Sooooo… for all of us who have finished the campaign, 343 LIED. THE MARKETING HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GAME. So why was chief in a cloak???
Things change during the development process. Assuming that the teaser we saw with the Chief in the desert was meant to be in the game, judging from the crack in the Chief’s visor, it would have taken place sometime after the fist fight with Spartan Locke. And, of course, the Chief was wearing the cloak to keep the sand particles from getting inside his armour.
It was just a commercial.
> 2533274809226598;2:
> Things change during the development process. Assuming that the teaser we saw with the Chief in the desert was meant to be in the game, judging from the crack in the Chief’s visor, it would have taken place sometime after the fist fight with Spartan Locke. And, of course, the Chief was wearing the cloak to keep the sand particles from getting inside his armour.
I really don’t think anything like that really changed. All the marketing all the way up to release had nothing to do with the actual plot.
Halo 2, 3, & 4 all had some conceptual advertising that wasn’t exactly what those games delivered. The disparity from how H5G was advertised and what the game is is significant and can be problematic If you didn’t like what was delivered due to expectations for something else.
> 2617047104895806;4:
> > 2533274809226598;2:
> > Things change during the development process. Assuming that the teaser we saw with the Chief in the desert was meant to be in the game, judging from the crack in the Chief’s visor, it would have taken place sometime after the fist fight with Spartan Locke. And, of course, the Chief was wearing the cloak to keep the sand particles from getting inside his armour.
>
>
> I really don’t think anything like that really changed. All the marketing all the way up to release had nothing to do with the actual plot.
I disagree.
When we first saw the Chief in the desert we saw that he was holding Cortana’s chip meaning that he hadn’t given up on finding her and we saw a Guardian rise from the sand however we did not know that the two were linked at the time, but we knew that they would have something to do with the plot. Then there was the whole “Chief is dead” live action advert. ONI was obviously behind all of that as Team Osiris was hunting the Chief and Blue Team down and Buck says in the game that if everyone knew they, Team Osiris, would be hated; so to cover up that the Chief had gone AWOL, ONI invented a story to believe that he was dead. That’s what I believe anyways.
That trailer wasn’t just for Halo 5, but for Halo on the Xbox One as a whole.
Halo 6 will start off on Sanghelios. So we may see some hot cloak-on-cloak action then.
Don’t get me wrong, I think the rest of Halo 5’s marketing was really disingenuous. Especially the over emphasis of the Locke vs. Chief thing.
> 2791963697563797;3:
> It was just a commercial.
Still false advertising.
> 2533274846254259;8:
> > 2791963697563797;3:
> > It was just a commercial.
>
>
> Still false advertising.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31-NAkq8YEY
It’s not uncommon that game trailers show scenes that don’t appear in games -_-
> 2533274929494620;7:
> Don’t get me wrong, I think the rest of Halo 5’s marketing was really disingenuous. Especially the over emphasis of the Locke vs. Chief thing.
Agreed. Only one confrontation between Locke and Chief that was no where near the scale of the ads. In addition, not once was it ever said in-game that the Chief and the rest of Blue Team had been deemed traitors by the UNSC. I expected the “hunt” to escalate to the point where Blue Team would be designated enemies to the UNSC and Locke would be given orders to kill if necessary, then at some point the truth becomes clear and Locke agrees to help the Chief.
It’s almost like an entire chunk of the rising action of the “hunt” was omitted from the game and what we get is an “I’ll try to bring you in unharmed” followed by “You have my complete trust, let’s be friends.”
Microsoft said that the E3 2013 Halo trailer with poncho Chief wasn’t related a real Halo game.
“There was no ambiguity in not putting a number after the game. For me, what we showed wasn’t the game. Nobody should be confused on that. I didn’t really want to try to show something that was clearly a thought piece by the studio around where Master Chief is in his journey, and then drop the name after it and be somewhat disingenuous about that being the game.
“But I did want Bonnie to come out and say, ‘First-person shooter. Master Chief.’ Because they’ll get the questions — ‘Hey, is this ODST? What are you guys doing?’ Bonnie comes out and reaffirms that 343 is building this game. It’s Master Chief. It’s a first-person shooter at 60 frames per second. It’s coming in 2014.”
- Phil Spencer
Obviously the Guardian and Chief’s pursuit o Cortana made it in, but the Halo trailer from 2013 was more of a conceptual trailer than one meant to advertise Halo 5.
It was just a teaser.
<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post inappropriate content.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Show me on the doll where 343 touched you
> 2533274864753203;13:
>
Lmao!!
> 2533274846254259;8:
> > 2791963697563797;3:
> > It was just a commercial.
>
>
> Still false advertising.
Nope.
You know. Halo 2’s Marketing was the same way. It was all about saving Earth from the Covenant. They really made it seem that was what we were going to do.
But we only spent 3 levels on Earth and the remainder was dealing with the flood and Alien politics.
Halo 2 must have pissed you off with it’s E3 demo completely scrapped XD
As some of your theories are interesting, the topic of this post was more or less to connect the ads to the lore that was in the game. By omitting like 90% of the ads from the game, they now confused people like myself because what happened in the trailers is usually lore (ex. Thom dying in the Reach trailer). So now, just because the ads aren’t in any way shape or form related to the actual story of the game, am I still suppose to believe that the lore from the ads is canon? 343 really messed this one up.
> 2533274859114948;18:
> As some of your theories are interesting, the topic of this post was more or less to connect the ads to the lore that was in the game. By omitting like 90% of the ads from the game, they now confused people like myself because what happened in the trailers is usually lore (ex. Thom dying in the Reach trailer). So now, just because the ads aren’t in any way shape or form related to the actual story of the game, am I still suppose to believe that the lore from the ads is canon? 343 really messed this one up.
Since when were trailers canon?
> 2533274859114948;1:
> Sooooo… for all of us who have finished the campaign, 343 LIED. THE MARKETING HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE GAME. So why was chief in a cloak???
hes wearing it in the Lone Wolf achievement…so its in the game 