{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
6/23/2012 10:28:34 PM
229
Does anyone else refuse to accept the Halo:Reach story as canon?
I remember I first read Eric Nylund's The Fall of Reach when I was about 7. I remember being in love with that story, even though I didn't even entirely understand a lot of it. Since then I have read the book COUNTLESS times. Now I can recognize that the writing style and general mechanics aren't all that impressive, and some parts that could be amazing with more details and elaboration, but the story itself is amazing. When Halo Reach came out, the entire battle is on a much smaller scale, and simply doesn't feel as good. I understand that Nylund's version wouldn't make for much of a campaign, but at least the story is excellent. The Reach campaign just moves around too much and I can't seem to get myself to enjoy it.
I have heard that the events of a video game override books in terms of what is canon, but I can't bring myself to accept the game's story. Does anyone else feel this way?
[Edited on 06.23.2012 2:28 PM PDT]
-
Sure, but I think of Halo: Reach as an alternate universe.
-
You are free to choose what you want. But that's still like believing that water, earth, wind, and fire are still elements when they are not. Pick and chose your canon, but it will not be the real canon. The real canon includes all the games. Discard one, and your canon is broken and incomplete. Also 343i is made up of huge Halo fans like ourselves. Personally I like the story of Halo 4, or at least what they are doing with Chief. Chief was a badass but I felt like he WAS the suit of armour, not a [i]man[/i] inside the suit. Personally, how happy would you be with no more Halo forever? I'd rather have some Halo than no Halo. Maybe not a trilogy like 343i did but they could have explored some loose ends, like Gamma Company or Grey Team. Again let me state this. We have NO say in what is and isn't canon. That's like trying to say that the Hobbit isn't canon to the Lord of the Rings universe because you don't like it. It clearly is. [Edited on 07.18.2012 11:53 AM PDT]
-
And what about what I've chosen to consider as canon? I´m a huge bungie and halo fan but it should have ended with their creators, now I'm just seeing everywhere a Bungie-halo wannabe with the whole purpose of selling it's name and not being what I loved for so many years. May not be an official canon but I chose to believe that halo ended with reach. Is it legal?
-
Halo Reach, and Halo Wars for that matter, are canon. Despite what we may like or dislike, Bungie (and now 343i) decide what canon is. Also, I believe it was stated that game canon > book canon except for gameplay mechanics I believe (e.g. Superheated plasma in reality could melt human flesh). We have no say in what is and isn't canon.
-
What?? No way, I totally consider halo reach as canon, though halo 4 isn't going to be on my list, halo is bungie, period.
-
No. Why should I? game canon > book canon and when MS just lets Nylund write what he wants then it's no surprise that Bungie doesn't care what he wrote. [Edited on 07.18.2012 4:16 AM PDT]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Madmaxepic perhaps even had a time limit where the Covenant ships would actually glass you if you were to slow.[/quote][url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD2mGq6GD68]With Liberty, anything's possible[/url] (not my video but it's relevant). Anyways, that'd be great as long as it's not bs punishment like H3's hog run (you get out to visit the Final Grunt and stay with him, you eventually get killed off by the game instead of being stranded) or killing civilians on Exodus (even if it's a damn accident, the game will still punish you).
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Cmdr DaeFaron Personally, I felt one of Reach's best mission sets was Exodus-New Alexandria. Parts could be improved (Like the triage station... with zero civilian doctors or UNSC medics helping the wounded), but overall I enjoyed the feeling they put out.[/quote]I agree, I liked these two levels. Although they could have been more epic. There probably should have been more civilians, more variety in their designs, and perhaps a few that were actually armed. As for New Alexandria, the level could have been more explosive, perhaps even had a time limit where the Covenant ships would actually glass you if you were to slow. That would have been awesome to watch, just for fun. Overall, there should have been more levels with Reach being utterly melted by Covenant ships. [quote]At the same time, the book didn't portray the ground forces of Reach to be anything like how a military stronghold world would be. That meaning, competent, prepared, or even being there in great number.[/quote]Yeah, it would have been cooler with tons of marines and tanks and stuff. The whole thing could have been so much more intense.
-
So what did you enjoy about past Halo games/stories?
-
I accept that it is canon. I just think it is severely crap. Reach along with more new material has brought me to the breaking point of disconnecting with the Halo Franchise from a canon perspective from any point onwards. The story can just go -blam!- itself. Yes, I get that Greg Bear works are great blah blah blah. But that's not why I read about the Halo Universe, played halo nor enjoyed Halo. This is something different and something new, which is great and refreshing but it's just Halo on the cover not the 01-08 Halo I enjoyed. Abandon ship.
