×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Real-Life Equivalents of Video Game Weapons

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the just-give-me-a-rocket-launcher dept.

Games 137

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.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

137 comments

holy shit (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31227084)

i want a portal gun

I'll just wait for Real-Life BFG9000 ... (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31227094)

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

Re:I'll just wait for Real-Life BFG9000 ... (1)

purpledinoz (573045) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227380)

I wonder if it would be ever as good as it is in Doom, where you can shoot the wall directly in front of you, and all the enemies in your field of view immediately dies.

Re:I'll just wait for Real-Life BFG9000 ... (1)

KlaymenDK (713149) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228260)

Wasn't it, "and all the enemies that have that wall in their field of view immediately dies"?

I seem to recall surviving that weapon by quickly turning away and back again at strategic moments. But of course, that was a long time ago and my mind has begun to fade...

Re:I'll just wait for Real-Life BFG9000 ... (2, Informative)

Ant P. (974313) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228534)

Actually it's more like "all the enemies in the direction you were facing when you fired it from the position you're standing when it hits".

The trick there is you can fire it down a long corridor in one direction, run off the opposite way so someone gives chase, and when it hits the wall the guy behind you gets blown to bits. Similarly you can survive it completely unhurt by getting on the opposite side of whoever fired it - as long as you know which way they fired.

Not really something you can build in real life.

Re:I'll just wait for Real-Life BFG9000 ... (1)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | more than 4 years ago | (#31232274)

Actually it's more like "all the enemies in the direction you were facing when you fired it from the position you're standing when it hits".

Yep. A picture [gamers.org] for illustrative purposes. (From the BFG FAQ [gamers.org] .)

Not really something you can build in real life.

Alas, life does not let us shortcut the laws of physics with a code patch.:)

Re:I'll just wait for Real-Life BFG9000 ... (1)

buruonbrails (1247370) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227712)

As for me, I'm still waiting for real-life Gauss rifle (along with Advanced Power Armor).

Crowbar (5, Funny)

lul_wat (1623489) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227108)

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

Re:Crowbar (1)

nitroyogi (1471601) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227170)

And I always wanted the Quake gauntlet!

Re:Crowbar (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31227248)

humiliation!

Re:Crowbar (1)

Jarik C-Bol (894741) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228608)

Quake Gauntlet is a circular saw with a lot of extension cords, and the guard removed. (or one of those battery powered ones, but they don't last long enough to win a deathmatch with)

Re:Crowbar (1)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230554)

Quake Gauntlet is a circular saw with a lot of extension cords, and the guard removed. (or one of those battery powered ones, but they don't last long enough to win a deathmatch with)

... you've tried it?

Re:Crowbar (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31227198)

Not sure, but I think a Rocket Crowbar might be better.

Raccoon Suit (4, Funny)

DavidD_CA (750156) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227218)

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.

Re:Raccoon Suit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31229254)

We already have a vicious beaver suit. Hmm. I never thought I would use the words "vicious" and "beaver" in the same sentence. Thanks for giving me that opportunity!

Re:Raccoon Suit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31232362)

Raccoon suit has nothing on our Beaver Skin. And once you slap snow-shoes on it... well, bring it on.

Ha! Captcha == Contest

Re:Crowbar (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31227226)

Speaking of halflife, is anyone still waiting for the last 'episode' and most likely having to solve another simple see-saw fulcrum puzzle? Is that all it will take for halflife to survive in the current decade?

Re:Crowbar (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31227842)

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

crowbar IS a RL tool, moron

Re:Crowbar (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227882)

Would you really want a crowbar? Without a rubber handle, it would hurt your hands like hell when smashing someone's head in.

Maybe a claw hammer would be better? You'd have a two-part choice on damage too.

Me? I just prefer running people over in my car. And why is it called 'running over'? Most of the time they bounce off the bonnet.

Re:Crowbar (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31230152)

Who uses a crowbar? Real men use chainsaws.....

