Forums :: THE SNAKE SOUP
Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - Printable Version

+- Forums :: THE SNAKE SOUP (http://thesnakesoup.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Metal... Gear?! (/Forum-Metal-Gear)
+--- Forum: Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes (/Forum-Metal-Gear-Solid-V-Ground-Zeroes)
+--- Thread: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? (/Thread-Why-do-they-suddenly-not-use-real-weapons)

Pages: 1 2 3 4


Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - MetalGearBob - 01-11-2015 09:32 AM

Hi.

Havent been following MGs for years now in order to avoid spoilers, but now I played Ground Zeroes on the PC and WTF happened to weapons in MGS?

They always used more or less real weapons as models and gave them the apropriate designations like AK47 or Mk23 aka SOCOM. But now they use some fictional guns, that although they look very realistic and also functional, are completely made up stuff, that seems to be a blend of different real life weapons.

Whats the idea behind this new confusing scheme?

Is MGS 5 set in a parrallel universe? The whole game felt like a bad dream. But I couldnt wake up. Not that I think its bad. I just dont know what to think yet. Have to play it a couple times more I guess.


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - sput - 01-11-2015 10:55 AM

Creative freedom? Or maybe liscencing?


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - SlograKiller - 01-11-2015 02:14 PM

Licensing costs. Konami's put a lot of money into MGSV already. It doesn't matter much though, in my opinion.


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - Canucklehead - 01-11-2015 02:20 PM

They probably will have licensing for the weapons in Phantom Pain, but when it comes to Ground Zeroes, why would you waste money licensing weapon names for A FUCKING DEMO!?


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - MetalGearBob - 01-12-2015 12:24 AM

I didnt know you had to pay for licensing for that. But maybe the game will be so controversial, that they didnt want to risk anything, when it comes to real life brands and products.


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - SexyKaz - 01-12-2015 04:24 AM

Except for Puma but since when did they fucking care?


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - Canucklehead - 01-12-2015 06:54 AM

You're sexy. Can I fuck you!?

(01-12-2015 12:24 AM)MetalGearBob Wrote:  I didnt know you had to pay for licensing for that. But maybe the game will be so controversial, that they didnt want to risk anything, when it comes to real life brands and products.

Controvercy isn't a factor; FN had no problem with Modern Warfare 2 giving the player a Minime to slaughter civilians in the No Russian level. In fact, the only case I can think of where a weapons manufacturer had it out with a game developer and/or publisher was Colt and Ubisoft. What the issue between them was, I don't know, but notice how Ghost Recon 2 was the last of their games to use Colt licensed weapons. Even in GRAW2, the only time an Armalite appeared was in the multiplayer, and it was simply called "A4 Rifle" while everything else had the correct names. And Rainbow Six: Raven Shield was the last of that series to use Colts weapons; the M1911s and M4s that appeared afterwards were not Colt-brand.

Normally, they don't mind, and a lot of them actually like the publicity. Look at Modern Warfare 3; anything Oakley and EoTech brand have their logos about twice the actual size and always in view. And with guns becoming such a past-time, with these fucking kids going to shooting ranges with an M4 all decked out with scopes and lasers and front grips and flashlights and Magpul this and Blackhawk chest rigs all so they can shoot at paper targets 50m away for twenty minutes and then go back home feelings like studs. You fucking blow their minds when you tell them that we shoot at upwards of 800m with Armalite-type rifles, as if anything beyond 50m requires a fucking Sniper Rifle...oh, sorry, I forgot Sniper Rifles are now called "Snipers."

Fuck, I hate kids.


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - Old Gross - 01-12-2015 07:28 AM

Despite the possibility that it's KojiPro and/or Konami trying to save money, I was wondering if the firearms industry might be having a stick up its ass about things, that perhaps even though one could afford licensing rights to weapons, they'd still say no. Still sounds weird to think they'd give such a damn about how their weapons are portrayed in videogames, but who knows?


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - Canucklehead - 01-12-2015 07:40 AM

With all the recent gun violence in the 'Snates, I could see some weapons devs being a tad iffy about their stuff appearing in games, especially since when someone gets shot in the 'Snates, the first thing to get blamed is video games. But in this case, I'm more than certain that Ground Zeroes didn't have licensed weaponry solely because it's a TWENTY MINUTE FUCKING DEMO! They would have had to have two separate license agreements, one for each game, so they wouldn't waste money licensing a FUCKING DEMO, and focus on the actual game instead.


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - SexyKaz - 01-12-2015 09:35 AM

Quote:You're sexy. Can I fuck you!?
Play me like one of your French fiddles.

I just hope this whole fake weapon names-thing is just a big fuck you from Kojima to all those 12-year old COD-kids who boast about every useless gun trivia. Kinda like MGS4 did.


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - Canucklehead - 01-12-2015 03:19 PM

12 year old dipshits are Metal Gear's new target audience. Just look at Raiden and shit.


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - SexyKaz - 01-13-2015 01:53 AM

Oh yeah, that's why Peace Walker was a cold war lesson for elementary students.

*sheds a tear*


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - Canucklehead - 01-13-2015 07:35 AM

So many teenage nuts burst for the first time when they zoomed in under Paz's clothes to reveal her poorly drawn red underwear. And then the sexy time with P/Kaz on the beach...*fap fap fap!*

Least there were no trails of shit, right, MGS4?


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - SolidSnarf86 - 02-02-2015 04:38 AM

It could also be that they just haven't finished the game yet and want to leave options open for what weapons to include in it. If they pay a weapons company to use the weapon it sort of locks them in to use that. Plus it might also be playing off the fact that a lot of the weapons you'll be getting will be like in Peace Walker and will be custom builds from Mother Base.


RE: Why do they suddenly not use "real" weapons? - Canucklehead - 02-02-2015 06:43 AM

Ground Zeroes and Phantom Pain are two different games, so each game needs its own licensing agreement. They can't pay to use a weapon in Ground Zeroes and then also use it in Phantom Pain unless the agreement specifically states that they can, and they'd still have to pay more to use it in both games.

So no, that's not it. And they already knew what weapons they were gonna use for Ground Zeroes, so they could have licensed them for it, but they chose not to. Chances are, it was because Ground Zeroes is just A FUCKING DEMO, and they knew they'd sell it for less than full retail price, and didn't want to waste money on the licensing fees.

Chances are you'll still see the real weapons in Phantom Pain.