343, how is the Chief anything like Escharum?

Community Halo Universe
1

Which is worrying for where they plan on going with Atriox.

In the Canon fodder article they talk about how they wanted to make Escharum sympathetic because he was a just soldier wondering he did the right thing and that in the same situation the Chief would be doing what the Banished were doing.

That’s just not true and I am stunned 343 could think that.

The Master Chief is the selfless defender of humanity. He has given his entire life to protecting humanity from genocidal war mongering aliens like the Brutes. He is not seeking a legacy or doing it for martial glory.

Escharum is a warlord who loves fighting for its own sake and wants the Brutes to dominate the Galaxy. He delights in inflicting pain on anything he thinks is weaker than him. He’s a coward and a bully. A loudmouth braggart who gloats endlessly in complete contrast to the stoic Chief.

The Chief is willing to work with his former mortal enemies and has compassion for Cortana even after all the bad things she did.

Escharum shows no empathy or understanding for his enemies. He sees them as “prey”. For him this is all just a vain effort to carve out a legacy for himself.

But let’s get more specific. 343 argue that losing Doisac provoked a reaction from Escharum. That if the Chief or humanity were in the same unthinkable situation as the poor Brutes they might act the same…

Only the Chief has lost his adopted homeworld of Reach. They made a whole game about it. Destroyed by the same species in the Banished. Humanity has had not just one world destroyed by war mongering and genocidal aliens but multiple. Objectively, in the world of Halo, it has taken these blows with dignity and it’s goals are entirely defensive. There would be no war if the Brutes stopped attacking humanity. They are the problem here. Humanity has had it far worse than the Brutes and isn’t throwing a tantrum.

Also Escharum never questions his choices. Pretty single minded whole way through.

2 Likes
2

I’m not saying the Banished are good people, but they went after the thing responsible for blowing their homeworld up. Chief would have done the exact same thing if it was some other rampant AI that destroyed Earth. And yes, Escharum was just a soldier following orders. He was the second in command to Atriox and at the end was just carrying out the last wish of Atriox. So, the comparison being drawn by 343 is accurate. That’s not to say there’s isn’t difference of character and morale judgement because there is, but they are both soldiers trying to do what’s best for their people.

3 Likes
3

Per the Encyclopedia Atriox went to the Ark before he knew Cortana was even a thing. His plan was to get a Halo Array and take the secrets of Zeta Halo.

Revenge has nothing to do with it. The Banished existed before Cortana and were already a major threat to the Galaxy.

The Brutes destroyed Harvest and Reach and all those other planets. Humanity hasn’t morphed into the Imperium and begun to exterminate the Xenos. Whereas the Brutes are doing that, before they even got a single planet destroyed by an unrelated party. So they have just carried on being as evil and wretched as they always have been.

He’s a fanatic, not a soldier. He endlessly talks about Atrioxes vision and the glory that he seeks. That’s not just following orders he enjoys his work and the butchery it entails.

In Shadows of Reach, Escharum was the commander responsible for killing human civilians and driving them from their homes. Those same brutes who eat people and torture them. Just because in game we don’t have civilians for him to kill and torment doesn’t mean he wouldn’t do that.

“What’s best for their people?” You don’t think the idea that the Brutes should conquer the Galaxy should be questioned and challenged by the heroes? That the writers comparing that to humanity defending itself is a little odd?

1 Like
4

Yeah, Atriox seeks the Halo Array for personal benefit and to increase the Banished’s power in the galaxy, but that doesn’t change the fact they went after Cortana because of her destroying Dosiac. No matter how you look at it, both Atriox and Escharum care about their homeworld and Cortana took that from them. So, while Atriox intended on going to Zeta Halo to unearth secrets discovered on the Ark, they also had every intention of eliminating Cortana for what she did. And as far as Escharum not being a soldier and not following orders, all a soldier is is someone who fights in an army and he does just that. Yeah, he’s a fanatic, but still a soldier and following the last known directive of his assumed to be dead leader; take control of Zeta Halo and free the Endless.

5

That’s playing down the evil of what Atriox is doing. He wants the Halo so he can use it and his armies are occupying the Galaxy. That’s as bad as the First Order in Star Wars. The way you frame that is as if it’s a normal thing that shouldn’t be criticised or attacked by the heroes. Look past the Saturday morning cartoon stuff; he’s kind of evil. The characters should view the Banished with hatred and contempt.

