Old School weaponry
- Thread starter Grizzle
- Start date
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Why the fuck should guns from Craptics be used in FO3 ?
By the time of the way (and the end of weapons productions) those guns are ANTQUES.
That means very few will exist.
More 'modern' non real weapons will be in supply.
Look at FO1 for a good implemantation of this.
By the time of the way (and the end of weapons productions) those guns are ANTQUES.
That means very few will exist.
More 'modern' non real weapons will be in supply.
Look at FO1 for a good implemantation of this.
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
The thompson being used in FO2 was one of that games mistakes.... Like new Reno.
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
And quite a few that dont. While gangsers were sure to pop up, the ENTIRE town was a giant easter egg.
Grizzle said:
The same brainfart that made you miss the fact that we have an edit function, New Reno didn't fit Fallout's setting, MCA admitted that it didn't fit, most people who pay attention to game design could also tell that New Reno didn't fit, F
OS and FOT both didn't fit in the Fallout setting, and most important of all - the Fallout setting in that real-world guns are rare and an exception because the universe is an alternate timeline and not Counter-Strike?That's not a brain fart, that's full-on mental diarrhea.
Thank you for playing, but get a clue.
Wild_qwerty
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
Grizzle said:
I have to admitt, you do have a point. While I dont think the guns should be 'real world guns' they could still be modled (in other words resemble) after some guns. Some of the older guns had a really cool style to them and look pretty sweet. While FOT had two many 'real world' guns some of the images looked pretty cool.
In FO history didnt china capture alaska t one point (sorry I cant remeber) so it would be plausable that after it was recaptured by the US that they captured all the chinese soilders waepons and equipment in the process. I imgine that these may have been shipped state side to be recyled or destroyed (I would learn towards recylced as the wars were over resources). So it is possible that there was a substanial ammount of non US weaponry in the US when the bombs fell. So maybe you could have a cache of Chinese weapons in a big warehouse for a recylcing plant
Gunslinger
Mildly Dipped
Older model weapons are still a viable market, at least today. WW2 ended more than half a century ago but there are still weapons floating about. At some gunshows, I've seen at least a good handful of Australian Lee-Enfield SMLE's. Then there's the numerous online auctions sprouting more WW2-era weapons. And alot of WW2 weapons were exported and even manufactured in and to alot of countries for reasonably prices, especially at the end of the war (Lee Harvey Oswald bought his WW2 era Italian rifle for just twelve dollars or so).
The major reasons for the continual interest in this particular era of guns are nostalgia and collector concerns. But, these weapons are just as effective as modern day weapons, if not more. However, infantry combat has evolved such that rather than concentrating on firearms that hit a target with force and reach, the shift has been moved to lighter weighing firearms that can shoot high volumes of fire at a lesser range. The shift from cartridge sizes was signifcant in this refocusing. But outside of cosmetic differences, a WW2 era gun would more than hold its own today. Frankly, the epitome of gun workmanship was reached by John Moses Browning, not by Mikhail Kalashnikov.
From personal experience in gun-fearing California, I've test fired a Argentinian Mauser rechambered into Winchester .308. The owner used it for hunting and he claimed that it could manage a whole 5-round clip of sub MOA groupings at a hundred yards, which he later demonstrated (I would never be able to manage that with ANY gun; my eyes are bad, or at least that's my excuse). My point is that they can still hold up their own. The grizzled gun experts/freaks in my area scoff at most people carrying a semi-automatic Bushmaster (which is illegal in California unless it has a fixed magazine) chambered in .223 and swear by their assorted collections of Mausers and M1 carbines.
Fallout does feature the 1950's vibe, with quasi-futuristic weapons. Like what Wild_qwerty said: I'd rather see weapons based on generic real-life weapons rather than actual real-life weapons. Fallout managed this well but Fallout Two added some unnecessary real-life weapons.
The major reasons for the continual interest in this particular era of guns are nostalgia and collector concerns. But, these weapons are just as effective as modern day weapons, if not more. However, infantry combat has evolved such that rather than concentrating on firearms that hit a target with force and reach, the shift has been moved to lighter weighing firearms that can shoot high volumes of fire at a lesser range. The shift from cartridge sizes was signifcant in this refocusing. But outside of cosmetic differences, a WW2 era gun would more than hold its own today. Frankly, the epitome of gun workmanship was reached by John Moses Browning, not by Mikhail Kalashnikov.
From personal experience in gun-fearing California, I've test fired a Argentinian Mauser rechambered into Winchester .308. The owner used it for hunting and he claimed that it could manage a whole 5-round clip of sub MOA groupings at a hundred yards, which he later demonstrated (I would never be able to manage that with ANY gun; my eyes are bad, or at least that's my excuse). My point is that they can still hold up their own. The grizzled gun experts/freaks in my area scoff at most people carrying a semi-automatic Bushmaster (which is illegal in California unless it has a fixed magazine) chambered in .223 and swear by their assorted collections of Mausers and M1 carbines.
