• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

In hindsight, was the story in Halo 4 really all that necessary? Spoilers

T'Zariah

Banned
It's been over two months since Halo 4 has come out and the more I think about it, the more I think the story is completely unnecessary, along with the actual tale being told, being completely and utterly awful.

Everything felt forced.

You get Chief talking, which was a nice change, really. But his dialogue is crap. There's no badass quotes just self-pity. 'She said that to me once' The whole, I can't do this without you shiz. He's become too clingy to Cortana. It just feels off. While there are some, admittedly, touching scenes, it still comes across as WTF.

Then you have terrible characters like Palmer and Del Rio. Del Rio has no other traits besides being an unlikable jackass for no apparent reason. "Arrest that man!" Yeah....okay, dude. Palmer is....well...Palmer. There really needs no explanation.

The Didact as a whole. The game NEVER explains what or who he is, outside of vague sentences, that you'd need to read the Forerunner trilogy to even remotely understand the context of which. Just an awful villain. Back in the Halo trilogy, you got a sense of awe and mystery with the Forerunners...now...they're just laughable of what they used to be. I honestly think we were better off not going into AS much detail about them. But that's just me, personally.

Lasky wasn't given the justice he was due. Forward Unto Dawn set him up as a terrific character, but all of it's underutilized in Halo 4. He's basically Del Rio if he were a reasonable and likable character. Nothing else about him stands out.

To paraphrase another user "Bungie had a story to tell with the trilogy and ended well enough. Halo 4 basically just forced expanded the universe and it feels extremely unnatural, inorganic, and completely unnecessary outside of the excuse making more games to for money purposes."

The game turned me off from Halo's storyline, because it can only go downhill from here, unless they retcon the shit out of it (like usual, but that's a rant for another time).

Until 343 proves otherwise, Halo is dead to me.
 
The story in Halo 4 was absolutely terrible and made no sense. I still don't have a clue what was going on for half of that game.
 
Gee...I dunno maybe if you paid attention and stopped looking forward to the next shoot out it would have made sense? Sorry to me the story was perfectly OK.
 
Can somebody please explain why they're still fighting the Covenant? I only play the games and can't be bothered looking it up.
 
The story in Halo 4 was absolutely terrible and made no sense. I still don't have a clue what was going on for half of that game.

That's funny, because it wasn't really hard at all to understand for me (and no, I didn't read the books besides the original three but they don't pertain to Halo 4).

With that said, Bungie hurt Halo's story when they made the Covenant speak English and delved into their conflict with each other. So Halo 2 hurt Halo's story and mystery for me.
 
Gee...I dunno maybe if you paid attention and stopped looking forward to the next shoot out it would have made sense? Sorry to me the story was perfectly OK.

No? The game had giant holes in its story that required reading up on. I played through it twice and still had no clue why the covenant were attacking again? Why were the humans so powerful now? I mean the ENTIRE story of the Didact was hidden away in videos that streamed off waypoint and only unlocked by hidden items! Ridiculous.
 
Yeah the story in Halo 4 is awful and just can not be followed easily without reading the EU material. They could have at least put a codex or something in the game to help in the basic understandings of the plot!

Simple things like character motivations don't make sense. Why are we fighting the covenant again? Who really is the didact and the librarian? What was even bloody happened in the scene between the librarian and MC? After that scene I just stopped trying because if 343 cant bother to make a coherent narrative why should I try to decipher the mess they left us with? Game reviewers should have bloody pounced on how bad this was!

I admit I did like the stuff with Cortana quite abit, but I do wish they had done more with it as it was the only highlight of the plot.

Gee...I dunno maybe if you paid attention and stopped looking forward to the next shoot out it would have made sense? Sorry to me the story was perfectly OK.

No, no, no, nonono....no.
 
Can somebody please explain why they're still fighting the Covenant? I only play the games and can't be bothered looking it up.

They explain that in game. They are a hyper religious splinter group.

