Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: The UNSC nor covenant will be in new trilogy
  • Subject: The UNSC nor covenant will be in new trilogy
Subject: The UNSC nor covenant will be in new trilogy
  • gamertag: Fin
  • user homepage:

"but you already knew that, I mean, how couldn't you?

Only when no Human brick is left atop another, shall we be satisfied with your destruction.


Posted by: grey101

Posted by: gtfan92

Posted by: raganok99
Frankie says no purple

Here is your tragic fall. You are taking a statement that has been said, interpreting it, and then applying your interpretation has canonical fact and the only way things could be. "No purple" could easily refer to Covenant environments like High Charity that have played major roles in the Halo franchise. Stop saying your interpretation is fact when in reality you have no proof of such.


um common sense says we aren't going to be seeing that since we aren't going to be on a covenant ship or planet


We don't know where Halo 4 will take place, at best we can speculate it starts on the 'legendary planet' but where it goes after that is anyone's guess.

  • 08.10.2011 6:37 AM PDT


Posted by: privet caboose
I'd be fine with having a few Covenant species show up in the trilogy. Elites, Brutes, Engineers...anything really. "The Covenant" is finished, but the races that made up that Covenant are sure to make atleast a cameo appearance somewhere in this new trilogy. I can't see the Elites being completely gone from something this huge. Halo is just as much about the Elites as it is the humans.

To be completely honest my fingers are still crossed for a dual campaign ala Halo 2. I REALLY want to see Rtas and the Arbiter hunting down the brutes and things like that. Exploring for the other rings to destroy them, that kind of thing. I think it'd be really interesting and would be a good throw back to the last trilogy to "finish up" what was left after Halo 3.

But, if the "no purple" thing is true I guess that rules out my hopes.


I wouldn't mind having a dual campaign with the arbiter again.

I'm just curious but would having the elites and brutes in multiplayer be so big a deal that it is an impossible thing to do or can we remember that multiplayer is non-canon and can have some creativity in multiplayer.

  • 08.10.2011 7:14 AM PDT

Death to rank junkies.

Posted by: firecrakcer

Posted by: privet caboose
I'd be fine with having a few Covenant species show up in the trilogy. Elites, Brutes, Engineers...anything really. "The Covenant" is finished, but the races that made up that Covenant are sure to make atleast a cameo appearance somewhere in this new trilogy. I can't see the Elites being completely gone from something this huge. Halo is just as much about the Elites as it is the humans.

To be completely honest my fingers are still crossed for a dual campaign ala Halo 2. I REALLY want to see Rtas and the Arbiter hunting down the brutes and things like that. Exploring for the other rings to destroy them, that kind of thing. I think it'd be really interesting and would be a good throw back to the last trilogy to "finish up" what was left after Halo 3.

But, if the "no purple" thing is true I guess that rules out my hopes.


I wouldn't mind having a dual campaign with the arbiter again.

I'm just curious but would having the elites and brutes in multiplayer be so big a deal that it is an impossible thing to do or can we remember that multiplayer is non-canon and can have some creativity in multiplayer.


I'm guessing that there will be Spartans and something equivilant to choose from in multiplayer.

  • 08.10.2011 8:25 AM PDT
  • gamertag: qirahs
  • user homepage:

Madara, Tobi....call me whatever you want. I'M NO ONE. I DON'T WANT TO BE ANYONE. ALL I CARE ABOUT IS COMPLETING THE MOON'S EYE PLAN."


Posted by: firecrakcer

Posted by: privet caboose
I'd be fine with having a few Covenant species show up in the trilogy. Elites, Brutes, Engineers...anything really. "The Covenant" is finished, but the races that made up that Covenant are sure to make atleast a cameo appearance somewhere in this new trilogy. I can't see the Elites being completely gone from something this huge. Halo is just as much about the Elites as it is the humans.

