Halo: Legends 'The Babysitter' Review.

CivBase wrote:I don't think they did bad with Halo 2. I liked the idea of the Brutes in the game and the prophets, the gravemind, all that jazz..

I agree.

CivBase wrote:My problem is that after Halo 3 was released, people began to focus not on where the game was going, but the background to all that had happened. This wouldn't be a problem, but because Halo 3 left off with the Covenant being made up of primarily brutes, that is where the attention stayed..

I agree too. While there was still the rest of the Covenant like grunts, jackels, hunters etc...the brutes and the prophet of truth seemed to be the driving force behind the whole thing which did sorta leave the other covie's out in the cold. If that's what you meant...that's just IMO.

CivBase wrote:Everyone got so wrapped up with elites being the good guys and brutes being the bad guys in Halo 3 that they didn't go back to the old ways for the prequels. That's where a lot of stuff got screwed up as far as brutes go..

Yeah I can see what you mean. After Halo 2's ending and with Halo 3 picking up right in the middle of it all, it would have been nice to have that little story of the Elites teaming up with Humans in Halo 2. I bet this could/would have been done if the big M didn't rush Bungie into shoving the game out the door as fast as they can.

Then again that is what Halo: Uprising is for right? I still have to read that.

CivBase wrote:The story behind the flood and Spartans is similar. Flood had been in the past three Halo games (because the story for the Halo games pretty much revolved around the idea of MC and the rings/flood) and people like ES wouldn't let go of it. Bungie did a great job with the MC storyline IMO, but people began to apply MC themes to stories that weren't about MC. It just doesn't work.

Hmmm, I do see what mean. They've made MC this huge character that now every mainstream halo game and Halo media must have something to do with him. Bungie tried to do something without him in ODST but whether or not it was people's reasoning to not like it because of the absence of the cheif is unknown. Wait who am I kidding, it must have been the price. But we shall have none of that here.

Anyways, I guess I agree.

Well, it was no surprise that Master Chief is heading down Mario's way while Mario is going down Mickey's way.

In a couple of decades if the Halo franchise still exists, Master Chief will just be a person you slap into a game for money. In a few more decades, he'll have so many games that use him as the main character, but he will be as bland as ice.

Zaki90 wrote:Well, it was no surprise that Master Chief is heading down Mario's way while Mario is going down Mickey's way.

In a couple of decades if the Halo franchise still exists, Master Chief will just be a person you slap into a game for money. In a few more decades, he'll have so many games that use him as the main character, but he will be as bland as ice.

Mario is awesome, how dare you use his name in vain.

Everybody loves an Italian midget plumber that shoots fireballs, fights a giant turtle, and saves a princesses on a regular basis while riding on the back of some two-legged dinosaur/lizard/thing with a super long tongue.

Hard to believe it all started as an accounting program.

Well you know what annoys me is that there is going to be a Final Fantasy 14 and nobody says anything.

But as soon as a new Halo is mentioned, people go crazy. (by people i don't mean just TCF i mean people in general)

I just don't get it.


Oh and Mario is awesome. You can't shit about him.

RockaHolicGameR wrote:Well you know what annoys me is that there is going to be a Final Fantasy 14 and nobody says anything.

But as soon as a new Halo is mentioned, people go crazy. (by people i don't mean just TCF i mean people in general)

I just don't get it.

Well, to be fair, many people do go crazy about it. Just not as much so in America, as Halo(whether some think so or not) is an icon and way more know about it than FFXIV.

Yeah but still. You know what I mean. I just used FF and an example.

I guess it just comes down to the basics. People generaly hate things that are popular. So when it comes to Halo, well, they make it there lifes work to hate it and try to make others hate it as well.

RockaHolicGameR wrote:Well you know what annoys me is that there is going to be a Final Fantasy 14 and nobody says anything.

Actually, with the spinoffs and everything, it's closer to Final Fantasy 2^14.

I believe that Bungie did as good of a job as they could with Halo 2, but they really dropped the ball on Halo 3.
In Halo Wars...
Nuke. The. Fridge.

But you see that's the thing. With all those spin-offs and everything there's SOOO much Final Fantasy. But very little people say anything about milking the franchise and turn around and say everything milking about Halo's franchise.

It doesn't matter though, that's just IMO.

CivBase wrote:I don't think they did bad with Halo 2. I liked the idea of the Brutes in the game and the prophets, the gravemind, all that jazz.

My problem is that after Halo 3 was released, people began to focus not on where the game was going, but the background to all that had happened. This wouldn't be a problem, but because Halo 3 left off with the Covenant being made up of primarily brutes, that is where the attention stayed.

Everyone got so wrapped up with elites being the good guys and brutes being the bad guys in Halo 3 that they didn't go back to the old ways for the prequels. That's where a lot of stuff got screwed up as far as brutes go.

The story behind the flood and Spartans is similar. Flood had been in the past three Halo games (because the story for the Halo games pretty much revolved around the idea of MC and the rings/flood) and people like ES wouldn't let go of it. Bungie did a great job with the MC storyline IMO, but people began to apply MC themes to stories that weren't about MC. It just doesn't work.

Precisely.

