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: Stephen L. (SoundEffect) <soundeffect@hotmail.com>	Date: 1/13/12 11:14 a.m.
In Response To: Re: this (General Vagueness) : Right, but it's a fact about one Sangheili-- unless you left something out, : it doesn't say this view is universal or even common among the Sangheili, : which would've at least lent some support, it's just one guy. Taking an : individual as a good representative for an entire species in a case like : this is not a good idea. : Here I think we might be hitting a conflict between what's interesting and : what makes for good fiction (and possibly future plans). : That concept and/or type of honor is not very alien though (or pretty much at : all) and neither is one side in a war thinking the other is beneath : contempt, and you haven't said what's so alien about their viewpoint. I'm not talking about the kind of loathing one human has for another as a basis of the Elites versus humans. Elites and humans are two different species. I'm suggesting Elites view killing humans with as little regard as you would stepping on an ant or spider on your walk to work. Or one animal versus another as long as we're talking different species. What Halo has done is made the Elites too 'human' in that they have too many human qualities when they could have been wholly alien in concept and execution. : This is well said. Bungie and Microsoft and 343i and the various book authors : and comic authors and animation directors did not have a cohesive vision, : and maybe straight up disagreed, and thus something is lost. Halo is a : monument to all their sins. Unfortunately it's very difficult to tear down : that monument. : I see you keep having this response when people tell you how and why these : incongruencies happened and, with all due respect, I don't think you get : it: most (or at least half, or at the very least myself) of the people : presenting this stuff haven't been trying to convince anyone that canon : doesn't matter or anything like that, they're explaining how it was messed : up from the very beginning, so there's only so much that can be done. But it's still happening needlessly. I keep bringing it up and showcasing the flaws to prevent future occurrences. For new stuff, it's entirely preventable. : This is another side to the problem, or the problem framed a different way. : Do you really think Bungie could've denounced it? Do you really think the : person (or small group of people, because I don't think they'd speak for : everyone) that said that would get to keep their job, or not be punished : in some way, quite possibly along with the whole company? Do you think MS : wouldn't have just turned around and said "Well he's wrong/they're : wrong, it's all official, it's all canon"? Since you read TFoR and : The Flood first and hold them in high regard, would this have even : affected your view of canon? I work with what's given. If they call it unofficial, I don't count it. If it is official, then please do the job of making sure it's consistent. That's all I'm asking.

My HBO Articles

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.