• Why the tech of the Halo Universe is a step backward.
    1,885 replies, posted
Worst fucking post in that thread. [quote]The covenants can beat the "2011" humans at 500 feet easily, just give them the focus rifle, which is a sniper rifle, that can burn in only 1 second because they have no shields :)[/quote]
anyways I drew how the MA should be irl since the design is utterly retarded and doesn't fit the description in the books [IMG]http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/6800/48226108.png[/IMG] took out the flashlights since it's really pointless imo
Ehm, if you watch the animations in the game pretty much the whole back end of the gun is for ammo. The magazine is huge already you actually made it smaller. Also, games before books. The books are describing the design in the games not the other way around. Visually you basically ruined the design.
[QUOTE=BmB;27188307]Ehm, if you watch the animations in the game pretty much the whole back end of the gun is for ammo. The magazine is huge already you actually made it smaller.[/QUOTE] uh [IMG]http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20090914185032/halo/images/6/6a/Chief-Marine.jpg[/IMG] magazine size is somewhat like this: [IMG]http://img41.imageshack.us/img41/9496/sizeb.png[/IMG] and pic: [IMG]http://img440.imageshack.us/img440/5453/85218439.png[/IMG] don't forget you're probably referring to how long the bullets are rather than the width (which probably defines how big the magazine appears), which is important when coming to accommodate ammo since I doubt the rifle feeds from a sideways stacked magazine [editline]3rd January 2011[/editline] if you also look at the m14 which also uses 7.62x51mm rounds you'll see they're roughly the same size as the MA series' magazines [IMG]http://www.armyproperty.com/Equipment-Info/Pictures/M14.jpg[/IMG] and the type of magazine that the user above holds about 20 rounds [QUOTE=BmB;27188307]Also, games before books. The books are describing the design in the games not the other way around. Visually you basically ruined the design.[/QUOTE] we were talking about the iron sights and how they perform in the books no? I was providing insight and also voicing my opinion on how the MA rifle would be more practical if it were real life remember, when it comes to weapons: looks<practicability; and imho the games are abysmal in terms of weapon design plausibility
[QUOTE=evilweazel;27187949]Saying all Halo players are like that is like me saying all mass effect players are in it for the Tali romance scene.[/QUOTE] That's also like saying that all SW fans are kiddies that were introduced to the franchise through Clone Wars.
It's not hard to follow the extremely simply lines that defines and epitomizes the design. You broke every single one of those lines for no apparent reason. The extremely tight design principles and pleasing visuals are a huge part of what makes Halo, if you're going to throw that away in the name of practicality you might as well just stop talking about Halo.
[QUOTE=BmB;27188764]It's not hard to follow the extremely simply lines that defines and epitomizes the design. You broke every single one of those lines for no apparent reason. The extremely tight design principles and pleasing visuals are a huge part of what makes Halo, if you're going to throw that away in the name of practicality you might as well just stop talking about Halo.[/QUOTE] That's not the point here, we were discussing the practicability of the rifle rather than visual aesthetics; and if you don't like the design, so be it but keep on topic please
That's exactly the point here we're talking about Halo. You're straying off that topic with your gun nerd thing.
[QUOTE=BmB;27189081]That's exactly the point here we're talking about Halo. You're straying off that topic with your gun nerd thing.[/QUOTE] We were discussing the MA at the moment [editline]3rd January 2011[/editline] on the other hand you were straying off to fantasyland going stating visual aesthetics about the game and whatnot read the topic title
-snip- Late as FUCK
I love you. I really do. Not only is this thread awesome with it's mostly intelligent replies, the thread on Bungie is almost as awesome with it's retarded replies. The sad part is no one argues it correctly.
