I really enjoyed Halo 4 SP. The forerunners were just O.K. though and weren't as interesting as the covenant and the flood. They didn't seem to have a sense of teamwork or anything.
I absolutely loved the MC / Cortana bits and how MC would do anything for her after all their adventures and all the times she's saved his life.
Yes! Halo 4 was the definitive title for us novel-addicts. It was the perfect companion to everything that happened in the Forerunner trilogy and the Kilo-Five trilogy.
I don't understand the dislike for Palmer. Not only does she have a great VA (Hi femshep!), but her bristle and gristle is a welcome foil. I like her. *shrugs*
I like your lore expositions, but you're beginning to lose credibility with statements like this. Palmer is terrible. She's the dude-bro attempt at replacing the archetype that Sgt Johnson filled.
As has been said, while the story in Halo 4 is not in and of itself bad, the way it was presented is. Playing the game, I expected a lot of in-game storytelling, a bit like Halo 1 and 2. I mean, we are in this new Forerunner world, full of mysterious tech and artifact. We should have spent a significant amount of the first section of the game learning about the world, getting information about the lore but this barely happened. Halo 1&2 always had this brief moments in between gunplay that fills you with background lore/story either through Cortana or the messages of the prophets. Or accessing some Forerunner facility to get more story bit. This was almost entirely missing from H4, and when present it only serve to get you to go press a button or the other.
I like your lore expositions, but you're beginning to lose credibility with statements like this. Palmer is terrible. She's the dude-bro attempt at replacing the archetype that Sgt Johnson filled.
Palmer's alright. I think most peoples issue with her was a perceived lack of respect for the player, rather than how she was in-universe; "I expected you to be taller" + "eggheads" means some fans were left feeling insulted.
Palmer's alright. I think most peoples issue with her was a perceived lack of respect for the player, rather than how she was in-universe; "I expected you to be taller" + "eggheads" means some fans were left feeling insulted.
I think Palmer gets a bit of a bad rep really. She wasn't terrible, she just wasn't good either. She was pretty poorly written in SpOps though. I think people got a little over sensitive about the whole "eggheads" thing.
Yes! Halo 4 was the definitive title for us novel-addicts. It was the perfect companion to everything that happened in the Forerunner trilogy and the Kilo-Five trilogy.
I've read all the novels and I think Halo 4 and the Traviss books were complete bunk. Nightfall was also pretty poor, FuD was better imo. Tbh a lot of the lore 343 released doesn't do much for me (I did like Evolutions, the Forerunner trilogy & some of Legends though).
Edit: Palmer is badly written, I hope Locke is handled better (& I hope we aren't forced to play as him for >50% of the campaign)
Do you guys think 343 will retcon the Reach ending and kill off Halsey (maybe not in 5 but eventually)? I doubt Chief would be killed anytime soon, and if anyone were to die it would probably be Halsey way before he would even be considered. I mean they had no issue retconning the Humans being Forerunners thing, so I figured maybe this was possible.
I'd rather no one be killed off just for the sake of it or to force character development, but just speculating.
I really wouldn't call that a retcon. Don't take the closing narration itself as an actual canonical moment that happened - it's not like Halsey was literally standing there on Reach decades later monologuing. It's just a common story-telling tool. Also, what are you referring to as far as the human/Forerunner "retcon"? We knew as far back as the H3 terminals that they were two distinct species.
I do think they will kill off Halsey eventually though, but probably not in Halo 5. I find it unlikely they'd keep her around forever. She has to go eventually, I just think it's a matter of how and under what circumstances.
____________________________________________
Regarding Palmer, she was alright during the few moments she had in the campaign. I think most people's problems with her come from how badly SpOps dialog could get (lol let's save the dumb eggheads, oops more marines died man they blow lul) and most fans were almost exclusively exposed to her through that.
