Doesn't that depend on what you thought of Believe? (Destiny)

by Ragashingo , Official DBO Cryptarch, Thursday, August 31, 2017, 12:29 (2427 days ago) @ Durandal

The believe ads were based on the general marketing of Halo as a more somber, grim future. They highlighted the stakes of the conflict and were grounded in the lore of the story.
It fit the overall marketing theme and the feel that Halo 3 was the end of the series. None of this infinite sequel stuff (COD, I'm looking at you).

Destiny isn't the same, and isn't going for the same feeling. If anything it's more like Halo 2 marketing where Chief shows up to start the fight.

Note that part of the reason that Halo 4 and 5 seem so bad is the move away from the more grounded sci fi and military realism seen in the Bungie produced series. While the worst part of Bungies's games was the "Who can have the most heroic death" contest of Reach, Halo 4 discards all of humanity's strategy and tactics to put incompetent stereotypes in charge.

The armor designs followed, changing into something no different from any other future armored shooter.

Believe was so close to making sense and being great. After all, the Chief does disappear through the Ark portal and is not seen again for (at that point) who knows how long if ever. The veteran recollections would work great in that context.

Unfortunately, the heavy implication of the Believe ads was that the Master Chief died / sacrificed himself via Plasma Grenade during a big ground battle on Earth. But it did not fit within the game, period. Gameplay wise, that's not how the Chief would ever die with any of us playing. Saving the entire universe? Sure! Going through a portal and not coming back giving those veterans the impression that he died? That works. But right in front of them on a hill of no galaxy-wide consequence when Halo 2 left us the Halo Array primed to fire?

No. No. No.

And then, of course, Halo 4 just complete obliterated the Believe ads with the Chief coming back less than a decade later. :/