Forum:How to deal with canon holes in Reach?

Canon Holes
How are we suppose to deal with the discrepancies between the game and the book? I'd love to hear you're thoughts on this.Weeping Angel 22:36, 15 March 2012 (EDT)
 * Just like this. Tuckerscreator (stalk ) 22:42, 15 March 2012 (EDT)
 * No, there are no canonholes at all. The changes made were merely retcons. See here for a past discussion of this.-- 22:40 15 March 2012 (EST)

I guess I should have poked around a bit more before created a Forum sorry about that. should i delete this now?Weeping Angel 15:04, 16 March 2012 (EDT)
 * No, it's fine to have. Only admins can delete pages anyway.-- 15:06 16 March 2012 (EST)

I guess there's still a preconception that Reach is somehow "going against canon." I know the debate has been exhausted elsewhere (literally exhausted sometimes), but I'd like to leave a few relevant tidbits here for people to mull over: This isn't a rant against you, Weeping Angel, or anyone specific, rather my take on some trends I've been noticing. It's just my two cents, for what it's worth. --  Specops306   Autocrat     Qur'a 'Morhek   08:27, 17 March 2012 (EDT)
 * 1) Games have always taken precedence over novels. Always. This is not a new thing, so why did people suddenly start taking the book as superior canon?
 * 2) The explanation for the supposed "discrepancies" reveal that they are no such thing - they've just been incorporated into a larger narrative. Things like the Spartans being unaware of the invasion, Halsey bullshitting over Spartan numbers, and so on, are given actual backstories - I don't think of this as a retcon, so much as an expansion. The old canon isn't obsolete. It's just been updated.
 * 3) I see Reach as the start of a downward trend in community positivity - let's face it, Reach is when people started saying that Microsoft was milking the cashcow franchise, that it's ruined, that they should just stop. I hate this type of thinking. I live in a dairy town, and the thing about cows is that you use them for one of two things - you milk them, and get something out of it, or you slaughter it. Which of the two sounds more appealing? I see it more as a reaction to change - "Halo isn't exactly the same, however shall we cope?"
 * 4) It's only gotten worse with Halo 4 - with virtually NO gameplay or actual story information, the community has somehow convinced itself that 343i is turning Halo into "CoD in space", distorting quotes to support this. They've convinced themselves that nobody else but Bungie has the right to do anything with Halo, that it is a sacred cow to be protected. God, I hate this line of thought even more. Change is good! Healthy! Without it, we'd all still be primordial slime! Evolution has always been a part of Halo - it's right there, in the name!


 * Off topic but nothing hurts when you learn a fun trivia: "from Wikipedia, the "Combat Evolved" subtitle was an addition by marketers at Microsoft, who felt that Halo alone was not a descriptive enough title to compete with other military-themed games." — subtank  11:05, 17 March 2012 (EDT)


 * Yes, the reason why the tagline was included is a stupid one. But it's become iconic, and it's also accurate - Halo is a series where combat is constantly evolving. Dual Wielding in Halo 2. Equipment in Halo 3. Armour Abilities in Reach. Halo Wars. New weapons and enemies. Change is a core component of Halo, and it irritates the hell out of me when I see people complaining about it. Again, not regarding anyone specific, just in general. --  Specops306   Autocrat     Qur'a 'Morhek   21:59, 17 March 2012 (EDT)