So its something that I’ve been recently wondering which guilty spark model is canon the Original design or the H2A reskin based on the Halo 4 Forge Monitor?
I believe the Anniversary versions are canon compared to the original versions. I think Grim said that sometime ago, I could be mistaken though.
> 2533274891247826;2:
> I believe the Anniversary versions are canon compared to the original versions. I think Grim said that sometime ago, I could be mistaken though.
I think you’re right
For all we know there could be different monitor shells they can use. Leading to them all being possibly canon.
> 2533274836874363;4:
> For all we know there could be different monitor shells they can use. Leading to them all being possibly canon.
Yeah, and there is also the possibility that Monitors can shift the appearance of their shells (hard light, blah blah blah.)
This has been bothering me lately as well. While both models have appeared in the series for similar amounts of time at this point, I am pretty sure that the newer model is what is considered canon.
However, what is somewhat perplexing to me is how the new guilty spark monitor model (as in all of the monitors of the rings) differs from the exuberant witness model (Which has a spinning orb in the center and seems to be able to shift certain areas around the eye to look around)
> 2533274925633740;6:
> This has been bothering me lately as well. While both models have appeared in the series for similar amounts of time at this point, I am pretty sure that the newer model is what is considered canon.
>
> However, what is somewhat perplexing to me is how the new guilty spark monitor model (as in all of the monitors of the rings) differs from the exuberant witness model (Which has a spinning orb in the center and seems to be able to shift certain areas around the eye to look around)
Why? We have different shapes for computers, why not forerunner monitors?
Personally, I think it is stupid that 343i retcons things that Bungie made canon. I feel like they should add, not take away.
> 2533275034067023;8:
> Personally, I think it is stupid that 343i retcons things that Bungie made canon. I feel like they should add, not take away.
Generally, I agree, but I honestly think 343 has done a better job with creating a coherent and not contradictory universe than Bungie did (hello, Reach!). Visual retcons are a necessity when using an evolving medium, and few mediums evolve as quickly as CGI. Old!Spark is a bit blocky, and probably wouldn’t really fit in with how sleek the Forerunner stuff has become.
In general, the only example of a visual retcon I personally don’t like is Halo CEA. That game just doesn’t look great (Master Chief looks absolutely horrible - look at his barrel chest and T Rex arms!), there’s no unified style, and the original is far more visually stimulating.
> 2533275034067023;8:
> Personally, I think it is stupid that 343i retcons things that Bungie made canon. I feel like they should add, not take away.
I think people throw the word retcon out way too much around when it comes to 343 “changes”. Are the monitor shells really that different so that one needs to be regarded as canon or non-canon?
What’s so drastically different about these two that one has to be considered not official in the story? The Marathon symbol? If we’re talking about artistic preference, sure, they’re quite a bit different. But as far as “which one exists in the canon of the Halo story”… they’re the exact same thing.
Adding to the monitor shell is exactly what 343i did do with the anniversary additions. It’s the exact same shape, etc, but with more detail appropriate to the more advanced tech used to create the model. They didn’t take away anything at all from the canon of the monitors and their shells.
Maybe all are
> 2533274964189700;7:
> > 2533274925633740;6:
> > This has been bothering me lately as well. While both models have appeared in the series for similar amounts of time at this point, I am pretty sure that the newer model is what is considered canon.
> >
> > However, what is somewhat perplexing to me is how the new guilty spark monitor model (as in all of the monitors of the rings) differs from the exuberant witness model (Which has a spinning orb in the center and seems to be able to shift certain areas around the eye to look around)
>
>
> Why? We have different shapes for computers, why not forerunner monitors?
Just that they have the same overall shape, but certain parts seem to function differently. What I wonder is if the new guilty spark design can move in the same ways and we just never see it.
Why would this matter?
Accidental repost.
> 2533274884722193;10:
> > 2533275034067023;8:
> > Personally, I think it is stupid that 343i retcons things that Bungie made canon. I feel like they should add, not take away.
>
>
> I think people throw the word retcon out way too much around when it comes to 343 “changes”. Are the monitor shells really that different so that one needs to be regarded as canon or non-canon?
>
> http://www.halopedia.org/File:HaloCE-343GuiltySpark.png
>
> http://www.halopedia.org/File:H2A_-_Guilty_Spark_close-up.jpg
>
> What’s so drastically different about these two that one has to be considered not official in the story? The Marathon symbol? If we’re talking about artistic preference, sure, they’re quite a bit different. But as far as “which one exists in the canon of the Halo story”… they’re the exact same thing.
>
> Adding to the monitor shell is exactly what 343i did do with the anniversary additions. It’s the exact same shape, etc, but with more detail appropriate to the more advanced tech used to create the model. They didn’t take away anything at all from the canon of the monitors and their shells.
I should clarify: If it was simply an aesthetic choice due to the whole “Anniversary update” thing, I don’t mind. I don’t see the quality and art of the Anniversary edition canon. In my opinion, Halo CE and the original Halo 2 are canon and the Anniversary’s are just for people who want to see what updated graphics look like. My issue is if 343i takes something that has always looked the same (for example, using the Halo 3 Pelican cockpit model for Halo era Pelicans) and then says “well, this is how it always looked. This is canon”.
No, it isn’t canon. You didn’t make THAT game or its rules, you just updated the graphics to sell a buck and impress some of the population of gamers. They should just stick to adding onto the series with new installments instead of changing the way old ones looked. What happens if we have a Halo CE Anniversary Anniversary in 10 years? Will they change it again and say “this is how it always looked. This is canon?” That would just be stupid.
What “rules”? Nothing about the rules of the monitors (specifically the monitors, as I can agree that there are real changes elsewhere in the Halo anniversary editions, such as the Halo 1 Banshees) are changed by the H2A model. It’s exactly the same, form and function. There’s nothing in the story that changes if you accept that the H2A model is “canon”. It’s not as if they engraved “My name is Chakas, I am human” on Guilty Spark’s forehead, or gave him some new weapon, ability, or piece of equipment which would suggest some capability which was absent before.
Even looking beyond things which would have an actual impact on the story (you could turn him into a square instead of a ball and it wouldn’t change the story, but that sort of actual change I would agree with being different canonically), nothing about the H2A model is different enough that it’s a “different monitor shell” (the way the Banshees in Halo 1 anniversary are clearly different Banshees).
This kind of thing can be difficult to talk about definitively, since we can’t say for example exactly how Guilty Spark would have looked if Halo CE was made using H2A tech. Would he look just like H2A’s GS? I don’t know. Either way, H2A intentionally made the monitor shell the same shell as the original Halo 2 shell, which was the same as the Halo CE shell.
Do we need to decide which monitor shell is canon between (the original) Halo CE, Halo 2, and Halo 3? They’re all very different, artistically, but what’s the actual difference? There isn’t one. There is no canon difference.
> 2533274936927904;1:
> So its something that I’ve been recently wondering which guilty spark model is canon the Original design or the H2A reskin based on the Halo 4 Forge Monitor?
Is it not the closest version to the model in Halo 3?
I may be wrong, but I believe the general redesign had something to do with the monitors eye being the Marathon logo, which is obviously tied to Bungie. This also explains the redesign of the Reclaimer symbol.
Ya why does it matter?
> 2533274985084926;19:
> Ya why does it matter?
just curious that’s all if it was set in stone that H2As guilty spark takes priority over HCEA and H3 or if they’d said anything space magic logic for the change or if it was just aesthetic. Just because someone is curious doesn’t mean it matters it just means your curious and I can never settle until someone throws a suggestion my way.