This may come across as a bit behind the times, considering Halo: Fractures was released months ago, but I haven't gotten around to reading it until recently. Besides, this isn't meant to be a discussion of the lore from the book, but rather, of the product itself.
After reading "short story" after "short story" in Fractures, I couldn't shake the feeling that so many of these stories were ending the moment they started to get interesting, as if they were simply the prologue to a larger story. Well, this turned out to be more or less true. We've already had Halo: Smoke and Shadows, which is a continuation of Fractures' Into the Fire, and there are 3 more books slated for 2017 that appear to have strong narrative connections to "short stories" featured in Halo: Fractures. Which essentially makes Fractures a paid collection of previews, rather than a proper anthology of short, complete stories.
So, I ask: does this bother you? Are you fine with 343 selling people what is essentially the book equivalent of Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes, or would you prefer it if they focused on making a proper anthology of fully realized narratives?
After reading "short story" after "short story" in Fractures, I couldn't shake the feeling that so many of these stories were ending the moment they started to get interesting, as if they were simply the prologue to a larger story. Well, this turned out to be more or less true. We've already had Halo: Smoke and Shadows, which is a continuation of Fractures' Into the Fire, and there are 3 more books slated for 2017 that appear to have strong narrative connections to "short stories" featured in Halo: Fractures. Which essentially makes Fractures a paid collection of previews, rather than a proper anthology of short, complete stories.
So, I ask: does this bother you? Are you fine with 343 selling people what is essentially the book equivalent of Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes, or would you prefer it if they focused on making a proper anthology of fully realized narratives?