{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
5/3/2012 12:54:45 AM
52
Did Bungie mean to end the Halo series with Halo 3?
Let me elaborate. I'm wondering if Bungie meant for the Halo 3 ending to be the true ending to the Halo series, that 343's Halo games would mean nothing. Did Bungie leave the Halo 3 ending unexplained so that 343 could continue it, or did they do it to bring the "true" Halo story to a close that was up for interpretation? Will Bungie consider the next Halo games to be true Halo?
I've been wondering what Bungie thinks of 343 continuing the series, that is unless Bungie meant to close the Halo story with the third installment.
Uh...discuss where you think 343 is going with the next Halo games.
-
As far as i know there story line was corrupted in the development of halo 2. Halo 3 was just the last third of halo 2 in all reality and they would have made a story that we don't know of for halo 3. But do to Msoft they were forced to cut there (baby) halo 2 in half. and the halo story was decimated by Msoft( 34three) we are getting the interpenetration of what Msoft interprets is the right story for halo to take (and whats the most profitable). Though this has never been officially said that i know of and is primarily my opinion from the story i placed together from the books and original game.
-
1 Reply[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] da 70 70 hatred The Halo 3 ending was fine. No need to add unnessasary sequels. Halo 3 - Finish the Fight Halo 4 - Restart the Fight[/quote] Halo 5 - Fight some more Halo 6 - Finish the fight again
-
I believe a more accurate way of putting it would be that Bungie had every intention of stories taking place after Halo 3. Not necessarily working on the games themselves. Bungie announced their independance ridiculously close to the release of Halo 3. Clearly something of that legal complexity and bargaining would have been in the works for quite some time a probably happened during a large part of the production of Halo 3. Would they have known that part of their contract would require them to complete two more Halo games after that? Perhaps, perhaps not, but they likely knew that they wouldn't be following up on Chief's story themselves. I don't think they designed the game and the ending with the thought that they would be returning to the series later in the future since they probably knew while working on the game that they wouldn't be keeping the Halo series themselves, but I do believe they designed the game in a way that it could be followed up on by SOMEONE.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ROBERTO jh [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] HipiO7 Yeah. Bungie had meant to leave the series there, but seeing how enormous it had grown, they left the ending semi-opened for future titles, most likely knowing MS would continue their flagship game.[/quote] ... You know, I'm actually surprised at how few people know that Bungie originally had every intention of continuing the Chief story.[/quote] I know Bungie had intentions of following up the story, but they didn't have the intention of following it up after Halo 3. They had always talked about leaving it there, leaving an ending that could allow them to return later in the future when they decided. They were just replaced with 343 for Halo 4.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ICanHazRecon911 Let me elaborate. I'm wondering if Bungie meant for the Halo 3 ending to be the true ending to the Halo series, that 343's Halo games would mean nothing. Did Bungie leave the Halo 3 ending unexplained so that 343 could continue it, or did they do it to bring the "true" Halo story to a close that was up for interpretation? Will Bungie consider the next Halo games to be true Halo? I've been wondering what Bungie thinks of 343 continuing the series, that is unless Bungie meant to close the Halo story with the third installment. Uh...discuss where you think 343 is going with the next Halo games.[/quote] I personally believe that Bungie intended Halo 3 to be the end of a [i]story arc[/i] as intended, but they were likely forced to leave an open Legendary ending simply because there needed to be a way out for the next inevitable installment regardless of whether they or 343i would do it. It'd be clear to them during Halo 3's development while negotiating their deal for independence that Microsoft would continue commissioning games for the franchise. As we would all later find out post Reach, Bungie was required to complete two additional Halo games (ODST and Reach) after 3 prior to truly being independent, and doing Halo 4 themselves was an idea that was initially tossed around before settling on Reach as Sketch would mention in the podcasts. So it's fairly likely that Bungie was well aware that the Halo franchise was not ending with Halo 3 since they were already selling the IP off to Microsoft to expand upon while simultaneously under contract to produce more Halo games themselves during Halo 3's production. Edit: I should however add that prior to Halo 3, the franchise as a whole (or rather story arc wise) was intended by Jason Jones to end at 2. The exact place where an interview was made that mentioned this currently eludes me, but Halo 2 was originally meant to close the series in terms of story only to be cut in half due to time constraints. Halo 3's campaign is essentially the second half of what Halo 2 should have been had it not abruptly ended. [Edited on 05.07.2012 10:53 PM PDT]
-
Quite frankly, I thought it was the best ending to the best series ever created. Despite it being a massive cliff hanger, I would enjoy seeing Halo be at rest. Maybe if they wouldn't have given 343 the rights and waited another 10 years or so to start up on Halo again. Once their new project got old. Hopefully by then most of us would have kids and we could start their video game experience with the one that started ours. Of course that would never happen.
