Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Your vote on Halo:Reach and the FOR Canon errors (3 options)
  • Subject: Your vote on Halo:Reach and the FOR Canon errors (3 options)
Subject: Your vote on Halo:Reach and the FOR Canon errors (3 options)
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

We are all going to get banned aren't we?


Posted by: Pipboy 3050

Posted by: ajw34307

Posted by: Pipboy 3050
Wait, you are saying Bungie had a responsibility to make halo 4 because of the legendary ending? If they created Halo 4, they would have to open more doors and more mysteries that would continue to convoluted the Halo story.


I'm saying Halo 4 would have been a better choice. In what way would Halo 4 convolute the story? I question you definition of the word, you have happily defended Reach when that is the most convoluted dichotomy the Haloverse has seen.

Right away, are you stupid? Reach came out over 3 years after H3, I also question your concept of time.

Halo 4 is a horrible idea, I think Bungie made the right decision to leave it at the legendary ending and to let the fanbase come up with their own theories and idea's instead of answering the question right away.

The legendary ending is not to open the door for yet another sequel (although MS and 343 might see it that way) it is there for the legacy and legend of MC and Cortana. This is the final mystery of the Halo universe and it should be left totally unanswered.


Despite the fact the final Terminal had MB pretty much tell you he was sending John to the Forerunners as an example of his atonement? Sure, lots of room for fan interpretation there. I'd like to point out that the fans do not make the storyline.




Sorry, Halo 4 is NOT a better choice then a game based on the battle of Reach.



New game that adds to canon and story> new game that trys to fill nonexistent wholes in a plot by making more inconsistencies.

  • 05.25.2011 10:14 AM PDT

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

Posted by: Pipboy 3050
Although Bungie's execution of a Reach game was off, it does not change the fact that it is a far better idea then Halo 4.

Fact?

No, opinions.

  • 05.25.2011 10:17 AM PDT

"A LIE is a LIE"


- Truly intelligent and deep Black ops trailer


Posted by: grey101


New game that adds to canon and story> new game that trys to fill nonexistent wholes in a plot by making more inconsistencies.


The that's the actual execution of the game. We are talking about the CONCEPT of Halo 4 compared to the Battle of Reach.

If I was a bungie employee and I was told "Ok, two choices, we make our FOURTH big game based of MC and Cortana for the FOURTH TIME, or, we make a prequel based of the Battle of Reach, with new characters"

Which would you say yes to? I sure as hell know.

Keep in mind the original idea is different from the execution of the game.

[Edited on 05.25.2011 10:22 AM PDT]

  • 05.25.2011 10:21 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

We are all going to get banned aren't we?


Posted by: Pipboy 3050

Posted by: grey101


New game that adds to canon and story> new game that trys to fill nonexistent wholes in a plot by making more inconsistencies.


The that's the actual execution of the game. We are talking about the CONCEPT of Halo 4 compared to the Battle of Reach.

If I was a bungie employee and I was told "Ok, two choices, we make our FOURTH big game based of MC and Cortana for the FOURTH TIME, or, we make a prequel based of the Battle of Reach, with new characters"

Which would you say yes to? I sure as hell know.

Keep in mind the original idea is different from the execution of the game.


IT doesn't matter. even though i would rather wait another 6-10 years for the chief to be touched i would rather have something new than an unneeded story and a unneeded game.

  • 05.25.2011 10:23 AM PDT

"A LIE is a LIE"


- Truly intelligent and deep Black ops trailer


Posted by: grey101

IT doesn't matter. even though i would rather wait another 6-10 years for the chief to be touched i would rather have something new than an unneeded story and a unneeded game.


I agree it doesn't matter now. But I think the battle of reach is a needed game. At least, one with red and blue team.

  • 05.25.2011 10:27 AM PDT

"A LIE is a LIE"


- Truly intelligent and deep Black ops trailer


Posted by: anton1792
Posted by: Pipboy 3050
Although Bungie's execution of a Reach game was off, it does not change the fact that it is a far better idea then Halo 4.

Fact?

No, opinions.



Factually speaking, Bungie has already made three games based of MC and Cortana. I can assure you, if the entire Halo fanbase were asked three years ago if we would rather have a FOURTH game based of MC for the FOURTH TIME, or a game depicting Reach with NEW CHARACTERS, The vast, vast, vast majority of the fanbase would say the second option.

  • 05.25.2011 10:31 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

We are all going to get banned aren't we?


Posted by: Pipboy 3050

Posted by: grey101

IT doesn't matter. even though i would rather wait another 6-10 years for the chief to be touched i would rather have something new than an unneeded story and a unneeded game.


