Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Unexplainable errors in the Halo canon. (Spoilers)
  • Subject: Unexplainable errors in the Halo canon. (Spoilers)
Subject: Unexplainable errors in the Halo canon. (Spoilers)
  • gamertag: Moirai
  • user homepage:


Posted by: immadchill

Posted by: TheGreenAlloy

Posted by: immadchill

Posted by: TheGreenAlloy

Posted by: immadchill
I wish Bungie or 343i could just make something up about the PoA being in atmosphere so that we could rest easy

That's called a retcon. Something there'll have to be loads of if Reach were to be canon.


Reach is canon, and not a retcon. Like if they said that the PoA was outfitted with an anti-grav pod or something but other Halycon class cruisers couldnt venture into atmosphere

I don't think you understand.


Explain it to me then. A retcon is something that conflicts with something else previously stated and the older thing is no longer known as fact and the new one is, right?


Retcon means 'Retroactive Continuity'.

If a story writer wants to include a new section of story into an existing story and finds that it clashes with something already established then they can retroactively alter the continuity/story flow/events to 'accommodate' the new section.

Sometimes retcons can be well done. Sometimes they can fix existing problems. Halo: Reach, unfortunately, is more of a chainsaw and band-aid retcon.

Sorry, guys. But sidelining part of a story that has been considered canon for roughly eight years and not even making a decent effort to make it all fit together properly is rather unimpressive. I realise it's your story, and therefore you have the right to do what you like with it. But as an end consumer who pays hard earned cash for this stuff, I have a right to disagree and not like it. Simple as that.

  • 06.08.2011 4:12 PM PDT

Our big green style, cannot be defeated!
-Sgt. A.J. Johnson - Halo 2 - Metropolis

The books are right, & Halo Wars & Reach are inaccurate. Book canon overrides game canon, & any remake of a book not sponsored by Bungie is also inaccurate. There you go. I wouldn't trust Dr. Halseys "journal", because 343 helped make Reach. Things like that journal try to fit things that were never in the story into the story. If there's a book about Noble Team & Reach, it would contradict the original book. Every Halo game except for Halo Wars & Reach don't follow the book canon. ODST doesn't either, but you can assume that's what went down in New Mombasa. So I like ODST.

  • 06.08.2011 7:25 PM PDT


Posted by: xecnalxes117
The books are right, & Halo Wars & Reach are inaccurate. Book canon overrides game canon, & any remake of a book not sponsored by Bungie is also inaccurate. There you go. I wouldn't trust Dr. Halseys "journal", because 343 helped make Reach. Things like that journal try to fit things that were never in the story into the story. If there's a book about Noble Team & Reach, it would contradict the original book. Every Halo game except for Halo Wars & Reach don't follow the book canon. ODST doesn't either, but you can assume that's what went down in New Mombasa. So I like ODST.


*Facepalm* Wars is accurate to canon bar some gameplay elements, a feature in EVERY game.

Also, books do not override games in canon, you got the rules mixed up.

  • 06.08.2011 7:31 PM PDT

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: otterboyz
If the angle at which the super carrier was, which was below the super macs, unless they were pointed at the planet for some idiotic reason instead of defending it, then the time for pointing the SMAC at the carrier would have resulted in that SMAC's destruction. Now, you could solve this by pointing multiple SMACS at it but still that would result in a lose of at least two SMACS, which the UNSC couldn't give up because the super mac cannons the only thing defending the planet from a fleet with good chances. they might of considered it but then kat's plan came up, and which would you rather have? and expected casualty rate of a few marines, sabers and a frigate or 2 ODPS essential to the defense of the planet?

Some SMACs would already be in view of the Supercarrier, so it is not like taking the time to rotate them (which would take a few minutes anyway) is putting them in any danger that they would not already be in. If you wish to move them away from the range of the Supercarriers weapons then fine, but I cannot see ho rotating whilst performing this motion is not possible. This is also looking at the SMACs directly overhead that would have to rotate almost 180*. The ones further afield would have smaller angles to rotate to.