BBJynne wrote:ONI doesn't cover everything up left and right.

look at our intelligence agencies. if one of them hid information of something as important as important as knowing what leadership was, new enemy races, or any of the other stuff people credit them for, it would be in some deep shit when PEOPLE DIE because of that.

ONI is supposed to help win the war, not be a cop-out for every problem with canon that arises

1.) ONI is not the CIA. They are known to be very secretive, there is actually little known about them
2.) Will post later...

TNine wrote:ONI is not the CIA. They are known to be very secretive, there is actually little known about them

America doesn't have just the CIA, but w/e.
The point is, intelligence agencies are supposed to get information about the enemy and stop the enemy from getting information. What many people seem to credit ONI with is cover-ups, which is something that is the opposite of what they're supposed to be doing.

ONI is divided into four sections, one of which deals with the "cover-ups" and propaganda.

Section II is the one that decided "SPARTAN's never die" as a result of them thinking that it would damage morale if people heard that SPARTAN's were dying. I'm guessing if there was an instance whereas a cover-up would be necessary, Section II would be doing that.

Something based on Moral like distorting true casualties is a far stretch from hiding the existence of Brutes and Prophets.

Where is a link to it?

www.halopidia.com


hahaha

RockaHolicGameR wrote:See that's what I don't understand. I can see where you guys get irritated about Halo Wars but what was wrong with Halo 2?

Exlpain to me what they did wrong with that plz...

Okey dokey, the main problems with it as I see them.

Basically, because Halo was such a hit, and had so many players, they felt it necessary to turn it into a game where you get on a server, and generally have fun no matter who you are playing with, to a game, where you rank up, and play with people who use the autosniper and grenades non stop. In Halo2/3 either you are saying "This is BS" or they are saying "This is BS" there are hardly any kills where I feel like, I actually killed someone reasonably, and the majority of the times I die, it is for the gayest stuff, like spawning in front of a rolling Warthog, or getting swarmed by enemies that spawn right next to you. If you play a game, where you throw a grenade, and shoot someone, and they turn around and shoot you and kill you in half a second, even though they should be dead, then there is a major design flaw built into the game. In practically all the games I play, I win because it is obvious that they have an inferior connection, and I lose because I have an inferior connection, there are hardly any skill kills.

Ringleader wrote:

RockaHolicGameR wrote:See that's what I don't understand. I can see where you guys get irritated about Halo Wars but what was wrong with Halo 2?

Exlpain to me what they did wrong with that plz...

Okey dokey, the main problems with it as I see them.

Basically, because Halo was such a hit, and had so many players, they felt it necessary to turn it into a game where you get on a server, and generally have fun no matter who you are playing with, to a game, where you rank up, and play with people who use the autosniper and grenades non stop. In Halo2/3 either you are saying "This is BS" or they are saying "This is BS" there are hardly any kills where I feel like, I actually killed someone reasonably, and the majority of the times I die, it is for the gayest stuff, like spawning in front of a rolling Warthog, or getting swarmed by enemies that spawn right next to you. If you play a game, where you throw a grenade, and shoot someone, and they turn around and shoot you and kill you in half a second, even though they should be dead, then there is a major design flaw built into the game. In practically all the games I play, I win because it is obvious that they have an inferior connection, and I lose because I have an inferior connection, there are hardly any skill kills.

Not to mention the AR takes a bajiazzilion rounds to kill...

Ringleader wrote:

Okey dokey, the main problems with it as I see them.

Basically, because Halo was such a hit, and had so many players, they felt it necessary to turn it into a game where you get on a server, and generally have fun no matter who you are playing with, to a game, where you rank up, and play with people who use the autosniper and grenades non stop. In Halo2/3 either you are saying "This is BS" or they are saying "This is BS" there are hardly any kills where I feel like, I actually killed someone reasonably, and the majority of the times I die, it is for the gayest stuff, like spawning in front of a rolling Warthog, or getting swarmed by enemies that spawn right next to you. If you play a game, where you throw a grenade, and shoot someone, and they turn around and shoot you and kill you in half a second, even though they should be dead, then there is a major design flaw built into the game. In practically all the games I play, I win because it is obvious that they have an inferior connection, and I lose because I have an inferior connection, there are hardly any skill kills.

I thought you where going to talk about the campaign, everyone knows what pisses them off in Halo 2 / 3's matchmaking. I'm sure we could all make lists.

Anyways, I agree with you. Even though I never actually played Halo 2 online (because i did not have live at the time) I experience stuff like that all the time in Halo 3. And for some reason I keep going back for more. Every single game that has online multiplayer has stupid crap that pisses people off like that. No game's multiplayer is without it's faults. But I'm sure everyone here knows that.

So yeah, multiplayer has it's issues. But what game doesn't?

I don't know if you wanna continue this disscusion in this thread but if it's okay then, whatever.

Where can I watch Halo Legends online?

From your Good friend Gary in Lake Video, Michigan.
You can't get good service there, but it's better than nothing.

Rasq'uire'laskar wrote:From your Good friend Gary in Lake Video, Michigan.
You can't get good service there, but it's better than nothing.

Google Video, Youtube

Maybe Gary doesn't have the video, but he does try.

Rasq'uire'laskar wrote:Maybe Gary doesn't have the video, but he does try.

Mega Video!

Fred has to switch the light on and off from the inside of the wall. His Ipod's rock music is also rancid.