Game with good flamethrower?
>>338044341
Rising Storm
There are no games with good flamethrowers because there are no games with good fire.
Are you looking for good flamethrower flamethrowers or good "real" flamethrowers?
>>338044341
The 2033 redux flamethrower is 10/10
Tf2
The one and only.
>>338044341
World at Warexcept it's shit in Zombies.
Far Cry 2+3+4
CoD WaW
Return To Castle Wolfenstein
Ratchet & Clank games, there is DER FLAMMENWERFER in each one of them (or at least I think), some better than others
Company of Heroes has good flamethrowers
>>338044735
Your teammates don't like it very much
VtM:B
It's the ultimate "fuck you and your shit" weapon.
>>338045120
They're much better in COH 2
Gears of war
Depends if you mean good as in realistic, or good from a gameplay perspective.
haardsuit faggots get the fuck out.
>>338044473
>mfw just realizing I never actually played as a flamethrower
time to fire up RS again
Dead Space
>>338047125
>>338044580
Satisfying ones that you enjoy to use.
Bonus point for interaction with the environment.
>>338044626
I wanted to say this as well, but then I remembered OP asked for GOOD flamethrowers.
>>338044626
Yeah I love the Phlog too
Why not an icethrower ?
>>338049267
ice is gay
>>338049342
Nuuuuh yu are gaaay !
>aerosol flamethrowers
>>338049267
THAT FUCKING CUNT MEI
>>338044473
fpbp
Red Orchestra 2
Men of War
c&c generals
Fallout 1 and 2
>>338049717
>>338044473
>>338049618
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAVi99Rwh8g
>>338049267
doesn't look chinese
>>338049717
When you think about it a flamethrower is fucking terrifying
>>338050167
Most deaths were by carbon monoxide poisoning, not actually being caught on fire (Which kills you instantly anyway)
>>338049964
>>338050236
I see, the screams were just in granddad's imagination.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2sC29_XR88
>>338050456
They certainly weren't caused by a flamethrower. The running around on fire for a minute is hollywood bullshit. Actually read up on them and you'd see that.
>>338050602
So why don't we execute prisoners by lighting them on fire?
>>338050732
Because it looks too cool.
>>338050732
Because it's inhumane.
>>338050732
Why would we? Are they hiding in a cave or in a bunker covered by vegetation?
Here is some education for you from someone whose job almost their entire lives has been about flamethrowers.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ts55TNp1Fq4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lc6Jtupbtic
>>338050236
>being caught on fire (Which kills you instantly anyway)
>The running around on fire for a minute is hollywood bullshit.
How new are you?
>>338049717
Full video for people who are interested
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPQYK5ZMbWY
>>338050987
See >>338050954
Pretty sure Charlie Fucking Hobson knows more about it than you do
>>338050602
Being lit on fire ain't nothin' to fuck with
Men of War has pretty great flamethrowers too. Burning down buildings or foliage filled with enemy troops is great
>>338050987
I bet you think shooting the tanks will make it blow up like a bomb too
>>338051084
And I'm pretty fucking sure all the videos of men burning alive say otherwise
lurk moar
>>338051273
IF you hit the ammo rack, it does.
>>338051434
You say "Lurk moar" because you don't actually have footage of people running around on fire like in the movies. The most you'll get is like this where it's walking a bit then falling over >>338051145
Sure you know better than the guy who had a hand in development of them, training men on them, maintaining them, and studying them almost his entire life
>>338051607
No, it doesn't. They don't use volatile fuels like gasoline in them and they also don't use oxygen. The most you'll get is if you hit the compressed air area is some shrapnel depending on the pressure and your luck. Or using incendiary ammunition (Not standard issue)
>>338051618
I say lurk moar because you clearly need to lurk moar now fuck off to /b/ or liveleak to find this shit and stop being an ignorant little cunt.
>>338051839
there is plenty ww2/iraq/aphganistan(soviet)/grozni photos that disagree with you
>>338051864
>I have no argument or knowledge of these things
>I will scream "Lurk moar"
>>338052052
We stopped using them after Vietnam. Post some photos then, or better yet video! You are not arguing with me, you are arguing with Charlie Hobson who is an expert about these things.
>>338047398
Only Dead Space 2. It's decent in 3, but not as good as other guns you can make.
>>338052194
t. Charlie Hobson
>>338052596
Are you going to post some evidence?
>>338052194
who the fuck cares about tank US uses?
>>338052805
Are you just spouting gibberish now?
>>338044341
Heretic
Strife
Powerslave/Exhumed
Turok 2 / Evolution
Return to castle Wolfenstein / Wolfenstein 2009
Unreal 2
Serious Sam TSE
>>338047260
loved that game
>>338051019
He made a special about BF 1
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDRRlVElEXI
>>338052194
T-62 is still in use and that has a flamethrower variant.
But you're right, the West dropped it's Flamethrowers. Last one was M132 and 'Zippo'.
>>338052913
you know that tower is 4 tons? It just fell off i guess.
>>338053317
There's really no need for them now with airstrikes always in demand. We used them for mainly burning vegetation and getting fags that are in caves (Carbon monoxide poisoning)
>>338053364
Are you understand the impression we are talking about tanks (Vehicles) and not flamethrower tanks that you wear on your back?
>>338044341
Ratchet & Clank
>>338050602
Which movies do people run around for a minute on fire after being shot with a flamethrower? Mad Max maybe?
>>338053670
Saving Pvt Ryan? (They never got to use flamethrowers to clear the bunkers btw, they were held up)
>>338053479
got derailed by ammo rack guy, damn
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPQYK5ZMbWY
explain me this then, fuel is always under pressure according to this wouldn't incendiary ammo blow up this thing?
>>338053479
Correct. This is the first time in history where militaries invest to make weapons LESS lethal. It's fucking madness, but "Muh civvies".
I miss the time when people used to be armed with napalm rocket launchers.
But they're useless against modern tanks so, no fucking point and since the majority of the hot zones are bumfuck middle eastern countries, there is no need to invest in them and caves are out of reach of tanks.
However, my guess is, when the inevitable war with China happens (and it's going to, the world can't keep ignoring the multiple international laws China keeps breaking, the USA is reinforcing Asia more and more every year and rents out British Indian Ocean territory) then I'm sure flamethrower tanks will be more useful.
>>338053840
Why don't you watch the fucking interviews Ian did with the guy? He answers that exact question
>>338053725
The Brits did. The Canadians did. The French did. Only the Americans rejected Churchill Crocodiles and Funnies. Which is why so many of them fucking died when the rest of the landings barely lost any.
>>338053996
We had man portable ones on the Pvt Ryan beaches, but they were held up. I think they were actually one of the last to land. We used them in Japan for that purpose a shit ton
>>338053725
Only flamethrower part I remember is when the dudes tank blows up or whatever. Haven't seen SVP in years
>>338054307
You don't remember the "Let em burn" part which is always brought up as inaccurate?
>>338054117
I know, but the rest of the landings had Crocs on which made bunker clearing much easier.
>>338054353
Not really. I'll just go on youtube later
Shotguns and flamethrower are my go to weapons in vidya if available.
Fallout 1/2 flamethrower death animation is bretty gud
>>338044341
is that the Resident Evil 2 Remake?
