Okay, this has been on my mind for quite some time. Why did the fight between MC and Locke seem like it was a fair fight? That chief had to actually struggle to beat him. In my opinion it seems rather stupid that a much smaller spartan with less augmentations could be equally matched with such a strong spartan like MC.
Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
I think the way it looked in the cut scene was weird for how slow and clunky it was, and to be fair the S-IVs can pull their weight compared to previous generations but the chief being halo’s mascot and his years and years of experience will put him on top of 99.9% of fights.
Depending on which Spartan II fights which Spartan IV,the fight could be one sided or balanced.
> 2533274824050480;2:
> Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
Do you have a source for that?
I would be very interested in knowing.
> 2533275013370605;5:
> > 2533274824050480;2:
> > Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
>
> Do you have a source for that?
> I would be very interested in knowing.
Tried finding it without success 
It might have been someone else that said it, but that was definitely the gist of the justification. I’ll post here in case I come across a source though.
The fight between Locke and Chief is a pretty confusing one for people who are lore-savvy.
Let’s first establish what we know.
-Spartan 4 augmentations are less effective than Spartan 2 or 3 augmentations.
-Gen 2 was built in order to compensate for the shortcomings of Spartan 4 augmentations.
-Gen 2 is stronger and lighter than Gen 1.
-A Spartan 4 in Gen 2 is said to be on physically on par with Spartan 2 in Gen 1.
Blue Team wears Gen 2 armour in Halo 5. Theoretically this should mean that Chief has a strength advantage over Locke. Unfortunately the cutscene seemed to indicate that both had similar levels of strength.
This there are no concrete answers and 343 hasn’t shed any light on the situation we will have to come up with a few theories.
- This was done in order to make Locke not seem like a pushover.
AKA 343 breaking established lore for the sake of image of their new character. (This is probably the answer). - Locke’s armour is extra special.
Locke’s Hunter armour is said to be a advanced prototype suit. However this theory isn’t very solid as the suit seems to specialise in situational awareness. - Chief wasn’t giving is his all.
This is plausible, however the fact that Chief initiated the fight, threw very heavy swings and seemed to be straining at the end damages the validity of this claim. - The tailoring of Spartan 4 augmentations.
Unlike the previous generations, the Spartan 4s have their augmentations specifically tailored to each individual. Theoretically this could mean that some individuals with more robust genetics would be able to handled a stronger level of the Spartan 4 augmentations. The problem with this is that there is nothing to back this up and that all sources state that Spartan 4 augmentations produce physically inferior results compared to Spartan 2s. - Gen 2 doesn’t function like the previous MJOLNIRs in that instead of magnifying baseline abilities it enhances all the Spartans that wear it to a certain level making any and all Spartans in Gen2 relatively equal. (Like the previous theory however there is no evidence to support this).
- Gen 2 can’t enhance Spartan 2s further for another reason such as diminishing returns or operator safety limits or another reason.
> 2533274824050480;6:
> > 2533275013370605;5:
> > > 2533274824050480;2:
> > > Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
> >
> > Do you have a source for that?
> > I would be very interested in knowing.
>
> Tried finding it without success It might have been someone else that said it, but that was definitely the gist of the justification. I’ll post here in case I come across a source though.
I hope you find it. If you do we will be able to put this annoyance to rest. This scene has been bothering me ever since I saw it.
> 2533274824050480;2:
> Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
Yep, but I don’t think 343 is trying to make Locke the “Mascot” I’m pretty sure that they just want a little history between chief and Locke so in future halo titles, when they are forced to fight together (My opinion: say another attack from the flood.) there will be a bit of struggle and drama, like for instance when Locke Talks to Arbiter In halo 5 Arbiter doesn’t just open up to him because Locke was hired to hunt down and Kill him a few years prior. Speaking of Arbiter, he also says " Master chief and I. . . are friendship . . . its complicated." I feel they will have Master chief and Locke bond a “Complicated” friendship as well, through some catastrophic event (such as the flood.). I believe 343 wants Locke to be a key player in the future, but I don’t think there trying to replace chief with Locke. It would be ridiculous, after all the titles that Chief has been the main character, to just replace him with Locke is absurd. but as far as Chief vs Locke, I think Locke putting the crack in his helmet will be the thing that will remind chief of the struggles they had in the past, so when It comes time for them to fight together, He wont let his past events behind him.
