Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: Would CE, 2, and 3 be enough to tell the story of Halo?
  • Subject: Would CE, 2, and 3 be enough to tell the story of Halo?
Subject: Would CE, 2, and 3 be enough to tell the story of Halo?

Haters are going to hate.
Praisers are going to praise.

The Bungie Forums are what keeps my mind sharp and my fingers active, between writing my own movie scripts, drawing, and studying industrial design. At the moment I'm working on miniatures for a short movie that I'll hopefully be able to film once I've saved up for a camera... That's me, with the mug, trying to have a conversation with Konoko.

Disclaimer: There have been a lot of threads about canon superiority, etc, this is not one of those threads. This thread is not about challenging canon whatsoever. The thoughts behind it have however spawned from reading that type of threads.

All of a sudden I realized that most of the discussions about broken canon/canon superiority were mostly due to content beyond the games. This got me to think: would Halo hold up as a story without the books?

So here's the thought experiment: which additional peices, outside of the original trilogy, do you think are vital for Halo as a story? Or is it perfectly fine without anything else?

Of course, a lot of the fantastic lore would be lost, such as the Spartan program, Dr. Halsey an her work with A.I, how the Prophet of Truth came to power, how Rtas lost half of his jaw, and much, much more. But that isn't DIRECTLY part of this experiment. The question is whether Halo is capable of telling its core story, an--in comparison--undetailed story about why the Forerunners built the ringworlds, The Didact, The Librarian, MB, OB, 343 Guilty Spark; The Flood, The Gravemind; The Covenant, Prophets, Elites, Holy Journey; Humanity, John, Cortana; etc.

How vague is to vague, how clear should something be spelled out? Are there elements in the story that are too ambiguous, too undefined for you to be able to take them for granted, get something out of the story? Something as simple as Cortana being an A.I, is that even mentioned in CE? I know 343 calls her a "Construct", but what does that mean if you don't have a reference? Now this particular example becomes clear in the other games, but I guess that there might be other parts that would be considered unclear. Reference is everything. I mean, what is there actually that stops the player from believing that Cortana is a Ghost? At that point reference; it is science fiction, and she is in the computer. It's a rather dumb example, but you get what I'm trying to say.

Give it a try, if only for fun, you'd be surprised of how much the games are able to tell (don't forget things such as multiplayer map descriptions, etc), and you'd be surprised of how different the story becomes!


Personally I would miss a lot of the awesome lore, but I still think I'd love Halo's story if only the games existed.

This thread ties into a thread about how the story of Destiny will be told.

  • 09.24.2012 7:25 AM PDT

By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.

Absolutely not, IMO. Halo as a universe wouldn't have nearly enough substance to keep me hooked without the novels and additional media, it'd be a vague galaxy-hopping odyssey with few-to-no actual details to the story leaving huge gaps between the games. How did John get back to Earth? What happened before Halo CE? Why is Johnson alive? Why do the Covenant want to kill us anyway? What went on in the month-long time gap between Halo 2 and 3? What's all this about Forerunners?

There would just be too many unanswered questions IMO, enough to make Halo 3's story seem more like a badly structured fanfic than it already does.

  • 09.24.2012 7:59 AM PDT

I played the trilogy before I read the books, it was an enjoyable story. Halo 2 especially was what turned me onto the greater universe, and it frustrated me a little when Halo 3 pulled back from revealing those greater aspects.

Funnily enough, I decided to read the books because I wanted to know why Johnson was alive. Started with First Strike, realised it was the sequel to another book and finished that before moving on.

Then I got it into my head to write (bad) fan fiction, and so I swotted up on Halopedia big-time. But before all that, the games themselves were enough for me.

  • 09.24.2012 8:09 AM PDT


Posted by: the real Janaka
Something as simple as Cortana being an A.I, is that even mentioned in CE? I know 343 calls her a "Construct", but what does that mean if you don't have a reference? Now this particular example becomes clear in the other games, but I guess that there might be other parts that would be considered unclear. Reference is everything. I mean, what is there actually that stops the player from believing that Cortana is a Ghost? At that point reference; it is science fiction, and she is in the computer. It's a rather dumb example, but you get what I'm trying to say.[/quote]


"I'm initiating the Cole Protocol; Article 2. We're abandoning the Autumn. That means you too, Cortana. Destruction or capture of a shipboard A.I is absolutely unacceptable." ~ Keyes, The Pillar of Autumn.

[Edited on 09.24.2012 8:16 AM PDT]

  • 09.24.2012 8:16 AM PDT

By the power of truth, I, while living, have conquered the universe.

