SpaceAlex 0 Posted December 27, 2002 </span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Kermit @ Dec. 27 2002,02:06)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (SpaceAlex @ Dec. 25 2002,22:51)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">G36a is for mulitplayer and single player missions, not for campaign missions.<span id='postcolor'> Play Red Hammer. Â You use the G-36 in that campaign.<span id='postcolor'> Red Hammer was made by Codemasters, not BIS. Red Hammer is like a third party product. It was nice to use G36 in RH though. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nyles 11 Posted December 27, 2002 In terms of realism and historical accuracy, both BIS and Codemasters have done horrible things. With BIS it starts with camouflage (ofp seems like a mix of 70's and 90's troops, there are so few properly colored units from the mid-eighties) and continues to things like the availability of certain wargear like the CarlGustav which is not really in use by standard US Army troops (apart from Rangers, but only starting with the early 90's) and those Apaches in the final Resistance cut-scene. There is a lot of bull in all campaigns, not just the G36A issue in Red Hammer. This weapon you could even justify as some sort of field test for yet non-available wargear. Afterall the G36 in OFP should normally be named G36E and not G36A. Maybe some sort of prototype like with the V80? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
