Codename 47 vs Bob Lee Swagger

RJ,

Just watched the beginning of Hitman, forgot I had burned it. Things of note:

1) It is stated that the assassins are trained from birth to be "experts in every aspect of combat" and that Agent 47 is "the very best of them."

2) I also watched the sniper scene, there is no way to tell how far exactly the shot was in the screen, he's far far away and the camera moves to quickly to judge. Stands to reason that the camera speeding up is to compensate for the long (over 4km) distance.

3) Most importantly, they know exactly where the shot came from, since 47 blew up the gun and case after the shot and the point of explosion was seen by many. So the stating of 4km stands as fact in regards to the movie, they weren't making wild guesses.

4) "It's in the movie so it counts", as you say.

So stop acting like a child and just deal with the fact the the fictional Agent 47 is a far superior sniper to the fictional Swagger, ergo, 47 wins.

Originally posted by Robtard
RJ,

Just watched the beginning of Hitman, forgot I had burned it. Things of note:

1) It is stated that the assassins are trained from birth to be "experts in every aspect of combat" and that Agent 47 is "the very best of them."

2) I also watched the sniper scene, there is no way to tell how far exactly the shot was in the screen, he's far far away and the camera moves to quickly to judge.

3) Most importantly, they know exactly where the shot came from, since 47 blew up the gun and case after the shot and the point of explosion was seen by many. So the stating of 4km stands as fact in regards to the movie, they weren't making wild guesses.

4) "It's in the movie so it counts", as you say.

So stop acting like a child and just deal with the fact the the fictional Agent 47 is a far superior sniper to the fictional Swagger, ergo, 47 wins.

Swagger is.

If you are going to assume that 47 is just as good as Swagger is in a wooded environment, then I would be justified in saying Swagger is just as good with an assualt rifle. After all, you stated that Swagger took out scores of mercs after the Russian killed himself, right? He did so, taking out a chopper at the same time.

Originally posted by Robtard
RJ,

Just watched the beginning of Hitman, forgot I had burned it. Things of note:

1) It is stated that the assassins are trained from birth to be "experts in every aspect of combat" and that Agent 47 is "the very best of them."

Pay close attention to the above quote, RJ.

Is it me, or do you not pay any attention to any kind of narrative, do you just see the pretty pictures and think "counter intel, ghile suits, I wonder how many miles away that is"?

RJ,

Hahahaa, the nonsense never stops from you. "Every aspect of combat"

47 could enter this "wooded environment" (which you pulled out of your ass) and still sniper Swagger from over 2 miles, while all Swagger could do is scope him out with his binoculars because Swagger's gun doesn't shoot that far, not that he could pull off a 2 mile shot in the first place, as the conditions for him to make one at a mile's distance had to be precise.

Repeat: It's rather simple, the only way Swagger could win is by doing what he does best, being a sniper. Agent 47 is a far superior sniper so Swagger's best chance has already been outclassed.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
If you can present a scenario between Swagger and 47 where things are even, I welcome it. As it stands now, between these two, with their respective skills, it goes one way or the other in a landslide.

The perfect scenerio was presented to us by the thread's starter man. 47 Vs. Swagger in the middle of Philly. 47 has to find Swagger, and when he does, they have a gunfight, or resort to sniping eachother.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
He is shown shooting some Russian from a distance that I guaged to be about a mile. Youtube it and see for yourself.

You guaged about a mile? That's assuming. Your assumption doesn't hold anything since the distance was stated in the movie. It's just your thought, how can it possibly hold it's own against all of us?

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
Pay close attention to the above quote, RJ.

Is it me, or do you not pay any attention to any kind of narrative, do you just see the pretty pictures and think "counter intel, ghile suits, I wonder how many miles away that is"?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Oh I pay attention to narrative very closely. For example in Shooter, there is a scene where one of the feds says Swagger took out "a hundred men." But I guess that counts for nothing. 🙄

Why does that statement in in Shooter count, yet you have argued that the "shot at over 4km" statement in Hitman doesn't? Mind you, the "4km" statement also has a scene to back it up.

Originally posted by Scythe
You guaged about a mile? That's assuming. Your assumption doesn't hold anything since the distance was stated in the movie. It's just your thought, how can it possibly hold it's own against all of us?

And I am still amazed that one can ignore the fact that there is no gun on this Earth that has that far an effective range, not even close.

And with a shot that far, the bullet is gonna travel like 12 to 15 seconds. Just a few random facts I am throwing out there.

Not to mention it would lose all it's velocity......

Originally posted by Robtard
More double standard foolery.

Why does that statement in in Shooter count, yet you have argued that the "shot at over 4km" statement in Hitman doesn't? Mind you, the "4km" statement also has a scene to back it up.

That scene, or the opening sniping sequence.

Anyway, someone is talking about it after the fact and they mention he took down 100 men. I gotta watch the DVD again to see exactly which scene.

