Talk:Halo (franchise)/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

New Halo Game

Im a bit to lazy to find the actual interview (MTV Multiplayer go look it up) but you've all probably heard the outrage of Microsoft killing Bungie's reveal at e3. But wouldn't you know some retard at Microsoft said "Yes! bungie is making a new halo game!"

and before you all say "ITS HALO WARS! ITS HALO: CHRONICLES! OMGWTFBQQSAUCE GTFO!" MTV multiplayer asked if MS was talking about Halo Wars or Halo Chronciles and MS said. no. completely diffrent game

also Bungie did state they were going to reveal something (did not mention halo though)

so i think you should just stick that under new games or under development. because Bungie state they WILL reveal it later. May as well get that area prepped.

edit: http://multiplayerblog.mtv.com/2008/07/16/microsoft-confirms-bungie-is-developing-new-halo/ There you go

This is Halo 3: ODST. Its name hadn't been revealed back in July of 08. AniRaptor2001 (talk) 17:23, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Lego Halo

Real or fake? It's currently contested. It looks like it might have been an April fools day joke, but it would get Bungie alot of money. Hard to call this one. - 72.141.197.83 (talk) 15:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It was an april fools day joke. It fooled me lol/--FailureAtDeath (talk) 02:19, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

i love bees.com not concluded

i have looked around the internet and found that there is no definite answer to the ilovebees.com. I think that someone shound try to obtain an official statement from bungie/microsoft to finalize the whole ilovebees things, especiall because its hurting my head. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.231.189 (talk) 23:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Noahs Ark Reference

This page forgets to mention the fact that the game refers to Noahs Ark in that the Covenant are trying to find The Ark to escape The Flood and how the refer to an age of rebirth.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.185.254.229 (talk) 20:26, April 22, 2008

Don't you think that would go better in the Halo 3 article? Roman Slayer (talk) 21:48, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Either way it needs a reliable source. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 22:19, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Adding every reference to every mythology / legend / other creative works that Bungie makes during Halo would quickly make the article incredibly long. It would probably all be original research as well (a no go for wikipedia). The only place I can think of that has even noted things like this is the halo wikia site. We can't cite that. Everyone else just thought "oh yeah, it does make references to that" and didn't make any special article or anything about it. --RC Master (talk) 23:01, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Machinima Additions

I added some information to the Machinima section concerning the development of machinima after the release of Halo 3. If you have anything to discuss, stick it in here. Racooon (talk) 08:08, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Do you have a source for the Jonathan Quail info? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:12, 7 May 2008 (UTC))

External Links

I would like to bring up Halopedia as an external link. It's on a wikia premise and is very informative to those looking for Halo-based information.Lovemuffin333 03:49, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Generally other wiki's are frowned upon. Though if the content is reliable and it can provide additional information outside of the content in the article if it were FA, then it can be an exception. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:27, 15 May 2008 (UTC))

There are some links to Halopedia on Halo pages, but as Halopedia does not have a good page on the series as a whole, it makes little sense to link to it. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 19:29, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Halopedia has too much information on the Halo series to make it into one page. It gives pages with extensive detail and information on each of the games. It has legitimate information and does not make jokes about. Manticore is an administrator to the site and he and other administrators keep the site in check for these pages on the Halo games. Lovemuffin333 22:28, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

We do link to Halopedia, just not on this page because there is no directly corresponding page which is good. The games Halo: Combat Evolved, Halo 2 and Halo 3 all have links to Halopedia and it is a really good site, but if it has too much info to add to one page about the Halo series then we shouldn't link to it on this particular article. James086^{Talk | Email} 23:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Gizmondo?