Posted by: Wolverfrog

Posted by: the real Janaka
Something as simple as Cortana being an A.I, is that even mentioned in CE? I know 343 calls her a "Construct", but what does that mean if you don't have a reference? Now this particular example becomes clear in the other games, but I guess that there might be other parts that would be considered unclear. Reference is everything. I mean, what is there actually that stops the player from believing that Cortana is a Ghost? At that point reference; it is science fiction, and she is in the computer. It's a rather dumb example, but you get what I'm trying to say.[/quote]


"I'm initiating the Cole Protocol; Article 2. We're abandoning the Autumn. That means you too, Cortana. Destruction or capture of a shipboard A.I is absolutely unacceptable." ~ Keyes, The Pillar of Autumn.


What does the 'A' stand for?

[Edited on 09.24.2012 8:25 AM PDT]

  • 09.24.2012 8:24 AM PDT

I was a Halo fan without having read any Halo novel. That being said, there are many novels that explain quite a bit of backstory. Without, FotR, First Strike, the games would have large gaps in the story. Of course, one would just fill in the gaps.

  • 09.24.2012 9:22 AM PDT


Posted by: ajw34307
Absolutely not, IMO. Halo as a universe wouldn't have nearly enough substance to keep me hooked without the novels and additional media, it'd be a vague galaxy-hopping odyssey with few-to-no actual details to the story leaving huge gaps between the games. How did John get back to Earth? What happened before Halo CE? Why is Johnson alive? Why do the Covenant want to kill us anyway? What went on in the month-long time gap between Halo 2 and 3? What's all this about Forerunners?

There would just be too many unanswered questions IMO, enough to make Halo 3's story seem more like a badly structured fanfic than it already does.
This.

Without it, Halo is basically Battle LA. Random aliens attacking for no reason.

  • 09.24.2012 12:13 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Don't do anything you wouldn't want to have to explain to paramedics. Trust me, I'm a pilot.

I've played all the games and read all the books, and personally, I think the books are needed. The games do a fine job of portraying the main events in the Halo universe, but the lore found in the books adds so much more depth to the universe than the games could. I think that, without the books, the Halo universe would not be as great as we know it, simply because we would be lacking the depth that the books provide.

  • 09.24.2012 12:20 PM PDT

I didn't start to get into any of the extended universe until after I had played halo 2. I found that the first two games had enough story for me to enjoy and to get an overall sense of what the story was about.

So if there was no books, animated shorts, graphic novels, etc.. then I think the games would stand up fine (as long as you can fill in some gaps by yourself). Clearly there are a lot of people who do not read the books or other media that still love the games and have an understanding of the story at a more basic level, and this seems to be fine by them.

  • 09.24.2012 12:46 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Five exclamations marks are a good signifier of an insane mind. As is trying to hide from Death in an airtight room. Silly wizard.

It would seem empty. However, the problem looking at it this way is that we know what the games say, what the novels says, and what they don't say that the other fills in. For example, if there were never any novels, we wouldn't know the reason for the war, the story of John, who Cortana is, and several other things. However, that would leave several huge gaps is the story telling.

If First Strike was never written we wouldn't know how John got from 04 to Earth. That would be a glaring plot hole that a good storyteller wouldn't leave unaddressed. If there was no FS, Halo 2 would probably have started different, probably with the UNSC picking up John or another character expositing about the events between the games.

As it is, the games alone would not be able to tell a full and fulfilling story.

  • 09.24.2012 12:58 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member

I think if you were to throw in Halo: Reach, yes, the games would be enough to tell the story.

Maybe even ODST as well. It may be fine without it, but it doesn't hurt in any way I don't think.

  • 09.26.2012 7:49 PM PDT

I think if you were to throw in Halo: Reach, yes, the games would be enough to tell the story.
This. But I would still recommend buying the novels as well. If nothing else, it adds to the experience. But the truth is that it fills a lot of the voids.

But that doesn't mean the games are useless without them.

  • 09.27.2012 4:34 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member


Posted by: MaxRealflugel
I think if you were to throw in Halo: Reach, yes, the games would be enough to tell the story.
This. But I would still recommend buying the novels as well. If nothing else, it adds to the experience. But the truth is that it fills a lot of the voids.

But that doesn't mean the games are useless without them.



I agree.

  • 09.27.2012 5:23 AM PDT

-blam!- Was that actually blammed out? Or did I just type it? You'll never know.

Yup.

  • 09.27.2012 7:57 AM PDT

~ Life is Killing Me. ~

~ I hate, therefore I am. ~


Posted by: dahuterschuter
Yup.


This.

If you bother to read the terminals in Halo 3, and listen to all the cut-scenes in all the games (i.e. don't skip through them), then there is no need for the books at all.