They don’t care about their homeworld. Atriox is -Yoink!- in his bunker saying he would rather see Germany be destroyed than surrender. What they care about is their deluded fantasy about the greatness of the Banished and the Brutes. They would gladly see every brute die to achieve that vision. Which Atriox actually did. Literally chose his fantasy over his people. They only like Doisac in terms of a prize they have lost, it’s a selfish and possessive thing. How it sets back their plans for galactic domination.

Plus, it didn’t change their behaviour as you imply. They were already out to do what they were doing before. Already killing innocent humans. Already occupying human worlds. Remember Halo Wars 2 cutscene with Banished army in ruined human city. How they keep telling you “we leave the Galaxy at the mercy of a monster”. They’ve just carried on what they were doing after murdering Cortana. There’s no change in their goals or behaviour at all.

Like I can’t take seriously the Banished being angry at humanity. Humanities hatred and contempt for them should eclipse anything they have after what they’ve done. That said per Season 2 they are taking Banished Skulls so there is that. Like I really wanted a character to challenge what the villain was saying rather than tacitly accept it.

Chief has went against orders when they weren’t right. Del Rio told him to not follow the Didact. A slave and ignorant fanatic like Escharum would have obeyed had Atriox made a similar order.

You don’t see it as hypocritical that Atriox and the Brutes are mad at their homeworld getting wrecked? When they have been doing this for decades and plan to do it to more; because they want unlimited power. I don’t sympathise with them dying for the same reason I don’t sympathise with the crew of the Death Star.

But that’s the point. Chief has lost his planet. There’s no What if to ponder as 343 suggests; I know how he reacted to that. He hasn’t decided he needs to wipe the Brutes out. That shows that he isn’t like Atriox or Escharum. To me the differences are vastly more important and telling than the similarities. It’s getting it backwards to suggest they’re alike.

6

I’m not playing down Atriox’s intentions at all. I believe without a doubt that he’s an evil SOB and needs to be put down, but — through watching the cutscenes between him and Cortana and reading the Encyclopedia — Atriox went after Cortana mainly for revenge for what she did to Dosiac. It even says just that in the Encyclopedia. Atriox and Escharum’s main goal was to become powerful enough to protect the Banished and Brutes against any enemy and even though he was already heading to Zeta Halo because of what he found on the Ark, he also wanted revenge. And I do see it the hypocrisy in them being angry about Dosiac, but we’re not really talking about hypocrisy.

1 Like
7

If he’s that evil then he can’t be compared to the Chief or humanity.

Why should his anger be given the time of day or set on a pedestal? I mean the Chief kills millions of these things and all his commanders. Are we going to have that also treated sympathetically and guilt tripped over it?. “Escharum was my teacher, you will pay Spartan.” Yeah for a guy with nothing to lose he sure does complain a lot. Humanity has good reasons to want revenge on the Brutes; they do not. The characters should mock the Banished and hold them in contempt for what they’re doing.

I think 343 wanting to put across this sympathy shows they don’t think he’s evil or want this to end with the Bansihed being destroyed and it’s leaders punished. That demonising Cortana for destroying their planet is actively pushing against that sentiment. There’s nothing wrong with killing the Brutes; they deserve it.

They spend more time legitimising the Banished and make every effort to play down how evil they are. To the point that many fans would and do resent if the Banished are shown killing innocent humans. Which shows how heavily 343 has pushed that depiction that they’re somehow a grey faction.

If they are being hypocritical then they have no right to be angry or demand vengeance. What about humanities vengeance for their crimes?

Because if he is a hypocrite that should be pointed out. In Infinity War Dr Strange mocks Thanos motivations when he says them. You don’t get that mockery and insult directed at the Banished. Instead you get 343 writing how they really want you to emphasise with the Bansihed cause. When really the focus should be on getting vengeance on these animals and punishing them.

But 343 does say that Escharum and by extension the Banished were worthy of mercy and sympathy. I think the other party has to actually do something to demonstrate that and warrant that reaction. Otherwise the heroes are simply validating and normalising what the villains are doing. Why is Cortana evil for destroying Doisac but the Brutes destroying worlds is just politics or legitimate military strategy and something we need to turn the other cheek about?

8
  • At the begining : Banished kill human for power and search forerunner artefact for power
  • Since Doisac is destroyed : Banished kill human for revenge and search Halo Zeta for power
  • If Doisac had’nt been destroyed : Banished kill human for power and search Halo Zeta for power

So finally, Doisac destruction just give the Banished one more motivation to attack humanity, revenge, but didn’t change anything to their action since they were already fightings human and searching forerunner power.

