Subtitling Halo 5 was a dumb decision. Main installment Halo sequels are not subtitled, they are simply numbered. Subtitles have been and should be reserved for standalone Halo games. Reach was a prequel. ODST, Wars, and Spartan Assault were all spinoffs. Giving Halo 5 a subtitle creates a jarring inconsistency in the franchise’s naming convention and defies over a decade of Halo tradition. The game should simply be called Halo 5, and I predict that regardless of its subtitle, fans will still just call it Halo 5.
Furthermore, the subtitle itself reeks of Bungie-envy. Regardless of how relevant to the plot the word “Guardians” may be, the fact remains that the player characters in Destiny are called Guardians. Halo 5 is set to launch a year after Destiny. It needs to compete with Destiny, not impersonate it. When you consider the fact that the teaser trailer for Halo 5 depicts Master Chief cosplaying a Destiny Guardian, and that the game has now been subtitled “Guardians,” it creates the impression that Halo is desperately trying to keep up with its parent company by being something it is not.
You may feel it is too early to start nitpicking the game with pedantic criticism, but I feel this is the perfect time. Halo 5 doesn’t launch until Fall 2015. A year and a half is plenty of time to change something as simple as a title.
Drop the “Guardians.” Call it “Halo 5.” That is all.
EDIT: This post is a simplified expression of my views. Those who are interested can find my follow up post on page 6. It deals with issues raised in the preceding pages and discusses points which were omitted from the OP to keep it short.
“Halo: Combat Evolved” would like a word with you!
In all seriousness I do not mind the subtitle and I don’t see how it detracts.
People will adhere to tradition in regards to ANYTHING about Halo, eugh.
> “Halo: Combat Evolved” would like a word with you!
>
>
> In all seriousness I do not mind the subtitle and I don’t see how it detracts.
I said, “Main installment Halo sequels are not subtitled.” As the original game that birthed the franchise, CE is outside the realm of my argument. Incidentally, because CE is the original, in a sense, it too stands alone like the other subtitled games.
It is also worthy of note that CE was not originally subtitled. Bungie always used one word titles (Myth, Marathon, ONI) and Halo was to be no different. The subtitle was added shortly before launch so that consumers would not misinterpret the name “Halo” as a religious reference.
Will the subtitle detract from the game in any way? Probably not, but this isn’t about that. Its about consistency and tradition.
Who cares about the name?
Guardians is a generic name, used in many books,films and games. Isn’t it better than calling it than just calling it halo 5?
Imagine if they kept the numbers on call of duty?
I really don’t see how adding a subtitle detracts from the quality of the game in any way, shape, or form.
Though, I’m very curious on why 343i chose to give the game a subtitle rather than simply calling it ‘Halo 5’.
> Who cares about the name?
>
> Guardians is a generic name, used in many books,films and games. Isn’t it better than calling it than just calling it halo 5?
>
> Imagine if they kept the numbers on call of duty?
I’m not sure I follow how the addition of a “generic name” is intrinsically better than a conventional one.
As to Call of Duty, it no longer incorporates numbers because they don’t want to convey in their titles how stretched out and milked to death the franchise is. This tends to happen the further you get away from number three. The trilogy works well because a conventional story telling method is the three act structure. Continuing to make installments long after the conclusion of a three part story tends to come off somewhat indecent, so subtitles are adopted to both hide the true number of installments, and enable new installments to be made almost indefinitely with no clear end in sight. This is what CoD has done and it is what AC is currently doing.
We had ACIV: Black Flag and now we have the upcoming AC: Unity, which is really ACV, but we appear to have lost the number. Do we really want Halo to follow in these same footsteps? To stretch on until all intrinsic quality is lost and, like a TV show that has run for too many seasons, it eventually runs out of momentum and dies? Or would we rather have a new trilogy with a clear beginning, middle, and end akin to what we experienced in Halo 1, 2, and 3? I, for one, want Halo to deliver a satisfying conclusion. Considering the precedent established in other games, the adoption of the subtitle bodes ill.
I’m sure we all remember when 343i stated that the Reclaimer “trilogy” was turned into more of a saga?
Mayhaps we’re seeing this subtitle because this isn’t the only part of Halo 5, perchance.
Honestly the game was announced on Friday, do we really know anything about the game yet NO. There could be a very large reason as to why guardians is in the name. And we probably won’t know if that is true for a while.
> I’m sure we all remember when 343i stated that the Reclaimer “trilogy” was turned into more of a saga?
>
> Mayhaps we’re seeing this subtitle because this isn’t the only part of Halo 5, perchance.
Exactly. You may have just hit the nail on the head. But as I outlined in my previous post, that bodes ill for the franchise as a whole. When the switch from trilogy to saga was announced, I imagined this was done in the name of squeezing in a Halo 7 as a grand finale, as the number 7 resonates with both fans and the franchise due to Halo’s Bungie origins. Now I fear that they intend to stretch Halo out as along as possible. Halo not ending after number 6 was something I was prepared to accept, but that was predicated on the assumption that Master Chief’s story would eventually have the guts to end and be over. To reference Assassin’s Creed again, we really don’t need Chief to become another Ezio.