In other words... (0, Offtopic)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227152)

slow game news day.

Re:In other words... (1)

selven (1556643) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227894)

I disagree, this stuff is actually interesting. The power suit alone would make a good article, we also get plasma cutters, lasers and all sorts of interesting tech being developed. I thought this stuff is what Slashdot was supposed to be all about?

Wishlist: (1)

dushkin (965522) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227192)

* Frostmourn, hoooo!
* BFG!
* FatBoy from Fallout 3 :D
* The slime shooter from unreal. It's just cool.

Re:Wishlist: (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227870)

Well, if we're wandering into fantasy... the sword to have is Greyswandir — if you can get your hands on the jewel of judgement, you can scribe a whole new reality. And it sheds all types of sorcery like water.
I think it's pretty clear that one of the most badass sci-fi weapons is Reason... but it needs some fancier heat-dissipation technology.
Finally, the Puppeteer laser weapons (ala Ringworld) are way up there. All they need is a tunable laser to be the shiznit.

Re:Wishlist: (1)

Trent Hawkins (1093109) | more than 4 years ago | (#31229174)

Well, Fat Boy is more or less real. The nuke exists and it's about the size as in the game, though the bang is bigger. However in reality they figured that the dangers of launching a nuke point blank would exceed the benefits and decided to make it artillery launched [youtube.com] .

Portal gun (1)

V2Blast (893608) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227294)

Where's my portal gun? I thought we were supposed to be living in the future.

Re:Portal gun (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31227804)

You'll need to wait for the future of the future for that to happen.

Re:Portal gun (1)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230698)

Where's my portal gun? I thought we were supposed to be living in the future.

Sorry, you'll have to get in line behind Avery Brooks, who's STILL waiting for his flying car.

You can reload an M1 Garand mid-clip (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31227406)

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 [youtube.com]

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 (1)

Calinous (985536) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227556)

The M1 Garand could be reloaded before its clip was empty - but I think shooting the rest of the bullets and putting a new clip was faster.

Re:You can reload an M1 Garand mid-clip (2, Insightful)

lyinhart (1352173) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228116)

The article doesn't features game with actual weapons like Call of Duty, it instead features weapons that don't actually exist yet as they are portrayed in games. I hope someone else does a comparison with how weapons work in Modern Warfare 2 with their real-life counterparts, kind of like how Top Gear did comparisons with Gran Turismo and real life cars.

Re:You can reload an M1 Garand mid-clip (4, Insightful)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228326)

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.

Re:You can reload an M1 Garand mid-clip (1)

Moraelin (679338) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228814)

Clips are different from box magazines. I don't think that extracting the left-over rounds from a Garand clip would be that unrealistic a fuss.

A railgun will certainly get the job done... (5, Interesting)

Genda (560240) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227414)

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... (2, Informative)

dintech (998802) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227526)

It's fascinating to hear these kinds of war story. Thanks very much.

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31227588)

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.

Bullshit. 20 miles/sec is fast, but it is many orders of magnitude less than that which is required to initiate fusion on impact. To have a reasonable fusion reaction we are talking about 100s of millions of K (or higher if you don't have a 50/50 mixture of deuterium and tritium).

To put 20 miles/sec into context, the Earth's orbital velocity is about 30 km/s. Asteroids and other objects in our System have impacts at much higher speeds. Fusion isn't observed.

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done... (5, Interesting)

Genda (560240) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228288)

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... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31228742)

All you had to do, is do a Google search on "railguns and fussion",

... and you'd get "Did you mean, railguns and fusion? Search for railguns and fusion."

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done... (0)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228930)

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.

Uh uh, would you kindly direct us to any reliable source? Meteorite-induced nuclear reaction having been observed in recent past? I would very much like to know about it.

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done... (5, Funny)

westcoast philly (991705) | more than 4 years ago | (#31229702)

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... (5, Funny)

lul_wat (1623489) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230002)

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.

