- gamertag: [none]
- user homepage:
Posted by: OrderedComa
1. A matter of opinion. Not everyone thinks they suck, not everybody likes the Reach Brutes, like or dislike of them doesn't really hold any meaning to the discussion.
2. People are allowed to dislike something without explaining why, and if you want to know why they don't like x, just ask.
1. Like I said...it was a major idea put forward that they were generally disliked or inferior to their counter-parts in Halo 2/3/ODST. I used the word "sucked" in the sense that they were the least favorite.
2. Funny thing is, a large majority of people who said they disliked Brute, never explained why, or gave terrible nonsense reasons as to why they hated them. I called people on it...and they have YET to explain with valid reasons that could constitute the total hatred of their species.
Posted by: OrderedComa
3. On the contrary, the books do an excellent job with the Brutes, they don't just say "Brutes are bad, don't like them hmkay", no they show you, as well as tell you why the Brutes are not likeable. This is a mark of good story telling
No, this is the mark of BAD story telling. They are using the cheapest and lowest plot devices to make us dislike them. The Brutes fight amongst each other, they eat people, they roar and howl. They are not dinosaurs and this is not Jurassic park. This is a sentient species. Sentience implies intelligence, consciousness, and adaptability. They were written, as if they lacked these qualities, and thus, written as little more than wild, non-sentient, animals who act on instinct.
Now you are going to say "that is exactly what they are, wild animals". You, and everyone after you, is going to say this because that is how the lazy writers made them look.
I say the writers are stupid, and lazy, and retarded because (A) they cannot stay consistent, and (B) they use cheap plot devices to classify an ENTIRE civilization and thus (C) show what total retards and morons, not to mention totally unimaginative, they, being the writers, are.
How many wolves have split the atom? How many gorillas have built space faring ships? How many lions have have engineering capabilities to build their own vehicles? The writers fooled EVERYONE into thinking they were animals, in spite of their scientific accomplishments, which were also written by the writers. So on one hand, the writers say they have accomplished great scientific feats, but on the other hand, they are not sentient, but rather stupid, arrogant, thick-headed, and nothing more than wild animals who just kill each other with little regard for consequences and never evaluating their actions. These two ideas do not connect and they are opposing ideas that cannot co-exist on the same species given what is required for each end of the spectrum.
There is a DAMN GOOD REASON why I say these books suck! The writers suck. Oh God...God have mercy, nothing sucks more than these Halo novel writers! Everything sucks as far as these books are concerned. There are so many contradictions in the character writing, so many conflicting ideas, no motives, no sensibility, irregardless of the fact the Brutes, or a certain number of them at least, have demonstrated, in their history, intelligence equal to that of Albert Einstein. As far as these Halo novel writers go, they make George Lucas look like Edgar Allen Poe or F. Scott Fitzgerald.
Posted by: OrderedComa
One flaw I noticed in your argument is that you are talking about creating a villain as if you are talking about one single person, some of your qualifications will carry over, however structuring a race of antagonists will differ greatly from creating a main villain. And one simply cannot make every character, race, or species in a story likable just for the simple reason that you can't please everybody. What one person finds likable, another person will utterly loathe.
It is possible to make every character like-able. It is possible to like antagonists, despite their methods. Darth Vader is a like-able character, even in the first move. He was written well, and you like the depth of his character. He is not atypical bad guy...he has style and class. Even the empire were not A-typical. The empire presented itself as the legitimate ruling government fighting terrorists. Both sides, were the heroes of their own story. When there is only one point of view...it's called bad writing.
I like Brutes because I feel bad for them, knowing how little care was put into their design.
Sure, some of the concepts I put forward cannot apply to an entire race, but it shows that I have a better grasp on story writing than the writers do.
Just adapt the ideas to a wider scope, that's it, problem solved. There is no flaw in the argument, just widen the scope of what I said to encompass the entire race.
I hope you never become a writer.
