- Plasma Prestige
- |
- Intrepid Legendary Member
Expressing my strong liberal views without shame. Favorite quotes below:
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."
"One starts to live when he can live outside himself."
- Albert Einstein
I just want to sit down and play a damn game, not "do homework" before I go into it.
Halo 4's story was comprehensible even if you didn't read the novels. Having to watch the terminals isn't asking too much, even if you have to, God forbid, use Halo Waypoint to watch them (or, if you're lazy, the Internet). Halo's extended media enhance Halo 4's story more so than any other campaign, but it was not an abstruse mess without the novels as it has been played to be.
Posted by: Dark Hunter 2100
Posted by: Plasma Prestige
Halo 3's campaign existed for the sole purpose of ending a trilogy.
In all fairness, that's exactly what Bungie was aiming for. Bungie was never known for games that lingered on and on into existence, they made the game, maybe a sequel, and then it was that. The only reason Halo 2 didn't end the trilogy was because they didn't have enough time, so they had the tough, awkward job of making the end of one game a game of its own. If it was up to them, Halo Reach and Halo 4 would not exist.
Bungie made two extremely well made campaigns, then dropped the ball on 2.5 of them (Reach, Halo 3, and to some extent ODST because of the awful characters). I understand being forced into an agreement to make games: but don't ruin the integrity of a franchise that you not only built up but one millions adore to spite MS.