Halo Maps Forum

A Community discussion forum for Halo Custom Edition, Halo 2 Vista, Portal and Halo Machinima

Home

Member List

Recent Posts

»Forums Index »Halo Custom Edition (Bungie/Gearbox) »Halo CE General Discussion »Why does mc need some, sands of time prince of persia bull crap look.

Page 2 of 2

Go to page: · 1 · [2] · Prev

Author	Topic: Why does mc need some, sands of time prince of persia bull crap look. (53 messages, Page 2 of 2)
Moderators: Dennis
clonecam117 Joined: Dec 11, 2012 Now a professional VFX/particle effect artist.	Posted: Jul 12, 2014 06:58 PM Msg. 36 of 53 Quote: --- Original message by: The Doctor Bungielievers would love Bungie to make Halo again. You know what? They ucked Halo Reach. They started sucking the moment they put a Destiny easter egg in Halo 3 ODST. They were no Bungie anymore. And then they ucked up the timeline in Reach and its multiplayer, just to make it feel more.. nostalgic. Then they fired Marty O' Donnell after he finished the Destiny OST and didn't pay him for the extra hours. They allied with Activision. They now are Activision, and they will make a s***ty futuristic, post-apocaliptic CoD because that's what they are now. And you can't just "Milk" Halo. There is too much story behind to be covered in even twenty games. And normal people won't read the books because they played a game, they will just play more games. I would like 343 to cover everything and show people that Halo is more than a game about a "robot" who kills aliens and has no face. You rock, Doc.

ZOBI3KING Joined: Dec 25, 2012 Look at me, I'm the captain now.	Posted: Jul 13, 2014 05:54 AM Msg. 37 of 53 Quote: --- Original message by: The Doctor Bungielievers would love Bungie to make Halo again. You know what? They ucked Halo Reach. They started sucking the moment they put a Destiny easter egg in Halo 3 ODST. They were no Bungie anymore. And then they ucked up the timeline in Reach and its multiplayer, just to make it feel more.. nostalgic. Then they fired Marty O' Donnell after he finished the Destiny OST and didn't pay him for the extra hours. They allied with Activision. They now are Activision, and they will make a s*ty futuristic, post-apocaliptic CoD because that's what they are now. And you can't just "Milk" Halo. There is too much story behind to be covered in even twenty games. And normal people won't read the books because they played a game, they will just play more games. I would like 343 to cover everything and show people that Halo is more than a game about a "robot" who kills aliens and has no face. Just noticed this and made a thing called an opinion and some counter points. 1. Reach's timeline actually does fit into TFoR timeline albeit with a couple problems (but since when has any lore not infringed over itself) check this video http://youtu.be/GV_89X3xdQc. And your opinion on multiplayer is purely opinion, but I do question on where you got the idea that they did it the way they did it to make it feel more nostalgic. 2. The firing of Marty O' Donnell was most likely a repeat of the Modern Warfare 2 incident where MW2 devs were fired before getting a promised royalty from Activision on the game. Also Bungie isn't Activision, having a contract with a publisher isn't exactly the same as merging companies. Any AAA game company needs a publisher (unless they are large enough to self-publish like Valve) and Activision was the one who was able to strike the deal with Bungie; like it or not the games industry is a business where greed and other corporate f* ups happen constantly. 3. This line "they will make a s***ty futuristic, post-apocaliptic CoD because that's what they are now" I'm guessing is based off of an opinion with no solid basis of judgement, I'm assuming you haven't played the game and are going off of opinions created by viewing media coverage of the game and making judgments about a game you haven't played. If you haven't played it, that gives makes your opinion lose legitimacy considering you made a judgement off of something you haven't even tried. Unless you have tried the game, why are you judging it. 4. Making 343i cover every piece of lore probably wouldn't be the best idea considering for familiar fans, it would be retreading old ground, new fans will be confused with a large amount of information dropped on them assuming you don't want them to continually churn out new Halos. Also you can "milk" anything that can be sold. Halo is a franchise and can be milked at any moment and to some it already has. Being "milked" doesn't necessarily mean making a bunch of Halos, but money is always a factor and more Halo games=more $. Not all of these counter-points reflect my personal stance on Marty getting fired, Bungie, 343i, etc. but all of them were made with truth and least amount of bias. Also on the actual subject, how/why are people still talking about a poncho in a teaser trailer from a year ago. I'm also pretty sure Prince of Persia: Sands of time doesn't look anything like this. or this

