Possible reason for why shotgun is extraordinarily good... - Page 3

BDC22 · 12-20-2001, 11:12 AM

not trying to get on ur nerves but how is that different??

Tyler Durden · 12-20-2001, 11:23 AM

spoo ! They didn't have anything like an AK-47 back then. If they did, then they would have used it. Being shot in the chest with a m1garand will throw you back, it might even go through you. But I still say being shot with a shot gun, will not throw flesh, and chunks of body out your damn back ! THats so stupid, omg. And im sure your right, it can happen, but how good do you think it would look on the Quake3 engine ? Not very good, it has a hard time dealing with things like that. It was only made for people being shot and blowing up.

Recycled Spooge · 12-20-2001, 11:26 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by BDC22:
not trying to get on ur nerves but how is that different??<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
You're answers are very vague. I guess I didn't know what you ment by, "It wouldnt splash like water though." I don't know what you mean; do you mean that blood is more dense, so it would look more like "sour milk" flying out? Or do you mean that it would spray out more instead of splashing?

------------------

If you're so good at being a lesbian, then why do you turn me on? -Steve Carell(The Daily Show)
YOUR FAVORITE BAND SUCKS!!!!!!! - Me.

[This message has been edited by Recycled Spooge (edited December 20, 2001).]

Recycled Spooge · 12-20-2001, 11:31 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Tyler Durden:
spoo ! They didn't have anything like an AK-47 back then. If they did, then they would have used it. Being shot in the chest with a m1garand will throw you back, it might even go through you. But I still say being shot with a shot gun, will not throw flesh, and chunks of body out your damn back ! THats so stupid, omg. And im sure your right, it can happen, but how good do you think it would look on the Quake3 engine ? Not very good, it has a hard time dealing with things like that. It was only made for people being shot and blowing up. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I wasn't talking about the shotgun. The shotgun is the stupidest idea in this entire game. I don't care about the shotgun. The shotgun can fuck itself for all I care. I was talking about the normal weapons. Second, I know there was no AK47, DUUUUHHHHHHH!!!!! I was just using it as an example; but still, even though we didn't have the AK47, we had the Sturm Gewehr 44 which was very similar to the AK47.

------------------

If you're so good at being a lesbian, then why do you turn me on? -Steve Carell(The Daily Show)
YOUR FAVORITE BAND SUCKS!!!!!!! - Me.

Sandman · 12-21-2001, 07:04 AM

Tyler Durden: you said the M1 Garand would throw you back if it hit you, possibly even go through you. Possibly? This is a 220-grain, .30-06 round traveling at 2800 feet per second. A direct hit from this rifle will go through a human like a hot knife through butter.

Recycled Spooge · 12-21-2001, 07:18 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Tyler Durden:
First, if you knew that there were no ak's in WWII, THEN STOP TALKING ABOUT THEM ! Who cares what it can do, what matters is the weapons during WWII ! And if your not talking about the shot gun, then what are you talking about ? This whole thread was based on the shotgun, thats what everyone else is talking about, not the fucking ak-47 !<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Please learn how to read, or at least TRY to read what I wrote. You just make yourself look stupid. :P I am talking about guns that were really used in the war!!

------------------

If you're so good at being a lesbian, then why do you turn me on? -Steve Carell(The Daily Show)
YOUR FAVORITE BAND SUCKS!!!!!!! - Me.

[This message has been edited by Recycled Spooge (edited December 21, 2001).]

Hans · 12-21-2001, 07:31 AM

Here are pictures of an STG44 and AK together:

You can see how similar they are. So although there was no AK47 in WW2, there was a very similar weapon. Anyway, you can now continue your flame war.

[This message has been edited by Hans (edited December 21, 2001).]

Recycled Spooge · 12-21-2001, 07:41 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Hans:
Here are pictures of an STG44 and AK together:

You can see how similar they are. So although there was no AK47 in WW2, there was a very similar weapon. Anyway, you can now continue your flame war.

[This message has been edited by Hans (edited December 21, 2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank you Hans, clearly some people still did not get this concept.

------------------

If you're so good at being a lesbian, then why do you turn me on? -Steve Carell(The Daily Show)
YOUR FAVORITE BAND SUCKS!!!!!!! - Me.

12-21-2001, 10:13 AM

This thread is going to hell in a handbag

SoLiDUS · 12-22-2001, 02:13 AM

" ... "
/me stands up

YOU ARE ALL RETARDS.
:P

/me sits down
" ... "

------------------

WHAT YOU SAY ! *slams fist on desk while other hand rests*

Cpt.J.H.Miller · 12-22-2001, 04:55 AM

This thread was supposed to be to discuss the shotgun, not babble on about something someone didnt actually say!

"An AK 47 could pierce through a human body from a further range and I wouldn't be surprised if the guns used in WWII could the same at closer range."

He wasnt Saying That An AK was in WWII DUH!

Vist Team ~SPR~ Here