- OrderedComa
- |
- Noble Member
Posted by: Metroidman42
You,sir,are a raving fanboy of epic proportions. Books=games in canon. There are some exceptions(gameplay mech.).
I agree with this statement, and I would probably add delusional in their too.
Posted by: Naked Crook
I read that really long reply on the previous page.
We can argue this till we are blue in the face...but we have to remember one thing.
"What do we think of the Brutes"
As far as I am concerned, you have based your dislike of the Brutes based on the books, while I have based my like of the Brutes on the games.
Unfortunately...the games are more valid.
While your books can be revised, edited, altered, re-released, re-published, corrected, retconned, and changed...the games will NEVER change. The games will always be here. They will never go away. They will forever be static, unchangeable.
My timeline...goes like this.
Halo Wars > Halo Reach > Halo 1 > Halo 2 > Halo ODST > Halo 3
Your time line is similar to mine, except it is polluted with content that can be changed at any time.
My time line will never change. I can turn these games on tomorrow, next week, next year, next decade...and they will be the same as they were the first time I played them. The story will never change.
Your books, have been retconned and edited too many times to NOT call it revisionist history. They were never thought out, poorly planned, and their existence insults the Halo Universe. This is a testament to the quality of the writers. This is why I have no stock in what the books write.
That would have been because according to the original versions of TFoR the Elites had not been encountered in the war yet, and that particular information is now horribly outdated, retconned, and useless as evidence for anything, imo.
And frankly the books do a horrible job with the Covenant anyway.
Does that quote sound familiar Coma? It should...you said it. The first book, destroyed the Halo Universe before it even started. How can you put so much stock in a line of books that were mistaken on the first step.
SOURCE: http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=58081717&p ostRepeater1-p=2
Oh...but...it's nothing a little bit of revisionist history can't fix. That's right...
You even said the Books did a horrible job with the Covenant. So why do you defend their work on the Covenant in this thread, but degrade it in another? You are losing creditability.
Your dislike of the Brutes depends on a time line that has been constantly revised and, by your own admission, horrible in terms of Covenant development.
My opinion is based on a time line that does not, and will never change. Your opinion is based on information that can be changed at the drop of a hat. The books are comparable to a witness in court who keeps changing their story. Sooner or later, all creditability is lost. The books have lost their creditability.
I doubt you will read and fully understand what I have said. So I will end with this:
I like the Brutes because of the Games, and not the books...because the books are unreliable.
Enjoy those books...enjoy revisionist history.
Well you would be wrong, I had no particular liking for the Brutes ever since I played Halo 3 and saw and heard what they did or what they intended to do.
Unfortunately, you are completely wrong, the books and the games are on completely total and equal footing, except for the instances I gave examples for, where either source will take precedence depending on the situation regarding the issue.
I did not know you were a prophet. Just because there have been no re-releases of the games does not mean it will never happen, and in fact the games have at least one retcon themselves, Johnson was supposed to have died in Halo: CE, and yet there he is alive and well for Halo 2. And it doesn't even have to be a a re-release of a game to change the story, Bungie or 343 could make a statement that completely changes the plot of any of the games, or they could release a new game that changes and aspect of one of the former games. You are not a prophet, you cannot possibly know with any degree of certainty what the future holds.
Oh I didn't know changing such minor details as when a Covenant species was first encountered was revisionist history, oh wow, you're so smart. NOT
The only thing that has ever changed in the books is the introduction of Covenant species, and even then the changes were made because they make way more sense. If the writers sucked, they wouldn't have been hired in the first place or have any popular books or writing at all, so there goes your paper thin argument up in flames.
Again with the taking my words out of context, I probably was not as clear as I should have been, I will admit that, but everyone in that thread already would have known what I've meant as I've argued with several of them over the issue of how the Covenant's military might was portrayed and I've stated my position on what I think of their MILITARY portrayal enough times that people would know what I meant. So I am not being hypocritical on the issue at all, you are merely missing what I meant, and if you still think I am contradicting myself, then you are quite dense and thickheaded.
Again with the prophet stuff, you don't know with certainty what will happen even within the next ten minutes, there is no way in Hell that you could possibly know what will happen in regards to the games.
And that analogy of yours hardly relates at all, you are stretching yourself thin in your delusions, bucko.
And I fully and completely understand every single word you have said in this post, and I do not agree with any of it in the slightest. In fact, it is just the arrogant nonsense filled with delusions of grandeur that I have come to expect from you.