I don't know why people think halo 1-3 had good stories. Great games, but the story has always been meh.
 
They explain that in game. They are a hyper religious splinter group.

I don't know why people think halo 1-3 had good stories. Great games, but the story has always been meh.

No they don't. Chief says "I thought we had a truce with the Covenant?"

And it's left at that.

You'd only know about the "Storm" if you read Halo:Glasslands.
 
So I haven't played Halo 4 and I probably won't. But for the love of god, why are we fighting the COVENANT AGAIN? I thought all but the elites were defeated at the end of 3 and Humans and elites became BFF's? What the hell happend?
 
No? The game had giant holes in its story that required reading up on. I played through it twice and still had no clue why the covenant were attacking again? Why were the humans so powerful now? I mean the ENTIRE story of the Didact was hidden away in videos that streamed off waypoint and only unlocked by hidden items! Ridiculous.

Nope! I didn't read the Forerunner books and followed it perfectly.Th Covenant attacking are a splinter group from the original who believe in the Didact. Admittedly the backstory of the Didact could have been handled better but then they're in the damn game! I really don't see what the fuss is.
 
They explained who the Didact was in the game, he was a forerunner that was held responsible for the protection of life on the universe, but he saw humans as a threat and wanted to turn all of them into prometheans, it's all in the encounter with the librarian, I understood it all and I haven't read any EU stuff except for Fall of Reach.
 
I think it kind of sucked that the Chief barely acknowledges the other spartans. I thought he'd be at least a little surprised (or happy) to see new ones.

That the AI of the Infinity only appears during the Spartan Ops cutscenes is kind of weird as well.
 
They explained who the Didact was in the game, he was a forerunner that was held responsible for the protection of life on the universe, but he saw humans as a threat and wanted to turn all of them into prometheans, it's all in the encounter with the librarian, I understood it all and I haven't read any EU stuff except for Fall of Reach.

^^ THIS!! I really don't see how the story was so hard to follow
 
No they don't. Chief says "I thought we had a truce with the Covenant?"

And it's left at that.

Fairly sure Cortana mentions the possibility of a splinter group right after Chief's question. So, no. It wasn't left at that.
 
Nope! I didn't read the Forerunner books and followed it perfectly.Th Covenant attacking are a splinter group from the original who believe in the Didact. Admittedly the backstory of the Didact could have been handled better but then they're in the damn game! I really don't see what the fuss is.

If it's not in the core story I don't count it. I'm not hunting for items then quitting the game and loading up a video just to understand who the MAIN ANTAGONIST is and what his super weapon even does exactly.
 
I liked that it was about Master Chief and Cortana exploring a completely unknown alien world, an aspect of the first Halo's campaign I really liked and something I felt that the games after the first were really missing.

But yeah, a lot of the Didact and Covenant stuff could have been handled a lot better.

But I did like it as a story about an aging super soldier trying to save his computer chip girlfriend, the rest of it is just backdrop to that as far as I was concerned.
 
No they don't. Chief says "I thought we had a truce with the Covenant?"

And it's left at that.

You'd only know about the "Storm" if you read Halo:Glasslands.

You're wrong. Cortana explicitly mentions they are a splinter group. We don't get there name, but do we need to? Splinter group is enough


Cheap first post. First post is cheap.

Yeah it was catty. My bad, I just can't stand these overly dramatic "they have lost my business forever" proclamations
 
If it's not in the core story I don't count it. I'm not hunting for items then quitting the game and loading up a video and understand who the MAIN ANTAGONIST is and why he's doing it all.
Why he is doing it is explained by the Librarian,his back story is all you need to watch on waypoint IF you feel the need to.
 
So I haven't played Halo 4 and I probably won't. But for the love of god, why are we fighting the COVENANT AGAIN? I thought all but the elites were defeated at the end of 3 and Humans and elites became BFF's? What the hell happend?