> 2535410704700107;9:
> > 2533274824050480;2:
> > Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
>
> Yep, but I don’t think 343 is trying to make Locke the “Mascot” I’m pretty sure that they just want a little history between chief and Locke so in future halo titles, when they are forced to fight together (My opinion: say another attack from the flood.) there will be a bit of struggle and drama, like for instance when Locke Talks to Arbiter In halo 5 Arbiter doesn’t just open up to him because Locke was hired to hunt down and Kill him a few years prior. Speaking of Arbiter, he also says " Master chief and I. . . are friendship . . . its complicated." I feel they will have Master chief and Locke bond a “Complicated” friendship as well, through some catastrophic event (such as the flood.). I believe 343 wants Locke to be a key player in the future, but I don’t think there trying to replace chief with Locke. It would be ridiculous, after all the titles that Chief has been the main character, to just replace him with Locke is absurd. but as far as Chief vs Locke, I think Locke putting the crack in his helmet will be the thing that will remind chief of the struggles they had in the past, so when It comes time for them to fight together, He wont let his past events behind him.
If they didn’t want Locke as a replacement, there would have been more missions for the player as Chief. It was fairly obvious who the story was focusing on in Halo 5 and that’s exactly why 343i had to make announcements saying future titles would focus on Chief.
> 2533274824050480;10:
> > 2535410704700107;9:
> > > 2533274824050480;2:
> > > Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
> >
> > Yep, but I don’t think 343 is trying to make Locke the “Mascot” I’m pretty sure that they just want a little history between chief and Locke so in future halo titles, when they are forced to fight together (My opinion: say another attack from the flood.) there will be a bit of struggle and drama, like for instance when Locke Talks to Arbiter In halo 5 Arbiter doesn’t just open up to him because Locke was hired to hunt down and Kill him a few years prior. Speaking of Arbiter, he also says " Master chief and I. . . are friendship . . . its complicated." I feel they will have Master chief and Locke bond a “Complicated” friendship as well, through some catastrophic event (such as the flood.). I believe 343 wants Locke to be a key player in the future, but I don’t think there trying to replace chief with Locke. It would be ridiculous, after all the titles that Chief has been the main character, to just replace him with Locke is absurd. but as far as Chief vs Locke, I think Locke putting the crack in his helmet will be the thing that will remind chief of the struggles they had in the past, so when It comes time for them to fight together, He wont let his past events behind him.
>
> If they didn’t want Locke as a replacement, there would have been more missions for the player as Chief. It was fairly obvious who the story was focusing on in Halo 5 and that’s exactly why 343i had to make announcements saying future titles would focus on Chief.
I’m not sure if you meant future titles would focus on Locke and you accidentally put Chief, but Why would the franchise want to replace him?
> 2535410704700107;11:
> > 2533274824050480;10:
> > > 2535410704700107;9:
> > > > 2533274824050480;2:
> > > > Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
> > >
> > > Yep, but I don’t think 343 is trying to make Locke the “Mascot” I’m pretty sure that they just want a little history between chief and Locke so in future halo titles, when they are forced to fight together (My opinion: say another attack from the flood.) there will be a bit of struggle and drama, like for instance when Locke Talks to Arbiter In halo 5 Arbiter doesn’t just open up to him because Locke was hired to hunt down and Kill him a few years prior. Speaking of Arbiter, he also says " Master chief and I. . . are friendship . . . its complicated." I feel they will have Master chief and Locke bond a “Complicated” friendship as well, through some catastrophic event (such as the flood.). I believe 343 wants Locke to be a key player in the future, but I don’t think there trying to replace chief with Locke. It would be ridiculous, after all the titles that Chief has been the main character, to just replace him with Locke is absurd. but as far as Chief vs Locke, I think Locke putting the crack in his helmet will be the thing that will remind chief of the struggles they had in the past, so when It comes time for them to fight together, He wont let his past events behind him.
> >
> > If they didn’t want Locke as a replacement, there would have been more missions for the player as Chief. It was fairly obvious who the story was focusing on in Halo 5 and that’s exactly why 343i had to make announcements saying future titles would focus on Chief.
>
> I’m not sure if you meant future titles would focus on Locke and you accidentally put Chief, but Why would the franchise want to replace him?
Nope, placed those names where they belonged. They made the announcements after all the backlash from fans. Same thing for split screen.
I’ll answer your question with a question. Why would 343 make a game that divides a passionate community, fix stuff that isn’t remotely broken while ignoring actual issues, release unfinished games, and hire people who hate Halo to work on Halo when Halo was successful and didn’t need experimentation? Guess we’ll never know. They did so many things so right, but have messed up heavily on other fronts.
