Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why are so many people hating on Halo: Glasslands? *SPOILERS*
  • Subject: Why are so many people hating on Halo: Glasslands? *SPOILERS*
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4
Subject: Why are so many people hating on Halo: Glasslands? *SPOILERS*

@spaboolly


Posted by: anton1792
Posted by: A Puzzled Mind
Hell, here's the best review I found on Amazon:

For interest's sake, the same dude who wrote that discusses it at length here, and Frankie chips in too about half way down.


To be honest, I don't think I like where 343 is going with all this stuff. They made a big deal about "listening to what the fans want" but he kind of just told them to shut up and wait to see what they decide to do.

  • 11.07.2011 7:25 PM PDT


Posted by: MsCadetUNIVERSE

Posted by: anton1792
Posted by: A Puzzled Mind
Hell, here's the best review I found on Amazon:

For interest's sake, the same dude who wrote that discusses it at length here, and Frankie chips in too about half way down.


To be honest, I don't think I like where 343 is going with all this stuff. They made a big deal about "listening to what the fans want" but he kind of just told them to shut up and wait to see what they decide to do.


I find it the fact he went "And that it's affecting people in such a strong way is satisfying, but then again I know everything that's coming along."

So, he's happy people don't like it at all?

  • 11.07.2011 9:28 PM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!

[Rolls eyes]

  • 11.07.2011 9:45 PM PDT


I might start rambling but what I want to say is Halo has always been about multiple evils, and each one of those evils has there own characters we get to judge on there actions. We have never been told this is good and this is bad, we have always been told here is what someone has done and these are the positives and negatives, you judge. This novel, this novel got stuck on its moral high horse and started chanting this is right and this is wrong.

That is my mine gripe with this book and I think it needs to be seriously amended somehow.

My other gripe is this book seems to hide away the military sci-fi and pull out a unknown and out of place collection of soap operas.

  • 11.08.2011 1:27 AM PDT
  • gamertag: Zereta
  • user homepage:

I have a feeling that the folks disappointed with Halo: Glasslands are really going to enjoy whatever the sequel to it is. Glasslands is a set-up novel. By the end of it, you can see the major plot threads that Karen Traviss wants to talk about and explore in her trilogy. Nothing more, nothing less, save for the links to Halo 4 with the UNSC Infinity.

Sure, the handling of Halsey as a character is pissing people off. But here's how I see it: Halo: Reach introduced Dr Halsey to the gamer audience, to the folks who don't read the novels. This makes her a character that can be revisited in another, future game release. Karen Traviss, I feel, basically used the moral ethics line, to separate her from the rest of the Spartans (Who do not have a video game presence), so that it is easier to insert her in a game later on. The fact that she's with ONI further helps this. Its a roundabout way of doing it, but its a way.

Maybe I'm just trying to cover Karen's ass here. I love her novels and had no problems with Glasslands.

  • 11.08.2011 3:19 AM PDT

For the purpose of righting the wrongs of those who don't agree with Karen Traviss' perspective, allow me to elaborate.

I think it's fair to say that most of the people who visit here will be in their teens. NOTE: I said most, not all.

So it's also fair to say that most visitors/members here won't have children, or military experience. So allow me to explain a few things...

Imagine having your child snatched away at the age of six. Imagine your child dying.

Imagine a great and destructive war coming to an end. No more clear and obvious enemy, no more certainty.

Imagine finding out that one individual, in this case Halsey, has kidnapped children, thrown them into a life of military governance and experimented on them.

I'll admit, Nylund's novels painted a far rosier picture of Halsey. The Spartan's admired her, looked up to her, regarded her as a form of surrogate mother, if you like. And Nylund's novels also concentrated heavily on combat and the inevitable flickering of green acknowledgement lights.

Traviss, however, does none of this. She paints a darker picture, one filled with more realistic characters who have their own ambitions, be they good or bad. Her writing is born from a military background, whereas Nylund's is more technical or scientific.

