Support NeoGAF

[greenleafcm]

Not caring whether or not lives are lost for the sake of the "greater good", and actively and maliciously seeking to destroy lives just for the sake of destroying them may not necessarily be the exact same thing...but it's still wrong, and it still classifies a character as a villian. Obviously Cortana is not opposed to forcibly stopping those that oppose her either. Like how the Didact's madness and hatred wasn't native in him from the beginning of his life or even his technically his fault, it doesn't change what he did and what he became. So while not inherently "evil", that still doesn't mean that this Domain!Cortana's actions are excusable by any means. She's still a villain now....

So either we're going to end up killing her for good later, which seems a little redundant in light of the respectful "death" she got in 'Halo 4'. Or we'll just end up saving her, which completely negates the concepts of sacrifice, accountability, and having to move on after loss. I just don't see how either of these options is somehow better than having her stay dead in the first place. The villain of this story could have very well been the composed Didact - he was already perfectly set up to be so. As a 'digital essence' he could've likely even posed as Cortana for a time to manipulate his enemies. There'd be no leaps of logic in regards to his motivations (he already wanted to take control of The Mantle) or how he is still "alive" because at no point were we ever told he died. But now we have to contend with just why Cortana has suddenly turned treacherous, how the heck she survived the events of 'Halo 4', and how a human-made AI can just take control of the entire Precursor information network. That's a lot of hoops to jump through. After all this set up for the return of the Forerunners and potentially the Flood...now all of the sudden there's AI rebellion and takeover too? It's just a strange turn of events when there's much more streamlined ways we could have gotten to a similar point/outcome. Ways that wouldn't totally negate a main character's narrative closure and final heroic act, or hamstring every other character's development in the process.

 

[Victorious Secret]

Context is everything. We have screenshots of the ending (supposedly) yet what leads to those moments?

Do people like greenleaf have access to the full game? Or are they happy to take a dump with only 4 levels being showcased? In a game with 15 of them, I'd say it's premature to start crucifying the story with barely 1/3rd of it out there.

I'm content with waiting till Tuesday to find out what's what with this game and if anything has really been "ruined"

But alas, 90% of us here are #ProDevelopers while the 10% that probably are scratch their heads at the leaps of logic we create to maintain our delusional stances.

 

[Ascenion]

Not caring whether or not lives are lost for the sake of the "greater good", and actively and maliciously seeking to destroy lives just for the sake of destroying them may not necessarily be the exact same thing...but it's still wrong, and it still classifies a character as a villian. Obviously Cortana is not opposed to forcibly stopping those that oppose her either. Like how the Didact's madness and hatred wasn't native in him from the beginning of his life or even his technically his fault, it doesn't change what he did and what he became. So while not inherently "evil", that still doesn't mean that this Domain!Cortana's actions are excusable by any means. She's still a villain now....

So either we're going to end up killing her for good later, which seems a little redundant in light of the respectful "death" she got in 'Halo 4'. Or we'll just end up saving her, which completely negates the concepts of sacrifice, accountability, and having to move on after loss. I just don't see how either of these options is somehow better than having her stay dead in the first place. The villain of this story could have very well been the composed Didact - he was already perfectly set up to be so. As a 'digital essence' he could've likely even posed as Cortana for a time to manipulate his enemies. There'd be no leaps of logic in regards to his motivations (he already wanted to take control of The Mantle) or how he is still "alive" because at no point were we ever told he died. But now we have to contend with just why Cortana has suddenly turned treacherous, how the heck she survived the events of 'Halo 4', and how a human-made AI can just take control of the entire Precursor information network. That's a lot of hoops to jump through. After all this set up for the return of the Forerunners and potentially the Flood...now all of the sudden there's AI rebellion and takeover too? It's just a strange turn of events when there's much more streamlined ways we could have gotten to a similar point/outcome. Ways that wouldn't totally negate a main character's narrative closure and final heroic act, or hamstring every other character's development in the process.

