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: Nothing should be considered canon
Posted By: Avateur <avateur@gmail.com>	Date: 10/21/09 4:29 a.m.
In Response To: Re: Nothing should be considered canon (Narcogen) : If you consider newer versions more canonical than older ones this doesn't : happen. Games just get retconned and the retconned versions don't get : released (or indeed developed). Yep. I personally feel that without the games there wouldn't be novels, 343 Industries, or other merchandise to expand on the franchise, and thus the games (retcons and all, especially if it's Bungie making these retcons) are the highest source of canon. When I say "games" I am literally referring to the story within the games, regardless of how the player goes about getting to the end result (speed-runs, Warthog launches, slow and steady, etc). Some things require the suspension of reality in order to make the game playable and, dare a game ever do this, fun. But threads like these that pop up over at B.net or, unfortunately in the past month, here, where people are discounting entire games/stories/concepts all based on voice changes or the range at which a gun can hit a target, well, sarcastically speaking, nothing should ever be considered canon because clearly one or two small and relatively irrelevant points are capable of deeming an entire series complete moot and a waste of time. Oh, and when Reach comes out, I bet threads like these multiply even more. "We Make Games We Want to Play" <-- God forbid Bungie retcon or lead the story or games in a direction that they believe is fun or where they believe makes the most sense or fixes previous problems they saw. But of course, that only means that the game itself is garbage, not canon, and should have never been made. Oh, and I bet the reason for why Reach will be deemed unworthy will also be over something small, too! Maybe over the fact that a BR with a slightly different spread is in it compared to H2 and H3. Who knows. It's just sad that topics like these pop up at B.net and, for the first time since I started posting on the forums, here.

Message Index

Should Gameplay be considered Canon?	Riceatron	10/20/09 10:29 p.m.
Re: Should Gameplay be considered Canon?	General Vagueness	10/20/09 11:11 p.m.
Re: Should Gameplay be considered Canon?	General Vagueness	10/20/09 11:21 p.m.
Re: Should Gameplay be considered Canon?	Narcogen	10/20/09 11:24 p.m.
Re: Should Gameplay be considered Canon?	Leviathan	10/21/09 12:26 a.m.
Re: Should Gameplay be considered Canon?	Narcogen	10/21/09 4:15 a.m.
Re: Turrets	JonnyOThan	10/21/09 12:41 p.m.
Re: Turrets	Gilver	10/21/09 1:08 p.m.
Re: Turrets	Anton P. Nym (aka Steve)	10/21/09 1:19 p.m.
Re: Turrets	Gilver	10/21/09 1:42 p.m.
Re: Turrets	SonofMacPhisto	10/21/09 2:13 p.m.
Re: Turrets	Anton P. Nym (aka Steve)	10/21/09 2:23 p.m.
Re: Turrets	SonofMacPhisto	10/21/09 3:28 p.m.
Re: Turrets	Gilver	10/21/09 4:56 p.m.
Re: Turrets	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	10/21/09 4:11 p.m.
Re: Turrets	FyreWulff	10/21/09 5:52 p.m.
Re: Turrets	SonofMacPhisto	10/21/09 6:09 p.m.
Re: Turrets	Narcogen	10/22/09 2:40 a.m.
Re: Turrets	Avateur	10/22/09 2:59 a.m.
Re: Turrets	Narcogen	10/22/09 8:30 a.m.
Sure.	serpx	10/20/09 11:52 p.m.
Nothing should be considered canon	Avateur	10/21/09 12:46 a.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Narcogen	10/21/09 4:16 a.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Avateur	10/21/09 4:29 a.m.
Agreed	yakaman	10/21/09 7:58 a.m.
Amen. *NM*	SonofMacPhisto	10/21/09 8:15 a.m.
Re: Agreed	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	10/21/09 8:29 a.m.
Re: Agreed	Jillybean	10/21/09 8:50 a.m.
Re: Agreed	Avateur	10/21/09 12:01 p.m.
Without reading the thread fully...	sharpsniper99	10/21/09 6:03 p.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Anton P. Nym (aka Steve)	10/21/09 11:49 a.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	The BS Police	10/21/09 11:16 a.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	General Vagueness	10/21/09 11:45 a.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	The BS Police	10/21/09 11:58 a.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Avateur	10/21/09 12:04 p.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Riceatron	10/21/09 1:44 p.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Hikaru-119	10/21/09 2:42 p.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Avateur	10/21/09 7:08 p.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Riceatron	10/21/09 10:10 p.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Gravemind	10/21/09 4:24 p.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	General Vagueness	10/21/09 6:53 p.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Avateur	10/21/09 7:11 p.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Gravemind	10/21/09 8:24 p.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Avateur	10/21/09 8:28 p.m.
Re: Nothing should be considered canon	Gravemind	10/21/09 8:22 p.m.
Re: Should Gameplay be considered Canon?	Cody Miller	10/21/09 1:56 a.m.
Re: Should Gameplay be considered Canon?	Avateur	10/21/09 2:30 a.m.
Re: Should Gameplay be considered Canon?	Narcogen	10/21/09 4:17 a.m.
Gameplay is never canon *SP*	Metalingus627	10/21/09 3:45 a.m.
Re: Should Gameplay be considered Canon?	Archilen	10/21/09 4:24 a.m.
Question...	stan	10/21/09 9:07 a.m.
Follow up...	stan	10/21/09 9:09 a.m.
Fully agree *NM* *NM*	Avateur	10/21/09 12:06 p.m.