Ultimately though it comes down to trying to avoid hitting the planet, which is why I don't really think it should have been shot immediately when it de-cloaked. In fact, if Bungie had kept the Supercarrier in the same location in Reach's atmosphere then this could explain why the SMACs where not used. (50 gigatons round may be do a lot of damage. Although it could just as easily over-penetrate the crust and have its effects mitigated... But it would do as an explanation.) There is no reason why it should not have been shot down after that when it entered low orbit. Using a SMAC that is further away but in line with the Supercarrier would not endanger the planet.

At this point the UNSC only knows about that one ship, they do not know about the impending Covenant invasion. There is no reason why they would not trade a SMAC or 2 in order to remove that threat immediately.

  • 06.08.2011 8:01 PM PDT

Our big green style, cannot be defeated!
-Sgt. A.J. Johnson - Halo 2 - Metropolis

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

*Facepalm* Wars is accurate to canon bar some gameplay elements, a feature in EVERY game.

Also, books do not override games in canon, you got the rules mixed up.
Books most certainly do. Obviously you've only played the games. Don't say that you have, because if you did, you'd be agreeing with me.

  • 06.08.2011 8:20 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

The truest halo canon source would be the foundations, and do you know what the foundation is? the 4 copies of the halo story bible. them and only them, nothing else can be heralded as the absolute truth of canon, but the halo games from bungie are created directly from the book, by the people who wrote the bloody book. the halo novels were written by outside writers only with minor assistance from the bible, as well as the guys at bungie. the writers were more then encouraged to take artistic license to change canon to make for a good story.
if you play halo reach, then halo ce, then halo 2 and 3, and odst, guess what you will notice? not a single detail outside aesthetics is against canon. it when you throw in the books that were not even written by bungie, is when the canon problems start up.


Posted by: Moirai

Posted by: Atom Alchemist
dear god here comes another long and poorly written response.

anyways, reach invasion timeline.

here is a single, solidary word for you.
RETCON first strike has already been retconned, and the other books will probably follow suit, remember this, when it comes to canon, the first source is always the right one, and the secondary sources are changes to correspond with the first source. seeing as halo started as a video game, the "first"and truest source of what is canon and what isn't would be halo games devoloped by bungie studios. so, halo 1:CE, Halo:2 Halo:3 and Halo:4 are all canon, regardless of what you, or anyone else may think.(outside easter eggs of course) the books are secondary, as they are written outside of the bungie studio, and are not the same media outlet,(one being a novel, the other being a video game)
Actually, that pretty much sums up every little errors you have with the canon, grow the hell up, and think for a split second, the games are all canon, regardless of what you may think, it's the books that are canonically incorrect, not the games.


And therein lies the problem. Too many variations on 'canon'.

The whole point of having a canon story line is to establish a series of immutable reference points to which all other additions can be attached without fear of contradiction.

The books were considered canon by Bungie. They originally authorised them and worked with the authors, giving them full unfettered access to the Halo story bible to achieve this. Now that they've wanted to crowbar in another game they've decided to retcon that chunk and demote it to a lower level of canon, whatever the heck that is.

Besides, the idea of any story having 'two' canon sources is ridiculous, and now leaves that part collapsing in a steaming pile of joke.

It's a bit like screwing around with the foundations of your house and then wondering why bits are falling off and leaving big holes in it. As it is, nailing a few boards over them here and there and then proclaiming, "See? Good as new!", doesn't really cut it in my book.

  • 06.08.2011 8:36 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: xecnalxes117
Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

*Facepalm* Wars is accurate to canon bar some gameplay elements, a feature in EVERY game.

Also, books do not override games in canon, you got the rules mixed up.
Books most certainly do. Obviously you've only played the games. Don't say that you have, because if you did, you'd be agreeing with me.


the first book was written within one month of the game being release, it was in fact written in under a month, the game was written over the course of several years, the games are the true source of canon, you sure are a complete retard when it comes to canon priority.

and i've read every book, and halo comic barring cryptum, but i know that the game canon comes first at all times.