-
I think these notions that "Companies don't control what's canon" are ridiculous. Of course they determine what is definitively canon; [i]they're the ones who wrote it.[/i] It would be absolute chaos if we had every pisant fanatic and fan defining their own canons, and the storyline as we know it would likely dissolve.
-
So if 343i has fixed everything and added things to fill the holes and they (who now own Halo) say it is canon how is it not?
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Cheeto666 I love Reach's story. Go ahead, try me. Bring up anything you want that you think cannot fit within both series' of events, aside from the dates, and I'll logically make it work with both stories. They don't have to conflict. People are just butthurt that Bungie didn't make a game based entirely on the novel, which is what everyone wanted, expected, and didn't get. That's the real reason behind the hatred for Halo: Reach. It has nothing to do with either story, and more to do with the community throwing a hissy fit over not getting the story they wanted.[/quote] ... Here we go again ... Really? There are no contradictions whatsoever, no change in theme at all? Of coarse you have an explanation for everything; it is always possible to find some kind of excuse. That's exactly what 343i have been doing with Data Drops, they've tried to explain things, fix plot holes, by adding new information that fills us in on what [i]actually[/i] happened. So in a sense, yes, you're right, there aren't any contradictions nor plot holes whatsoever, cause if there are, all we'll have to do is find some far-fetched reason for it to work. There is always something one can resort to. No fictions ever have had any plot holes nor have they ever contradicted anything within itself. You loved Reaches story, therefore you see no wrong with it. I couldn't care less for it, so I see all what's wrong with it. And since there apparently isn't anything wrong with it, I'm the one with bad taste. Ok, have it your way. I'm just wondering if this is how you treat all fiction; whether you actually have any complaints, any at all, over some part of some fiction. I know I have. Ex: I love Halo CE, Deus Ex, and KotOR, but that doesn't delude from the fact that these games have flaws. [i]Even the sun has its spots[/i]. Reach on the other hand, has far too many. Fantastic game in many aspects though, just not story. [Edited on 07.03.2012 5:27 AM PDT]
-
I don't care. The game had action. The book had written words. ;D
-
I love Reach's story. And I think that Nylund goofed making the Battle of Reach take place over a day or so. The Covenant don't play things safe, they take bigger risks than we do. They wouldn't send 300+ ships to squash a human force half that size, and they certainly wouldn't send 700 (I think that was how many was in the revised TFoR). That said, the Covenant were also engaging more and more in stealth operations. Nylund wrote that himself. So having a massive stealth war take place on Reach makes perfect sense [i]within[/i] Nylund's canon. The only thing that needs to change is the dates. That's all. Everything else can be [i]logically[/i] explained while allowing both universe to operate. Go ahead, try me. Bring up anything you want that you think cannot fit within both series' of events, aside from the dates, and I'll logically make it work with both stories. They don't have to conflict. People are just butthurt that Bungie didn't make a game based entirely on the novel, which is what everyone wanted, expected, and didn't get. That's the real reason behind the hatred for Halo: Reach. It has nothing to do with either story, and more to do with the community throwing a hissy fit over not getting the story they wanted.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] StealthSlasher2 Reach was the perfect opportunity to finally portray what a large scale battle in the Haloverse would be like in a game[/quote]It's sad that even in ground battles, all it could muster was up to 10 troopers at a time. 40 AI and vehicles. Hardly impressive when 99% of them are territorials.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Cmdr DaeFaron [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Ghost The only thing I really missed in Reach were the epic space battles between large human and Covenant ships. I feel like the space battles played a huge role in the books, but are ignored in the games. Sure, we got that one space level, but it was really nothing special. The books describe captains frantically relaying orders, as they try to overcome the massively overpowered ship. In Reach, destroying a Covenant carrier looks like the easiest thing in the world. tl;dr Halo needs more space battles as portrayed in the books[/quote] If highjacking a Covenant vessel mid-battle with it being in formation and not completely alone and jammed is easy, and rigging a ships slipspace drive as a bomb... Then sure, taking out super carriers are a piece of cake.[/quote] Taking out a Super Carrier by hijacking a Corvette with a Frigate + dozens of single ships is still nowhere near visually portraying a large scale space engagement involving multiple ships from both sides. The closest this was ever achieved was in Halo 3 and even then it was a cop out as none of the Covenant vessels can be seen actually shooting each other as the pelicans flew past. What we ended up getting seemed like Covenant ships (of which we couldn't tell which belonged to which faction) lazily trying to drift past each other. Instead, we had to listen to that battle play out via radio transmissions. Reach was the perfect opportunity to finally portray what a large scale battle in the Haloverse would be like in a game (Halo 2's in-game ship sprites don't exactly count when they instantaneously, spontaneously, and continuously blow up every few seconds to the point that more than 60 will have been 'destroyed' in about two minutes). Not to mention it'd be the first time to really show how technologically inferior the UNSC fleet was. Instead we're still left with the impression (game-wise) that UNSC ships are very durable against Covenant vessels.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Ghost The only thing I really missed in Reach were the epic space battles between large human and Covenant ships. I feel like the space battles played a huge role in the books, but are ignored in the games. Sure, we got that one space level, but it was really nothing special. The books describe captains frantically relaying orders, as they try to overcome the massively overpowered ship. In Reach, destroying a Covenant carrier looks like the easiest thing in the world. tl;dr Halo needs more space battles as portrayed in the books[/quote] If highjacking a Covenant vessel mid-battle with it being in formation and not completely alone and jammed is easy, and rigging a ships slipspace drive as a bomb... Then sure, taking out super carriers are a piece of cake.
