Video game gun experts...among other "experts"

I have also been hearing opinions that much of modern war will be waged by remote control because their is not much need of humans to be inside many of the war machines being devolved.

Strange times.. I personally hate video games and try to get my nephews to put them away and play with real stuff, like guns and bows
Click to expand...

There are people that think we can pull this off but it still is not actually feasible on the ground anyway. Drones work out in limited roles because the situation is more controlled and stable. When you take this to the ground the situation becomes much more complex.

Let's imagine a remote controlled (drone) tank. What do you do when it throws a track, or a fuel filter freezes and needs replaced, or a hundred other small manual tasks that the computer control just can't do?

I suppose it could be self destructed to keep it from falling into enemy hands but that would be a real waste from my experience.

Also, troops in tanks have on occasions in history, dismounted and acted as infantry when confronted with situations where the tank itself couldn't be employed but the crews could.

And even today with drone operators performing combat missions by "computer game", they still must maintain their physical fitness, weapons proficiency, and knowledge of basic soldier skills because sometimes the toys just stop working and you have to become the weapon, not just guide it.

We really are not that close to a remote controlled army, but when we are, they'll look like terminators (figuratively).

Actually, I would never want an army of robots. It's just not what war is all about. War is a human struggle, take the humanity out of war and there is no terror, no downside, it's just an expensive game of robot warriors. I don't want to live to see it.
 
Last edited:
I'm not entirely sure what to call these people, but it was clear that the lad hadn't a clue to what he was talking about.
Click to expand...
Around here, we call them Call of Duty Groupies. Some have a legitimate interest in learning to shoot, so it's not all a wash.

And, before we get too critical, how many folks bought and/or got into guns because of Miami Vice back in the day? C'mon, be honest...:)
 
there not a very smart group of people. to many of them think soldiers are let loose in "enemy' towns with a semi auto 10 guage shotgun in either hand, that you can actually jump over a 6 foot tall wall while dual wielding a pair of m60s and so on.


most of the groupies of these games that i know and work with, are those i wouldnt trust with a rubber pocket knife.
 
I'm not entirely sure what to call these people, but it was clear that the lad hadn't a clue to what he was talking about.
Click to expand...

They are called......."Video Game Commandos" - they are numerous, more numerous than zombies. Their intimate knowledge of firearms is only equaled by politicians' knowledge of the ObamaCare bill provisions
 
Younger gen...

I worked on a DoD contractor job for approx 8 weeks in the summer of 2006 carting new US military applicants & recruits around in a 1999 15 pass Ford E350 van.
Some were cool & polite/eager to learn and a few were stuck-up nitwits/brats.

The ones with the bad attitudes or lack of maturity seemed like they knew it all or didnt care if they treated people like dirt. :mad:
I was in the US armed forces & the DEP(delayed entry program) in my teens. I NEVER acted this way.
 
Call of Duty and the others have added to things somewhat, but this has been a pretty common thing all along, even back in the days when you "learned" everything from books and magazines.

Its also not just limited to the young and uninformed. Ive run into more than my share of "combat vets" who had no idea as to what they were talking about. In a couple of cases, I let my then 7 and 8 year old sons show them how to "really" shoot a SMG.

With that said, Im 58, and Im a big fan, and at times, a big hater of the first person shooters, and weve had pretty much every one of the "better" games, since they first showed up. While they are just a game, they can also have their place as a quasi simulator, if you have the right bunch of people, and use them in that capacity. Most just run around "running and gunning" and base their skills on "kills/points", regardless of "deaths". Not the best way to "learn", or base your skills on, but I suppose its just the nature of things.

Me, when I play alone, which anymore is mostly what I do, Im one of the dreaded and vile "campers" (apparently, "ambush" and "bushwhack", are unknown concepts in the land of the gamers :)). I usually find a spot, fire a couple up, and then move on to another spot, of course, leaving some kind of "goodie" behind when I go. Obviously I have no skills, since I wont come out and "fight like a man", and my higher than average kill to death ratios dont really mean anything. It seems its more important to have 20 kills, even if you die 30 times, as long as you die over and over, like a man. ;)


Oh, and if you really want to get them PO'd, run a large caliber belt fed with FMJ's (the games dont seem to understand AP either), and just shoot through the walls from the other side as you go by, in all the likely hiding places.