Fallout does feature the 1950's vibe, with quasi-futuristic weapons. Like what Wild_qwerty said: I'd rather see weapons based on generic real-life weapons rather than actual real-life weapons. Fallout managed this well but Fallout Two added some unnecessary real-life weapons.
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
The closest FO3 should come to real life weapons is to take real weapons and have a newer version of it (like a FN P-90 c) and even that should be limited to a few guns, if any.
Yeah, but not real modern weapons because that's a wee bit unfallouty.
Last thing I want to see is a raider shooting me with a PSG-fucking-1.
Last thing I want to see is a raider shooting me with a PSG-fucking-1.
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Raiders should have older shit, or common weapons.
Pistols and hunting riffles and smaller SMGs at most. Maybe occasional big guns for raider leaders homemade shit for smaller bands.
Pistols and hunting riffles and smaller SMGs at most. Maybe occasional big guns for raider leaders homemade shit for smaller bands.
psycho i agree with that sentiment about only leaders possibly having some big boy weaponry. And i appreciate input from gunslinger. The idea of a certain gun from another era being rechambered to fit a different shell casing from the fallout array of bullets could be really tinkered with to be a plus for the game, as long as like psycho said it is kept to a minimum.
Any real-world weapon made before 1960 would fit well in a Fallout game, if you ask me. Other, non-real-world weapons should be inspired by the '50s sci-fi. Modern real-world weapon are somewhat out of place in Fallout - for example, those ultra-modern H&K rifles Fallout 2 had in abundance. Also, I don't see how a Tommy Gun clashes with the setting - though that weapon is mostly associated with gangsters, it was relatively common with the US army in World War II and I doubt it magically disappeared afterwards.
Tommy guns are a sort of weapon that refuses to die quietly. It remained in service during the Vietnam war and is still a very viable weapon; the .45cal pistol bullets are *exceedingly* powerful (FO2 does a piss-poor job of modeling just how effective a weapon it is) and it held a lot of them (The largest drum carried one hundred bullets) Recently they've been seen in "service" with the IRA! You can still buy them, in fact. A semi-automatic only model is produced so that more people can have them. The Thompson is lucky enough to have two sustaining values; it's both effective and has a following.
The FN FAL was perfect; that weapon was introduced in the '50s or 60's I think. The Pancor Jackhammer, as cool as it was, is still only a prototype today! Perhaps some guns should be more uncommon, but still available. Fallout 1 did this pretty well; you only ever got one 9mm Mauser, one .223 pistol, and I think there were a few other "one-off" weapons in that game. In FO2 .223 pistols practically fell from the sky.
I'd have some stuff like a BAR or an MG42 available in limited numbers, and also some newer stuff available too, but also in limited numbers so as to give the feeling that these weapons were just coming out when the war hit and only a few people would have them. It's not the overall presence of such weapons that ruins the setting, it's the pervasiveness of some of the designs; i.e. the H&K caseless Assault rifles. You could kill Hubollogists and pick up a couple of those at a pop! I would avoid using these weapons as "filler" weapons, probably by making sure to have a good supply of generic filler weapons to arm the general goons with.
The FN FAL was perfect; that weapon was introduced in the '50s or 60's I think. The Pancor Jackhammer, as cool as it was, is still only a prototype today! Perhaps some guns should be more uncommon, but still available. Fallout 1 did this pretty well; you only ever got one 9mm Mauser, one .223 pistol, and I think there were a few other "one-off" weapons in that game. In FO2 .223 pistols practically fell from the sky.
I'd have some stuff like a BAR or an MG42 available in limited numbers, and also some newer stuff available too, but also in limited numbers so as to give the feeling that these weapons were just coming out when the war hit and only a few people would have them. It's not the overall presence of such weapons that ruins the setting, it's the pervasiveness of some of the designs; i.e. the H&K caseless Assault rifles. You could kill Hubollogists and pick up a couple of those at a pop! I would avoid using these weapons as "filler" weapons, probably by making sure to have a good supply of generic filler weapons to arm the general goons with.
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
THe HK SMG from FO/F02 or was also a good implementation of weaponry. It takes an existing weapon, and uses a 'future' version of it.
Very appropate for FO.
Very appropate for FO.
The thing most people also have to take into account is the setting placement and related design aspects. I was a bit blunt with the initial assessment, but outside of a corny comic book, where would you find 40's gangsters in a dark piece of science fiction? New Reno, with all of those aspects, was more of the corny "any easter egg goes" near-catastrophe of Fallout 2.
The number of the guns were mainly what was wrong. The .223 was used once, had a remarkable presence in Fallout, but was used ad nauseum in Fallout 2. I would, at best, accept that at the time of Fallout 2 that perhaps one or two Thomson's made it through the years. There was a reason why many of Fallout's guns were nondescript generics - mainly because some had obvious signs of wasteland repairs on them in order to make them function. FOT had a number of guns shit out from a WWII antiques store for no other reason than the year is +2170 and MicroForte had the science fiction style off. The number of misplaced guns in that was just simply amazing as they seemed to believe the science-fiction style was that of the 40's. Generics, with the weapons that a 50's-60's science-fiction comic/story writer would would dream up of and later make into popular imagination (take a look at some of the ray guns and etc. from that time).
