- OrderedComa
- |
- Noble Member
Posted by: ajw34307
Posted by: JDYeash937 MkII
Posted by: Astrogenesis 1
Posted by: DecepticonCobra
Posted by: wswartzendruber
It seems to me that we're getting some really mixed signals on what's going on here.
Game canon trumps book canon. Some of us really like The Fall of Reach, but fair enough. However, later canon trumps earlier canon. Technically, as this book is a new print for 2011, those parts of the game have been voided. But at the same time, that's just silly as Halo is a game first and a book second, making this release pointless.
I don't see how it trumps it though since it doesn't change anything.
What he is trying to say, is that the book released in 2011 contradicts the events of the game released in 2010, and as new canon trumps old canon, it should make the events of Reach irelivant.
However, game canon trumps all other canon!
The question is, can game canon trump a book that was released after the game?Game canon should not trump book canon on the basis that games' storylines have to be written completely differently to a book would, because of fitting it in with enjoyable gameplay.
If Halo had MGSlol levels of cutscene just to improve the viability of canon, I think many would simply stop playing it.
I actually quite like the explanation someone once gave, saying that Reach was a game released in the Haloverse after the war to make the Battle of Reach seem much more valiant than it actually was.
So the game could be like ONI propaganda after the war? I like this idea.
As I've pointed out before that theory has a couple mighty big holes in it. Like for instance the way the "in universe" letter that came with the game and some people have used as evidence. The letter is between two ONI officials, and they would know the actual details about how long Reach took to fall and how long the battle actually was, if it was intended to be completely proganda, the letter would have been written that, it would not have said "this is the most complete account of the Battle of Reach and the actions of Noble Team during it" if Reach was intended to just be a bunch of ONI propaganda the ONI officials would not have referred to the information within as fact. It would have been written more like this if it was supposed to be entirely propoganda "here's the official story that the higher ups have decided on and want to go down on the history books". And I'm not saying ONI would suddenly come out and tell the truth after the war, but why would they continue making more lies to improve morale when there is no more war going and no more need to improve the morale to keep fighting? That just completely flies in the face of common sense.