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done... (1)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227664)

Your search - "really exciting industrial accidents" - did not match any documents. [google.com]

Damn! I thought I was really on to something there. Boo...

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done... (1)

stewhites (1747718) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227918)

If you click on the above link, one of the search results is this very page! Bizarre portal action? I almost feel if i looked at my puter, i could see the back of my own head!

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done... (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31227754)

That is pure awesome.

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done... (-1, Offtopic)

zippthorne (748122) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228078)

Calculated by who, the screenwriters for the movie, Eraser?

Re:A railgun will certainly get the job done... (3, Insightful)

Rich0 (548339) | more than 4 years ago | (#31229942)

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.

Screw guns from video games (4, Funny)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227464)

I want a bowel disrupter!

Re:Screw guns from video games (4, Funny)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227854)

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 (4, Informative)

GigaplexNZ (1233886) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228156)

You mean like the Orgasmo Ray from the movie Orgasmo?

Re:Screw guns from video games (0, Flamebait)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230310)

Hm. Never heard of that movie [wikipedia.org] . Please don't assume everyone on the planet watches the same media that you do.

Re:Screw guns from video games (1)

Cabriel (803429) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231800)

Never assume he's being malicious. In his one sentence, he gives you the weapon name and the place to find it. That's the very definition of informative.

Re:Screw guns from video games (1)

dunkelfalke (91624) | more than 4 years ago | (#31229146)

That will cause a sharp rise of suicides.

Re:Screw guns from video games (1)

Silmandil Quirpon (1487025) | more than 4 years ago | (#31229536)

That will cause a sharp rise of suicides.

Sure people will shoot themselves, but they won't die, just experience la petite mort.

(Well, except for the people that rig it up to auto-fire.)

Re:Screw guns from video games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31229246)

...single women walking through the campus at night, broadcast in the general direction of motorists passing by on the interstate, your ex in her bedroom from the tree outside her window...

Re:Screw guns from video games (1)

idontgno (624372) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230258)

This [technovelgy.com]

Niven is usually classified as a Hard SF author, but he does love investigating the social aspects of his future tech. In this case, an interesting piece of triva is that in the Known Space continuity, pranking someone by hitting them with a tasp is colloquially known as "making someone's day".

Also in the milieu is the very real prospect of stimulation addiction, even with the "hardwired version" [technovelgy.com] of the tasp.

Re:Screw guns from video games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31228856)

I want a bowel disrupter!

Try White Castle. Two or three cheeseburgers should do it.

I know it's old news, but... (2, Interesting)

interactive_civilian (205158) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227488)

...those Japanese robotic/cyborg exoskeletons are AWESOME! And, they are only going to get more awesome from here on out! Mjolnir armor, here we come!

Even without the super-soldier aspect, the super-rescue-worker aspect is mind-boggling, not to mention the super-dock-worker. Alien queens better look out!

Re:I know it's old news, but... (1)

drinkypoo (153816) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228504)

I hadn't bothered to watch the video for the powered armor before, but WOW. We have man-wearable armor today which can stop a .50 caliber round... not a .50 AP round to be fair, but hey, that's a matter of time. The problem is that it makes you about as agile as a one-legged bear. Make it support itself and maybe just double the strength of the wearer, and it will have some actual utility. Helicopters have been relegated to support roles (remember the canning of the Comanche project?) because a man with a rocket launcher can blow one up. Powered armor would enable a much more powerful version of a man with a rocket launcher. Perhaps as power sources continue to shrink, maybe even a man with a lightning gun.

Re:I know it's old news, but... (1)

GooberToo (74388) | more than 4 years ago | (#31229810)

Helicopters have been relegated to support roles (remember the canning of the Comanche project?) because a man with a rocket launcher can blow one up.

