Halo 2 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why Bungie is RIGHT
  • Subject: Why Bungie is RIGHT
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: Why Bungie is RIGHT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Bungie is correct in predicting the future of military warfare. In 2552 there will be guns that use bullets, similar to the ones we use today but with new gadgets, etc. Now, in order to know why that is true we must look at the history of the "Gun" and other military weapons.

The first reason for needing to know the history of the gun is to see how much progress we've made since the creation of the first gun. The first "gun" was used in 1259 (a cannon) in defence of a city. gunpowder was invented even further before, as early as 900 A.D., but was first used against their enemies in 1067. now, how far have we advanced? Not much. Most technological breakthroughs since that time have been towards transportation. the cannon was the first gun. then came muskets. then rifles. the cannon was used as late as the civil war and probably even further! the only new true changes, besides changing ammunition shapes and weapon configurations, the gun remains unchanged. shells and warheads are nothing but souped up cannonballs. missiles credit transportation breakthroughs (rocket technology) more than military breakthroughs, for it is more or less a guided cannonball. so, it is logical to assume that in 500 years there won't be THAT many changes to military weaponry, ESPECIALLY infantry weaponry. The Mac Guns are about as advanced as we're going to get 500 years later. But as I stated earlier, Transportation is what has been getting more and more advanced. We went from sailing boats and horses to steamships and trains and cars and plains and now spaceships. all within 1 and a half a century! so space travel as documented in halo is likely to occur 500 years later.

[Edited on 7/12/2004 3:56:23 PM]

  • 07.12.2004 3:05 PM PDT
Subject: Why Humans Still Use Bullets..........................................
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

you bring up a good point why we still use bullets but doesnt mix with the Halo story line were ballistics there all energy, but what the hell would we use except energy man

  • 07.12.2004 3:07 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Master Chief_604
you bring up a good point why we still use bullets but doesnt mix with the Halo story line were ballistics there all energy, but what the hell would we use except energy man


Im sorry but i can't understand your post, can you re-phrase it?

  • 07.12.2004 3:09 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I'm not sure I agree. Breakthroughs in nanotechnology forcasted to occur within the next century would allow man-portable energy storage devices with enough energy density to power directed energy weapons, and refinements in electronics and materials science allowed by nanoscale manipulation of matter could shrink potent antipersonel lasers to assault rifle sizes. This is all in the far future of course, but certainly achievable within a 500 year timeframe.

  • 07.12.2004 3:11 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Because bullet hurt people and can cause dead wich is the wanted result.

[color=black]The one and [/color][color=olive]only[/color][color=black] Captain Obvious
Guru of PC hardware help
[/color]
* [color=000066]Halo CNN 24/24 7/7[/color]
* [color=000066]Little guide to the knowledge of the PC[/color]
* [color=000066]Ultimate Halo 2 guide[/color]
* [color=000066]The Forum Militia[/color]
* [color=000066]Click here only if you realy are an idiot[/color]

[color=olive]AOD-Coylter[/color]
[color=black]Army Of Darkness[/color]

  • 07.12.2004 3:13 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

but there possibly could be better things instead of bullets

  • 07.12.2004 3:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I would have to agree with you OU812. When I was playing Halo, I was confused when we still used bullets 500 years from now. But now that you pointed it out, it makes sense. Also the transportation.

  • 07.12.2004 3:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

You are right man...bullets will be around 500 years from now, and Halo is not far from realistic...that is, if the human race will last another 500 years...I think that some kind of mass destruction or disease or machine takeover will happen in the next 500 years in our world...humans are just too destructive to survive and it kind of sucks...

  • 07.12.2004 3:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Master Chief_604
but there possibly could be better things instead of bullets


bullets are dense and tough, and cheap to make bud, there will never be anything better unless they figure out how to propel water bullets

  • 07.12.2004 3:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I'm not sure I agree. Breakthroughs in nanotechnology forcasted to occur within the next century would allow man-portable energy storage devices with enough energy density to power directed energy weapons, and refinements in electronics and materials science allowed by nanoscale manipulation of matter could shrink potent antipersonel lasers to assault rifle sizes. This is all in the far future of course, but certainly achievable within a 500 year timeframe.

good point, but i doubt that we would have the money to put one of those yippy-cay-yay's in every soldier of the army.

but that's not my core refuting evidence. Remember when we (in the 2000's) were supposed to be living on the moon now and have a space ship in every garage? that's what they forecasted in, like, the 50's. forecasts always predict early growth to keep morale high and to show the "human drive for perfection". Although I realize that 500 years is a long time, but give the current trends, i dont see it happening, ESPECIALLY with all the chaos that we had to endure (the uniting of earth!!!!! and quelling rebelions, etc.)

[Edited on 7/12/2004 3:18:46 PM]

  • 07.12.2004 3:16 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Jedi631
You are right man...bullets will be around 500 years from now, and Halo is not far from realistic...that is, if the human race will last another 500 years...I think that some kind of mass destruction or disease or machine takeover will happen in the next 500 years in our world...humans are just too destructive to survive and it kind of sucks...


"ARE YOU JOHN-117 CONNER?"

"YOU ARE TO LEAD THE WORLD AFTER JUDGEMENT DAY!!!"

