Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I cannot begin to describe how few feths I give about the wider Halo universe. I stopped liking the games when they stopped being a very cerebral romance story.

 Kain wrote:

 Psienesis wrote:
... this is why the HH should have remained a myth. The depictions of the Primarchs on the page has... not been good.

If Halo can have a Forerunner saga then 40k can damn well have a War in Heaven and Horus Heresy series.

So, a turn for the worse from a storyline perspective?

Halo was just fine until it went all wierd with the Forerunner saga and then the plot for Halo 4.

That Lord of Change seems like the most incompetent servant of Tzeentch there is.

No Primarch was corrupted so easily, except maybe Fulgrim, who the narrative intended to be a weak-willed douche. Horus fell not so much due to lacking will, but because he was written to be an epic douche (Sadly). Curze and Angron were insane. Alpharius was an idiot. Magnus was shoehorned into his role by the single most powerful arbiter of fate and causality in the setting. Mortarion was forced into doing so to save his Legion from Nurgle killing them all. Lorgar fell because he chose to, because he has this weird boner for the truth, even if the truth is terrible.

Don't fall into the mindless HH bashing of some posters without at least learning the definition of context first.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
That Lord of Change seems like the most incompetent servant of Tzeentch there is.

No Primarch was corrupted so easily, except maybe Fulgrim, who the narrative intended to be a weak-willed douche. Horus fell not so much due to lacking will, but because he was written to be an epic douche (Sadly). Curze and Angron were insane. Alpharius was an idiot. Magnus was shoehorned into his role by the single most powerful arbiter of fate and causality in the setting. Mortarion was forced into doing so to save his Legion from Nurgle killing them all. Lorgar fell because he chose to, because he has this weird boner for the truth, even if the truth is terrible.

Don't fall into the mindless HH bashing of some posters without at least learning the definition of context first.

Speaking of mindless bashing there's quite a lot of Oldcron hate here http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/553304.page

Thought you'd be able to balance out the set of opinions better than I can.

Yeah I guess I made a post or something.

In any case, the Horus Heresy books and Forerunner trilogy get bashed primarily because people get upset when they find that reality does not match their imaginations. Yeah, yeah "Less is more" but there's a certain point of so much less that your house is just foundation in a hole in the ground and you're told to "pretend you're in a house." Not to mention, a great deal of the most iconic characters and concepts of the setting had their time in the sun or started out in that particular era. Leaving it purely in the background when there was so much room to expand into it and explore would be silly./

People get upset when the setting turns out to not match what they wanted to happen.

 Void__Dragon wrote:
People get upset when the setting turns out to not match what they wanted to happen.

I wonder how much butthurt would spring out if and when they go and do a War in Heaven series after the Horus Heresy saga is done.

 Soo'Vah'Cha wrote:
I think the Primarchs never fully left puberty

This, pretty much.

 Psienesis wrote:
It should be noted, however, that, in the end, Macharius reached the end of his crusade, and then lamented that he could conquer no more, and his generals would not follow him into the Halo Stars.

Also of interest is that many of the worlds he conquered in his Crusade fell back into revolt and heresy upon his death.

That's because Macharius was based completely off of Alexander the Great.

Yes, I know. However, just because you base a character on another (whether a real person or another, more-famous, fictional character) does not mean you need to slavishly follow that storyline from beginning to end.

I can only imagine that having his conquests crumble after his death, and his generals all fighting amongst themselves, as did Alexander, is intentional.