Originally posted by Scythe
The perfect scenerio was presented to us by the thread's starter man. 47 Vs. Swagger in the middle of Philly. 47 has to find Swagger, and when he does, they have a gunfight, or resort to sniping eachother.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
As does Shooter. The cabin scene when he shoots down the second chopper.

That scene, or the opening sniping sequence.

Anyway, someone is talking about it after the fact and they mention he took down 100 men. I gotta watch the DVD again to see exactly which scene.

You dodged the question. You take everything in shooter as "if it's in the movie it counts", yet that same reasoning doesn't apply to Hitman in your eyes. It's childish to behave that way in a debate, the double standard bit.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
If it was close, if it made me think "That might be 4 km, I dont think so but maybe it is", I would ignore it.

And I am still amazed that one can ignore the fact that there is no gun on this Earth that has that far an effective range, not even close.

And with a shot that far, the bullet is gonna travel like 12 to 15 seconds. Just a few random facts I am throwing out there.

Not to mention it would lose all it's velocity......

Whether a real gun could achieve it does not come into it, you absolute cretin. If it's possible in the movie world, it's possible in this Vs. match. There's no light sabers in real life, no bat mobiles, no f*cking hitmen trained from birth, you complete ignoramus.

Originally posted by Robtard
You dodged the question. You take everything in shooter as "if it's in the movie it counts", yet that same reasoning doesn't apply to Hitman in your eyes. It's childish to behave that way in a debate, the double standard bit.

So what does that mean if Swagger took down 100 men, AND an attack chopper, all in one sitting? I would say that change things quite a bit, especially in the urban scenario, evening the odds and then some.

edit

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
So 47 shooting over 2 miles (I cant believe I am even saying that) is valid because some fed agent said some Russian told him, right? And therefore this makes him a better sniper, correct?

So what does that mean if Swagger took down 100 men, AND an attack chopper, all in one sitting? I would say that change things quite a bit, especially in the urban scenario, evening the odds and then some.

I would have thought the 100 men bit would be in separate instances. If not, prove it.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
So 47 shooting over 2 miles (I cant believe I am even saying that) is valid because some fed agent said some Russian told him, right? And therefore this makes him a better sniper, correct?

So what does that mean if Swagger took down 100 men, AND an attack chopper, all in one sitting? I would say that change things quite a bit, especially in the urban scenario, evening the odds and then some.

Do you not comprehend what you read? I spelled it out exactly for you above when I watched the film. The shot was made and they knew EXACTLY where 47 stood when he made the shot, they were not making wild guesses. Yes, considering a major aspect of being a sniper is getting one hit kills and from long distances, it means 47 is a better sniper, in the very least, he can kill from 2-3 times the distance that Swagger is lethal at.

Did he actually do all that? Was it said like that in the movie? Or are you just pulling more turds out of your ass?

What does it mean when it's explicitly said that 47 is an "expert in all aspects of combat" and "the very best of assassins."? Would you say that changes things quit a bit?

This is all besides the point that has been rehashed to you over and over, these are movies, not real life. As you said "if it's in the movie it counts".

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
OK then, you tell me. What rifle in the world can shoot 2.5 miles? Hmm?

You are very good at SAYING I am wrong, how's about you PROVE it? Yeah, thats a challenge. Bring it or STFU about it.

Originally posted by Utrigita

Yes It can shoot that far

http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/rifle/M107.html

Someone already stomped you on this, but you decided to bring it up again some pages later, hoping people would forget how full of BS you are.

You don't know anything about snipers or sniping, you don't know what counter-intel is, so please stop pretending you do. Everyone else knows you don't know jack.

Now, please STFU wanker. Or better yet, GTFO. I promise you that you won't be missed.

And if Impediment gives me a warning for this without first owning RJ for his "STFU" comment, then your bias towards RJ would become more obvious than it already is.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
If it was close, if it made me think "That might be 4 km, I dont think so but maybe it is", I would ignore it.

And I am still amazed that one can ignore the fact that there is no gun on this Earth that has that far an effective range, not even close.

And with a shot that far, the bullet is gonna travel like 12 to 15 seconds. Just a few random facts I am throwing out there.

Not to mention it would lose all it's velocity......

Dude, it might be made-up. Forms of entertainment seem to do that. Look at Metal Gear Solid 4, the weapons in that game are all real, but there's a gun with unlimited ammo and another weapon called the solar gun, it fires....solar energy....yeah... But the fact is, they seem real, and look real, and make people go, yay! So swing with it man, I doubt a fantasy gun is gonna really help, it may decide the match, but we forget the match-up is in Philly, doesn't mean they'll go straight to snipe. I think the thread starter would've specified if it were a sniping battle.

Whoa, I just read this:

http://www.inetres.com/gp/military/infantry/rifle/M107.html

Holy shit, now that's a spicy meatball!