Halo 4 campaign was good, and could have been great but for a few things that dragged it down IMO
1. Disappearing weapons - happened all too often, and that is NOT Halo.
2. Closing off 'backtracking'. Toomany areas were closed off behind you, and this couple with the disappearing wepaons undermined the feeling of 'Halo', which it got right in many other ways.
3. The 'Visit Waypoint' terminals exposition - just clumsy. Please 343 if you are going to put exposition and backstory to the narrative, then put it in the GAME! With all the tlak of 'immerrsion' on the multiplayer side, don't take the player so obviously out of the game by directing them to an external website. That is immersion destroying.
4. Dumb QTEs. Now I really don't like QTEs at the best of time, but 'Press RT to Kill Elite'. You got to be shitting me? Just lazy, and again, immersion destroying. If there are gonna be QTEs in Halo 5 (hopefully not), then put some thought into them mm'kay?
The big thing it got right for me was evoking that 'alien-like' feeling of awe and wonder that I got in Halo CE. I thought Halo 2 really lost that and it didn't really return.
I'm hopeful that 343 can deliver a great campaign in Halo 5, but will be very disappointed if there is a repeat of the above list.
Halo 4 campaign was good, and could have been great but for a few things that dragged it down IMO
1. Disappearing weapons - happened all too often, and that is NOT Halo.
2. Closing off 'backtracking'. Toomany areas were closed off behind you, and this couple with the disappearing wepaons undermined the feeling of 'Halo', which it got right in many other ways.
3. The 'Visit Waypoint' terminals exposition - just clumsy. Please 343 if you are going to put exposition and backstory to the narrative, then put it in the GAME! With all the tlak of 'immerrsion' on the multiplayer side, don't take the player so obviously out of the game by directing them to an external website. That is immersion destroying.
4. Dumb QTEs. Now I really don't like QTEs at the best of time, but 'Press RT to Kill Elite'. You got to be shitting me? Just lazy, and again, immersion destroying. If there are gonna be QTEs in Halo 5 (hopefully not), then put some thought into them mm'kay?
The big thing it got right for me was evoking that 'alien-like' feeling of awe and wonder that I got in Halo CE. I thought Halo 2 really lost that and it didn't really return.
I'm hopeful that 343 can deliver a great campaign in Halo 5, but will be very disappointed if there is a repeat of the above list.
Agreed. I honestly enjoyed Halo 4's campaign more than 3's (felt 4's was more impressive for its time + felt Halo 4 had more action) but those are all good points that you made.
Halo 4 campaign was good, and could have been great but for a few things that dragged it down IMO
1. Disappearing weapons - happened all too often, and that is NOT Halo.
2. Closing off 'backtracking'. Toomany areas were closed off behind you, and this couple with the disappearing wepaons undermined the feeling of 'Halo', which it got right in many other ways.
3. The 'Visit Waypoint' terminals exposition - just clumsy. Please 343 if you are going to put exposition and backstory to the narrative, then put it in the GAME! With all the tlak of 'immerrsion' on the multiplayer side, don't take the player so obviously out of the game by directing them to an external website. That is immersion destroying.
4. Dumb QTEs. Now I really don't like QTEs at the best of time, but 'Press RT to Kill Elite'. You got to be shitting me? Just lazy, and again, immersion destroying. If there are gonna be QTEs in Halo 5 (hopefully not), then put some thought into them mm'kay?
The big thing it got right for me was evoking that 'alien-like' feeling of awe and wonder that I got in Halo CE. I thought Halo 2 really lost that and it didn't really return.
I'm hopeful that 343 can deliver a great campaign in Halo 5, but will be very disappointed if there is a repeat of the above list.
To be fair, I think the Waypoint thing was due to limited disc-space. The main disc was completely filled already and they still required a second-disc install/download for multiplayer and SpOps.
I definitely agree on all the other points though.
The story relies far too heavily on the books though. Major aspects of the were very clumsily handled and a lot of the story relied on the assumption that the player had read the books and other secondary lore. This made it extremely difficult to follow for those who hadn't.