With just the games, Halo has an amazing story and background lore making it what it is.

The books are just extra fluff, there to flesh out the details in between certain in-game events.

If the games went away, the books wouldn't exist. If the books went away, the games would still be perfectly fine.

For these reasons, the Halo games (any game actually) have always held more importance to me as Canon/Lore than any book ever could.

It's the games that matter, not the books.

[Edited on 09.27.2012 8:02 AM PDT]

  • 09.27.2012 8:01 AM PDT

Posted by: Primum Agmen
A tosser is the same as a wanker. To toss oneself off is to fondle the trouser weasel.


Current Gamertag:
JesusWasAHindu

The think the games are great by themselves. The universe gets even better when you look deeper.

  • 09.27.2012 8:16 AM PDT

Haters are going to hate.
Praisers are going to praise.

The Bungie Forums are what keeps my mind sharp and my fingers active, between writing my own movie scripts, drawing, and studying industrial design. At the moment I'm working on miniatures for a short movie that I'll hopefully be able to film once I've saved up for a camera... That's me, with the mug, trying to have a conversation with Konoko.

Hmm, I'm a bit reluctant to post my answer to many of the fine responses this thread has received, cause I'm worried that it'll all appear as yet another bash on Halo post Bungie, since if I am to defend my feelings about the original trilogy being enough to tell the core story, I'll have to point out the reasons for why I don't think it's necesary to expand anymore... But here it goes:

Many of your points actually are awnsered by the games.Posted by: ajw34307
How did John get back to Earth?
Ah yes, the gaps between the games are a bit abrupt; they don't exactly flow into each other. But I still don't think an entire book is the answer for that. Speaking of "galaxy-hopping", that is kind of what the books describing the events between the games ended up being, although not vague, but super detailed (going back to Reach and rescuing CASTLE Base, the Unyielding Hierophant). The problem lies with the games, they should have tied into each other better. Seeing as the mistake has been made however, I wouldn't argue that the books have handled those gaps particularily well, even though they featured tons of cool stuff. What happened before Halo CE?Harvest didn't respond, the UNSC sent a fleet--to investigate--of which only one ship made it back, and when the Covenant invaded Reach, the Pillar of Autumn made a blind jump (Instructions Manual). It's not very detailed, but it's answered none the less. Which was the point of the thread; does the core story work within the games(?). Why is Johnson alive?This is one of the parts where the games fall short, and I'm not sure I could live without the "uneven elephant" quote.. Why do the Covenant want to kill us anyway? Was Halo 2 that boring? Also, manual + Conversations From the Universe.What went on in the month-long time gap between Halo 2 and 3?Same as before. If nothing happened, why spend anything on it? Unless one decides to come up with an elaborate side-story... What's all this about Forerunners? I hate to say this, but they were supposed to be mysterious... Even so, we have learned a lot about them, the problem is only that most people don't seem to be able to take things for granted whatsoever, they don't seem to get any satisfaction unless a question is answered on a meta level, have it confirmed by Frankie, or whatever, even though one really can't interpret most of the things in more than a couple of ways.

A couple of things we have learned about the Forerunner: Five or six fingers? (is the panel made so that five-fingered beings are able access it with either left and right hand, or has it changed just for the Chief?). Seriously, in how many ways is it logical to interpret this particular detail? I for one react in the complete opposite way: have everything completely unvailed and I'll fall asleep.

The door size: they can't be bigger that their doors.. Ops..
Their architecture tells a lot about their top teir ranks. Form follows function, less is more, efficiency; they rely on basic physical atributes rather than elaborate endeavours, etc.
I can't even begin to stess enough how much of the story the multiplayer levels from Halo 3 are able to tell, if you're able to make something out a the vague stuff.

The story of the Didact and the Librerian: Tells us that, even though they were highy intellectual, they were still bound by emotions, very much like human beings. They even had to program powerfull A.I.s to make the hard decisions. Their entire culture, way of life, beilief in the Mantle, was hypocritical, etc.

Multiplayer map descriptions, Terminals. They give us a pretty good view of who the are/were. Especially this picture. Yes, it is completely based on assumption, but why assume something else that isn't strengthened by other vague clues? Cause that's the point really, the more time one devotes to investigating all the small, vague details, the more rewarded one will feel.

From the Gravemind we learned: a lot of story-specific poetry.

When 4, 5, 6, and yet another trilogy of books is released, and all questions are answered, then what? I definitelly don't think that the Forerunner were undefined.There would just be too many unanswered questions IMO, enough to make Halo 3's story seem more like a badly structured fanfic than it already does.I've seen this sentiment here and there, but I've never read a detailed description of why. A lot would be unanswered, left with little light shone on, but I think it was left in a rather atmospheric state of illumination, opposed to bloom.Posted by: Spartan1995324
Posted by: ajw34307
This.