I agree it doesn't matter now. But I think the battle of reach is a needed game. At least, one with red and blue team.

to be honest while the concept of doing a reach game was/is good it just needs to be done right.

If spartan IIIS are on reach then give them SPI and more stealthy mission.

  • 05.25.2011 10:31 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member
  • gamertag: LASEM
  • user homepage:

Got pork?

You obviously haven't met my younger brother then.

Posted by: grey101
I say the 3rd one because we shouldn't be the ones coming up with explanations and loopholes for the errors. Bungie should have specifically stated why this and this happened instead of leaving it up to us.

Not to mention the point of Reach falling was to show how weak the UNSC really was to the covenant; The game did that Last stand BS, which wasn't the case whatsoever


This guy summed it up, I agree entirely. They should have sticked to the book!

  • 05.25.2011 10:35 AM PDT

"A LIE is a LIE"


- Truly intelligent and deep Black ops trailer


Posted by: grey101

Posted by: Pipboy 3050

Posted by: grey101

IT doesn't matter. even though i would rather wait another 6-10 years for the chief to be touched i would rather have something new than an unneeded story and a unneeded game.


I agree it doesn't matter now. But I think the battle of reach is a needed game. At least, one with red and blue team.

to be honest while the concept of doing a reach game was/is good it just needs to be done right.

If spartan IIIS are on reach then give them SPI and more stealthy mission.


I'd be lying if I said I didn't agree.

  • 05.25.2011 10:41 AM PDT


Posted by: ajw34307

Posted by: OrderedComa

Posted by: ajw34307

Posted by: Pipboy 3050

Posted by: ajw34307

Er... The difference is that Reach is based of TFOR and FS, events established in the canon for a decade. Halo 3 was an independant story, nothing was canonically "wrong" with it; ODST and Wars are also independent events which had little to no explanation.

Also, Wars has no canon errors.


Define what you mean by "Based of" because Halo:reach had completely different locations and characters to TFOR with the exception of Keyes.

heck, even caboose said he did a section on ODST canon errors.


I also agree wars did not have any canon errors, but many of fans disagreed with this.


The problem with Reach is that Bungie is dragging the story out over a month when we have several novels dedicated to telling us what happened. It was a simple story that reflected Titanic's ironic reputation of being unsinkable and followed the story of Red/Blue Team defending the planet to it's downfall. We needed this crap about Noble Team about as much as we needed the SW prequels, there's just no point to a story which doesn't need to be told.

Bungie would have been better off making Halo 4, but they couldn't be bothered with making a decent story because of the "baggage". Well I'm sorry, Bungie, why did you include the Legendary Ending in Halo 3 if you say you don't like leaving doors open?


Then you should include quite a bit of the Halo lore in your "useless crap that doesn't need to be told", like the Cole Protocol or Halo 3: ODST, or Halo Evolutions. Every story told in the Halo Universe has some purpose behind it, none of it is meaningless or useless or "doesn't need to be told", at least to me.

I think Bungie said part of the reason they weren't going to do a Halo 4 was because they felt it would have to start up a new trilogy or something of the sort and they didn't feel right starting a long project they couldn't and wouldn't be able to finish.


What? We knew almost nothing about what happened on Earth after In Amber Clad followed Regret until ODST, Reach had already had 2 novels dedicated to the story of how it fell. How did you drag Evolutions into this too?


Ok, I'll drop the ODST one :P haha. What I meant by bringing Evolutions into this is that most of the stories in there don't really fit what you made it sound like you wanted, with a few minor exceptions none of them were stories that needed to be told.

Ignoring the conflicts between TFoR and Reach I think it was a story that needed to be told and did a good job with what it was supposed to be, we knew nothing about what was going on ground side other than what was going on the generators, Reach answered those questions.

  • 05.25.2011 10:43 AM PDT

By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.


Posted by: Pipboy 3050

Posted by: grey101

Posted by: Pipboy 3050

Posted by: grey101

IT doesn't matter. even though i would rather wait another 6-10 years for the chief to be touched i would rather have something new than an unneeded story and a unneeded game.


I agree it doesn't matter now. But I think the battle of reach is a needed game. At least, one with red and blue team.

to be honest while the concept of doing a reach game was/is good it just needs to be done right.

If spartan IIIS are on reach then give them SPI and more stealthy mission.


I'd be lying if I said I didn't agree.


Then I can see we can agree on something. Headhunters depicts a MJOLNIR variant of SPI, I question why that wasn't in Reach.

