Do you guys think Halo 3 should have been the last Halo game?

[Uncle Jon]

Granted I know that the game does not end at the real ending of Halo 3, but from what I remembered they really hyped the third game as if it was going to be the last game in the series with "end the fight". Also since the series peaked at Halo 3 and wen't downhill afterwards should they have stopped at the third game?

[Falleax]

In the mainline series, yes. The saga of the Human/Covenant war came to a conclusive and worthy end, of course the war wouldn't just stop there, the UNSC and Elites would still need to spend a few years, maybe even decades mopping up the Covenant remnants. There was absolutely no need to continue Chief's story, Bungie intended him to be a kind of living time capsule, a hero who has passed into legend.
There was plenty of room for spin offs and side stories, like ODST, Halo Wars and Reach but not a true continuation.

[Mistfox]

Originally posted by Falleax:

In the mainline series, yes. The saga of the Human/Covenant war came to a conclusive and worthy end, of course the war wouldn't just stop there, the UNSC and Elites would still need to spend a few years, maybe even decades mopping up the Covenant remnants. There was absolutely no need to continue Chief's story, Bungie intended him to be a kind of living time capsule, a hero who has passed into legend.
There was plenty of room for spin offs and side stories, like ODST, Halo Wars and Reach but not a true continuation.

I agree. The fact that they pushed the series far beyond its intended bounds is one of the causes of continuity problems and lore contradictions, not helped by the fact of 2 different "creative" input. A living time capsule and "a hero in hidden for our time of need" is a good place to end but being exhumed barely 4 years later ruins it. You can't make a legend if you keep digging him out too soon.

If they wanted to continue Halo, they should have at least made it 100-200 years later.

[JARK]

Yes. I think they should've started a prequel trilogy that focused on the Ancient Human - Forerunner - Flood wars.

[Falleax]

Originally posted by JARK:

Yes. I think they should've started a prequel trilogy that focused on the Ancient Human - Forerunner - Flood wars.

We really don't need that. Revealing so much information about the Forerunners completely ruined the mystery and awe surrounding them.

[JARK]

Originally posted by Falleax:

Originally posted by JARK:

Yes. I think they should've started a prequel trilogy that focused on the Ancient Human - Forerunner - Flood wars.

We really don't need that. Revealing so much information about the Forerunners completely ruined the mystery and awe surrounding them.

You're assuming they would've done it the same way in a prequel trilogy. Even still, we don't always need a "Forerunner-type" trope to be eternally coated in mystery & awe for those things to be positive additions to lore. Rather, there's no need for literary elements to always be constructed or remain in certain ways.

Not a knock on you but this kind of discussion reminds me how literature professors are completely stuck with the attitude that "this is the way it has always been done, and I proved it with my ph.d thesis, and so it shall remain so." No, that stifles creativity by offering no flexibility. (The American public tends to do that with their patronage towards high-profile movies, for example; Europeans, from what I gather, appreciate artsy and trend-breaking films more).

[Mistfox]

Originally posted by Falleax:

Originally posted by JARK:

Yes. I think they should've started a prequel trilogy that focused on the Ancient Human - Forerunner - Flood wars.

We really don't need that. Revealing so much information about the Forerunners completely ruined the mystery and awe surrounding them.

And more than that, there is a lore problem concerning the difference between humans and Forerunners. Forerunners were supposed to be humans but Microsoft took the story into a totally different direction that was not intended.

Remember in Halo 3, Guilty Spark outright said that humans were Forerunner? And that the Prophet of Truth, despite his misunderstanding of Halo, also said that Forerunners were humanity's ancestors? The story went strange from the Halo books and Halo 4.

"You are the child of my makers. Inheritor of all that they have left behind."
"You are Forerunner."
"But this ring is mine!"

[StinkDiver]

Halo 4 is a great game, and much better ending to the series than 3, 3 felt underwhelming and rushed, a bit like hobbit battle of the five armies "you guys REALLY couldnt have wrapped this "story" up in game 2? Or made 3 more worthy of existing?" It wasnt awful and it has some great story moments, but overall its more of the same, oh more flood, another halo ring, oh haha look the last level is from CE yall remember CE right?! then we get a quick post war cutscene on earth, and another ending scene where chief goes into stasis floating in space, like oh...... that was it? thats what all this was building towards? 1 2 and 3 make 4 feel more complete, but played in there own it feels dissapointing to end so suddenly where 3 does. to keep with the LOTR analogy 1 2 and 3 feel like the hobbit, like a pre cursor to something bigger, and 4 feels like LOTR with actual payoff consequences and emotion. Of course im speaking as someone with no nostalgia for the series who has only recently played all of the original games.