Without it, Halo is basically Battle LA. Random aliens attacking for no reason.
You are definitely underestimating how much the games were able to tell.Posted by: Wolverfrog
"I'm initiating the Cole Protocol; Article 2. We're abandoning the Autumn. That means you too, Cortana. Destruction or capture of a shipboard A.I is absolutely unacceptable." ~ Keyes, The Pillar of Autumn.
Thanks! I knew I was being lazy when I decided to post without at least watching the cutscenes on youtube.. It is however sad that nothing about the flash-cloned-brain-A.I. lore made it into the games. Makes me wonder from where idea originated; if it was Nylund himself or if Bungie had given him that information. The only previous occurrence that is a bit similar from Bungies side that I can think of is the Deadly Brain, from Oni (must refresh my Marathon memory).Posted by: ajw34307
What does the 'A' stand for?
Nice, that almost proves on its own that Cortana and her origin should have been fleshed out a bit.Posted by: MAC Blast
If there was no FS, Halo 2 would probably have started different, probably with the UNSC picking up John or another character expositing about the events between the games
This is a really good point. If it weren't for the books, if they didn't carry the heavy load, there might have been a lot of blatant exposition in the games.Posted by: AH4L
I think if you were to throw in Halo: Reach, yes, the games would be enough to tell the story.
I'm wondering, what do you think Reach (the game) added to the core story?Posted by: Uriel S167That's fairly similar to what I think.If there is anything that the games can't be without, it's their virals.



[Edited on 09.28.2012 5:11 AM PDT]

  • 09.27.2012 12:23 PM PDT

In the Gaming world they call me The Prodigy. My guess is because I spent my time helping every person with every problem rather they where my enemies or not. With that said I also ended up blowing the minds of everyone I met online. And in the real world if we are talking about Game development and computer skill. None the less I tend to present my self in a generally professional manner and I do not tolerate an annoying degree of Disrespect or high levels of ignorance.


Dispite whatever the text above says, I just skimmed through it all,
TL;DR

In my opinion the Halo Universe it's self is incredibly vast and is well referenced, though I am sure that 343i nor Bungie has told it's beloved community everything yet. Though the games are good the only game that is included with a built in reference database is 343i's Halo CE Anniversary called the library.

  • 09.28.2012 7:21 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member


Posted by:

Posted by: AH4L

I think if you were to throw in Halo: Reach, yes, the games would be enough to tell the story.


I'm wondering, what do you think Reach (the game) added to the core story?



I thought about this before I reached my decision... and it made me realize that when you think about the start of Halo 1, you're basically thrown right in to the action. For some reason, you've apparently just made a huge jump trying to evade the Covenant from something, and suddenly you're Master Chief waking up from Cryo-sleep and everyone is always so amazed to see you.

The reason I think Halo: Reach helps to understand the story is that it gives a little bit of background as to what was going on prior to Halo 1 and the reason that the humans found Halo in the first place - evading the Covenant from Reach.

[Edited on 09.28.2012 9:28 AM PDT]

  • 09.28.2012 9:28 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Wort, wort, wort!


Posted by: the real Janaka
What's all this about Forerunners? I hate to say this, but they were supposed to be mysterious... Even so, we have learned a lot about them, the problem is only that most people don't seem to be able to take things for granted whatsoever, they don't seem to get any satisfaction unless a question is answered on a meta level, have it confirmed by Frankie, or whatever, even though one really can't interpret most of the things in more than a couple of ways.

A couple of things we have learned about the Forerunner: Five or six fingers? (is the panel made so that five-fingered beings are able access it with either left and right hand, or has it changed just for the Chief?). Seriously, in how many ways is it logical to interpret this particular detail? I for one react in the complete opposite way: have everything completely unvailed and I'll fall asleep.

The door size: they can't be bigger that their doors.. Ops..
Their architecture tells a lot about their top teir ranks. Form follows function, less is more, efficiency; they rely on basic physical atributes rather than elaborate endeavours, etc.
I can't even begin to stess enough how much of the story the multiplayer levels from Halo 3 are able to tell, if you're able to make something out a the vague stuff.

The story of the Didact and the Librerian: Tells us that, even though they were highy intellectual, they were still bound by emotions, very much like human beings. They even had to program powerfull A.I.s to make the hard decisions. Their entire culture, way of life, beilief in the Mantle, was hypocritical, etc.


