Talk:Metal Gear Solid

US special forces with French FAMASs?

My only gripe with this game is why the Japanese developers decided to give the so called US special forces you take on FAMASs. It just has always seemed kinda weird with me. There are so many better looking guns than these. Excalibur01 09:00, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

That annoys me, too. It was used in the PS1 original supposedly only because it was "easy to render" graphics-wise. However, as far as Twin Snakes (which was developed in-house at Silicon Knights in Canada) goes, I would have preferred it to (a bit logically) be replaced by the M4A1. Spartan198 08:19, 21 February 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

True, that. I recently came into possession of Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes for the Nintendo Gamecube and was quite stunned to find that they hadn't updated the FAMAS to an M4 Carbine (or even a M16A3 assault rifle), considering that they bothered to put both the Beretta M9 and Heckler & Koch PSG1-T less-lethal tranquilizer weapons into the game.

I also saw somewhere that there was a Heckler & Koch submachine gun in the beta (possibly the MP5N) which was later cut from the release version. Unfortunately, I don't know the source off the top of my head. 203.206.5.121 14:58, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

In the Japanese version, the SOCOM was replaced by the USP from MGS2. So they had to render that into the game. So why couldn't they put a gun actually used by US Forces? Lazy people these days... Hoot471 22:03, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

That's damn right, Hoot471. 203.161.84.114 13:12, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Just chalk it up to people who don't know guns Excalibur01

Actually, according to the developers, they had been looking for unusual-looking and/or obscure weapons as well.

The FAMAS is not obscure because it's used by a major military, the French. Unusual doesn't describe it. They could have picked a more futuristic design 69.51.184.172

Not knowing about guns isn't the problem, Excalibur01.

The problem is that the development team of Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes only thought of adding things (first-person shooting, less-than-lethal weapons, etcetera) to the game, instead of improving stuff that was already in it (dialogue, weaponry, etcetera).

In fact, I remember quite clearly reading an article on IGN about how Hideo Kojima did extensive weapons research in preparation for developing the game.

The only reason for the French FAMAS assault rifle being in the original Metal Gear Solid was because of graphical limitations and if they had tried rendering an AR-15 model assault rifle, it would have turned out unrecognisable and that is forgivable considering that the game was released in 1998.

The Twin Snakes however, is a different story. 203.161.84.114 10:58, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Aside from the graphical limitations, I think from an ingame perspective it's possible that the Genome army, being a "black project," needed a standard assault rifle that was less traceable than "All-American homegrown" M4s or M16 rifles. It could be the case that the FAMAS rifles seen in the game were just the most available and least traceable 5.56mm rifle at the time when the time came to approve the weapons for the Genome army, and 5.56mm ammunition is certainly available from many more sources than rifles are.

Even so, it doesn't excuse how useless the gun is in Twin Snakes at penetrating body armour, which you can see in action here: [1] (granted, the player in the video is not using the FPV function to aim for headshots). --Mazryonh 17:22, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Why all the FAMAS hate? I think it's a really cool rifle (my personal favorite) and very original to this game besides it's getting boring to see M4 this and M4 that in every freaking game out there. (no offence. M4A1 is still a decent gun) --SilentwarriorX 14:28, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

M16s and M4s are used by so many nations all over the world (even at the time of MGS1's original PS1 release) that I doubt traceability would have been a problem, even for a black ops unit. I know it certainly wasn't back in the '60s when MACV-SOG units were launching covert raids into Laos and Cambodia armed with CAR-15s and XM177s, which weren't exactly commonplace like the M16/M4 platform is today. Compare the number of FAMAS users [2] with the number of M4 users [3] and you'll see my point that, if anything, the FAMAS is more traceable than the M4 alone, let alone the entire M16 family.

@Silentwarrior

No one is "hating on" the FAMAS. As for "M4 this, M4 that in every game", what else do you expect? The M4 is the standard by which every firearm of its class is judged. It's light, accurate, easy to maintain and operate, reliable, and highly modular. It's the epitome of what a military firearm should be. Spartan198 07:48, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Heh, nice yankee propaganda :) I still think that AK is better (I'm sure a lot of people agree with this one) and it's even more reliable and easier to maintain than M4. But why all the bother? Americans use a lot of european guns and nobody's complaining? --SilentwarriorX 04:48, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I stand corrected on the FAMAS. I do, however, remember reading that during the development of MGS they wanted an assault rifle that looked futuristic in 1998, so they picked the FAMAS to that end. It's likely that they also did so since it was easier to render convincingly with the 3D technology of that day. I own a copy of the PS2 version of MGS2, and even that engine has problems with rendering an M4 convincingly. The round handguard ends up being diamond-shaped, the front sight (being a 2D plane with no thickness) is invisible when you look at it head-on, etc. So it's probable that the FAMAS was chosen for having far fewer curves, which are hard on a primitive engine's polygon limit.