Nothing could be farther from the truth. Its true many helicopters function in a support role, but this has always been true. However, if you look at recent major engagements, helicopters have served on the front lines, often during initial insertions, engagements, or major offensives, whereby they absolutely were not serving support roles. For example, Apaches took out many SAM and radar sites before stealth bombers and fighters began their assaults. So to say, "helicopters have been relegated to support roles", is completely false. Apaches frequently fire the first rounds in new conflicts; and not as a support role.

And FYI, the Comanche program was canceled because it was way over budget, was not delivering its project goals, and it was believed the Apache platform could be retrofitted to address the lion share of the Comanche program objectives. Furthermore, with the fall of the Soviet Union, the need for the Comanche has been significantly questioned.

Furthermore, Apaches are relatively hard to shoot down, having taken direct hits from RPGs and flown home, and in general helicopters are hard targets when they are properly flown. The problem with most well known shoot downs are that idiot higher ups decided that helicopters should be flown low, slow, and forced to become highly visible targets such that they can be an ideal, easy target rather than the hard target they generally are. What you're describing is largely an idiocy problem which is pervasive within the military rather than an equipment issue. My understanding is some demotions have taken place and flight profiles have significantly changed.

The latest Apaches are capable of both radar and heat seeker missile counter measures. Extremely few are willing to engage any troops when Apaches are visible or even if they have been recently observed within an area. Areas where Apaches commonly patrol have some of the lowest IED rates in country. In Iraq and Afghanistan, Apaches have monikers such as "Demon Night Sharks" and everyone is scared shit-less of them. They can engage targets with their 30mm cannon [photobucket.com] well beyond the range at which they can be heard or observed. And its cannon is the least lethal weapon it carries. As scary as the Apache is, some of the technology it carries is basically 20 years old - even in the most common Longbow variant. As is, the Apache has few rivals on the battlefield and even tank crews, operating modern tanks with the latest armor, will openly tell you they're scared shit-less of them and their kind - even when they don't have missiles and/or rockets.

We have man-wearable armor today which can stop a .50 caliber round... not a .50 AP round to be fair,

I'm actually not aware of any such armors, but ignoring that, any body armor capable of stopping a NATO .50 BMG round is still going to kill the wearer in a single shot. The blunt force trauma which would be transferred from these projectiles is huge. To prevent that transfer of force requires some type of rigid frame which does not come in contact with its wearer - which means you're no longer talking about body armor. Right now, about the most effective body armor available is Dragon Skin and a ball .50 BMG will cut through it like butter. Being hit by a .50 BMG round normally results in body parts explosively flying in various directions. It has a lots and lots of energy. And Dragon Skin is way more effective than what is actually issued to troops right now. In fact, many actually spend their own money to obtain it despite the fact the military has effectively banned the armor because of political back door money deals. Simply put, no body armor is even close to stopping .50 BMG rounds.

To put this into perspective, take a look at this [50bmgrifles.net] . The round second from the right is what is shot from an M16, and it slices though body armor issued to police like its not there. The round one to its left is what is fired from an AK47. As you continue to progress further and further left, you'll find body armors have progressively more difficulty dealing with its energy. By the time you reach the .50 BMG, the round won't even know the body armor was there. Think about, the standard ball .50 BMG is designed to penetrate light vehicle armor, brick, heavy foliage, small trees, etc... And keep in mind, ball ammo is the general purpose round.

Re:I know it's old news, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31230508)

... just reading about this is hot.

Damn.

Re:I know it's old news, but... (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31231726)

Great post... right up to the part about "bodies exploding" from being hit by .50 BMG. This fantasy used to focus on .223 (hit in the hand and the whole arm blew off; hit in the hand and the bullet ricocheted up the arm and pierced the heart, etc. ad nauseum).

Don't get me wrong, the .50 BMG has *far* more kinetic energy than .223, .308, etc. But apply a bit of logic to what you wrote. "By the time you reach the .50 BMG, the round won't even know the body armor was there." True, it has extreme penetration. Think about that for a minute. However much armor it can penetrate, it can penetrate far more tissue or even bone. Still continuing the thought experiment note that it is not depositing much of its energy to do so. If it did, it would not continue to penetrate.

