[Spoilers] Campaign Impressions/Discussion

So. I beat the Campaign the other day. Not sure what to think. Did the advertising lie to us? Hmm. I suppose it did a little bit. But putting that aside, I won’t use that as reason to view Halo 5 negatively.Overall I quite like it. But it has its flaws.

So, what did Halo 5 do right? Well, between the new abilities and the squad combat, the gameplay of H5’s campaign was a nice change of pace, and for some, a well needed breath of fresh air. I liked the Squad combat overall, as it allowed for situations and environments we couldn’t quite experience in past Halos. But, part of me did miss those personal moments. And I’m not necessarily referring to that in the sense that I always want my character to be alone. But think back to encounters in past games. The moment during the Silent Cartographer when you turn the corner of that one Hallway inside that forerunner structure and the Zealot comes charging at you. That was a very one on one moment that couldn’t quite exist in the world of squad combat. In the future, it would be cool to see a bit of both in Campaign. Having some missions with a team, and others designed for a lone player environment like past Halos. Looking at enemies. I think the Soldiers were a smart addition. More of an Elite equivalent, while the Knights were upgraded to mini bosses. I think it worked out well. Makes the Knights seem more bada**. And Speaking of Bosses. I think Warden Eternal made for a very cool boss. I suppose he could be considered the newest boss style enemy addition we’ve had since H2.

How did H5 deal with its characters? Did Chief or Lock really benefit from having friends around all the time? (From a story/character perspective, that is)
Well. I consider Team Osiris to be a wasted effort. And I don’t even mean that in an insulting way. By the end of the story, I didn’t feel much attachment to them. Probably because I, like many others wanted to see more Chief, the main character of the story. I respect Locke as a character. And I love Buck. But Osiris needed their own space to breath. It was easier to get attached to Buck’s ODST team and Noble Team because going into the experience we knew the game didn’t revolve around Chief, and solely revolved around those two new groups of characters. Made it easier to care about them. But in the end, Osiris means very little to me. Blue Team also didn’t fair much better. We didn’t go to deeply into the other members of Blue Team. But perhaps this is less hurtful to them as a group. They’re other Spartan 2’s. What would you expect? They’re straight to the point, and get the job done. They’re family. Chief’s personal upbringing was the same as theirs. But in the end. Having them around would be nice in the future. But not quite so mandatory 100% of the time. But take note: 343 has clearly considered Squads returning for H6. In fact, they ended H5 with a setup for H6’s 4 man squad. Chief, Locke, Palmer, and Arbiter all untied in one place against one enemy. Right there is H6’s four man squad, should they choose to bring that back.

What about the major plot points of Halo 5? Were there some issues?… Yes. There were some.
Overall. I think the biggest issue with H5’s plot wasn’t the direction itself, but the fact that it did little to build off of the direction Halo 4 seemed to be pointing us in. What exactly am I talking about? Let’s take a look backwards for a moment. The Reclamation. Humanity’s journey to reclaim what the Forerunner’s left behind. The Librarians plans for humanity. Chief’s “accelerated evolution”. The Didact believing that nothing good will come of Humanity’s journey to ascend as the rulers of the Galaxy. The Composer and the Promethean Knights being AI’s made from organics. The future of Chief’s journey in a world without Cortana. All major plot points the player was left to think about after completing Halo 4. Halo 5 did little to progress along the path of anything I just mentioned. At all. Nothing further elaborating the accelerated evolution. Nothing being Reclaimed by humanity at all. The Librarian and her plans are maybe mentioned once or twice but are regarded as if they no longer really matter. And are the Promethean’s still relevant? The Composer? The Didact? And let’s not forget that they kind of 180ed on letting Cortana die. If they always planned on her return, then they wouldn’t have made her death so dramatic. I think they just changed their minds, honestly. Now, you could argue that some of this did sort of come up in H5. If the Knights are composed beings doomed to eventually go corrupt and Rampant, then siding with Cortana would make sense to them, as she has access to the Domain. But I’m not really sure where things will go from where they leave off.