To be completely honest my fingers are still crossed for a dual campaign ala Halo 2. I REALLY want to see Rtas and the Arbiter hunting down the brutes and things like that. Exploring for the other rings to destroy them, that kind of thing. I think it'd be really interesting and would be a good throw back to the last trilogy to "finish up" what was left after Halo 3.

But, if the "no purple" thing is true I guess that rules out my hopes.


I wouldn't mind having a dual campaign with the arbiter again.

I'm just curious but would having the elites and brutes in multiplayer be so big a deal that it is an impossible thing to do or can we remember that multiplayer is non-canon and can have some creativity in multiplayer.


I've actually been wondering what 343 is going to do about multiplayer. I'm pretty sure that we won't see any elites in multiplayer simply because like grey, i believe they won't appear in campaign and therefore it wont make much sense to put them in as multiplayer models, the fans who never played the original trilogy wont know whats going on.

And to be honest, i couldn't be more happier. I'm done with elites and all the other covenant races. I don't want to see the aliens that butchered the human race for nearly 30 years and then towards the end ally with them.

Where you have elites like r'tas during the halo 3 cutscene after floodgate still holding a superior attitude and a condescending tone while talking to fleet admiral hood despite what he has done to the human race "were it not for the arbiter's council, i would have glassed your entire planet!"

The only elite i could stand in halo 3 was the arbiter, but only barely as he was the only elite that actually looked sorry for what he did and the fact that he aided MC.

But anyways, i think bungie made the right move in halo 3 having the arbiter's side of the FUD split from MC's side. That way, arbiter could go back to his planet, settle whats going on over there, as the elites need him. And so that he has no tie to the new trilogy (as of Halo 4).

I hope H4 is going to be sort of like CE, just chief and cortana, going lone wolf style (even more so than ce as chief had some unsc forces backing him up for a little bit).

Just like CE, it would be sort of like an adventure-shooter.

  • 08.10.2011 8:33 AM PDT

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

Posted by: qirahs
Where you have elites like r'tas during the halo 3 cutscene after floodgate still holding a superior attitude and a condescending tone while talking to fleet admiral hood despite what he has done to the human race "were it not for the arbiter's council, i would have glassed your entire planet!"

Because, you know, childhood indoctrination into a religion is totally easy to overcome.

And the "threat" he made was emphasizing the scale of the Flood threat, not because Rtas necessarily has something to prove.

  • 08.10.2011 9:34 AM PDT


Posted by: Melkorpwn
Posted by: firecrakcer

Posted by: privet caboose
I'd be fine with having a few Covenant species show up in the trilogy. Elites, Brutes, Engineers...anything really. "The Covenant" is finished, but the races that made up that Covenant are sure to make atleast a cameo appearance somewhere in this new trilogy. I can't see the Elites being completely gone from something this huge. Halo is just as much about the Elites as it is the humans.

To be completely honest my fingers are still crossed for a dual campaign ala Halo 2. I REALLY want to see Rtas and the Arbiter hunting down the brutes and things like that. Exploring for the other rings to destroy them, that kind of thing. I think it'd be really interesting and would be a good throw back to the last trilogy to "finish up" what was left after Halo 3.

But, if the "no purple" thing is true I guess that rules out my hopes.


I wouldn't mind having a dual campaign with the arbiter again.

I'm just curious but would having the elites and brutes in multiplayer be so big a deal that it is an impossible thing to do or can we remember that multiplayer is non-canon and can have some creativity in multiplayer.


I'm guessing that there will be Spartans and something equivilant to choose from in multiplayer.

of course, and to me the more multiplayer models the better. I love being able to customize my characters and felt very annoyed that the elites had armor sets instead of changeable armor pieces. That and I like breaking away from the standard human player model in a very large amount of games today

  • 08.10.2011 9:45 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Do not panic, or you will fail.