  • 06.08.2011 8:39 PM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

Posted by: Atom Alchemist
and i've read every book, and halo comic barring cryptum, but i know that the game canon comes first at all times.

True, but that doesn't forgive the games for disregarding established canon, even if it was book canon.

  • 06.08.2011 10:02 PM PDT


Posted by: anton1792
Some SMACs would already be in view of the Supercarrier, so it is not like taking the time to rotate them (which would take a few minutes anyway) is putting them in any danger that they would not already be in. If you wish to move them away from the range of the Supercarriers weapons then fine, but I cannot see ho rotating whilst performing this motion is not possible. This is also looking at the SMACs directly overhead that would have to rotate almost 180*. The ones further afield would have smaller angles to rotate to.

Ultimately though it comes down to trying to avoid hitting the planet, which is why I don't really think it should have been shot immediately when it de-cloaked. In fact, if Bungie had kept the Supercarrier in the same location in Reach's atmosphere then this could explain why the SMACs where not used. (50 gigatons round may be do a lot of damage. Although it could just as easily over-penetrate the crust and have its effects mitigated... But it would do as an explanation.) There is no reason why it should not have been shot down after that when it entered low orbit. Using a SMAC that is further away but in line with the Supercarrier would not endanger the planet.

At this point the UNSC only knows about that one ship, they do not know about the impending Covenant invasion. There is no reason why they would not trade a SMAC or 2 in order to remove that threat immediately.


But would you rather lose two SMACs as an expected casualty rate or a few marines and a frigate?

  • 06.08.2011 11:00 PM PDT


Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
Posted by: Atom Alchemist
and i've read every book, and halo comic barring cryptum, but i know that the game canon comes first at all times.

True, but that doesn't forgive the games for disregarding established canon, even if it was book canon.


But if the book was written in a month...

  • 06.08.2011 11:03 PM PDT

I am invisible, understand, simply because people refuse to see me.
--Ralph Ellison

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
Posted by: Atom Alchemist
and i've read every book, and halo comic barring cryptum, but i know that the game canon comes first at all times.

True, but that doesn't forgive the games for disregarding established canon, even if it was book canon.


But if the book was written in a month...


What does that matter? It's been established canon for years. The Halo: Reach campaign could have easily respected TFoR canon but they chose not to do that. I think that's the thing that bothers people about it.

  • 06.08.2011 11:12 PM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
But if the book was written in a month...

How long it took to write it means nothing. Would it be different if it took several years? Just because you have little respect for previous canon doesn't mean the rest of us do. We won't so easily throw or copies of Fall of Reach in the trash just because Halo: Reach is the higher ranking canonical source.

  • 06.09.2011 12:08 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Member of Bungie.net for nearly three years, still continuing!

Enjoy what you have and live on.

My gamertag is Elder Bias


Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
How long it took to write it means nothing. Would it be different if it took several years? Just because you have little respect for previous canon doesn't mean the rest of us do. We won't so easily throw or copies of Fall of Reach in the trash just because Halo: Reach is the higher ranking canonical source.


Agreed.

It is true that most Halo games were created by the Halo bible (which it is book, anyway.) and to my understanding, book canon does override the game canon. Halo trilogy with Halo wars is well-established canon sources, among with books, encyclopedia and Halo bible being top ranking canonical sources.


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
But if the book was written in a month...


Time spent on the books means nothing at all, why you even add that to your argument? Surely you know that serves no purpose and no support to your argument...

Frankly, I'm going to say one thing: Halo: Reach is no longer canon to me, especially major errors that broke the canon apart and it is hopeless to retcon to fix it. (My opinion)



[Edited on 06.09.2011 12:23 AM PDT]

  • 06.09.2011 12:21 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: raganok99

Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
How long it took to write it means nothing. Would it be different if it took several years? Just because you have little respect for previous canon doesn't mean the rest of us do. We won't so easily throw or copies of Fall of Reach in the trash just because Halo: Reach is the higher ranking canonical source.