-
I was always happier with the non Leg ending of Halo 3. I thought I was alone ... maybe not.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] cortana 5 [url=http://i1071.photobucket.com/albums/u520/CortanaV/MOARNOTdesu/8c3e7245.gif]I care.[/url][/quote] James May looked eerily like Stephen Fry there for a second. o_O [quote]I wish 343i well, but the fact of the matter is that they haven't worked on a game from the ground up on their own. CEA does NOT count.[/quote] You make it sound as if they're totally inexperienced in the gaming industry, I would amend your post by saying that they haven't worked on a [b]Halo[/b] game before. The employees they have come from a wide variety of backgrounds, in their ViDocs you see the companies they've worked with before. Some of the level designers are from the Metroid series, for instance. [quote]Anyways, Bungie intended for the trilogy to end at Halo 3. One example of this truth is a common western writing technique that most would call "coming full circle." At the beginning of Halo: CE, the chief gets out of a cryo tube, while at the end of Halo 3, he gets back into the cryo tube. It's a subtle symbolism that speaks volumes. So, yeah, I care if it's not Bungie. The story was meant to end and I feel like it's doing Halo a disservice by continuing it in this manner. [/quote] You don't know that though. They sure as hell made a good job of leaving a -blam!--ton of loose ends toward the end of the game and even had a plot outline for a Halo 4 before they decided that it would be too much baggage to handle for their last Halo game so they moved on to Reach. Isaac Hannaford, one of their wonderful concept artists, had concept work done for a Forerunner promethean, that's a relatively good indication that they had some of the more intimate details ironed out during the early stages. [quote]Hell, there aren't any flood in Halo 4. Halo was about the flood.[/quote] Correction: Frankie said that we won't be FIGHTING the Flood in Halo 4, he never specifically said that they aren't in the game. Also, you can't just expect the Flood to immediately pop into the picture again. These things require build-up, for someone who seems to be so invested in the story you should understand that. [quote]They could have at least changed the name. Of course, that wouldn't mean as much money because consumers are lemmings and will better gravitate to the name Halo.[/quote] Why? It's in the same universe as Halo, it has the same characters, the same engine (albeit a heavily modified one), the same weapons, the same voice actors and even some of the same employees. Conclusion: It's still Halo.
-
[url=http://i1071.photobucket.com/albums/u520/CortanaV/MOARNOTdesu/8c3e7245.gif]I care.[/url] I wish 343i well, but the fact of the matter is that they haven't worked on a game from the ground up on their own. CEA does NOT count. Anyways, Bungie intended for the trilogy to end at Halo 3. One example of this truth is a common western writing technique that most would call "coming full circle." At the beginning of Halo: CE, the chief gets out of a cryo tube, while at the end of Halo 3, he gets back into the cryo tube. It's a subtle symbolism that speaks volumes. So, yeah, I care if it's not Bungie. The story was meant to end and I feel like it's doing Halo a disservice by continuing it in this manner. Hell, there aren't any flood in Halo 4. Halo was about the flood. They could have at least changed the name. Of course, that wouldn't mean as much money because consumers are lemmings and will better gravitate to the name Halo. I really with that the series was just put to rest. But that's not happening, so I'll just opt to not buy Halo 4. Simple fix. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] LeTHaL BuLLeTs *Clears throat* here we go again... WHO CARES? if the story makes sense, and it does, then why do we need to know if it was meant to be like tht? :P and as far as how 343 will do, IM SICK OF HATERS... they will do just fine, and i'm VERY excited for halo 4... who cares if it isnt bungie? its bungies universe that they have created and it will be continued without the creators and carried over just fine. [/quote]
-
Of course not, Halo is a monetary empire, no-one wants to end the series. It certainly could have ended after Halo 3, but I doubt anyone's ever going to put Halo to rest now.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] HipiO7 Yeah. Bungie had meant to leave the series there, but seeing how enormous it had grown, they left the ending semi-opened for future titles, most likely knowing MS would continue their flagship game.[/quote] ... You know, I'm actually surprised at how few people know that Bungie originally had every intention of continuing the Chief story.
-
Yeah. Bungie had meant to leave the series there, but seeing how enormous it had grown, they left the ending semi-opened for future titles, most likely knowing MS would continue their flagship game.
-
Its not REACH, it's a Shield World, they were the next best thing to the halo rings, and they can block the blast from killing you... leading me to believe we will find forrunners inhabiting this "planet", along with sentinels and a new fight. That was not REACH, and Reach is glassed, though, It's possible they went back and rebuilt many things there, however, it was not.
-
They wanted to keep the story alive. That's why chief said "Wake me if you need me" at the end of Halo 3. I assumed the huge planet at the end of Halo 3 was actually planet Reach, and the reason for "Halo: Reach" was to explain why chief was chosen by Cortana and also to give you a glimpse of the planet that would be used for the next game in line. Also since the Covenant won the battle of Reach, I thought that was the explanation for the weird, alien style of the planet shown in the Halo 4 trailer. I have not read the books at all so if there is an explanation to what happened in planet Reach after the events of Halo: Reach, please let me know.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] NiRaC4ntSnip3 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] SEAL Sniper 9 Legendary ending. /thread They contemplated making Halo 4 rather than Reach (thank God they didn't).[/quote] Well of course they contemplated it. I think the point is, did they [i]want[/i] to make Halo 4? As I see it, they left the possibility open because of Microsoft's demands, but didn't want to.[/quote] As has been said, they originally wanted too, but they didn't want to, nor could they, have done the necessary sequels. Knowing it would take more than one game, they went with Reach instead.
-
-
a month or two ago i would have said that i hate 343 and that halo 4 will suck etc. i was a hater. now i realize that bungie had their run and it was awesome, now i still do wish bungie made halo 4 ( i would rather them finsih what they started) but i also think 343 will do a good job on halo 4 [Edited on 05.06.2012 1:35 PM PDT]
-
They have repeatedly told us that they wanted to continue making Halo. Also, I believe that they would have probably continued doing so till this day, however something happened between Microsoft and Bungie. It was probably around 2006-2007. Microsoft was probably demanding something Bungie didn't want to make, so they quit, otherwise I don't see any logical reason for Bungie not to make more Halo games, aside from developer staleness that occurs when you make the same thing over and over again. In the end, it doesn't matter. Bungie had their ups and downs, the community is widely split over which game they like. Halo 2 or 3 will probably end up winning polls for the best Halo game, but Halo Wars is probably the only game that won't get a significant proportion of the votes.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] SEAL Sniper 9 Legendary ending. /thread They contemplated making Halo 4 rather than Reach (thank God they didn't).[/quote] Well of course they contemplated it. I think the point is, did they [i]want[/i] to make Halo 4? As I see it, they left the possibility open because of Microsoft's demands, but didn't want to.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] SHOCKER1000 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Elder Bias [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] DecepticonCobra Or 343 could fail miserably. [/quote] This. There is [i]very[/i] high chance that 343i will fail and cause Halo franchise to collapse. [/quote] and your basing this on?[/quote] Poor treatment of book re-releases, Glasslands, etc.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] SHOCKER1000 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Elder Bias [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] DecepticonCobra Or 343 could fail miserably. [/quote] This. There is [i]very[/i] high chance that 343i will fail and cause Halo franchise to collapse. [/quote] and your basing this on?[/quote]Retardation.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Sigma617 It seems that way to me OP. Halo 3 had one of the most perfect, bittersweet endings of all time. I would have had no problem with them leaving it like that.[/quote] This, but I still am all for Halo 4, 5, and 6.
-
Legendary ending was too specific. It was odd, and mysterious, and not at all what you'd put at the very end.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ICanHazRecon911 [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] SonicJohn I think Bungie wanted to leave the Chief drifting in space. I have a feeling the legendary ending was added as a recommendation (demand?) from Microsoft. Who knows. I still like that Bungie did a great job of self-containing their Halo games to work completely outside of Microsoft's story.[/quote] I was kind of thinking that too... It seems like the most plausible answer.[/quote] I doubt it as the legendary ending was also hinted at in the legendary terminals in Halo 3 when MB talks about making amends and sending you to his makers so that they know he tried to right what he originally wronged, or something along those lines.
-
I think it was a fitting ending for the trilogy. Had they purposely ended it this way for the end of the Halo series is unknown as they made 2 more Halo games afterwards. Unless you can get confirmation from a Bungie Employee I doubt we'll ever know. However, I would say no. As I'm sure Bungie knows Microsoft knows that Halo=Money. Hence the 2 extra Halo games.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] YakZSmelk [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] ThePredkiller2 Yeah they should've ended it with Halo 3. For me, the Halo franchise ended when Bungie left Microsoft. Bungie4life[/quote] You know that you can like Bungie and 343i at the same time right? Halo's Universe is far to large to end, personally I'm happy they are continuing to expand on the franchise. [/quote] I don't like them for sucking up to the big corporations. Its dirty and it don't smell rightt.