I think 343 tried to give them a better motivation than juste “we attack everyone to be the stronger”. However, Cortana isn’t the humanity, so our species can’t be blamed for it. And I’m agree than the Banished shouldn’t be show with compassion after all of what they did

Even if the brutes deserved what happened, I think Doisac destruction seems horrible because Cortana had so much power she could have stop the Banished otherwise (Guardian EMP is enough against a planet). Unless 343 show us the Banished were a real threat to Cortana who hadn’t other choice, Doisac destruction will stay an unnecessary genocide

1 Like
9

Blockquote Humanity has had not just one world destroyed by war mongering and genocidal aliens but multiple. Objectively, in the world of Halo, it has taken these blows with dignity and it’s goals are entirely defensive.

I would like to point out that ONI’s policy after the war was to sow conflict and suspicion among the warring keeps on Sanghelios. They even flirted with poisoning their food supply.

Additionally, Gray Team destroyed Glyke, a Sangheili colony, under their orders–from ONI–to attempt retributive action against the Covenant in the wake of humanity’s genocide. They finally used a NOVA bomb to obliterate the planet after being cut off from all news of the war after the invasion of Earth. Glyke’s population was in the billions. This event fractured Gray Team, and they lost cohesion for some time after being revived aboard Fleetmaster Rojka 'Kaasan’s starship.

10

A reasonable policy. They killed two thirds of the human population and humanity want to avoid an open war. Why not sow discord amongst them? Keep them off balance and prevent another Warlord, like Atriox, from amassing a fleet and attacking Earth. Clearly they didn’t follow this policy. They should have nuked Doisacs shipyards long before Atriox became a threat. Appeasement is not the right policy.

Considered and then dismissed poisoning the food. Because humans have things like morals which Brutes lack.

A single rogue black ops unit operating separate to the government and society. Where the Covenant and Banished openly have the goal of galactic conquest and genocide. Have destroyed a lot more than a single city. Plus, again, this was a decision disputed by the human characters which proves that humans are better than Brutes.

I don’t see why we as the player should be told to feel bad for killing something like Escharum. Its a very deflating moment in the game. It reeks too much of 343 buying into “the Banished are a grey faction” thing people like to push and advocate for. When they’re really, really not.

11

A reasonable policy. They killed two thirds of the human population and humanity want to avoid an open war. Why not sow discord amongst them? Keep them off balance and prevent another Warlord, like Atriox, from amassing a fleet and attacking Earth.

They could (and should) have consistently backed the Arbiter, instead of encouraging rivals for him such as the Servants of the Abiding Truth and (inadvertently) Jul 'Mdama’s Covenant.

Clearly they didn’t follow this policy. They should have nuked Doisacs shipyards long before Atriox became a threat. Appeasement is not the right policy.

And yet you also say…

A single rogue black ops unit operating separate to the government and society. Where the Covenant and Banished openly have the goal of galactic conquest and genocide. Have destroyed a lot more than a single city. Plus, again, this was a decision disputed by the human characters which proves that humans are better than Brutes.

So Halo’s humanity should be nuking more worlds, so long as they have a twinge of conscience?

Glyke was an entire planet, not a city. It had billions of Sangheili inhabitants.

And Gray Team wasn’t rogue. They were following orders that came from one of the most influential organizations in human society.

Considered and then dismissed poisoning the food. Because humans have things like morals which Brutes lack.

This is ONI we’re talking about. I’m not aware of any reason that morality played a factor in their dismissal of this plan.

I don’t see why we as the player should be told to feel bad for killing something like Escharum. Its a very deflating moment in the game. It reeks too much of 343 buying into “the Banished are a grey faction” thing people like to push and advocate for. When they’re really, really not.

John’s reflection on Escharum following the latter’s death flows from his regret over not saving Cortana, then playing into her trap on Genesis, and the destruction and bloodshed that followed.

12

Because the Arbiter is an Elite Nationalist who destroyed 13 humans world and killed a few billion people. Bungie got away with making him the Hero because they never showed him do anything bad and avoided drawing attention to this. It’s why we don’t see him in Halo Reach. But there is a legitimate reason to be suspicious of him. Plus I question why this policy wasn’t applied to the Banished who represent, apparently, a vastly greater threat than the Arbiter or the Storm Covenant. It’s almost as if they wrote the faction in and kind of forgot ONI proactively trying to weaken the Covenant Remnant factions; like the Banished.

