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: this
Posted By: Bry <bmulheran@gmail.com>	Date: 1/11/12 6:29 p.m.
In Response To: Re: this (Stephen L. (SoundEffect)) : This was some of the justification that Elites hadn't been seen prior to : Reach. Humans were vermin to be ground under, not really true : lifeforms...certainly not personally worthy of the attention of an : honorable race such as the Sangheili. : I see that the rise of the "Demons" in more and more successful : ground engagements (and in fact having killed perhaps the first : human-encountered Hunters on Sigma Octanus) made the stakes high enough to : warrant the inclusion of Elite ground commanders at Reach, and of course : something more highly prized, the Halo ring. : This is extrapolation on what we were given in the first two novels and the : first game. I wouldn't really include the game in that. At no point when playing the game does one get the impression that the Sangheili haven't been around for the entire war (take it from me, I played Halo and Halo 2 long before I read the books, so it was actually rather strange and didn't seem to make a whole lot of sense in that context. Just one of a number of reasons why I'm wary of trusting them implicitly. Just the opposite in fact, everyone seems rather used to seeing them. Be it the typical Marine, MC, Cortana or Keyes). To say it changed their character has its own flaws to be honest. Essentially, the games were giving us the impression that the Sangheili were always at the forefront of the Covenants military actions, especially in Halo 2 and its deleted scenes (The Unggoy Rebellion, taming the Hunters, etc). When one has not been conditioned with the novels from the get-go, it doesn't fit anywhere near as nicely (exactly why were Unggoy and Kig-Yar alone doing such a good job of exterminating us, etc). As a fan of the fiction and of the Sangheili, this was by far one of the most important and worthwhile retcons the series has had. For me, it re-opened the doors to more possibilities and ideas that FoR had previous slammed shut in a rather crude, badly fitting manner. While that is not to give all retcons a clean pass, this was one particular area of contention that was never really clean cut, black and white. So its the old Obi-Wan Kenobi cliché about points of view, etc.

Diecast Scale Model Collection

Message Index

343I and the future of Halo.	ElzarTheBam	1/10/12 6:16 a.m.
Re: 343I and the future of Halo.	DEEP NNN	1/10/12 8:04 a.m.
Re: 343I and the future of Halo.	FoolsRun	1/10/12 8:44 a.m.
Re: 343I and the future of Halo.	General Vagueness	1/10/12 4:21 p.m.
Re: 343I and the future of Halo.	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/10/12 5:29 p.m.
this	davidfuchs	1/10/12 5:32 p.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/10/12 6:53 p.m.
Re: this	Quirel	1/10/12 11:16 p.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/11/12 6:25 a.m.
Re: this	General Vagueness	1/11/12 11:27 a.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/11/12 12:03 p.m.
Re: this	General Vagueness	1/11/12 12:11 p.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/11/12 1:08 p.m.
Re: this	Anton1792	1/11/12 3:12 p.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/11/12 5:13 p.m.
Re: this	Bry	1/11/12 6:29 p.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/11/12 6:52 p.m.
Re: this	Bry	1/11/12 7:28 p.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/11/12 8:08 p.m.
Re: this	Bry	1/12/12 6:15 a.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/12/12 6:44 a.m.
Re: this	scarab	1/12/12 2:49 p.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/12/12 3:48 p.m.
Re: this	Bry	1/12/12 4:05 p.m.
Re: this	scarab	1/12/12 5:23 p.m.
Re: this	General Vagueness	1/13/12 10:23 a.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/13/12 11:14 a.m.
Re: this	General Vagueness	1/13/12 12:05 p.m.
Re: this	General Vagueness	1/12/12 5:16 p.m.
Re: this	Anton1792	1/11/12 9:31 p.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/11/12 10:23 p.m.
Re: this	Anton1792	1/12/12 5:27 p.m.
Re: this	General Vagueness	1/12/12 5:00 p.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/15/12 4:47 p.m.
Re: this	General Vagueness	1/15/12 5:29 p.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/15/12 7:13 p.m.
Re: this	General Vagueness	1/16/12 12:35 a.m.
Re: this	Bry	1/16/12 5:38 a.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/16/12 8:17 a.m.
Re: this	Leisandir	1/16/12 8:45 a.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/16/12 9:07 a.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/16/12 4:33 p.m.
Re: this	Bry	1/16/12 10:31 a.m.
Re: this	Stephen L. (SoundEffect)	1/16/12 11:27 a.m.
Re: 343I and the future of Halo.	General Vagueness	1/11/12 11:10 a.m.
Re: 343I and the future of Halo.	FoolsRun	1/11/12 7:25 a.m.
halomultiplayer.isnotcanon.net	scarab	1/11/12 7:31 a.m.
Re: halomultiplayer.isnotcanon.net	FoolsRun	1/11/12 7:53 a.m.
Re: 343I and the future of Halo.	General Vagueness	1/11/12 11:43 a.m.
Re: 343I and the future of Halo.	Flynn J Taggart	1/11/12 1:20 p.m.
the comments they're responding to	kidtsunami	1/10/12 4:12 p.m.
The one thing 343i needs to do:	Azo 'Galvat	1/11/12 12:03 a.m.