[Falleax]

Originally posted by Mistfox:

Originally posted by Falleax:

We really don't need that. Revealing so much information about the Forerunners completely ruined the mystery and awe surrounding them.

And more than that, there is a lore problem concerning the difference between humans and Forerunners. Forerunners were supposed to be humans but Microsoft took the story into a totally different direction that was not intended.

Remember in Halo 3, Guilty Spark outright said that humans were Forerunner? And that the Prophet of Truth, despite his misunderstanding of Halo, also said that Forerunners were humanity's ancestors? The story went strange from the Halo books and Halo 4.

"You are the child of my makers. Inheritor of all that they have left behind."
"You are Forerunner."
"But this ring is mine!"

You know, I always assumed Humans were a separate species from Forerunners even before 343 existed. I saw that one comic in the graphic novel of that ancient African dude watching the Ark portal being built and assumed all those characters in the games were speaking metaphorically or ignorantly. I guess that's either me being dumb or Bungie not being as clear as they could have been. After all why would I trust the words of a senile 100,000 year old robot who's trying to kill me, or a cosmic horror who's the enemy of all life, or a crazed zealot alien who doesn't truly understand the will of the Forerunners.
I still personally prefer the idea of Humans not being Forerunners (not the way 343 handled it, that's dumb as heck) but I get why Bungie wanted it their way.

[JARK]

Originally posted by Mistfox:

Originally posted by Falleax:

We really don't need that. Revealing so much information about the Forerunners completely ruined the mystery and awe surrounding them.

And more than that, there is a lore problem concerning the difference between humans and Forerunners. Forerunners were supposed to be humans but Microsoft took the story into a totally different direction that was not intended.

Remember in Halo 3, Guilty Spark outright said that humans were Forerunner? And that the Prophet of Truth, despite his misunderstanding of Halo, also said that Forerunners were humanity's ancestors? The story went strange from the Halo books and Halo 4.

"You are the child of my makers. Inheritor of all that they have left behind."
"You are Forerunner."
"But this ring is mine!"

I thought that was Halo 1? When Guilty Spark calls the Chief a "Reclaimer?"

In any case, was it also not implied that the Forerunners themselves don't see biology as the metric to bequeath their legacy to? They themselves inherited much of their ways from the Precursors (who might actually turn out to be the progenitors of the Flood, ironically, or perhaps poetically). I, too, had thought that the Forerunners were humans, but it also occured to me later -- before Halo 4 -- that they might've been human-LIKE, and 343 doesn't preclude that possibility. It seems ambiguous on purpose.

The whole concept of the "Mantle of Responsibility" (IIRC) is that they were probably open to a worthy species inheriting their ways. But talking about that is post-Halo 3 and pre-Halo 5 lore.

I don't think I am off the mark in any way to have wanted to explore their ancient conflict -- especially from the POV of the human & pre-covenant species allegiance (the Sangheili, etc. allied with the humans in their wanton extermination of the Flood, IIRC). They wouldn't necessarily portray the Forerunner in the same way; if things had panned out differently, 343i would not have necessarily hit the same story beats if they even had a different focus to begin with.

To be more specific, they went with exploring that ancient conflict as a backdrop for the Chief's (and current humanity's) POV with which to provide a tone for the current conflict's settings. Yet they never went anywhere with it in Halo 5 -- instead focusing on bringing back Cortana from "death" as an "evil" character (one who justifies the ends with the means), who is usurping the "Reclaimer" mantle from unworthy humanity (tbf, the post-war Covenant is also turning unworthy, seeing as how they can't even unify themselves). And all of a sudden I'm supposed to believe that the Didact and his Prometheans (the Warden and Guardians included) agree with her? Would they not just see her as inferior AI, or was it because she was able to kick the Didact's butt? (She's probably not inferior, and as of Halo 5, seems on the level of Mendicant Bias and Offensive Bias). All that would've been ok, if a bit decoherent, had 343i not also overly marketed the conflict between Master Chief's team and Spartan Locke's. The tonality for that game was incongruous with its marketing and also with its direct predecessor.