I don't dislike Nylund's novels at all. In fact, I loved them. But Traviss tells it like it is. War is brutal and people suffer. But they also seek to destroy everything that the enemy still has, to ensure mankind's safety and security.

I'm with Karen Traviss.

  • 11.08.2011 7:46 AM PDT

The Razor.

For the honour of the Mirratord.


Posted by: MaxRealflugel
For the purpose of righting the wrongs of those who don't agree with Karen Traviss' perspective, allow me to elaborate.

I think it's fair to say that most of the people who visit here will be in their teens. NOTE: I said most, not all.

So it's also fair to say that most visitors/members here won't have children, or military experience. So allow me to explain a few things...

Imagine having your child snatched away at the age of six. Imagine your child dying.

Imagine a great and destructive war coming to an end. No more clear and obvious enemy, no more certainty.

Imagine finding out that one individual, in this case Halsey, has kidnapped children, thrown them into a life of military governance and experimented on them.

I'll admit, Nylund's novels painted a far rosier picture of Halsey. The Spartan's admired her, looked up to her, regarded her as a form of surrogate mother, if you like. And Nylund's novels also concentrated heavily on combat and the inevitable flickering of green acknowledgement lights.

Traviss, however, does none of this. She paints a darker picture, one filled with more realistic characters who have their own ambitions, be they good or bad. Her writing is born from a military background, whereas Nylund's is more technical or scientific.

I don't dislike Nylund's novels at all. In fact, I loved them. But Traviss tells it like it is. War is brutal and people suffer. But they also seek to destroy everything that the enemy still has, to ensure mankind's safety and security.

I'm with Karen Traviss.


Agreed.

  • 11.08.2011 8:29 AM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!

Bam said the lady! I try to portrait to my friends, Halsey as the things she's done.
Anyways, about the great schism and the brutes/elites.
"The feud between Jiralhane and Sangheili had finally erupted again with the Great Schism, but Jul had never quite worked out where the fault lines were. Jiralhanae fought each other, they fought the Sanagheili, and, for no reason Jul could truly understand, some of them remained loyal to Sangheilios."
Chapter 11

  • 11.08.2011 8:35 AM PDT

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

Posted by: Spartan 100
Bam said the lady! I try to portrait to my friends, Halsey as the things she's done.
Anyways, about the great schism and the brutes/elites.
"The feud between Jiralhane and Sangheili had finally erupted again with the Great Schism, but Jul had never quite worked out where the fault lines were. Jiralhanae fought each other, they fought the Sanagheili, and, for no reason Jul could truly understand, some of them remained loyal to Sangheilios."
Chapter 11

You forgot to mention how this concession was made for the Brutes but yet Humanity are branded all the same with some sudden, forced [And rather convenient!] stereotype of being "galactic liars". We know what the Brutes did to the Elites, and how they truly feel about the Elites; what they have always felt and how these feelings manifested themselves during the Schism. They inflicted far more harm on the Sangheili than Humanity did really by attacking them from the inside. Humanity only defended itself afterall, on their own ground. Of course not all Brutes would take part in the Schism, but for the Sangheili to make this admission and accept some into their society whilst maintaining that Humanity are this hive minded, "liar" vermin species is too much of a stretch for me and others to make, and your tripe addresses none of it. [It never has]

  • 11.08.2011 9:54 AM PDT


Posted by: MaxRealflugel
For the purpose of righting the wrongs of those who don't agree with Karen Traviss' perspective, allow me to elaborate.

I think it's fair to say that most of the people who visit here will be in their teens. NOTE: I said most, not all.

So it's also fair to say that most visitors/members here won't have children, or military experience. So allow me to explain a few things...

Imagine having your child snatched away at the age of six. Imagine your child dying.

Imagine a great and destructive war coming to an end. No more clear and obvious enemy, no more certainty.

Imagine finding out that one individual, in this case Halsey, has kidnapped children, thrown them into a life of military governance and experimented on them.