  • 05.25.2011 10:44 AM PDT

"A LIE is a LIE"


- Truly intelligent and deep Black ops trailer


Posted by: ajw34307

Then I can see we can agree on something. Headhunters depicts a MJOLNIR variant of SPI, I question why that wasn't in Reach.


Other then SPI Armour, the thing I want to get my hands on is that MA5K carbine

[Edited on 05.25.2011 10:51 AM PDT]

  • 05.25.2011 10:51 AM PDT

By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.


Posted by: Pipboy 3050

Posted by: ajw34307

Then I can see we can agree on something. Headhunters depicts a MJOLNIR variant of SPI, I question why that wasn't in Reach.


Other then SPI Armour, the thing I want to get my hands on is that MA5K carbine


Agreed, that thing is a real beauty.

  • 05.25.2011 10:52 AM PDT

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

Posted by: Pipboy 3050
I can assure you, if the entire Halo fanbase were asked three years ago if we would rather have a FOURTH game based of MC for the FOURTH TIME, or a game depicting Reach with NEW CHARACTERS, The vast, vast, vast majority of the fanbase would say the second option.

Did you conduct a poll or something?

  • 05.25.2011 11:11 AM PDT

My vote is that halo reaches canon errors are large and unacceptable given the circumstance.

Now, if they had bothered to alter the old canon to actually reasonably fit in, I wouldn't mind. Bit they have it so reach get invaded 2 weeks before the entirety of the S-IIs are aware, even though half the planet is already apparently on frucking fire before the people aboard the POA find out that it's being invaded.

They should've just changed the battle in TFOR to be 2 weeks, to fit the game.

  • 05.25.2011 11:30 AM PDT



Posted by: RotaryCookie


The most likely explanation is that the generators beam power to either a ground based, or satellite based relay and it is then beamed to the ODPs from there.

The reason the covenant attacked the generators directly is because there is too much redundancy in the relay network for an aggressor to disable it before the SMACs/ODPs open fire on them.


I never liked the idea that power was "beamed up" that does not make any sense to me. In a world where humanity still uses projectile weapons that technology dosent fit in with the rest of the tech we see the UNSC using. The amount of power needed to power a SMAC I would guess is allot and your saying that it can connect to its power source like a phone connects to Wi-Fi? I had always thought that the SMACS where connected to the generators by a tether similar to a space elevator but not as big or noticeable. and as for why the convent didnt just cut the cable its possible they didnt notice it in the chaos of the battle over reach plus any covenant ship getting close enough to go for that cable would surely be targeted by the SMACS before they got close enough to fire .

  • 05.25.2011 11:35 AM PDT

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

Posted by: SCmustang
I never liked the idea that power was "beamed up" that does not make any sense to me. In a world where humanity still uses projectile weapons that technology dosent fit in with the rest of the tech we see the UNSC using. The amount of power needed to power a SMAC I would guess is allot and your saying that it can connect to its power source like a phone connects to Wi-Fi? I had always thought that the SMACS where connected to the generators by a tether similar to a space elevator but not as big or noticeable. and as for why the convent didnt just cut the cable its possible they didnt notice it in the chaos of the battle over reach plus any covenant ship getting close enough to go for that cable would surely be targeted by the SMACS before they got close enough to fire.

This.

  • 05.25.2011 11:41 AM PDT

i stand corrected thanks for the link

  • 05.25.2011 11:50 AM PDT

Hm... Just wondering, without reading the link.

Could they 'jam' the power transmissions? or not.

[Edited on 05.25.2011 12:35 PM PDT]

  • 05.25.2011 12:33 PM PDT

"A LIE is a LIE"


- Truly intelligent and deep Black ops trailer


Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Hm... Just wondering, without reading the link.

Could they 'jam' the power transmissions? or not.


Yes, they can probably even "Suck in" power transmissions and use the power simply by intercepting its course.

[Edited on 05.25.2011 12:41 PM PDT]

  • 05.25.2011 12:40 PM PDT


Posted by: Pipboy 3050

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Hm... Just wondering, without reading the link.

Could they 'jam' the power transmissions? or not.


Yes, they can probably even "Suck in" power transmissions and use the power simply by intercepting its course.


I'm not so sure. They may be able to detect the beams and jam them (although I'm sure the UNSC has deployed significant anti-electronic warfare gear to counter this threat) but use the power? unlikely.

Why? well what are the chances that the covenant just so happen to use identical technology, and just so happen to be carrying a receiver device on board? What if the UNSC simply "locks" the beam so you need a password to use it?

To me it seems like a fairly secure system. But I could be way off.

  • 05.25.2011 1:02 PM PDT

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

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Hm... Just wondering, without reading the link.

