Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: Interesting Frankie Quote | |
| Posted By: Narcogen <narcogen@rampancy.net> | Date: 6/10/11 2:36 a.m. |
In Response To: Re: Interesting Frankie Quote (Stephen L. (SoundEffect)) : I'd like to hear your thoughts on this Narc, considering our previous : discussion: From what I've seen of the trailer footage, they have : seriously revamped the look of the Forward unto Dawn. I can barely : recognize any of it from what we'd seen before. Now the Chief shouldn't : have different shoulders, other armor differences or built-in maneuvering : jets, yet he comes out of cryo different than when he went in. : He's still on the aft half of the FUD and I can't think of anything less than
: The forward half from Halo 3 would look pretty funny if hooked to the new
: To me this is a pretty severe change. I want a Mazda 3 to still be a Mazda
I'll tell you why-- because I don't care. The FUD is not a character. The FUD's design, beyond its grossest possible aspects, is of no particular interest to me. It affects neither plot nor character, because for purposes of both plot and character the FUD could just as well be the Galactica or the Tardis, as it is merely a means of transportation. The only portions of the FUD's design which are relevant to the final action of Halo 3 and the events of this trailer is that it is a ship of human origin that has been severely damaged (specifically, ripped in half) and is adrift. Those elements are preserved. If it were no longer of human design, but of apparent Covenant design, I'd object. If it were now intact instead of damaged, I'd object. While the *basis* of my objection is the modification to the armor and the lack of apparent opportunity for such a modification, that is not my *reason* for objecting. My reason for objecting is that pretending that this functionality existed all the time raises uncomfortable questions about either the game's designers or the Chief as a character. Is he an idiot? Was he unaware he had this capability? If not, how do we explain how he never used it when the situation would seem to have called for it? There is no substantive unanswerable question raised to me about changes in the technical specifications of the designs of various UNSC or Covenant vehicles or technologies, because by and large these do not impact character, plot, or theme, and only rarely gameplay-- and gameplay we already know and accept is a source of changes that are otherwise inexplicable. I'm not interested in the technical details of the Haloverse for themselves, only insofar as they serve as a believable setting for the characters, plots, themes, and gameplay that are the real substance of Halo. So the Dawn or the Autumn looking a bit different doesn't phase me as long as they are recognizable, which they are. When they impact those other things, though, that's where I have a problem. I don't suppose really there's any explanation I can give you that won't, from your perspective, amount to hand-waving, any more than the responses to my objections-- that it's just a trailer, stop thinking about it-- seem like hand-waving to me, because for you, those details are core to your experience of Halo, just like character, plot, theme and gameplay are crucial to mine. This is an area where an otherwise minor technical detail seems to me to be unfairly infringing on an area of importance to me.
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |