Frequently Asked Forum Questions
Search the HBO News Archives Any All Exact		Search the Halo Updates DBs Halo Halo2		Bungie Webcam HBO XBL Gamertags *Ar's Simple HTML Guide Shishka's Guide for Newcomers The Lowdown on Download Accelerators Red Loser's Anti-Spamming Guide Egg FAQ | More Egg Stuff c0ld's Movie Starter Guide Shishka's HaloPC Pre-Release FAQ 3.1 AutoMagic 117 StripzMaker
Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts

Re: Yes, it is.
Posted By: Bry <bmulheran@gmail.com>	Date: 10/15/08 10:50 a.m.
: I also like learning things about the Haloverse. But it's not learning unless : the information is true. Which is exactly why I like it when we get proper official sources. : What, exactly, do you gain from that? Is that what Halo is about? Is that : really learning? Wow, that's a great big chunk you quoted there and I don't really know which bit of it your specifically referring to... Still... what is Halo about..? I am intriqued of what you might mean there. Can we not have a desire to learn more about certain aspects that are hinted at but never fleshed out when they have a specific appeal to us? ...Hmm, this could be long... Let me clarify to a degree what I am talking about. Remember those articles Bungie did that went into detail about the weapons? Or the Warthog too for that matter? We got information like the manufacturers name, the unit cost (one M9 HE-DP Grenade, that'd be 30 UNSC credits please), some real geeky technical details which most people probably don't care about. And personally, I find some of that interesting and I'd certainly say its learning about the background universe. Something like that for everything in the UNSC inventory would be something nice to have IMO. I'd especially like to know a lot more about the Pelican, Longsword, Seraph and Phantom. There is precedent in other words. Perhaps some of my topics of interest in Halo are not what Halo 'is all about', but I enjoy it, am interested and find it entertaining. Is that not what matters at the end of the day? Anyways, I guess it just isn't as simple for me to look at Halo references as it used to be. I increasingly looking to the novels as more like a secondary canon source. I found myself increasingly less trusting of them, with the exception of Contact Harvest because it is quite literally from the horses mouth (No offence Mr Staten!). Then this little post cropped up... actually, I should have reminded us of this earlier since its pretty relevant to the topic and its from our good friend and trusted beacon of guidance, Joe Staten himself: http://forums.bungie.org/halo/archive28.pl?read=847640 Joe really changed a lot of how I look at the Haloverse with that simple post, and not just because he was replying to me, though that certainly made me kind of giddy at the time. It introduced a lot of doubt to me. I began questioning all kinds of things in the novels or older games thinking; "Is this still relevant? Is it now inaccurate?" BTW, Joe also pretty much says ILB is, in theory, canonical there, Bungie did approve its creation after all. But its waaay way way down on the list of canonical influence. I personally probably wouldn't make reference to it at all given its controversial history already.

Message Index