Super Flanker Joined: Oct 5, 2012 The length of your life depends on my aim.	Posted: Jul 13, 2014 10:18 AM Msg. 38 of 53 I'm surprised being annoyed with a spartan cloak got this thread to page 2. Edited by ASCENDANTJUSTICE on Jul 13, 2014 at 10:19 AM

Echo77 Joined: Jul 20, 2010 Humble thyself and hold thy tongue.	Posted: Jul 13, 2014 11:08 AM Msg. 39 of 53 Quote: --- Original message by: The Doctor 1. Just to mention the first thing that comes to my mind: The Pillar of Autumn was never meant to enter the atmosphere. It was stated several times in The Fall of Reach and The Flood (describing perfectly how the ship deteriorated as it entered the atmosphere), even in Halo Combat Evolved you can see if that wasn't true, they would have landed it instead of crashing it. The deterioration and crash instead of an actual landing could have something to do with the fact that the Autumn was getting shot to pieces as soon as dropped out of slipspace.= 3. A game needs to be at least one of this: Funny, entertaining, tell a story or be competitive. CoD isn't any of this. Not only is most of this opinion, saying that the Call of Duty games don't tell a story is blatantly false. Whether or not they tell a good story is up for debate, but you can look up every single Call of Duty game and find a plot synopsis. 4. 343i covered a lot of lore Bungie didn't touch and at the same time, developed the story. Just with the terminals in HCEA and H2A they have visited more lore than Bungie did with H1. "More" doesn't equal "better". Halo can't be milked not just because of the existing lore, but because of the possibilities it gives to the universe.It's not another CoD without story that changes the models and weapons and sells millions, it's a saga with a backstory big enough to do whatever they want with the plot. They have everything to work with from Harvest to Reach, the war against the insurrection, etc. There was a lot of existing backstory to work with, but Halo 4 didn't really use any of that. Most of the backstory for Halo 4 (the whole Forerunner plot) was made for Halo 4. Just because they can "do whatever they want with the plot," doesn't mean everyone is going to accept it if it deviates from what they think Halo is supposed to be. Of course it means money, it's a product. You wouldn't want a game developed in 3 years by hundreds of people to be released for free and deny the developers families warm food, house and clothes, right? I don't think anyone is saying that they want the developers to go hungry. We want them to make a game that fits with what we think Halo is supposed to be. The thing is that this product offers more and more every "version", unlike other games. Just because it has more features doesn't automatically make it superior to all the previous games, because the same can be said of each Call of Duty sequel (new equipment, new gametypes, new plotlines, etc.), and you don't seem very fond of that franchise. Edited by Echo77 on Jul 13, 2014 at 11:10 AM

clonecam117 Joined: Dec 11, 2012 Now a professional VFX/particle effect artist.	Posted: Jul 13, 2014 11:31 AM Msg. 40 of 53 Stop with the stupid damn Halo 4 circlejerking already.