Agreed.

It is true that most Halo games were created by the Halo bible (which it is book, anyway.) and to my understanding, book canon does override the game canon. Halo trilogy with Halo wars is well-established canon sources, among with books, encyclopedia and Halo bible being top ranking canonical sources.


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
But if the book was written in a month...


Time spent on the books means nothing at all, why you even add that to your argument? Surely you know that serves no purpose and no support to your argument...

Frankly, I'm going to say one thing: Halo: Reach is no longer canon to me, especially major errors that broke the canon apart and it is hopeless to retcon to fix it. (My opinion)



first off, all the people after my initial two posts who are talking about the book's time it took to get written etc are missing the point.

i was pointing out how the book was written after halo ce had already gone gold, it was written the month before halo ce was released and released around the same time. i was establishing which actually came first, (the game did) that is all i was doing.

and no it's not that i have disrespect for established canon, i simply treat it differently, it's a pretty simple system, games made by bungie override all canon in the event of direct contradictions. regardless of how established it may be. it just makes it simpler, much simpler. plus that is how canon works. the closer it is to the source material, the "truer" it is to canon, the bungie halo games are as close to the bible as we will ever get, so they are the truest canon we can see. whereas the books are written by a third party, but with the knowledge of the bible, this would be one step below the games because it written by a outside source. etc etc etc.

  • 06.09.2011 12:44 AM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien


Posted by: Atom Alchemist
first off, all the people after my initial two posts who are talking about the book's time it took to get written etc are missing the point.

i was pointing out how the book was written after halo ce had already gone gold, it was written the month before halo ce was released and released around the same time. i was establishing which actually came first, (the game did) that is all i was doing.

and no it's not that i have disrespect for established canon, i simply treat it differently, it's a pretty simple system, games made by bungie override all canon in the event of direct contradictions. regardless of how established it may be. it just makes it simpler, much simpler. plus that is how canon works. the closer it is to the source material, the "truer" it is to canon, the bungie halo games are as close to the bible as we will ever get, so they are the truest canon we can see. whereas the books are written by a third party, but with the knowledge of the bible, this would be one step below the games because it written by a outside source. etc etc etc.

I don't believe that a 340 page book was written in under a month. I HIGHLY doubt that even being possible, let alone practical. The wiki itself states that the book was written in just under TWO months, which seems far more likely. That being the case your entire argument of Halo CE being first to be finished is probably not true. Either way, the overall story of MC and his origins was probably written long before the game was even considered for the XBOX seeing as it was in development for a very long time.

In regards to the second part, how do you explain old canon being published AFTER new canon (aka the recent reprint of Halo: The Fall of Reach for 2011 over Halo: Reach the game)? It seems to me that there will be little to no correction of the current errors. Seeing as Halo Reach doesn't involve any of the events from FoR directly (yet it conflicts with several of them) I doubt that anything will change if it hasn't already. So what we will be left with is two pieces of hard canon that disagree with each other. Game canon may trump book canon, but what happens when game canon not only conflicts with established canon, but newer canon?

(be sure to note that Reach conflicts with all the books up until Contact Harvest, ie FoR, Flood, First Strike and GoO)

[Edited on 06.09.2011 12:53 AM PDT]

  • 06.09.2011 12:49 AM PDT
  • gamertag: Moirai
  • user homepage:

As I mentioned before, the problem here is multiple 'canon' storylines. And that in itself is utterly ridiculous.

Joe Staten stated some time back in the HBO forums (approx 2007) that game canon trumps book canon trumps marketing canon.

That only makes my point for me. It's dumb. The whole concept of canon is that there is only one definitive storyline.

Either you (Bungie/343) state quite clearly that the games are completely canon and the only true source, and that the books and anything else is just completely wrong and have no place in the true Halo universe, or you dispense with the whole concept of any type of 'canonical' storyline. You can't have multiple levels of canon, and then, on top of that, mix different parts of them together however you see fit at the time to define the elements and events of a fictional universe. That just makes a complete mockery of the whole concept.