Posted by: OrderedComa
You don't seem to know what broken gameplay is at all. The armor breaking apart had no bearing on the ease of beating the Brutes at all, it was only a visual representation of the level of health they had left, much like how the appearance of shields was changed a great deal in Reach so you could see shields "pop" and tell how much shield was left based on their appearance. The Brute armor breaking apart was purely aesthetic in design. And the Grunts and Jackals don't really wear armor, they're common level Grunts, they're not even well armed to begin with, why would they be given obvious armor like the Brutes all of a sudden?
So I guess once Brutes lost the ability to regenerate their shields, it didn't make them easier. If Brutes had solid armor, that never broke, and continually regenerating shields, they would have been a lot harder as enemies.
In Halo 1, 2, 3, and Reach...Elites don't lose their power armor and their shields continually regenerate, no matter if you drop their shields once, twice, or a 1000 times.
And you are saying this KEY difference had NO IMPACT on difficulty?
My point is, only Brutes have armor that breaks apart. Why doesn't Elite power armor break apart? Why didn't that aesthetic choice befall the Elites as well? Shield popping could have worked just as well for the Brutes as it did the Elites. I want an answer to this question.
You wont be able to answer this question, because you know you are wrong. I am half expecting anyone who reads this, to never answer this question. There is no valid answer short of:
"This is not aesthetics, this is called broken mechanics"
Brutes are hated, because Bungie made stupid design choices. Every reason the Brutes are hated, is because of the stupid design decisions made by, so called, experts in novelization, or game design.
Posted by: OrderedComa
And the health system on the Brutes in Halo 2 was completely broken. They're a common enemy and appear in semi large hordes, if each one has about as much strength as "boss" enemy like a Hunter, then their health system is completely broken. Why else do you think their health was nerfed for Halo 3? Because their health system was broken in Halo 2 and made the game almost too hard to play.
I had no problem with halo 2 Brutes. They were of perfect difficulty. Perhaps you...SUCK...at the game.
Perhaps you should go back to games like...Mario Party...because you...SUCK...at Halo, and you are unable to deal with challenging foes.
I think that's it. I think you just suck at Halo and you are whining because the race you hate so much was pwning you...over...and over...and over..and over!
Posted by: OrderedComa
Oh I'm sure you'd stick with the organization or group that betrayed you, mhm, yeah, that's what everyone would do. The Elites are totally dishonorable for declaring war on those who betrayed them and slaughtered them in cold blood.
And the Elites didn't turn their backs on their beliefs at all, they rejected what they found out were the lies and held onto what hadn't been proved a lie. They still believe in their religion.
They left...because a few hats and ships were exchanged. They turned their back because they were no long guards for the Prophets and they lost a few dozen ships. Cry babies if you ask me.
Nothing honorable about that.
"I want my hat back...WHAAAAAAA. I want my ship back...WHAAAAAAAAA". Then the Elites quit their galactic club because they had fewer rights.
Why didn't they try earning their position, instead of thinking it was their divine right to rule? See what I mean...the writers are stupid.
Cry me a river, build a bridge over it, and jump off.
I don't hate Elites, but this is the major reason I like Brutes more. They don't whine and complain like Elites do.
That is beside the point.
Posted by: OrderedComa
And the Elites were hardly even brought up in any sort of detail until you came along. A few passing mentions were made by some people, but no one made any posts adoring the Elites and claiming they are so much better than Brutes.
In my original post, I never brought up Elites (short of making a simple comparison on how when someone hates on the Elites, people jump down his/her throat or the breaking of the armor. Not once did I make evaluated comparisons between the two). If you recall, I quoted someone who brought them up and compared the two...in detail. In fact...it was you who made an evaluated comparison.
Posted by: OrderedComa
I still kinda like Maccabeus, he reminded me of a the Elites a bit.
You brought them up first...
Dumbass...
You must be in a Coma. I know of no explanation as to why your brain has such little activity.
Posted by: OrderedComa
I have one last thing to say to you...
You can shut up right about...THERE. Everything you say has no value to me.
[Edited on 03.26.2011 10:15 AM PDT]