Or, do a simple calculation for a perfectly elastic collision with a 75kg target and see how little it actually moves the target. Hollywood notwithstanding firearms don't knock people around and wouldn't even if they transferred all energy.

I don't have citations handy, but in the 80s or early 90s one of the gun magazines ran a series on ballistics in tissue with *real* data, not pulling shit out of the ass. The *real* data doesn't support some common beliefs, such as the *real* effect of .45 ACP (which basically penetrates well with a shallow wound cavity around the wound channel). 7.62mm short has some interesting ballistics (double tumble, penetration path in tissue is not straight) that wouldn't normally come into play (it goes through too fast). I've got the magazines, just don't remember the name.

Re:I know it's old news, but... (1)

pckl300 (1525891) | more than 4 years ago | (#31229096)

Can the exoskeletons be used on Ninja Warrior to make for a super-gas-station-clerk?

I own a Saiga-12... (1)

spywhere (824072) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227572)

...so I'm really getting a kick out of these comments.
Saiga-12 [giantbomb.com]

Re:I own a Saiga-12... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31227840)

In what way is your owning of a Saiga going to make a difference?

Saigas are nothing special.

what's with (1)

AlgorithMan (937244) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227630)

what's with real-life shrink-ray, freeze-gun and devastator? or at least jetpack or holoduke!? what are they waiting for to develop these? christmas?

Re:what's with (1)

Ihmhi (1206036) | more than 4 years ago | (#31230364)

Freeze gun: tank, host, liquid nitrogen. Damn near freezes on contact.

Jetpacks have been done. they're just loud and inefficient.

And if the Devastator you're talking about is the mini nuke, then let me introduce you to the Davy Crockett [wikipedia.org] .

FGMP15 FTW (2, Interesting)

mjwalshe (1680392) | more than 4 years ago | (#31227948)

and the concept of a Jump Commado from traveller still the most OTT unit ever put on paper.

Don't need BFG, just want Quake Grenade Launcher (1)

aunchaki (94514) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228142)

Plasma guns, railguns, lighning guns, supersuits. Meh...

I want a grenade launcher that'll let me bounce grenades around corners and off floors. My all-time favorite FPS weapon.

Eh, plasma guns and lasers are cool 'n all (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31228328)

but what I really want is a hookshot. It would make parkour even more awesome.

Medipack (4, Insightful)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228414)

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 (1)

Tibia1 (1615959) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228586)

Want to know why medpacks are the same in every game? Because man is more creative when it comes to destruction. Or at least men who play video games are.

Re:Medipack (3, Funny)

Mashdar (876825) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228688)

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

Re:Medipack (3, Interesting)

NewKidInTown (888648) | more than 4 years ago | (#31231666)

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.

Re:Medipack (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31228876)

You should see what they are issuing out to the military these days in terms of med-packs. Not as cool as video game ones, but pretty amazing all the same. QuickClot being one of the new toys that has been saving alot of lives.

In terms of "real" medi-packs Left4Dead is probably more "real" than any other game out there, but its still definitely fantasy.

An old game I used to play called Jagged Alliance was much more so. It was a turn based tactical squad game. You had damage, but different types. The more damage you took the worse your squad performed, but also they could go into shock and pass out instead of running around at full speed with 1% health. You also had bleeding which had to be be stopped with bandages. Massive amounts of damage couldn't be insta-healed in the action and had to wait for down time to rest and heal up, which effectively put a character out of the fight and forced you to either have to guard them or let them die. Guarding them took more members of your team out of the fight, and letting them die would cause you to lose your investment of time and money, as well as other member of the squad being very unhappy about it.

I think they have a similar system in the game Stalker as well as America's army (bleeding and bandages).

What about Borderlands? (3, Interesting)

protodevilin (1304731) | more than 4 years ago | (#31228670)

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 about (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31229824)

What about the cerebral bore?

*pop*

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...