Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Legacy Halo

Master Chief The Only Remaining Spartan!

OP Ryan Mc 2007

Hi guys and gals i know in the books blue team amd other spartens survive reach but is it just me that hated the way 343 all of a sudden threw them into halo 5.... it was just to messy the fact they missed out where they have been the whole time and why they werent there to help chief in halo 1,2,3 and 4 then all of a sudden boom!....there they are in halo 5 with him! Npt everyone who plays the games reads the books and 343 have gotten way out of control with all there marketing missing stuff put the games to try sell extra merchandise! Also I just much prefered the older games when the soldiers see chief and its made out like hes the only spartan left and they say things like look a real spartan! Makes his character and you as the player of this character feel even more unique and unstoppable and i just cant stand those new spartans like Sarah Palmer who go on like there the dogs bollocks all coky and arrogant like there at master chiefs level when they really arent! They never went through any of the augmentations master chief did and i bet there training wasnt as extensive as it was for the original spartans like the chief!
I like this post and I agree. You should do what I do to help in situations like this, just believe that Chief's story ended at the conclusion of Halo 3 and he's still floating in space, and that the series ended with the game Halo Reach and nothing after it exists.
Totally agree with you, in the Halo CE and Halo 3 game manuals Master Chief is called "the last of the SPARTAN II soldiers" and in Halo 5, from nowhere, 3 more appear...
This without talking about how flat and badly written are, obviously. I've found the Halo 5 campaign awful.
I can see why the appearance of three other Spartan's who are seemingly best pals with the Chief would throw a lot of players who aren't familiar with them through a loop. However, I also see the reverse side to this and like to think that because of their inclusion to the game that they have been introduced to a wider audience who may be tempted to read more about them.
I think this is part of a wider problem with Halo's storytelling that's been with the series from the beginning: the disconnect between the games and the books. 343 made it one of their priorities to try to close this gap, and the results have been mixed. Bungie made very few serious attempts to resolve the disconnect, instead choosing to ignore or take from the books at their convenience. Reach is the best example of this: they wanted to tell a story that didn't involve the Master Chief, so they ignored The Fall of Reach instead of trying to work around it. In my opinion this lead to a better product, but for people who really enjoyed The Fall of Reach I can see why the annoyance kicked in. On the flip side, we have 5 which introduced Blue Team without much explanation at all. They weren't mentioned in any previous game and existed solely in the books. Halo 3 makes it seem like MC is the last Spartan and really runs with him as a sort of messiah for humanity. 4 doesn't do anything to dispel the notion that he is the only Spartan II, so 5 comes along and drops Blue Team and moves on like nothing happened. It was jarring, and that's where the red flags should have started going off in our heads (when we learned Blue Team would feature in 5) because 5 jumped the shark in more ways that just Blue Team.

I tend to be in the camp of "Halo 4 was good standalone and didn't require knowledge from the books", but knowledge from the books certainly helped a lot. 5 is exceptionally jarring without at least having read The Fall of Reach. The rest of the story's failures have nothing to do with it being too tied to the books, but BT's existence is a big one.

So the question is: did Bungie make the right decision to mostly ignore the books? I think so. Contact Harvest, Halo 3's dialogue, Halo 3's terminals, and I Love Bees all contradicted one another with regards to the relationship between the Forerunners and Humans, so we can't just blame Microsoft for making life harder on Bungie since those 4 things all came from Bungie itself. It really comes down to whether or not the Nylund-verse should have been given more serious treatment in Halo 2 and 3. I don't think we'll ever be able to answer that definitively, but I think that Halo 3's story benefits greatly from Master Chief being the lone Spartan II.

Here's the back of the box blurb from Halo 3:

The Covenant controls Earth, the all-consuming Flood is unleashed and the fate of the galaxy hangs in the balance. An ancient secret, buried under the sands of Africa for untold millenia may hold the key to our salvation or our doom. Spartan-117, the Master Chief, a biologically augmented super-soldier, must uncover that secret and stop the forces that threaten us once and for all. He is the last of his kind, a warrior born for combat, bred for war... and humanity's only hope.

