Halo 4 Review
- Thread starter Slycne
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That's not quite how canon works. Canon is simply the body of fiction in a universe that's considered to be "real". It's not that works from the Extended Universe are not considered canon, it's simply that when conflicts present themselves the parent material is always correct unless otherwise stated by the creators.Draconalis said:
In this case, yes the events of Halo: Reach would supersede anything from the novels, but only in cases where the two differed. However, the lines have become a bit more muddied as 343i has specifically brought all production of the Halo universe under their purview, the previous novels were actually commissioned by Microsoft (though Bungie still held some creative control over them).
Admittedly I oversimplified (Or out right explained myself incorrectly), but this is the point I was trying to make. Extended Universe takes a backseat to whatever the parent material states.Slycne said:
It can be done wrong. It can be done very wrong. Entire franchises have crashed and burned by doing things wrong.Korten12 said:
I would say that Reach broke canon. Simply because it borrowed elements from books, (Spartan-III's, Reach in general) and just kind of changed everything.Draconalis said:
The only reason I can see them changing it is because the Reach book, though an amazing book, wouldn't have translated well to a game.
Halo 4 just kind of does its own thing, and I can't consider it even good.
Hence why I found Reach uninteresting, since there was already a novel entitled Fall of Reach, and Master Chief wasn't the player character, just some guy who ends up dead at the end. My bigger-HALO-fan-friends thought I was mad, but I am now psyched for this new game and direction for the story, and new weapons & enemies to kill them with!Shocksplicer said:
So I've been a Halo fan for years, after finishing Halo 3 I thought it was the end... then rumors popped up like bubbles about Halo 4. I personally think Halo 4 should get a five star rating, or a ten or 9.5 with other reviewers.
Sorry, no. That's one of the truly disappointing elements of this game although, to be fair, there aren't a great many flaws despite what others might say.Scow2 said:
I played the game a second time after reading this review and there are a great many fights/encounters which would have been more memorable and epic had they featured Marty O'Donnell's soundtrack talents. I often found myself hoping for a pumping guitar solo to complement the Chief's blatant badassery but sadly the game is clearly going for poignant rather than epic this time around. In fact, like Justin says in his review, most of the time it's just ambiance playing in the background which is a real shame.
The biggest problem is the fact that even if there was brilliant music beneath the game you would never hear it. There are no sound options to increase music volume (there's no excuse for any game to neglect such simple features) and the general battlefield noise drowns the music out more often than not.
The only time I heard a Halo related piece of music (and I've listened to those soundtracks so many times that I would spot one) is during the end credits. Go figure.
The graphics are awesome, but the game is NOT HALO. The music ssssssuuuuuuucccccckkkkksssss!!!, it is so lame that it actually pulls me out of the experience. It is the first halo game that bores me during gameplay because of the music. Also, the multiplayer is COD like, showing that the 343 guys really failed to understand what made Halo games tick.
It is a good game, but it departed too much from its source material.
It is a good game, but it departed too much from its source material.