Yes, because that’s how we use Nukes in the real world. Let’s say a country was planning a preemptive nuclear strike on the US. Let’s also say that there was no conventional way of dealing with this. Are you saying the US would be wrong to Nuke that country in those circumstances? Those are the circumstances of the Banished threat. Especially since in the world of Halo Capital ship weapons do as much damage as Nukes. A rogue captain or Banished raider with an Assault Carrier should really be viewed more as a small cache of WMD than a simple warship.

I really doubt billions were in one city. Sanghelios in its entirety only has a few billion.

The atrocities of the Covenant and Banished vastly eclipse any handful of examples from a few Halo 4 era books. Which given 343 keeps retconning things I am not even sure we can even rely on; as mentioned before the Banished do not fit at all into a narrative of an aggressive humanity. ONI would have probably captured Atriox and discreetly shot him if they had been.

Those are unrelated things. He feels regret that he wasn’t able to save Cortana. Why would the hero feel guilt killing Escharum in a duel? He has no reason to feel guilty over that. If anything he gave the Brute what he wanted. Killing the Banished is a good thing and they are the ones attacking humanity. If they want to talk peace and leave human territory fine. Until then, they got to go. This is my point, it’s a good thing that he kills Escharum so why guilt trip the player over taking down the final boss of what’s a clear cut villainous faction?

13

Master Chief respected Escharum for his courage, hsi ability to fight and his last decision against his inevitable death. He didn’t regret to killed him or was agree with his moral decisions like genocide

1 Like
14

I really doubt billions were in one city. Sanghelios in its entirety only has a few billion.

I must not have gotten my edit in time. Glyke was a planet with billions of inhabitants. The NOVA destroyed the entire planet. This is from a 2017 novel, well past the time of Halo 4.

Given the attitude that the UNSC had toward the Banished, I don’t think they were aware of just how powerful they had become up to the events of the Zeta Halo Conflict. And they were also being oppressed by Cortana. Kind of makes it hard to gather intel.

In the ending cutscene for the House of Reckoning, John acknowledges Escharum’s status as a “monster.” But again, John isn’t a vengeful character. It’s why he didn’t curbstomp Mercy or let him wallow in anguish when he had the chance. He knew he had defeated Escharum, and so he acknowledged that one similarity: both of them hoped they had done right by their respective groups. That’s it.

15

Atriox and the Banished never mention the destruction of Glyke as motivation for attacking the UNSC. Their reasons are entirely selfish and driven by their desire for power. They barely even mention Doisac for that matter.

How? The Banished were around long before Halo 3. If the Banished were so powerful and important. If Atriox legend was so significant then how could they not have been aware of him? Why would effort not have been taken to wipe the Banished out. The faction has clumsily written into the story because they didn’t exist at the time of Halo 4 and 5. The amount of people who still say the Banished are just small time raiders despite 343 and the characters stating that they’re the greatest power in the Galaxy still amazes me.

It’s too much sympathy. Why shouldn’t he want vengeance on the Banished and Atriox? To me that just makes the Chief indifferent to the evil they are committing and what they’ve done. Having him offhand remark he’s a monster, but act like that, isn’t really appropriate moral condemnation. When you have a faction that’s evil you knock them off their pedestal; you don’t validate what they’re doing. “Oh Escharum was an honourable soldier who I treated with respect.” No, he’s a butcher who tortured your friend and is leading an unprovoked invasion; threatening genocide on humanity. He should curbstomp him. The Banished are no different than the Locust in Gears of War. Like why does he glare angrily at the Weapon when he finds Thorne tortured to death but treats his murderers as friends? Most of what we get from Chief is him being sympathetic for the Banished and indifferent to what they’re doing; whilst we get all this dialogue on how “oh they’re just like me”. No, I can’t relate to that and if they continue with that story thread I’ll just dismiss it entirely.

Plus, making the Chief that sympathetic towards the Banished is a poor choice. If the point of him losing Cortana is that he has to find new purpose, why shouldn’t that be his duty in destroying humanities enemies? If instead, we’re busy making friends with Atriox and making these false comparisons it’s just not as dramatic. It’s too somber. Instead of congratulating the player for killing Escharum and the Harbinger you get basically chastised for killing them. Why? Neither of them had rampancy.