And if youre a little bored, and in a room, or other similar place, dont go anywhere after the first time they come in, just stay put and move around a little. They ALWAYS come back, and you can kill them over and over, and it gets easier each time, as they get madder and madder every time you kill them. Then when you get tired of that, just run off, and leave them a little present for the next time. Usually by then, they come back with friends. Nothing like a couple of two or three kills on a bouncing betty or claymore to sweeten the pot and rage. :D
 
Sounds a lot like my tactics, but I typically play as a designated rifleman with my friends, shoot and move, never staying in one spot for long, all the while frustrating my opponents because they can't find me to take their revenge.

Your style of play is not exactly "camping" but more about common sense and tactical thinking. Tactics > Reflexes any day IMHO.

back on topic, one of my co-workers has agreed to take him out to the range for some quality time. I don't have any ammo for my rifles so he's going to bring a small .22lr that he has had stashed away that I didn't even know he had. He's got a few others to include a Mosin M91/30 and some other larger caliber firearms that should be a nice wake up call to the difference between reality and what movies/games portray.

He's a good guy, though he's a little more blunt than I am at times on this topic :rolleyes:
 
After watching my son clear all the Nazis off the Arnhem bridge with a "liberated" G43 "sniper rifle", I got kind of bored. At first it was a thing of beauty to see, later...not so much.;)

Admittedly this was quite a few years ago, and I hope they have improved the reality since, but in the end, its just a game.

My son-in-law got a bit upset at me when I was able to outshoot him in a deer hunter game, including 200yd shots with a crossbow....

And yes, I have run into those who only know guns from video games. It's a REAL eye opener to them when they meet a DEagle in real life!:D
 
Unfortunately, preferring video games over actual experience is not limited to pre-teens.

My godson and his friends were of college age, last time his dad and I invited them out to the range with us. They declined, as they preferred to play COD rather than shoot an M1 Garand, AR15, scoped .30-06, .44 magnum revolver, etc. Ironically, some of the guns they liked in the game were going to actually be fired at the range, yet they passed.

Of course, it would have been interesting to see whether they could hit the bullseye with the AR15 from a static position in real life, as compared to nailing targets with an M4 while at a full run in the video game.

This phenomenon is also not limited to shooting.

The same group of guys got into some of the martial arts games, but had absolutely no interest in trying kenpo or aikido in real life.

Getting them out onto a boat, or even up in an airplane, is not guaranteed, either.

In large part, getting out and actually doing stuff seems to be more an over-40 thing. Yes, there are younger guys who are very active, but I am appalled by the number of young couch potatoes I see.

But they can shoot like Leatham on a videogame, or snowboard like Shaun White, or drive like Schumacher... So why go through the agony of having to work hard, and go through the initial period of incompetence and mediocrity, in the real world.
 
My kids learned in reverse. They had been shooting the real stuff a number of years before they ever saw a video game that was shooting related.

The funny part is, even at a very young age, they were quick to pick up on the "wrong" things in the games (as well as TV and movies), that many adults never did. Movies or games, we always discussed these things as they came up, and they were lucky enough to have access to a number of the guns encountered in both, to know what the real things are like, and what to really expect from them.

My kids are in their late 20's now, and while things are a little different these days, game wise, then they were when they were small, I dont see their kids having a dissimilar experience here. They will handle and learn to shoot, as their dads did, long before they get to play a game doing so. Im sure they'll get to play too, and I hope I still have the reflexes to be an opponent and/or team member.

It suxs getting old and you start loosing your edge, and its embarrassing when an 8 year old British kid on your team calls you a wanker for not keeping up in the game. Ill bet I can still out shoot him with the real stuff though, and flopping down on the ground is a breeze. Its the getting up part thats getting to be a bit of a challenge. :D
 
Unfortunately, preferring video games over actual experience is not limited to pre-teens.
Click to expand...

Well, that's cause they are in the real world.

Fellas, you'll never get through to any of them if you continue to hold on to the view that video games, and particularly on-line multiplayer games are not real. They very certainly are a real experience because the player is interacting with real people in a controlled environment.

AK103K's description of his experiences are real because both he and his victims:D experienced real emotions, fun, challenge, frustration, satisfaction, there is nothing fake about this.

These kids will resist you if you approach it from the idea that they are living in a fake world cause they are not.

They don't have the reality issue, you do.

Once you understand this, then you won't come across as offering a better experience, or suggesting a real experience over a false one. You will come across as offering a new experience that doesn't threaten the ones they currently favor.

Not better or real, but new and different. Break them in in an environment where a lot is going on, where there is alot of activity. They are used to a high level of stimulation, games pump big sounds and visuals at a furious rate, they'll get bored easy if you go to a quiet range. Get them to an indoor range first.

There is alot to look at, a lot going on, and the bangs and booms have real feeling right there in your insides.

