More blood and gore.

[Wölfriel]

What i mean is will we see more damage to the bodies from the weapons we use? there are already good blood splatter on the walls but the shotguns feels weak in this game, they dont do massive damage to someone or even make them ragdoll away when you shoot them from close range they just flop down on spot and its not satisfying to use.

Maybe its just me but i do want more gore when it comes to use powerful weapons like skull damage from headshots or limbs fly off when using a shotgun maybe it dont belong to this type of game but it would be cool.

[JtDarth]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Hashley Hashbrowns:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย JtDarth:

I mean, he could be talking about 7.62 tokarev(7.62x25), which would leave some relatively small holes. Or maybe 7.62 Nagant (7.62x38R)

But 7.62x39 (Ak 7.62), 7.62x51 (Nato rifle, .308 equivalent) or 7.62x54R (What the classic Mosin fires) all would leave some nasty, messy holes at close ranges, both entry and exit. Admittedly, you aren't likely to see dramatic chunks unless an extremity is hit (arm, leg, head).

Tokarev? Isn't that AP or something?

Not really, it's more a simple factor of it being a smaller projectile relative to the amount of powder behind it. I don't think 'body armor penmetration' was a factor in that particular round's development. I've heard it referred to as 'boomer 5.7' before, which was good for a laugh.

[DJK83]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย JtDarth:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย DJK83:

It depends on exactly what you mean. If you're saying that buckshot has the ability to push over a dummy, then you're not wrong. However, if you're trying to argue that a normal sized person could be thrown back several feet, then the laws of physics dictate that you're wrong. Again, the shooter experiences the same force as the target, so if you can fire a shotgun without being sent flying, then the person getting shot won't be sent flying either.

That's not even remotely accurate on the physics. The shooter does NOT experience the same amount of force as the target.
That's a lie based on a very basic and oversimplified version of newtonian physics being applied to the interaction, and assuming that all the potential energy of the gas expansion that propels the projectile is distributed equally between shooter and target, being sent equally both straight back and forward. It is not. This isn't even getting into the effect inertia and other such real factors play into the exchange. It is exceedingly complex, and there are often secondary reactions that can apply additional force or mitigate force on either side of the equation.

You're being a bit pedantic. Of course it's an oversimplification, but the energy imparted on both the shooter and the victim is close enough that this explanation serves to illustrate why a firearm that can be safely shoulder-fired simply can't exert enough force to send the victim flying.

[alucard.gaming@*****software.com]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย DJK83:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย JtDarth:

That's not even remotely accurate on the physics. The shooter does NOT experience the same amount of force as the target.
That's a lie based on a very basic and oversimplified version of newtonian physics being applied to the interaction, and assuming that all the potential energy of the gas expansion that propels the projectile is distributed equally between shooter and target, being sent equally both straight back and forward. It is not. This isn't even getting into the effect inertia and other such real factors play into the exchange. It is exceedingly complex, and there are often secondary reactions that can apply additional force or mitigate force on either side of the equation.

You're being a bit pedantic. Of course it's an oversimplification, but the energy imparted on both the shooter and the victim is close enough that this explanation serves to illustrate why a firearm that can be safely shoulder-fired simply can't exert enough force to send the victim flying.

I think it boils down to a static equilibrium moment problem. The shot person is experiencing the force of the shot times the distance between the reactive force point (their feet) to the point of being shot as a rotational moment. The person flies backwards relative to the point of contact with the ground, so maybe not across an entire room but definitely back away from the shooter's prospective.

[JtDarth]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย DJK83:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย JtDarth:

That's not even remotely accurate on the physics. The shooter does NOT experience the same amount of force as the target.
That's a lie based on a very basic and oversimplified version of newtonian physics being applied to the interaction, and assuming that all the potential energy of the gas expansion that propels the projectile is distributed equally between shooter and target, being sent equally both straight back and forward. It is not. This isn't even getting into the effect inertia and other such real factors play into the exchange. It is exceedingly complex, and there are often secondary reactions that can apply additional force or mitigate force on either side of the equation.

You're being a bit pedantic. Of course it's an oversimplification, but the energy imparted on both the shooter and the victim is close enough that this explanation serves to illustrate why a firearm that can be safely shoulder-fired simply can't exert enough force to send the victim flying.

It's not being remotely pedantic. The amount of force the shooter feels is NOWHERE near as much as the projectile has inflicted on it.

Take a firecracker, and hold it in your open palm. You will get burns. Now, make a fist around it, and you get fingers blown off, because the force of the explosion has nowhere to go. In a firearm, that explosion DOES have somewhere to go.
Literally the existence of shaped charges.