Take the reveal of the Didact for example; Cortana and the Chief somehow immediately know who he is and don't seem even slightly surprised that they discovered a living Forerunner, a race thought to be long gone. It's clear he hates humans, it's clear he's a powerful Forerunner and it's very clear he's the bad guy. Somehow every character seems to know all this yet it's never explained to the player. The player is left completely in the dark about so many story details that it seems like the only reason we're fighting this guy is because he has glowing armour and a scary voice. It almost feels like 343 skipped a cutscene somewhere. It's just poorly written and badly handled.
Another aspect which was badly done was the Librarian cutscene. Unless you had a deep knowledge of Halo's lore almost all of that cutscene was complete gibberish. Who is this Librarian? What's her connection to the Didact? What is the mantle? Apparently the humans fought the Forerunners years ago? What the hell is a genesong? So much stuff is thrown at the player in the space of only a few minutes with very little explanation. It's just not very good.
Even if you had read the books some aspects were a bit rubbish. Cortana and the Chief were immediately ready to risk everything in taking the Didact down, even though they knew almost nothing about him. The human characters showed absolutely no surprise in finding the assumed dead Chief on a random Forerunner planet. Del Rio and Palmer are both shoddily written and lackluster characters.
All that said, I really enjoyed 4. I'm one of the few steadfast defenders of the game in HaloGAF. However a lot of its plot is pretty weak.
And on that Didact part, wasn't it obvious this guy was very, very bad news from the moment they met him? Why wouldn't they try their best to stop whatever he was from getting off Onyx? Oh, and Cortana was already gathering info about the Didact and knew that something was amiss before ever seeing him. Wasn't that obvious from the jump? I think one of the Covenant even specifically call him "Didact" in the Chief and Cortana's presence.
And on that Didact part, wasn't it obvious this guy was very, very bad news from the moment they met him? Why wouldn't they try their best to stop whatever he was from getting off Onyx? Oh, and Cortana was already gathering info about the Didact and knew that something was amiss before ever seeing him. Wasn't that obvious from the jump? I think one of the Covenant even specifically call him "Didact" in the Chief and Cortana's presence.
I do the way they handled some of the stuff was a little clunky, but I also don't think it was nearly as difficult to follow without reading the books as some people make it out to be.
'Behind the story of the Master Chief.' Campaign vidoc? Or perhaps an actual cgi video focusing on someone in the universe investigating Chief? A bit like the interrogator at the start of 4?
Do you guys think 343 will retcon the Reach ending and kill off Halsey (maybe not in 5 but eventually)? I doubt Chief would be killed anytime soon, and if anyone were to die it would probably be Halsey way before he would even be considered. I mean they had no issue retconning the Humans being Forerunners thing, so I figured maybe this was possible.
I'd rather no one be killed off just for the sake of it or to force character development, but just speculating.
exactly! I've felt from the onset after playing enough of and then ultimately beating Halo 4 that it was the new singleplayer campaign benchmark for the series. I felt almost immediately that it was going to be a tough effort to surpass in a followup. I don't believe for a second that they outclass that game simply by just giving us larger battles or fights against scarab sized enemies. I want to see the same or better amazing presentation and story, as well as the same overall quality in the handling of important characters. No game in the series, at least not since Halo 2, has done the characters more justice than Halo 4 did. And seeing how as far as the games are concerned no two characters have ever been more important than Cortana and Master Chief, it is in that specific regard that Halo 4 easily surpasses the prior titles. But it doesn't stop there for me. It also excels in areas that I commonly see it get attacked, such as the gameplay. I don't know about anyone else, but there is no Halo game where I've actually had more fun actually fighting against the various enemies and using the different lineup of weapons. The Prometheans were a great addition. And the game's sound design was incredible. That's another issue I've always had with Halo, but it especially became an even bigger nag for me once the series hit the 360. Halo 4 finally got it right.