There were plans to put Halo on the Gizmondo, before they went bankrupt.[1][2][3]. Should this be mentioend the article? -- Coasttocoast (talk) 23:50, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks like at least a mention should be included in the article. We'll look into putting something in from the sources you provided. Thanks. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC))

Any thoughts on which section would be the best place to include it? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 23:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC))

Probably under the "Main trilogy", in the paragraph concerning the original game. Unless we were to add an "Origins" section, but that seems like an unnecesarry adition at this point. Blackngold29 23:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Trilogy vs (Original) series

I think we need to pick one term and stick to it, in reference to Halo, H2, and H3. It is sometimes called the "trilogy" and other times the video game series. We should probably establish this in the intro paragraph as well. Suggestions? Blackngold29 15:52, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Go with trilogy, then, to distinguish it from the other games (which may turn into series themselves.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 15:58, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I agree. The article name, 'Halo (series)', is most certainly a factual inconsistency. It should be renamed to, 'Halo (trilogy)'. Paulmarv (talk) 06:26, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

This wasn't referring to the article itself, just three original games that constitute part of the scope of the article. This article most definitely covers more than the original trilogy; there's no reason to rename it. — TKD::{talk} 08:45, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Movie section

What should we do about the hidden content in the "Film adaptation" section? Should it be removed altogether? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC))

I would think it should be removed, upon a revival of the project (which may or may not happen) we can easily put it back in. Blackngold29 15:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the April 1st content for the sake of keeping the wikicode uncluttered. Here's the edit difference in case it needs to be added back in. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 17:06, 12 June 2008 (UTC))

Three soundtracks...

As there were two for H2 it seems kind of misleading to start the paragraph off "Three soundtracks...have been released based on the Halo game series". I guess technically there are three soundtracks, however there have been four releases. This is probably a pretty small detial, but any thoughts? Blackngold29 15:47, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Good catch; I've changed it to four (we just have three articles, but there were four releases.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 16:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

DS necessary?

Is the inclusion of the Halo DS section necessary? If we're going to exclude the movie because it has been all but canceled, shouldn't this get the same treatment? Or perhaps move it to another section (Spinoffs perhaps)? Blackngold29 04:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I've been bouncing the DS thing around in my head since I read up on the Gizmondo links above. How about this—shoot it down if it may not work—what if we moved the Halo DS content to the "Development" section, combine it with some of the content about the Gizmondo version, and rename it as "Unreleased games" or something? Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 17:23, 6 June 2008 (UTC))

That's fine with me, Guy. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 17:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

If we add that should be throw a line about the movie in there too? I kind of see the two (movie and DS) on the same level. Blackngold29 20:03, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

It's probably ok where it is. There's enough content for it to stand on its own and I think it fits better with the "Printed adaptations" in the "Merchandise" section. Take a look at the update and see if everything flows ok. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC))

"Alternate reality games" section seems mis-labled

The Alternate reality games section seems mislabled. The small paragraph goes on to discuss The Cortana Letters, I Love Bees and Iris. The opening sentence claims "Alternate reality games were used to promote the release of the games in the main trilogy." however the only alternative reality game mentioned is I Love Bees. Perhaps the section should be expanded and changed to "Marketing", in which case it could/should be expanded. Blackngold29 02:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I've thought about this too, but since I Love Bees and Iris (it just isn't explicitly stated as such) are alternate reality games, it still seem somewhat suitable where it is. I wouldn't be opposed to a move, but you're right, it would need a lot more content to be a well-balanced marketing section. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 04:15, 8 June 2008 (UTC))

Another handheld rumor

There was a rumor that Microsoft was creating a handheld Xbox and that Halo would be a game for it. A leaked video showed a handheld playing Halo. This device actually turned out to be theUltra-Mobile PC.[4] [5] [6]

Maybe a short mention in the article? -- Coasttocoast (talk) 20:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Added. Thanks for the heads up. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 05:42, 12 June 2008 (UTC))

Main trilogy section

What aspect of the games is supposed to be addressed in this section? It seems like it gives the release dates and then goes on to repeat the Common elements section. Should we give the release dates and editions and eliminate the actual gameplay content? Thoughts? Blackngold29 23:18, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