This is also ignoring that while that bullet feels full force of energy in ONE direction, the firearm itself is feeling it in MULTIPLE directions, reducing the amount of movement backwards (or upwards for that matter) due t ocompeting impulse. Energy transfer is not 100% efficient, and there are a MASSIVE number of variables involved that reduce the amount of energy that makes it to the shooter as opposed to the target.

To say 'shooter feels same force (which is a measure of expended energy) as target' is categorically wrong. The only way for it to 'look' right is for someone to oversimplify the scenario to the point of irrelevance.


Shotguns, in particular, tend to be more prone to imparting their energy directly onto target all at once, as they tend to have lower penetration capability and wider spread force of impact. No, you are not getting hit with a 12 gauge at close range and not getting rocked back, sorry. There are a bunch of factors that make the effect on the shooter (and the transmission of energy) less dramatic (both in terms of reaction and in actual physical force applied). Not least of which is that the shooter tends to be in a braced stance prepared for it, while the target, not so much. I have personally seen a 12 gauge shotgun take a whitetail deer off it's feet quite ass-over-kettle from standing. Whitetail deer tend to weigh between 150 and 300 pounds.

I'm not saying the guns in this game should do hollywood BS, but the ragdolls ARE too stiff against the impulse that caused death, generally.

[The PeePeePooPoo Man]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย JtDarth:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย DJK83:

You're being a bit pedantic. Of course it's an oversimplification, but the energy imparted on both the shooter and the victim is close enough that this explanation serves to illustrate why a firearm that can be safely shoulder-fired simply can't exert enough force to send the victim flying.

It's not being remotely pedantic. The amount of force the shooter feels is NOWHERE near as much as the projectile has inflicted on it.

Take a firecracker, and hold it in your open palm. You will get burns. Now, make a fist around it, and you get fingers blown off, because the force of the explosion has nowhere to go. In a firearm, that explosion DOES have somewhere to go.
Literally the existence of shaped charges.

This is also ignoring that while that bullet feels full force of energy in ONE direction, the firearm itself is feeling it in MULTIPLE directions, reducing the amount of movement backwards (or upwards for that matter) due t ocompeting impulse. Energy transfer is not 100% efficient, and there are a MASSIVE number of variables involved that reduce the amount of energy that makes it to the shooter as opposed to the target.

To say 'shooter feels same force (which is a measure of expended energy) as target' is categorically wrong. The only way for it to 'look' right is for someone to oversimplify the scenario to the point of irrelevance.


Shotguns, in particular, tend to be more prone to imparting their energy directly onto target all at once, as they tend to have lower penetration capability and wider spread force of impact. No, you are not getting hit with a 12 gauge at close range and not getting rocked back, sorry. There are a bunch of factors that make the effect on the shooter (and the transmission of energy) less dramatic (both in terms of reaction and in actual physical force applied). Not least of which is that the shooter tends to be in a braced stance prepared for it, while the target, not so much. I have personally seen a 12 gauge shotgun take a whitetail deer off it's feet quite ass-over-kettle from standing. Whitetail deer tend to weigh between 150 and 300 pounds.

I'm not saying the guns in this game should do hollywood BS, but the ragdolls ARE too stiff against the impulse that caused death, generally.

+1 thread over.

Also add guts and gore pls devs

[Hashley Hashbrowns]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย JtDarth:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย DJK83:

You're being a bit pedantic. Of course it's an oversimplification, but the energy imparted on both the shooter and the victim is close enough that this explanation serves to illustrate why a firearm that can be safely shoulder-fired simply can't exert enough force to send the victim flying.

It's not being remotely pedantic. The amount of force the shooter feels is NOWHERE near as much as the projectile has inflicted on it.

Take a firecracker, and hold it in your open palm. You will get burns. Now, make a fist around it, and you get fingers blown off, because the force of the explosion has nowhere to go. In a firearm, that explosion DOES have somewhere to go.
Literally the existence of shaped charges.

This is also ignoring that while that bullet feels full force of energy in ONE direction, the firearm itself is feeling it in MULTIPLE directions, reducing the amount of movement backwards (or upwards for that matter) due t ocompeting impulse. Energy transfer is not 100% efficient, and there are a MASSIVE number of variables involved that reduce the amount of energy that makes it to the shooter as opposed to the target.

To say 'shooter feels same force (which is a measure of expended energy) as target' is categorically wrong. The only way for it to 'look' right is for someone to oversimplify the scenario to the point of irrelevance.


