Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Do you think bungie should have made Halo reach O.D.S.T
  • Subject: Do you think bungie should have made Halo reach O.D.S.T
Subject: Do you think bungie should have made Halo reach O.D.S.T

If they made Halo Reach O.D.S.T with a campaign and had new O.D.S.T armor for in game and muliplayer in Reach.

[Edited on 08.24.2011 12:15 PM PDT]

  • 08.24.2011 12:14 PM PDT

The OST for ODST!

No, because they already made an ODST game, and it was awesome.

  • 08.24.2011 12:21 PM PDT

Tripp

it sounds pretty good, id play it, i think the story should follow Buck though, but over alot i think reach should have followed the book Fall of Reach

  • 08.24.2011 12:22 PM PDT

"On the seventh day, god did not rest, but rather he created 64 player multiplayer!"

I wouldn't mind it actually. ODST wasn't the best, but I did enjoy it, mainly because it was something different.

Halo Reach ODST could be interesting...but...Bungie would screw up the canon even more.

  • 08.24.2011 12:44 PM PDT


Posted by: Hydrilus
I wouldn't mind it actually. ODST wasn't the best, but I did enjoy it, mainly because it was something different.

Halo Reach ODST could be interesting...but...Bungie would screw up the canon even more.

+1

  • 08.24.2011 1:01 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I just play for fun. MLG can kiss my ass.


Posted by: Hydrilus
I wouldn't mind it actually. ODST wasn't the best, but I did enjoy it, mainly because it was something different.

Halo Reach ODST could be interesting...but...Bungie would screw up the canon even more.


I'm going to point this out one last time: Bungie made the canon, 343 will make canon, and games > books.

  • 08.24.2011 1:14 PM PDT

Posted by: cB4d93
Posted by: Silent Eli
you are a good translator
Idiot can be a hard language to learn, but once you get it down, everything becomes so clear! The whole world will make sense to you.


Posted by: Caaaarrrl

Posted by: Hydrilus
I wouldn't mind it actually. ODST wasn't the best, but I did enjoy it, mainly because it was something different.

Halo Reach ODST could be interesting...but...Bungie would screw up the canon even more.


I'm going to point this out one last time: Bungie made the canon, 343 will make canon, and games > books.

Doesn't make it okay to piss on the books that most of us enjoyed.

  • 08.24.2011 1:19 PM PDT

I would really enjoy it. I only bought ODST last week because it was the only Halo I had never played, and I loved it. It would be interesting to learn what the team ended up doing in the Halo Universe.

  • 08.24.2011 1:58 PM PDT

Posted by:ScubaToaster
Posted by: HipiO7
This man, this man right here put it so eloquently that I actually cancelled my own 2000+ word long post.
/slow clap for respect


:)
The person who said participating is important, not winning, obviously never won anything.

I absolutly loved ODST. I'm really hoping sometime in the future 343i will make another ODST game, this time about Buck and his 25 years in the war.

  • 08.24.2011 2:00 PM PDT

Vengeance only leads to an ongoing cycle of hatred.

The Reach campaign was bad enough. I don't want them to add fuel to the fire. I loved ODST, but it'd just make more canon breaks probably to make an ODST-type game for Reach.

  • 08.24.2011 2:04 PM PDT

"On the seventh day, god did not rest, but rather he created 64 player multiplayer!"


Posted by: BK Burger Boy

Posted by: Caaaarrrl

Posted by: Hydrilus
I wouldn't mind it actually. ODST wasn't the best, but I did enjoy it, mainly because it was something different.

Halo Reach ODST could be interesting...but...Bungie would screw up the canon even more.


I'm going to point this out one last time: Bungie made the canon, 343 will make canon, and games > books.


Doesn't make it okay to piss on the books that most of us enjoyed.


The only reason the whole 'Bungie says game canon > book canon' argument exists in the first place is BECAUSE Bungie screwed it up. That's their excuse to put them in the clear for making the ridiculously unnecessary changes that they did.

When Halo CE and The Fall of Reach came out, I remember reading interviews with Bungie and they talked about how they worked with the authors of their books to make sure everything was consistent. They wanted to protect their story and make sure everything was done perfectly. There was no 'game story comes first, books are secondary' excuse, there was just HALO, one big connected universe.

