I hope Halo 5 has a Halo in it.

Games Halo 5: Guardians
#1

Was the last time we actually played a Halo game on a Halo, Halo 3? It seems strange to me in terms of story (but inevitable due to brand recognition) that there be Halo games without actual Halos in them or without the rings playing as central a role as they did in the original trilogy. Now it seems like the series should be titled The Spartan or John 117. And I’d actually like that as it would be ballsy and unique (would never happen of course).

There’s a disconnect between the title and the games now - a small gripe but still…

But the main reason I hope there’s a Halo in Halo 5 is because there isn’t any environment in any Halo game more exciting than the game’s namesake. I’ll forever remember looking, in awe, at the way the ring stretched high into the sky. The idea that keeping games on Halos gets old is shortsighted. Three entire games could be set on the same Halo and still be great if done intelligently.

I’d love to see a next gen reimaging of that environ.

An open-world Halo, where I can literally go around the entire ring - but that won’t happen for years, if ever, as it seems like something lots of fans think is alienating.

What do you think? Would you like to explore a new Halo ring?

#2

Well, in Halo 4 we were “near” a Halo ring. However, I agree that they should still hold some sort of significance in future Halo games.

I would love to be on another Halo ring in Halo 5. They could really use the power of the Xbox One to make it look awesome.

#3

I agree that there should be some sort of return to a Halo ring in the future games. Heck I’d even settle for a return trip to the Ark.

#4

Yeah, it’d be nice to see another Halo and have a significant purpose.

#5

> What do you think? Would you like to explore a new Halo ring?

yes, yes, yes.
even though i don’t it makes a visible if difference
if you walk around a Halo or on Requiem, i kind of
missed the pure existence of a Halo.

therefore, i’d really like go to another Halo.

#6

I believe that the Composer mission for Halo 4 should have happened ON Installation 03, rather than ‘near’ it, just for the sake of relevance. But yes, another Halo ring, or even The Ark (which is still possible assuming Mendicant Bias is still apart of the story), would be a nice destination to wonder off to.

#7

A Halo ring should at least make an appearance that lasts for more than 5 seconds.
But, a whole mission on a Halo ring would still be better.

#8

I thought you were referring to the gameplay at first, lol.
Reach’s Forge World was on a Halo, I believe… that kinda counts!

#9

You know what would be cool in a future Halo - Chief goes to investigate a new Halo (maybe this is a secret Halo built by some rogue former UNSC element as an ultimate weapon. death star style), and after the first few missions on this Halo, an accident happens and the Halo breaks apart. So you find yourself on a large, shattered bit of Halo, floating through space, but you need to make your way to a distant piece (that’s where your team is or your goal is). So just imagine the conflict, varying environments, and the intensity of that situation - desperately needing to make your way from one floating piece to the next, each new section acting as a new chapter/level. And several areas would be exposed to space or the environmental controls would be out of whack, so you find yourself in all these different decaying landscapes, maybe you’d even have to space-jump from one section to the next. It would be a world that’s literally falling apart around you all the time. Would certainly bring some vulnerability to the Chief and be a fairly unique setting.

God I wish I hadn’t imagined this haha.

#10

> You know what would be cool in a future Halo - Chief goes to investigate a new Halo (maybe this is a secret Halo built by some rogue former UNSC element as an ultimate weapon. death star style), and after the first few missions on this Halo, an accident happens and the Halo breaks apart. So you find yourself on a large, shattered bit of Halo, floating through space, but you need to make your way to a distant piece (that’s where your team is or your goal is). So just imagine the conflict, varying environments, and the intensity of that situation - desperately needing to make your way from one floating piece to the next, each new section acting as a new chapter/level. And several areas would be exposed to space or the environmental controls would be out of whack, so you find yourself in all these different decaying landscapes, maybe you’d even have to space-jump from one section to the next. It would be a world that’s literally falling apart around you all the time. Would certainly bring some vulnerability to the Chief and be a fairly unique setting.
>
> God I wish I hadn’t imagined this haha.

I can kind of see an EVA oriented level…

#11

We spent 3 games dealing with the Halos, it’s time to move on. Halo 3 ODST and Halo Reach were fine without Halo rings, as was Halo 4. Hell, Halo 3 only had 1 level on a Halo, and it wasn’t the best mission, in my opinion. The best levels in Halo 2 were also not on the Halo ring (again, my opinion).

#12

> We spent 3 games dealing with the Halos, it’s time to move on. Halo 3 ODST and Halo Reach were fine without Halo rings, as was Halo 4. Hell, Halo 3 only had 1 level on a Halo, and it wasn’t the best mission, in my opinion. The best levels in Halo 2 were also not on the Halo ring (again, my opinion).

I understand…but then it’s time to stop calling the series Halo. Again, I know this will never happen due to brand recognition, but it’s ridiculous, in story terms, for Halo to be the title when it’s not about Halo. The titles then are purely superficial, purely business. That’s irritating.

And I like Halos themselves. We forget how amazing a concept they are. They could easily be done again, and done well, and the game could easily be great.

#13

The only Halo that offers any more to the story is Installation 07. Other than that, I don’t think that we should blindly spend campaigns on Halo’s just because of the name of the IP.

Plus, the term “Halo” has much more to it than giant ring worlds. Halo Radiation is a form of energy that nullifies the connection between thought and form, and it is the only known way to stop the Flood and/or Precursors.

#14

> The only Halo that offers any more to the story is Installation 07. Other than that, I don’t think that we should blindly spend campaigns on Halo’s just because of the name of the IP.
>
> Plus, the term “Halo” has much more to it than giant ring worlds. Halo Radiation is a form of energy that nullifies the connection between thought and form, and it is the only known way to stop the Flood and/or Precursors.