As has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, the game does a poor job of explaining that. Ultimately though, who cares? Fighting the Covenant again was the best part of Halo 4. The Promethean's are terrible new antagonists.
 
Could someone who says the plot was easy to understand please explain what happened when you went to heaven and met that ghost Forerunner lady, who evolved you so your face couldn't be melted off by the Didact?

Because that didn't make a lick of sense to me.
 
This is why a lot of devs would probably prefer to make games without a story. There wasn't anything confusing about Halo 4's plot.
 
I didn't find the story in the original trilogy particularly good either, and Reach was quite weak also. I was actually more interested in the somewhat hard sci-fi approach of Halo 4 than the "Hey everybody it's Earth!" approach of 3.
 
They explained who the Didact was in the game, he was a forerunner that was held responsible for the protection of life on the universe, but he saw humans as a threat and wanted to turn all of them into prometheans, it's all in the encounter with the librarian, I understood it all and I haven't read any EU stuff except for Fall of Reach.
Exactly, I don't get the confusion
 
Could someone who says the plot was easy to understand please explain what happened when you went to heaven and met that ghost Forerunner lady, who evolved you so your face couldn't be melted off by the Didact?

Because that didn't make a lick of sense to me.

You didn't go to heaven to meet the Librarian. The Librarian (the original) planted an AI there as a counter defense against the Didact should he get released. The AI gave Chief a mysterious augmentation that is yet unexplained but not everything has to be. I'm sure we'll learn more about what the Librarian AI did to the Chief in one of the sequels.
 
Yeah, and also - it's the first game in a triology. If everything was to be specified in detail in the first game... Well that would just suck.
 
Everything was explained in the campaign.

The Didact was explained in the Librarian encounter.

The Covenant are explained in the first level as a splinter group that are a bunch of extremists.

You don't have to hunt around for this, you just have to listen.

That said it sucks that in the NEW trilogy I'm still fighting Covenant in a warthog. I wanted them to set the game like 1000 years in the future in some part of the galaxy without UNSC or Covies. But I guess then many would say its not Halo anymore.
 
Could someone who says the plot was easy to understand please explain what happened when you went to heaven and met that ghost Forerunner lady, who evolved you so your face couldn't be melted off by the Didact?

Because that didn't make a lick of sense to me.
The librarian "upgraded" the Chief somewhat as after the war thousands of years earlier they devolved humanity to what we are now. Her "upgrade" gave Chief a fighting chance against the Didact.
 
Why he is doing it is explained by the Librarian,his back story is all you need to watch on waypoint IF you feel the need to.

They explain nothing between the Didact and Librarian either. I'm just thinking "Who the hell is this woman?" my first time through. The story and lack of explanation was one of the main criticisms of the campaign. You might have fully understood but clearly many didn't.
 
Because that was the point of the end of 3, the resolution between the two sides, and the rings. When you shoehorn them in anytime you want, it deflates the ending of the first trilogy.

Must I endure stupid story retcons because 343 are too incompetent for decent enemy design and have to rely upon nostalgia?
 
They explain nothing between the Didact and Librarian either. I'm just thinking "Who the hell is this woman?" my first time through. The story and lack of explanation was one of the main criticisms of the campaign. You might have fully understood but clearly many didn't.

Um..did you play Halo 3? She is mentioned in H3 and in the Terminal videos her relationship with the Didact is explained.
 
343 proved they are just as capable of making an awful story as Bungie was.

I have to disagree, Halo 4 may not be Shakespeare, but it has vastly superior dialog when compared to the previous Halo games, you really feel that the characters are more human beings rather military archetypes.
 
You didn't "go to heaven" to meet the Librarian AI. The Librarian (the original) planted an AI there as a counter defense against the Didact should he get released. The AI gave Chief a mysterious augmentation that is yet unexplained but not everything has to be.