> > Who cares about the name?
> >
> > Guardians is a generic name, used in many books,films and games. Isn’t it better than calling it than just calling it halo 5?
> >
> > Imagine if they kept the numbers on call of duty?
>
> I’m not sure I follow how the addition of a “generic name” is intrinsically better than a conventional one.
>
> As to Call of Duty, it no longer incorporates numbers because they don’t want to convey in their titles how stretched out and milked to death the franchise is. This tends to happen the further you get away from number three. The trilogy works well because a conventional story telling method is the three act structure. Continuing to make installments long after the conclusion of a three part story tends to come off somewhat indecent, so subtitles are adopted to both hide the true number of installments, and enable new installments to be made almost indefinitely with no clear end in sight. This is what CoD has done and it is what AC is currently doing.
>
> We had ACIV: Black Flag and now we have the upcoming AC: Unity, which is really ACV, but we appear to have lost the number. Do we really want Halo to follow in these same footsteps? To stretch on until all intrinsic quality is lost and, like a TV show that has run for too many seasons, it eventually runs out of momentum and dies? Or would we rather have a new trilogy with a clear beginning, middle, and end akin to what we experienced in Halo 1, 2, and 3? I, for one, want Halo to deliver a satisfying conclusion. Considering the precedent established in other games, the adoption of the subtitle bodes ill.
The name shouldn’t be bothering you that much though. If some bungie or ps4 fanboy is saying it’s copying destiny out of spite then just ignore them.
> > > Who cares about the name?
> > >
> > > Guardians is a generic name, used in many books,films and games. Isn’t it better than calling it than just calling it halo 5?
> > >
> > > Imagine if they kept the numbers on call of duty?
> >
> > I’m not sure I follow how the addition of a “generic name” is intrinsically better than a conventional one.
> >
> > As to Call of Duty, it no longer incorporates numbers because they don’t want to convey in their titles how stretched out and milked to death the franchise is. This tends to happen the further you get away from number three. The trilogy works well because a conventional story telling method is the three act structure. Continuing to make installments long after the conclusion of a three part story tends to come off somewhat indecent, so subtitles are adopted to both hide the true number of installments, and enable new installments to be made almost indefinitely with no clear end in sight. This is what CoD has done and it is what AC is currently doing.
> >
> > We had ACIV: Black Flag and now we have the upcoming AC: Unity, which is really ACV, but we appear to have lost the number. Do we really want Halo to follow in these same footsteps? To stretch on until all intrinsic quality is lost and, like a TV show that has run for too many seasons, it eventually runs out of momentum and dies? Or would we rather have a new trilogy with a clear beginning, middle, and end akin to what we experienced in Halo 1, 2, and 3? I, for one, want Halo to deliver a satisfying conclusion. Considering the precedent established in other games, the adoption of the subtitle bodes ill.
>
> The name shouldn’t be bothering you that much though. If some bungie or ps4 fanboy is saying it’s copying destiny out of spite then just ignore them.
Names are important things. They shouldn’t be dismissed as tangential to the quality of the thing being named. While I am not asserting that Halo 5 will be bad because it is subtitled, I am asserting that the presence of a subtitle implies a whole host of bad things about the future of the franchise.
And for the record, I am the one accusing Halo of copying Destiny, and I am a guy who is both a fan of Halo, and super psyched for Destiny.
How is this bad at all?
Your comparison to Destiny is quite a stretch I honestly don’t see how this affects anything at all. Guardians isn’t something that’s trademarked by Destiny…
The title is Halo 5: Guardians. Not Halo: Guardians
I’d just like to post for posterity’s sake that I am pleasantly surprised at the level of optimism and positive thinking being displayed in this thread. I suppose that this close to the announcement our community is still in the phase where we all assume that the new game will descend from on high and lead the franchise to the promised land. I myself and not feeling that rosie-eyed. I remember Reach.
Perhaps its my fault for trying to preemptively enter the phase where the community picks apart and complains about every tiny facet of the new game, but I believe that if we criticize it while its still in development then there might not be any need to criticize it when it arrives. Wishful thinking perhaps, but it is nonetheless my line of reasoning.
If the name Guardian was somehow a selling point for Destiny, I could maybe see it. But no one’s gonna play Destiny just because they get to be called a Guardian.
> If the name Guardian was somehow a selling point for Destiny, I could maybe see it. But no one’s gonna play Destiny just because they get to be called a Guardian.
While the connection between Destiny and the word “Guardians” may seem tenuous now, I’d be willing to bet that a year after the launch of the game that connection will be considerably more solid in the minds of the gaming community. However, that’s not the point. This has less to do with how Halo 5 is perceived by the masses, and more to do with simple principle.