Posted by: raganok99

Posted by: gtfan92

Posted by: raganok99
Frankie says no purple

Here is your tragic fall. You are taking a statement that has been said, interpreting it, and then applying your interpretation has canonical fact and the only way things could be. "No purple" could easily refer to Covenant environments like High Charity that have played major roles in the Halo franchise. Stop saying your interpretation is fact when in reality you have no proof of such.


Lol, excuse me for using common sense... nowadays, this universe forum lacks of common sense.

In case, we are not going to see Covenant, that's fact. Refer yourself to Grey's posts with proof.

O RLY!.jpg

I wasn't aware you had a 15-month advance copy of Halo 4. Can you give a nice little synopsis of the plot?

I take it reading comprehension isn't your strong point. You seem to be blind to the very likely possibility that you could be wrong. Maybe you should use some common sense and actually read what I am posting.

I am going to write a couple of short points summarizing what I have been trying to state.

1. The Encyclopedia was terribly written and is known to include some non-canonical information. It wouldn't be too hard for 343i to write a story that might contradict something written in a promotional piece.

2. "No purple" could easily mean that there isn't a Covenant environment that is encountered. We could easily see a few cameos by Covenant races without having entire missions take place on one of their ships or planets.

3. Having neither the Covenant races nor the UNSE appear in the new trilogy does not makes sense at all from a story telling standpoint or a Halo standpoint. If MB is using the Chief to atone for his sins, couldn't it be possible that he is also using him to atone for the atrocities committed by the Forerunners against the ancient Human races? Also, the Chief not having a familiar ally or a source of the standard Halo weaponry would defy common logic and really distance the game from the Halo we know.

Now, do you want to make another smarmy, smartass comment, or do you actually want to confront the fact that I and many other have broken the argument presented by you and the OP?

  • 08.10.2011 10:45 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

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

blind to the idea of me being wrong despite me saying several times that this is my theory based off the current info we have?

No purple means no purple

[Edited on 08.10.2011 11:00 AM PDT]

  • 08.10.2011 10:52 AM PDT

Old school Bungie, born and raised,
In the Septagon is where I spend most of my days.
Relaxin', maxin', posting all cool,
Talking about Halo, life and some school.
Got in one little argument, and the mods got scared,
they said "You're gonna get banned and your member title'll be bare!"

How exactly did "You might be wrong." "No I'm isn't." reach fourteen pages?

Now if there was only a way to harness this energy into usable power...

  • 08.10.2011 10:57 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Do not panic, or you will fail.


Posted by: grey101
No purple means no purple

That is like saying, "Cold fusion means cold fusion." No purple could mean that there is not a single Covenant thing in the games at all. It could also mean that there will not be a level taking place in a exclusively Covenant environment. (T&R in CE, High Charity in Halos 2&3) However, the former Covenant races could still play a role.

  • 08.10.2011 10:59 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Do not panic, or you will fail.


Posted by: prometheus25
How exactly did "You might be wrong." "No I'm isn't." reach fourteen pages?

Me being at work with nothing else extremely exciting to do?

  • 08.10.2011 11:00 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

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


Posted by: gtfan92

Posted by: grey101
No purple means no purple

That is like saying, "Cold fusion means cold fusion." No purple could mean that there is not a single Covenant thing in the games at all. It could also mean that there will not be a level taking place in a exclusively Covenant environment. (T&R in CE, High Charity in Halos 2&3) However, the former Covenant races could still play a role.


seeing how the covenant is associted with the color purple the best way to say "no covenant" other than flat out saying it is no purple.

We already know we aren't going in covenant themed environments since we aren't going to be on a covenant ship and high charity is destroyed.

  • 08.10.2011 11:02 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Do not panic, or you will fail.


Posted by: grey101

Posted by: gtfan92

Posted by: grey101
No purple means no purple

That is like saying, "Cold fusion means cold fusion." No purple could mean that there is not a single Covenant thing in the games at all. It could also mean that there will not be a level taking place in a exclusively Covenant environment. (T&R in CE, High Charity in Halos 2&3) However, the former Covenant races could still play a role.


seeing how the covenant is associted with the color purple the best way to say "no covenant" other than flat out saying it is no purple.