> 2533274824050480;12:
> > 2535410704700107;11:
> > > 2533274824050480;10:
> > > > 2535410704700107;9:
> > > > > 2533274824050480;2:
> > > > > Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
> > > >
> > > > Yep, but I don’t think 343 is trying to make Locke the “Mascot” I’m pretty sure that they just want a little history between chief and Locke so in future halo titles, when they are forced to fight together (My opinion: say another attack from the flood.) there will be a bit of struggle and drama, like for instance when Locke Talks to Arbiter In halo 5 Arbiter doesn’t just open up to him because Locke was hired to hunt down and Kill him a few years prior. Speaking of Arbiter, he also says " Master chief and I. . . are friendship . . . its complicated." I feel they will have Master chief and Locke bond a “Complicated” friendship as well, through some catastrophic event (such as the flood.). I believe 343 wants Locke to be a key player in the future, but I don’t think there trying to replace chief with Locke. It would be ridiculous, after all the titles that Chief has been the main character, to just replace him with Locke is absurd. but as far as Chief vs Locke, I think Locke putting the crack in his helmet will be the thing that will remind chief of the struggles they had in the past, so when It comes time for them to fight together, He wont let his past events behind him.
> > >
> > > If they didn’t want Locke as a replacement, there would have been more missions for the player as Chief. It was fairly obvious who the story was focusing on in Halo 5 and that’s exactly why 343i had to make announcements saying future titles would focus on Chief.
> >
> > I’m not sure if you meant future titles would focus on Locke and you accidentally put Chief, but Why would the franchise want to replace him?
>
> Nope, placed those names where they belonged. They made the announcements after all the backlash from fans. Same thing for split screen.
>
> I’ll answer your question with a question. Why would 343 make a game that divides a passionate community, fix stuff that isn’t remotely broken while ignoring actual issues, release unfinished games, and hire people who hate Halo to work on Halo when Halo was successful and didn’t need experimentation? Guess we’ll never know. They did so many things so right, but have messed up heavily on other fronts.
I’m going to assuming your part of the “passionate community”. if you are so passionate about halo why would you waste your time criticizing there work. Do you remember “The death of Cortana”. do you remember all the criticism they got for killing her. Guess what she was alive, they turned out just fine. I believe 343 knows exactly what there doing and like all things you just need to wait and see what they are making next. I’m am VERY confident they will never replace a player like chief with Locke. and just like Cortana’s alive so Chief will be alive as well. Its way to much of a risk to replace MC with Locke. and if they do, I’m sure they will realize their mistake and fix it. And What? they clearly are focusing on Locke because of how many campaign missions they Had? That’s like saying in 2010, There trying to Replace Master chief with Noble 6, before finishing the game. The story between Locke and MC isn’t over. you don’t know what will happen. Locke could have a glorious death in halo 6 and die. so don’t go assuming things based on human mistakes from a human run company, when your a human yourself. humans make mistakes. and if 343 makes a mistake, they can fix it. Its kind of hard to create a super popular videogame for so many people with different expectations. 343 will do what they see fit.
> 2535410704700107;13:
> > 2533274824050480;12:
> > > 2535410704700107;11:
> > > > 2533274824050480;10:
> > > > > 2535410704700107;9:
> > > > > > 2533274824050480;2:
> > > > > > Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yep, but I don’t think 343 is trying to make Locke the “Mascot” I’m pretty sure that they just want a little history between chief and Locke so in future halo titles, when they are forced to fight together (My opinion: say another attack from the flood.) there will be a bit of struggle and drama, like for instance when Locke Talks to Arbiter In halo 5 Arbiter doesn’t just open up to him because Locke was hired to hunt down and Kill him a few years prior. Speaking of Arbiter, he also says " Master chief and I. . . are friendship . . . its complicated." I feel they will have Master chief and Locke bond a “Complicated” friendship as well, through some catastrophic event (such as the flood.). I believe 343 wants Locke to be a key player in the future, but I don’t think there trying to replace chief with Locke. It would be ridiculous, after all the titles that Chief has been the main character, to just replace him with Locke is absurd. but as far as Chief vs Locke, I think Locke putting the crack in his helmet will be the thing that will remind chief of the struggles they had in the past, so when It comes time for them to fight together, He wont let his past events behind him.
> > > >
> > > > If they didn’t want Locke as a replacement, there would have been more missions for the player as Chief. It was fairly obvious who the story was focusing on in Halo 5 and that’s exactly why 343i had to make announcements saying future titles would focus on Chief.