Echo77 Joined: Jul 20, 2010 Humble thyself and hold thy tongue.	Posted: Jul 13, 2014 03:07 PM Msg. 41 of 53 Quote: --- Original message by: The Doctor Quote: --- Original message by: Echo77 Quote: --- Original message by: The Doctor 1. Just to mention the first thing that comes to my mind: The Pillar of Autumn was never meant to enter the atmosphere. It was stated several times in The Fall of Reach and The Flood (describing perfectly how the ship deteriorated as it entered the atmosphere), even in Halo Combat Evolved you can see if that wasn't true, they would have landed it instead of crashing it. The deterioration and crash instead of an actual landing could have something to do with the fact that the Autumn was getting shot to pieces as soon as dropped out of slipspace.= 3. A game needs to be at least one of this: Funny, entertaining, tell a story or be competitive. CoD isn't any of this. Not only is most of this opinion, saying that the Call of Duty games don't tell a story is blatantly false. Whether or not they tell a good story is up for debate, but you can look up every single Call of Duty game and find a plot synopsis. 4. 343i covered a lot of lore Bungie didn't touch and at the same time, developed the story. Just with the terminals in HCEA and H2A they have visited more lore than Bungie did with H1. "More" doesn't equal "better". Halo can't be milked not just because of the existing lore, but because of the possibilities it gives to the universe.It's not another CoD without story that changes the models and weapons and sells millions, it's a saga with a backstory big enough to do whatever they want with the plot. They have everything to work with from Harvest to Reach, the war against the insurrection, etc. There was a lot of existing backstory to work with, but Halo 4 didn't really use any of that. Most of the backstory for Halo 4 (the whole Forerunner plot) was made for Halo 4. Just because they can "do whatever they want with the plot," doesn't mean everyone is going to accept it if it deviates from what they think Halo is supposed to be. Of course it means money, it's a product. You wouldn't want a game developed in 3 years by hundreds of people to be released for free and deny the developers families warm food, house and clothes, right? I don't think anyone is saying that they want the developers to go hungry. We want them to make a game that fits with what we think Halo is supposed to be. The thing is that this product offers more and more every "version", unlike other games. Just because it has more features doesn't automatically make it superior to all the previous games, because the same can be said of each Call of Duty sequel (new equipment, new gametypes, new plotlines, etc.), and you don't seem very fond of that franchise. Edited by Echo77 on Jul 13, 2014 at 11:10 AM 1. All the games have been loyal to the lore since H1... Until HR came out. Even Halo 1 contradicts the books to some degree. For example: "In Halo: The Fall of Reach, the description of the Pillar of Autumn is considerably different from its Halo: Combat Evolved incarnation. The bridge is described as having a command chair and a curved viewport; in Halo: Combat Evolved, this chair is absent and the window consists of several flat sections. The novel also describes the bridge as being extremely cramped, with only a meter of space between the command chair and the other stations, while in the game, the bridge is clearly more spacious. According to the novel, there is also an elevator leading directly from the engine room to the bridge. In the game, the engineering and the bridge are on the same level, and there are no doors which may belong to an elevator adjoining the bridge. In addition, the engine room is described as being "hexagonal", while in the game, it consists of two vaguely rectangular chambers with the engine core in the middle." - Halopedia Halo 1 mentions a command shuttle in passing, and then never references it again throughout the rest of the game. This command shuttle is mentioned nowhere in "Halo: The Flood". 3. Yes, but it's never a good story, it's allways a story about a solider dropped somewhere without any back story. That's as true a statement for CoD as it is to say Halo 4 was a story about a soldier dropped somewhere without any backstory. The newest books might provide that backstory, but none of the other games had a list of required reading material necessary to understand them. They were self-contained stories in and of themselves, and the books supplemented them. 4. That doesn't make sense. I didn't say better, I said they told more to the players with a few cutscenes than Bungie did with an entire game. They told too much. Halo 3 had some of the best Cortana/Chief interactions out of the entire series, and it wasn't because they were over the top and forced, it was because they were subtle, but meaningful enough to tug on your feels (that sounds dirty, but it isn't). The Cortana/Chief interactions in Halo 4 were awkward for me, and didn't have the same effect. - And Bungie could do that? Why? 343i is basically Bungie. Halo 4 included the AI natural rampage, quotes from the books in terminals and easter eggs, explored the backstory of the forerunners... At least is not like Reach and is loyal to the lore. Halo 4 is loyal to the backstory that sprang into existence for the sole purpose of providing backstory for Halo 4. - And tell me, what is exactly that? I think those who say that just want Bungie to make Halo again, even if they include Star Wars and Star Gate in the storyline. It's hard to say what Halo is, and much easier to say what Halo is not. To me, Halo isn't about an army of supersoldiers stationed aboard one of the most largest, most powerful vessels in the galaxy. It's about an army of regular human beings and a dwindling number of supercommandos making the best of what they have, fighting a technologically and numerically superior force and ultimately prevailing through the sweat of their brow and stick-to-it-iveness. It's not about predetermined destiny embedded in the genetic code of humanity by ancient aliens, it's about humanity striving towards that destiny of their own accord. - No. I didn't mean more features, I meant developing the story. It's like a book saga, you can stop making books and leave the story incomplete but the right thing would be to finish it. Just for the fans who have supported you for years. But who's to say that a story is incomplete, and when it's finished? You can make Titanic, but does that mean you're obligated to make a Titanic II and III "for the fans who supported it"? There comes a point when you start deviating too far from the original theme, and you're just adding unrelated filler material. Edited by Echo77 on Jul 13, 2014 at 03:12 PM