I'll admit, Nylund's novels painted a far rosier picture of Halsey. The Spartan's admired her, looked up to her, regarded her as a form of surrogate mother, if you like. And Nylund's novels also concentrated heavily on combat and the inevitable flickering of green acknowledgement lights.

Traviss, however, does none of this. She paints a darker picture, one filled with more realistic characters who have their own ambitions, be they good or bad. Her writing is born from a military background, whereas Nylund's is more technical or scientific.

I don't dislike Nylund's novels at all. In fact, I loved them. But Traviss tells it like it is. War is brutal and people suffer. But they also seek to destroy everything that the enemy still has, to ensure mankind's safety and security.

I'm with Karen Traviss.


Imagine dealing with your child's death.

30 years later a destructive war comes to an ends.

You are then told a woman kidnapped your child, experimented on him and forced them into the military.

Now you figure out the UNSC must had something to do with it because she needed funding and they kinda end up in the navy.

Now the UNSC denies funding and ONI is left with a large portion of the blame.

Nylund created a picture of Halsey and said this is what shes done, here positives and her negatives, you pick what you think of her. We painted the picture she was good because the positive included saving humanity but then lost it a bit because she kid napped Linda.

Travis says here, here Halsey... She is a bad person and constantly throws it down your throat, almost character expressed she is bad person at some point.

She may have a milatary background but use Jargon was minimal and eclipsed my Nylund's... That is not right, Halo books have a lot of Jargon.

these characters are not realistic because they seem really open to breaking rules on classified material and seem to have no long term sight, they are immature beyond belief.

Karen Traviss is not suited to right this sort of novel, she obviously can't handle a grey standpoint although she claimed that is what this novel is. She would be better suited to writing soaps because they seem to have the defined Good and Bad she likes.

  • 11.08.2011 10:10 AM PDT

i need some sleep.....

i hate bees...

no rest for the weary...


Posted by: ROBERTO jh
There are only a few reasons I can think of OP:

1) The people hating Glasslands are action junkies (action being the smallest portion of it, obviously).


Basically, I agree with Sanjeev


I think this is probably it, granted I wouldn't refer to them as action junkies, but I mean it is different from the most of the rest of the books. and people don't tend to like different.

But ya, I really like it as well.

  • 11.08.2011 11:01 AM PDT


Posted by: Mr Evil 37

Posted by: MaxRealflugel
For the purpose of righting the wrongs of those who don't agree with Karen Traviss' perspective, allow me to elaborate.

I think it's fair to say that most of the people who visit here will be in their teens. NOTE: I said most, not all.

So it's also fair to say that most visitors/members here won't have children, or military experience. So allow me to explain a few things...

Imagine having your child snatched away at the age of six. Imagine your child dying.

Imagine a great and destructive war coming to an end. No more clear and obvious enemy, no more certainty.

Imagine finding out that one individual, in this case Halsey, has kidnapped children, thrown them into a life of military governance and experimented on them.

I'll admit, Nylund's novels painted a far rosier picture of Halsey. The Spartan's admired her, looked up to her, regarded her as a form of surrogate mother, if you like. And Nylund's novels also concentrated heavily on combat and the inevitable flickering of green acknowledgement lights.

Traviss, however, does none of this. She paints a darker picture, one filled with more realistic characters who have their own ambitions, be they good or bad. Her writing is born from a military background, whereas Nylund's is more technical or scientific.

I don't dislike Nylund's novels at all. In fact, I loved them. But Traviss tells it like it is. War is brutal and people suffer. But they also seek to destroy everything that the enemy still has, to ensure mankind's safety and security.

I'm with Karen Traviss.


Agreed.

I'm with you too Mr Evil. And I fall under the teen, no children, no military experience category. I loved Glasslands.

  • 11.08.2011 2:29 PM PDT


Posted by: MaxRealflugel
For the purpose of righting the wrongs of those who don't agree with Karen Traviss' perspective, allow me to elaborate.

I think it's fair to say that most of the people who visit here will be in their teens. NOTE: I said most, not all.

