Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why does no one remember that John isn't an exceptional Spartan?
  • Subject: Why does no one remember that John isn't an exceptional Spartan?
Subject: Why does no one remember that John isn't an exceptional Spartan?
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

____________(˜˜˜||˜˜˜˜||˜˜˜˜˜)_∏______
l | --------____.`=====.-.~:________\___|=======================[ oo]
|_|||___/___/_/~```|_|_|_|``(o)----------<)

So, in the interest of debate, who do you guys think the "Other Hyper-lethal" Spartan is?

Me? I think its obviously Master Chief.

However, I am interested to hear other theories/opinions,

  • 05.05.2011 12:19 PM PDT


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: Surperion93
I'll admit my bias. I like Noble Six because he doesn't get any god-treatment as I've seen Chief get. He's also newer and has more development ingame.

SO the dislike extends form the way people treat John and not John as a Spartan I assume?

I think Noble Six was beefed up for Halo Reach. I mean "Hyper leathel" and "Lone Wolf" doesn't suit a Spartan 3. They work as a team and they get sent to there deaths. I ALWAYS imagined that was essentially what a S-III was... disposable.


Yeah, pretty much. I'll admit he did awesome stuff, but I believe other Spartans given same support+gear could do it. Better, worse, or the same.

Most of my dislike is simply how I saw a -blam!-load more hero worship Post Reach release.


Well if you see my previous posts I agree. Some one said I was set on making him look "God-like" and I was "Bias" when if you read it, I clearly state other Spartans in his position could do the job just as good. My WHOLE point is just even though I think every Spartan is exceptional you seem to be under-rating the chief a little. He is better then just avarage amung the Spartans, never said he was the best of the best.

  • 05.05.2011 12:23 PM PDT


Posted by: C0MIC RELIEF
So, in the interest of debate, who do you guys think the "Other Hyper-lethal" Spartan is?

Me? I think its obviously Master Chief.

However, I am interested to hear other theories/opinions,


Agreed. Bungie know the fan boys would go blood thursty if MC was not considered 'Hyper-lethal' plus in my opinion the story does seem to pretty much happen around him. Being a major player in the series you have got to of killed a lot of -blam!-.

  • 05.05.2011 12:27 PM PDT

Me? I kinda think Linda is personally with her ability with the sniper rifle.

She's one person I can think of that'd fit it.

  • 05.05.2011 12:29 PM PDT


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Me? I kinda think Linda is personally with her ability with the sniper rifle.

She's one person I can think of that'd fit it.


LOL in the trailer for Halo reach Halsey says "Noble 3, as a sniper his skills are un-matched" When I heard that I was like "WTF about Linda".

  • 05.05.2011 12:32 PM PDT

"What do you hear?"
"Nothing but the rain."
"Then grab your gun and bring in the cat."
"Boom, boom, boom!"

Posted by: keeno 111
You've ovbiously never seen a real politcal debate. Stop being a nancy.


Quote fail. Could care less for politics and insulting someone over a differing opinion shows your immaturity.

Posted by: C0MIC RELIEF
So, in the interest of debate, who do you guys think the "Other Hyper-lethal" Spartan is?

Me? I think its obviously Master Chief.

However, I am interested to hear other theories/opinions,


Not really a big fan of MC but I'd have to agree with the statement. Game wise, it's the Chief and the only reason why both him and Six share the rating is because they're player controlled characters. It's a way saying you're special. XD

Lore-wise? That's a tough one. Me, I'd personally go with Fred but I'm slightly biased in that regard. Second best at everything and the only reason he didn't come in first was because he hated the attention. I also believe that he was as well-rounded as the Chief, their only difference being John had luck on his side.

But I think we all have different views on this one lol so it'll be interesting to hear other people's ideas and theories.

  • 05.05.2011 1:11 PM PDT


Posted by: DecepticonCobra
Posted by: Gamma 46

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Hm, I'd say until we know what Six's past deployments are like, we can't say Chief has more Covenant engagements.

Six, at the very least, knows how strong Zealot shields were prior to the WC encounter.


I agree there are too many unknowns, but of what portrayal we've gotten about him- perhaps as much as we'll ever get as they don't want to ruin his character being 'you'- he was largely involved in anti-Terror ops, perhaps being thrown into more Covenant-related Ops as the Inner-Colonies faced annihilation.