16

The Banished began at the earliest in 2549. They only gained prominence in the post-war era; Isabel’s description of them needs to be understood as the exaggerated summary of a panicked AI with no combat experience.

I never claimed Glyke was their motivation; I was using it to rebut your claim that humanity has had an entirely defensive posture.

I think you’re misinterpreting Chief’s sentiment in the cinematics you mentioned. I find the most likely reason for his refusal to answer the Weapon after Griffin’s death to be his personal sense of guilt over failing to save him. That’s one of the most consistent things about John’s character throughout the games and novels. He feels personally guilty for the loss of anyone who was under his charge. In this case, he blamed himself for allowing the Infinity to be overrun and the UNSC on Zeta Halo to be hunted down.

Given John’s statements about settling the score and his rock-solid confidence in his own ability to thwart anything the Banished could throw at him, I think to say that he sympathizes with them as an organization is far-fetched.

As for Escharum, John killed him. He took his life
There’s no need to go further. Spartans generally eschew personal vengeance. As Linda noted, hatred of the enemy gives control of one’s self to said enemy. Besides, weren’t you just saying that John is different from Escharum because he’s not a brutal, vindictive monster?

I’m not sure why you’re taking such an emotionally charged position about this subject.

17

So they hop from being too small to notice to galactic super power in a few months? That’s very convenient.

Exception that proves the rule and it takes place long after the Brutes have done most of the killing.

The way the Weapon asks him what he is feeling and he is shooting daggers at her is consistent with his hostility towards her in other cutscenes. My take is this is him blaming Cortana and thus taking that out on the Weapon. He never shows that kind of hostility towards the Banished, Escharum and Atriox. Why is he more hostile towards an ally who is seven years off being a problem than the cannibal Imperialists massacring his people?

Not at all. If he only expresses compassion for the organisation and it’s members, then his opposition to it is simply a job. It reduces the stakes to the level of quiet professionalism. That just makes everything less dramatic.

I can’t honestly recall him talking about settling the score and these are really overshadowed by this sympathetic talk. 343 definitely seem to be putting more emphasis on it. The fact they made an article drawing attention to it shows this is a clear centrepiece of the story. Even when he talks about how Atriox beat him it’s more an admiration about how he was taken down by this other combatant.

And? He killed Escharum with the same attitude of removing a loose nail. If, hypothetically, your country is being invaded, why shouldn’t that manifest in hatred, contempt for the enemy and knocking them off the pedestal they set themselves on? To me it’s not natural that his response to Escharum is to relate so strongly to him.

Plus, if you have an evil faction, its usually par for the course for the hero to knock that factions ideology and way of doing things. The Covenant gets knocked by Cortana a few times in Halo 2 for example. This model isn’t followed for the Banished.

“ Besides, weren’t you just saying that John is different from Escharum because he’s not a brutal, vindictive monster?”

No, he would be perfectly justified in hating the Banished and it’s unnatural that he does not. Is Thor a brutal vindictive monster because he’s a bit annoyed at Thanos for killing Loki and massacring his people? The hero can be filled with a sense of righteous purpose without being a monster. Making him indifferent to what the Banished are doing in a misguided attempt to emphasise the characters nobility is not the best way to go forward.

To me the plot seemed to push towards this and then 343 pull back sharply from this and I don’t think that’s good story telling. I don’t think people want the Chief to make peace with Atriox after he realises he has a few valid points. I think people would rather if he was like Doomguy and his nobility was emphasised with compassion for his allies and friends.

Well it annoys me immensely that they went out of their way to demonise Cortana for two games. To the point they decided they had to kill the character off and switch her out for the Weapon. But seem to think the flesh eating cannibal, Imperialist and fascist faction shouldn’t be vilified. It’s even more annoying when many fans agree with this sentiment. “Atriox would never hurt humans”, “I hope they don’t just make the Banished villains” stuff like that.

I mean I thought the idea was looking forward to the look on Atrioxs face when he finds all those columns of wrecked Banished tanks on Zeta Halo. But Apparently I am being told I am meant to see the Banished as good guys. Guess I’ll have to get my apology ready to Atriox for killing his mentor and saying how it wasn’t personal.

It matters because it concerns me about where the story is going:

  • I don’t want to be denied vengeance on Atriox
  • I don’t want a Banished Alliance. That’s dumb.
  • He should be closer to Doomguy than Captain America (which is unfair because Cap doesn’t relate to Red Skull or Thanos)
1 Like
18

So they hop from being too small to notice to galactic super power in a few months? That’s very convenient.