So it's also fair to say that most visitors/members here won't have children, or military experience. So allow me to explain a few things...

Imagine having your child snatched away at the age of six. Imagine your child dying.

Imagine a great and destructive war coming to an end. No more clear and obvious enemy, no more certainty.

Imagine finding out that one individual, in this case Halsey, has kidnapped children, thrown them into a life of military governance and experimented on them.

I'll admit, Nylund's novels painted a far rosier picture of Halsey. The Spartan's admired her, looked up to her, regarded her as a form of surrogate mother, if you like. And Nylund's novels also concentrated heavily on combat and the inevitable flickering of green acknowledgement lights.

Traviss, however, does none of this. She paints a darker picture, one filled with more realistic characters who have their own ambitions, be they good or bad. Her writing is born from a military background, whereas Nylund's is more technical or scientific.

I don't dislike Nylund's novels at all. In fact, I loved them. But Traviss tells it like it is. War is brutal and people suffer. But they also seek to destroy everything that the enemy still has, to ensure mankind's safety and security.

I'm with Karen Traviss.


Okay lets imagine all of the children along with everyone else who were dying because of the Insurrectionist's indiscriminate attacks.

Let's also remember that a few of the clones lived at least 8 years (Daisy-023 clone). That sill has to suck for the family, but by that point they may have come to terms.

And if war is brutal and people suffer than what was wrong with what Halsey did? I know its cliche but the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.

Also ONI seems to forget the things they approved. Obviously someone in ONI had to have knowledge of what was going to happen during the Spartan II program in order for the massive budget to be approved. They also manipulated orphans into joining the Spartan III program, which was basically to make throwaway super-soldiers. That was done with Parangosky definite approval. And then you have to remember that they used both Sangheili and Human prisoners to learn about the Flood. Which the good Admiral more than likely knew about.

Which then leads me to ask why the high moral ground is given to Admiral Parangosky and ONI.

Also there are the off-hand comments BB makes about Halsey cloning her brain so it can be used to create an AI. How is that any better using a dead person's brain which could include residual memories?

How does forcing a civil war between the more dominant group that wants a cease-fire and the religious fanatics who still want to destroy your species seem like a good idea in anyway, shape, or form?

Traviss's writing to me did not seem to be coming from a military background to me. It seemed more to be based on subterfuge and politics and had an feel arty to it. And good for her that she can write 2 or 3 storylines with unfleshed out characters in each. If you have ever read the Malzan Books of the Fallen each of which has a strong supporting cast and upwards of 5 or 6 storylines per novel or Dune or a good deal of other sci-fi and fantasy novels out there, including Ghosts of Onyx and Contact Harvest.

Not to say Traviss is a terrible writer, but she probably could have put some effort into learning the backstory of Halo. It just seems like she trying to create better characters that trump everyone elses, kinda like what happened in the Star Wars EU and what occasionally happens in the Warhammer 40k fluff. But it also was far from the worst book in the Halo canon.

  • 11.08.2011 5:04 PM PDT

I think its worth remembering that Traviss is british, and shes writing up kilo-five using a lot of british idioms etc. This sort of may be confusing our american friends who expect a unit of soldiers to be all "OORAH LETS GET IT DONE MARINES" when they are more like "Right o lets crack on then chop chop."

I can totally believe that Traviss is a military journalist in the context of the British army.

Im british and i liked the book.

[Edited on 11.08.2011 7:22 PM PST]

  • 11.08.2011 7:21 PM PDT

As far as the Brutes serving Elites part, it is quite possible at least some are being used as slave labor rather than willing volunteers. After all, with the whole population of Sanghelios to maintain, it would be impossible to rely completely on Grunts even if they wanted to. Besides, the Brutes arent completely stupid to the point that they wont realize their best chance of survival lies with serving the Elites since they are technologicaly superior and less likely to devolve into tribal combat. Though I am also confused about humanity being liars. Perhaps "liars" mean something else to an Elite from their perspective?

