Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3Talk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 - Internet Movie Firearms Database - Guns in Movies, TV and Video GamesTalk:Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3
It might be a good idea to give this its own subheading (or even sub-page, there's a lot of weapons in the trailer). Usually we cover guns that appear in trailers and previews, but it's rather unique for a game trailer to have so many real weapons in it, and it'd look weird shoehorning shots from this trailer into the main page's gun entries. Evil Tim 18:28, 18 November 2011 (CST)
Here's some more screenshots from the same commercial. Note that I accidentally uploaded an existing screenshot. The following weapons appear in the commercial: FN SCAR-L, Czech Skorpions, RPG-7, M67 grenade, Barret M82, 9-Bang, M4A1 Carbine, M1911 and its modern variants, AKMS, Remington RSASS, M60E4, M16A2, and the M203 launcher. - Kenny99 21:56, 18 November 2011 (CST)
Actually, that "SCAR-L" is an ACR. :\ BTW, I just love this commercial for some reason. =) - Mr. Wolf 19:28, 19 November 2011 (CST)
Seeing Sam Worthington in it just feels weird, since he's the star of BO. Do you think it was a dig at Treyarch? --Funkychinaman 10:57, 22 November 2011 (CST)
Well, the rules on IMFDB state that commercials are not allowed to have their own pages. But maybe these screenshots can have their own section on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 main page as a "trivia special"? --ThatoneguyJosh 01:58, 23 November 2011 (CST)
The thing is while commercials are not allowed, trailers usually are allowed on the main page. I think in this very unusual case this trailer has enough guns to warrant a page of it's own. Evil Tim 03:52, 23 November 2011 (CST)
Hmm... that would be nice to see a page about this trailer on here. But then again, we'd probably have other people complaining that it would be our obligation to also include pages for the live action trailer for Call of Duty: Black Ops, the Black Ops Zombies trailer and the Rezurrection expansion pack trailer. Personally I say put all these screenshots on the bottom of the Modern Warfare 3 page as a "trivia special", and if someone wants to add screenshots from the live action trailers for Black Ops and it's expansions, then I agree on the same deal; putting them on the bottom of the main page as a "trivia special" --ThatoneguyJosh 07:36, 24 November 2011 (CST)
Naw, if you actually did the gun IDs properly for this trailer it'd be about the same size as the actual page. I think for this a sub-page is probably the best bet. And to be honest, if someone wanted to make the three pages you mention, I'd say the same would apply (and as to complaining, the standard "make it yourself if you want it done so bad" response would be fine). It's not like this is going to be a huge issue with games companies suddenly all having live action trailers with loads of guns in them. Evil Tim 08:16, 24 November 2011 (CST)
In my opinion, I would rather create a small section for the commercial instead of making a separate page for it in compliance with Imfdb rules. - Kenny99 03:34, 25 November 2011 (CST)
IMFDB rules say nothing about trailers, only commercials which are not trailers are forbidden. I'm saying create a sub-page for it since it would be way bigger than a "small section" if you did it properly, which is how it should be done. Evil Tim 04:26, 25 November 2011 (CST)
It's the gas grenade Price throws when he's interrogating Waarabe. Looks almost like a VOG grenade with a pin stuck on one end, or an M34 after a crash diet. Evil Tim 07:21, 25 November 2011 (CST)
Desert Eagle
Now that's settled, Evil Tim, can you do the same treatment to the slide markings, as I think it might actually say Desert Hawk rather than Eagle, but don't have anything on this computer to clear it up. Can make out though that this is a Magnum Research as the bottom line ends in Minneapolis MN. --commando552 11:08, 25 November 2011 (CST)
This is a slightly different gradient mapping (you can still see the E, it's the same image, on photobucket to save server space), but it actually looks like the second word is completely missing. I don't see why, they thank MR and "Desert Eagle" (which is a separate thing?) in the credits. Evil Tim 11:22, 25 November 2011 (CST)
Thanks, to me it look like it says either "Hank" or "Hawk" and am assuming Hawk, as that is less mental. --commando552 11:48, 25 November 2011 (CST)
Ok, ok, calming down now. Here's where we get back to fun because the magazine is both correctly and incorrectly modelled!
