Talk:List of inconsistencies in the Halo series: Difference between revisions

==Halo Wars-Halo Escalation==

:::: Well then may I make an edit request? I request this <small>'''"However, Halo 4: The Essential Visual Guide establishes that John's suit's superficial upgrades are based on a variant of the Mark IV, retroactively indicating that the suits seen in the Prologue are in fact this particular variant"'''</small> be slightly changed to this <small>'''"However, Halo 4: The Essential Visual Guide establishes that John's suit's superficial upgrades are based on a variant of the Mark IV, possibly indicating that the suits seen in the Prologue are in fact this particular variant"'''</small> As while the EVU states that John's custom MKVI is based on an earlier line of MKIV '''it is never directly stated''' that what we see in Halo 4's prologue is that MKIV, so I request this minor change as since it is never directly stated it leaves it open for interpretation and later changes, as well as pleasing both sides and ending this edit war. - [[User:JJAB91]]

:::I'm with Braidenvl and Morhek - the issue here was the removal of the EVG's explanation, not what Holmes tweeted. Like Killamin7, I'd also to question the logic of deferring to direct developer statements over likewise official media: over the years we've had plenty of more or less silly "explanations" to appease the fans - that the M7 SMG was still "in the factory" during ''Reach'' or that the Skirmishers were all wiped out during the same game (oh <s>yes</s> no, the ''Kilo-Five Trilogy'' cannot be canon now!). Or Frankie's aforementioned prowler comment. Personally, I would prefer if Holmes' statement superseded the EVG's explanation since I'm not a fan of the utter lack of a logical visual continuity in the MJOLNIR series' development, but it doesn't justify removing perfectly valid information. I would have no problem with changing the "retroactively" to "possibly", though I don't see the point - the intention of the EVG's statement was crystal clear. I mean, consider a scenario where the EVG ''isn't'' referring to the Prologue suits: that there is a canonical Mark IV variant identical to the one in Prologue, but the armor in Prologue isn't that variant but is instead wholly non-canonical. In that case, what was the point of the EVG's claim? To establish there is in fact a Mark IV variant identical to the Chief's ''Halo 4'' suit that we never see, because the only feasible appearance of that suit isn't canon? --[[User:Jugus|<font color="MidnightBlue"><b>Jugus</b></font>]] <small>([[User talk:Jugus|<font color="Gray">Talk</font>]] | [[Special:Contributions/Jugus|<font color="Gray">Contribs</font>]])</small> 08:40, 8 June 2014 (EDT)

:In fact, I don't really like considering as an inconsistency—or a potential inconsistency—something that is created in order to expand on an original scenario (e.g.: Bungie complexifying the events of Reach). For me, a real inconsistency that was "fixed" afterwards was the Scarab's designation, for example. The [https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/universe/vehicles/scarab Waypoint article] clearly established that both the ''Halo 2'' and the ''Halo 3/Reach'' models had the same designation (Type-47) due to a UNSC administration quirk, and proceeded to give more detailed designations (Type-47A Protos and Type-47B Deutoros). That's the example I wanted to add, something clear and simple, without the whole expanded universe of ''Reach'' including 5 or 6 sources dealing with the events. Though I felt maybe the Scarab example was too minor. [[User:Imrane-117|Imrane-117]] ([[User talk:Imrane-117|talk]]) 19:59, 27 March 2016 (EDT)

== The babble juice dosage that Olivia received from A Necessary Truth?  ==

:True. Perhaps the transponder in the neural interface can be somehow deactivated, but being easily deactivated by the user wouldn't logically be ideal to the UNSC. Perhaps Schein disabled Wakahisa's and then ripped out the one in his throat? Still wouldn't make sense as to why the neural interface transponder could be deactivated by the user though. --[[User:NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">'''NightHammer'''</span>]]''^{[[User talk:NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(talk)</span>]]}^{[[Special:Contributions/NightHammer|<span style="color: #2B1AAA;">(contribs)</span>]]}'' 10:56, 12 October 2016 (EDT)

== Didact in the Composer ==

::No. We are given his current (Halo 5) height in the dossiers that came with the Limited Edition of the game.[[User:TheEld|TheEld]] ([[User talk:TheEld|talk]]) 20:57, 7 August 2018 (EDT)TheEld