We already know we aren't going in covenant themed environments since we aren't going to be on a covenant ship and high charity is destroyed.

[citation needed]

And no, not the old Chevrolet.

  • 08.10.2011 11:04 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Senior Heroic Member
  • gamertag: Wosh
  • user homepage:

I count on packet loss to keep my gun fully loaded.

I have a funny feeling that the Greg Bear books have something to do with it. I bet you will fight Forerunners. Or will fight flood alongside Forerunners. And there will be humans, just not UNSC. The book is good, and a sequel comes out in January. Pick 'em up.

  • 08.10.2011 11:05 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

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


Posted by: gtfan92

No purple means no purple[/quote]
That is like saying, "Cold fusion means cold fusion." No purple could mean that there is not a single Covenant thing in the games at all. It could also mean that there will not be a level taking place in a exclusively Covenant environment. (T&R in CE, High Charity in Halos 2&3) However, the former Covenant races could still play a role. [/quote]

seeing how the covenant is associted with the color purple the best way to say "no covenant" other than flat out saying it is no purple.

We already know we aren't going in covenant themed environments since we aren't going to be on a covenant ship and high charity is destroyed.[/quote]
[citation needed]

And no, not the old Chevrolet.


wait until the game comes out and you'll see.

  • 08.10.2011 11:05 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Do not panic, or you will fail.


Posted by: grey101
wait until the game comes out and you'll see.

"Wait and see" is generally used as a nice substitute for "What I theorize could happen, but since I have no concrete proof to back it up, I am just going to tell you to wait 15 months when the argument will be buried and forgotten."

Yeah, "wait and see" just rolls of the tongue a lot more smoothly.

  • 08.10.2011 11:08 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

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


Posted by: gtfan92

Posted by: grey101
wait until the game comes out and you'll see.

"Wait and see" is generally used as a nice substitute for "What I theorize could happen, but since I have no concrete proof to back it up, I am just going to tell you to wait 15 months when the argument will be buried and forgotten."

Yeah, "wait and see" just rolls of the tongue a lot more smoothly.


or i am saying that because i know we will not be on a covenant ship in a game based around the forerunners and some foe.

  • 08.10.2011 11:09 AM PDT

Old school Bungie, born and raised,
In the Septagon is where I spend most of my days.
Relaxin', maxin', posting all cool,
Talking about Halo, life and some school.
Got in one little argument, and the mods got scared,
they said "You're gonna get banned and your member title'll be bare!"


Posted by: grey101

Posted by: gtfan92

Posted by: grey101
wait until the game comes out and you'll see.

"Wait and see" is generally used as a nice substitute for "What I theorize could happen, but since I have no concrete proof to back it up, I am just going to tell you to wait 15 months when the argument will be buried and forgotten."

Yeah, "wait and see" just rolls of the tongue a lot more smoothly.


or i am saying that because i know we will not be on a covenant ship in a game based around the forerunners and some foe.


While you're up, can you get me tomorrow's stock numbers? Thanks.

  • 08.10.2011 11:11 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Do not panic, or you will fail.


Posted by: prometheus25

Posted by: grey101

Posted by: gtfan92

Posted by: grey101
wait until the game comes out and you'll see.

"Wait and see" is generally used as a nice substitute for "What I theorize could happen, but since I have no concrete proof to back it up, I am just going to tell you to wait 15 months when the argument will be buried and forgotten."

Yeah, "wait and see" just rolls of the tongue a lot more smoothly.


or i am saying that because i know we will not be on a covenant ship in a game based around the forerunners and some foe.


While you're up, can you get me tomorrow's stock numbers? Thanks.

Or the Powerball numbers. IIRC, it's at $220 mil.