  • 11.08.2011 7:38 PM PDT


Posted by: thefallenlords
As far as the Brutes serving Elites part, it is quite possible at least some are being used as slave labor rather than willing volunteers. After all, with the whole population of Sanghelios to maintain, it would be impossible to rely completely on Grunts even if they wanted to. Besides, the Brutes arent completely stupid to the point that they wont realize their best chance of survival lies with serving the Elites since they are technologicaly superior and less likely to devolve into tribal combat. Though I am also confused about humanity being liars. Perhaps "liars" mean something else to an Elite from their perspective?


My comment is the fact that when has humanity lied to Elites?

  • 11.08.2011 10:00 PM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!

Do anyone of those who say, oh it was okay and justifiable to kidnap children because of bla bla bla, even have children?
If you do, go up to your child, look at him, give him a hug and tell hm that.

  • 11.08.2011 11:25 PM PDT

@spaboolly

Posted by: Spartan 100
Do anyone of those who say, oh it was okay and justifiable to kidnap children because of bla bla bla, even have children?
If you do, go up to your child, look at him, give him a hug and tell hm that.


To my knowledge, this thread is not about whether we agree with what Halsey did or how we feel about her actions in the Spartan-II project or whether we consider them to be justified.

It's about why some people dislike the book. I can hate Halsey all I want. To be honest, I never liked her much. But that's not the point. From an objective, real world point of view, I disliked the novel for a lot of reasons. I already said why, so I'm not going to get into that again.

One of them was that I didn't agree with the way she treated Halsey. Do I think it's wrong to abduct, experiment on, and clone children? Absolutely. Was it justified in the end? Well that's the issue in a lot of the Halo fiction, isn't it? Does our survival justify the atrocities we committed to achieve it?

That, in my opinion, is the point of literature. To leave room for you to think and analyze and form your own opinion. First Strike does that well. Nylund seems to take an "it is what it is" approach. As has been stated by many people, Traviss most certainly does not.

  • 11.09.2011 12:44 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Deva Path


Posted by: DecepticonCobra

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


Posted by: Spartan 100
Do anyone of those who say, oh it was okay and justifiable to kidnap children because of bla bla bla, even have children?
If you do, go up to your child, look at him, give him a hug and tell hm that.


For the last time the UNSC and ONI both approved of that.

And if my spawn had the inert means to stop a civil war and then an alien one your damn sure i would let him go.

  • 11.09.2011 5:05 AM PDT
  • gamertag: Zereta
  • user homepage:


Posted by: grey101

Posted by: Spartan 100
Do anyone of those who say, oh it was okay and justifiable to kidnap children because of bla bla bla, even have children?
If you do, go up to your child, look at him, give him a hug and tell hm that.


For the last time the UNSC and ONI both approved of that.

And if my spawn had the inert means to stop a civil war and then an alien one your damn sure i would let him go.


Still doesn't make it wrong, morally. Kidnapping kids, lying to them, lying to their parents and causing more grief is a move by a piece of crap.

The argument here is not whether Halsey was a monster or not, she is. Its whether she was the only one. The thing about Glasslands is that it disregards the other major players who worked with Halsey (Like Parangosky and Mendez) and puts all the blame on Halsey, which is very unfair and does not make sense.

  • 11.09.2011 7:30 AM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!

We see it through the eyes of other characters.
To agree with them or not is our descision.

And your spawn? Not your child but your spawn? Of course you'd say that about your "spawn".

[Edited on 11.09.2011 8:21 AM PST]

  • 11.09.2011 8:15 AM PDT

Admitedly, the claim that humans are liars to Elites is shaky, but it could be possible that humans consistently claimed (in Contact Harvest at least) that we had no Forerunner relics because we didnt know what they meant by relics. Next thing you know, they find the Portal to the Ark in Africa. Im not saying that the view that humans lied to elites makes sense, but given the way the canon works, that is the best explanation I can give.

  • 11.09.2011 8:19 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4