Talk:Titan (canceled game): Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:35, April 2, 2012

Nobody has been fired. The internal teams were disbanded, and absorbed by the other group working on Halo Wars. -- Councillor Specops306 - Kora 'Morhek 07:17, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Even the concept of having a MMO of Halo sounds ridiculous. Thank god they abandoned the project...Little_Missy - File:Cortana Gif.gif 12:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Merge all cut-content into this article?

Now, rather than deleting all of these, why not create a hub for cut-content? Just like our Pre-Xbox Halo article. It would look far better and readers can find all of the cut-content information in one place! :D — subtank 07:09, 31 March 2012 (EDT)

Sounds good. We should do that. Are all of these cut contents notable enough to have their own page? No.—S331

_{(COM • Mission Log • Profile)} 07:12, 31 March 2012 (EDT)

Except that's a heck of a lot of content-there's already articles for cut content in other areas (even levels, so shouldn't the same standard be applied? Better to have individual articles than make a user trawl through hordes of data.--Hawki 08:48, 31 March 2012 (EDT)

This a cancelled game and all of its contents. Where can we put deleted levels or vehicles? Well, I guess we can. —S331

_{(COM • Mission Log • Profile)} 10:46, 31 March 2012 (EDT)

Hm. Could possibly work as an article, but the gallery's going to be huge. Tuckerscreator^(stalk) 12:03, 31 March 2012 (EDT)

Not really. All we need to make sure is that every images is categorised accordingly and properly.— subtank 10:34, 2 April 2012 (EDT)

There. Revamped. Doesn't look that bad. The Pre-Xbox Halo article could use this layout style. :P — subtank 19:42, 2 April 2012 (EDT)

Looks terrible IMO, but it's all down to opinion, and I won't start an edit war. I will say it's kind of redundant to compare it to the Pre-Xbox article because in that case, many of the concepts still exist in some form, the article simply covers how they were, and of concepts that are unique to it, there seems to be an absence of images. It also raises the issue of what happens if some of these concepts are revitalized. Happens more often then you might think.--Hawki 20:35, 2 April 2012 (EDT)

@@ Line 12: / Line 12: @@
 ::::Not really. All we need to make sure is that every images is categorised accordingly and properly.— <span style="font-size:16px; font-family:OrbitronMedium;">[[User:Subtank|<span style="color:#FF4F00;">subtank</span>]]</span> 10:34, 2 April 2012 (EDT)
 :::::There. Revamped. Doesn't look that bad. The [[Pre-Xbox Halo]] article could use this layout style. :P — <span style="font-size:16px; font-family:OrbitronMedium;">[[User:Subtank|<span style="color:#FF4F00;">subtank</span>]]</span> 19:42, 2 April 2012 (EDT)
+::::::Looks terrible IMO, but it's all down to opinion, and I won't start an edit war. I will say it's kind of redundant to compare it to the Pre-Xbox article because in that case, many of the concepts still exist in some form, the article simply covers how they were, and of concepts that are unique to it, there seems to be an absence of images. It also raises the issue of what happens if some of these concepts are revitalized. Happens more often then you might think.--[[User talk:Hawki|Hawki]] 20:35, 2 April 2012 (EDT)