One thing needs to be reiterated though; the Genome Army are not a Special Forces or Black Ops unit--they are a black project, through and through. To my knowledge the Genome Soldiers don't have any field experience either, being raised only on virtual training.

Besides, the MGS series seems to operate on a different timeline than ours, especially since in MGS4 the XM8 was formally adopted. Maybe in the MGS timeline Colt never let their rights to the M16/M4 family lapse. It could explain why in MGS4 so very few soldiers use M4s (only Old Snake and certain soldiers from "All-American" forces), and no one uses M16s. It's too bad that they didn't implement the FAMAS in MGS4 for old time's sake. The M4 maybe the "epitome" of a short-barrelled assault rifle, but it's a standard that can be met in other ways, otherwise we wouldn't see things like the G36C, the FN F2000, the SA80 series, the Steyr AUG, the FAMAS itself, etc.--Mazryonh 15:24, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I imagine of people in the MGS universe use M4s (that's surmountable to saying nobody uses EOTechs because they replaced Snake's 552 with an Aimpoint CompM2). Even the enemy contractors were originally armed with M4s [4], which is probably the reason the US soldiers and Marines later in the game have XM8s, as a way of visually "separating" them from the contractors. Some of the dialogue regarding it was even left in when Drebin told Snake that the M4 Custom was "a favorite of the big PMCs" and flashbacks during the very first mission briefing even showed contractors with them. So the M4 is a lot more widespread than it appears in the final game. And who's this "certain soldier from the 'All-American' forces" you're talking about? Spartan198 17:23, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

I recall seeing a terrified trainee soldier on the Missouri in MGS4 pointing his M4 (sideways, for some reason) at the swarms of Dwarf Gekko crawling up the ship's bridge. Still, my point on how graphically difficult it is to convincingly render a weapon with so many rounded surfaces like the M4 stands as the most probable theory as to why it wasn't used in MGS1. They make up for it in MGS2 though (if I ever get my PC port copy working again I'll post screenshots)--Seal Team 10, the Tanker Marines, and the Presidential Bodyguards all use M4s.

I still think the relative lack of M4s/M16s in MGS4 (despite Drebin's quip) is a sign that Colt in the MGS timeline held onto their rights with that weapon series, and gave "preferential customer" status to the US forces, while making others pay through the nose to use those weapons, which is probably why FN has so much more market share in MGS4--the SCAR-H, P90, and Five-SeveN all make appearances among many more NPCs than the users of Colt products do. --Mazryonh 16:26, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

That or the weapons developers for the game MGS4 wanted the most futuristic of weapons, meaning weapons that are either supposed to replace current standard rifles of today like the M4 or M16. With the P90s, it's always a gun that's for fictional special elite characters. The weird part in MGS4 is that Drebin said the M4 is the official carbine for the US army, but when later on when we see US forces swarm Liquid, they all had XM8s.

And to SilentwarriorX, it isn't "yankee" propaganda. Some of the users on this site aren't even American. I will admit the AK is a reliable weapon to use, robust but even the AK has its limits when it comes to sighting targets and accuracy. I'd love to have an AK-47, but you don't see a lot of western military adopting anything similar to AKs. It's more or less a symbol of terrorism, fear and hatred. So the forces in MGS 1 would need a weapon that doesn't represent something that the AK is known for. Though as a futuristic gun, they could have use G36s which were just coming out in the early 90s. Excalibur01 06:47, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