In a "Games" section, we should give an overview of the game, kinda like a trimmed down lead, and mention what makes the game unique. Because the games share so many themes, it's probably ok to keep each paragraph short. However, I think the "Common elements" section should focus less on the progression of the elements and more on what is common in the entire series. That to me explains how each one is different rather than common. This will allow for more info to into the games section. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:41, 14 June 2008 (UTC))

New source to add to an appropriate article

Kevin Rorabaugh, “How Hardcore Are You? Your proudest gaming moments: The next contestant in our monthly harder-core-than-thou competition arrives!” in Electronic Gaming Monthly 228 (May 2008): 10. Made a potato launching replica of the M41 SSR MAV/AW Rocket Launcher from Halo; features a photograph as well and set aside from other letters to the editor in special colored box in magazine Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 16:27, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Halo 4?

I've heard alot of rumors of another installment —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.203.28.14 (talk) 23:48, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

Rumors are not credible to be added anywhere on this site. Unless a reliable source comes up with an article about it, then H4 shouldn't be mentioned. Blackngold29 23:51, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

They recently hinted at another possible Halo game (apart from the ones that we already know about) in their most recent vidoc.UKWikiGuy (talk) 19:29, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gearbox_Software#Games_currently_in_development Hows that for a source?--Chipmonk328 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.153.163.69 (talk) 01:45, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

in the last issue of game informer, it has a spot were halo 4 is in development, but not by bungie. Gearbox is developing halo 4.

Isnt halo a prequel to marathon? --FailureAtDeath (talk) 04:35, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Please add the Halo (2009 film)

i made an article called Halo (2009 film). Let me edit Halo series —Preceding unsigned comment added by Negabandit86 (talk • contribs) 23:25, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Cultural Impact

Pete Wentz's claims about Halo are irrelevant and useless. He may be a celebrity, but his opinion on this subject is no more relevant than the opinion given by a random high school student. In fact, the random high school student's opinion is probably more relevant. I will wait a bit to see if someone can come up with a real reason to keep this claim, otherwise I will remove it. It deviates from the point, contains no substantial information, and its truth (or agreeableness) is highly debatable. Certainly within the field of "gaming" most "gamers" would probably read that sentence and say: "I dont care what pete wentz has to say about halo, in fact its mere mention makes me angry." The sentence is therefore detrimental to the cultural impact section (it turns readers off, and makes them question the article as a whole). please debate me, but I doubt anyone can come up with a meaningful and successful argument. I have rewritten this little paragraph probably 8 times, using many different arguments against the inclusion of this sentence. I see no reason for keeping it, and, as a gamer, it stood out like a sore thumb as worthless fan drivel.Gordonliu420 (talk) 04:04, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I can't help but detect a bit of frustration in your comments. Is this a topic you've been trying to deal with on this page before? Forgive me if my observation is off the mark.

Anyway, back on point. While I agree that Pete Wentz is not seen as a video game authority, I believe the context in which his statement was made is the main reason it is included. He said those words at the unveiling of the Master Chief wax sculpture at Madame Tussauds in Las Vegas. Pete Wentz was the person chosen to reveal the sculpture at the official unveiling ceremony.

As a gamer myself (though never played Halo), I really wasn't that turned off or angry to read his comments, and I'm sure I'm not alone. And while I sure there are a fair number of gamers that might be mad at reading it, Wikipedia articles are written for everybody; no audience trumps another.

The article has also been through a failed Featured article candidacy. And while it did not pass, the main reason was for poorly written prose. No mention of Pete Wentz's statement one way or another was made. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:45, 14 July 2008 (UTC))

Another point, the article mentions that it was Pete Wentz who said it (not just saying "the Master Chief has been compared to ...") so readers can judge themselves whether they agree with him. You (Gordonliu420) obviously don't trust Pete Wentz' judgement but another person might and there is a link to his article if they don't know who he is. It is left up to the reader whether to trust the source of that comparison. James086^{Talk | Email} 14:56, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

The part comparing Halo to Star Wars really needs to go. Ask people on the street to name more then one character from Halo, then ask them to name some from Star Wars —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.88.212.44 (talk) 13:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Merge in New Halo Project?

