Forums / Community / General Discussion

Should halo have ended

OP punked face

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
Do you guys think halo is getting dragged out at this point, or at least the story of chief, bungie obviously had similar thoughts, and with spartan assault only on windows phones, it feels like Microsoft is just continuing it for money. A good artist knows how to finish while they're ahead.
Parts of it, such as the Storm Covenant story, feels like Microsoft/343 is just pulling the leftovers out of the fridge and heating them up. However, I do like their Forerunner plot line they have going on so no, I don't think they should have ended it.
Should star wars have ended?
Edit: Adding more since I don't want someone to somehow consider tins spam... somehow...

Halo has too much potential and things to explore for it to have ended already I think.
Quote:
Should star wars have ended?
Edit: Adding more since I don't want someone to somehow consider tins spam... somehow...

Halo has too much potential and things to explore for it to have ended already I think.
It has potential, whether or not it lives up to said potential is the scary thing. And yeah, Star Wars probably should've ended a long time ago.
Quote:
Should star wars have ended?
Star Wars ended in 1983.

I would like to see new multiplayer, or even just an expandable arcade version. Halo's been on a yearly release cycle since 2007, with this being the first time we don't get a full console release. It's obvious that Microsoft is trying their hardest to get as much money out of Halo as possible. But you can't blame them for continuing a game that sells like hotcakes.
Halo has so much potential and ending it after just like three or four "main storyline" games would have been stupid, in my opinion.
No. I feel the Halo universe is so huge, that there can't be enough games or books to tell the entire story.

Besides, there are many other franchises that have been dragged out for years and still are popular (ex. Mario, Star wars, Pokemon, Star Trek). Not to say these franchises are bad, but a franchise can still be popular after many years.
No. That's like saying that Mass Effect should have ended despite the huge universe and only covering 3 years in the games even though ME3's endings just plain suck, although Shepard was dead for 2 years after the prologue of ME2, but still...

However, with things like Spartan Assault, it just seems like it's getting into the milking phase if they continue doing stuff for Windows 8 when a majority of people don't have it and will not get it just for Spartan Assault...

Besides, there's other franchises that have been dragged out but are still popular, like Star Trek, or Star Wars.
The Halo universe is incredibly expansive. The number of stories that can be told through the games are numerous. I feel that cutting the games short would be a disappointment to most.
It could have easily ended with Halo 3. But the series sells too strong for it to end abruptly. The multiplayer has lost its fire, that's for certain.
Quote:
Quote:
Should star wars have ended?
Star Wars ended in 1983.
In your opinion.

OT: I've always thought Chiefs story should have ended. Halo 3 brought it full circle and would have been a great place to let the Chief hype die down. Halo 4 should have started from a new point, possibly Spartan Thorne or continuing Rookie and Buck's story as Spartan IV's.

Dragging on the Chiefs story and humanizing a character who should have remained un-humanized was the wrong way to go in my opinion. Rather, Halo 4 should have been ONI's attempts at recreating the success of the Spartan II's without following Halsey's path of indoctrination and breaking of the human spirit.

Chief would be there as a monument to their sins, an icon for what was not allowed to happen again.

I didn't ge the point of changing a character we knew and loved.
No, I feel Halo still has alot of potential and I have alot of hope going into Halo 5.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Should star wars have ended?
Star Wars ended in 1983.
In your opinion.

OT: I've always thought Chiefs story should have ended. Halo 3 brought it full circle and would have been a great place to let the Chief hype die down. Halo 4 should have started from a new point, possibly Spartan Thorne or continuing Rookie and Buck's story as Spartan IV's.

Dragging on the Chiefs story and humanizing a character who should have remained un-humanized was the wrong way to go in my opinion. Rather, Halo 4 should have been ONI's attempts at recreating the success of the Spartan II's without following Halsey's path of indoctrination and breaking of the human spirit.

Chief would be there as a monument to their sins, an icon for what was not allowed to happen again.

I didn't ge the point of changing a character we knew and loved.
They changed him before CE was even released... he was a "character" in The Fall of Reach. His face, personality, motives were described.