You've contradicted yourself, which isn't to say I disagree with your disdain for the nature of the story. A villain is more or less inherently evil. Stinkles was pretty spot on with the question he posed to you. Cortana likely isn't evil, she just has the misfortune of finding herself in opposition to Chief making her an antagonist and given I haven't played the game I could be wrong and she is a villain and then I'll say I was wrong, but as it stands stories have protagonists and antagonists. Villain is a very specific term for a certain type of character that is usually an antagonist. Even at the end of Mass Effect 3 the reapers Given what you wrote and what I've seen and read of the leak Cortana is an antagonist. Now the rest of what you've written here about why she is the antagonist we may never know. I personally agree that the choice for antagonist and the way the story is going is not to my liking and sadly this leak may have forever soured my feeling towards Halo 5 much how the endings to Mass Effect have soured my opinion of 3, but I'll reserve final judgment until I complete Halo 5.

Side note: why in the world is the plot so Mass Effecty? Not saying that is a bad thing because ME3 left room for improvement but why? Personally this entire campaign will hinge on execution for me and I'm just feeling like it won't be there.

 

[Flipyap]

The Forerunners also composed their enemies and genetically regressed a species to an earlier evolutionary state.

I know. That was just an example of previously established ways of controlling entire species through means other than extermination.

 

[DecepticonCora]

I know. That was just an example of previously established ways of controlling entire species through means other than extermination.

Totally true, but when one has machines that can level cities in a matter of seconds, I can't see any other reason for them in a galactic police state.

 

[DecepticonCora]

Context is everything. We have screenshots of the ending (supposedly) yet what leads to those moments?

Do people like greenleaf have access to the full game? Or are they happy to take a dump with only 4 levels being showcased? In a game with 15 of them, I'd say it's premature to start crucifying the story with barely 1/3rd of it out there.

I'm content with waiting till Tuesday to find out what's what with this game and if anything has really been "ruined"

But alas, 90% of us here are #ProDevelopers while the 10% that probably are scratch their heads at the leaps of logic we create to maintain our delusional stances.

I won't crucify the story, but given that Brian Reed could call Halsey a monster for her actions, why is it a leap to say the same for Cortana? I know Reed as a lead writer has more of an advantage than a fan, but that is how I see it.

 

[PetulantChild]

The context is presentation and delivery.

I could, for example, describe the opening of The Last of Us, but it would not hold a candle to the actual game opening.

Let's play this game:

Halo 3 starts off with the MC falling from space where somehow Johnson, the Arbiter and Miranda find him. They escape from the jungle and make it back to a UNSC base where they hold off the attack and MC almost dies from an explosion. After that they drive to Voi and they destroy the AA gun so that Truth's Keyship in the giant portal thingy is destroyed. Truth activates the portal and it transports them to the "Ark" thingy, where Truth is defeated and the Flood comes too from High Charity, disabling the last Elite ship. MC then rescues Cortana from High Charity and blows it up, just after he finds a newly constructed Halo ring, which he activates and then they escape, although only half of the vessel arrives and MC/Cortana are left behind. Also Johnson dies at the end.

There's no space magic, so it seems more plausible than the Halo 5 plot.

 

[Johndoey]

I honestly can't figure why they didn't just have Blue team go rouge hunting Didact and just do that that asshole is still around.

 

[DecepticonCora]

I honestly can't figure why they didn't just have Blue team go rouge hunting Didact and just do that that asshole is still around.

I wonder that too. He was composed, we have no idea where he ended up and he'd have plenty of motivation to keep order in the galaxy. Unless he is actually dead.

 

[greenleafcm]

You've contradicted yourself, which isn't to say I disagree with your disdain for the nature of the story. A villain is more or less inherently evil. Stinkles was pretty spot on with the question he posed to you. Cortana likely isn't evil, she just has the misfortune of finding herself in opposition to Chief making her an antagonist and given I haven't played the game I could be wrong and she is a villain and then I'll say I was wrong, but as it stands stories have protagonists and antagonists. Villain is a very specific term for a certain type of character that is usually an antagonist. Even at the end of Mass Effect 3 the reapers Given what you wrote and what I've seen and read of the leak Cortana is an antagonist. Now the rest of what you've written here about why she is the antagonist we may never know. I personally agree that the choice for antagonist and the way the story is going is not to my liking and sadly this leak may have forever soured my feeling towards Halo 5 much how the endings to Mass Effect have soured my opinion of 3, but I'll reserve final judgment until I complete Halo 5.