> > >
> > > I’m not sure if you meant future titles would focus on Locke and you accidentally put Chief, but Why would the franchise want to replace him?
> >
> > Nope, placed those names where they belonged. They made the announcements after all the backlash from fans. Same thing for split screen.
> >
> > I’ll answer your question with a question. Why would 343 make a game that divides a passionate community, fix stuff that isn’t remotely broken while ignoring actual issues, release unfinished games, and hire people who hate Halo to work on Halo when Halo was successful and didn’t need experimentation? Guess we’ll never know. They did so many things so right, but have messed up heavily on other fronts.
>
> I’m going to assuming your part of the “passionate community”. if you are so passionate about halo why would you waste your time criticizing there work. Do you remember “The death of Cortana”. do you remember all the criticism they got for killing her. Guess what she was alive, they turned out just fine. I believe 343 knows exactly what there doing and like all things you just need to wait and see what they are making next. I’m am VERY confident they will never replace a player like chief with Locke. and just like Cortana’s alive so Chief will be alive as well. Its way to much of a risk to replace MC with Locke. and if they do, I’m sure they will realize their mistake and fix it. And What? they clearly are focusing on Locke because of how many campaign missions they Had? That’s like saying in 2010, There trying to Replace Master chief with Noble 6, before finishing the game. The story between Locke and MC isn’t over. you don’t know what will happen. Locke could have a glorious death in halo 6 and die. so don’t go assuming things based on human mistakes from a human run company when your a human yourself.
Wow, lots of stuff to get to here.
First off, criticizing something does not mean someone hates it. People who make the argument that criticism equals hate need to learn that’s simply not true. For instance, if a coach yells at his players to get better, does that mean he hates them? No, some of the best and most caring coaches are some of the most critical. Besides, product success is based on demand. Halo is only going to sell when it satisfies its customers. At the same time, critics need to listen to why someone likes something they hate.
The only reason there have been changes is because of a vocal community. Yes, it’s true there are tons of problems with Halo currently, but 343i does listen at least a bit. You are confident they won’t replace Chief because 343 heard how put off everyone was by the lack of Chief missions in Halo 5. Sitting back and worshiping a company when they do stuff you don’t like leads to nothing. I love Halo 5 and have played it more than any other game, but it’s far from my favorite and has a ton of problem so I criticize it because I want to see it and future games become better.
Now for your comparison of Locke with Noble 6. Locke was in Halo 5, a mainline game, while Noble 6 was in Halo: Reach, a spinoff. No rational person hates Reach, Wars, Wars 2, ODST, Spartan Assault, and Spartan Strike for not having Chief. Halos 1-4, the mainline games, had Chief as the main character. Halo 2 had Arbiter missions, but there was more time as Chief. Additionally, both of their story arcs were connected. If there was a game called Halo: Osiris, for example, then I expect to see a lot of Locke.
Anyway, I’m not a fan of typing wars, so I’m not going to be replying after this.
> 2533274824050480;14:
> > 2535410704700107;13:
> > > 2533274824050480;12:
> > > > 2535410704700107;11:
> > > > > 2533274824050480;10:
> > > > > > 2535410704700107;9:
> > > > > > > 2533274824050480;2:
> > > > > > > Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yep, but I don’t think 343 is trying to make Locke the “Mascot” I’m pretty sure that they just want a little history between chief and Locke so in future halo titles, when they are forced to fight together (My opinion: say another attack from the flood.) there will be a bit of struggle and drama, like for instance when Locke Talks to Arbiter In halo 5 Arbiter doesn’t just open up to him because Locke was hired to hunt down and Kill him a few years prior. Speaking of Arbiter, he also says " Master chief and I. . . are friendship . . . its complicated." I feel they will have Master chief and Locke bond a “Complicated” friendship as well, through some catastrophic event (such as the flood.). I believe 343 wants Locke to be a key player in the future, but I don’t think there trying to replace chief with Locke. It would be ridiculous, after all the titles that Chief has been the main character, to just replace him with Locke is absurd. but as far as Chief vs Locke, I think Locke putting the crack in his helmet will be the thing that will remind chief of the struggles they had in the past, so when It comes time for them to fight together, He wont let his past events behind him.
> > > > >
> > > > > If they didn’t want Locke as a replacement, there would have been more missions for the player as Chief. It was fairly obvious who the story was focusing on in Halo 5 and that’s exactly why 343i had to make announcements saying future titles would focus on Chief.