Shotguns, in particular, tend to be more prone to imparting their energy directly onto target all at once, as they tend to have lower penetration capability and wider spread force of impact. No, you are not getting hit with a 12 gauge at close range and not getting rocked back, sorry. There are a bunch of factors that make the effect on the shooter (and the transmission of energy) less dramatic (both in terms of reaction and in actual physical force applied). Not least of which is that the shooter tends to be in a braced stance prepared for it, while the target, not so much. I have personally seen a 12 gauge shotgun take a whitetail deer off it's feet quite ass-over-kettle from standing. Whitetail deer tend to weigh between 150 and 300 pounds.

I'm not saying the guns in this game should do hollywood BS, but the ragdolls ARE too stiff against the impulse that caused death, generally.

A honorable mention, parts of shrapnel or something like metal that are coming your direction is bound to cause either bruises or really bad wounds.Doesn't have to be explosion or whatever but something heavy like that can do a lot of damage.

[Gregory Stevens]

Listen to all these Liberal kids complaining about gore being added. It's reality, I know that may be hard to understand, but bullets do rip bodies to shreds, I've been on Ogrish, Live Leak(unfortunately) and Leaked Reality before it was shut down. I've seen more deaths than police investigators. Bullets can and will tear chunks out, doesn't matter the caliber. You hit the same spot a few times and watch the magic happen.

[Hashley Hashbrowns]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย PINEAPPLEPETE:

Listen to all these Liberal kids complaining about gore being added. It's reality, I know that may be hard to understand, but bullets do rip bodies to shreds, I've been on Ogrish, Live Leak(unfortunately) and Leaked Reality before it was shut down. I've seen more deaths than police investigators. Bullets can and will tear chunks out, doesn't matter the caliber. You hit the same spot a few times and watch the magic happen.

I've seen a car accident in real life and it reminds me of necromorphs from dead space.(No wonder the artist who made them was inspired to make those scary ♥♥♥♥♥.) Question tho, can something as small as what kolibri's caliber open a head?

[JtDarth]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Hashley Hashbrowns:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย PINEAPPLEPETE:

Listen to all these Liberal kids complaining about gore being added. It's reality, I know that may be hard to understand, but bullets do rip bodies to shreds, I've been on Ogrish, Live Leak(unfortunately) and Leaked Reality before it was shut down. I've seen more deaths than police investigators. Bullets can and will tear chunks out, doesn't matter the caliber. You hit the same spot a few times and watch the magic happen.

I've seen a car accident in real life and it reminds me of necromorphs from dead space.(No wonder the artist who made them was inspired to make those scary ♥♥♥♥♥.) Question tho, can something as small as what kolibri's caliber open a head?

A kolibri? No. You'd need some sort of LMG in the same caliber and a full belt to really tear up a body with that caliber.

Something that SIZE, with enough speed behind it? Yes. Most the damage something like a .50 bmg does to a human body isn't the bullet itself but the energy transfer into a soft target causing cavitation. In theory, any projectile moving with adequate speed could do the same (although the smaller the projectile, the less efficient the transfer of energy into surrounding tissues, so the higherr the amount of raw energy needed).
I don't think current tech could propel something that small fast enough without also disintegrating the projectile. That's more 'railgun' territory than it is conventional firearm.

[Hashley Hashbrowns]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย JtDarth:

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Hashley Hashbrowns:

I've seen a car accident in real life and it reminds me of necromorphs from dead space.(No wonder the artist who made them was inspired to make those scary ♥♥♥♥♥.) Question tho, can something as small as what kolibri's caliber open a head?

A kolibri? No. You'd need some sort of LMG in the same caliber and a full belt to really tear up a body with that caliber.

Something that SIZE, with enough speed behind it? Yes. Most the damage something like a .50 bmg does to a human body isn't the bullet itself but the energy transfer into a soft target causing cavitation. In theory, any projectile moving with adequate speed could do the same (although the smaller the projectile, the less efficient the transfer of energy into surrounding tissues, so the higherr the amount of raw energy needed).
I don't think current tech could propel something that small fast enough without also disintegrating the projectile. That's more 'railgun' territory than it is conventional firearm.

Remind me to get a upper and make it use belts so i can use it on deer.If there's a will, there's a way!

[HumanEXE]

I want realism, nothing more, nothing less. If the devs go with realism before anything, this game will rock for long.

[Night Code]

I think they said somewhere that they would be adding in gore at some point.

[The PeePeePooPoo Man]

โพสต์ดั้งเดิมโดย Night Code:

I think they said somewhere that they would be adding in gore at some point.

I need to see tons of brains guts spit and ass to fly whenever I shoot something.

However I'd like to have them remove the nudity from the game cause that is just plain tasteless.