lugo is surrounded by unarmed civilians who are justifiably angry at the Delta operators after all the destruction they caused. I, like most other players I'm sure, opened fire on these civilians to avenge Lugo. While the gameplay was average, I loved the narrative of this game because it was one of those rare games that made me feel terrible at the end for enjoying it. It made me feel bad for finding it entertaining before knowing the full cost of my actions, and it forces you to fight enemies that aren't necessarily bad guys or good guys. They are just people trying to survive just like you. It basically tells you that there is no good and bad, unlike other shooters, and it forces you to think about who you are killing and why you are killing them and it causes you to almost distance yourself from Walker unlike most games where you are happy to play as the badass protagonist. --SmithandWesson36 (talk) 00:26, 5 August 2014 (EDT)
- See, I can't buy that because the scenarios are so stupid and manufactured. The crowd is armed, Lugo had four weapons (his rifle, his Tavor, his pistol and the Desert Eagle he pulls out of his ass at the end of act 1 when you breach the cockpit) and he doesn't have them anymore. Even if you ignore that, they're hitting you with rocks which are about the same in mechanical terms as shots from an assault rifle. And if you just shove the guy in front of you back, they run away like frightened rabbits, clearly having not planned for you to escalate to bilateral shoving.
- It's really based around the dead-centrist belief that if you take no action it has no consequences, which is the same logic as the Star Trek Prime Directive and is nonsense (if you can press a button to stop, say, Stalin's purges or the genocide in Cambodia and you don't do so, you are still partly responsible for what happens) and it can't even work out how to frame that properly since everyone would still have died when the water ran out even if Walker didn't do anything at all. Aside from the stupid framing of his "mission" (three men to search a 1,200 square mile city full of tower blocks with just camelbaks for water and no packs? And their orders are to report back if they find at least one living person?) it's just a big guilt trip by a writer who thinks he's a whole hell of a lot more insightful than he actually is. Or rather it's a rearranged story screwed around with by a hack who worked for the publisher who then tried to have the real writer's name taken off the credits (Walt Williams did not write Spec Ops: The Line, Richard Pearsey did) and took refuge in being incomprehensible as an alternative to saying anything coherent about anything.
- It's childish to expect that every action we take will necessarily translate into the outcome we desire, but it's adolescent sulking to believe that no action we take can possibly have the result we desire, or that the possibility of failure is reason enough to not act.
- The central argument is the same one that almost kept America out of WW2, and the game is basically the same as if Spielberg stomped onto the set three minutes before the end of Schindler's List and started angrily berating the audience for being entertained by the Holocaust. If he actually thought that, what would it have said about him that he made the movie anyway?
- Besides, who in the world honestly plays FPS games for their well-written plots? You play them to shoot dudes because shooting dudes is fun. Hell, a lot of people who play CoD and even more who play Battlefield never even touch the singleplayer. I'd happily play a game if it was good even if the bad guy was the evil US General Ulysses Flagg who'd stolen a German nuclear submarine and was threatening to nuke Riyadh unless they recognised Dubai as the Neo Confederate States of TruMerica and I was alternating between a sneaky Spetznatz team and a bunch of patriotic Iranian commandoes. Evil Tim (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2014 (EST)
Grim question
So, is the "sandboarding" torture that the 33rd uses actually a real thing? Spartan198 (talk) 02:39, 27 January 2020 (EST)
Not quite AK-103
In-game "AK-47" may be not an AK-103, primarily due to the lack of a butt folding mechanism (the game model shows that the butt is fixed). Most of all, the machine gun from the game resembles the TSS AK-103 self-loading carbine, the photo of which you can see below.
Andrey Karchikyan (talk) 08:24, 06 November 2020 (EST)
- Uh, at full size that render from the game shows the black side folding hinge along the rear of the receiver and the receiver also has the stock unlocking button and catch for a folding stock, although the wood stock doesn't look like it could fold properly anyway without the cutout for the scope rail. -AgentGumby (talk) 09:01, 6 November 2020 (EST)
- Maybe you are right - indeed, on the left side of the weapon you can see the stock release button and the latch for the folding stock, but on the right side there are no signs of the presence of a button, and the stock itself seems to be held not on the hinge, but on the connecting bar, and rigidly fixed without the possibility of folding. Perhaps this is a hybrid in which a fixed butt was installed on the AK-103. - Andrey Karchikyan (talk) 21:11, 17 November 2020 (EST)