Side note: why in the world is the plot so Mass Effecty? Not saying that is a bad thing because ME3 left room for improvement but why? Personally this entire campaign will hinge on execution for me and I'm just feeling like it won't be there.

Now we're just arguing syntax then. Because it is true in most mature fiction you'll be hard pressed to find a villain that is truly "evil" in the most one-dimensional sense. The problem is though it is a very slippery slope when you try to use that as a way to sidestep their misdeeds. So saying here that "Well Cortana isn't really evil." is a very weak excuse to make her actions and motivations seem somehow pardonable when really they're not. She's still destructive, she's still manipulative, she's still a villain. Much like when the movie 'Avengers' came out, fans of Loki often tried to undercut his wrongdoings because he was a sympathetic and likeable character - but that doesn't make what he did right or him any less of a bad guy. That's what I'm worried that we're going to see here. Cortana isn't "unfortunately finding herself on the opposite side as the Chief", she's very actively choosing to take the order of the Galaxy into her own hands with no regard for the cost. No matter what "peace" she says justifies that, it's still wrong. She's not an antagonist, she is a villain. So while I concede my word choice was poor, my point still stands that this just seems like a completely arbitrary and unnecessary choice for her character and the story.

Basically at this point the framework of the plot is like iRobot and ME3 got mashed together. Maybe the game's script will explain things well enough so as to make it not horrible, but the inherent problems ingrained in the premise itself remain.

 

[Slightly Live]

Maybe the game's script will explain things well enough so as to make it not horrible, but the inherent problems ingrained in the premise itself remain.

Nothing wrong with the game's premise. It's all about execution, and no amount of spoilers is going to give you that experience.

Doubling down and going around in petty arguments is great waste of time. As is judging the game based on a few spoiler paragraphs and 4chan images.

 

[greenleafcm]

I won't crucify the story, but given that Brian Reed could call Halsey a monster for her actions, why is it a leap to say the same for Cortana? I know Reed as a lead writer has more of an advantage than a fan, but that is how I see it.

 

[greenleafcm]

Nothing wrong with the game's premise. It's all about execution, and no amount of spoilers is going to give you that experience.

Doubling down and going around in petty arguments is great waste of time. As is judging the game based on a few spoiler paragraphs and 4chan images.

So why are you here then if you think there's no point in talking about it before playing it?

Again, this is a leak/spoiler thread...we're here to discuss our opinions based on what we see/hear about the game before it comes out. I don't like anything I've seen thus far - in the summary, in the statements from people who have played the game (who aren't under embargo), and in the images. If you like what you've seen or you don't care either way, that's fine too. But there's no rule stating this is a "positive posts only" thread.

 

[AlStrong]

.

moe

 

[Victorious Secret]

I won't crucify the story, but given that Brian Reed could call Halsey a monster for her actions, why is it a leap to say the same for Cortana? I know Reed as a lead writer has more of an advantage than a fan, but that is how I see it.

Halsey is a monster for her actions that arose for reasons not remotely connected to saving humanity - rather preserving the power that one large part of humanity had.

So is Cortana a monster for doing the same, only against humanity as it appears to be here? Is monster just a relative term for these two? I mean, the Halsey hate train didn't really get going until Kilo 5, although the perspectives there had merit.

We call Halsey a monster with full respect to all revealed actions. We don't know exactly what leads to Cortana (if its even her anymore) acting the way we are assuming she does. For all we know, her and Chief are headed on a trip in their favourite rocket ship with sunshines and rainbows. Don't know until someone posts the entire ending (as well as the entire game) so we have context.

I just disagree with green leaf going around saying "double standards" and throwing up the victim card to shield himself from dissent. Its a double standard to judge the character without really having any idea what leads her to going batshit crazy (once again, its the assumption we are making that she loses it). We just don't know. We can speculate, and thats just great, but taking the position of people like green leaf and tearing down the story without even knowing what actually happens is premature.

