- ghostvirus
- |
- Exalted Mythic Member
Posted by; A random forum poster
Posted by; ghostvirus
This apple is brown, and rotten. This orange on the other hand, is in relatively average shape. So the orange is definitely the preferable option. ----------You can't compare apples and oranges. You're so dumb.
Your right. Bungie is not going to add any new guns to Halo Reach. Even if it makes sense for them to do so. Even if they are expected to do so. Because Halo: Reach takes place a few months before Halo 3.
I mean, clearly there aren't any weapons in Halo 3: ODST, that don't exist in Halo 3. Oh thats right, there are two weapons unique to ODST, despite it taking place a month before Halo 3.
Just because you didn't see something, or something has yet to be referenced doesn't mean that something doesn't exist.
If you look at the gun portfolio, that exists today. There are thousands, of distinctly different guns. Now imagine, our reality is completely different then what it currently is. Imagine a fictional book and video game series existed, that told the story of a war that actually exists in our reality. But in this reality, its completely fictional.
Now imagine, After several successful books and video games, they make a prequel book, or a prequel video game. However, in this prequel, there are weapons, or vehicles not previously seen.
In this context, does that sound out of the ordinary, impossible, or worth -blam!-ing about? Of course not. There are thousands of weapons in the world. There are certainly standard issue weapons, and equipment. But there is certainly weapons, equipment, and vehicles that exist, that are not often seen, or used in war. But still exist.
Beyond the fact, it is just a game. Bungie IS going to add new toys to play with. Regardless of weither it makes sense.
The reality is, there is absolutely no reason for you to close off any possibility of new weapons, vehicles or even enemies. The enemies might be sort of a stretch, but unseen weapons and vehicles? Not at all.
--------------------
Another example, that should make things even clear would be the Call of Duty franchise. Imagine if there were several modern warfare novels. And that modern warfare 2 was a prequel, not a sequel. And the game has weapons and equipment not seen in Call of Duty 4, or written about in the novels. Would anyone -blam!-, "Why are there new weapons in this game, its a prequel?". No because the novels follow a tight narrative, they only refer to the guns the characters use. They don't list off every known gun in existence, or in use. The other part is, the new weapons and equipment existed in reality the whole time. Even if we have never heard them referenced by COD fiction, we know they existed the whole time anyways.
I mean, do you honestly believe, the Spartan Lazer was designed, tested, ran through prototypes, reproduced, and then shiped to earth, between Masterchiefs departure, and its appearance in ODST? So they designed, created and reproduced the Spartan lazer in a couple of hours?
How many times does something we consider new, have to show up in a prequel novel, for people to get, these new things aren't fictionally new. The BR, and Hornet in Contact Harvest. The Splazer in Halo Wars.
Just because something didn't appear in one game, but appeared in a sequel, doesn't mean that something was created in the fictional time frame between the two games. It simply means the characters in the previous game, didn't have access to the weapons in the sequel.
Simply stated, there will be new things in Halo: Reach. And as always, anyone that has a problem with it, will be considered a tool.
[Edited on 11.05.2009 3:33 PM PST]