They were consolidating power for about a decade before making themselves a prominent faction. Staying under the radar is not necessarily equal to being too small to notice.

Exception that proves the rule and it takes place long after the Brutes have done most of the killing.

I don’t know about that first part. ONI has had one scheme after another for eliminating competition to humanity, but they often come to naught. I think a lot of the reasons are meta in nature; making humanity too powerful is unpopular with some fans.

But yes, that was indisputably after the Brutes had filled their plate with blood.

The way the Weapon asks him what he is feeling and he is shooting daggers at her is consistent with his hostility towards her in other cutscenes. My take is this is him blaming Cortana and thus taking that out on the Weapon. He never shows that kind of hostility towards the Banished, Escharum and Atriox. Why is he more hostile towards an ally who is seven years off being a problem than the cannibal Imperialists massacring his people?

To be honest, I don’t think Chief harbors true hostility toward Cortana. He called her out on her lies during The Breaking, absolutely. But he wanted her to come back with them. During Shadows of Reach, it’s explicitly stated that he feels regret over what became of her. He blames himself for it. And the UNSC audio log “The Weapon” has the following relevant dialogue:

Chief: “She looks just like her.”
Halsey: “If you say so. I see something else. Something more innocent… from a simpler time.”
Chief: “Does she know me?”
Halsey: “No. She is a blank slate. No memories, no history. Her core is nearly complete. Once it is ready, it will be up to the two of you. The weapon will lock her down. You will retrieve Cortana and bring her back here.”
Chief: “For execution.”
Halsey: “For deletion. We are at war, Master Chief. If you do not think you can do this… Now is the time to step down. I am sure Spartan Locke is available.”
Chief: “That won’t be necessary.”
Halsey: “Good. Tomorrow will test us all.”

It appears that he’s more conflicted over having to kill Cortana than he is about her betrayal, here.

There’s also this dialogue from the level Repository:

On the destruction of Doisac:

Chief: “It’s my fault.”
Weapon: “How?”
Chief: “I should have stopped it. I could have reasoned with her.”
Weapon: “Could you? It was her choice. Her programming.”
Chief: “Was it? I don’t know anymore.”

He doesn’t trust her, of course, because of his past experiences with Cortana and how he believed he failed her. He didn’t want a repeat. I think the hostility after Griffin’s death, though, was mainly because he had just failed to save Griffin.

Not at all. If he only expresses compassion for the organisation and it’s members, then his opposition to it is simply a job. It reduces the stakes to the level of quiet professionalism. That just makes everything less dramatic.

At what point does the Chief express compassion for the Banished or any of its members? He unrelentingly kills every one of them who gets in his way. As for quiet professionalism… that aptly describes most Spartan-IIs. It’s okay if some things are understated. Not everything has to be at the height of drama.

Let’s revisit some passages from Shadows of Reach:

“The Covenant had stolen her past. [Linda] wanted to put a [high explosive armor piercing] round through the head of every alien she saw (yes, even the ones who were supposedly allies now, she realized with a pang of guilt), to burn their homes and raze their cities and wipe even the memory of their malevolent empire from the galactic record.
And she despised herself for being so weak. Because hate was surrender.
Hate gave control of one’s thoughts and feelings to the enemy. It made a soldier predictable, and when a Spartan became predictable, the next thing she became was dead.
So a Spartan could not hate.” -pages 170-171

How is this relevant to John?

“[Blue Team] were extensions of one another, certain enough of their teammates that at times it felt like they were all limbs on the same body. . . John knew that the rest of Blue Team were as angry as he was about what had befallen Reach. . . .they were all quietly relieved that their mission had become so entwined with the campaign to drive the Banished off Reach.” -pages 256-257.

On the loss of a rehabilitation pioneer named Bella Disztl:

“John stayed behind the [Warthog turret], firing at shapes in the smoke and cutting them down in a cold fury. . . .The Banished should never have set foot on Reach–and Reach should never have been glassed in the first place. He had met, and even fought beside, too many noble aliens to believe they were all responsible for this entire mess. But those who were–those he was happy to deal with.” -page 301

He clearly had an emotional investment in the fight on Reach, and the fight on Zeta Halo matters to him as well.

