Halo: Combat Evolved Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: The remake should reference reach
  • Subject: The remake should reference reach
Subject: The remake should reference reach

Chuck Norris is a real man, The children of today and most recent generations have slowly been introduced to more androgynous idols (Justin Bieber), glamorized by their combination of masculine and feminine characteristics. This eases and camoflauges the breakdown of traditional role of a man and women and the traditional family unit so that children are more susceptible to the "moral" teachings of corporate media (disney etc al) so as to ensure their future profits and world domination.

Moderator Notice: This user has been blacklisted from this forum. Until the user is removed from the blacklist, all posts this user has made have been hidden, and all topics created by this user have been censored.
  • 06.05.2011 10:59 PM PDT

The dialogue is not being changed in any way at all. just the Visuals. there are a lot of easter eggs in the first Halo Game anyway! i was only 8 when Halo: CE came out, so it is going to be amazing to play it all over again! i should be able to complete that game on legendary now!

  • 06.05.2011 11:27 PM PDT

Nah. I actually think that, if anything, Halo 1 should avoid Reach like the plague.

See, there's a big symbolic issue. The Halo trilogy is this big epic about reclamation, and it's well-bookended in and of itself. Reach, however, doesn't recognize this; well before the ball even got rolling, you have Halsey sitting around a big Forerunner artifact talking about "a birthright from an ancient civilization." It's trying to give cause to a story that never needed it, and it's trying to impose on and be what the opening of Two Betrayals and all the other stuff is, only far less meaningfully and with mind-blowingly awkward narrative timing when the larger picture is considered. It's not a problematic factual issue, but it's a massive one in terms of narrative symbolism.

Halo 1 works better in and of itself if Reach is just ignored.

//=======================

That's more or less my biggest overarching complaint on Reach's campaign, actually. I couldn't care less about its conflicts with the other canon, since I've never explored any of it, but its narrative just doesn't work alongside the trilogy; it tries to impose itself on the trilogy when it really should have just been about the fall of Reach; it should have given Halo context, not cause.

  • 06.06.2011 12:39 AM PDT

Due to some e-mail dumbness, my GT is not the one listed on my profile. My GT is the same as my board name.


Posted by: Tupolev
That's more or less my biggest overarching complaint on Reach's campaign, actually. I couldn't care less about its conflicts with the other canon, since I've never explored any of it, but its narrative just doesn't work alongside the trilogy; it tries to impose itself on the trilogy when it really should have just been about the fall of Reach; it should have given Halo context, not cause.
Agreed %100. One of my biggest beefs with Reach's story was that the Forerunners were referenced at all. The Vidocs and everything said they were going for "a more human" story and what we got was... well, not.

  • 06.06.2011 4:38 AM PDT