While he does know Zealot shield strength, it doesn't necesarrily mean he's fought one. I agree it's HIGHLY probable, but it is by no means guaranteed. I'm sure the UNSC has let the Spartans research/document shield strengths of various Covenant classes encountered. We may not have had the best info, but it's entirely possible that we had recorded some information about shield strength and how much it takes to down one.

Either way, I still believe Chief by far had much more Covenant contact compared to Six, and thus, had an ever so slight advantage in that regard.

Even with Chief having more Covenant contact, it doesn't show. Elites are constantly outclassing Chief when he decides to pick a fight with them. There are about four instances of an Elite giving Chief trouble, one at Gamma Station, one on the Ascendant Justice, one on the wreckage of the Pillar of Autumn and one on a Covenant ship as he was rescuing Dr. Halsey.

I'm sure Six has had trouble, but he took down quite a few Elites before succumbing to death. I doubt Chief would've lasted as long in a similar position.


I've said it before, I guess I'll just say it again :P

I personally wouldn't use the Gamma Station encounter as evidence, nor be inclined to hold it in much regard, as when it was written that was supposed to be the first time that Elites were encountered in the war and there was no intel on them, it only makes sense that Chief would have a serious struggle with his first Elite. Your first encounter with something will usually be your hardest. Now, as to why I wouldn't use this as evidence or hold it as very credible evidence is the fact that Elites being encountered for the first time at Reach has since been retconned and Elites were fought all throughout the war. So Chief would have fought them before that point and the struggle of it being his first Elite shouldn't be there anymore, so imo some of the validity of this point has been removed.

On to the second event :P Chief had been fighting almost non-stop for a good 3+ days at least (IIRC), been wounded a whole lot in that space of time, and was suffering a major lack of sleep. So his combat prowess was not at optimal levels, and the Elite he fought was one of the best of the best as far as Elites go as it was a Shipmaster or some other high ranking Elite (please correct me if I'm wrong). In addition to Chief's condition, the Elite is wielding a sword in a very tight space (if memory serves me well). Any Spartan would be struggling with that under the exact same circumstances, even Fred who's the CQB specialist.

I don't remember him having trouble on the Pillar of Autumn, do you mean with Zamamee? Even if it wasn't him specifically, the Spec Ops Elites are nothing to sneeze at, they're some of the top fighters the Elites have. And pretty much everyone agrees that any Spartan will have more difficulty with any of the Elites above Major. And with the fight with Lodamee in the package, of course the Elite beat him in a duel, he would have beaten Fred in an energy sword duel too. And Chief's fought Elites with energy swords while his own weapon was either useless or he was weaponless, it was not certain that Lodamee would win the whole fight and kill Chief. I think any other Spartan would be in the same position simply for the fact that the energy sword is an Elite weapon and any Elite using it will know more about how to use it properly and more skillfully than a Spartan or anyone else who has just acquired one.

  • 05.05.2011 6:42 PM PDT

Posted by: RotaryCookie
In the modern Royal Marines, as an officer you have to be able to do everything your troops can do, and more, and do it better.

Of course, you'll never be able to out-shoot the sniper, or come close to being able to command an armoured batallion anywhere as good as the guy who's spent his entire career driving his tank about.
As far as general duties go though, you have to be bloody special.

MC would never have been chosen as leader if he couldn't out-perform his peers in most situations, minus their specialities.
MCs speciality is his luck, or ability to see things that others can't, similar to Kurts sixth sense, albiet with a different purpose.
Not saying he's godlike or a billionty times better,just that he, like any SPARTAN is seriously good as what he does.



I fail to see how anyone can argue with this logic.

As I've previously posted as well this is why I think Chief was better then average. In order to lead you need to lead by example not just your words. IMO I view Fred as probably the most "tangibly" talented Spartan, but for the most part being a leader wasn't his thing. Chief then I feel was, let's say "minutely" below Fred in terms of ability but was a natural leader.

I'm not saying Chief was head and shoulders above the rest, because he wasn't, but he clearly was on the short list of "Best of the Spartans."

  • 05.05.2011 6:48 PM PDT

See my vids on Youtube http://www.youtube.com/user/Chronicler177

No, he was never the best. But the fact is that he did what he did, and that's what makes him a hero.