Ever heard of functional/practical design? The thing about the AR is that it's basically a statement that guns don't have to be ugly. This is also why I enjoy the XM8 so much. Going by this, each part must have a practical function that it does well for a good reason, while looking good and integrating into the design. Without too much if anything in the way of frills and fancy. I don't know where the AR might have it's supposed back up iron sight, but it can't be on the electronics casing. If you analyze that part of the design you will see quickly one thing: Where guns today have scopes and sights and shit, the AR has a computerized display. It has this, because it's a digital gun, and it doesn't need sights. It doesn't have sights because it doesn't need them. That's what the casing says. Then of course the design must follow this, the practical part as well. It must be a good enough gun not to need it for it to make sense. And you could go through this process of epitomizing and practicalizing each part while retaining the design principle that defines the gun. What you can't do is throw together random shit vaguely in the shape in paint and call it an AR.
I can't tell if the people in this thread all enjoy Halo and are trying to have a nice discussion about the game's universe, or, a bunch of people who dislike Halo and came in to hop on the Halo hate bandwagon. You can like Halo and Minecraft at the same time. It's possible.
[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;27180993]There's no real need to paint ships for camouflage since really damn hard to even see another ship from a distance in the first place, and by the time they're close enough to identify you'd probably be blasted by a couple dozen plasma bolts. It would be like painting a missile or airplane blue just so it blends into the sky.[/QUOTE] Which they actually do sometimes....
Ehm, you're probably better off reducing emissions than painting camouflage in space. Presumably active camo can extend to other parts of the EM spectrum than visible as well.
I don't want to shit on this discussion or anything. But apparently from the wikia: The MA5C has concealed iron sights used by Marines and other personnel with the improper equipment to up-link a targeting reticule to the users [URL="http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Heads_Up_Display"]Heads Up Display[/URL] or [URL="http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Neural_Interface"]Neural Interface[/URL]. Which makes sense I think because in the books doesn't it explain the Master Chief having the reticule on his HUD. Not that I'm trying to be a CHIEF RULEZ kind of person.. but I've been reading the books recently and just thought I'd put my 2 cents in. Feel free to point out my mistake though I'm not trying to be Mr. Right here.
Marines do have HUD's though, in their eyepieces and visor helmets. Of course some of them don't and their helmets might fly off or something.
[QUOTE=BmB;27189339]Marines do have HUD's though, in their eyepieces and visor helmets. Of course some of them don't and their helmets might fly off or something.[/QUOTE] Oh I know, I was just trying to back up that point. Wouldn't that solve the whole "it doesn't have sights!" argument?
[QUOTE=CakeMaster7;27163500]Yuuzhan Vong are REAL threats. 13 TRILLION lives were lost as a result of the war against the Yuuzhan Vong.[/QUOTE] Err....According to Wookiepedia, the war had taken 365 TRILLION lives, in the short span of only 4 years. Yuuzhan Vong are dicks
They're also an expanded universe power inflation jackoff fantasy and we shouldn't talk about it. This will happen to Halo eventually. But I hope later rather than sooner.
[QUOTE=BmB;27189242]Ever heard of functional/practical design? The thing about the AR is that it's basically a statement that guns don't have to be ugly. This is also why I enjoy the XM8 so much. Going by this, each part must have a practical function that it does well for a good reason, while looking good and integrating into the design. Without too much if anything in the way of frills and fancy. I don't know where the AR might have it's supposed back up iron sight, but it can't be on the electronics casing. If you analyze that part of the design you will see quickly one thing: Where guns today have scopes and sights and shit, the AR has a computerized display. It has this, because it's a digital gun, and it doesn't need sights. It doesn't have sights because it doesn't need them. That's what the casing says. Then of course the design must follow this, the practical part as well. It must be a good enough gun not to need it for it to make sense. And you could go through this process of epitomizing and practicalizing each part while retaining the design principle that defines the gun. What you can't do is throw together random shit vaguely in the shape in paint and call it an AR.[/QUOTE] Xm8 wasn't serviced for a reason, and if you told weapon designers to make a pretty gun for your army they'd point and laugh Sure if you wanted them to make something practical and good looking they'll take the idea seriously but for government types and soldiers, I'd think the'd jump for something more practical even if it sacrifices aesthetics As for characteristic guns, look at the xm29 oicw; that gun underwent several designs before it became the shape we all recognise; I was pointing out the same for the MA, as the gun does not seem very efficient with its current design as well as not having the visual aesthetics match up with its technical specifications so I did a quick sketch on paint to point out for a more plausible design while retaining the overall silhouette Mind you that the MA overall is a pretty impractical gun that merely shoots at 300 meters with a bullpup configuration along with a pretty giant profile for a gun that shoots at that range and to top it off, it has a giant flashlight when in 2552, none of the soldiers seem to carry a night vision device
Shut up you're not listening to what I'm saying you're just having your gun nerd hardon. Everything I've heard about the XM8 was that it was a very good gun, the reason it wasn't serviced was because replacing perfectly functional guns already in use would be pointlessly expensive. Don't try and twist this into some sort of fuckfaced function over form bullshit. You're not listening to what I'm saying. You're not listening to what I'm saying.