And what of Warden Eternal? What is he? Where did he come from? Why is he even around? Who created him? Is he actually a composed Forerunner who is using Cortana to reclaim the Forerunner might and power before the humans have a chance? (I doubt this theory holds true. Just tossing out ideas). I was secretly hoping that the whole AI army plot point would eventually lead us into the introduction of Mendicant Bias into the story. Alas. He is no where to be found. Maybe in Halo 6. It would really make some of the weirder elements of H5 worth it if it led us into MB showing up.

Overall, I think Halo 5’s story wasn’t as bad as some people think. It just felt very out of the blue and didn’t feel like it built much off of where Halo 4 seemed to be taking us. Also. Not enough Chief. I think we were all hoping for more self-reflection and personal moments with Chief. I wanted more conflict between Chief following Cortana, and Blue Team being hesitant because they didn’t have the attachment to Cortana Chief did. And maybe the game lost the “Hunt the Truth/Team Rivalry” vibe after the Locke v Chief cutscene, which kind of made people a little upset. But on a related note I really like the Chief v Locke cutscene. Very intense.

> And what of Warden Eternal? What is he? Why do they not answer this? Exuberant says that he isn’t a “robot”. But doesn’t elaborate.

I agree with almost everything you’ve brought up.

This statement though…I don’t think there’s any deeper meaning to it. It’s just Exuberant being her naive self and failing to understand Buck’s colloquialisms. Warden Eternal isn’t a Robot, he’s an Artificial Intelligence. She assumed that Buck was referring to him as a basic machine.

> 2533274819302824;2:
> > And what of Warden Eternal? What is he? Why do they not answer this? Exuberant says that he isn’t a “robot”. But doesn’t elaborate.
>
>
> I agree with almost everything you’ve brought up.
>
> This statement though…I don’t think there’s any deeper meaning to it. It’s just Exuberant being her naive self and failing to understand Buck’s colloquialisms. Warden Eternal isn’t a Robot, he’s an Artificial Intelligence. She assumed that Buck was referring to him as a basic machine.

Hm. Didn’t think about it that way.That’s one mystery solved. Now if only we knew where Warden came from and why he even exists.

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post spam.</mark>

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

Key’s would be proud.

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post spam.</mark>

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

Key’s Senior would also be proud.

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post spam.</mark>

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

RIP Keys

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post spam.</mark>

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

RIP Keys Senior too.

> 2533274912254619;1:
> And let’s not forget that they kind of 180ed on letting Cortana die. If they always planned on her return, then they wouldn’t have made her death so dramatic. I think they just changed their minds, honestly.

Before Halo 4 came out, it was stated that the then Reclaimer Trilogy had a planned beginning, middle and end. The reason they made her death so dramatic was because the creative director of Halo 4, Josh Holmes, pushed hard to make it so, because his mother was going through Alzheimer’s at the time, and he wanted to channel that experience into Cortana’s character moments in the game. If he had to push hard for this, then clearly the story writers were approaching that plot point half-heartedly. This leads me to believe that they had planned for Cortana to be the “Big Bad” in Halo 5 and beyond.
In Halo CE, in an early draft, it was planned for Cortana to go mad from power in the Control Room, and try to take control of Halo and the Galaxy, but that idea was scrapped. 343i is simply taking the story where Bungie feared to tread.

> 2533274967414694;8:
> > 2533274912254619;1:
> > And let’s not forget that they kind of 180ed on letting Cortana die. If they always planned on her return, then they wouldn’t have made her death so dramatic. I think they just changed their minds, honestly.
>
>
> Before Halo 4 came out, it was stated that the then Reclaimer Trilogy had a planned beginning, middle and end. The reason they made her death so dramatic was because the creative director of Halo 4, Josh Holmes, pushed hard to make it so, because his mother was going through Alzheimer’s at the time, and he wanted to channel that experience into Cortana’s character moments in the game. If he had to push hard for this, then clearly the story writers were approaching that plot point half-heartedly. This leads me to believe that they had planned for Cortana to be the “Big Bad” in Halo 5 and beyond.
> In Halo CE, in an early draft, it was planned for Cortana to go mad from power in the Control Room, and try to take control of Halo and the Galaxy, but that idea was

But the thing that made me think they weren’t necessarily planning to bring her was the nature of how final her death felt. And how they chose to present her survival in Halo 5. It felt very “Oh sh*t we gotta bring her back! Quick, think of something!”