That's my main concern and the part I hate about the expanded lore. I really, really liked forerunners being mysterious (inb4 ajw starts explaining how they were badly written and not mysterious at all) and us making the bigger picture from all the details (talking about the games here). They explained the forerunners so much, they had to come up with another layer of mysterious things, even more advanced than forerunners - the precursors. I think that was the writers writing themselves into a corner and trying to punch a hole in the wall to get out of that corner. I mean, Bungie always made mysterious (story wise) games, look at Marathon! You could miss a lot of details if you didn't find all the terminals, and even then you had to piece all that stuff together. And the ending.. hell, that was a pretty epic piece of writing, or at least very satisfying for me.

If not for the expanded universe there would probably be no Halo 4.

  • 09.28.2012 10:16 AM PDT

Skillet was here and referred to himself in the third person.

Yes. Because of the actual meat of the story. Look at what Halo 1 through 3 cover.

Halo 1 covers the discovery of not only the existence of the Halo rings, but the Flood, and the eventual escape and destruction of the local infestation.

Halo 2 covers the continuation of the Human/Covenant war, establishes the Prophet of Truth as the main Covenant antagonist, as well as the re-introduction of the Flood as a viable threat, and introduces the main antagonist for the story with the introduction of the Gravemind.

Halo 3 covers even more of the Human/Covenant war, as well as the ending of that war with the death of Truth, and the destruction of the Gravemind and the Flood's current space-faring infestation.

As Achronos said originally before Halo 3's release, the game marked the end of that story arc. And yes, those three games are enough to tell the story of Halo.

Also, there doesn't need to be a Halo 4. Master Chief could be dead at the end of Halo 3, and it would finish the story with no unanswered questions.

Everything that is part of the expanded universe, technically doesn't need to be discussed. Including ODST, and Reach. They're both additional stories, but not required to understand what has happened and why.

This post is longer then I meant for it to be, but to put it simply, a good story needs to answer who, where, why, how, and less importantly, when. The first three Halo games do this well. Everything else is optional and arguably, not important.

EDIT: On the topic of the Forerunner... they're really not that important. Plus, Halo 3 answers any questions associated with them. They either were Human, or Humans are Forerunner (no, it's not the same thing). They created the Halo rings as a last-ditch effort to combat the Flood as well as saving enough of the galaxy for evolution to take place and repopulate the life-bearing planets, then activated them, killing themselves in the process.

It's pretty simple, but I don't think anything else needs to be said. Usually, mysterious races are best left shrouded in mystery. Look at the Protheans in Mass Effect 3. The character of Javik didn't live up to the expectations of most of the fans. It's not that Javik was a bad character, it's that taking a mysterious character or race of people that has a broad range of theories as to who they are, and then "answering" the questions, destroys every ounce of mystery that made the character or race mysterious and enigmatic in the first place. You can argue "yeah, duh, that's the point" but when you have a race that is maintained by its mystery, and then you take away that mystery, what do you have left?

[Edited on 09.29.2012 4:27 AM PDT]

  • 09.29.2012 4:14 AM PDT

Haters are going to hate.
Praisers are going to praise.

The Bungie Forums are what keeps my mind sharp and my fingers active, between writing my own movie scripts, drawing, and studying industrial design. At the moment I'm working on miniatures for a short movie that I'll hopefully be able to film once I've saved up for a camera... That's me, with the mug, trying to have a conversation with Konoko.

Posted by: Skillet98Very well put.

  • 09.29.2012 10:02 AM PDT

If you're passionate about the thing you're talking about, I'll always lend an ear.

Posted by: Skillet98

I agree.

Especially about the mystery part. I loved the mystery surrounding the forerunners which made the Halo rings feel so much more alien and distant. It's that "not knowing" that makes this particular race so compelling and intriguing since their inception.

I also agree about the core story. The Halo Trilogy is enough to tell the the story of Halo because it is the story of Halo.

Everything else is expanded. Stories which touch upon or give greater depth to the main event of the trilogy. As good or as bad as it may be, it is very much an addition to the story rather than the Halo story itself. So yes, the trilogy is enough to tell the story of Halo.

But then again the story of Halo is expanding for the sake of expansion, and we'll see Halo 4-6 add on to that. But I feel as though that particular Arc has finished, and that arc to me was essentially the story of Halo.

Everything beyond that, is just done with continuing the story in mind, not because there was a story to be told but in some sense, to make a new one. One that I feel will try to be as "Halo" as possible according to 343i/ Frankie but at the same time, the core foundations have changed and that fundamentally changes everything.

[Edited on 09.29.2012 12:26 PM PDT]

  • 09.29.2012 12:18 PM PDT