Resolved

There is a proposal to merge this article in here. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:35, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• Merge whole or don't merge - As this game will come out eventually, and since there will probably be an announcement within a few months with a lot more details, we don't want to trim this down and then have to expand it back out. So either merge it whole, or keep it where it is and let it grow, which it definitely will. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:39, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

There isn't really that much to merge, that entire "article" can be easily merged into the "Spin-offs and sequels" subsection. - Caribbean~H.Q. 05:09, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

• rather not merge, as it seems likely that it will be officially announced soon: i don't see much point in cluttering up this article. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 15:08, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Something to keep in mind is that new articles related to the Halo trilogy Featured topic could be cause for the topic to become delisted. Though the topic name refers to a "trilogy", I'm sure some might wonder why Halo: Chronicles, Halo Wars, and New Halo Project don't belong in there. The Kingdom Hearts Featured topic is currently in a retention period until the three unreleased game articles can be audited. See discussion for more details.

It may actually be better to merge until some more information is released. That's what we did for the Kingdom Hearts articles.(Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:32, 24 July 2008 (UTC))

I do agree that at some point,all the game articles should be added to the Halo Trilogy topic. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 16:50, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, but that's the point. I would rather overwrite the Trilogy topic with a 'games' topic or the Halo media topic; but I don't think the trilogy is endangered by its existing as a stub right now. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 17:07, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

For now, let's not merge, as Halo (series) is going for FA, and it doesn't need this kind of extra, game specific information, especially since we'll just have to pull it back out later when there is more news. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:09, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

Cortana Letters

Pedantic:

The text explaining the Cortana letters is only accurate in the broadest sense of the word "prior". The letters were sent out in 1999, and meant to generate buzz around Bungie's initial incarnation of Halo. Microsoft's buyout of Bungie changed those plans, and they have little to do with the product that Bungie actually released in 2001. The IGN article's attribution of the Cortana Letters to Halo's buzz doesn't entirely hold together, esp since the individual responsible for the letters left bungie in Oct 1999. http://marathon.bungie.org/story/cortana.html 71.74.156.227 (talk) 05:13, 30 July 2008 (UTC)TDK

That's your opinion. IGN, however, is a reliable source, something you are not. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 12:04, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

IGN's reliably is not the real issue. Wikipedia's interpretation of what IGN stated is the issue. The final cortana letter was sent 11 months prior to Microsoft's buyout of Bungie, and a full 28 months prior to the actual release. The claim "...were circulated by Bungie prior to Halo: Combat Evolved's release" implies a much closer chronology and stronger casual relationship than the IGN article would suggest, especially given that there is no documentation of either Microsoft or Bungie conducting any additional "guerilla marketing/ARG gaming" surrounding Halo between November 1999 and summer of 2004 (ilovebees for Halo 2). A much more likely/conservative interpretation of IGN's statement is that the letters were written to generate buzz for Bungie's debut of Halo in July of 1999. This is the change I've made (and I feel better about it too :) ).71.74.156.227 (talk) 07:43, 31 July 2008 (UTC)TDK

Halo (Spieleserie)

The German Link must be changed. It is not Halo: Kampf um die Zukunft, it is now called Halo (Spieleserie). Thank you. --84.164.73.137 (talk) 07:20, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:First official halo screenshot.jpg

The image Image:First official halo screenshot.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

New halo film

Will some please write a wiki page based on this new Halo film information I found on this website? The website is: http://www.latinoreview.com/news/exclusive-halo-movie-has-reach-4305 Who ever chooses to write this page please contact me saying you have written the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill Bon Jovi (talk • contribs) 23:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