I agree Installation 07 would be pretty cool to check out. Would have liked a chance to chat with 049 Abject Testament, but I can live without it.

#15

Despite the name of the franchise being Halo, I’d rather not see more Halo rings. For one the current story arc doesn’t seem to involve them, so I’m sure it would feel entirely forced. Second, I don’t want to see another “blow up construct, save the galaxy” ending.

> I understand…but then it’s time to stop calling the series Halo. Again, I know this will never happen due to brand recognition, but it’s ridiculous, in story terms, for Halo to be the title when it’s not about Halo. The titles then are purely superficial, purely business. That’s irritating.

That’s ridiculous reasoning in my opinion.
The franchise shouldn’t change name when it still takes place in the same universe and canon.

#16

Changing the name Halo to something else just because there has not been a mission on a halo ring sounds stupid to me.

And what would they call it, Forerunners? Haha.
Master Chief 6
Reclaimer 7
The Mantle 8

Ok ok, I’ll stop :stuck_out_tongue:

#17

> > We spent 3 games dealing with the Halos, it’s time to move on. Halo 3 ODST and Halo Reach were fine without Halo rings, as was Halo 4. Hell, Halo 3 only had 1 level on a Halo, and it wasn’t the best mission, in my opinion. The best levels in Halo 2 were also not on the Halo ring (again, my opinion).
>
> I understand…but then it’s time to stop calling the series Halo. Again, I know this will never happen due to brand recognition, <mark>but it’s ridiculous, in story terms, for Halo to be the title when it’s not about Halo.</mark> The titles then are purely superficial, purely business. That’s irritating.
>
> And I like Halos themselves. We forget how amazing a concept they are. They could easily be done again, and done well, and the game could easily be great.

I don’t see how. People don’t associate the name of the franchise just with the ring worlds for which it’s named. Should Halo: Fall of Reach just been called Fall of Reach? Should Halo 3: ODST been called ODST? Neither of these have to do with the Halo rings in any prominent manner, but are labeled Halo because it is all part of the same franchise, the same story.

#18

It seems like some people aren’t actually reading my posts, or that they’re focusing on something that irritates them and makes them want to pick a fight, despite the fact that each time I’ve addressed how I understand why the title change will never happen. And I understand why people don’t like it, but I’m not being argumentative about it or a jerk.

Was merely making a comment about how franchises (in general) can keep having titles that aren’t really connected to the actual stories of each successive iteration. I find that irritating.

I know it seems dumb to change the name of Halo.

I was making 2 small comments:

1- it’s weird to think that Halo keeps getting called Halo when it’s no longer really about a Halo or even the events of Halo 1-3 (you can argue about Halo energy or stuff like that, and that’s fine, but that’s not the reason it’s called Halo anymore. It’s called Halo just because it’s a franchise and I’m simply saying that I would LIKE it if the title of a series is a little more relevant and pertinent. I would have liked Reach to just be Reach. ODSTS…yeah ODST .

2-I like Halo as a setting. Would really like to explore a new one on next gen.

That’s all. Not sure why this is so offensive.

#19

> > > We spent 3 games dealing with the Halos, it’s time to move on. Halo 3 ODST and Halo Reach were fine without Halo rings, as was Halo 4. Hell, Halo 3 only had 1 level on a Halo, and it wasn’t the best mission, in my opinion. The best levels in Halo 2 were also not on the Halo ring (again, my opinion).
> >
> > I understand…but then it’s time to stop calling the series Halo. Again, I know this will never happen due to brand recognition, <mark>but it’s ridiculous, in story terms, for Halo to be the title when it’s not about Halo.</mark> The titles then are purely superficial, purely business. That’s irritating.
> >
> > And I like Halos themselves. We forget how amazing a concept they are. They could easily be done again, and done well, and the game could easily be great.
>
> I don’t see how. People don’t associate the name of the franchise just with the ring worlds for which it’s named. Should Halo: Fall of Reach just been called Fall of Reach? Should Halo 3: ODST been called ODST? Neither of these have to do with the Halo rings in any prominent manner, but are labeled Halo because it is all part of the same franchise, the same story.

well, in my opinion, i accepted that Reach & ODST didn’t include
any Halos because of the Subtitle. It wasn’t just a simple “Halo”,
it was a different Story from a different Perspective.

But all Major Installments featured or involved Halos in some kind of way,
except Halo 4. Which, to be honest, felt kind of strange.
I mean, imagine a Predator Movie without Predators.
Or an Alien Movie without Xenomorph.

The same way i feel about Halo Games, Movies etc without Halos.
i mean, if someone is new to the franchise & wants to know what
a Halo actually is & then gets told none of them actually feature
a Halo…that could be quiet irritating. at least i would be confused.

That’s why don’t think any Halo Media without
any references to Halo-Installation should be just called “Halo”.
Changing the Name is not a really an option,
because of Brand recognition, but there should be at least a Subtitle.
So it is at least obvious what it is about.

Like it was with Reach and ODST.
You at least knowed it isn’t just about Halos, but about
something called Reach and something called ODST.

#20

We are battling the promethians who built the Halos. If someone doesn’t understand why there aren’t Halos in Halo games now, they should do some research. Having a number after the title also suggests that if this is their first Halo game, they have missed a lot of the story and if they want clarity, they should go back and read the books, play the old games, or get some other media form that will describe the history, or read the Halo Wiki pages. We don’t have to have a Halo in Halo, just so long as it doesn’t stray so far from the story. It’s all about Master Chief anyways and his name isn’t in the title either.