 

[Olengie]

I still support Halsey

 

[greenleafcm]

Halsey is a monster for her actions that arose for reasons not remotely connected to saving humanity - rather preserving the power that one large part of humanity had.

So is Cortana a monster for doing the same, only against humanity as it appears to be here? Is monster just a relative term for these two? I mean, the Halsey hate train didn't really get going until Kilo 5, although the perspectives there had merit.

We call Halsey a monster with full respect to all revealed actions. We don't know exactly what leads to Cortana (if its even her anymore) acting the way we are assuming she does. For all we know, her and Chief are headed on a trip in their favourite rocket ship with sunshines and rainbows. Don't know until someone posts the entire ending (as well as the entire game) so we have context.

I just disagree with green leaf going around saying "double standards" and throwing up the victim card to shield himself from dissent. Its a double standard to judge the character without really having any idea what leads her to going batshit crazy (once again, its the assumption we are making that she loses it). We just don't know. We can speculate, and thats just great, but taking the position of people like green leaf and tearing down the story without even knowing what actually happens is premature.

Maybe you need to go back a few pages then, because we had someone in here earlier who played the game (not a press copy) and they confirmed that everything about the leak - right up to the cliffhanger ending and final scene with Locke/Chief/Arbiter/Halsey - is exactly how things go down.

There's no assuming anything at this point, because we already know everything that happens in the basic sense.

Also Halsey may have been on the side of the UNSC, but she still did what she did because she thought it would be for the good of everyone in the long run and that the insurrection was out of control. So if she gets to be called a "monster" for that, then yes, a power-mad Cortana in control of Forerunner death machines gets to be too regardless of her good intentions.

 

[Orochinagis]

Halsey is a monster for her actions that arose for reasons not remotely connected to saving humanity - rather preserving the power that one large part of humanity had.

So is Cortana a monster for doing the same, only against humanity as it appears to be here? Is monster just a relative term for these two? I mean, the Halsey hate train didn't really get going until Kilo 5, although the perspectives there had merit.

We call Halsey a monster with full respect to all revealed actions. We don't know exactly what leads to Cortana (if its even her anymore) acting the way we are assuming she does. For all we know, her and Chief are headed on a trip in their favourite rocket ship with sunshines and rainbows. Don't know until someone posts the entire ending (as well as the entire game) so we have context.

I just disagree with green leaf going around saying "double standards" and throwing up the victim card to shield himself from dissent. Its a double standard to judge the character without really having any idea what leads her to going batshit crazy (once again, its the assumption we are making that she loses it). We just don't know. We can speculate, and thats just great, but taking the position of people like green leaf and tearing down the story without even knowing what actually happens is premature.

Cortana like the Forerunners virtually deprived Humanity to take the Mantle and took it for herself maybe because she thinks Humanity is not ready still. So in her arrogance, possibly due new concience she is now the Guardian (*ding!* roll credits) of the Mantle.

 

[Ascenion]

Now we're just arguing syntax then. Because it is true in most mature fiction you'll be hard pressed to find a villain that is truly "evil" in the most one-dimensional sense. The problem is though it is a very slippery slope when you try to use that as a way to sidestep their misdeeds. So saying here that "Well Cortana isn't really evil." is a very weak excuse to make her actions and motivations seem somehow pardonable when really they're not. She's still destructive, she's still manipulative, she's still a villain. Much like when the movie 'Avengers' came out, fans of Loki often tried to undercut his wrongdoings because he was a sympathetic and likeable character - but that doesn't make what he did right or him any less of a bad guy. That's what I'm worried that we're going to see here. Cortana isn't "unfortunately finding herself on the opposite side as the Chief", she's very actively choosing to take the order of the Galaxy into her own hands with no regard for the cost. No matter what "peace" she says justifies that, it's still wrong. She's not an antagonist, she is a villain. So while I concede my word choice was poor, my point still stands that this just seems like a completely arbitrary and unnecessary choice for her character and the story.

Basically at this point the framework of the plot is like iRobot and ME3 got mashed together. Maybe the game's script will explain things well enough so as to make it not horrible, but the inherent problems ingrained in the premise itself remain.

