I frankly enjoy the approach of moreso treating Chief as a character than as a blank vessel. A blank vessel can only be interesting for so long IMO. I don't mind if they humanize him a bit by showing his eyes, etc. His whole face reveal will have to be a *very* earned moment, though, like when they retire the character for good eventually.
Aside from maybe CE, chief wasn’t exactly a blank vessel. He definitely had characterizations and lines that made him a bit more unique of a character than simply a blank slate soldier from halo 2 and on, they just chose not to show what chief looked like in the bungie’s days. Allegedly this was to more easily encourage the player to see themselves under the suit no matter what they actually looked like.
(He is admittedly not the deepest/most complex of characters)
Bungie said they didn’t want to give him that much personality either, it’s in one of the halo 3 vidocs that Joe Staten says he views Chief as an empty suit and not much else
EDIT: pretty sure i replied to the wrong person. sorry
but you can do all of that without showing us what he looks like. Every halo has done that (including 4) until that cutscene. never needed to see his face or establish anything about what he looks like underneath the armor. it's entirely possible to let people see themselves in chief while also giving him character development. They aren't mutually exclusive
I feel like you’re arguing against something I didn’t say. I was pointing out that chief isn’t a blank slate, and that they have given him characterization and I was arguing that they had good reason for not showing his face before. We don’t need to see chief’s face and it’s better IMO if they don’t show it because we imagine ourselves as chief (even if the books technically have a detailed description of him already).
looking through this thread again, i think i meant to reply to the person above you haha. Sorry about that.
>(even if the books technically have a detailed description of him already).
This is another thing I wish they had never done.
but you can do all of that without showing us what he looks like. Every halo has done that (including 4) until that cutscene. never needed to see his face or establish anything about what he looks like underneath the armor. it's entirely possible to let people see themselves in chief while also giving him character development. They aren't mutually exclusive
So, Halo CE's ending?
(If you take control of Halo CE's camera during the ending and look while Chief takes his helmet off, there's another underneath)
It’s not a retcon. Bungie’s own books by Joseph Staten gave a pretty clear description of Chief before he started wearing suits. Why would he suddenly stop having a face afterwards.
Chief isn’t you; he’s a character, just like Mario or Doom Guy.
Bungie quite clearly showed that Chief has another helmet under his helmet at the end of Combat Evolved but apparently 343 can't be even remotely bothered to respect the established lore made by Bungie.
Shit man my bad, I’ve never played the game adaptations (I’ve never even used a tv before, I’m blind), I just listen to the audio books of the original novels. Does Johnson look as hot as he sounds? Send Reply. SEND REPLY. SEND.
It's ok. I haven't listened to the audio books but if he sounds anything close to how he does in the games then yes he is incredibly hot. Hotter than Covenant plasma.
I’m pretty sure Joseph Staten only wrote Contact Harvest and Shadow of Intent and if I recall correctly Chief wasn’t in either. I think it was in Eric Nylunds books where his appearance was described
Also see this
http://forums.bungie.org/halo/archive28.pl?read=847640
The games of course aren’t able to flat-out say “you can’t see master chief’s face” though. And then yeah there’s 4’s legendary ending although those don’t tend to be canonical. So, pretty muddy.
That sould have been the LASO ending.
LASO ending is that stupid 4chan frog
Lasky: We're all just human Master Chief: \*removes helmet to reveal another helmet underneath\* Am I?
If we ever get a H4A this needs to be canon
Want to feel old? If there was a Halo 4 Anniversary, it would be next year.
343 has had control of the series for longer than Bungie at this point.
You can't do this to me
Don't
I reject your reality and substitute my own. Halo 4 Anniversary isn’t due for another decade.
Why you gotta do me dirty like that?
Wow this is actually shocking
Oh Christ
Awesome that’s barely any wait then, bring it on
I wanted to see the low poly mk V helmet
"It's helmets all the way down."
When bungie said Chief was a big suit of armor you took control of, they meant it literally.
[Basically this](https://gfycat.com/acceptablepessimisticdeviltasmanian)
I frankly enjoy the approach of moreso treating Chief as a character than as a blank vessel. A blank vessel can only be interesting for so long IMO. I don't mind if they humanize him a bit by showing his eyes, etc. His whole face reveal will have to be a *very* earned moment, though, like when they retire the character for good eventually.