  • 05.05.2011 6:58 PM PDT


Posted by: CowPieSky32
I'm not saying Chief was head and shoulders above the rest, because he wasn't, but he clearly was on the short list of "Best of the Spartans."


And I like this viewpoint.

Chief, and the 'normal' blue team members/Spartans often with him, are IMO, the best of the Spartan IIs.

  • 05.05.2011 7:01 PM PDT

"I may not be perfect, but always been true."

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: CowPieSky32
I'm not saying Chief was head and shoulders above the rest, because he wasn't, but he clearly was on the short list of "Best of the Spartans."


And I like this viewpoint.

Chief, and the 'normal' blue team members/Spartans often with him, are IMO, the best of the Spartan IIs.


This, although I'd say either Fred or Kurt are better in my opinion, but meh, that's just me.

[Edited on 05.05.2011 7:23 PM PDT]

  • 05.05.2011 7:22 PM PDT


Posted by: RKOSNAKE
Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: CowPieSky32
I'm not saying Chief was head and shoulders above the rest, because he wasn't, but he clearly was on the short list of "Best of the Spartans."


And I like this viewpoint.

Chief, and the 'normal' blue team members/Spartans often with him, are IMO, the best of the Spartan IIs.


This, although I'd say either Fred or Kurt are better in my opinion, but meh, that's just me.


Well, saying "Chief is one of the better/best Spartans." is a far cry from saying "Chief is the best Spartan!"

or "Chief is a god of death and carnage!"

Which is why I'm fine with it, and he isn't coming across as "You don't see chief as the best! BURN AT THE STAKE!"

  • 05.05.2011 7:28 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Awesomeness will ensue..."

BEN 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

  • 05.05.2011 7:32 PM PDT

@accordingto343

Your one stop shop for all of 343's fabulous errors and ridiculous notions in the Halo lore.

Posted by: OrderedComa

Posted by: DecepticonCobra
Posted by: Gamma 46

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Hm, I'd say until we know what Six's past deployments are like, we can't say Chief has more Covenant engagements.

Six, at the very least, knows how strong Zealot shields were prior to the WC encounter.


I agree there are too many unknowns, but of what portrayal we've gotten about him- perhaps as much as we'll ever get as they don't want to ruin his character being 'you'- he was largely involved in anti-Terror ops, perhaps being thrown into more Covenant-related Ops as the Inner-Colonies faced annihilation.

While he does know Zealot shield strength, it doesn't necesarrily mean he's fought one. I agree it's HIGHLY probable, but it is by no means guaranteed. I'm sure the UNSC has let the Spartans research/document shield strengths of various Covenant classes encountered. We may not have had the best info, but it's entirely possible that we had recorded some information about shield strength and how much it takes to down one.

Either way, I still believe Chief by far had much more Covenant contact compared to Six, and thus, had an ever so slight advantage in that regard.

Even with Chief having more Covenant contact, it doesn't show. Elites are constantly outclassing Chief when he decides to pick a fight with them. There are about four instances of an Elite giving Chief trouble, one at Gamma Station, one on the Ascendant Justice, one on the wreckage of the Pillar of Autumn and one on a Covenant ship as he was rescuing Dr. Halsey.

I'm sure Six has had trouble, but he took down quite a few Elites before succumbing to death. I doubt Chief would've lasted as long in a similar position.


I've said it before, I guess I'll just say it again :P

I personally wouldn't use the Gamma Station encounter as evidence, nor be inclined to hold it in much regard, as when it was written that was supposed to be the first time that Elites were encountered in the war and there was no intel on them, it only makes sense that Chief would have a serious struggle with his first Elite. Your first encounter with something will usually be your hardest. Now, as to why I wouldn't use this as evidence or hold it as very credible evidence is the fact that Elites being encountered for the first time at Reach has since been retconned and Elites were fought all throughout the war. So Chief would have fought them before that point and the struggle of it being his first Elite shouldn't be there anymore, so imo some of the validity of this point has been removed.