> > > >
> > > > I’m not sure if you meant future titles would focus on Locke and you accidentally put Chief, but Why would the franchise want to replace him?
> > >
> > > Nope, placed those names where they belonged. They made the announcements after all the backlash from fans. Same thing for split screen.
> > >
> > > I’ll answer your question with a question. Why would 343 make a game that divides a passionate community, fix stuff that isn’t remotely broken while ignoring actual issues, release unfinished games, and hire people who hate Halo to work on Halo when Halo was successful and didn’t need experimentation? Guess we’ll never know. They did so many things so right, but have messed up heavily on other fronts.
> >
> > I’m going to assuming your part of the “passionate community”. if you are so passionate about halo why would you waste your time criticizing there work. Do you remember “The death of Cortana”. do you remember all the criticism they got for killing her. Guess what she was alive, they turned out just fine. I believe 343 knows exactly what there doing and like all things you just need to wait and see what they are making next. I’m am VERY confident they will never replace a player like chief with Locke. and just like Cortana’s alive so Chief will be alive as well. Its way to much of a risk to replace MC with Locke. and if they do, I’m sure they will realize their mistake and fix it. And What? they clearly are focusing on Locke because of how many campaign missions they Had? That’s like saying in 2010, There trying to Replace Master chief with Noble 6, before finishing the game. The story between Locke and MC isn’t over. you don’t know what will happen. Locke could have a glorious death in halo 6 and die. so don’t go assuming things based on human mistakes from a human run company when your a human yourself.
>
> Wow, lots of stuff to get to here.
>
> First off, criticizing something does not mean someone hates it. People who make the argument that criticism equals hate need to learn that’s simply not true. For instance, if a coach yells at his players to get better, does that mean he hates them? No, some of the best and most caring coaches are some of the most critical. Besides, product success is based on demand. Halo is only going to sell when it satisfies its customers. At the same time, critics need to listen to why someone likes something they hate.
>
> The only reason there have been changes is because of a vocal community. Yes, it’s true there are tons of problems with Halo currently, but 343i does listen at least a bit. You are confident they won’t replace Chief because 343 heard how put off everyone was by the lack of Chief missions in Halo 5. Sitting back and worshiping a company when they do stuff you don’t like leads to nothing. I love Halo 5 and have played it more than any other game, but it’s far from my favorite and has a ton of problem so I criticize it because I want to see it and future games become better.
>
> Now for your comparison of Locke with Noble 6. Locke was in Halo 5, a mainline game, while Noble 6 was in Halo: Reach, a spinoff. No rational person hates Reach, Wars, Wars 2, ODST, Spartan Assault, and Spartan Strike for not having Chief. Halos 1-4, the mainline games, had Chief as the main character. Halo 2 had Arbiter missions, but there was more time as Chief. Additionally, both of their story arcs were connected. If there was a game called Halo: Osiris, for example, then I expect to see a lot of Locke.
>
> Anyway, I’m not a fan of typing wars, so I’m not going to be replying after this.
That not how debates work,
First off I did not say that you HATED halo, and second About Noble six. yes I know I compared it to a spin of game because of how ridiculous it would be to replace master chief with Locke.
> 2533274824050480;12:
> > 2535410704700107;11:
> > > 2533274824050480;10:
> > > > 2535410704700107;9:
> > > > > 2533274824050480;2:
> > > > > Yeah, I didn’t like that either. I think 343 wanted to push Locke as the new mascot of Halo, but without -Yoink!- off the old fans too much. I don’t remember where I read this, but I believe it was Frankie who said that Chief was always the one in control of the fight and Locke was putting all his might into it the entire time. That sounded a bit like backpedaling to me, but I accepted it to be at peace with the cutscene. I also justified it by saying that Locke is exceptionally competent at combat which is why he was able to put up a fight for even that short amount of time. But in the end, Chief will always come out on top.
> > > >
> > > > Yep, but I don’t think 343 is trying to make Locke the “Mascot” I’m pretty sure that they just want a little history between chief and Locke so in future halo titles, when they are forced to fight together (My opinion: say another attack from the flood.) there will be a bit of struggle and drama, like for instance when Locke Talks to Arbiter In halo 5 Arbiter doesn’t just open up to him because Locke was hired to hunt down and Kill him a few years prior. Speaking of Arbiter, he also says " Master chief and I. . . are friendship . . . its complicated." I feel they will have Master chief and Locke bond a “Complicated” friendship as well, through some catastrophic event (such as the flood.). I believe 343 wants Locke to be a key player in the future, but I don’t think there trying to replace chief with Locke. It would be ridiculous, after all the titles that Chief has been the main character, to just replace him with Locke is absurd. but as far as Chief vs Locke, I think Locke putting the crack in his helmet will be the thing that will remind chief of the struggles they had in the past, so when It comes time for them to fight together, He wont let his past events behind him.