Of course they won't do either because books and other 'story' material are just too big a cash cow to rip the carpet out from under their feet. So we'll continue to get this complete mess of competing/conflicting stories for as long as MS want to keep milking the dumb money sacks.... -_-


[Edited on 06.09.2011 2:43 AM PDT]

  • 06.09.2011 2:36 AM PDT

"Find where the liar hides, so that I may place my boot between his gums!" - Rtas 'Vadum

Posted by: otterboyz
But would you rather lose two SMACs as an expected casualty rate or a few marines and a frigate?

I doubt 2 SMACs would be lost, 1 if any. The rounds travel so much faster than Covenant plasma torpedoes. Anyway, I would go with whatever was the most reliable course of action to get the job done - the destruction of that Covenant ship.

With using the SMACs, the only point where failure could occur is if the round misses its target. Move the SMACs directly overhead away from the approaching Supercarrier as they cannot fire at it just yet. Use the SMACs further along the planets curvature to shoot the Supercarrier when it gets in view. Any platforms lost here would most likely be the ones directly overhead at the time, and they would not be able to be saved anyway.

With Kat's plan, there are a lot of points where failure could occur, and almost relies upon the Covenant to a certain extent.

Firstly, transport the slipspace bomb to the Corvette.

That involves:

~ Defending the slipspace bomb at Anchor 9 where it is being attached to the Pelican. An attack could occur here (and it did) which could have resulted in the loss of the bomb.

~ Taking the Corvette. Disable its engines to allow time to load the bomb. UNSC forces could have been wiped out by the Banshee/Seraph patrols here. It is also a wonder how the Supercarrier did not see this or wonder why the Corvette suddenly just slows down drastically. So we are lucky that the Supercarrier remained ignorant of the whole situation.

Now we rely on 6 and a squad of Marines to take the Corvette. Weren't we lucky that the atmosphere in the ship had somehow vented prior to us getting there, thus killing most of the crew? Yes, because if it had not then this part of the plan would most likely have failed.

~ Now transport the Bomb to the Corvette via Pelican. It could have been attacked by Covenant patrols on route and lost.

~ Assume now that the Covenant will not attempt to contact the Shipmaster of the Corvette between now and docking, or realise that something else is wrong.

~ Hope that the bomb was engineered correctly to give the desired results.

It could quite easily have failed, and the Supercarrier problem would not have been dealt with if it had. If any SMACs would be lost, it would be because they could not be moved away from the Supercarrier quick enough, so this plan would not save any that we would lose from using them to fire on the Supercarrier. It also resulted in the death of a Spartan-II.

  • 06.09.2011 8:39 AM PDT


Posted by: Atom Alchemist
dear god here comes another long and poorly written response.

anyways, reach invasion timeline.

here is a single, solidary word for you.
RETCON first strike has already been retconned, and the other books will probably follow suit, remember this, when it comes to canon, the first source is always the right one, and the secondary sources are changes to correspond with the first source. seeing as halo started as a video game, the "first"and truest source of what is canon and what isn't would be halo games devoloped by bungie studios. so, halo 1:CE, Halo:2 Halo:3 and Halo:4 are all canon, regardless of what you, or anyone else may think.(outside easter eggs of course) the books are secondary, as they are written outside of the bungie studio, and are not the same media outlet,(one being a novel, the other being a video game)
Actually, that pretty much sums up every little errors you have with the canon, grow the hell up, and think for a split second, the games are all canon, regardless of what you may think, it's the books that are canonically incorrect, not the games.


It's quite annoying when people throw the word RETCON around.

I wish people would realize that the original intent of retcons exist for the sake of improving and clarifying stories. When properly applied, it is only used to further solidify the plot's competence and consistency.

In case of Halo Reach(game), Bungie had its head in its ass.

Not only did they ignore established canon of 10 years, they downgraded their story quality.

Even if the book had never existed, the game's storyline is still downright retarded with poor Hollywood-esque characters,incompetent military organizations, and cheap plotpoints.

