![]() |
Quote:
|
The only way to get everyone on the same page is to have them all come together to a single physical location and witness many different machine guns shooting both day and night. Then everyone can base their opinions on what their eyes actually see and not base their thoughts on the many different variables that different cameras, displays etc can produce.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
~ |
Quote:
Most European countries don't allow automatic weapons for private use, but while in the Army I was trained to the use of: 1) the MG42/59, which is the Beretta version, chambering the 7.62 NATO round (comparable to a .308 Winchester), on both rates of fire (900rpm and 1500rpm) 2) the .50cal HMG M2, standard NATO issue 3) Beretta AR70/90, in 5.56mm NATO 4) Colt M4, also in 5.56 NATO While travelling in the US and in exchange programs with other armies I also used similar weapons, but most notably: 1) M134 Minigun in 7.62mm NATO (shot from a helicopter stand in the sea) 2) HK21 in 7.62mm 3) M1919 in .30cal (or .30-06) I have also seen heavier calibre guns being shot, but their range and ballistics quite differ from WW2 ones. For whatever what I just wrote up is worth, I think that in terms of brightness the tracers of CoD are quite spot on, and although the brightness might look a bit too high (esp at a distance, but I have seen different colours/tracers behaving in different ways), I reckon they did quite a neat job with it. As for the curvature, yes, there should be and as far as I could see there is, tracers burn for different times, and surely look like lasers (it's very thrilling to see them the first time!). Another thing to take into account is that the trajectory of tracers can differ from the other bullets because of its different weight, but this becomes more tangible at certain distances. |
Well, I guess we will have to disagree. There have been vets and people such as I who have fired these things that say both. Half say they look "real", the other half, me included, say they look fake and crappy.
|
Quote:
Anyway, among the many videos in different calibres, this one is quite spot on: the only minor squiggles you see with the tracers are due to the movement of the operator's hand (who's fairly steady actually). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOlRK...eature=related |
Quote:
In the game, the tracers are moving faster then this, the FPS is WAY to high on COD, the tracers in this video are moving at a healthy pace, but nothing as fast as COD. play the game and watch how fast the bullet's are traveling. Their moving twice as fast as these.The rate of fire is also way to high, either that or there is literally a tracer in every round. Also, notice on your video how the tracers go out and appear to hang for a moment and then begin to drop? COD does none of this. There is no arcing round or glowing ball. You cant see any tracers floating in the distance. They literally go out like lasers and vanish before your eyes. If the game tracers looked like this and had these characteristics, I would be happy. However they are a far cry from looking like this video. Also, who the hell thought to use white tracers as default? White tracers? com one on.... no one uses white tracers. |
its comparing modern day naval with WWII air though... completely different beasties, me wooda thort
|
Quote:
The ones you see in the videos are tracers from a naval .50cal (M2HB), which has a variable rate of 450–635 rounds/min, less than half of an RAF spec version, which had 1200 rounds/min. Muzzle velocity of the .50cal is 2,910 ft/s (890 m/s), the RAF spec .30cal was around 800 m/s, so it's a slightly slower bullet, but the rate of fire is twice as fast. As for the colours, if memory serves the RAF used white incendiary/tracers, but I'm trying to look for the info source on this. |
No amount of postings of videos of night shot tracer videos have any bearing on CloD tracer effects.
These videos show how tracer can look to a camera at night The tracers in the game are trying to simulate how a tracer looks to the eye during daylight. There is simply no comparison. |
Quote:
With all due respect,I think people could express an opinion on this matter ONLY if they saw tracers in real life. Lying about it is just silly and counterproductive me thinks. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
. |
I stumbled upon this vid today. It shows tracers during the day and at night from the same vantage point on a LAV.
The cameraman pans around during the shooting and I believe this give the best impression yet of what tracers really do look like as the camera seems to record very close to what the human eye sees or at least what my eyes have seen. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ypsee...feature=relmfu |
I one you all for get is that all of the modern weapon that are shot are showing shots that are over 1500m or more were in the game most shot are only 300m to 500m so they look a lot faster, also tracer and incendiary round in modern armament is a lot different to what was in 1942 and they burn brighter and longer.
Here footage from spit in ww2 and you ahev trouble seeing the tracer rounds http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv8rFPLN_Fg this one from P51 and you don't see a lot of trcer rounds http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjr8Z...eature=related |
Quote:
Salute ! |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Another thing that "experts" don't probably know is that nowadays there are three kinds of tracers: bright, semi-bright and dim. Once again, please bear in mind the RAF standard order of the era: "Browning 303s fire 1200 rounds per minute, that's 20 per second. As mentioned above, what you see also depends on the number of tracers loaded. If you have a tracer every 5 rounds then that's 4 tracers streaking away every second." |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I voted "dont care"
|
Quote:
|
Your post
Quote:
You are one of those reasons why people laugh about america where I come from. Probably also one of the reasons why you have such an insane criminal rate in your country. If cops can't follow basic ethics and rules then why do you expect others to? In my opinion you are just a "rank" warrior yourself, hiding behind a uniform and guns and thinking you're something better. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and if you don't like it just go away. Reading your post scares me to hell because everytime I have to do business in your country I run into stupid cops who behave like gangsters and you seem to be very proud of that culture yourself. The word tolerance and self control is probably new to you but I recommend looking into it and NOT repeating such crazy misbehavior because it reflects on all cops which don't have a very good reputation - neither with "punks" nor with normal "people". http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r5MSdORQI_U That said I also want to vote "don't care". Tracers are probably the most unimportant thing to me. Especially because the ones we got are okayish. Most humans eyes are different. Also modern ammo can't be compared to the 50ies. The projectiles changed in both, shape (aerodynamics) and the firing mechanics themselves have been altered. Small caliber and cannon is also a big difference. Yes, the tracers could eventually be fine tuned but it's not a big deal to me. I prefer a great flight model, more planes, easier ways to create awesome mission content, beautiful scenery and so on. But to each his own I guess. One thing most people should not forget though: it's almost impossible to re-model tracers accurately. This depends on 2 things I believe 1. eyes cannot "capture" tracers visually - only see them in movement - or rather because eyes cannot follow them entirely we see them. 2. everyone has different frame rates etc. - so the effect of a tracer might vary unless we would have a game with a fixed frame rate of e.g. 60 or 120 for 3d. If it comes to visuals like that I'd rather have more detail in the scenery than the most perfect tracers ever. Cool clouds, weather effects, rain, fog, dust, leafs swirling around, more ground detail, more objects etc. |
Mh, all the same I actually regret that this thread has been taken over, or lets say taken away from the subject that winny, yellonet and helicon were argueing about.
I read the whole thread now in about 1,5 hours, and winny really made a point there within this discussion, sadly Bliss just did not get it. Now the last few pages since yellonet and winny are not writing anymore it is dull again like in the beginning, old stuff gets brought up again and again like vibrations and guncam footage. The idea that the tracer "bar"'s front point is inside the trajectory arc, but the "bar"'s end is not when for example pulling up or down is a good one. Winny and yellonet, go ahead, hopefully you will ever get a statement of a dev what they think about it(its just geometry/math/physics ;; they sure considered this in the making, but must have had other priorities) Whatever, let them rage on in here:rolleyes: |
All times are GMT. The time now is 10:59 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.