Imagine if 343i had instead started their whole story arc by saying: "Forget the Chief and Cortana; their part in the timeline is done, let's focus on fleshing out a narrative that Bungie hinted at in the obscure Halo 3 collectibles lore." There's no guarantee that from that angle they would end up with a very similar result. More to the point: they should've been willing to try fleshing out a non-Master Chief / Cortana story arc in a video game, but given the ambivalent reactions people have to changes, no matter how gradual or drastic they are, I do not blame them for being afraid to do that.

They DO have a novel or two or three set in that era, but that's again with the purpose of tying back to Halo 4 (and not even Halo 5).

[Moostar]

Originally posted by Darunia:

Granted I know that the game does not end at the real ending of Halo 3, but from what I remembered they really hyped the third game as if it was going to be the last game in the series with "end the fight". Also since the series peaked at Halo 3 and wen't downhill afterwards should they have stopped at the third game?

At this point, yes. or at least with reach. 343 has spit in the face to fans and at this point. there doesnt seem to be a point to keep it going anymore.

[†Ironguard†]

Yes. Yes it should have been the last halo. What 343 has done with halo its heresy! I never finished halo 4 campaing. 5 minutes was enough. I got totally different vibe from it. I was depressed several months about it. The mighty halo had fallen. Atleast we have now MCC to remember the better days.

[Pharaoh (Revolution Idol)]

Originally posted by ʟօʀɖ ȶɨֆʍ:

Halo 4 is a great game, and much better ending to the series than 3, 3 felt underwhelming and rushed, a bit like hobbit battle of the five armies "you guys REALLY couldnt have wrapped this "story" up in game 2? Or made 3 more worthy of existing?" It wasnt awful and it has some great story moments, but overall its more of the same, oh more flood, another halo ring, oh haha look the last level is from CE yall remember CE right?! then we get a quick post war cutscene on earth, and another ending scene where chief goes into stasis floating in space, like oh...... that was it? thats what all this was building towards? 1 2 and 3 make 4 feel more complete, but played in there own it feels dissapointing to end so suddenly where 3 does. to keep with the LOTR analogy 1 2 and 3 feel like the hobbit, like a pre cursor to something bigger, and 4 feels like LOTR with actual payoff consequences and emotion. Of course im speaking as someone with no nostalgia for the series who has only recently played all of the original games.

That is completely backwards from the way I see it. Halo 1-3 is LOTR and the 343 games are The Hobbit.

Originally posted by Mistfox:

Originally posted by Falleax:

We really don't need that. Revealing so much information about the Forerunners completely ruined the mystery and awe surrounding them.

And more than that, there is a lore problem concerning the difference between humans and Forerunners. Forerunners were supposed to be humans but Microsoft took the story into a totally different direction that was not intended.

Remember in Halo 3, Guilty Spark outright said that humans were Forerunner? And that the Prophet of Truth, despite his misunderstanding of Halo, also said that Forerunners were humanity's ancestors? The story went strange from the Halo books and Halo 4.

"You are the child of my makers. Inheritor of all that they have left behind."
"You are Forerunner."
"But this ring is mine!"

I'm pretty sure Humans are still descended from Forerunners. At least some humans are.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cIFNDy2zDM

"Your nobility has blinded you, as ever"

"The Librarian left little to chance didn't she?"

"If you haven't mastered even these primitives, then man has not attained the mantle. Your ascendance may yet be prevented."

I interpreted this to mean there were two factions of Forerunners (or at least, two or more factions of some kind). Some who wanted to benefit mankind, and others, like The Didact, who saw us as a threat.

I haven't read a Halo book since "The Cole Protocol" so maybe I'm just not up to date on the lore.

[James Bondage]

What do you mean "should have been"? Halo 3 *was* the last Halo game ever made, everyone knows that.

[throwing smoke]

In my headcanon it is, and anything after is just fanfiction, I mean, 4's story is so bad it might as well be fanfiction. Not that 3's story is incredible or anything, infact the only Halo story I really liked was 2. It's just that Halo 3 wrapped things up very nicely and had a great ending, so it ends there for me.

[TheLightningYu | Mike]

No i'm quite happy they continued to give us more Halo Games, especially considering that Halo 5 've gotten my love for Halo back after such a long time with H2, as with Halo 3 and onward my appreciation and interest got slowly lost. I'd argue without Halo 5, i wouldn't have even bought TMCC to begin with and would've rarely booted up on my OG Xbox Halo 1&2 for nostalgia reason.