Real-Life Equivalents of Video Game Weapons

antdude writes "This GamesRadar article compares a bunch of fantastic video game weapons and their real-life equivalents: 'There are certain things we just accept in video games. An overweight pipe technician can jump five times his own height. A first aid kit will instantly heal bullet wounds and replace lost blood. And any theoretical physics model can be cleanly packaged into a lightweight, handheld weapon with a minimum of fuss. But in certain cases, that last one isn't too far off the truth. As guano loopy as most game weaponry is, some of it definitely isn't implausible. In fact, some of it exists already. Kind of.'"

Comments

I'll just wait for Real-Life BFG9000 ...

[Anonymous Coward]

... till then its too boring to even bother looking at them.

Crowbar

[lul_wat]

What's the real-life equivalent of the Crowbar from halflife? I always wanted one

Raccoon Suit

[DavidD_CA]

I'm waiting for the US military to develop a Raccoon Suit (from Mario) for our solders.

But I bet those Canadians will beat us to it.

Lasers

[TandooriC]

If they can't even make sharks with lasers how can they even hope for rail guns, tesla coils and plasma rifles?

You can reload an M1 Garand mid-clip

[Anonymous Coward]

Without having RTFA, I want to take this opportunity to point out that an M1 Garand (the semi-automatic infantry rifle of the U.S. military during World War II) can, in real life, be reloaded before the clip is empty. Many idiots who replicate the rifle in video games infer that, just because the clip automatically ejects when it is empty, it can only be ejected this way—that is, if you have one or two rounds left, you have to shoot them before you can take a chance to load a fresh clip. I don't know who got this wrong first, but it has turned into a pernicious meme that has reared its ugly head in every World War II shooter I have ever played.

Proof: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrXLtkY4wOw

Game designers, please do more research than playing some other WW2 game for a few hours. Diligent fans, this is an issue worth making patches for. Besides being just plain wrong, this is a substantial and unwarranted disadvantage for what is supposed to be "the greatest implement of battle ever devised." And that's according to General Patton, who (speaking of memes) knows a little more about fighting than you do, pal, because he invented it!

Re:You can reload an M1 Garand mid-clip

[Sycraft-fu]

This list was about sci-fi/non-real weapons that in fact DO have at least a somewhat functioning real counterpart. It wasn't about real weapons that are in games. However in general, whining about real weapons not being real enough in games is silly. Games are, well, games. They aren't meant to be real. Things are done in the interest of fun. One thing you see extremely commonly is that magazines are magical. That is to say if you do a tactical reload, you keep all the ammunition that was in that mag, yet every one you insert in to the weapon is full. Of course the real world doesn't work that way, but pissing around with loading magazines is boring in a game. It is done for fun and gameplay, not for realism.

However, I will give you your point on the M1 clip issue precisely because being able to do tactical reloads makes a game more fun. In general, I like games where you can reload your weapon as often as you like. Fire one bullet and take a guy down? Reload. The point of limited magazines/clips in a game is so that you can't just hose down enemies continuously, not to be perfectly real. So yes, it makes sense to allow you to swap out the clip in an M1 when you like.

A railgun will certainly get the job done...

[Genda]

Railguns are amazing things... You just have to be careful not to vaporize your projectile. It was calculated that if they could get a one ounce steel ball bearing up to a speed of 20 miles per second, it would cause a fusion reaction on impact with relatively stationery object. I was working in a large industrial machine in late the 70s, I was down in the power section of a massive ring roller. The thing occupied four stories, one above ground and three stories underground, at the very bottom floor was the power system. There were three huge copper bus bars that fed into a massive 2000 amp, 1760 volt three phase breaker switch. We were working electronic and hydraulic systems, and had the false floor pulled up, and some hydraulic mechanic dropped an 8 inch adjustable wrench across the bus bars. There was a mind numbing BOOM, accompanied by a blue green flash you could almost see through the back of your head, and when the dust and debris settled, there was a quarter inch of roasted wrench sticking out of the concrete ceiling. This place was noted for really exciting industrial accidents.

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done...

