Page 1 of 2

PR M16A4 on CDG.net!!

Posted: 2007-12-14 15:46
by Hitperson
for all you guys that play css take a look see!!

http://cdg.net/forums/viewtopic.php?p=7208122#7208122
awesomeness.

Posted: 2007-12-14 15:54
by Jedimushroom
F*** Yeah Seaking!

EDIT: Make it for the M4A1

Posted: 2007-12-14 16:37
by Hitperson
this isn't FPSbanana.

Posted: 2007-12-14 17:03
by G.Drew
look for the Dev Journal guys in announcements, its all there

Posted: 2007-12-14 17:05
by Rhino
I also love how our M16 in the HL2 engine looks soo much nicer than the Insurgancy one :D

Insurgancy
Image

PRs
Image

Posted: 2007-12-14 17:14
by Hitperson
just a shame the dust cover doesn't open :(

Posted: 2007-12-14 18:15
by Jaymz
Hitperson wrote:just a shame the dust cover doesn't open :(
Image

Posted: 2007-12-14 21:40
by Hitperson
lol at the nit picking picture.

anyway i was just making an observation.

the bolt would have been nicer to look at mobile or not.

Posted: 2007-12-14 22:09
by WNxKenwayy
Still missing the small metal nipple thing that is on the end of the bolt release latch. Its used to lock the bolt to the rear. kkthxbi.

Posted: 2007-12-15 02:24
by pasfreak
i dont see any of those retention clips on the handguards

looks good tho

Posted: 2007-12-15 03:03
by Desertfox
I see no foregrip! This is blasphemy!

Posted: 2007-12-15 03:22
by Bob_Marley
[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:I also love how our M16 in the HL2 engine looks soo much nicer than the Insurgancy one :D
From a technical point of view, maybe. But the insurgency one wins back serious cool points for having proper hand guards and not the tacticool (and ugly as hell) picatinny rail/short grip cover doubled up look on the PR one.

Posted: 2007-12-15 03:34
by Oldirti
[R-MOD]Bob_Marley wrote:From a technical point of view, maybe. But the insurgency one wins back serious cool points for having proper hand guards and not the tacticool (and ugly as hell) picatinny rail/short grip cover doubled up look on the PR one.
What does that even mean?

Posted: 2007-12-15 05:39
by pasfreak
i guess he means m16a2 style handguards?

that's pretty much the older m16a4s
the most recent ones have the full rail handguard made by kac
does add some weight tho, but who cares you can put all this cool stuff on
that adds even more weight lol

Posted: 2007-12-15 17:39
by Katarn
Hitperson wrote:just a shame the dust cover doesn't open :(
Someone was too lazy to that on the compile, not mai fault. :p

Posted: 2007-12-15 17:44
by Rambo Hunter
[R-MOD]Bob_Marley wrote:From a technical point of view, maybe. But the insurgency one wins back serious cool points for having proper hand guards and not the tacticool (and ugly as hell) picatinny rail/short grip cover doubled up look on the PR one.
I thought M5 RAS was standard issue for the USMC M16A4?

Posted: 2007-12-15 18:29
by hall0
'[R-DEV wrote:Rhino;550078']I also love how our M16 in the HL2 engine looks soo much nicer than the Insurgancy one :D

Insurgancy
Image

...

Yap it looks better but this isnt the Insurgency 16a4, this one looks more like a m16a2 and this version isnt in Insurgency.


This is the Insurgency M16a4
Image

Posted: 2007-12-15 18:40
by Rambo Hunter
That pic just makes ours look even better :D

Posted: 2007-12-15 23:00
by Jedimushroom
I'm going to say it once more.

Make it for the M4.

Otherwise I shall scream and scream and scream until I am sick.

Posted: 2007-12-16 00:31
by Bob_Marley
Rambo Hunter wrote:I thought M5 RAS was standard issue for the USMC M16A4?
That doesn't stop it from being ugly.