You see, how they “killed” the Didact in a manner that could’ve been final, but left suspicion of survival. And then the ending of the game gave us a glimpse at what to expect in the future. chief struggling with the the loss of Cortana. But in Halo 5, not only did they discard the potential for Chief’s internal struggle (This hurt the story a lot imo), but just take a look at how Cortana returned. By some good fortune she somehow got transported to a place that could cure her Rampancy. And let’s not forget that place, being an access point to the Domain, seemed to magically have access to it again after it was non-functional for thousands of years. Quite convenient for suddenly having Cortana overcome her rampancy, don’t you think? It all felt very much a like a plot point built on an barely-believable premise that they had to push for to undo the killing of Cortana. I suppose my issue isn’t so much how they 180ed Cortana’s fate, because like you said, maybe that wasn’t the case, but I suppose how they kind of jerked away from Halo 4’s ending in general is what really bothers me.

> 2533274967414694;8:
> > 2533274912254619;1:
> > And let’s not forget that they kind of 180ed on letting Cortana die. If they always planned on her return, then they wouldn’t have made her death so dramatic. I think they just changed their minds, honestly.
>
>
> Before Halo 4 came out, it was stated that the then Reclaimer Trilogy had a planned beginning, middle and end. The reason they made her death so dramatic was because the creative director of Halo 4, Josh Holmes, pushed hard to make it so, because his mother was going through Alzheimer’s at the time, and he wanted to channel that experience into Cortana’s character moments in the game. If he had to push hard for this, then clearly the story writers were approaching that plot point half-heartedly. This leads me to believe that they had planned for Cortana to be the “Big Bad” in Halo 5 and beyond.
> In Halo CE, in an early draft, it was planned for Cortana to go mad from power in the Control Room, and try to take control of Halo and the Galaxy, but that idea was

But the thing that made me think they weren’t necessarily planning to bring her was the nature of how final her death felt. And how they chose to present her survival in Halo 5. It felt very “Oh sh*t we gotta bring her back! Quick, think of something!”

You see, how they “killed” the Didact in a manner that could’ve been final, but left suspicion of survival. And then the ending of the game gave us a glimpse at what to expect in the future. chief struggling with the the loss of Cortana. But in Halo 5, not only did they discard the potential for Chief’s internal struggle (This hurt the story a lot imo), but just take a look at how Cortana returned. By some good fortune she somehow got transported to a place that could cure her Rampancy. And let’s not forget that place, being an access point to the Domain, seemed to magically have access to it again after it was non-functional for thousands of years. Quite convenient for suddenly having Cortana overcome her rampancy, don’t you think? It all felt very much a like a plot point built on an barely-believable premise that they had to push for to undo the killing of Cortana. I suppose my issue isn’t so much how they 180ed Cortana’s fate, because like you said, maybe that wasn’t the case, but I suppose how they kind of jerked away from Halo 4’s ending in general is what really bothers me.