All futuristic weapons in Fallout were based on clunky technology as if the works of Russell Ohl, Walter Brattain, John, Bardeen, Mervin Kelly and Bill Shockley never happened and the world developed from a logical extension of Lee De Forest's application of vacuum tubes. I am quite disappointed in the number of topics that lean more towards Counter-Strike than exploring that aspect of the Fallout universe. Then again, the whole setting thing seems to confuse many people, especially when it comes to FOS. Oh, wait...FOT. No, wait, FOS! Ah, hell, they're both shit, different grades of shit, and known for that due to very good reasons that mostly involve skewing the setting style.
So, to better state my previous, perhaps one or a few token guns, but beyond that is pushing it. Keep it to something like the Desert Eagle. Since that didn't really fit into what a 50's science-fiction writer would write in, I tend to think it is from someone in the senior aspect of the development team wanting it in and be damned anyone who doesn't agree, or a token piece for some particular reason that may be forever unknown to us unless said developer(s) speak up about that aspect. Either one does make sense.
The number of the guns were mainly what was wrong. The .223 was used once, had a remarkable presence in Fallout, but was used ad nauseum in Fallout 2. I would, at best, accept that at the time of Fallout 2 that perhaps one or two Thomson's made it through the years. There was a reason why many of Fallout's guns were nondescript generics - mainly because some had obvious signs of wasteland repairs on them in order to make them function. FOT had a number of guns shit out from a WWII antiques store for no other reason than the year is +2170 and MicroForte had the science fiction style off. The number of misplaced guns in that was just simply amazing as they seemed to believe the science-fiction style was that of the 40's. Generics, with the weapons that a 50's-60's science-fiction comic/story writer would would dream up of and later make into popular imagination (take a look at some of the ray guns and etc. from that time).
All futuristic weapons in Fallout were based on clunky technology as if the works of Russell Ohl, Walter Brattain, John, Bardeen, Mervin Kelly and Bill Shockley never happened and the world developed from a logical extension of Lee De Forest's application of vacuum tubes. I am quite disappointed in the number of topics that lean more towards Counter-Strike than exploring that aspect of the Fallout universe. Then again, the whole setting thing seems to confuse many people, especially when it comes to F
OS. Oh, wait...FOT. No, wait, FOS! Ah, hell, they're both shit, different grades of shit, and known for that due to very good reasons that mostly involve skewing the setting style.So, to better state my previous, perhaps one or a few token guns, but beyond that is pushing it. Keep it to something like the Desert Eagle. Since that didn't really fit into what a 50's science-fiction writer would write in, I tend to think it is from someone in the senior aspect of the development team wanting it in and be damned anyone who doesn't agree, or a token piece for some particular reason that may be forever unknown to us unless said developer(s) speak up about that aspect. Either one does make sense.
PsychoSniper
So Old I'm Losing Radiation Signs
Good 'miniarticle Rosh.
To be honest, I think Reno could have been a good location.
If done differntly.
They should have had the gangs startd with the survivors of prewar street gangs who looted gun stores and took over town.
By the time of FO2, most guns are repaired over an over and over, so there shouldnt be much left for the gangs other than standard 10MM pistols and SMGs.
The SMG should have been rarer in FO and more expensive, with raider encounters having the most powerful raider with a SMG.
In Reno, the majority of the 'gangsters' should have had mele weapons, with some with pistols, and even fewer with SMGs. The bouncers should have had SMGs and a thompson or two, with MUCH more firepower.
To be honest, I think Reno could have been a good location.
If done differntly.
They should have had the gangs startd with the survivors of prewar street gangs who looted gun stores and took over town.
By the time of FO2, most guns are repaired over an over and over, so there shouldnt be much left for the gangs other than standard 10MM pistols and SMGs.
The SMG should have been rarer in FO and more expensive, with raider encounters having the most powerful raider with a SMG.
In Reno, the majority of the 'gangsters' should have had mele weapons, with some with pistols, and even fewer with SMGs. The bouncers should have had SMGs and a thompson or two, with MUCH more firepower.
I can see where this is going. It is going to the place all Fallout Weapons threads go. Logically, there wouldn't be many functioning firearms in the wasteland. Remember The Road Warrior? Max had one gun at that point, and a handful of shells at best. The Humongous had one pistol with a few shells too. That was it! People in post-apocalyptic worlds would have lots of melee weapons like chains, knives, axes, all kinds of pole-arms, even the occasional sword of some sort. Lots of things like flame-throwers and stuff like that that are easy to cobble together would be around too.
But that is not the Fallout setting. Fallout has lots of guns, however illogical it may be. It's just not fallout unless you have an incredibly improbable man-portable minigun and a ray gun of some sort. There really is no explanation for this other than that it makes the setting work.
But that is not the Fallout setting. Fallout has lots of guns, however illogical it may be. It's just not fallout unless you have an incredibly improbable man-portable minigun and a ray gun of some sort. There really is no explanation for this other than that it makes the setting work.