ZOBI3KING Joined: Dec 25, 2012 Look at me, I'm the captain now.	Posted: Jul 13, 2014 04:21 PM Msg. 42 of 53 3. A game needs to be at least one of this: Funny, entertaining, tell a story or be competitive. CoD isn't any of this. Entertaining is a very debatable term because something found entertaining is based on a bias per person on what they personally find entertaining. CoD may not entertain you, but it obviously entertains the millions of people who aren't you. Also I don't exactly "love" CoD, but you fail to mention that it is one of the most played competitive games in esports. Also CoD 4 (a.k.a. the first Modern Warfare) was praised for the cinematic campaign before those campaigns were done to death as MW clones. Quote: Quote From Wikipedia Article on CoD 4 The game's story has received a considerable amount of acclaim from reviewers. GamePro notes that "the intense single-player campaign offers up an action packed experience that features a tremendously compelling narrative; there are moments in the game that will send chills down your spine."[36] GameSpot mentioned that the fact the "single-player campaign is over in a flash" as the only major flaw.[38] While IGN described the campaign as "still very linear" like that of its predecessors, "eschewing the concept of sandbox gameplay," it noted that this resulted in "a much richer, more focused experience" with "beautifully scripted set pieces."[71] IGN's Voodoo Extreme similarly remarked that it "virtually plays on a rail, but that's part of its charm."[72] In contrast to later entries in the Call of Duty franchise, Ben "Yahtzee" Croshaw of Zero Punctuation gave the game a positive review, praising how it "never sacrifices gameplay for story, or vice versa" and that it featured "less of the smarmy, black-and-white, 'My Country, 'Tis of Thee' jingoism that turns me off most war games".[73] You don't have to like CoD, but it does include the features you believe it lacks.