I question the reliability of that site, as the story apparently broke on April 1, 2008 and I have seen no other evidence anywhere to back it up. If the movie ever happens it will be a major deal and I'm sure that at least a few video game sites (IGN, GameSpot, etc.) would've picked up on something. Blackngold29 23:52, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Halo film (part 2)

The e-mail of the person who wrote that webpage is on the webpage I provided. Get in contact with him and he can provide evidence. The is: mayimbe@latinoreview.com. Besides even if he can't provide evidence we don't need to say we are sure the information is true, we will clearly state the information is based on rumours. If this Halo page I am requesting is made then it will be a popular page... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill Bon Jovi (talk • contribs) 08:32, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Halo Wars

Why dont I see Halo Wars mentioned? Chipmonk328

Do a command-F (or control, whatever). It's mentioned. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 01:56, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

nvm sorry. Chipmonk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.153.163.69 (talk) 02:05, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

New halo film (part 3)

I have found some more up to date information about the new planned halo film, here it is http://screenrant.com/halo-fall-of-reach-movie-brusimm-3924/ it has brand new information and design pictures. Please someone write a page about it... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bill Bon Jovi (talk • contribs) 06:14, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

An article shouldn't be created for the film yet, as it fails WP:NFF. --Silver Edge (talk) 06:32, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

The link cites both Wikipedia and IMDB—two unreliable sites—as its main sources. Blackngold29 14:22, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I didn't add the information myself either until I saw Kasra Farahani (Wolfman remake, Hancock, Spider-Man 3) had created concept art for it. So should his work and Beattie's new script be mentioned, because those are cases when self-published sources like Latino Review are most certainly reliable. Alientraveller (talk) 15:52, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't meet WP:SPS or WP:RS. Latino Review does not have established editorial processes, and we only have their word that it's actually concept art by the artist; the image looks more like cheap 3D images than concepts. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 16:02, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Latino Review was interviewed by Empire once and it's amazing how many scripts they can get (The Dark Knight was the only script they were unable to get ahold of last year). They managed to get Paramount to hire Beattie to rewrite G.I. Joe. So if they get word someone's written a spec script, it's pretty verifiable. Would it be ok if I cited Total Film to support the current cite? Alientraveller (talk) 16:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

If you actually have Total Film for such a citation; remember WP:CITE#SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 18:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Extra Addition to Halo Merchandise

I think there should possibly be an extension to the Halo merchandise section in order to include other Halo related items that haven't yet been mentioned. Aside from the Halo media, I myself have 5 different Halo posters that I have purchased from Gamestop. You can find these posters online at sites like All Posters.
Other merchandise I have seen is that Gamestop for a while had sold a Halo special edition Xbox 360, a Spartan Xbox 360 controller, Halo hats, a missile organizer case, and action figures as well. And though I can't find it now, I know that Bungie's main website had an online store. They also sold Halo merchandise such as sweatshirts, pens, coffee mugs, and even backpacks that were all related to Halo.

Here's a general link to Gamestop's Halo Merchandise --Certificated (talk) 20:26, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

If you find reliable sources that suggest it is worthy of mention, bring it here. Otherwise it's minutiae which isn't that important to overall understanding of the topic. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 20:35, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Sources?

"Four additional games, one stand-alone and a 'new trilogy', are planned to continue the series." Where's the source? Or can soemone at least explain what they are? 69.125.120.10 (talk) 02:07, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

It's been removed. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^(talk) 02:43, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Halo Zero

This page is of the Halo Universe and I think that the fan-made game Halo Zero should be mentiones. If you want to see what Halo Zero is search for it in Halopedia. UNSC 405th (talk) 22:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Unless there are multiple, reliable sources about the subject independent of its creators, it's not worthy of mention. --Der Wohltempierte Fuchs ^(talk) 23:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

controversy and marketing of halo 1 before release

i remember an uproar about this game many many years ago, when microsoft bought the whole thing and didn't release it for pc. does anyone know more about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.15.133.41 (talk) 03:24, 27 February 2009 (UTC)