I'm not necessarily trying to justify her actions, they are reprehensible but the reasoning is sound at least I think it is if it ends up being in line with reaper thinking. Loki is a bit of a bad example because he literally is a Villain, no arguement there. I'm placing Cortana mentally along with

Spoiler

Duke

from Tales of Vesperia. Spoilers for that if you haven't played it:

Spoiler

Duke basically agrees with the protagonists until their goals diverge. Duke then takes it upon himself to sacrifice all human life including his own in order to defeat a cosmic entity and restore the world to a state he desires and a bit for revenge. Effectively he believes all humans don't deserve to live for reasons which are relatively sound from his point of view and isn't fighting for personal gain basically

his ideals are pure while his method is cruel. In my opinion that distinction is the difference between a villain and an antagonist. Intention is everything when it comes to villainy I think and Cortana's intent seems noble so far. But I can see your reasoning and can mostly agree with the labeling based on that. I'm not necessarily sidestepping her deeds as much as I am trying to find the reason. Everyone makes mistakes occasionally with the best intentions. I'm just giving her the benefit of the doubt.

 

[DecepticonCora]

Halsey is a monster for her actions that arose for reasons not remotely connected to saving humanity - rather preserving the power that one large part of humanity had.

So is Cortana a monster for doing the same, only against humanity as it appears to be here? Is monster just a relative term for these two? I mean, the Halsey hate train didn't really get going until Kilo 5, although the perspectives there had merit.

We call Halsey a monster with full respect to all revealed actions. We don't know exactly what leads to Cortana (if its even her anymore) acting the way we are assuming she does. For all we know, her and Chief are headed on a trip in their favourite rocket ship with sunshines and rainbows. Don't know until someone posts the entire ending (as well as the entire game) so we have context.

I just disagree with green leaf going around saying "double standards" and throwing up the victim card to shield himself from dissent. Its a double standard to judge the character without really having any idea what leads her to going batshit crazy (once again, its the assumption we are making that she loses it). We just don't know. We can speculate, and thats just great, but taking the position of people like green leaf and tearing down the story without even knowing what actually happens is premature.

I'm not saying your wrong, but my main concerns stem from a statement Frankie made where two things stick out to me.

1. It was obvious what happened to Cortana at the end of Halo 4 and she is gone.
2. Chief has to deal with her loss.

The key phrase I see in #1 is "at the end of Halo 4". Not "at the end of Halo 4 along with posts by Catalog, Saint's Testimony and other relatively obscure things." And by obscure I merely mean in terms of people actually seeing them. I don't think very many people saw Catalog make posts in Waypoint's Universe section nor read ST (which was not even included in the important media chart for Halo 5). Catalog mentioned the heart of the Mantle's Approach going into slipspace. I would have to ask Frankie how anyone was supposed to know that and hence be obvious if the only mention of it came from Catalog in a forum post months after Halo 4 launched? Further, when Halo 4, the Essential Visual Guide, her Waypoint article and Frankie himself said she died only for that to be the case, I can only call it what it is and say that was a lie. I won't say that now since I'm still lacking context, but if it is Cortana then points #1 and #2 are falsehoods.

If it isn't Cortana and maybe a fragment, copy made by the Librarian or whatever scenario someone has come up with, #1 is true, but at the same time #2 is still false. We can believe that what we see isn't the real Cortana, but very little besides maybe behavior differentiates the two. She goes by the same name, looks the same, still has an attachment to Chief, the works. How is Chief supposed to process her loss when she is still there and the leader of an enemy faction? I think it is a terrible send-off for such an influential character for her to spend years being a staunch ally and Chief's humanity and protector until the end where she gave her life so that he may live only for what is really an evil clone to come out of the woodwork and need killing to save the galaxy.

I know everybody is all hung-up on not calling her evil because of context, but activating the Guardians has already caused destruction and death and if she uses them and her AI followers to create a galactic police state then what else should I call it? We can argue the greater good, but it would show a lack of understanding on her end, and 343's, if she can have the Domain at her fingertips, yet make the same exact mistakes as the Forerunners is having an iron-fist on the galaxy in the belief that is achieving the will of the Mantle. I'd also say it puts a smudge on the Librarian as well if she is either allowing this happen or just doesn't care. She argued that such strong measures of control were bad for the galaxy before her death and I don't think her AI would differ with her on that too much.