  • 07.12.2004 3:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

haha okay maybe not machine takeover, but somebody will fxck us sometime, and we will become extinct

  • 07.12.2004 3:21 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Jedi631
haha okay maybe not machine takeover, but somebody will fxck us sometime, and we will become extinct


I'll tell you what will.........................ALL MIDDLE-EASTERN MALES BETWEEN AGES 16-50 AND PRACTICE THE RELIGION OF ISLAM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • 07.12.2004 3:23 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Water bullets kick ass..

  • 07.12.2004 3:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Cypriss
Water bullets kick ass..


SIGNED, but wouldn't that hydrate the enemy?!?!

  • 07.12.2004 3:25 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Also, I'm not saying that bullets 500 years later will be the same as they are now (as they appear to be in halo), they are in fact more advanced. Because they look "wimpy" or the same as what we have now in halo doesn't mean they are actually wimpy. the armor of the enemy is just so advanced that it makes it look that way. here's an analogy to help you out. say I punched you in the gut and you said it didn't hurt. so i go out to get some brass knuckles. but you, knowing that i was going to get a better method of hurting you, went out and bought a bullet-proof vest. we both up'd the ante, yet the end result remains the same, I couldn't hurt you.

  • 07.12.2004 3:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: OU812
but that's not my core refuting evidence. Remember when we (in the 2000's) were supposed to be living on the moon now and have a space ship in every garage? that's what they forecasted in, like, the 50's. forecasts always predict early growth to keep morale high and to show the "human drive for perfection". Although I realize that 500 years is a long time, but give the current trends, i dont see it happening, ESPECIALLY with all the chaos that we had to endure (the uniting of earth!!!!! and quelling rebelions, etc.)


Fair enough, but keep in mind, human development often far exceeds any forcasts. If you asked computer scientists in the 1950s to forcast future computer development, they'd tell you that by 2004 computers would have the power of a modern graphing calculator and be the size of a washing machine. Further, many of the expectations people have for nanotechnology are founded in real science, rather than the fanciful sci-fi dreams that fueled much of that 1950-1960 era spaceship-in-every-garage belief.

  • 07.12.2004 3:39 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Fnord
Posted by: OU812
but that's not my core refuting evidence. Remember when we (in the 2000's) were supposed to be living on the moon now and have a space ship in every garage? that's what they forecasted in, like, the 50's. forecasts always predict early growth to keep morale high and to show the "human drive for perfection". Although I realize that 500 years is a long time, but give the current trends, i dont see it happening, ESPECIALLY with all the chaos that we had to endure (the uniting of earth!!!!! and quelling rebelions, etc.)


Fair enough, but keep in mind, human development often far exceeds any forcasts. If you asked computer scientists in the 1950s to forcast future computer development, they'd tell you that by 2004 computers would have the power of a modern graphing calculator and be the size of a washing machine. Further, many of the expectations people have for nanotechnology are founded in real science, rather than the fanciful sci-fi dreams that fueled much of that 1950-1960 era spaceship-in-every-garage belief.


But the forecast was inaccurate because of our discovery of new materials that could be applied to computer technology in such a way that we would make a huge jump technologically. Without that discover of new materials the forecast would have been right, or even worse than predicted. That is the only time i can remember when we actually had a technological growth that ended up EXCEEDING forecasted expectations. All other fields of technology have maintained a steady y=x growth pattern rather than their predicted y=x^2 growth pattern.

  • 07.12.2004 3:45 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

discuss

i know there are more opinions on this

  • 07.12.2004 3:55 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: OU812
But the forecast was inaccurate because of our discovery of new materials that could be applied to computer technology in such a way that we would make a huge jump technologically. Without that discover of new materials the forecast would have been right, or even worse than predicted. That is the only time i can remember when we actually had a technological growth that ended up EXCEEDING forecasted expectations. All other fields of technology have maintained a steady y=x growth pattern rather than their predicted y=x^2 growth pattern.


Keep in mind, nanotechnolgy is largely about creating revolutionary new materials that can be applied to nearly all fields in the same way semiconductors were applied to computing. With the precise control over matter that nanotechnolgy can lead to given time, many revolutionary things are possible, including man-portable energy weapons.

  • 07.12.2004 3:58 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Also, with nanotechnology, you could basically build anything you wanted, from scratch, er, from atoms, uh...yea.... Including super-strong alloys for armor and stuff, endless amounts of food for the hungry yadayadayada.

P.S. you people spend way too much time reading.... :P

[Edited on 7/12/2004 4:01:30 PM]

  • 07.12.2004 4:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

i say we won't use bullets in 500 years. Quite simply because lasers are already in dev.

  • 07.12.2004 4:01 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

All the guns in Halo 2 are ahead of their time. The shotgun fires 8 gauge buckshot rounds. The SMG has caseless ammunition. The Battle Rifle has auto scope and the Sniper Rifle fires depleted uranium shells. And the Rocket launcher has rotating cylinders and can home in on all vehicles.

[Edited on 7/12/2004 4:02:35 PM]

  • 07.12.2004 4:02 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Like then name Mulletman. But why do you think we will use lasers, it seems to complicated.

  • 07.12.2004 4:03 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we basically have caseless ammo(not widely used), homing rockets(stinger missile launcher) and I know we damn well have DU rounds... :D

  • 07.12.2004 4:04 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3