[QUOTE=BmB;27189873]Shut up you're not listening to what I'm saying you're just having your gun nerd hardon. Everything I've heard about the XM8 was that it was a very good gun, the reason it wasn't serviced was because replacing perfectly functional guns already in use would be pointlessly expensive. Don't try and twist this into some sort of fuckfaced function over form bullshit. You're not listening to what I'm saying. You're not listening to what I'm saying.[/QUOTE] Ok then simplify your point because this is what I got: -Guns can be cool looking as well as retaining practicability -You drawing sucks; looks nothing like the original AR ok? I replied with: -no, users will most likely choose practicability over aesthetics and sadly enough, practicability does not always mean aesthetics -well ok then, move along, I merely drew it so it is more plausible based on real life designs If I'm wrong then correct me; I'd like so see where you're getting at. If I'm wrong as well then reply in a more mature manner because based on your last retort I see, "BLAHBLAHBLAH YOU'RE WRONG NOT LISTENING BLAHBLAH" [editline]3rd January 2011[/editline] Also, why the fuck does everyone in halo carry a flashlight and not night vision
Marines wouldn't have that much use for a nightvision device in boarding action, but otherwise yeah. ODST and Spartans have NV in their helmets though.
This thread is so funny now.
I like how Kill001 doesn't seem to read anything BmB is saying and just makes stuff up and pretends he's responding to it.
[QUOTE=Zezibesh;27190257]Marines wouldn't have that much use for a nightvision device in boarding action, but otherwise yeah. ODST and Spartans have NV in their helmets though.[/QUOTE] Its kinda odd how modern militaries arm their soldiers with night vision but in halo the troops lack their version of night vision or visr which would be great for boarding also didn't the book say something about spartans being able to see in the dark, what happpened to that
[QUOTE=OTZ;27191126]Its kinda odd how modern militaries arm their soldiers with night vision but in halo the troops lack their version of night vision or visr which would be great for boarding also didn't the book say something about spartans being able to see in the dark, what happpened to that[/QUOTE] They can see better in the dark than average humans, but that doesn't mean night vision doesn't help.
[QUOTE=Alan Ninja!;27160660]It has to be manufactured and distributed. I'm pretty sure they don't keep outlawed weapons around for hundreds of years.[/QUOTE] napalms fairly simple to make... Styrofoam +gasoline= napalm(sorta)
[quote]Something tells me we'd still lose a ground war with them.[/quote] [quote]halo isn't CoD[/quote] [quote]Read the books. There is no way we would survive. Heck a needle from a needler or one plasma rifle round would kill a normal soldier. A few elites would probably melt a tank with their plasma rifles.[/quote] [quote]Then they glass our a$$ and we lose[/quote] [quote]the Covenant would eventually win... you know why? The Covenant are a single group formed by many aliens and they're troops don't fight for money, so the covenant don't have to pay the army anything... unlike humans Also the Covenant outnumber humans... Besides... the Covies have ARMOUR LOCK!!![/quote] These guys are hilarious...
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.