Now imagine the last sentence starting with "He is one of the last of his kind". Not so romantic and biblical anymore. You are the Master Chief, the last of your kind, humanity's last hope. The buck stops with you. That's empowering, and it's one of the reasons why 3's story, despite its flaws upon closer inspection, is so effective. The premise is so darn compelling that the execution didn't need to be perfect for the story to feel perfect. When you muddle the premise with "well, actually, he's not the only Spartan II left", you take away a very powerful and compelling tool out of your toolbox. 4 was headed in a fascinating direction, setting up 5 to explore Chief's relationship with his own humanity and isolation. 5 ditched that entirely and did, well, whatever the heck it was that it did.

People have been clamoring for the games to include more from The Forerunner Saga (my favorite Halo books), so much so that it seemed like a unanimous opinion around here that 5 would feature Mendicant Bias. We were all completely wrong. With 5, 343i took the most fruitless parts from the books and ignored the most fruitful parts, IMO. 4 took the fruitful parts and was all the better for it. 3 had a closer relationship with the books but ultimately did its own thing and was all the better for it. Reach completely ignored the books and was all the better for it. That's 3 different approaches that all worked for different reasons, so it's possible for a Halo game to either draw from, ignore, or draw from and ignore parts from, the books and have a successful story. 343i just needs to be more thoughtful of what they gain from taking or ignoring.
I completely agree. The fact that the MC isn't the last Spartan until the birth of the Spartan IVs not only takes away what makes him a special and compelling character (kind of like a cross between Captain America and Iron Man, for those Marvel fans out there), but raises the question: where were Blue Team and all the other Spartans that supposedly survived (like Jun) at the battle for Earth? And why didn't they join the Chief on his mission to the Ark, or at least have a quick reunion before he left?

Another question I have is: since when were the Forerunners not humans. This is clearly supposed to be one of CEs revelations. At the beginning of Two Betrayals, the Monitor has been treating the Chief like "one of the family." And when the Sentinels begin to surround the Chief, Spark starts saying, about activating the Rings, "last time, when you asked me; would I do it?" He says "you" to refer to the Spartan as if he were there millennia ago when Halo fired the first time. Also, Spark seems genuinely surprised that the Chief didn't know what the Rings do. Finally, in Halo 3, Spark says to the Chief: "You are the child of my makers, inheritor of all they left behind. You ARE Forerunner." If the humans were a separate race that the Forerunners chose to take their place, wouldn't they have programmed the Monitors to teach the humans about protocol? And why would Spark say "you are Forerunner" if he wasn't?

Until recently, I knew little to nothing about the lore outside the games themselves. I decided to try to catch up by reading some of the articles on this site, just so that if any of it came up in Infinite I'd be prepared. I gave up pretty quick, though; the more I read, the more confused I got. So now I'm back to sticking to the games before 4.
where were Blue Team and all the other Spartans that supposedly survived (like Jun) at the battle for Earth? And why didn't they join the Chief on his mission to the Ark, or at least have a quick reunion before he left?
Blue Team, along with Halsey and Mendez, were trapped in Onyx trying to find a way out during the events of Halo 2 and 3. In Halo: First Strike, which canonically takes place between Halo: Combat Evolved and Halo 2, the Chief and a handful of survivors from Installation 04 go to Reach and find them alive. They do fight on Earth but in a different location before Lord Hood relayed Dr. Halsey's signal and sent them to Onyx.
I completely agree.
I know that there are various explanations for them throughout other books, but you and I have the same view on how they just suddenly all appeared in Halo 5 and fought together for the first time since we first met Chief.
There was definitely a much more distinguished feel to playing as "the last Spartan" in Halo CE through Halo 3. It felt like you were the only one around who could do what you do, including but not limited to destroying Halo, saving Earth from invasion, activating the Ark, etc.
The other Spartans all had a solid mystique to them throughout the first three games because you never really knew what became of them/where they were/etc. To have them all just show up and start fighting together was a bit disappointing as a fan of the books, because while reading them you'd think if they all got together and were healthy, there is nothing they couldn't do.
I think fireteam osiris also makes getting to know blue team harder since the players are just introduced to not only 3 more spartan 2s but also 4 new spartan 4s. As far as casual players are concerned, its a lot.
I agree, I think so sort of side game, or show would be a good filler for the gaps, I know there is information out there but I would love to see a little show of how Buck became a Spartan.
I agree. I would like 343 to make additional games based on the books and expand the Halo universe.
znazanz777 wrote:
I think this is part of a wider problem with Halo's storytelling that's been with the series from the beginning: the disconnect between the games and the books. 343 made it one of their priorities to try to close this gap, and the results have been mixed. Bungie made very few serious attempts to resolve the disconnect, instead choosing to ignore or take from the books at their convenience. Reach is the best example of this: they wanted to tell a story that didn't involve the Master Chief, so they ignored The Fall of Reach instead of trying to work around it. In my opinion this lead to a better product, but for people who really enjoyed The Fall of Reach I can see why the annoyance kicked in. On the flip side, we have 5 which introduced Blue Team without much explanation at all. They weren't mentioned in any previous game and existed solely in the books. Halo 3 makes it seem like MC is the last Spartan and really runs with him as a sort of messiah for humanity. 4 doesn't do anything to dispel the notion that he is the only Spartan II, so 5 comes along and drops Blue Team and moves on like nothing happened. It was jarring, and that's where the red flags should have started going off in our heads (when we learned Blue Team would feature in 5) because 5 jumped the shark in more ways that just Blue Team.

