- RKOSNAKE
- |
- Exalted Legendary Member
"I may not be perfect, but always been true."
Posted by: spartan120
Posted by: Chronicler 177
No, he was never the best. But the fact is that he did what he did, and that's what makes him a hero.
I agree :)
I'll admit, I skipped over a lot of these posts [Too long, did not listen]
What I did notice is a lot of MC Hatin' and a lot of poorly constructed arguments as to why MC is/is not better than N6 [or why SII are not better than SIII] That's not to say my argument will be any better :D
Ultimately, the game cannot be used as an accurate measure of whom is better than whom, so we can rule that out [although not completely, and I'll come to that] All we really have left are the novels, which I hold dearly [the originals, not the re-issues] in my heart and have so for the last 10 years.
It is true that John was not the most talented Spartan: the strongest, fastest, most intelligent: yes, this much is true, however what did separate him from the others was his ability to perform to a certain degree, his missions, achieve certain outcomes and lead his Spartans through the thick of things. We also know that he was a particularly lucky individual, if one can put a measure on something intangible, like luck.
What we should also consider is, John, like all the Spartans, was still only human, he was just an exceptionally capable [augmented] human.
Noble Six is much the same, and, like any operator, he just gets the mission done to the best of his abilities, dealing with any snags that may pop up along the way.
The only real measure we have at our disposal, of who is better [and why this question is being asked is beyond me] is who you, as the player/reader can most identify with, or simply just who you prefer.
At the beginning of this post, I mentioned how the game cannot be used to accurately measure who is better [Six or John] however there are two sides to that equation, and the statement is both right and wrong. The intention of the developers [Bungie] was to create a blank slate, an avatar, for you, the player, to assume the role of a character in a living, breathing universe, with 'real' people, interesting stories and themes of grandeur and transcendence [as in most Science Fiction worth it's salt] The point I am making is that when you play the game, you are the character interacting in the game world, and the character is you, functioning in the game world.
The characters Bungie created for us to play as are intended to give us the most enjoyment we can possibly have while playing the game. You are meant to be Bad Ass and you're meant to feel like a Bad Ass when you play. If you play Halo Reach better than you played any of the previous Halo games, and developed some form of attachment to the characters of each game, then you will naturally feel Six is better than John, and the same theory works in the opposite direction, i.e, John is preferred over Six.
I think Batman said it best:
'It's not who I am underneath, but what I do, that defines me'
To simplify:
You cannot be wrong, no matter who you choose, it's how you play that defines which character [six or John] is better.
Phew! Now to wait for the rage replies :D
No u Noebl Zix > Mastur Chef!1!!!!
Just kidding, I think you're right, although, people tend to get more attached to one character (John) more because he has been around for 3 games in comparison to Six who was only in one game.
I for one, prefer Six, why? Because he at least displayed humanity, he was not the "Strong and Silent" type of guy, and pretty much didn't felt like I was using a freaking Cyborg/Robot.
John was just too boring and mechanical to use in my opinion, the guy showed no emotion whatsoever through the games (at least in my perspective).
Six was friendly with other soldiers and even made a friendship with Jorge, whom at the end gave his life for Six and Reach.
So yeah, I'd pick Six over John any day.