But you will never ever get thru to them if you continue to think that on-line gaming isn't real. It is real, it just has no permanence beyond it's effect on the individual and his wallet.
 
Well said lcpiper, couldn't have said it better myself. Paintball might be a good way to get engaged in the shooting sport, while not quite the same, it does have that competative aspect to it that can later be applied to competitive shooting perhaps?

Personally I'd love to get into competition shooting, if it were not for a limited disposable income at this moment, I'd be at the range every week throwing lead down range
 
lcpiper, it may be a "real" experience, but it is completely unreal with regard to the laws of physics.

So, if we want them to just have a good old time, then there is no problem.

If we actually want them to understand how firearms (or cars, motorcycles, airplanes, boats...) work, and how to operate them effectively, then no, games are not real.

If I took my godson out to a diamond or double diamond run, because he kicked butt at Wii skiing or snowboarding, I would probably get him hurt pretty badly. Ideally, he'd realize he should not try that. I get the impression some gamers actually think they would be able to go out and handle the mountain.

On a more scary note, some of them may think that because they were awesome at some of the James Bond games, then they should be able to hop onto a Triumph Daytona or similar as their first motorcycle...

Full disclosure: I'm a gamer, myself. However, my sword handling and archery skills are nothing at all like those of my Skyrim assassin's; I can't climb walls like Sam Fisher; I am pretty sure I can't jog around non-stop for half an hour at a time, and expect to hit anything with a rifle while doing so, though I could in Ghost Recon or COD.

So, I appreciate the entertainment value of video games. I even appreciate that there can be problem-solving skills development from some games. But the games are NOT real.
 
No one plays a video game cause the game is real in the sense you suggest. They do play them for the very real experience that I was talking about.

Somehow I think you missed the very specific point I was trying to drive home.

You will not get anywhere telling them their games aren't real because they are. Offer them something new and different without threatening what they currently enjoy the most and you have a chance to get them off the couch.
 
lcpiper, the point of this thread was people playing games, and therefor thinking they actually knew how the game weapons worked in reality.

Your argument has nothing to do with the OP's discussion.

Edit: Didn't mean to sound that harsh. Your argument is valid, in terms of trying to get them off the couch; but that is a separate issue (even if I did allude to it)

Second Edit: Then again, maybe you are saying you don't normally see this tendency among gamers (thinking they know more than they do).

I see it fairly often, sometimes on TFL, typically in the DEagle fanbois. (This does not include people who actually own and shoot the big magnum autos, like 44AMP, but rather the guys who ask what we think about the DEagle for CCW...)
 
Last edited:
I started playing video games when I was 4 and airsoft when I was 12 or 13.

I had an awesome replica MP5 that could fire 800 RPM, perfectly to scale, all that stuff. My friends and I would dress in MILSIM gear and run around 40 acres of woods trying to be tactical. Sometimes it worked, sometimes it didn't.

We had more than one debate on the merits of an M16 vs. an AK. We had plenty of caliber war discussions. I thought a .50 BMG was the most accurate thing in the world. I thought there was some kind of "Class 3 license" that everybody had to get if they wanted an automatic weapon and explosives were a no-no.

We didn't know a whole lot back then but it sure got me interested.
 
Edit: Didn't mean to sound that harsh. Your argument is valid, in terms of trying to get them off the couch; but that is a separate issue (even if I did allude to it)
Click to expand...

No problem, and your right. I was just following the discussion down the path. We all know there are people like the guy the OP encountered.
 
As aggravating as some of the COD groupies(double fish burger) are, I know that a couple of my Fraternity Brothers have become shooting buddies because of Call of Duty.

And they've purchased thier own guns, and not all of them are "tactical" either.

I agree with Tom, it isn't a 100% wash, and some good comes of it.

A friend of mine was shooting Pop's M1A at the range, and after struggling to keep it on the paper at 300 yards, he exclaimed that it "was way harder in real life." Appreciative chuckles were had all around.
 
It truly makes you appreciate the amount of training and talent real operatives have when they are able to maintain their groupings within the size of a quarter (Marksmen to be precise).

There are some upros to having folks like this I suppose, if it gets them into the shooting world and sparks a desire to learn more about the shooting sport then by all means I say play away. It's the educating one self that I'd really like these people to really take to heart, we have enough people on our side of the fence that hurts the image of gun owners, don't need anymore than what we already have.
 
To me, it makes you appreciate how damn good those programmers are to develop the games with all of the possible parameters. That said, as MLeake said, it is not reality - but if it helps to get a few into the real world of firearms, then fine. But I have also seen a few at clubs/ranges thinking they were going to do the COD thing for real. They learned quickly.......:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top