I tend to be in the camp of "Halo 4 was good standalone and didn't require knowledge from the books", but knowledge from the books certainly helped a lot. 5 is exceptionally jarring without at least having read The Fall of Reach. The rest of the story's failures have nothing to do with it being too tied to the books, but BT's existence is a big one.

So the question is: did Bungie make the right decision to mostly ignore the books? I think so. Contact Harvest, Halo 3's dialogue, Halo 3's terminals, and I Love Bees all contradicted one another with regards to the relationship between the Forerunners and Humans, so we can't just blame Microsoft for making life harder on Bungie since those 4 things all came from Bungie itself. It really comes down to whether or not the Nylund-verse should have been given more serious treatment in Halo 2 and 3. I don't think we'll ever be able to answer that definitively, but I think that Halo 3's story benefits greatly from Master Chief being the lone Spartan II.

Here's the back of the box blurb from Halo 3:

The Covenant controls Earth, the all-consuming Flood is unleashed and the fate of the galaxy hangs in the balance. An ancient secret, buried under the sands of Africa for untold millenia may hold the key to our salvation or our doom. Spartan-117, the Master Chief, a biologically augmented super-soldier, must uncover that secret and stop the forces that threaten us once and for all. He is the last of his kind, a warrior born for combat, bred for war... and humanity's only hope.Now imagine the last sentence starting with "He is one of the last of his kind". Not so romantic and biblical anymore. You are the Master Chief, the last of your kind, humanity's last hope. The buck stops with you. That's empowering, and it's one of the reasons why 3's story, despite its flaws upon closer inspection, is so effective. The premise is so darn compelling that the execution didn't need to be perfect for the story to feel perfect. When you muddle the premise with "well, actually, he's not the only Spartan II left", you take away a very powerful and compelling tool out of your toolbox. 4 was headed in a fascinating direction, setting up 5 to explore Chief's relationship with his own humanity and isolation. 5 ditched that entirely and did, well, whatever the heck it was that it did.

People have been clamoring for the games to include more from The Forerunner Saga (my favorite Halo books), so much so that it seemed like a unanimous opinion around here that 5 would feature Mendicant Bias. We were all completely wrong. With 5, 343i took the most fruitless parts from the books and ignored the most fruitful parts, IMO. 4 took the fruitful parts and was all the better for it. 3 had a closer relationship with the books but ultimately did its own thing and was all the better for it. Reach completely ignored the books and was all the better for it. That's 3 different approaches that all worked for different reasons, so it's possible for a Halo game to either draw from, ignore, or draw from and ignore parts from, the books and have a successful story. 343i just needs to be more thoughtful of what they gain from taking or ignoring.
343i pay this man
And that is why Halo 5 got so mu7ch backslash