Oh, that's right, they made Chief " The One", I always love it when that happens in a narrative. Super soldier saviour of mankind is not enough, he must also be a Keanu Reeves. The entire evolution of the human race all culminated in his creation, or some BS. I groaned.
 
I have to disagree, Halo 4 may not be Shakespeare, but it has vastly superior dialog when compared to the previous Halo games, you really feel that the characters are more human beings rather military archetypes.

Del Rio is the classic Officer who has no idea WTF he's doing.

Palmer literally HAS no character. She's just there.

Lasky is just the exact opposite of Del Rio.

What part of that are they "human beings"
 
For those of you that haven't seen the Halo 4 terminals, just do a quick YouTube search.

Anyways...
I think 343i did a lot right and wrong with the story for 4. I loved that they catered to fans who read the books, and rewarded them by making references/etc. However, I felt they should've explained some things better in game. This is in contrast to Bungie, who never referenced the books. Even in Reach, they went against canon just because.

The cutscenes were made beautifully, some great production values. The voice acting of all the characters, and mo-capping was all excellent. It felt a step up from the past Halo's, and felt like a AAA game. It added an extra dimension into the game IMO.

Characters could have been developed better. Lasky had some good potential, but he's not quite there yet. Palmer is a pretty eh character. Del Rio is an idiot. I'm pretty disappointed there was no "oh shit it's chief" scenes. After saving the world multiple times, it'd be nice to get some respect from the Spartan IVs besides "I thought you'd be taller ;)."

And speaking of Spartan IVs, why are they portrayed as idiots in Spartan Ops? That was disappointing.
 
It's been over two months since Halo 4 has come out and the more I think about it, the more I think the story is completely unnecessary, along with the actual tale being told, being completely and utterly awful.

Everything felt forced.

You get Chief talking, which was a nice change, really. But his dialogue is crap. There's no badass quotes just self-pity. 'She said that to me once' The whole, I can't do this without you shiz. He's become too clingy to Cortana. It just feels off. While there are some, admittedly, touching scenes, it still comes across as WTF.

The Didact as a whole. The game NEVER explains what or who he is, outside of vague sentences, that you'd need to read the Forerunner trilogy to even remotely understand the context of which. Just an awful villain. Back in the Halo trilogy, you got a sense of awe and mystery with the Forerunners...now...they're just laughable of what they used to be. I honestly think we were better off not going into AS much detail about them. But that's just me, personally.

Bungie had a story to tell with the trilogy and ended well enough. Halo 4 basically just forced expanded the universe and it feels extremely unnatural, inorganic, and completely unnecessary outside of the excuse making more games to for money purposes.

The game turned me off from Halo's storyline, because it can only go downhill from here, unless they retcon the shit out of it (like usual, but that's a rant for another time).

Until 343 proves otherwise, Halo is dead to me.
I've heard this one before.

But I think one of the bigger problems with the story is that if you didn't catch up on the expanded universe in the past four books prior, than it comes off as confusing not knowing all these characters. The mistake was building a story that really didn't explain itself without the use of the EU material. Most people don't know who the Didact, the Librarian, and co. before the game.

But yes, Lasky and Palmer I feel were more geared towards Spartan Ops. Which is a shame, because I would've liked to see them more in the Campaign considering Spartan Ops has a certain element of self-aware cheese.

As for CortanaxMaster Chief, it was already getting weird in Halo 3. 343 just took it up a notch. In a weird chest-touching sort of way.
 
Del Rio is the classic Officer who has no idea WTF he's doing.

Palmer literally HAS no character. She's just there.

Lasky is just the exact opposite of Del Rio.
What part of that are they "human beings"

Del Rio is a by the book commander, if you listen carefully you'd notice that, he refused to let Cortana go because he didn't want to risk his mission with a faulty AI.

And Lasky did what he did because he is more of a risk taker and he has high respect for Master Chief, this is even more evident in the ending cutscenes.

And Palmer... Yeah she is bland, I agree.
 
Top Bottom