Could they 'jam' the power transmissions? or not.

Jamming, like the jamming of a radar signal, is done by flooding the receiver with signal noise making the detection of a particular signal nearly impossible.

If your only aim is to absorb energy from the signal, and not pick out a signal, then jamming is no good. It is like:

Imagine a laser shining into a detector. The laser will turn on and off to generate particular signals. (Something like morse code or something). To interfere with that you could flood the detector with "noise", i.e. shine a torch in it or something, which will mess up the signal being detected.

But if you are using the Laser to melt something (transfer bulk energy - Like what is happening with the SMACs) shining a torch or flooding it with other laser light, is not going to do much to stop the laser from cutting through something. As far as I know, jamming in this case is not effective.

Intercepting and blocking the beam involves physically getting into the path of the transmission. Obvious problems here - SMACs will gut anything that tries to get close, and the Covenant can't transition too close to the planet at this point.

Do we also see the Covenant being able to think this stuff up, even if it is possible? They are not exactly the sharpest knives in the galactic drawer, and their knowledge of physics is severely lacking. By Human standards, they do not have a very good grasp of Maxwell's equations, which are absolutely fundamental to understanding the mechanics of this stuff.

  • 05.25.2011 1:19 PM PDT

@accordingto343

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

Posted by: anton1792
Posted by: DecepticonCobra
My issue with the SMAC situation is that I thought they were put in geosynchronous orbit, much like the ones on Earth. We know one is hovering near SWORD Base, I assume an SMAC is what shot down the corvette.

Yeah. People say that the SMAC would have levelled the entire area (Given its energy, it is reasonable to assume) and it was not travelling nearly fast enough. MACs do have different modes of firing though. Voc on Waypoint mentioned that.

Posted by: DecepticonCobra
Now Earth has 300, Reach has 20. They may be able to fire pretty fast, but I think they have a range of effectiveness because in The Fall of Reach the Covenant ships did their best to stay out of their range. Now I'm sure 300 MACs orbiting a planet would be pretty visible, but I don't think having 20 scattered around Reach would be very visible.

It was only the Energy Projector carrying ship that did that, successfully at 100'000km. Covenant ships have been described to move fast. Their reaction less drives being better at manoeuvring than the UNSC ones. (Whatever they are...) So perhaps they are fast enough to detect and dodge in 8 seconds? Even at that range, they have to have some pretty good impulse engines and compensation for inertia.

I can't see why the SMAC round would have a range other than the fact that the Covenant ships could move out the way. There is nothing in space to stop a MAC round. It will go on forever until it hits something. The Hypercarrier (Yes Hypercarrier, to separate it from the actual Supercarriers that the Covenant have. There is no way they have hundreds of those things) was not 100'000km away from Reach, it was in low orbit at only a few thousand kilometres.

Posted by: RotaryCookie
The most likely explanation is that the generators beam power to either a ground based, or satellite based relay and it is then beamed to the ODPs from there.

The reason the covenant attacked the generators directly is because there is too much redundancy in the relay network for an aggressor to disable it before the SMACs/ODPs open fire on them.

^ What he said.


Thanks for the info about the MAC round, I hadn't realized it could theoretically go on until it hits something. Also, I got that range situation from a part of The Fall of Reach, it mentioned the Covenant ships stayed quite a but away from the SMACs, I'll check it later.

  • 05.25.2011 3:06 PM PDT

If you can read this, that means I'm not a Shaolin monk...

yet.


Posted by: grey101

Posted by: Pipboy 3050

Posted by: grey101
I say the 3rd one because we shouldn't be the ones coming up with explanations and loopholes for the errors. Bungie should have specifically stated why this and this happened instead of leaving it up to us.



Also Grey101, I do believe Bungie fans will always come up with loop holes and explanations. We've been doing it for Halo 3, we've been doing it for ODST and Halo wars, and we are doing now for Reach. (except with reach, everyone finds it so criminally wrong)



what i am saying is we shouldn't be the ones trying to smash a piece of the puzzle together and make it fit as we are doing now.

If bungie were to say the forerunners are all unicorns and they never lived in the orion arm. yet say they are the same forerunners we know; we shouldn't have to break our backs over it and try to make it fit while others blindly accept it because bungie said so.


Reach is like this.

  • 05.25.2011 11:33 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Yes I'm fairly young. No, that doesn't mean I'm automatically dumber than you or have less life experience, thats just generally the case. I am not your general case.

Wow...I can make them fit together perfectly, I really don't see the need for this argument.

  • 05.25.2011 11:37 PM PDT