-
The only thing I really missed in Reach were the epic space battles between large human and Covenant ships. I feel like the space battles played a huge role in the books, but are ignored in the games. Sure, we got that one space level, but it was really nothing special. The books describe captains frantically relaying orders, as they try to overcome the massively overpowered ship. In Reach, destroying a Covenant carrier looks like the easiest thing in the world. tl;dr Halo needs more space battles as portrayed in the books
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Alf stewert [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] TedToaster22 I wish I could find make them easily co-exist, but some of the things we're expected to believe are pretty far-fetched. For example, think of how interconnected our world is today. Someone explain to me how ONI was able to keep people on the planet ignorant of the invasion up to August 30th, after 500 years of additional communications technology advancement.[/quote] Today we have organisations that change and cut us off from infomation or donw right dont release it, Why would this not change in 500 years?[/quote] Heck, the news itself keeps the bulk of what happens in the middle-east hidden. They talk about a roadside bomb killing a humvee driver, but never mention the strike that took out 30+ terrorists. It's extremely easy to make everybody blind to what happens in a specific part of the world. [Edited on 07.02.2012 7:56 PM PDT]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] TedToaster22 I wish I could find make them easily co-exist, but some of the things we're expected to believe are pretty far-fetched. For example, think of how interconnected our world is today. Someone explain to me how ONI was able to keep people on the planet ignorant of the invasion up to August 30th, after 500 years of additional communications technology advancement.[/quote] Today we have organisations that change and cut us off from infomation or donw right dont release it, Why would this not change in 500 years?
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] SyK0sAm In my mind [i]Halo: Reach[/i] never was canon and [i]Fall of Reach[/i] was. [quote]I have heard that the events of a video game override books in terms of what is canon, but I can't bring myself to accept the game's story. Does anyone else feel this way?[/quote] I'm with you there. I won't deny that [i]Reach[/i] was a very epic game and it gave you a good feel of loosing your closest squad members e.t.c, but I would've preferred to have experienced it from the story of [i]Fall of Reach[/i] just simply because it was a great book.[/quote] While it may have been nice, bungie did say (I believe very early on) that the game wasn't going to be a "book events straight out." Personally, I felt one of Reach's best mission sets was Exodus-New Alexandria. Parts could be improved (Like the triage station... with zero civilian doctors or UNSC medics helping the wounded), but overall I enjoyed the feeling they put out. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] BenTheSlayer011 Halo Reach didn't give you the sense of urgency it truly needed, Reach was THE military stronghold of the UNSC but it gave the sense you was saving a warehouse full of forklifts (pretty damn important). [/quote] At the same time, the book didn't portray the ground forces of Reach to be anything like how a military stronghold world would be. That meaning, competent, prepared, or even being there in great number.
-
I don't really think of it as such, so I guess I don't consider it canon either. Halo: Reach's story was far worse than the book, which I enjoyed quite a lot. I also don't really know what actualy happened now.
-
Halo Reach didn't give you the sense of urgency it truly needed, Reach was THE military stronghold of the UNSC but it gave the sense you was saving a warehouse full of forklifts (pretty damn important).
-
In my mind [i]Halo: Reach[/i] never was canon and [i]Fall of Reach[/i] was. [quote]I have heard that the events of a video game override books in terms of what is canon, but I can't bring myself to accept the game's story. Does anyone else feel this way?[/quote] I'm with you there. I won't deny that [i]Reach[/i] was a very epic game and it gave you a good feel of loosing your closest squad members e.t.c, but I would've preferred to have experienced it from the story of [i]Fall of Reach[/i] just simply because it was a great book.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Jose291 Reach should not be considered Halo, it's the black spot on the Halo franchise.[/quote] It technically wasn't according to Bungie until 343 tried to shoehorn it into canon.