 

[Orochinagis]

Surprising how 343i added wings on Cortana in halo 4 like some sort of hint of what will happen to her for Halo 5.

 

[Olengie]

Surprising how 343i added wings on Cortana in halo 4 like some sort of hint of what will happen to her for Halo 5.

She was an Angel and is now a Fallen Angel? lol

 

[FunkyPajamas]

She was an Angel and is now a Fallen Angel? lol

Victoria's Secret model. That explains the DD boobs.

 

[Muscle Wizard]

Leave it to gaf to agree with the all-controlling crazy computer lady.

 

[Flipyap]

Leave it to gaf to agree with the all-controlling crazy computer lady.

When the alternative is to let a shady cartoonishly evil all-controlling human organization keep inciting civil wars both among their own and other allied species (who already came close to wiping out humanity) whenever they're not coming up with insane schemes like using The Flood as weapons, inevitably dooming all life in the galaxy? Yeah, a computer zombie overlord sounds like a pretty sweet deal.

And this mess is the state of the Halo universe during a period of peace, when the whole thing isn't threatened by a galactic suicide cult or a sapient spacefaring parasite.

 

[DecepticonCora]

When the alternative is to let a shady cartoonishly evil all-controlling human organization keep inciting civil wars both among their own and other allied species (who already came close to wiping out humanity) whenever they're not coming up with insane schemes like using The Flood as weapons, inevitably dooming all life in the galaxy? Yeah, a computer zombie overlord sounds like a pretty sweet deal.

And this mess is the state of the Halo universe during a period of peace, when the whole thing isn't threatened by a galactic suicide cult or a sapient spacefaring parasite.

Unless her control leaves the galaxy vulnerable to the return of the aforementioned space zombies. Textbook example of not learning from the Forerunner's example. Heaven forbid if her rule collapses and everybody scrambles to scoop up pieces of her empire.

 

[Flipyap]

Unless her control leaves the galaxy vulnerable to the return of the aforementioned space zombies. Textbook example of not learning from the Forerunner's example. Heaven forbid if her rule collapses and everybody scrambles to scoop up pieces of her empire.

But everybody is always scrambling to gather their own pieces and keep their shit from falling apart. It's a galaxy that will never be united.
Sooner or later, someone will try to conquer everyone else. The one benefit to the reign of Cortana And The Computer Zombies (my new favorite band) is that her primary goal seems to be the preservation of other species. Her plan is doomed to failure because that's how endlessly serialized fiction works, but as far as leaving the galaxy in the hands of a singular force goes, this sounds like the least catastrophic option in the known history of the Halo universe.

 

[MikeDown]

I don't keep up with the book lore, but I keep people talking about the possible return of the Flood. Thought chief destroyed the Gravemind & flood thread in Halo 3.

 

[NoBL3Z]

You've contradicted yourself, which isn't to say I disagree with your disdain for the nature of the story. A villain is more or less inherently evil. Stinkles was pretty spot on with the question he posed to you. Cortana likely isn't evil, she just has the misfortune of finding herself in opposition to Chief making her an antagonist and given I haven't played the game I could be wrong and she is a villain and then I'll say I was wrong, but as it stands stories have protagonists and antagonists. Villain is a very specific term for a certain type of character that is usually an antagonist. Even at the end of Mass Effect 3 the reapers Given what you wrote and what I've seen and read of the leak Cortana is an antagonist. Now the rest of what you've written here about why she is the antagonist we may never know. I personally agree that the choice for antagonist and the way the story is going is not to my liking and sadly this leak may have forever soured my feeling towards Halo 5 much how the endings to Mass Effect have soured my opinion of 3, but I'll reserve final judgment until I complete Halo 5.

Side note: why in the world is the plot so Mass Effecty? Not saying that is a bad thing because ME3 left room for improvement but why? Personally this entire campaign will hinge on execution for me and I'm just feeling like it won't be there.

Bungie's original plot in CE was about Cortana becoming full rampant. And in Halo 3, dialogue of Cortana foreshadowed Halo 5 a bit too based off what I was reading in a 4chan (lol) thread.

