Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

FAMAS vs M16

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • FAMAS vs M16

    I have been looking around the web and been getting various different reports as to the actual differences between these guns. Apparently, even though the in game stats state the FAMAS is actually less powerful, they kill in the same amount of bursts? The M16 also has a faster reload action and slightly more recoil although people have debated this too.

    I only have the FAMAS atm and i must say its a destroying weapon in the right hands and its going to be hard to trade for another gun which is why im asking to those who have used both the M16 and the FAMAS, which to you is the better gun and why?

  • #2
    Re: FAMAS vs M16

    I dont like the burst rifles, but according to the data in our stats thread ( http://www.totalgamingnetwork.com/fo...d.php?t=220568 ), they are both 40-30 rifles.

    And there is also this:
    [media]http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/9651/riflesc.jpg[/media]

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: FAMAS vs M16

      hmm so in-game damage bar is wrong? either way, i just unlocked the M-16, my favorite AR from COD4, so it will be my AR of choice for now. i love using it in hardcore.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: FAMAS vs M16

        In-game damage bars were not right for CoD4 either. I wouldnt trust those at all.

        The M16 is a bit better because of the bullet pattern and reload time. Otherwise it would be like the M4/G36 thing with CoD4. (Where they were both the exact same weapon)

        Crunch
        Twitter: @CptainCrunch
        Battlelog/Origin: CptainCrunch

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: FAMAS vs M16

          ACR is M16 but auto. That rifle is pure cheat.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: FAMAS vs M16

            FAMAS fails IRL. I see IW did another great realism job there.

            M16A4 (Looks epic)
            [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yReLqt_zvaM[/media]

            FAMAS (Looks fail)
            [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xlBvsXHJpuk[/media]

            But it's not like I base my opinion on anything other than hatred. I absolutely hate the gun, it's big, ugly, heavy and you can't put much onto it.

            The whole design = fail

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: FAMAS vs M16

              There is NO realism in any CoD Game.

              None. Give up on the realism. There is none.

              Any CoD game. None.

              I'm sorry, none.

              Shifty is right on the videos too

              Crunch
              Twitter: @CptainCrunch
              Battlelog/Origin: CptainCrunch

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: FAMAS vs M16

                holy crap, that m16 video was awesome.

                what do you guys think are good loadout/perks when using m16?

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: FAMAS vs M16

                  Crunch I'm talking about the way the weapon reloads and handles. COD4 did a great job on just about every reload (Some were very slightly off). No ejection ports on the wrong side or anything.

                  As for weapon handling it wasn't that bad.

                  Now a FAMAS is the worlds biggest wasted piece of metal. It's got a huge bar on top which is pointless which can only be removed on the CQB versions for a uselessly long rail mount.

                  You can't put anything on it.

                  Heck you can put an M203A1, an ACOG, a PEQ-15, a laser, a grenade launcher sight, and more on 1 M4 and it's still not that heavy.

                  You can't do much with a FAMAS. You can do crazy useless stuff with an M4 that's just impractical to carry around but if you had Vin Diesels strength you would be a walking weapons platform.

                  Try to match this stuff with a FAMAS.

                  FAMAS spells fail all the time. At least the Germans got the G36 right and the Swiss got the SIG 550 done right too.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: FAMAS vs M16

                    The Bipod / GrenadeLauncher configuration on that M4 looks ...... interesting

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: FAMAS vs M16

                      Originally posted by -Shifty-
                      Crunch I'm talking about the way the weapon reloads and handles. COD4 did a great job on just about every reload (Some were very slightly off). No ejection ports on the wrong side or anything.

                      As for weapon handling it wasn't that bad.

                      Now a FAMAS is the worlds biggest wasted piece of metal. It's got a huge bar on top which is pointless which can only be removed on the CQB versions for a uselessly long rail mount.

                      You can't put anything on it.

                      Heck you can put an M203A1, an ACOG, a PEQ-15, a laser, a grenade launcher sight, and more on 1 M4 and it's still not that heavy.

                      You can't do much with a FAMAS. You can do crazy useless stuff with an M4 that's just impractical to carry around but if you had Vin Diesels strength you would be a walking weapons platform.

                      Try to match this stuff with a FAMAS.

                      FAMAS spells fail all the time. At least the Germans got the G36 right and the Swiss got the SIG 550 done right too.
                      I agree. You were saying that IW put so much realism into the weapon that it even fails in the game as it does in real life, as your videos show that.

                      Crunch
                      Twitter: @CptainCrunch
                      Battlelog/Origin: CptainCrunch

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: FAMAS vs M16

                        Originally posted by Vreki
                        The Bipod / GrenadeLauncher configuration on that M4 looks ...... interesting
                        Don't forget it has a silencer and a 100 round drum magazine. Basically, it's a Squad Automatic Weapon, Grenadier and CQB stealth weapon all in one. With the 4x zoom on the ACOG you can snipe headshots out to 500m. I don't know if you could do it that far with the silencer but you get the idea.

                        The M16A4 is also a good gun to quickly switch in the field. You can unscrew the grenade launcher and put it in your pack, drop the pack and do your mission.

                        Lets say you're a US Marine in Afghanistan and you're on a 3 day search and destroy mission looking for any signs of enemy forces.

                        You're going to need ammo, medical supplies and different types of weapons, food and water.

                        The M16A4 weighs 3.6 kg loaded.

                        The Famas weighs 3.9 kg empty 4kg loaded. This is the lightweight G2 version which isn't the most used.

                        You may need an M203, PEQ-15s, different sights, etc..

                        All this along with extra ammo (Not on your MTV) is going in your pack. When you reach your rally point or OP or whatever you drop your pack and go out without it. When you get to your destination, you can quickly, (under 3 minutes) mount or dismount anything. When you get back you can switch.

                        In the picture you can see why the FAMAS is so heavy. I circled the useless wasted heavy metals in red. The M16 uses lighter metals.

                        Oh and despite the FAMAS being a bullpup, the M16A4 is more accurate.

                        I'm just pointing things out here, not arguing with anybody, just giving you guys some facts.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: FAMAS vs M16

                          Actually, I was just hinting that the GL will fire straight into the bipod. At least in the picture

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: FAMAS vs M16

                            Originally posted by Vreki
                            Actually, I was just hinting that the GL will fire straight into the bipod. At least in the picture
                            You wouldn't use the GL with the bi-pod deployed. You wouldn't be able to get a high enough angle for most shots. If you're using a wall it wouldn't matter anyway because you would use the wall.

                            The bi-pod would be for stabilizing your weapon when using it as a SAW, as the wall would be. I doubt you can pin accurate enough fire to suppress an enemy with one weapon doing all the work without a bi-pod.

                            Or just have a fire team use their M16s on burst. That's accurate enough, and if you have 3 doing it (FTL, + 2 PFCs with M16s) and a SAW (= 4 so 1 fire team) you couldn't stick your head up even if you were crazy and loaded on cocaine.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: FAMAS vs M16

                              ok how does a 16 yr old have this much knowledge on assault rifles?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X