Close, its the chinese version of the AK-47. Made by Norinco, its officially called (to avoid copyright infringement i guess...) the Mac-90. Its a damn nice shooter. I havent sighted the scope yet, but whats nice about it is its on 2 rails so I can still aim with the iron sights.
and before I get my hands on something I already have, I'm getting my hands on a Springfield XD 4" .357 with a ported barrel, and a walnut stock M14
QuaunautThe longest seven days in history...Join Date: 2003-03-21Member: 14759Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
Get that PC down SOMEHOW for God's sake. 2600? +hands and suddenly BAM were screwed. I mean it looks nice and all, but lets tone it down a bit. Maximum liberty I'd say is 2000 for pistol only without hands <!--emo&:angry:--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin-BrigadierWolf+Aug 10 2004, 02:56 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BrigadierWolf @ Aug 10 2004, 02:56 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> That appears to be An AKM with an AK-74 type Muzzle Brake on it, Or it could be an AK74 with an AKM style magazine. Doesnt look like Its Russian made though. Im guessing Its Bulgarian. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Hmm, doesn't look like an AKM, doesn't have the Recess above the Magazine Housing, looks like an AK-47. Even though earlier AK-74 models were made in wood furniture, the new AK-74 type mags were already used, so that left the AK-74 possibility out. Mags can be either AKM or AK-47, don't know how to distinguish them (if there is a distinction). The flash indeed looks like an AK-74 Flash-Hider/Compensator. Dunno about the Drum mag though.
As said, it is a Norinco Mac-90 AKA a China-Type 47 if I'm not mistakened.
And believe me, there is no such thing as "copyright infringement" fears from Norinco. I believe a while ago there was some discussion about Russia's lack of effective Copyright enforcement outside it's area, as seen with the CZ 75 (Always copied easily, without any copyright problems.)
They do exact duplicates of some pistols such as the Sig-Sauer P-226, P-228, the Colt M1911A1, the Walther PPK, the Browning Hi-Power... Copyright doesn't envolve only names, but also patented systems such as the Browning-Petter locking system used in the Sig-Sauers, however, China is known to make cheap copies of anything, firearms included.
And yes, it is a PT 92. However, what does set the possibility of being a 92 derivate asside are the slide's recesses and the wierd grips: seeing it as the Beretta 92/96/98 Stock all have on-frame safety (exactly like the Taurus one's). Even though we know it is a Taurus, with that on-frame safety and slide recesses, there was no way it could be an M9 (Beretta 92F/92FS service).
@ Brig: Do they still use regular 92F's, or have they all updated to 92FS in service? From what I heard, 92F's tended to get their slide's shedding on the inside, thusly disconnecting it from the frame and making fire much more dangerous...
@ Drake: You own two cheap springers? Meh long live my KSC Beretta M9 Blowback (with factory 92F grips!)
The *real* AK47 magazine didnt have any stamping grooves. It was mostly smooth. The Magazines with all the lines, like in the picture, are AKM magazines.
Actual AK47's are not common at all which is why right off the bat I assume things to be AKM's. the original AK47 was only made in Russia and one or 2 Soviet Bloc countries (Bulgaria being one of them), and only for 2 years, 1949-1951. and theyre actually worth quite a bit. After 1951 it was completely replaced by the AKM. Its hard to tell the difference between the 2 because in terms of aesthetics, the First Production AKMs looked more or Less Identical to the original AK47, with the only significant changes being internal. It was only later that they added Plastic Pistol Grips. and once they did that, it was no longer hard to tell the difference. But for example, Norinco doesnt actually make an AK-47 copy. In fact, Nobody makes an AK47 copy. Theyre all copies of the AKM, Because like I said, the changes to the AKM were largely internal. The Major difference was that the AKM was redesigned for stamp and rivet manufacturing.
However they do make 5.45mm magazines that look exactly like the AKM stamped mags. As for the recess above the Magazinewell. As far as I know, that was first seen on the AK74, rather than the AKM. But, since the AKM was still manufactured even after the 74 was introduced, you also see alot of AKM's with those recesses.
Oh yeah, and Guys.. I know you all like to make really high polygon models and then say "HL2"... But.. the models in HL2 arent any higher polygon than most of the models in the Blueshift "High Definition Pack". I would say even for HL2 models, you're going to have to stick to a Max of about 1500 polygons for weapons.