I agree that halo 4 catches a lot of crap, but it's campaign is actually really good.
Having said that, Halo 2 is still my favorite, and the best to me. I would put Halo 4 in second.
I think H4 was awesome for letting you fly a pelican, a spaceship, and the whole ghost excaped part was very well done.
I liked the new enemies, but their ranks felt incomplete..like they still needed a bigger variety of enemy types.
Also the QTE boss fight at the end really killed it for me :/
Another complaint is how they didn't explain a lot of the backstory s and lore enough like why the covys were back fighting humanity, and other stuff (which it leaves you to find out through books, comics, and Wikipedia!). But I guess that is every halo game for ya.
So yeah, it was a great campaign, and has me excited for the next, but there is still more they can improve on in my opinion.
I like your lore expositions, but you're beginning to lose credibility with statements like this. Palmer is terrible. She's the dude-bro attempt at replacing the archetype that Sgt Johnson filled.
Say what you will, but I always defend my point of view. Dismiss it as nonsense if you wish, but it's the truth as far as I'm concerned. I don't have to rehash most of my arguments, because I've pointed out in great detail how I felt titles like Halo 3 overpromised on the character development front and then horribly under-delivered. I made countless complaints about how I felt this desire or obsession with bigger and bigger open spaces using the power of the 360 was leading to gameplay sections that felt, to me, thrown together and less carefully crafted to fit better into the overall story narrative of the games. Halo 4 made those gameplay sections and story sections fit and feel like they were one cohesive unit. Halo Reach was much better than Halo 3, but it was still a stepdown from Halo CE and Halo 2. I believe Halo 3 to be the worst executed game in the series, when in fact it should have been the easiest to bring in for a safe landing.
Love this. Halo 3 was my least favorite as well. Here's another vote for Halo 4 being an incredible game. I know 343 is full of professionals who can take criticism and understand it's part of the job but I hope every now and then they pat themselves on the back and smile at what they've accomplished. They're doing their absolute best to please every fan of one of the biggest gaming franchises ever, an impossible task.
Excited to see what comes at the end of the countdown, SO ready for another Halo and very interested to see where 343 takes Halo this time.
I like your lore expositions, but you're beginning to lose credibility with statements like this. Palmer is terrible. She's the dude-bro attempt at replacing the archetype that Sgt Johnson filled.
Love this. Halo 3 was my least favorite as well. Here's another vote for Halo 4 being an incredible game. I know 343 is full of professionals who can take criticism and understand it's part of the job but I hope every now and then they pat themselves on the back and smile at what they've accomplished. They're doing their absolute best to please every fan of one of the biggest gaming franchises ever, an impossible task.
Excited to see what comes at the end of the countdown, SO ready for another Halo and very interested to see where 343 takes Halo this time.
An opinion shared by the majority doesn't discredit the minority's, or make it any less valid.
My problem with Palmer really was just that she seemed to have no respect for Chief or what he had accomplished.
I have no problem with that in concept, but the execution was so lacking in characterization that she ended up coming across as nothing but an annoying "company man" that practically begs the player to dislike her.
"Oh so this is the guy who has saved humanity time and time again. So what, wanna fight about it? I'm the real badass here, all brand new and shit. Hey...hey! Hey!!! Listen to me!!"
It wouldn't be noble, but I was really hoping Chief was gonna give her the finger at the end of Halo 4.
I think the character can still be salvaged, but it'll require good writing to lay out the reasons behind her attitude.
I really wouldn't call that a retcon. Don't take the closing narration itself as an actual canonical moment that happened - it's not like Halsey was literally standing there on Reach decades later monologuing. It's just a common story-telling tool.
Aside from all the hinting throughout the first three games, Guilty Spark pretty much bluntly states it at the end of Halo 3. Another scene off the top of my head is near the end of CE when Spark refers to having a record of human history and its lost time. There's also this post that basically states Forerunners were intended to be humans.