Notice the spacing imples four holes in the magazine (a .44 would have 5) but the number of visible bullets I believe implies a .44 (a .50AE would only have three, unless the side of the top bullet at the side is supposed to be the side of the one at the top of the magazine). Evil Tim
Also, .44 Magnum is a rimmed caliber, and while I don't completely expect them to get this correct, the cartridges in the magazine are not rimmed, which would be characteristic of .50 AE rounds. Just a side note! --Ranger12 11:14, 25 November 2011 (CST)
I think it is meant to be the .50 AE mag, but is thrown off by two thing. Firstly the top round is smaller than the other visible rounds, and looks like it overlaps the top one as well. Secondly, the window is too long on this gun, being about a 1/3 the total length of the magazine. On a real magazine (.44 or .50, they are the same apart from the holes) the window in only about 1/4 the length of the magazine. These two factors combined mean more bullets are visible than there should be. --commando552 11:48, 25 November 2011 (CST)
The mags are pretty much made up to be just something to stick into the gun. They are so far from the real thing they can't really even be credited towards either gun.--Ranger12 15:31, 25 November 2011 (CST)
Well, the number of "windows" does tell you how many rounds, and the spacing says 4 rather than 5, so it's just another mistake with 8 rounds in a 7-round magazine. You want horrible magazines you need to go back to the original MW, if you were lucky you'd have two completely flat bullets on the top that looked a bit like they were for the right kind of gun. Evil Tim 15:37, 25 November 2011 (CST)
Yes, but a mag window never extends into the feed lips like in the picture. lol... And honestly, I never looked at the original MW mags. I'll take your word there.--Ranger12 15:50, 25 November 2011 (CST)
Well, I'm probably going to redo those at some point because I hate that page. Also, the window does that, I imagine, because they're BS'ing based on an Airsoft magazine, where the feed lips are instead the plastic top of the mag with the BB feeder and gas vent. I guess they knew there was a hole in the side of the magazine (which on the Airsoft version isn't a hole but a dip containing a little latch that releases the slide and such), knew there were feed lips, but weren't sure how the two things interacted with each other. Evil Tim 15:55, 25 November 2011 (CST)
Lol yea we'll just go with that explanation... --Ranger12 15:58, 25 November 2011 (CST)
The top of the magazine is correct, and the windows does extend up into the feed lips like this. See here for a side by side comparison of both .50 and .44 magazines showing this: http://www.magnumresearch.com/docs/MagazineOffer.pdf. It also seems like the crimp on the front of the magazine is different for the two calibers, but you don't get a good enough look at the magazine to work out which, if either, the game magazine is based on. --commando552 18:08, 25 November 2011 (CST)
Yeah, you're right, I just checked a couple more images on Google to be sure. I can't imagine that does much for the life of the feed lips? Evil Tim 18:18, 25 November 2011 (CST)
Yeaaaaa That explains why I've heard that the lifespan of DE mags are so short... Ok then lol --Ranger12 21:34, 25 November 2011 (CST)
Mk 14
So, I guess they just figured "nobody's going to throw their rifle on the floor and check it's the same one the other guys are using, right?" And they'd have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for us meddlin' kids. Evil Tim 16:52, 25 November 2011 (CST)
... what's the problem? --Ghostdigga 04:51, 27 November 2011 (CST)
The "Mk14" and "M14 EBR" are actually the same model (the Mk 14 Mod 0), even though it seems they want you to think the "M14 EBR" is the Mk 14 Mod 1 from the previous game. Evil Tim 06:17, 27 November 2011 (CST)
Since it's locked...
Can a mod change the bit about the M65 Atomic Annie?
"A doctored image of the nuclear test Upshot-Knothole Grable can be seen in some maps as a movie poster. Grable was a shell fired from an M65 Atomic Cannon and the W9 nuclear artillery shell was itself a modified antiaircraft gun."
Atomic Annie fired 280mm shells. There were never any 280mm AA shells, and the design of Atomic Annie itself was based on German railroad guns, not an AA gun. --Funkychinaman 10:49, 28 November 2011 (CST)
You're misreading. The W9 round itself is a modified antiaircraft gun which fires one subcritical mass at the other. The M65 is a gun which fires a gun which is a bomb. Evil Tim 11:32, 28 November 2011 (CST)
If it's just a gun-type fission device, can you clarify that? --Funkychinaman 11:35, 28 November 2011 (CST)
Just did that before reading. Evil Tim 11:41, 28 November 2011 (CST)
Thanks. --Funkychinaman 11:47, 28 November 2011 (CST)
How come the page is locked anyway? --RaNgeR 10:55, 28 November 2011 (CST)
M4A1
A quick query about the M4A1 used in the game, as you may be able to see in the pictures below the M4 is equipped with a rail riser, including when using the hybrid sight.
The EOTech XPS-3 part of the hybrid sight is situated on the lower rail whilst the magnifier is on the rail riser. Wouldn't this mess up the alignment between the two? Doesn't really look right to me but would like anyone else's input. --Noble.6 15:50, 28 November 2011 (CST)
If you zoom in and look carefully there's a silver plate between the base of the XPS-3 and the rail which raises it up to the same level as the riser. Evil Tim 16:22, 28 November 2011 (CST)
Ah, thanks. Seems like a lot of trouble to go to though... --Noble.6 16:48, 28 November 2011 (CST)
It's most likely that they designed the rifle before they decided to use this sight with it. A bit like how they just stuffed the RSASS into "Blood Brothers" even though the level was blatantly designed for the Barrett. Evil Tim 16:52, 28 November 2011 (CST)
"USP Tactical"
I would just like to point out that the supposed USP Tactical isn't one; it still has the regular USP's fixed iron sights for one thing. The Wierd It 05:33, 2 December 2011 (CST)
And has markings on it saying "USP Tactical," plus an extended barrel. It's a USP Tactical with the wrong iron sights. This is hardly impossible, since the Tactical uses the same dovetails as the standard USP slide so there's no reason you couldn't swap irons.
So? Every other USP in the series had said extended barrel, but we didn't call them Tacs. Plus it's not like they've ever used correct trades before. The Wierd It 06:27, 2 December 2011 (CST)
Ok, let me just copy-paste what I said last time this came up.
Here's an angle-for-angle comparison of the player models:
Error creating thumbnail: File missingStandard USP. Slide wording "(front cocking serration) USP .45 Auto." Has very slightly visible projecting barrel (it isn't "perfectly" visible or really visible at all outside taking stills no matter what you do). This is a USP 45, and the model is more or less lifted straight from the previous game.
Error creating thumbnail: File missingUSP Tactical model. Slide says "USP Tactical .45 Auto," has highly visible (and therefore longer) projecting barrel. This is a USP Tactical.
The new one has a longer barrel and correctly calls itself a USP Tactical on the slide, while the original is just a malformed USP.
Let me just break this down:
Someone decided they needed a new USP model.
They made a new USP model which has features correct for a Tactical, and slide engraving saying it's a Tactical.
They decided to use the old MW2 USP model as well for no good reason.
They decided to call both the USP 45, also for no good reason.
Hence, there are two gun models, the old mutant USP and the new Tactical. Evil Tim 14:59, 23 November 2011 (CST)
Evil Tim 06:01, 2 December 2011 (CST)