Evil_IceJoin Date: 2004-07-09Member: 29827Members, Squad Five Blue
Indeed, this is one thing that I have been trying to stress over these ODS guys, is that HL2 isn't that much higher poly, in fact, almost all of the models are about the same level PC as HL1 crap, the only thing that makes them look so much more realistic is the bump, specular, and difussion mapping, which means for every texture you put on a gun, you need 3-4 copies of it, each for the different lighting effects on the gun... very similiarly to Doom3, if any of you have tried modding it, you will notice that each weapon has an extremely undetailed model, with a crappy texture on it, but because of the 4 tga's per texture, the different lighting effects make it all look so much more convincing in game... too bad it's not as simple as higher PC's huh?
Its really the Normal Mapping that makes Doom III shine... and I mean that quite literally. Normal mapping basically takes a low polygon model, and using pixel shading, makes it appear to be higher in polygon count. There are of course, several ways to create normal maps, But an apparent oddity about them is that they tend to make things have a wierd plastic-like shine..
QuaunautThe longest seven days in history...Join Date: 2003-03-21Member: 14759Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
<!--QuoteBegin-BrigadierWolf+Aug 10 2004, 01:15 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BrigadierWolf @ Aug 10 2004, 01:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Its really the Normal Mapping that makes Doom III shine... and I mean that quite literally. Normal mapping basically takes a low polygon model, and using pixel shading, makes it appear to be higher in polygon count. There are of course, several ways to create normal maps, But an apparent oddity about them is that they tend to make things have a wierd plastic-like shine.. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Hence why DOOM 3 doesn't look all that plasticy anymore- they took out the pixel shaders. At the moment all they have is a different normal mapping thing, I don't know what its base is.
Normal mapping for idiots- a colored version of bump mapping. Bump mapping being just fake shine/shadows put onto a texture to simulate more polies than there reallyis(hence why you could look at the polycount in a very complex DOOM 3 picture, and it will be LESS polies than in NS, discluding particles[being that there are tons of those from everything. Just 1 shotty shot for example expels 12-15 particles of first 2 of fire, then quite a few of smoke, then add the decals against the walls, and for each decal the sprite of smoke of it hitting the wall. Its quite complex particle wise. But poly wise, simple).
1500? Screw that. if you're successfully running HL2, then you have a 9800 Pro or equivilent. With that much power, you could easily handle a 6000 poly v model. But thats besides the point because thats a base model without extensive optomization for being certain models.
not as well as you may think, considering how many polygons are being displayed in the architecture and Map details. the additional 5000 polygons might actually cause you quite a bit of slowdown. Of course as stated by Quaunaut, Doom 3 models have Less polygons than most NS models, so why would anyone in their right mind want to to make ridiculously high polygon models when the same effect can be acheived via normal mapping. This is of course talking about for games... for CGI thats always a different story.
Well the Hl2 buggy on its own is 15k polys....then u have all the people running around.....so even if it was ~ 2k for the models....and u have say 10 people on the screen (or running around) thats 35k....
Even hl can handle a 16k poly v model...(cs m4a1)...so i'm sure hl2 will be fine...plus the amount of polys a 9800 or equivalent can shift is a **** load more than that.
<!--QuoteBegin-BrigadierWolf+Aug 10 2004, 03:38 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BrigadierWolf @ Aug 10 2004, 03:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> not as well as you may think, considering how many polygons are being displayed in the architecture and Map details. the additional 5000 polygons might actually cause you quite a bit of slowdown. Of course as stated by Quaunaut, Doom 3 models have Less polygons than most NS models, so why would anyone in their right mind want to to make ridiculously high polygon models when the same effect can be acheived via normal mapping. This is of course talking about for games... for CGI thats always a different story. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> if we had leet skinners that knew how to bump, specular, and all that other jargain map, then believe me, I'd tone it down.
High poly models will look nice, however if you compare the fps drop of adding 5k poly compared to all the texture mapping, the more labor intensive mapping gives you better look per fps. If you want the best results with min lag, make around 3k models and do the best mapping that you can. Your gun will look better than Doom 3.