Echo77 Joined: Jul 20, 2010 Humble thyself and hold thy tongue.	Posted: Jul 13, 2014 05:00 PM Msg. 43 of 53 Quote: --- Original message by: The Doctor 3. If you play Halo 1-3 you know who MC is and the basic storyline. That's not what happens with CoD. Pretty much all of the Call of Duty games are either self-contained stories, tie into their particular subseries, or are based on historical events. 4. They are exploring the humanity of that "faceless robot" and that annoying AI. This started in H3 (really at the end of H2) with cortana's rampancy, but it developed way more in H4 with her death. The transition was quite sudden. Gone were the subtle-yet-meaningful interactions shown in Halo 3. In Halo 4, everything felt heavy-handed and over-the-top. You know the "APPLAUSE" signs in studio audiences that lights up to tell people when to clap? I felt like all the emotional moments in Halo 4 were signified with a metaphorical "EMOTIONAL MOMENT" sign lighting up. Forgive me, but my native language isn't english and complex, developed sentences aren't my strong point. Can you explain better? Basically, I feel like the only reason Halo 4 is so "loyal to the lore" is because the lore that it is loyal to (The Forerunner saga) was created for the sole purpose of providing the backstory for Halo 4. All of the other games and novels had to work around the existing lore. - The humanity have to develop and evolve. What did you expect? If H1 took place in Harvest with the first Covenant attack, you would play as one of the first Spartans, without energy shield and armor (I don't remember exactly when the Mjolnir project became factible in the battlefield). Humanity has to evolve or die, that's how they "won" the war against the covenant. Exactly, and I'm fine with humanity advancing and adapting, but they're doing it much too quickly. They've essentially transitioned from Halo's equivalent of the Rebel Alliance (in Combat Evolved) to the inexorable sweeping juggernaut that is the Galactic Empire (in Halo 4). But now, the forerunners return and you expect the technology to have evolved over the years after the S-III program and the augmentations to be more factible for normal human beings. The return of the Forerunners is the part that I don't like, because it lessens the accomplishments of humanity by revealing that all the major achievements they've made over the years essentially come down to "the Forerunners predetermined for this to happen". The Spartan III program was as close to an army of supersoldiers as the UNSC should have gotten, and they had disadvantages to balance out their numbers. There were many more of them, but their armor was cheaper, less sophisticated, lacked energy shielding. Their augmentations weren't as extreme as those undergone by the Spartan IIs. It took a team of SIIIs to do what a solitary SII could accomplish. In Halo 4, however, we have so many Spartans that they have their own service branch (yet, funnily enough, no chain of command). Their armor is more advanced and more sophisticated than even Master Chief's. In Halo 4, anyone can be a Spartan. They're not special anymore. Also, when humanity gets the Janus Key and discovers all the Forerunner worlds in the galaxy, they will be able to fight the forerunners and the flood (yes, they will probably make a return since the Didact was affected by the Gravemind). I've played the Halp 4 campaign more than once, and I don't know what the above sentence means. It's not about what was the game, it's about what it should be considering the lore. But if they keep making new lore that deviates from the common themes throughout the rest of the series, and making games based on these deviations, we end up with something that just doesn't feel like it belongs. The Halo 3 legendary ending was an open ending. A fair point, perhaps Titanic wasn't the best analogy. In any case, they did have an alternative to the direction they ultimately decided to take the story in: Onyx. Or the shield world that had been concealed within it, rather, where Blue Team ended up. It could have been a good way of tying the game together with the existing books, instead of creating an entirely new series of unrelated books (The Forerunner Saga) for the purpose of setting up the plot they went with in Halo 4. Edited by Echo77 on Jul 13, 2014 at 05:07 PM

