The tag alias #60668 laser_gun -> raygun is pending approval.

Reason: This is conceptually part of topic #36798, but non-BURs don't have a topic field and laser_gun has an implication.

The same concept is needlessly split between two different tags. Rayguns aren't real, so there isn't even any objective standard by which to start drawing lines between different types.

The only question I have is if it would be worth having separate tags for the type of sci-fi weapon which fires in a continuous beam and the type which fires in short, observably moving pulses. This doesn't affect the alias, though, as both tags are a mix of both types, and in both cases the vast majority of weapons depicted are not currently firing.

wat8548 said:
The only question I have is if it would be worth having separate tags for the type of sci-fi weapon which fires in a continuous beam and the type which fires in short, observably moving pulses. This doesn't affect the alias, though, as both tags are a mix of both types, and in both cases the vast majority of weapons depicted are not currently firing.

I would say no. I think the distinction isn't worth having, especially since the same rayguns could conceivably fire both types of blasts on the same setting depending upon what style the artist(s) chooses to depict it with.

I think I would flip the alias just because (imo) laser_gun is a more descriptive and universal name than raygun, but yes I fully agree with aliasing them together

cloudpie said:
I think I would flip the alias just because (imo) laser_gun is a more descriptive and universal name than raygun, but yes I fully agree with aliasing them together

I can see your point, but raygun would also include blasters of all sorts rather than just those that shoot lasers and laser-like effects. Rayguns include things like phasers, disruptors, plasma weapons, even masers (lasers except using microwaves and other EM wavelengths in that end of the spectrum), basically any energy projectile weapon regardless of what sort of energy it spits out.

clawstripe said:
basically any energy projectile weapon regardless of what sort of energy it spits out.

There's an energy_weapon tag. Would it be worth maybe setting up a set of implications with that?

For that matter, I'm seeing a few different related energy_* tags. Energy_sword, energy_blade, energy_dagger, energy_weapons, and then there's an energy_shield that could probably imply shield... Granted, none of these are ranged, but still. I wouldn't be surprised if there's more similar tags out there, too. This is also not getting into whether or not plasma weaponry is considered as simply "energy weapons" for the purposes of tagging images, since there's tags for that, too.

vulkalu said:
This is also not getting into whether or not plasma weaponry is considered as simply "energy weapons" for the purposes of tagging images, since there's tags for that, too.

According to the very earliest use of the tag plasma_blaster, one user was attempting to force it to refer specifically to a type of gun found in Lilo and Stitch, with plasma_rifle reserved for a weapon from Halo. There's also a wiki page for plasma_gun, apparently intended to act as the parent of those two tags (but without any actual implications set up). So it's the same situation as phaser, tagging a specific identifiable design of weapon without reference to its ostensible purpose, which is the exact opposite to the generic raygun and laser_gun tags.

That said, both contain multiple images of generic guns that don't reference either franchise, and I certainly think the tag names are too generic to intuitively serve their stated purpose. This is exactly the kind of thing we use suffixes for. (Also, kinda unfair that Doom doesn't get its own tag despite predating both of them.)

In terms of tagging, both ray_gun and raygun are almost universally interpreted as a specific style of sci-fi "gun" — a "cartoonish" "silly" "retrofuturistic" looking pistol (raygun never seems to apply to two-handed devices), with bright colours, tubes, knobs, antennae, fins and other embellishments. Also based off the search results, raygun often aren't laser guns at all, they're pistol shaped devices that shoot rings or rays that shrink, grow, expand, transform, or freeze characters.

post #3146139 post #3737281 post #2842910 post #2901799 post #3772123

On the other hand, laser_gun has a far broader interpretation, any kind of beam weapon, regardless of size, shape or design. They often resemble actual guns, or at least, have more grounded designs. As far as I can tell, there's no interpretation by users that a laser gun is meant to do anything besides kill, burn, or stun an enemy.

Some "ray guns" are tagged under laser_gun but I couldn't find any examples under ray_gun or raygun that look like any of the laser guns below. I don't think someone tagging or looking for a character carrying these types of weapons would think "raygun" before "laser gun".

post #1712918 post #2751268 post #3479688 post #2266831

It's not just a quirk of this site either, pop culture has made the terms distinct, "ray gun" is something out of a 50s pulp sci-fi comic, "laser gun" is (usually) a sci-fi weapon that takes inspiration from real-life firearms (check out the Google image search results for both "ray gun" and "laser gun")

I think there's value in keeping them separate, raygun is a handy shorthand for a sci-fi gun that is more cartoony or retrofuturistic in style, and can have fantastical effects. Laser gun is useful for any kind of hand-held energy-beam weapon.

maplebytes said:
I think there's value in keeping them separate, raygun is a handy shorthand for a sci-fi gun that is more cartoony or retrofuturistic in style, and can have fantastical effects. Laser gun is useful for any kind of hand-held energy-beam weapon.

If you want to keep the "realistic" rayguns separate from the "cartoony" ones, they'll need a less ambiguous tag name. See my comments about "plasma guns" above.

Bear in mind that "cartoony" and "realistic" content have equal status on this site, so you will need a reliable, objective way to distinguish the two of them at all times. It sounds like a recipe for grey areas to me.

wat8548 said:
Bear in mind that "cartoony" and "realistic" content have equal status on this site, so you will need a reliable, objective way to distinguish the two of them at all times. It sounds like a recipe for grey areas to me.

Don't get me started on the toony tag, which some people seem to think means 'not photorealistic' and applies it to regular ass drawings, instead of the cartoony character styles the name comes from.