> > >
> > > If they didn’t want Locke as a replacement, there would have been more missions for the player as Chief. It was fairly obvious who the story was focusing on in Halo 5 and that’s exactly why 343i had to make announcements saying future titles would focus on Chief.
> >
> > I’m not sure if you meant future titles would focus on Locke and you accidentally put Chief, but Why would the franchise want to replace him?
>
> Nope, placed those names where they belonged. They made the announcements after all the backlash from fans. Same thing for split screen.
>
> I’ll answer your question with a question. Why would 343 make a game that divides a passionate community, fix stuff that isn’t remotely broken while ignoring actual issues, release unfinished games, and hire people who hate Halo to work on Halo when Halo was successful and didn’t need experimentation? Guess we’ll never know. They did so many things so right, but have messed up heavily on other fronts.
I somewhat agree with this.
343 was really pushing their new character on the players. Now this isn’t necessarily a bad thing by itself, however its the fact that they did this in a mainline Halo game where people EXPECT the play as Chief. If the missions had been split 50/50 there wouldn’t have been as much outcry. Instead we got only 3 missions with Chief and 15 with Locke.
Fans probably would have been accepting if the game would have been one that bridges Halo 4 and Halo 5 and had only Osiris as the main characters.
As for 343’s practices in Halo 5, I think some of it comes down to the development issues Halo 5 had. The backlash from Cortana’s death and some meddling from Microsoft causes 343 to release an unfinished game. 343 made up for this by releasing a lot of free DLC post launch which is something no other Halo games got.
As for hiring people who hate halo, I think this is something that is blown out of proportion. Those people probably do like Halo, but they also had criticism with the games. As a developer it makes sense to hire people that are going to be critical and have new ideas and not be ‘yes’ men. Though in 343’s case it seems this practice has backfired somewhat.
I think another explanation lies in the fact that 343 is not bungie. They are a new team with old and new people. This means that changes were inevitable. No piece of art remains the same when its developer changes, because not everyone has the same artistic styles and ideas. 343 wanted to make Halo ‘theirs’ and while I understand the reaction of fans, as an artist myself I can sympathise with 343’s decision to leave their personal mark on Halo.
As for fixing things that isn’t broke and ignoring other issues, I will agree somewhat.
343 has made some bad decisions like the removal of split screen, ugly armours, less customisation, no firefight etc…
However they have also done good things such as Halo 4’s story, Halo 5’s forge etc…
One of the more controversial things has been Spartan Abilities. I myself enjoy these additions to the sandbox as I find classic Halo gameplay to be too limiting and simple compared to other fps nowadays. I do think that they need to tone down some of the abilities or even remove one or two, but I don’t think they should be all ditched.
343 are now listening to the fans. They will bring back split screen and black under suits. They may even perhaps (probably not) incorporate some of the classic artstyle in Halo 6.
Yes, I do understand the part about no split screen, I thought it was cool for the co op campaign that was all online, were you could actually be the Spartans with their weapons, but still, why you no split screen?
I guess you guys are right but still I think if 343 does replace Chief with Locke in future halo titles they will realize their mistake. but everything is said earlier I do still stand by. I think if 343 does know what their doing, this would be one of the better routes for the company to take.
> Yep, but I don’t think 343 is trying to make Locke the “Mascot” I’m pretty sure that they just want a little history between chief and Locke so in future halo titles, when they are forced to fight together (My opinion: say another attack from the flood.) there will be a bit of struggle and drama, like for instance when Locke Talks to Arbiter In halo 5 Arbiter doesn’t just open up to him because Locke was hired to hunt down and Kill him a few years prior. Speaking of Arbiter, he also says " Master chief and I. . . are friendship . . . its complicated." I feel they will have Master chief and Locke bond a “Complicated” friendship as well, through some catastrophic event (such as the flood.). I believe 343 wants Locke to be a key player in the future, but I don’t think there trying to replace chief with Locke. It would be ridiculous, after all the titles that Chief has been the main character, to just replace him with Locke is absurd. but as far as Chief vs Locke, I think Locke putting the crack in his helmet will be the thing that will remind chief of the struggles they had in the past, so when It comes time for them to fight together, He wont let his past events behind him.