Echo77 Joined: Jul 20, 2010 Humble thyself and hold thy tongue.	Posted: Jul 13, 2014 07:22 PM Msg. 44 of 53 Quote: --- Original message by: The Doctor 3. So basically no backstory. One example of backstory in Call of Duty is the recurring character, Victor Reznov, who appears in both Call of Duty: World at War and Call of Duty: Black Ops. You know... that Chief has been in cryogenesis for years right? Remember that UNSC is now not so occupied in the war but the science... He was only in cryo for four years. One would imagine that, since the UNSC is no longer occupied with the Human-Covenant war, that their scientific focus would shift away from military technology to other fields. Even if they kept making advancements to Spartan armor, it would still be very expensive. If the Spartan IV program had come into existence at the end of Halo 6, then maybe it would be a bit more believable, but at the current rate of advancement, I'm halfway expecting humanity to be technologically on-par with the Forerunners by the end of Halo 6. I'm not familiar with Star Wars quotes (I think it is lol) since I fell asleep while watching it :P Essentially, I'm saying that the UNSC transitioned from underdogs who were running out of resources into a military juggernaut with enough money and resources to field legions of Spartan IVs with armor that doesn't cut features to reduce cost like the SPI armor did, and an absolutely massive warship that could be regarded as the dominant force in the galaxy. I'm currently reading Ghosts of Onyx (My english skills haven't let me do so until the last year) so I will say anything about that part of the lore. Yes, SPI armor is obviously not as good as a Mark V, but it's meant to be more like an infiltration, cammo suit... The SPI armor is a simplified, more cost efficient alternative to MJOLNIR that uses its stealth aspects to compensate for a lack of shielding. It's armor that makes sense if you're trying to produce supersoldiers on a larger scale than the Spartan II program. As I said, Master Chief has been in cryo for years and his suit hasn't changed since the battle of earth. Probably he will change it in Halo 5 or 6, depending on his rogue adventure... - Have you played Spartan Ops? I don't have Live. :C - Yeah but I think that's the general feeling because Bungie made basically the same in every game: You kill the Covenant and the flood and blow up something at the end. I think 343i appreciates more Halo than Bungie... You didn't blow anything up at the end of Halo 2 or Halo 3: ODST, and there are no Flood in ODST or Reach. - The planet was clearly forerunner, not made of Onyx... Since you're currently reading Ghosts of Onyx, I can't clear up this misunderstanding without spoiling plot points.

Wolf_ Joined: May 16, 2006	Posted: Jul 14, 2014 05:16 AM Msg. 45 of 53 Just like to point out that : Bungie initially played with the thought of continuing the halo franchise with one more game, where you played as masterchief. However it proved that there were too much material to be covered in one game, thus they decided to explore the reach story further than what they did in the halo manual, and the novel. I am about 50% sure that the reclaimer trilogy is based on work and/or research bungie did before halo reach. The more you know

Juzo Joined: Jul 1, 2014	Posted: Jul 14, 2014 09:09 AM Msg. 46 of 53 Reach was a good game although for the deaths of each noble team member and In the end of the game it shows the year 2589?

Echo77 Joined: Jul 20, 2010 Humble thyself and hold thy tongue.	Posted: Jul 14, 2014 11:41 AM Msg. 47 of 53 Quote: --- Original message by: The Doctor 3. But he's not the main character. He becomes an important character, and he becomes a connection to a previous event, which is what backstory is. Just think that the manufacture costs of the armors would have dropped since the war on earth, considering this is the final version. Also, think that every resource wasted on the war every year would be redirected to R&D. That's the thing, though: they just got done with 28 years of war. If anything they should be shunting the majority of their resources and funding to rebuilding their infrastructure and replacing what the Covenant destroyed, rather than spending it on advancements to what is already the most sophisticated piece of UNSC body armor in existence in order to fight a now militarily crippled Covenant. Think about every Shaw-Fujikawa device that was made every year because the Covenant destroyed most of the fleet."the most expensive device humanity has ever created" obsolete because of the new forerunner tech engines present in the Infinity. The Shaw-Fujikawa drive was created in 2291. It had 261 years to advance and for manufacturing costs to be reduced. It was also the only device of its kind: if you wanted a ship to travel faster than light, a Shaw-Fujikawa drive was the only option. There was no cheaper alternative. The MJOLNIR program, on the other hand, didn't even have energy shields as standard until 2551, and Mark VI was only introduced in 2552. That means that they only kept it as standard for five years, at most, and then replaced supposedly with a hyper-advanced version that somehow costs less, even when they already have plenty of existing alternatives when it comes to body armor. It's just not a believeable amount of time. As a point of comparison, the US military kept the M1 helmet (the helmet they used during World War II) as the standard for 40 years before replacing it. And all the ODST armors would stop being produced because they are now spartans... All the ammo, all the equipment... It's like if the US government stopped investing in war and invested in Space exploration instead :P In the hyopthetical situation of ODSTs being wholly replaced by Spartans, that wouldn't cut cost: the ODSTs that become Spartans will still need armor. The latest generation of MJOLNIR armor. And they'll still need all the ammo and equipment. It'd be more like if the US government stopped investing in flak jackets and started investing in fighter jets. Plus the augmentation process techniques probably have been improved and now 99% of the subjects survive it. The UNSC already had an augmentation process that had a high survival rate: the Spartan III program, which was better suited to mass production. You can spoil whatever you want, I've spoiled myself in the Wiki for years... I'll just connect everything once I read all the books :P In that case, "Onyx," is a planet, and the planet has connections to the Forerunner. Edited by Echo77 on Jul 14, 2014 at 12:06 PM Edited by Echo77 on Jul 14, 2014 at 12:16 PM

EtchyaSketch Joined: Apr 11, 2014 S P I N	Posted: Jul 14, 2014 03:39 PM Msg. 48 of 53 I know I'm nitpicking but uhh, its called the Shaw-Fujikawa Translight Engine Not Shau-Fkujima (=u)

YakZSmelk Joined: Apr 3, 2006 - Environment Artist - robhow.com	Posted: Jul 14, 2014 07:49 PM Msg. 49 of 53 Quote: --- Original message by: Echo77 Quote: --- Original message by: Jesse The thing I didn't like about the overall story (including spartan ops) was that they added so many other Spartans, that I feel it detracted from the legendary awesomeness of the Spartans and the belief that the master chief was the only spartan left alive. It seemed like the UNSC could promote anyone they wanted to a spartan with the chemical enhancements. Spartans r cheep, where can I git one?! This. I feel like the Spartan IIIs were the closest we should have gotten to "disposable" super soldiers. There were more of them, they were cheaper, but they had tradeoffs: they had no energy shielding (with a few exceptions), and they basically had to operate as a fireteam to accomplish what a solitary Spartan could. But in Halo 4, not only do we have more Spartans, we have an entire service branch of Spartans (with no chain of command because makes fart noise with mouth) that anyone can join and become a supercommando almost on-par with the Chief. It'd be like the Star Wars universe suddenly became as simple as, "Any random being in the galaxy can go to the Jedi Temple on Coruscant and become a Jedi." It ruins the exclusivity, detracts from, as you said, the legendary status we've come to associate with Spartans. Edited by Echo77 on Jul 9, 2014 at 10:25 AM I agree with both of your sentiments towards Chief being the only Spartan left, but from what I picked up from the story was that Human Evolution is cyclical and the creation of/existence of the Spartan program is what keeps Humanity at odds with Forerunners. And that I like!

Dumb AI Joined: Sep 18, 2011 Dead.	Posted: Jul 14, 2014 08:01 PM Msg. 50 of 53 Weird sand poncho, people hunting for him, ancient technology... The Chief is obvious a Jedi now.

Super Flanker Joined: Oct 5, 2012 The length of your life depends on my aim.	Posted: Jul 15, 2014 05:57 AM Msg. 51 of 53 Quote: --- Original message by: Dumb AI Weird sand poncho, people hunting for him, ancient technology... The Chief is obvious a Jedi now. I'm curious to find out how, good halo & starwars would be in a single game. I don't think it would beat AVP.

Vergil Joined: Jun 13, 2011 you're just mad cuz you're angry	Posted: Jul 15, 2014 09:46 AM Msg. 52 of 53 http://hce.halomaps.org/index.cfm?fid=4435 Edited by Vergil on Jul 15, 2014 at 09:46 AM

Super Flanker Joined: Oct 5, 2012 The length of your life depends on my aim.	Posted: Jul 17, 2014 06:44 AM Msg. 53 of 53 Quote: --- Original message by: Vergil http://hce.halomaps.org/index.cfm?fid=4435 Edited by Vergil on Jul 15, 2014 at 09:46 AM From another engines perspective. Oh btw vergil, I found my H2 textures, do you still require them?

Page 2 of 2

Go to page: · 1 · [2] · Prev

Previous Older Thread Next newer Thread