I can’t honestly recall him talking about settling the score and these are really overshadowed by this sympathetic talk. 343 definitely seem to be putting more emphasis on it. The fact they made an article drawing attention to it shows this is a clear centrepiece of the story. Even when he talks about how Atriox beat him it’s more an admiration about how he was taken down by this other combatant.

Weapon: “. . .Spartan Theodore Sorel. Special weapons expert. Died thirteen days ago, like Makovich.”
Chief: “The assassin?”
Weapon: “Brutes. More than one. Whoever they are… they’re proficient. Well trained.”
Chief: “We’ve got a score to settle.”

Later….

Weapon: “I’ve lost his signal. If the Spartan Killers find [the Pilot]…”
Chief: “That won’t happen.”
Weapon: “How can you be sure?”
Chief: “Because they’ll need to go through me first.”

Chief’s recollection of his defeat by Atriox shows humility, without which you can’t learn. Perhaps his defeat had something to do with his feelings of guilt over Cortana clouding his judgment and consequently affecting his combat performance. Even if it doesn’t, it looks like (based on a cursory review of the dialogue) most of the discussions about Atriox and the Banished are contextualized (and overshadowed) by Cortana and John’s regret over not being able to save her. Atriox is assessed by the Chief in a discussion about Cortana, but he’s not the sole focus.

And? He killed Escharum with the same attitude of removing a loose nail. If, hypothetically, your country is being invaded, why shouldn’t that manifest in hatred, contempt for the enemy and knocking them off the pedestal they set themselves on? To me it’s not natural that his response to Escharum is to relate so strongly to him.

That’s kind of how Spartans treat most of their enemies, as an obstacle to be removed. And that’s okay, because John is not a normal person. He’s an emotionally stunted super-soldier.

No, he would be perfectly justified in hating the Banished and it’s unnatural that he does not. Is Thor a brutal vindictive monster because he’s a bit annoyed at Thanos for killing Loki and massacring his people? The hero can be filled with a sense of righteous purpose without being a monster. Making him indifferent to what the Banished are doing in a misguided attempt to emphasise the characters nobility is not the best way to go forward.

John did have anger toward the Banished on Reach, and I’m sure he has some toward them on Zeta Halo. But again, he’s a Spartan-II. He’s not natural in a lot of ways. There’s nothing inconsistent about his characterization in Infinite with virtually any other media in the past.

To me the plot seemed to push towards this and then 343 pull back sharply from this and I don’t think that’s good story telling. I don’t think people want the Chief to make peace with Atriox after he realises he has a few valid points. I think people would rather if he was like Doomguy and his nobility was emphasised with compassion for his allies and friends.

It would be better if the Master Chief is like the Master Chief, instead of some other fictional character. If Chief could work with the Arbiter, who glassed Reach and killed billions, it’s not so far-fetched to think that some kind of agreement could be reached between him and Atriox. It’s just that I don’t see any reason why that would happen unless Atriox has greatly overestimated his ability to control the Endless.

Well it annoys me immensely that they went out of their way to demonise Cortana for two games. To the point they decided they had to kill the character off and switch her out for the Weapon. But seem to think the flesh eating cannibal, Imperialist and fascist faction shouldn’t be vilified. It’s even more annoying when many fans agree with this sentiment. “Atriox would never hurt humans”, “I hope they don’t just make the Banished villains” stuff like that.

We have no disagreement here, except I’m not sure where you’re getting the cannibal stuff from.

I mean I thought the idea was looking forward to the look on Atrioxs face when he finds all those columns of wrecked Banished tanks on Zeta Halo. But Apparently I am being told I am meant to see the Banished as good guys. Guess I’ll have to get my apology ready to Atriox for killing his mentor and saying how it wasn’t personal.

There’s literally nothing in Infinite’s campaign that I interpreted as preparing the players for an alliance with the Banished. The canon fodder article that I think you’re referencing only mentions the comparison between Escharum and John as an addendum to a long discussion of the Cortana whispers. Unless I missed something else in that post (and maybe I have), I wouldn’t call it the centerpiece. But we can examine the claims, if you want.

. . .the Chief understands that death is something that changes people and Escharum made the same choice that he would—to fight to the bitter end.

I don’t see a problem here. John would have fought “to the bitter end” if Earth had been glassed.