On to the second event :P Chief had been fighting almost non-stop for a good 3+ days at least (IIRC), been wounded a whole lot in that space of time, and was suffering a major lack of sleep. So his combat prowess was not at optimal levels, and the Elite he fought was one of the best of the best as far as Elites go as it was a Shipmaster or some other high ranking Elite (please correct me if I'm wrong). In addition to Chief's condition, the Elite is wielding a sword in a very tight space (if memory serves me well). Any Spartan would be struggling with that under the exact same circumstances, even Fred who's the CQB specialist.

I don't remember him having trouble on the Pillar of Autumn, do you mean with Zamamee? Even if it wasn't him specifically, the Spec Ops Elites are nothing to sneeze at, they're some of the top fighters the Elites have. And pretty much everyone agrees that any Spartan will have more difficulty with any of the Elites above Major. And with the fight with Lodamee in the package, of course the Elite beat him in a duel, he would have beaten Fred in an energy sword duel too. And Chief's fought Elites with energy swords while his own weapon was either useless or he was weaponless, it was not certain that Lodamee would win the whole fight and kill Chief. I think any other Spartan would be in the same position simply for the fact that the energy sword is an Elite weapon and any Elite using it will know more about how to use it properly and more skillfully than a Spartan or anyone else who has just acquired one.

All fair evaluations.

That said, I would still say Noble Six outperformed Chief in the end. Yes, she died, but Six managed to kill numerous high-ranking Elites while getting shot at and bleeding out, probably suffering from a lack of sleep and rest too.

I get Chief did a lot of cool things, but if he didn't get Cortana, I doubt he would've lived to do so.

  • 05.05.2011 7:35 PM PDT

"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.

  • 05.05.2011 7:39 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Awesomeness will ensue..."

BEN SPARTAN120


RKOSNAKE

^-^ That's fair enough.

I feel the need to point out to you, however, that John was designed to be 'mechanical' in the games for the reasons I stated in my post. Your personality becomes the personality of the Game Character/Avatar, thats why when you play Halo and serve Carnage and Havok to the Covenant, you feel like one bad mother...

Do you see? :D

This tried and true formula has worked for Bungie in nearly all of their games, particularly Marathon, to which Halo is closely tied :)

The blank slate means you become the character. Mass Effect has really refined this [as one example] but Halo isn't Mass Effect. Regardless, the choices you make in the game [Halo] either impact you, or they don't. How you play in the game world is how John or Six are 'seen' in the game world.

I do it all the time, by trying to keep Marines/Crew or civilians alive, by trying to play the game tactically instead of run and gun , by not skipping through cutscense, etc. How I play is how my character is represented in the game world, as both John, or Six :)

I hope that makes sense.

  • 05.05.2011 7:57 PM PDT

K, I have the Journal and I also remember Halsey saying he stood out, she first mentions of 117 on September 15,2517.

Number 117 had an unprecedented string of forty-five victories over two weeks in a brutal version of King of the Hill. Walked away with a chipped tooth. Over a dozen broken arms, collarbones, and fingers among his opponents.

And on December 10, 2518 she states:

Several possible leaders are emerging from the pool of candidates(and we have yet to witness the aggressive alpha dominance predicted by ONI's "specialists").
Mendez and I agree that the top candidates for leadership are numbers 051, 092, 104, and 117. Mendez says his money is on Kurt. I refuse to engage in any puerile betting when so much more is at stake than money or pride.
Besides, I already know who will be their leader.
I knew the first day I met him.


Which is probably referring to John.

  • 05.05.2011 8:46 PM PDT

"What do you hear?"
"Nothing but the rain."
"Then grab your gun and bring in the cat."
"Boom, boom, boom!"

Posted by: keeno 111
And you show weakness to debate son.


By not insulting someone because I disagree with their views? It shows maturity and an open mind. It's a good thing to have.

I chose a character who isn't as fleshed out as the beloved Master Chief. Any points I could have made against 117, have been made. I see no point in repeating those. I offered my opinion on my choice, despite how bare it was.

Is Chief average among his peers? Yes but he was special. I won't deny that. But to say he's god-like just because he saved the galaxy? That's foolish, especially when you don't know how certain S-IIs or even Six could have handled the situation.

[Edited on 05.06.2011 1:40 AM PDT]

  • 05.06.2011 1:27 AM PDT

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

Exceptional or not. John was a pivotal player in preventing galactic suicide on many occasions.

I think that deserves some credit.

Even with the N6 comparison, one thing remains very important.

