FLAMETHROWERS!!!!!!
- Thread starter EMO_of_LiGHT
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Damn, you beat me to it.Clemenstation said:
ontopic:
It's not new, it's not surprising. Flamethrowers are sweet for CQB and suck at distance. Since most FPSs these days focus on CQB (everyone is tired of those sniping retards who try to teabag you for hours even tho you flushed them out with grenades, a knife or possible your spade a hundred times more (yeah, I pulled that statement out of my arse, call me a liar)) you have more use for Mr. Yellow...
Why flamethrowers are used more and more?
It's the reason children put their sims in a room without showers and toilets, then a sim cook something(and fail) next to lots of flammable objects... It's Video Game Cruelty Potential [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VideoGameCrueltyPotential]
I don't remember that game having half the amount of servers the original CoD had, even after the release of UO.
In an online FPS they don't kill fast enough, they're much more useful against scripts.(if the developers bothered to give the AI an "on fire" animation at all)
It's the reason children put their sims in a room without showers and toilets, then a sim cook something(and fail) next to lots of flammable objects... It's Video Game Cruelty Potential [http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/VideoGameCrueltyPotential]
Almost nobody played that game.delta4062 said:
I don't remember that game having half the amount of servers the original CoD had, even after the release of UO.
They're a substitute for the shotgun, but without the (usually)high "damage per click".Starnerf said:
In an online FPS they don't kill fast enough, they're much more useful against scripts.(if the developers bothered to give the AI an "on fire" animation at all)
This will continue as long as it looks good and the physics can allow for smoother flame chaos, If anything compaired to other more recent games(Gears2, Fallout3, CoD:WaW etc...) The best one to through it out there is still Farcry2 in my opinion, at least for the look of it. The Pyro from TF will always be the bringer of fire and master of the flame in gameing history.
Two points, firstly flame throwers shoot so very much further than most games depict, up to 80m, so they are all ways going to be "over powered" IRL the disadvantage was that it made you a slow moving bullet target who had to close to a quarter the range everyone else had also using a realistic flame thrower at CQB distances would be daft as the splash back would light you on fire. Secondly, any weapon that the U.S. voluntarily removed from its arsenal partially due to the negative media effects of its use is probably fairly horrific, so maybe if the flame thrower didn't appear in to many more "realistic" games, or if it does I really hope they hand out insta-kills because that is the stuff of nightmares.
Tangent: Did anyone hear know that THESE THINGS ARE FUCKING LEGAL in most states?!?!
Apparently they are legal because they are used to kill those African killer bees that we let loose into the wild and they just so happen to be the master race of bees.
Apparently they are legal because they are used to kill those African killer bees that we let loose into the wild and they just so happen to be the master race of bees.
Isn't there a caveat to that? Like they have to be gas powered or something.ElArabDeMagnifico said:
Rather than the petro-napalm firing devices (no-longer) favoured by the military.
Because developers are Super lazy, but I guess the best fire effects are...Mercenaries 2. World at war had good fire visuals, but crap fie physics, Farcry 2 was the opposite of World at war, and fallout 3 had fire and that's all. Mercs 2 made fire look good, and it set alight when needed and did spread along the tree's a bit, so yes, Mercs 2 is the best for fire. Too bad it has no flamethrowers.quickpaw said:
Because they aren't? COD WAW's flamethrower isn't 2d. Neither is Gears 2's or Killzone 2's. Oh, and for all those people that keep bitching about Killzone's flamethrower's horrible fire effects, SHUT UP!! It's a napalm flame thrower! The tank isn't filled with gas, it's filled with liquid. That's why it looks like it does. It's flaming liquid. Not all flamethrowers use pressurized gas.quickpaw said:
EDIT: Forgot to mention Far Cry 2's flamethrower, although I hate that damn thing. Not because it's a bad weapon, I mean it's a great weapon, no. I hate it because it gets all rusty and it blows apart and backfires after a few minutes of continuous firing.
It's true. Plus, they are fairly cheap. The downside is it's incredibly easy to start an uncontroled fire with a weapon designed specifically for the purpose of starting fires. The upside of that of course is the flamethrower also sees use in fighting fires, creating burn lines and whatnot.EMO_of_LiGHT said:
Actually, flamethrowers in general use an aerosol. Using a true gas (propane, butane, methane, etc) would certainly cause damage but using an aerosol (an atomized liquid) allows the fire to stick and continue to burn even after the weapon stops firing. The same thing can be achieved with a gas but it takes longer to achieve the same effect. That is of course refering to flamethrowers used in warfare - I've never done any research into the anti-insect application beyond finding out earlier this week that they were legal (along with miniguns, thermite and a number of other items that would seem to be illegal).Eipok Kruden said:
Guerrilla Games decided to use some sort of liquid gas so that players could ark the flame over stuff. The flamethrower is the most fun to use out of any I've ever seen, at least in my opinion. Nothing quite like arking a stream of flaming liquid over some cover and burning all the Helghast hiding behind it alive.Eclectic Dreck said:
