Post by Blade Runner 07 on May 15, 2015 18:58:54 GMT -5
Just gonna read and reply to your post as I go along.
On the nanobot theory: As far fetched as it was, had they just explained it In-game, it wouldn't have been so jarring. Still very far fetched though. Nano bots wouldn't change the entire cosmetic build of the armor most likely, maybe just repair the armor.
Very well said about explaining things in the parent medium, but can you remind me what Bungie did with Halo 3 that was like this??? Not questioning your word, I'm just interested in the child-spartans thing.
In the style change between Halo 2 and 3: All I really noticed was the next-gen difference. There was a huge controversy when the Halo 3 beta came out because of how similar it looked to Halo 2. IDK, Halo 2 and 3 look and feel so similar in style that there are practically 2 half's to a single game. Well accept for those "cortana moments" could do without those. On Reach I only meant that id Bungie would have remade Halo 1, it probably would have looked alot like Reach. We can only speculate.
"Not only that, but Bungie committed the highest of crimes. They took the EU that they themselves said was canon, and retconned pretty much EVERY single thing that happened on Reach."
I only follow the games story. If I devoted the time and energy to take in all the EU stuff I would probably hate on Bungie a bit for that, but as it stands, Bungie is relatively innocent in sticking to the cannon of the story they build in the four games before Reach. Very few things in Reach did I have a problem with story wise. Kinda. That's a post for another day.
Um, about the "Fall of Reach": You got me there. I don't really know what your talking about. I'm talking strictly the games. I agree with you 110% on the retconning buissness. I would much rather they just make a new series all together, than remove any sence of meaning to particular if not ALL aspects of the previous lore, just to tell a new story. All thats does is give the "milking the cash cow" impression. The kind of impression I'm getting off of everything Halo in the last three years.
At this point, I would have rather seen an Abrams style Halo Reboot, with it being an alternate universe compared to the direction there taking it. I only hope they run out of steam by Halo 8.
On putting your own touch on something: Video games are art, and Halo 2 Anniversary is gorgeous, but it's using art assets from the Halo 4 era which is visually screwing not only with the art style Bungie layed down for the original, but with the visual time progression of the universe. The majority of the game is fine because they had to create stuff that just want present in the Halo 4, thus having to recreate Bungies work, but that doesn't change the fact that they cut corners.
I think we were just so pleased with the near 1:1 visual upgrade Halo:CEA got that seeing for instance, the Halo 4 warthog model in Halo 2 was offensive and made only worse by the fact that you could switch to old graphics and see a HUGE difference in the model. That's neither what we wanted or expected, and that's what I mean by them putting their signature on everything. They are disrespecting Bungie as artists when they flat-out replace an asset with something that barely resembles what was there. The bite is taken off considerably because we have the option to switch graphics but it's still annoying.
You COULD, yes, but why would you? 343 is a different company with different goals and different resources. I found the change in hands EXTREMELY refreshing. The score (while it does lack Marty's chant in the forefront) is still pretty damn good. The foley is god damned beautiful, and the effects are top notch. Hell, even though I missed the witty Grunt quips, I found the "alien speak" much more fitting.
On Halo 4s unique style: I think I've said it before, but Halo 4 just failed to live up to exceptions. It's not a nostalgia thing either. It's the fact that EVERYTHING about the game besides general gameplay, was different to all the Halo games that came before it. For example, you could still get a "halo vibe" off of the Reach soundtrack even though it didn't really feature the theme. Reach proved that you can still have a Halo games that FEELS like Halo without an actual Halo ring, Cortana, or Master chief.
On halo 4 continuing with a new trilogy and the Star Wars comparison:
Halo 4 should have never been created if it was going to be so different to the previous games. Goldeneye Reloaded. I mean really, at least by the end, Star Wars Episode III felt like it was naturally segwaying into Episode IV. Episode IV also tied up that loose end as to what that Death Star thing was in Episode II&III, and whatever happened to those babies Padme had. 343i had to create half of a universe from scratch (Laskey/Infinity/Didact) just to justify what happened in Halo 4. Star Wars Episode II&III really played to the fact that they had three sequels already established.
Believe me when I say I'm NOT hating on 343i because they arnt Bungie. Bungie is unrecognizable today when compared to how it was five years ago. The Bungie I loved started dieing off sometime after Halo 3. I was not impressed with Destiny, but the "Reachy" feeling point from before still stands. They fired Marty O'Donnell and have Activision for publishers. I can't be sure who I distrust with a FPS more these days. Just wanted to make that clear.
How is that 343's fault? Microsoft is the one doing the milking. 343 is merely their tool. Again, this is misplaced hate for a company that doesn't deserve it. The people working at 343 are living their dream. They probably grew up playing Halo and now Halo is their job.
On Halo being no more than a cash cow:
I don't blame 343i for Halo being milked. I blame Microsoft for that. When 343i hears about the failure of Destiny, they probably call Bungie up and ask them out for drinks so they can talk about the failures BOTH of them faced in 2014. I'm not sticking up for Bungie as they exist today, bottom line. Still, if Bungie is a "1-trick horse", that both Marathon and Halo were pretty good tricks IMO.
Untill next reply: This is fun greeny. If we learn anything through these arguments than it was all worth it.
On the nanobot theory: As far fetched as it was, had they just explained it In-game, it wouldn't have been so jarring. Still very far fetched though. Nano bots wouldn't change the entire cosmetic build of the armor most likely, maybe just repair the armor.
Very well said about explaining things in the parent medium, but can you remind me what Bungie did with Halo 3 that was like this??? Not questioning your word, I'm just interested in the child-spartans thing.
In the style change between Halo 2 and 3: All I really noticed was the next-gen difference. There was a huge controversy when the Halo 3 beta came out because of how similar it looked to Halo 2. IDK, Halo 2 and 3 look and feel so similar in style that there are practically 2 half's to a single game. Well accept for those "cortana moments" could do without those. On Reach I only meant that id Bungie would have remade Halo 1, it probably would have looked alot like Reach. We can only speculate.
"Not only that, but Bungie committed the highest of crimes. They took the EU that they themselves said was canon, and retconned pretty much EVERY single thing that happened on Reach."
I only follow the games story. If I devoted the time and energy to take in all the EU stuff I would probably hate on Bungie a bit for that, but as it stands, Bungie is relatively innocent in sticking to the cannon of the story they build in the four games before Reach. Very few things in Reach did I have a problem with story wise. Kinda. That's a post for another day.
Um, about the "Fall of Reach": You got me there. I don't really know what your talking about. I'm talking strictly the games. I agree with you 110% on the retconning buissness. I would much rather they just make a new series all together, than remove any sence of meaning to particular if not ALL aspects of the previous lore, just to tell a new story. All thats does is give the "milking the cash cow" impression. The kind of impression I'm getting off of everything Halo in the last three years.
At this point, I would have rather seen an Abrams style Halo Reboot, with it being an alternate universe compared to the direction there taking it. I only hope they run out of steam by Halo 8.
On putting your own touch on something: Video games are art, and Halo 2 Anniversary is gorgeous, but it's using art assets from the Halo 4 era which is visually screwing not only with the art style Bungie layed down for the original, but with the visual time progression of the universe. The majority of the game is fine because they had to create stuff that just want present in the Halo 4, thus having to recreate Bungies work, but that doesn't change the fact that they cut corners.
I think we were just so pleased with the near 1:1 visual upgrade Halo:CEA got that seeing for instance, the Halo 4 warthog model in Halo 2 was offensive and made only worse by the fact that you could switch to old graphics and see a HUGE difference in the model. That's neither what we wanted or expected, and that's what I mean by them putting their signature on everything. They are disrespecting Bungie as artists when they flat-out replace an asset with something that barely resembles what was there. The bite is taken off considerably because we have the option to switch graphics but it's still annoying.
You COULD, yes, but why would you? 343 is a different company with different goals and different resources. I found the change in hands EXTREMELY refreshing. The score (while it does lack Marty's chant in the forefront) is still pretty damn good. The foley is god damned beautiful, and the effects are top notch. Hell, even though I missed the witty Grunt quips, I found the "alien speak" much more fitting.
On Halo 4s unique style: I think I've said it before, but Halo 4 just failed to live up to exceptions. It's not a nostalgia thing either. It's the fact that EVERYTHING about the game besides general gameplay, was different to all the Halo games that came before it. For example, you could still get a "halo vibe" off of the Reach soundtrack even though it didn't really feature the theme. Reach proved that you can still have a Halo games that FEELS like Halo without an actual Halo ring, Cortana, or Master chief.
On halo 4 continuing with a new trilogy and the Star Wars comparison:
Halo 4 should have never been created if it was going to be so different to the previous games. Goldeneye Reloaded. I mean really, at least by the end, Star Wars Episode III felt like it was naturally segwaying into Episode IV. Episode IV also tied up that loose end as to what that Death Star thing was in Episode II&III, and whatever happened to those babies Padme had. 343i had to create half of a universe from scratch (Laskey/Infinity/Didact) just to justify what happened in Halo 4. Star Wars Episode II&III really played to the fact that they had three sequels already established.
Believe me when I say I'm NOT hating on 343i because they arnt Bungie. Bungie is unrecognizable today when compared to how it was five years ago. The Bungie I loved started dieing off sometime after Halo 3. I was not impressed with Destiny, but the "Reachy" feeling point from before still stands. They fired Marty O'Donnell and have Activision for publishers. I can't be sure who I distrust with a FPS more these days. Just wanted to make that clear.
How is that 343's fault? Microsoft is the one doing the milking. 343 is merely their tool. Again, this is misplaced hate for a company that doesn't deserve it. The people working at 343 are living their dream. They probably grew up playing Halo and now Halo is their job.
On Halo being no more than a cash cow:
I don't blame 343i for Halo being milked. I blame Microsoft for that. When 343i hears about the failure of Destiny, they probably call Bungie up and ask them out for drinks so they can talk about the failures BOTH of them faced in 2014. I'm not sticking up for Bungie as they exist today, bottom line. Still, if Bungie is a "1-trick horse", that both Marathon and Halo were pretty good tricks IMO.
Untill next reply: This is fun greeny. If we learn anything through these arguments than it was all worth it.