I honestly can't figure why they didn't just have Blue team go rouge hunting Didact and just do that that asshole is still around.

They did in Halo Escalation, which is why nobody knows if he is truly dead, considering Chief had an Halo installation crash land on the Didact.

I'm not saying your wrong, but my main concerns stem from a statement Frankie made where two things stick out to me.

1. It was obvious what happened to Cortana at the end of Halo 4 and she is gone.
2. Chief has to deal with her loss.

The key phrase I see in #1 is "at the end of Halo 4". Not "at the end of Halo 4 along with posts by Catalog, Saint's Testimony and other relatively obscure things." And by obscure I merely mean in terms of people actually seeing them. I don't think very many people saw Catalog make posts in Waypoint's Universe section nor read ST (which was not even included in the important media chart for Halo 5). Catalog mentioned the heart of the Mantle's Approach going into slipspace. I would have to ask Frankie how anyone was supposed to know that and hence be obvious if the only mention of it came from Catalog in a forum post months after Halo 4 launched? Further, when Halo 4, the Essential Visual Guide, her Waypoint article and Frankie himself said she died only for that to be the case, I can only call it what it is and say that was a lie. I won't say that now since I'm still lacking context, but if it is Cortana then points #1 and #2 are falsehoods.

If it isn't Cortana and maybe a fragment, copy made by the Librarian or whatever scenario someone has come up with, #1 is true, but at the same time #2 is still false. We can believe that what we see isn't the real Cortana, but very little besides maybe behavior differentiates the two. She goes by the same name, looks the same, still has an attachment to Chief, the works. How is Chief supposed to process her loss when she is still there and the leader of an enemy faction? I think it is a terrible send-off for such an influential character for her to spend years being a staunch ally and Chief's humanity and protector until the end where she gave her life so that he may live only for what is really an evil clone to come out of the woodwork and need killing to save the galaxy.

I know everybody is all hung-up on not calling her evil because of context, but activating the Guardians has already caused destruction and death and if she uses them and her AI followers to create a galactic police state then what else should I call it? We can argue the greater good, but it would show a lack of understanding on her end, and 343's, if she can have the Domain at her fingertips, yet make the same exact mistakes as the Forerunners is having an iron-fist on the galaxy in the belief that is achieving the will of the Mantle. I'd also say it puts a smudge on the Librarian as well if she is either allowing this happen or just doesn't care. She argued that such strong measures of control were bad for the galaxy before her death and I don't think her AI would differ with her on that too much.

She's definitely alive, but probably fully rampant so a repeat of history (343 Guilty Spark and Medicant Bias), and she took the Didact's Cryptum and sealed Chief in it in Halo 5. It's basically a full run of Marathon.

I don't keep up with the book lore, but I keep people talking about the possible return of the Flood. Thought chief destroyed the Gravemind & flood thread in Halo 3.

In one of the Halo Escalation comics, a Flood spore was spotted in the Spirit of Fire Cryopods. So they definitely aren't gone. And there are still Halo Installations which contain some flood. I know it's getting out of hand but it's true.

 

[Fotos]

Just finished the game. Feel disappointed kind of. I don't really know what to think.

 

[Bob Dobalina]

Just finished the game. Feel disappointed kind of. I don't really know what to think.

If you're not under embargo, how does the final mission play out?

 

[wuruochong]

Just finished the game. Feel disappointed kind of. I don't really know what to think.

It's a cliff-hanger ending isn't it? Always hated those. Nothing resolved, nothing accomplished.

 

[Fotos]

If you're not under embargo, how does the final mission play out?

You play as Osiris and you just kill a fuck ton of Prometheans which gets really tiring towards the end of the game. You get to the Cryptum Master Chief is locked in and you have to go around and destroy these gravity balls that are laid around the map. I think there are 6? Don't remember the number. But you have a lot of vehicles at your disposal to destroy the objectives. After destroying all of them and killing all the enemies you then get to another room where you take on a shit load of waves of Prometheans. There are no vehicles in this room but there are Promethean, covenant, and UNSC weapons around. After all of that Osiris runs towards this generator thing and locke almost dies destroying it with his fists. That causes the Genesis Monitor to release the MC Cryptum from Cortana's possession. Then the final cutscenes start.