[Genda]

You know I've heard this from people before, and it always amazes me that they don't get it. All you had to do, is do a Google search on "railguns and fussion", there are plenty of articles about the experimentation using railguns as a viable means of ignition. Of course if you need a citation, see below. As for bits of space debris, hitting the atmosphere at speeds of up to 60 miles per second (see persied or leonid meteor showers), they ablate, slow down, vaporize. They absolutely do become plasma and some of the larger pieces (bolides) explode with kiloton force. Read about the early nuclear test ban problems involving accidental false positives, caused by small nuclear sized explosions coming from meteorites with sufficient mass and momentum to cause fusion explosions. That and a quick look at the fireballs created by Shoemaker-Levy on Jupiter should put to rest and idea that meteors or comet can't cause a fusion reaction. The issue is simply one of velocity and momentum. A steel ball going 20 miles per second has both. Please be so good as the do the physics before making a knee-jerk assumption. Using E=1/2MV^2, I come up with a net kinetic energy of 14 million joules focused on a circular region less than an inch across. The entire collision takes place in less than a microsecond, and in that time the entire mass of the ball bearing is rendered into ionized plasma, as is a significant amount of the surface material of the target. The reason for raising incredible rare gases to hundreds of millions of degrees is to create an atomic velocity high enough to ensure that a signification number of collisions will occur in that rarefied gas to sustain a fusion reaction, fusion can occur at a much lower temperature. The incredibly hot dense soup of metal ions at the point of this impact are moving with incredible momentum, the material at the point of impact is hotter than the surface of the sun, hotter than lightening, fusion will certainly occur. Maybe not a huge amount, but some, and it will certainly make a very big mess of the target.

H. Kolm, Electromagnetic Accelerator Concepts, DOE Impact Fusion Workshop, Los Alamos , N.M. (Jul. 10-12, 1979), Available from NTIS, Springfield, Va. pp. 206-217 (1979)

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done...

[westcoast philly]

HEY!! Citing your source, complete with publication date and page numbers is not allowed! This is Slashdot, you're supposed to just spew rhetoric and car analogies.

Please rephrase in the form of a car analogy, or state number of Libraries of Congress per second.... or it didn't happen.

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done...

[Rich0]

Yup - at significant speeds impacts are quite impressive.

That's why I was scratching my head at the Day the Earth Stood Still remake. In the beginning there is a ship detected flying towards earth. Somewhere in the dialog or on a display or something it was indicated that it was moving at some significant fraction of c - maybe 10-20% or something. Then they start talking about where it will land with the goal of sending in a science team to be there when it arrives. The science team is surprised that it apparently decelerated before landing so there was no big crater or anything.

Now, if I were in a science team and I found out that an object of significant size (in this case significant means bigger than a grain of sand) was flying towards the Earth at 20% of c, the last place I'd want to be is within 1000 miles of the impact point, and for that matter within 1000 miles of the point on the Earth opposite the impact point. To be honest, I'd probably prefer just to not be on the Earth at all. However, if I did decide to be at the spot where it would "land" then I wouldn't be shocked to find out it had decelerated - the fact that I was still alive would already confirm this.

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done...

[lul_wat]

You know I've heard this from people before, and it always amazes me that they don't get it. All you had to do, is do a Google search on "car analogies", there are plenty of articles about the experimentation using cars as a viable means of analogy. Of course if you need a citation, get bent. As for bits of car debris, hitting the motorway at speeds of up to 60 miles per second (see youtube), they ablate, slow down, vaporize. They absolutely do become plasma and some of the larger pieces (doors) explode with kiloton force. Read about the early nuclear test ban problems involving accidental false positives, caused by small nuclear sized explosions coming from cars with sufficient mass and momentum to cause fusion explosions. That and a quick look at the fireballs created by Russian cars should put to rest and idea that cars or trucks can't cause a fusion reaction. The issue is simply one of velocity and momentum. A steel car going 20 miles per second has both. Please be so good as the do the physics before making a knee-jerk assumption. Using E=1/2MV^2, I come up with a net kinetic energy of 14 million joules focused on a circular region less than an Library of Congress across. The entire collision takes place in less than a microsecond, and in that time the entire mass of the car is rendered into ionized plasma, as is a significant amount of the surface material of the target. The reason for raising incredible rare gases to hundreds of millions of degrees is to create an atomic velocity high enough to ensure that a signification number of collisions will occur in that rarefied motoway to sustain a car analogy, analogies can occur at a much lower temperature. The incredibly hot dense soup of cars on the motorway are moving with incredible momentum, the material at the point of impact is hotter than the surface of the sun, hotter than lightening, analogies will certainly occur. Maybe not a huge amount, but some, and it will certainly make a very big mess of the slashdot.