<!--QuoteBegin-hidden_sniper+Aug 10 2004, 01:47 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (hidden_sniper @ Aug 10 2004, 01:47 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> High poly models will look nice, however if you compare the fps drop of adding 5k poly compared to all the texture mapping, the more labor intensive mapping gives you better look per fps. If you want the best results with min lag, make around 3k models and do the best mapping that you can. Your gun will look better than Doom 3. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> thats what im going for but the rest of the guys dont seem to understand that
Evil_IceJoin Date: 2004-07-09Member: 29827Members, Squad Five Blue
anger at you fools! Higher poly != looks better!
all it means is it's less efficient now, for all of you who think you know what you are talking about with Doom3 having high PC models, you are mistaken, I have PERSONALLY already redone textures for the shottie and chaingun, successfully, and it's not even that labor intensive! In fact, because Doom3 models are nonprecompiled, you can have the engine make the maps for you! it's not that difficult... hell my tnt2 can't even run the game and I've modified a good bit of it, and honestly, nothing in the game is that impressive, it's just really extensive, like the shadow mapping calculations being done in real time are pretty crazy, but that's what gives Doom3 it's look and appeal, the models in Doom3 are nearly ALL lower detail than that of NS, the only real difference in the levels of detail are the maps, which are much more detailed, but again I must restate the fact that higher PC != (doesn't equal) better!
Personaly, I think a great skin on a 30 poly weapon looks better than just a 3k good model. The skin is what really makes a model good, ive never said omg seckzeh model to a high poly weapon w/ a bad skin :o
Take brigs weapons for instance, they look great cause they have really good skins, but their fairly low poly for the detail in them.
No matter how much u want it to be so, i'd still rather model on a slide safety or a catch of some kind than skin it....it just looks tacky.
True, there is an art in skinning, and it does complete the model, but if i had the choice between REDD's new high poly lmg with a good skin and the low poly one....i'd have to pick REDD's.
Comments
and before I get my hands on something I already have, I'm getting my hands on a Springfield XD 4" .357 with a ported barrel, and a walnut stock M14
btw i just wanted to say your right, its a PT92
.....again chrony baggins teese's us with his sexy models
y dam u Y
"off topic" mmmm Ph34R Teh cheapness
.....again chrony baggins teese's us with his sexy models
y dam u Y
"off topic" mmmm Ph34R Teh cheapness <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oo model ?
picture ?
request ?
sorry im confused <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif' /><!--endemo-->
Hmm, doesn't look like an AKM, doesn't have the Recess above the Magazine Housing, looks like an AK-47. Even though earlier AK-74 models were made in wood furniture, the new AK-74 type mags were already used, so that left the AK-74 possibility out.
Mags can be either AKM or AK-47, don't know how to distinguish them (if there is a distinction).
The flash indeed looks like an AK-74 Flash-Hider/Compensator.
Dunno about the Drum mag though.
As said, it is a Norinco Mac-90 AKA a China-Type 47 if I'm not mistakened.
And believe me, there is no such thing as "copyright infringement" fears from Norinco.
I believe a while ago there was some discussion about Russia's lack of effective Copyright enforcement outside it's area, as seen with the CZ 75 (Always copied easily, without any copyright problems.)
They do exact duplicates of some pistols such as the Sig-Sauer P-226, P-228, the Colt M1911A1, the Walther PPK, the Browning Hi-Power...
Copyright doesn't envolve only names, but also patented systems such as the Browning-Petter locking system used in the Sig-Sauers, however, China is known to make cheap copies of anything, firearms included.
And yes, it is a PT 92.
However, what does set the possibility of being a 92 derivate asside are the slide's recesses and the wierd grips: seeing it as the Beretta 92/96/98 Stock all have on-frame safety (exactly like the Taurus one's).
Even though we know it is a Taurus, with that on-frame safety and slide recesses, there was no way it could be an M9 (Beretta 92F/92FS service).
@ Brig:
Do they still use regular 92F's, or have they all updated to 92FS in service? From what I heard, 92F's tended to get their slide's shedding on the inside, thusly disconnecting it from the frame and making fire much more dangerous...
@ Drake:
You own two cheap springers? Meh long live my KSC Beretta M9 Blowback (with factory 92F grips!)
picture ?
request ?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
naa all this talk about airsoft res and berretas i just couldnt help it
Actual AK47's are not common at all which is why right off the bat I assume things to be AKM's. the original AK47 was only made in Russia and one or 2 Soviet Bloc countries (Bulgaria being one of them), and only for 2 years, 1949-1951. and theyre actually worth quite a bit. After 1951 it was completely replaced by the AKM. Its hard to tell the difference between the 2 because in terms of aesthetics, the First Production AKMs looked more or Less Identical to the original AK47, with the only significant changes being internal. It was only later that they added Plastic Pistol Grips. and once they did that, it was no longer hard to tell the difference.