@Silentwarrior We may use a lot of European guns, but is the FAMAS one of them? No, it's not. And the excellence of the M4 isn't "yankee propoganda", it's simple fact. Spartan198 05:40, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Spartan, just about every one of my friends who has served in the US military thinks the entire M16 series is crap compared to other rifles that are available now, or what they could have used since it's inception. I myself do not look forward to its use considering a few of the other options. Is it a bad gun? No. Is it the best gun? No. Is it the ideal military weapon? Probably not. sure its light and fairly accurate, but it is also VERY delicate compared to other weapons and also quite complicated compared to say an AK or an M14; it's ammunition is also underpowered and ballistically inefficient. Always remember that military equipment is done by the LOWEST bidder. Whoever can supply a product that can perform A, B, and C for less than $X per unit wins. But your opinion is your own, and neither my input or anyone else's is likely to change that, the same as our opinion is unlikely to change from yours. M4 is your favorite, that's perfectly fine; I think they're fun to shoot but it wouldn't be my first choice in combat. Besides, it's a videogame about genetically engineered supersoldiers and battlemechs, with psychics and ghosts. =P Mercer 16:07, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Please sign your name, in fact, register with the site first off. I'd tell you, all my pals are Marines and they know how to deal with what they got. They've never had actual problems with the M16/M4 in combat and most of them went to Iraq and a couple are now in Afgan with their M4s. Sure, they said it's jammed once or twice, but mostly from misfeds because of the magazines. This is the weapon they trust their life would in combat. Would they like something better? Sure, if the government and the conservatives in the military would get off their asses and pick a newer rifle, but no where soon are they getting the ACR or HK416s. And these are the kinds of guys that aren't above getting their own personal magazines as well as hollow points and frangible bullets, then getting rid of them because they are not regulation.

Lastly, yes this is a video game, but we're here to discuss about the guns of the game, not about the super soldiers, and battle mechs with psychics, and ghosts. You don't see anyone here talking about the weapon system on the Rex, do you? Excalibur01 15:00, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I truly hope your friends don't get caught violating the Hague Convention. Yes my friends too have performed admirably with their M4s, as there isn't exactly any alternative. The point I was making in regards to mechs, ghosts and such is that considering the other lack of realism already established is it really THAT big of a deal that they chose an assault rifle that was a little bit different, and probably easier to render? To be honest with you I was pretty unfamiliar with the FAMAS when MGS first came out and now i really like it and would love to take one for a test drive.Mercer 16:07, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Don't mind it too much, it's there SOP to dump their contraband ammo when they get rotated back and on glancing inspection, they don't look too much different front regular rounds.

Anyway, I will admit that when I first played the game back in 98, I knew next to nothing about guns at all and thought the FAMAS was a cool weapon. It isn't bad, but I still think when they remade the game for the Game Cube, they could have rendered the weapons with something else Excalibur01 18:10, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

I think that by the time the remake came out the FAMAS had become as synonymous with the game as the other weapons, otherwise they probably would have like they did with the Resident Evil remake. Mercer 18:55, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

And here I was thinking that one of the advantages of complying with the Hague convention in "low-intensity warfare" was that the insurgents were more likely to be wounded rather than killed outright, and therefore more likely to give up information when humanely interrogated (apparently it's not an uncommon element for insurgent detainees to discover that their treatment in the hands of "Blue Forces" is actually better than anything else they've had previously, which provides good incentive for them to crack). And where do your buddies dump the ammo (hopefully away from insurgent reuse)? Not the worst I've heard about our "Blue Forces," but not a good sign either.

The United States isn't a Hague Convention signatory. Spartan198 08:32, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

The US actually is, where did you get the idea that we are not?Mercer 22:56, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Every Internet search I do for "United States Hague Convention" brings up zilch regarding warfare. All that comes up is intercountry adoption. Spartan198 23:16, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

List of signatory countries with date of signature, http://www.pca-cpa.org/showpage.asp?pag_id=1038 R. Lee Ermy also discussed it on the ammunition episode of Lock 'n Load. 23:24, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

I'd agree with the FAMAS essentially becoming a symbol of the Genome Army in this game, but I'm still a little miffed that it didn't make a return in MGS4. --Mazryonh 15:55, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

That's probably because it wasn't featured in Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. Interestingly, development videos of Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty do show that there was a FAMAS assault rifle available during the beta stage. The developers most likely cut it because it was redundant. 203.59.36.239 09:31, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

It was replaced with the M4A1 for story purposes, or so the story goes. Spartan198 12:04, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

FAMAS Version

I'd mistakenly noted in the article that the Genomes used the F2/G2 version, but after playing it again, I noticed the full-sized hand guard rather than the small trigger guard (characteristic of the F1/G1 version). My apologies. I've also removed my noting from the article. Spartan198 09:28, 7 March 2009 (UTC) Spartan198

Another point; ammunition capacity gives it away as a G1 -- 25-round straight mags versus the 30-round NATO ones that the G2 takes. --Orca*