  • 08.10.2011 11:14 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

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


Posted by: prometheus25

Posted by: grey101

Posted by: gtfan92

Posted by: grey101
wait until the game comes out and you'll see.

"Wait and see" is generally used as a nice substitute for "What I theorize could happen, but since I have no concrete proof to back it up, I am just going to tell you to wait 15 months when the argument will be buried and forgotten."

Yeah, "wait and see" just rolls of the tongue a lot more smoothly.


or i am saying that because i know we will not be on a covenant ship in a game based around the forerunners and some foe.


While you're up, can you get me tomorrow's stock numbers? Thanks.


joke all you want but i am serious.

  • 08.10.2011 11:15 AM PDT

Old school Bungie, born and raised,
In the Septagon is where I spend most of my days.
Relaxin', maxin', posting all cool,
Talking about Halo, life and some school.
Got in one little argument, and the mods got scared,
they said "You're gonna get banned and your member title'll be bare!"


Posted by: grey101
joke all you want but i am serious.


Which is why it's funny.

Speculation is great, but in the end it's just speculation. You can't be militant about it.

  • 08.10.2011 11:16 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Do not panic, or you will fail.


Posted by: grey101

Posted by: prometheus25

Posted by: grey101

Posted by: gtfan92

Posted by: grey101
wait until the game comes out and you'll see.

"Wait and see" is generally used as a nice substitute for "What I theorize could happen, but since I have no concrete proof to back it up, I am just going to tell you to wait 15 months when the argument will be buried and forgotten."

Yeah, "wait and see" just rolls of the tongue a lot more smoothly.


or i am saying that because i know we will not be on a covenant ship in a game based around the forerunners and some foe.


While you're up, can you get me tomorrow's stock numbers? Thanks.


joke all you want but i am serious.

Seriously trolling.

  • 08.10.2011 11:17 AM PDT


Posted by: grey101

Posted by: prometheus25

Posted by: grey101

Posted by: gtfan92

Posted by: grey101
wait until the game comes out and you'll see.

"Wait and see" is generally used as a nice substitute for "What I theorize could happen, but since I have no concrete proof to back it up, I am just going to tell you to wait 15 months when the argument will be buried and forgotten."

Yeah, "wait and see" just rolls of the tongue a lot more smoothly.


or i am saying that because i know we will not be on a covenant ship in a game based around the forerunners and some foe.


While you're up, can you get me tomorrow's stock numbers? Thanks.


joke all you want but i am serious.


So serious.

  • 08.10.2011 11:18 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

*sigh* Damn my pride. Damn it.

Posted by: raganok99
All right, buddy.

I am not your buddy so don't do that.

Posted by: raganok99
Do you realize that being childish over encyclopedia isn't getting you to anywhere? And in fact, it is canon, whether you like it or not. Also that errors was from first edition... *facepalm* and I own second edition, I can tell is that it is heavily edited and it even removed that quote from "ilovebees" thing. Also second edition is new as well, it has updated info from Halo wars, Halo 3 ODST, all of those novels except Cryptum. So I'm pretty it is reliable source and even it is canon.

You do not seem to understand anything that has been said concerning the issue about Believe. The fact that the Encyclopaedia contains Believe and touts it as canon means that the Encyclopaedia is in error, because Believe was non-canon, (Quite rightly so) and is in contradiction with established events in Halo 3.

Master Chief was never captured at the Battle of Voi like Believe depicted, and apparently it implied his death at that point, which is rubbish.

The fact that the date is not explicit, but rather hidden with only an astute fan being able to decipher it, when the Encyclopaedia previously contained other more blatant errors means that to trust this as 343 Industries intent in the face of such poor editing, and Believes controversial canonical validity, is unwise.

I cannot simplify it anymore. Think like a sheep if you want, but anyone with half a brain cell would realize the amount of problems that Believe has, and the suspicious circumstances of that date being included in the Encyclopaedia when such poor editing was apparent.