Aside from all the hinting throughout the first three games, Guilty Spark pretty much bluntly states it at the end of Halo 3. Another scene off the top of my head is near the end of CE when Spark refers to having a record of human history and its lost time. There's also this post that basically states Forerunners were intended to be humans.
Which would have been fine, but I think 343 opened the gambit even wider by expanding upon Ancient Humanity, the Forerunners, and the battle over the birthright of the Mantle. They upped the stakes and deepened the lore to really extravagant levels.
What I love the most I think is the exchange between Master Chief and 343 GS from HCE, and how those lines were then foreshadowed in the Forerunner trilogy, thus given a whole new and far more extensive context, given the genesong of IsoDidact that is supposedly imprinted upon MC.
HCE: 343GS to MC: "Last time, you asked me, if it were my choice, would I do it? Having had considerable time to ponder your query, my answer has not changed."
Primordium: IsoDidact to 343GS: "Tell me, Chakas, if this was your choice, after all we have seen and survived would you fire the rings?"
So, instead of a more simple reveal in which we find out that the Forerunners were just humans whose historical records were lost in time, it takes on such a deeper, richer revelation... That modern humanity were a regenesis seed sent to Erde-Tyrene post-firing of all of the Halo rings, after many years of war between Ancient Humans, the Forerunners, and the Flood.
Palmer was bad, more so in Spartan Ops, but still. Chief, the guy that saved you and the entire galaxy, just walked up to help the infinity and get the wounded out of there and she opens up with some dumb quip. While the Chief wouldn't care, the players do. We had no attachment to the character and she starts off by trying to be witty against the guy who we have been playing as for years and who has been the single reason that the Covenant or the Flood didn't get exactly what they wanted.
That was only made worse when she became an increasingly annoying nag in Spartan Ops, who pretty much talked down anyone and everything. The fact that she was seemingly made out to be some kind of Sgt. Johnson replacement made matters only worse.
Now, regarding Locke. Having watched Nightfall, I am quite ambiguous to the guy as of right now. He didn't really lead, nor made the hard sacrifices (
That was the accompanying S2 Aiken
). Sadly, all I can remember from Locke in Nightfall was him being the guy with a somewhat normally functioning moral compass in a team of ONI douchebags.
Probably right about that. I did find it kind of strange since it would've put her at nearly 100 years old by that point lol.
Aside from all the hinting throughout the first three games, Guilty Spark pretty much bluntly states it at the end of Halo 3. Another scene off the top of my head is near the end of CE when Spark refers to having a record of human history and its lost time. There's also this post that basically states Forerunners were intended to be humans.
It initially seemed that humans and Forerunners were one and the same, but by the time Halo 3 came about that had changed. Bungie wrote the story/lore as they went along; things changed and not everyone was on the same page. In the H3 terminals there's a part where the Librarian is on Earth and talks about how amazing it is, saying something like "we knew it was special because they came from here, but it's even better than I'd imagined."
While the Chief wouldn't care, the players do. We had no attachment to the character and she starts off by trying to be witty against the guy who we have been playing as for years and who has been the single reason that the Covenant or the Flood didn't get exactly what they wanted.
I liked her introduction. She's a brash, confident character who doesn't give a rip about anything other than doing what needs to be done. I really can't grasp the hate that she gets from some very vocal people on here, nor do I understand why people dislike the direction that Halsey is going as well. Both of these characters have a ton of potential going into the next game and beyond. I think it's vastly unfair to be so quick to judge on character arcs that are either just beginning or aren't even close to being finished. But eh I'm just here to enjoy the ride that 343 is constructing for us lore addicts. (^_^)
Which would have been fine, but I think 343 opened the gambit even wider by expanding upon Ancient Humanity, the Forerunners, and the battle over the birthright of the Mantle. They upped the stakes and deepened the lore to really extravagant levels.