> 2533274912254619;9:
> > 2533274967414694;8:
> > > 2533274912254619;1:
> > > And let’s not forget that they kind of 180ed on letting Cortana die. If they always planned on her return, then they wouldn’t have made her death so dramatic. I think they just changed their minds, honestly.
> >
> >
> > Before Halo 4 came out, it was stated that the then Reclaimer Trilogy had a planned beginning, middle and end. The reason they made her death so dramatic was because the creative director of Halo 4, Josh Holmes, pushed hard to make it so, because his mother was going through Alzheimer’s at the time, and he wanted to channel that experience into Cortana’s character moments in the game. If he had to push hard for this, then clearly the story writers were approaching that plot point half-heartedly. This leads me to believe that they had planned for Cortana to be the “Big Bad” in Halo 5 and beyond.
> > In Halo CE, in an early draft, it was planned for Cortana to go mad from power in the Control Room, and try to take control of Halo and the Galaxy, but that idea was
>
>
> But the thing that made me think they weren’t necessarily planning to bring her was the nature of how final her death felt. And how they chose to present her survival in Halo 5. It felt very “Oh sh*t we gotta bring her back! Quick, think of something!”
>
> You see, how they “killed” the Didact in a manner that could’ve been final, but left suspicion of survival. And then the ending of the game gave us a glimpse at what to expect in the future. chief struggling with the the loss of Cortana. But in Halo 5, not only did they discard the potential for Chief’s internal struggle (This hurt the story a lot imo), but just take a look at how Cortana returned. By some good fortune she somehow got transported to a place that could cure her Rampancy. And let’s not forget that place, being an access point to the Domain, seemed to magically have access to it again after it was non-functional for thousands of years. Quite convenient for suddenly having Cortana overcome her rampancy, don’t you think? It all felt very much a like a plot point built on an barely-believable premise that they had to push for to undo the killing of Cortana. I suppose my issue isn’t so much how they 180ed Cortana’s fate, because like you said, maybe that wasn’t the case, but I suppose how they kind of jerked away from Halo 4’s ending in general is what really bothers me.

Or maybe the real plot twist is that 343i and Bungie are geniuses, planned the whole story out since the beginning, and Mendicant Bias is behind everything, such as Chief ending up on Requiem, Cortana accessing the Domain, etc. Because honestly, there are way to many coincidences in this new trilogy

Keys R.I.P

> 2533274883195859;11:
> > 2533274912254619;9:
> > > 2533274967414694;8:
> > > > 2533274912254619;1:
> > > > And let’s not forget that they kind of 180ed on letting Cortana die. If they always planned on her return, then they wouldn’t have made her death so dramatic. I think they just changed their minds, honestly.
> >
> >
> > But the thing that made me think they weren’t necessarily planning to bring her was the nature of how final her death felt. And how they chose to present her survival in Halo 5. It felt very “Oh sh*t we gotta bring her back! Quick, think of something!”
> >
> > You see, how they “killed” the Didact in a manner that could’ve been final, but left suspicion of survival. And then the ending of the game gave us a glimpse at what to expect in the future. chief struggling with the the loss of Cortana. But in Halo 5, not only did they discard the potential for Chief’s internal struggle (This hurt the story a lot imo), but just take a look at how Cortana returned. By some good fortune she somehow got transported to a place that could cure her Rampancy. And let’s not forget that place, being an access point to the Domain, seemed to magically have access to it again after it was non-functional for thousands of years. Quite convenient for suddenly having Cortana overcome her rampancy, don’t you think? It all felt very much a like a plot point built on an barely-believable premise that they had to push for to undo the killing of Cortana. I suppose my issue isn’t so much how they 180ed Cortana’s fate, because like you said, maybe that wasn’t the case, but I suppose how they kind of jerked away from Halo 4’s ending in general is what really bothers me.
>
>
> Or maybe the real plot twist is that 343i and Bungie are geniuses, planned the whole story out since the beginning, and Mendicant Bias is behind everything, such as Chief ending up on Requiem, Cortana accessing the Domain, etc. Because honestly, there are way to many coincidences in this new trilogy

I don’t know about all that but I am hoping that Mendicant Bias will tie into the story of the next game.

> 2533274819302824;2:
> > And what of Warden Eternal? What is he? Why do they not answer this? Exuberant says that he isn’t a “robot”. But doesn’t elaborate.
>
>
> I agree with almost everything you’ve brought up.
>
> This statement though…I don’t think there’s any deeper meaning to it. It’s just Exuberant being her naive self and failing to understand Buck’s colloquialisms. Warden Eternal isn’t a Robot, he’s an Artificial Intelligence. She assumed that Buck was referring to him as a basic machine.

I went back and heard the line again and it definitely sounds like sh’e implying that he’s something more.
“The Warden isn’t a robot. I thought you knew?”

I’m pretty sure that’s what she said. That really makes it sound like he’s something more than just an AI.