Posted by: raganok99
Obviously incapable to make proper debate? You jest. That's completely disrespectful to me and perhaps I wouldn't read your post anymore since you're still blind to that Covies and UNSC will "magically" appear at Halo 4 despite loads of evidence was shown that IT WON'T APPEAR AT HALO 4!

*sighs again*

I'm not going to explain why ad hominem is illogical and childish, you can look that up for yourself.

"and perhaps I wouldn't read your post anymore since you're still blind to that Covies and UNSC will "magically" appear"

In other words, you will be willfully ignorant and bias. And who said anything about magic? The solutions brought to you are far from that. Go and re-read my analogy with Cryptum's plot.

"despite loads of evidence"

This made me laugh a little. Your evidence thus far:

* Statements made by Frankie, one of which no one can even be sure exists, and both of which have no context to them at all.

* Halo 3 Marketing material, the problems with which I outlined in a footnote in a post above. ^

* The Encyclopaedia, which was previously slammed for rubbish editing for including false material, which draws on Believe material which was previously considered non-canon and...false material in itself.

Posted by: raganok99
Um, I have read Cryptum. I know what it happens, etc. So don't make any assumptions that I never read all novels. Sadly for you, I have.

Uhhhh...Where did I say that you had not read Cryptum? Where did I even imply that in my previous response to you?

Posted by: raganok99
As with your least experience with Halo, I would say that you don't understand much about Halo.

And how did you arrive at this conclusion? How do you know how long I have been following this franchise for?

What has that even got to do with anything?

Posted by: raganok99
It's funny that newcomers to Halo would want to see more covies and unsc in action in future games despite that there is six halo games for that: (Halo CE, Halo 2, Halo 3, Halo 3 ODST, Halo Wars and Halo Reach) in a span of ten years of fighting Covies.

Yeah, 10 years of fighting against Covenant. Maybe what fans want to see is the opposite? UNSC and Covenant on the same side? Perhaps they want to see the progress made in the post Halo 3 universe?

The Flood is a threat to both sides, as is sure to be this ancient evil. (Providing they are not the same of course)

Posted by: raganok99
Now, new Halo trilogy is announced by 343i and Frankie says no purple in Halo 4, it means that no covies, also no UNSC there as well.

How on Earth does no purple imply no UNSC?

Anyway, if you look a few pages back I have already tackled the OP along with that quote.

Posted by: raganok99
It's time for us to fight against Precursors/Flood or maybe some rogue Forerunners.

I don't see how that excludes the UNSC/Covenant from being a part of the fight against them. Naturally, one would assume such a large scale threat to include them.

Halo 4 is focused on Master Chief's destiny, not humanity's destiny
Does Greg Bear not say that one of Halo's themes is to ask the question of what it means to be Human? Halo is centered around Humanity and its place and role in the galaxy. About Reclaiming their lost empire and taking up the Mantle. It would not make a whole lot of sense for that arc to remain unresolved in the new trilogy, as it is one of the core themes.

or human covenant war
Who said that it was?

  • 08.10.2011 11:22 AM PDT


Posted by: Neutrino
*sigh* Damn my pride. Damn it.

Posted by: raganok99
All right, buddy.

I am not your buddy so don't do that.

Posted by: raganok99
Do you realize that being childish over encyclopedia isn't getting you to anywhere? And in fact, it is canon, whether you like it or not. Also that errors was from first edition... *facepalm* and I own second edition, I can tell is that it is heavily edited and it even removed that quote from "ilovebees" thing. Also second edition is new as well, it has updated info from Halo wars, Halo 3 ODST, all of those novels except Cryptum. So I'm pretty it is reliable source and even it is canon.

You do not seem to understand anything that has been said concerning the issue about Believe. The fact that the Encyclopaedia contains Believe and touts it as canon means that the Encyclopaedia is in error, because Believe was non-canon, (Quite rightly so) and is in contradiction with established events in Halo 3.