[Edited on 06.09.2011 9:20 AM PDT]

  • 06.09.2011 9:20 AM PDT

If you're passionate about the thing you're talking about, I'll always lend an ear.

Posted by: A Puzzled Mind
It's quite annoying when people throw the word RETCON around.

I wish people would realize that the original intent of retcons exist for the sake of improving and clarifying stories. When properly applied, it is only used to further solidify the plot's competence and consistency.

In case of Halo Reach(game), Bungie had its head in its ass.

Not only did they ignore established canon of 10 years, they downgraded their story quality.

Even if the book had never existed, the game's storyline is still downright retarded with poor Hollywood-esque characters,incompetent military organizations, and cheap plotpoints.

^EXACTLY

  • 06.09.2011 10:06 AM PDT

Get over it :P it's excusable, it's human error. Nobody is perfect. It was a fun game and thats that.

  • 06.09.2011 10:56 AM PDT


Posted by: INLINE JOSH
Honestly, although i do enjoy the books in the halo series, why does everyone try and interpretate them to be the most canon?

The games truly overule the books no matter what, hence why we had Halo Combat Evolved First.

If there is any errors or collisions deal with it.


People didn't care, until Reach came out. Cause they cannot try to connect Reach and the Book, the rule is now stupid and must be tossed out...

Anyway, if the Fall of Reach was written in under two months (I believe I heard in an interview with Nylund that he was rushed in writing it.) That means to me it's not the best quality source for information. He couldn't take his time for all the details (Hence the rather poor depiction of the battle timeline?)

  • 06.09.2011 10:59 AM PDT


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: INLINE JOSH
Honestly, although i do enjoy the books in the halo series, why does everyone try and interpretate them to be the most canon?

The games truly overule the books no matter what, hence why we had Halo Combat Evolved First.

If there is any errors or collisions deal with it.


People didn't care, until Reach came out. Cause they cannot try to connect Reach and the Book, the rule is now stupid and must be tossed out...

Anyway, if the Fall of Reach was written in under two months (I believe I heard in an interview with Nylund that he was rushed in writing it.) That means to me it's not the best quality source for information. He couldn't take his time for all the details (Hence the rather poor depiction of the battle timeline?)


He was still under strict oversight by O'Connor, so that hardly matters. Specifically, it was written in six weeks.

Anyhow, he wrote with much help from the Halo "Bible"(lol) peeps and they approved of what he wrote, esp the stuff he had to create himself.

And guess what, the book came out before the game...

  • 06.09.2011 11:07 AM PDT


Posted by: A Puzzled Mind

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: INLINE JOSH
Honestly, although i do enjoy the books in the halo series, why does everyone try and interpretate them to be the most canon?

The games truly overule the books no matter what, hence why we had Halo Combat Evolved First.

If there is any errors or collisions deal with it.


People didn't care, until Reach came out. Cause they cannot try to connect Reach and the Book, the rule is now stupid and must be tossed out...

Anyway, if the Fall of Reach was written in under two months (I believe I heard in an interview with Nylund that he was rushed in writing it.) That means to me it's not the best quality source for information. He couldn't take his time for all the details (Hence the rather poor depiction of the battle timeline?)


He was still under strict oversight by O'Connor, so that hardly matters. Specifically, it was written in six weeks.

Anyhow, he wrote with much help from the Halo "Bible"(lol) peeps and they approved of what he wrote, esp the stuff he had to create himself.

And guess what, the book came out before the game...


But did it come out before the game campaign was finished being written?

Either way, Fall of Reach used the very, very first version of the Halo Bible. So much stuff has been added to it since then.

  • 06.09.2011 11:14 AM PDT

Signatures are for squares.

How the mighty has fallen.

Are you seriously trying to argue that because Fall of Reach was written in a short amount of time it's an inferior story? That we should ignore it because it was written quickly? That's a pathetic argument and I'm surprised you're trying to make it.

  • 06.09.2011 11:16 AM PDT