Arqade is a question and answer site for passionate videogamers on all platforms. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Ok, so Black Mesa and Aperture Science were competing to discover and develop portal technology along with getting government funds. This "competition rush" caused the Black Mesa Incident and the Borealis accident. So, my question is: How could Black Mesa and Aperture Science be in this competition if Aperture Science had clearly already invented portal technology? In Portal 2, when you are testing with Cave Johnson, there is a poster on the wall which shows the previous version of the portal gun.

Clearly, Aperture Science had functioning portal technology back in the 60's. Why would Black Mesa still be trying to create portals in the 21st century if the technology had already existed?

share|improve this question

closed as primarily opinion-based by GnomeSlice, 3ventic, Cloudy Music, Frank, Blem Apr 23 '14 at 2:36

Many good questions generate some degree of opinion based on expert experience, but answers to this question will tend to be almost entirely based on opinions, rather than facts, references, or specific expertise.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

It might just be that Aperture Science' defintion of "functioning portal technology" was not actually sufficient for what the competition rush. They tend to make ... interesting technology. – Joachim Sauer Nov 27 '11 at 21:27
@JoachimSauer Fair enough. But it had to be functioning enough that a person could "safely" get from one place to another because (as is stated in the poster) the portal gun was required to solve the tests. – m.n.wiser Nov 27 '11 at 21:33
@ver If Black Mesa already had portal technology, then they wouldn't have still been experimenting with the basic portal concepts. Also, in Half-Life 2, portal technology is still being experimented with by both the Combine and the Rebels. You can tell they clearly do not have it working because the Rebels' "teleporter" doesn't send you where you should go and the Combine's "teleporter" sends you slightly to the future. – m.n.wiser Nov 27 '11 at 21:56
@m.n.wiser True, I forgot much about that, it's been a while. But IIRC, those teleporters were long-distance ones, whereas Aperture only takes you from one end of the room to the other. That may be the key difference. – ver Nov 27 '11 at 22:04
@ver: <spoiler>at the end of Portal 2 you see the Aperture portal gun going significantly further than just the end of the room</spoiler> – Joachim Sauer Nov 28 '11 at 7:05

While it's true that the Aperture Science Quantum Tunneling Device prototype and its subsequent models are capable of opening a portal from one place to another, the size of objects transported through such portals are severely limited. Furthermore, while it's believed that the "modern" version of the ASHPD (Aperture Science Handheld Portal Device) has a more-or-less infinite range, it's uncertain whether the earlier versions could boast the same. Finally: Aperture portals have to be placed using unimpeded line-of-sight from the portal device on an acceptable surface. As Black Mesa's teleportation technology can handle much larger objects over much longer distances and to destinations that have never before been reached, it's not surprising that the competition for government money was so fierce, despite Aperture's head start.

share|improve this answer

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.