Halo 5 has already borrowed from Destiny aesthetically in its E3 announcement trailer, and now its subtitle implies that it may borrow thematically as well. The two games will inevitably be compared due to the Bungie connection, and since Bungie is the older parent company, any similarity between new Halo games and Destiny will only reflect poorly on Halo. Halo 4 already created the sentiment within the community that Halo has lost its way. As it moves forward, Halo needs to either rediscover or redefined its own identity, and it can’t do that by emulating other games. Halo 4 has already proven that.
> > If the name Guardian was somehow a selling point for Destiny, I could maybe see it. But no one’s gonna play Destiny just because they get to be called a Guardian.
>
> While the connection between Destiny and the word “Guardians” may seem tenuous now, I’d be willing to bet that a year after the launch of the game that connection will be considerably more solid in the minds of the gaming community. However, that’s not the point. This has less to do with how Halo 5 is perceived by the masses, and more to do with simple principle.
>
> Halo 5 has already borrowed from Destiny aesthetically in its E3 announcement trailer, and now its subtitle implies that it may borrow thematically as well. The two games will inevitably be compared due to the Bungie connection, and since Bungie is the older parent company, any similarity between new Halo games and Destiny will only reflect poorly on Halo. Halo 4 already created the sentiment within the community that Halo has lost its way. As it moves forward, Halo needs to either rediscover or redefined its own identity, and it can’t do that by emulating other games. Halo 4 has already proven that.
I don’t think Halo is copying Destiny at all. I think that due to the nature of the circumstance it will be compared to Destiny but that’s fine. These two series’ are almost sharing the same blood so I don’t buy into the whole copycat conspiracy. Bungie stopped doing Halo to do another sci-fi shooter and now people are surprised and angry that those two are similar?
It’s inevitable that they are similar, they’re practically siblings.
> While the connection between Destiny and the word “Guardians” may seem tenuous now, I’d be willing to bet that a year after the launch of the game that connection will be considerably more solid in the minds of the gaming community. However, that’s not the point. This has less to do with how Halo 5 is perceived by the masses, and more to do with simple principle.
>
> Halo 5 has already borrowed from Destiny aesthetically in its E3 announcement trailer, and now its subtitle implies that it may borrow thematically as well. The two games will inevitably be compared due to the Bungie connection, and since Bungie is the older parent company, any similarity between new Halo games and Destiny will only reflect poorly on Halo. Halo 4 already created the sentiment within the community that Halo has lost its way. As it moves forward, Halo needs to either rediscover or redefined its own identity, and it can’t do that by emulating other games. Halo 4 has already proven that.
The word guardian already appears places in halo though.
The reason everyone is so defensive over it, is that we’ve seen 3 pieces of art for the game, and have a tittle, and you’re making a very bizarre nitpick that sounds like some conspiracy.
> > While the connection between Destiny and the word “Guardians” may seem tenuous now, I’d be willing to bet that a year after the launch of the game that connection will be considerably more solid in the minds of the gaming community. However, that’s not the point. This has less to do with how Halo 5 is perceived by the masses, and more to do with simple principle.
> >
> > Halo 5 has already borrowed from Destiny aesthetically in its E3 announcement trailer, and now its subtitle implies that it may borrow thematically as well. The two games will inevitably be compared due to the Bungie connection, and since Bungie is the older parent company, any similarity between new Halo games and Destiny will only reflect poorly on Halo. Halo 4 already created the sentiment within the community that Halo has lost its way. As it moves forward, Halo needs to either rediscover or redefined its own identity, and it can’t do that by emulating other games. Halo 4 has already proven that.
>
> The word guardian already appears places in halo though.
I’ll also add that the word “Guardian” has an extremely large significance to the lore.
> > While the connection between Destiny and the word “Guardians” may seem tenuous now, I’d be willing to bet that a year after the launch of the game that connection will be considerably more solid in the minds of the gaming community. However, that’s not the point. This has less to do with how Halo 5 is perceived by the masses, and more to do with simple principle.
> >
> > Halo 5 has already borrowed from Destiny aesthetically in its E3 announcement trailer, and now its subtitle implies that it may borrow thematically as well. The two games will inevitably be compared due to the Bungie connection, and since Bungie is the older parent company, any similarity between new Halo games and Destiny will only reflect poorly on Halo. Halo 4 already created the sentiment within the community that Halo has lost its way. As it moves forward, Halo needs to either rediscover or redefined its own identity, and it can’t do that by emulating other games. Halo 4 has already proven that.
>
> The word guardian already appears places in halo though.
>
> The reason everyone is so defensive over it, is that we’ve seen 3 pieces of art for the game, and have a tittle, and you’re making a very bizarre nitpick that sounds like some conspiracy.
I don’t think I ever implied the presence of a conspiracy…though I did imply a lack of originality.
I’d also like to point out that while we may only have concept art and a title, I have been criticizing the title and what it implies about the future of the franchise. Distinctness from Destiny is a secondary point for me.
Honestly, I’m surprised that this nitpick is being perceived as bizarre. This is the first main installment Halo sequel to be subtitled. That defies tradition. Usually appeals to tradition resonate with people.