But for example, Norinco doesnt actually make an AK-47 copy. In fact, Nobody makes an AK47 copy. Theyre all copies of the AKM, Because like I said, the changes to the AKM were largely internal. The Major difference was that the AKM was redesigned for stamp and rivet manufacturing.
However they do make 5.45mm magazines that look exactly like the AKM stamped mags.
As for the recess above the Magazinewell. As far as I know, that was first seen on the AK74, rather than the AKM. But, since the AKM was still manufactured even after the 74 was introduced, you also see alot of AKM's with those recesses.
Normal mapping basically takes a low polygon model, and using pixel shading, makes it appear to be higher in polygon count. There are of course, several ways to create normal maps, But an apparent oddity about them is that they tend to make things have a wierd plastic-like shine..
Instead of bothering with bump, specular or normal mapping, just make a higher polygon weapon and ignore the bump spec or normal...
U'r model won't respond as well to lighting conditions, but meh its easier than bothering with spec bump or normal.
Normal mapping basically takes a low polygon model, and using pixel shading, makes it appear to be higher in polygon count. There are of course, several ways to create normal maps, But an apparent oddity about them is that they tend to make things have a wierd plastic-like shine.. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hence why DOOM 3 doesn't look all that plasticy anymore- they took out the pixel shaders. At the moment all they have is a different normal mapping thing, I don't know what its base is.
Normal mapping for idiots- a colored version of bump mapping. Bump mapping being just fake shine/shadows put onto a texture to simulate more polies than there reallyis(hence why you could look at the polycount in a very complex DOOM 3 picture, and it will be LESS polies than in NS, discluding particles[being that there are tons of those from everything. Just 1 shotty shot for example expels 12-15 particles of first 2 of fire, then quite a few of smoke, then add the decals against the walls, and for each decal the sprite of smoke of it hitting the wall. Its quite complex particle wise. But poly wise, simple).
Of course as stated by Quaunaut, Doom 3 models have Less polygons than most NS models, so why would anyone in their right mind want to to make ridiculously high polygon models when the same effect can be acheived via normal mapping.
This is of course talking about for games... for CGI thats always a different story.
Even hl can handle a 16k poly v model...(cs m4a1)...so i'm sure hl2 will be fine...plus the amount of polys a 9800 or equivalent can shift is a **** load more than that.
Of course as stated by Quaunaut, Doom 3 models have Less polygons than most NS models, so why would anyone in their right mind want to to make ridiculously high polygon models when the same effect can be acheived via normal mapping.
This is of course talking about for games... for CGI thats always a different story. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
if we had leet skinners that knew how to bump, specular, and all that other jargain map, then believe me, I'd tone it down.
thats what im going for but the rest of the guys dont seem to understand that
Higher poly != looks better!
all it means is it's less efficient
now, for all of you who think you know what you are talking about with Doom3 having high PC models, you are mistaken, I have PERSONALLY already redone textures for the shottie and chaingun, successfully, and it's not even that labor intensive! In fact, because Doom3 models are nonprecompiled, you can have the engine make the maps for you! it's not that difficult... hell my tnt2 can't even run the game and I've modified a good bit of it, and honestly, nothing in the game is that impressive, it's just really extensive, like the shadow mapping calculations being done in real time are pretty crazy, but that's what gives Doom3 it's look and appeal, the models in Doom3 are nearly ALL lower detail than that of NS, the only real difference in the levels of detail are the maps, which are much more detailed,
but again I must restate the fact that higher PC != (doesn't equal) better!
Take brigs weapons for instance, they look great cause they have really good skins, but their fairly low poly for the detail in them.
I dunno, at the moment its more like
if (numberPolys/detail <= 0.5) {
higherpoly != looks better
} else {
higherpoly = looks better.
}
No matter how much u want it to be so, i'd still rather model on a slide safety or a catch of some kind than skin it....it just looks tacky.
True, there is an art in skinning, and it does complete the model, but if i had the choice between REDD's new high poly lmg with a good skin and the low poly one....i'd have to pick REDD's.
<a href='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=77471&st=0&#entry1184291' target='_blank'>http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/in...0&#entry1184291</a>