He survived.

All this "well, N6 could, would, should have" is nonsense. John was there kicking ass. While N6 is glassed in Reach. I hardly think that's a direct comparison.



[Edited on 05.06.2011 4:30 AM PDT]

  • 05.06.2011 4:27 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Ad eundum quo nemo ante iit

Posted by: ninjakenzen
Exceptional or not. John was a pivotal player in preventing galactic suicide on many occasions.

I think that deserves some credit.

Even with the N6 comparison, one thing remains very important.

He survived.

All this "well, N6 could, would, should have" is nonsense. John was there kicking ass. While N6 is glassed in Reach. I hardly think that's a direct comparison.



No one is taking that away from the Chief, but lets remember 6 died saving the Chief, thus enabling Humanity's victory.

So the '6 is terrible because is died' debate is moot.

  • 05.06.2011 4:58 AM PDT

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

Posted by: Snake Archer
Posted by: ninjakenzen
Exceptional or not. John was a pivotal player in preventing galactic suicide on many occasions.

I think that deserves some credit.

Even with the N6 comparison, one thing remains very important.

He survived.

All this "well, N6 could, would, should have" is nonsense. John was there kicking ass. While N6 is glassed in Reach. I hardly think that's a direct comparison.



No one is taking that away from the Chief, but lets remember 6 died saving the Chief, thus enabling Humanity's victory.

So the '6 is terrible because is died' debate is moot.

Hmm... Johnson and Keys died saving humanity.

Looks like everything humanity does from then on it partly accredited to them...

This logic is dum.

Noble Six died serving his mission. That's like saying without Jorge, Noble Six would have died activating the slipspace bomb.

Which is true..but...
So what?

People die for each other all the time in war. It's a very Noble deed that should be remembered. However this has no place in a comparison between Chief and N6.

  • 05.06.2011 5:23 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member
  • gamertag: AJF117
  • user homepage:

"Usually, the good Lord works in mysterious ways. But not today! This here is 66 tons of straight-up, H.E-spewing dee-vine intervention! If God is love, then you can call me Cupid!"

-Sgt. Johnson, Halo 2

he had one thing that the other spartans didnt luck and cortana

  • 05.06.2011 6:32 AM PDT

sup if you don't like what I post you can go suck one this is the internet not Grammer class so GTFO Grammer N@ZI's

Posted by: forthnback
Yes, he was the only Spartan in place when the Autumn jumped. As such, he was the Spartan on hand to tackle the Halo rings. In Halo 2-3, Blue Team was sent away. Once again, he was the only Spartan on hand to spearhead the Delta Halo campaign, along with the Ark landing.

John saved the galaxy, and inspired Humanity as it's hero. Yes.

He's also, according to the novels, entirely mediocre as a Spartan. He is not the strongest, fastest, best marksmen, smartest, most agile, etc. He is average, in literally every regard. He is exceptional in only one regard, and that was leadership. He was one of four Spartan selected to be leaders (and even then, Kurt's team frequently outperformed John's team because Kurt was the better commander).

Bungie's stance, not mine, is that John is an average Spartan who excells at only one thing. Leadership. And he isn't even the best at that.

For those familiar with the definition of average, this means John was in the middle of his class as far as terms of abilities went. That means that 50% of the Spartans, roughly, would have performed as good as he did in Halo 1-3, if not better.

I really laugh at everyone who claims John is somehow a better warrior than Noble Six. Leader, absolutely. But N6 was declared to be one of two Spartans to have the hyper-lethal rating....and god knows it isn't going to be 'everyman' John.

This man speaks the truth here have a cookie (::)

  • 05.06.2011 7:16 AM PDT


Posted by: ninjakenzen
Even with the N6 comparison, one thing remains very important.

He survived.

All this "well, N6 could, would, should have" is nonsense. John was there kicking ass. While N6 is glassed in Reach. I hardly think that's a direct comparison.



So, because Six died, he sucks? Not sure if that's what you are trying to say.

John was there, and fought on the orbital station. Six fought on the ground and died (He wasn't glassed, or his helm wouldn't be there.)

Survival in general does not prove one being better. The coward survives many engagements. Is he better then the sergeant who died in one of the first few?

  • 05.06.2011 7:19 AM PDT