He was never intended to just be the generic one-liner soldier, though thats how he was represented in the games. And that was used as an excuse to blow straight past developing him as a character. 343i's handling with him was fantastic, Spartans are Human, not machine.

And if Chief's story was supposed to be done Bungie wouldn't have shown a cliffhanger Legendary ending begging for a sequel.
I think it shpuld have ended at Halo 4. Chief's story, that is. I think their free to mske as many crsp spinoffs as hey want. Hell, they could have be something cool (even at least to me) of ODST 2 or an ODST like game only you play as a storm covenant.
Well, I would be saying it should of ended if they never showed the Forward unto dawn orbiting Requiem, since it did, no it shouldn't have ended.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Should star wars have ended?
Star Wars ended in 1983.
In your opinion.

OT: I've always thought Chiefs story should have ended. Halo 3 brought it full circle and would have been a great place to let the Chief hype die down. Halo 4 should have started from a new point, possibly Spartan Thorne or continuing Rookie and Buck's story as Spartan IV's.

Dragging on the Chiefs story and humanizing a character who should have remained un-humanized was the wrong way to go in my opinion. Rather, Halo 4 should have been ONI's attempts at recreating the success of the Spartan II's without following Halsey's path of indoctrination and breaking of the human spirit.

Chief would be there as a monument to their sins, an icon for what was not allowed to happen again.

I didn't ge the point of changing a character we knew and loved.
Did you express your opinion on this when they announced it back in 2011?

Edit: I think Halo 4 is the 7th Halo product to have John-117 be humanized.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Should star wars have ended?
Star Wars ended in 1983.
In your opinion.

OT: I've always thought Chiefs story should have ended. Halo 3 brought it full circle and would have been a great place to let the Chief hype die down. Halo 4 should have started from a new point, possibly Spartan Thorne or continuing Rookie and Buck's story as Spartan IV's.

Dragging on the Chiefs story and humanizing a character who should have remained un-humanized was the wrong way to go in my opinion. Rather, Halo 4 should have been ONI's attempts at recreating the success of the Spartan II's without following Halsey's path of indoctrination and breaking of the human spirit.

Chief would be there as a monument to their sins, an icon for what was not allowed to happen again.

I didn't ge the point of changing a character we knew and loved.
You know he's been humanized since 2001 right? Why can't the games explore the side followed in the books
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Should star wars have ended?
Star Wars ended in 1983.
In your opinion.

OT: I've always thought Chiefs story should have ended. Halo 3 brought it full circle and would have been a great place to let the Chief hype die down. Halo 4 should have started from a new point, possibly Spartan Thorne or continuing Rookie and Buck's story as Spartan IV's.

Dragging on the Chiefs story and humanizing a character who should have remained un-humanized was the wrong way to go in my opinion. Rather, Halo 4 should have been ONI's attempts at recreating the success of the Spartan II's without following Halsey's path of indoctrination and breaking of the human spirit.

Chief would be there as a monument to their sins, an icon for what was not allowed to happen again.

I didn't ge the point of changing a character we knew and loved.
You know he's been humanized since 2001 right? Why can't the games explore the side followed in the books
THIS

To be exact he was first humanized on October 30th, 2001.
I was under the impression "we" were Master Chief, just as we were Mario, Samus, Duke, and many more. Video games always had you, the player as the submersed character. Are we not human?

Bungie had problems with MS being the overbearing father, they fulfilled their contractual obligation and bailed on us, the franchise and MC.

For what its worth, good and bad, I am thankful to 343i that they continue to carry the torch of one of the most successful FPS of all time. Even though the growing pains are apparent. I believe if they cut down on the subcontracted work and do more in house work then things could work out for the better, too many cooks spoil the broth if you know what I mean.
Quote:
It could have easily ended with Halo 3. But the series sells too strong for it to end abruptly. The multiplayer has lost its fire, that's for certain.
But does that matter anymore? That Halo doesn't have the top multiplayer game title? The story, to me, has always been the decider of whether I buy a game or not.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2