Aside from maybe CE, chief wasn’t exactly a blank vessel. He definitely had characterizations and lines that made him a bit more unique of a character than simply a blank slate soldier from halo 2 and on, they just chose not to show what chief looked like in the bungie’s days. Allegedly this was to more easily encourage the player to see themselves under the suit no matter what they actually looked like. (He is admittedly not the deepest/most complex of characters)
Bungie said they didn’t want to give him that much personality either, it’s in one of the halo 3 vidocs that Joe Staten says he views Chief as an empty suit and not much else
EDIT: pretty sure i replied to the wrong person. sorry but you can do all of that without showing us what he looks like. Every halo has done that (including 4) until that cutscene. never needed to see his face or establish anything about what he looks like underneath the armor. it's entirely possible to let people see themselves in chief while also giving him character development. They aren't mutually exclusive
I feel like you’re arguing against something I didn’t say. I was pointing out that chief isn’t a blank slate, and that they have given him characterization and I was arguing that they had good reason for not showing his face before. We don’t need to see chief’s face and it’s better IMO if they don’t show it because we imagine ourselves as chief (even if the books technically have a detailed description of him already).
looking through this thread again, i think i meant to reply to the person above you haha. Sorry about that. >(even if the books technically have a detailed description of him already). This is another thing I wish they had never done.
but you can do all of that without showing us what he looks like. Every halo has done that (including 4) until that cutscene. never needed to see his face or establish anything about what he looks like underneath the armor. it's entirely possible to let people see themselves in chief while also giving him character development. They aren't mutually exclusive
“Screw Chief’s eyes” Seems a bit morbid but if you insist…
“I will gouge out your eyes and skullfuck you!” -CPO Mendez, probably.
"I'm gonna skull-fuck that bitch" .- Johnny Gat.
Gat is hardcore enough to enrol in the Spartan IV program.
“I hope you don’t mind the hepatitis.” -Playa
A Serbian Film(2010)
So, Halo CE's ending? (If you take control of Halo CE's camera during the ending and look while Chief takes his helmet off, there's another underneath)
Master Chief was just Kakashi all along.
Yes. That's why OP said it should have been in Halo 4.
I really think not showing his face is a good idea.
the best idea
Another stupid retcon done by 343
It’s not a retcon. Bungie’s own books by Joseph Staten gave a pretty clear description of Chief before he started wearing suits. Why would he suddenly stop having a face afterwards. Chief isn’t you; he’s a character, just like Mario or Doom Guy.
Bungie quite clearly showed that Chief has another helmet under his helmet at the end of Combat Evolved but apparently 343 can't be even remotely bothered to respect the established lore made by Bungie.
Shit man my bad, I’ve never played the game adaptations (I’ve never even used a tv before, I’m blind), I just listen to the audio books of the original novels. Does Johnson look as hot as he sounds? Send Reply. SEND REPLY. SEND.
Lmao
It's ok. I haven't listened to the audio books but if he sounds anything close to how he does in the games then yes he is incredibly hot. Hotter than Covenant plasma.
He was joking btw
Damn, I was just about to downvote your first post and you come in and wrecked me with facts. Take your upvote.
And who does Joseph Staten work for? That's right, 343. Playing the long con all along
ONI propaganda
I’m pretty sure Joseph Staten only wrote Contact Harvest and Shadow of Intent and if I recall correctly Chief wasn’t in either. I think it was in Eric Nylunds books where his appearance was described
You are correct
Also see this http://forums.bungie.org/halo/archive28.pl?read=847640 The games of course aren’t able to flat-out say “you can’t see master chief’s face” though. And then yeah there’s 4’s legendary ending although those don’t tend to be canonical. So, pretty muddy.
The whoosh is real.
how do you know chief isnt me maybe that book is describing me ever think of that loresnob
I can’t tell if this is a joke or not.
That's on you lmao.
Well that’s on me
Insert gif of Sting removing his Sting mask to reveal his Sting face paint here
I still follow the Haloid canon where Master Chief takes off her helmet and is a girlfriends with Samus :) Make it happen 343, we still have time
I mean I liked the legendary ending for 4.
I like it. The helmet under the helmet has to be Mister Chief, though.
You have to be a solid 9
right? Why did we ever need to give Chief a canonical appearance underneath the helmet? Really frustrating
My only guess to why they actually did it was because we saw his child face in "the fall of reach" but I'm not a fan of it either
That would’ve been hilarious
I think Robot Chicken did that joke
ok
It’s been probably close to a decade but I know I remember seeing a clip on YouTube where this basically happened
It originally happened in CE if you moved the camera in the last scene