Screw guns from video games

[antifoidulus]

I want a bowel disrupter!

Re:Screw guns from video games

[DNS-and-BIND]

You know, I've often thought that the coolest thing in the world would be an orgasm gun. Aim, pull trigger, and the target has an orgasm. Would be fun to use against politicians making speeches, pompous university presidents, and so on.

Re:Screw guns from video games

[GigaplexNZ]

You mean like the Orgasmo Ray from the movie Orgasmo?

Medipack

[gmuslera]

One thing that share futuristic video games with not so futuristic (i.e. from WWII and other wars) are "magical" medipacks,you get them and no matter what hits you (knives, grenades, a lot of bullets,some maybe in the head) you end with full health. Of all video games "weapons", that should be the one that would make a big difference for all.

Re:Medipack

[Mashdar]

We tested the wait-a-week-to-heal-one-hit-point model, but it did not score well with 18-24 males.

Re:Medipack

[NewKidInTown]

I disagree. In the original Rainbow 6 games (even leading up to the most recent ones in Vegas) the characters in your squad could take at most a glancing shot and be harmed. Their effectiveness dropped remarkably. If they got hit again, or were unlucky enough to be hit critically, they were dead. Not revived-at-the-end-of-the-mission knocked out, but dead. Your explosives expert takes a sniper shot the the head in the first mission? You better learn how to dismantle bombs, because he's gone. The characters that only got scratched during the mission took a few "weeks" to heal ,meaning they were ineffective in the following missions. It made for a more tactics-based game, instead of "I'm gonna run into that room and spray bullets at anything the moves" type game.

What about Borderlands?

[protodevilin]

Say what you will about its Fallout-esque gameplay, Borderlands was the first FPS in a long time that constantly had me saying, "God I love this gun." A sniper rifle that fires explosive incindiary bullets? An SMG that shoots corrosive acid rounds? Grenades that teleport directly to their targets and burst into an electric lightning storm? Sign me up.

What the military actually has is more impressive

[Animats]

The U.S. military has some weapons which are much better than many video game weapons. Video games need "balance", so players aren't given weapons that are too "powerful". DoD doesn't have that limitation.

• The Grid Square Removal Service. When a Multiple Launch Rocket System unit is loaded up with rockets with submunitions, it fires 12 rockets, each of which carries 518 submunitions, each of which explodes into a rain of fragments. This kills anything unarmored in a 1km grid square. In the U.S. Army inventory for years. Some Iraqi army units were wiped out with those things.
• The FireFinder radar. Shoot at a U.S. Army unit with an indirect fire weapon, and one of these will see the incoming projectiles, calculate the location of the gun, and pass that information to the U.S. Army guns, which will duly plaster the shooter. Within one minute. Standard equipment for Army and USMC artillery units. The technology dates from the 1970s, but in newer versions, it's been shrunk down to a size a HUMMV can carry.
• The XM-25 "smart" grenade launcher. Useful when someone is shooting at you from behind cover or from a window. Just point at the side of the window, and click a button to get the range with the laser rangefinder. Then fire a round though the window. The round goes through the window, and, with its timer set automatically, explodes 1-2 meters just inside, in the right place for killing the sniper. Finally, a practical weapon that shoots around corners.
• The Combat Engineer Vehicle, another reason the "Dune" approach to desert warfare won't work. These are tank chassis, with the armor, equipped with a bulldozer blade. They're used for removing obstacles. In the first Gulf War, they were used in Kuwait against dug-in Iraqi troops. They didn't bother shooting at them. They just bulldozed sand over their fighting holes, burying them alive.

"If you can see it, you can hit it. If you can hit it, you can kill it." As insurgent groups have figured out, the only way to succeed against a modern military force is to have a population in which to hide, one which the US isn't willing to exterminate.