  • 08.24.2011 2:56 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

hello i am nobel six lololololololol

"The enemy came. He was beaten. I am tired. Goodnight."

"I think Reach is a pretty cool guy. eh drives froklifts and doesn't afraid of anything."

Posted by: MasterChiefChef
No, because they already made an ODST game, and it was awesome.

Actually, I think that's a great reason for Reach: ODST!

  • 08.24.2011 5:58 PM PDT

"I don't care if it's God's own anti-Son of a -blam!- Machine or a giant hula-hoop!"

*Artist's interpretation*

[Edited on 08.24.2011 6:06 PM PDT]

  • 08.24.2011 6:06 PM PDT

Halo 1 ODST sounds more feasible, with De Silva and McKay. Story's already there and it includes some parts which would go well in a game. On the other hand a book is a book not a game.

  • 08.24.2011 6:12 PM PDT

I agree that game canon is not greater than book canon. Bungie went against canon in Reach significantly. However you have to realise Bungie had a lot to do quickly and had to compromise. I'm sure if they had more time they could come up with a better storyline (canon-wise). To me it is Reach that is canonically incorrect as FoR, FS and GoO books came first.

And I see so many people saying game canon> book canon. I mean until I see Bungie or 343i say that, it's probably just something someone came up with.

  • 08.24.2011 6:20 PM PDT

meh...

i think they should have done just ODST on reach and skip out on Halo:Reach. that way it could have gone with the books, had MC in it (showing him off in a whole new, badass perspective), and been an overall great game.

  • 08.24.2011 6:33 PM PDT

I would leave out anything from the books and base it on unanswered questions from the games. more people played the games than read the books.

  • 08.24.2011 6:44 PM PDT


Posted by: Hydrilus

Posted by: BK Burger Boy

Posted by: Caaaarrrl

Posted by: Hydrilus
I wouldn't mind it actually. ODST wasn't the best, but I did enjoy it, mainly because it was something different.

Halo Reach ODST could be interesting...but...Bungie would screw up the canon even more.


I'm going to point this out one last time: Bungie made the canon, 343 will make canon, and games > books.


Doesn't make it okay to piss on the books that most of us enjoyed.


The only reason the whole 'Bungie says game canon > book canon' argument exists in the first place is BECAUSE Bungie screwed it up. That's their excuse to put them in the clear for making the ridiculously unnecessary changes that they did.

When Halo CE and The Fall of Reach came out, I remember reading interviews with Bungie and they talked about how they worked with the authors of their books to make sure everything was consistent. They wanted to protect their story and make sure everything was done perfectly. There was no 'game story comes first, books are secondary' excuse, there was just HALO, one big connected universe.


You do know the whole "games>books" thing has been around for far longer than Halo: Reach has been right? That's been in place almost since the beginning. It was not instituted because of Reach.

Posted by: Spartan Mikey
I agree that game canon is not greater than book canon. Bungie went against canon in Reach significantly. However you have to realise Bungie had a lot to do quickly and had to compromise. I'm sure if they had more time they could come up with a better storyline (canon-wise). To me it is Reach that is canonically incorrect as FoR, FS and GoO books came first.

And I see so many people saying game canon> book canon. I mean until I see Bungie or 343i say that, it's probably just something someone came up with.


Voila, Bungie employee stating that games trump books in terms of canon. So it is TFoR that is in error if there are any unresolved conflicts between it and the game, and there really aren't any at all, nothing anywhere near as big or story ruining as everyone claims anyway. Ghosts of Onyx and First Strike have no conflicts with Reach at all.

[Edited on 08.24.2011 8:40 PM PDT]

  • 08.24.2011 8:28 PM PDT

Cave Johnson here, we're done!

PS: If you are reading this comment while imagining my voice, don't panic. That's just a side effect of the testing.


Posted by: MasterChiefChef
No, because they already made an ODST game, and it was awesome.


And another one could be double awesome, a prequel for an expansion.

Hell yes, add in that scarab mission and you got yourself a deal possible 343 or other game company that will not -blam!- this over.

  • 08.24.2011 8:41 PM PDT

Is it wrong of me? To take what's mine? Until the end of time?

No, Odst wasn't as fun as the other halo's. I'd play from the point of another spartan, But I wouldn't want to be an ODST again.

  • 08.24.2011 8:57 PM PDT