I know I described this horribly I hope you at least get an idea. I'm tired as hell because I just played straight through the whole campaign without any breaks. Feel free to ask anymore questions though.

I'm also assuming you know about the MC cryptum and the Genesis installation Monitor. I haven't been keeping up in this thread so I don't really know what has been talked about or spoiled.

It's a cliff-hanger ending isn't it? Always hated those. Nothing resolved, nothing accomplished.

Kind of. There's a resolution between Osiris and Blue Team. They're on the same side now. All of them including the Infinity are being hunted by Cortana and all of the AI on her side. Lasky says at the end that the infinity is just going to keep running until they can fight back against Cortana. I'm not too sure if Osiris/ blue team are separated from the infinity or not though. It ends with master chief and Locke walking out of a pelican on sanghelios where the arbiter, Halsey, and Palmer are waiting for them. They just look at each other in silence until Halsey asks Master chief why it took so long. Then it cuts straight to credits. There is nothing after the credits

 

[DecepticonCora]

But everybody is always scrambling to gather their own pieces and keep their shit from falling apart. It's a galaxy that will never be united.
Sooner or later, someone will try to conquer everyone else. The one benefit to the reign of Cortana And The Computer Zombies (my new favorite band) is that her primary goal seems to be the preservation of other species. Her plan is doomed to failure because that's how endlessly serialized fiction works, but as far as leaving the galaxy in the hands of a singular force goes, this sounds like the least catastrophic option in the known history of the Halo universe.

Unless she allows other species to continue to develop their own technology and grow, she'll still just be making the same mistake as the Forerunners. Yeah, they kept peace in the galaxy and preserved other species. All they had to do was stagnant their growth and make sure they never posed a threat to their authority. When the first world that does not want to accept her rule springs up, what do you suppose she is going to do? Tell them to stop nicely or use her city destroying machines on a planetary scale?

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

Wow reading this story impressions make me disappointing :/

 

[aly]

I'm gonna keep an open mind, but these spoilers aren't filling me with hope. First my split screen and then my Cortana. 343 pls.

 

[Lakitu]

I care more about how the missions and game plays out than the story. I've never been too invested in the story but more in the missions and gameplay.

 

[Olengie]

Then Cortana goes ahead and creates the Reapers. lol. jk

 

[Xzilerate1690]

Just saw the Locke vs Chief cutscene. Probably the best cutscene in the game. Like damn. Not sure if I'm allowed to post links. I will if I'm allowed.

 

[DATABASE DATABASE]

heh the Warden talks like a butler

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

Have we seen this already?

 

[Danny 117]

Just saw the Locke vs Chief cutscene. Probably the best cutscene in the game. Like damn. Not sure if I'm allowed to post links. I will if I'm allowed.

Link? PM Me

 

[Random17]

Watching the Chief/Locke confrontation, it was somewhat lethargic compared to the opening sequence. It ended up as an extended fist fight, and somehow Locke actually managed to get a few hits on Chief. But lol at his own armor locke being used against him.

 

[JumPeRJumPzZ]

Can someone upload this fight scene somewhere?

 

[soulluos]

Please post the link. This is the spoiler thread after all.

 

[Random17]

http://www.twitch.tv/mobiuz0ne/v/21996607

Near the end.

 

[BigAl1992]

Just saw the Locke vs Chief cutscene. Probably the best cutscene in the game. Like damn. Not sure if I'm allowed to post links. I will if I'm allowed.

Please do, as I'm sure it can hidden from view as a spoiler tag.

 

[Deadly]

Just wondering but how come these guys are all streaming and not afraid of being banned?

 

[Random17]

Just wondering but how come these guys are all streaming and not afraid of being banned?

The guy I linked above doesn't seem to know or care, lol.

He goes all the way to the start of mission six. 5 missions on Legendary reaches 4 hours, so the game is 12 hours on Legendary, maybe more. He wasn't the greatest player though.

 

[Xzilerate1690]

There was another guy who streamed the entire campaign earlier this morning.