Master Chief was never captured at the Battle of Voi like Believe depicted, and apparently it implied his death at that point, which is rubbish.

The fact that the date is not explicit, but rather hidden with only an astute fan being able to decipher it, when the Encyclopaedia previously contained other more blatant errors means that to trust this as 343 Industries intent in the face of such poor editing, and Believes controversial canonical validity, is unwise.

I cannot simplify it anymore. Think like a sheep if you want, but anyone with half a brain cell would realize the amount of problems that Believe has, and the suspicious circumstances of that date being included in the Encyclopaedia when such poor editing was apparent.

Posted by: raganok99
Obviously incapable to make proper debate? You jest. That's completely disrespectful to me and perhaps I wouldn't read your post anymore since you're still blind to that Covies and UNSC will "magically" appear at Halo 4 despite loads of evidence was shown that IT WON'T APPEAR AT HALO 4!

*sighs again*

I'm not going to explain why ad hominem is illogical and childish, you can look that up for yourself.

"and perhaps I wouldn't read your post anymore since you're still blind to that Covies and UNSC will "magically" appear"

In other words, you will be willfully ignorant and bias. And who said anything about magic? The solutions brought to you are far from that. Go and re-read my analogy with Cryptum's plot.

"despite loads of evidence"

This made me laugh a little. Your evidence thus far:

* Statements made by Frankie, one of which no one can even be sure exists, and both of which have no context to them at all.

* Halo 3 Marketing material, the problems with which I outlined in a footnote in a post above. ^

* The Encyclopaedia, which was previously slammed for rubbish editing for including false material, which draws on Believe material which was previously considered non-canon and...false material in itself.

Posted by: raganok99
Um, I have read Cryptum. I know what it happens, etc. So don't make any assumptions that I never read all novels. Sadly for you, I have.

Uhhhh...Where did I say that you had not read Cryptum? Where did I even imply that in my previous response to you?

Posted by: raganok99
As with your least experience with Halo, I would say that you don't understand much about Halo.

And how did you arrive at this conclusion? How do you know how long I have been following this franchise for?

What has that even got to do with anything?

Posted by: raganok99
It's funny that newcomers to Halo would want to see more covies and unsc in action in future games despite that there is six halo games for that: (Halo CE, Halo 2, Halo 3, Halo 3 ODST, Halo Wars and Halo Reach) in a span of ten years of fighting Covies.

Yeah, 10 years of fighting against Covenant. Maybe what fans want to see is the opposite? UNSC and Covenant on the same side? Perhaps they want to see the progress made in the post Halo 3 universe?

The Flood is a threat to both sides, as is sure to be this ancient evil. (Providing they are not the same of course)

Posted by: raganok99
Now, new Halo trilogy is announced by 343i and Frankie says no purple in Halo 4, it means that no covies, also no UNSC there as well.

How on Earth does no purple imply no UNSC?

Anyway, if you look a few pages back I have already tackled the OP along with that quote.

Posted by: raganok99
It's time for us to fight against Precursors/Flood or maybe some rogue Forerunners.

I don't see how that excludes the UNSC/Covenant from being a part of the fight against them. Naturally, one would assume such a large scale threat to include them.

Halo 4 is focused on Master Chief's destiny, not humanity's destiny
Does Greg Bear not say that one of Halo's themes is to ask the question of what it means to be Human? Halo is centered around Humanity and its place and role in the galaxy. About Reclaiming their lost empire and taking up the Mantle. It would not make a whole lot of sense for that arc to remain unresolved in the new trilogy, as it is one of the core themes.

or human covenant war
Who said that it was?


I think a Human-Covenant alliance, then a conflict in the alliance halfway through the game would make for some drama, and wild firefights.

  • 08.10.2011 11:32 AM PDT