Talk:Dirty Bomb

Article Sandbox Discussion (Archived)

I took a bunch of images for this game and combined them with some firearm ID info I found online. Needs help by proofreading and double checking the weapons IDs.--Wuzh (talk) 10:45, 6 December 2017 (EST)

Just a note, you only use "is based on" if it isn't clearly one thing or another. The Caulden isn't based on an M1911 variant, it is an M1911 variant. Evil Tim (talk) 02:54, 8 December 2017 (EST)

Well... I prefer writing "based on" because I feel uncomfortable with the "this is incorrect and wrong" attitude IMFDB seems to bring out. I've seen so many pages where the writer is like "this rail is two centimeters shorter than the real one so it's incorrect," (obviously not this extreme, but I just want to illustrate my point) I just feel anxious writing such things, so I prefer to keep my writing to a more neutral style, using "based on" when any gun looks like it's even slightly stylized in some media. I'm sorry if that's not what IMFDB looks for, but I'm sure others can help if this is a problem. --Wuzh (talk) 06:35, 8 December 2017 (EST)

On a side note, I literally cannot play this game. For whatever reason, every server I go into has a 200+ ping, creating like 3 seconds of lag and making it impossible for me to get new mercs. All the images I have are collected from free mercs in weekly rotation. I would appreciate any help for taking pictures, just the idle and the inspection images should be fine for now. Go into settings and disable the crosshair then set the HUD alpha to 0 to hide everything but the Beta Build watermark, which I presume cannot be removed by any means. --Wuzh (talk) 06:35, 8 December 2017 (EST)

Actually I'm fine now. I don't know what optimization magic they did but the game now runs fine.--Wuzh (talk) 03:59, 15 December 2017 (EST)

There was a real company called "bend over here it comes again arms?" Evil Tim (talk) 11:32, 20 January 2018 (EST)

Apparently so. --Wuzh (talk) 23:01, 20 January 2018 (EST)

MOA SNPR note

It isn't that weird to have different markings in different languages on some guns, for instance, Saiga receivers usually have сайга written in Russian and then "Made in Russia by Izmash" or something similar in English. Foreign-made weapons imported into a country that speaks a different language will usually have markings in multiple languages.--AgentGumby (talk) 22:27, 13 January 2018 (EST)

True, but it's a bit odd that there are Cyrillic and as-of-yet unidentified Asian characters on one side, and Latin ones on the other. That sorta implies that the gun was made in one place, exported to another, and then marked for export to somewhere else. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 22:42, 13 January 2018 (EST)

I just want to say that my images are not top quality. My PC is pretty old and my capturing software might have its own compression issues too, and the game is also in (an endless) Beta. The details could be clearer if we somehow manage to get better screenshots. --Wuzh (talk) 23:31, 13 January 2018 (EST)

Oh, don't worry, it's not the screenshot quality. Your screenshots are just fine. I just can't identify the language because I don't know Asian languages very well. Unless you were talking about something else, in which case this entire soliloquy was entirely pointless and I'm just rambling on for no reason. Pyr0m4n14c (talk) 00:30, 14 January 2018 (EST)

SMG9 is UDP9

Check this.

Error creating thumbnail: File missing

The Angstad Arms UPD9 -9x19mm

They are identical.--Dannyguns (talk) 06:44, 19 April 2018 (EDT)

No they aren't. Firstly, there are a LOT of differences. The game gun is side charging but the UDP-9 has an AR charging handle, the UDP-9 has a angled pistol size mag well but the game gun has one more like a mini standard vertical one, the game gun has a sort of H&K like fixed stock rather than the sliding stock on the UDP-9, and the handguards are different. More importantly, this gun was only unveiled in 2015 so the timeline doesn't really work out considering this game was in beta release in 2013. --commando552 (talk) 07:27, 19 April 2018 (EDT)

BR-16

I'm not inclined to think it's based on an HK416 because it notably lacks the 416's raised sight rail. Spartan198 (talk) 07:56, 19 April 2018 (EDT)

I'm in agreement. I've been looking closely at the shots of both the BR-16 and the M4A1, comparing them to photos of the real guns, and between the top rail not being raised to make room for a gas piston in the slightest and the lack of pictograms around the safety (ironically, it's the proper M4A1 that has something like that), I don't see anything indicative of an HK416 rather than an M4 without the carry handle as identified by someone who thinks "no carry handle = obviously a 416". Kadorhal (talk) 21:22, 18 June 2018 (EDT)