What I love the most I think is the exchange between Master Chief and 343 GS from HCE, and how those lines were then foreshadowed in the Forerunner trilogy, thus given a whole new and far more extensive context, given the genesong of IsoDidact that is supposedly imprinted upon MC.
HCE: 343GS to MC: "Last time, you asked me, if it were my choice, would I do it? Having had considerable time to ponder your query, my answer has not changed."
Primordium: IsoDidact to 343GS: "Tell me, Chakas, if this was your choice, after all we have seen and survived… would you fire the rings?"
So, instead of a more simple reveal in which we find out that the Forerunners were just humans whose historical records were lost in time, it takes on such a deeper, richer revelation... That modern humanity were a regenesis seed sent to Erde-Tyrene post-firing of all of the Halo rings, after many years of war between Ancient Humans, the Forerunners, and the Flood.
I'm not saying Bungie could've done better with their take on the fiction cause it's totally possible that 343 can do something great with the lore. But when you take something that's been fairly established throughout the entire series and decide to suddenly go in a completely different direction, it might rub people the wrong way. Especially at a time when the franchise was transitioning between studios, and 343 decided to distance themselves from Bungie artistically (ex: Covie designs), musically (hardly any allusions to older pieces) , and now canonically. It just seemed like, "Oh humans aren't Forerunners now? Just another thing that's gonna be changed because Bungie came up with it." If it had been just that change alone and not all the other examples of trying to put their stamp on the franchise, then maybe it could've been pulled off more smoothly. Certainly didn't help that this was mostly left for the books.
And to clarify, I wasn't one of those that was completely pissed off about it but it did bug me a bit. Like I said, it's possible for 343 to do really cool things with their Human/Forerunner angle.
It initially seemed that humans and Forerunners were one and the same, but by the time Halo 3 came about that had changed. Bungie wrote the story/lore as they went along; things changed and not everyone was on the same page. In the H3 terminals there's a part where the Librarian is on Earth and talks about how amazing it is, saying something like "we knew it was special because they came from here, but it's even better than I'd imagined."
That's interesting, wasn't aware of that. I figured they wanted to leave things open ended so as to not lock in anyone who might continue the franchise.
Aside from all the hinting throughout the first three games, Guilty Spark pretty much bluntly states it at the end of Halo 3. Another scene off the top of my head is near the end of CE when Spark refers to having a record of human history and its lost time. There's also this post that basically states Forerunners were intended to be humans.
Eh, internally it was a "retcon" of sorts, at least as far as the story bible goes. But in the actual games goes I never really perceived anything on that topic as being "retconned" so I guess I'm just kind of hesitant to use that word here if that makes sense.
I'm not sure about the significance your placing on the human history comment by the way. He was isolated for 100,000 years. The way I interpreted it was that he was excited to get a look at the events that happened since, which happened to be through the lens of "human history".
Palmer was bad, more so in Spartan Ops, but still. Chief, the guy that saved you and the entire galaxy, just walked up to help the infinity and get the wounded out of there and she opens up with some dumb quip. While the Chief wouldn't care, the players do. We had no attachment to the character and she starts off by trying to be witty against the guy who we have been playing as for years and who has been the single reason that the Covenant or the Flood didn't get exactly what they wanted.
That was only made worse when she became an increasingly annoying nag in Spartan Ops, who pretty much talked down anyone and everything. The fact that she was seemingly made out to be some kind of Sgt. Johnson replacement made matters only worse.
Now, regarding Locke. Having watched Nightfall, I am quite ambiguous to the guy as of right now. He didn't really lead, nor made the hard sacrifices (
That was the accompanying S2 Aiken
). Sadly, all I can remember from Locke in Nightfall was him being the guy with a somewhat normally functioning moral compass in a team of ONI douchebags.
I know right. Palmer came off as arrogant, not sure if this was due to their impants/training making the new Spartans overconfident or just attitude. The new Spartans should really be using Chief as the damn benchmark for calibre and talent.