In the end, the Chief sees Escharum as a soldier—somebody who was hoping he’d done the right thing, questioning the choices he’d made. Yes, he was a monster, but were humanity in the same position as the Banished, how different would their actions be? What terrible things are we capable of doing—be it in the name of survival or otherwise? The answer to that question for the Master Chief could be found in a mirror…

I don’t think the comparison of horrific deeds is unreasonable either, given the NOVA bomb on Glyke. But was Escharum questioning his own decisions? I think maybe. Not in an overtly noble way, but rather questioning whether to continue searching for the Endless was the right choice, given the endangerment to his forces on Zeta Halo. But that’s just my two cents.

Also, big thanks to Halopedia for the audio log and mission dialogue transcript!

19

He also tries to kill the Weapon because he suspects she might turn bad. There’s also moments of terse dialogue and the Weapon remarks on his hostility. So in that context he is shooting daggers at the Weapon; regardless of what personal guilt he may feel over this. So again, he’s angry at an AI who’s done nothing wrong but waxing lyrical about why the Banished are just like us.

He expresses compassion for them when he shows Escharum respect and let’s the Banished leader die in his arms. With the insinuation he will tell them that he died well.

That’s fine for the Covenant where the enemy is an impersonal force and you have a Saturday morning cartoon vibe. But, When you’re shown your friends being tortured, ship being destroyed and Cortana killed. It kind of is personal at that point. Like with the Arbiter and Tartarus. The situation lends itself to being dramatic. Atriox is why you did not get to save Cortana. Why shouldn’t you want him dead?

The books are written by different people to those who do the games. We’re assessing Chief as he is depicted in Infinite. Obviously the author understands that these characters should be a little annoyed at their homeworld being destroyed. That they would have no time for a Banished whining about how their freedom is being trampled on.

Overshadowed, but what we do hear does not fill me with confidence. I think it’s a bad direction for the UNSC to make peace with the Banished and I suspect this thing with Escharum is the thin end of the wedge here.

Oh they eat people. They talk about it a lot.

It is that article. I think it’s very significant that they compare Chief forgiving Cortana to him having compassion for Escharum. That’s setting alongside the central narrative thread of the game and arguably the conclusion of the Reclaimer Saga. That is preparing the players mentally for idea of reconciling with the Banished. It contextualises them not as a hated menace that needs to be stamped out but as a foe to be forgiven.

There’s a lot of very determined people in history. Stalin was very determined but I wouldn’t compare him to Chief. It’s not a very relevant comparison to draw. Plus, Escharum is motivated by power and what he wants to take from the Galaxy. His vanity and ego sets him apart from the Chief. 343 are comparing two very different characters.

That’s not really questioning his decisions. Should I conquer the Galaxy with the Endless or get a Halo or a good old fashioned orbital bombardment; it’s a tough choice. Should I kill Cortana or not. Not really comparable at all and he wasn’t really that conflicted.

Nice to know there is a little bit of mild angst towards the Banished from the Chief. But why would 343 push the sympathy for Escharum and the Banished; instead of emphasising how bad they are and the danger they represent?

20

He expresses compassion for them when he shows Escharum respect and let’s the Banished leader die in his arms. With the insinuation he will tell them that he died well.

This remains to be seen.

That’s fine for the Covenant where the enemy is an impersonal force and you have a Saturday morning cartoon vibe. But, When you’re shown your friends being tortured, ship being destroyed and Cortana killed. It kind of is personal at that point. Like with the Arbiter and Tartarus. The situation lends itself to being dramatic. Atriox is why you did not get to save Cortana. Why shouldn’t you want him dead?

The Arbiter glassed his home. I’d say that’s personal.

The Arbiter also offered reconciliation to Tartarus. Seems like a trend for mortal enemies in the Halo series to give second chances in spite of treachery and atrocity.

The books are written by different people to those who do the games. We’re assessing Chief as he is depicted in Infinite.

There’s no need to make this distinction. Since 343i received the mantle of the Halo series, they’ve tried to develop the canon in a holistic way. Chief in Infinite is the same character as Chief in Shadows of Reach; after all, Troy Denning (author of SoR) had to work with the narrative team at 343. His characterization of Chief was intentional.

Also consider that Jeff Easterling, one of the members of Halo Infinite’s narrative team, stated that every piece of Halo transmedia is canon unless stated otherwise. Games, books, whatever. It’s all part of the same whole.

Oh they eat people. They talk about it a lot.

Sure, but cannibalism is eating members of one’s own species. That’s like saying humans are cannibals for eating deer or something.

I think we’ll just have to wait for the second campaign to see which direction they decide to take things.