Halo director says silent Master Chief 'important' for Halo 4

Frank O'Connor talks about his surprise at fans' reaction to Halo: Reach, and how Halo 4 will expand the character of Master Chief.

34

Frank O'Connor, formerly of Bungie and now franchise director at 343 Industries, says he was "surprised" by how strongly fans reacted to Master Chief's absence in Halo: Reach, and says that the character will be explored more deeply in Halo 4.

"I was a great proponent of the new Spartans for Reach," he said. "I thought that people would do what they did with the Master Chief and put themselves into the character's shoes, but people missed him."

Master Chief wouldn't have fit the Reach timeline, but O'Connor suggests that the long time spent with the character and nostalgic connection fueled the fans clamoring for more. "It's been ten years of Halo, and for some people it was their first gaming experience, so we shouldn't really have been surprised that the character had become beloved and ingrained in the experience," he told OXM. "This is some people's main sci-fi experience - when I was a kid mine was Star Wars, but for some people it was Halo."

Still, O'Connor recognizes that so far Master Chief has been more of a cipher to step into, and thinks Halo 4 is the time to give him more grounding. "The thing is, people are interested in him - it's time to start exploring him as a character a little more, but you can do that with actions rather than words. It's all about how he behaves, and the choices that he makes." He says Master Chief is "a man of few words" and says it's "important to stick to that premise."

343 has called this new spin the start of the Reclaimer Trilogy, and have said it's "John's story" -- referring to Master Chief's other name, John-117. Halo 4 is slated for a holiday 2012 release.

Editor-In-Chief
From The Chatty
  • reply
    November 30, 2011 8:30 AM

    Steve Watts posted a new article, Halo director says silent Master Chief 'important' for Halo 4.

    Frank O'Connor talks about his surprise at fans' reaction to Halo: Reach, and how Halo 4 will expand the character of Master Chief.

    • reply
      November 30, 2011 9:04 AM

      Translation: if you thought Halo's storyline and world were overly pretentious and annoying in Halo 2 and Halo 3, buckle up.

      • reply
        November 30, 2011 9:23 AM

        Honest question... What made it pretentious?

      • reply
        November 30, 2011 9:40 AM

        [deleted]

      • reply
        November 30, 2011 9:55 AM

        Care to explain?

        • reply
          November 30, 2011 10:37 AM

          The names in Halo 1 are so over-the-top in pretentiousness. Master Chief. Pillar of Autumn. The gas giant Threshold (which is what attracts the compass on the rifle). Silent Cartographer. The Flood. It all takes itself way too seriously, for what is ultimately an amalgmation of four different sci-fi frameworks. And it's always shoving forward with way too much drama.

          I found the storyline and presentation in Gunman Chronicles to be more fun and better paced than Halo.

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 10:39 AM

            archville...wow, just wow. Is this really your opinion? Because it's terrible.

            • reply
              November 30, 2011 12:00 PM

              I don't see why you're wowing this, it's par for the course for him.

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 10:58 AM

            Wow... I'm going to guess you played it in 2004 on PC purely so when someone asked if you'd played Halo after calling it awful you could say yes. Because this has to be one of the more egregious cases of hating something going in and making sure everything reinforces your preconceived opinion. Master Chief is pretentious? Really? Master Chief is an actual real world title in the Navy, the top 1% of the Navy apparently. wjw

            • reply
              November 30, 2011 11:06 AM

              and who wants to fight non-awesome named stuff?

            • reply
              November 30, 2011 11:18 AM

              Yes, Master Chief is the highest enlisted rank, right above Senior Chief.

              Each command generally only has one, a command Master Chief. Then there is only one Master Chief of the Navy, which is the highest enlisted person in the Navy.

              So, not only does Master Chief sound cool, it is a real rank - so, not really pretentious.

            • reply
              November 30, 2011 11:58 AM

              My thoughts exactly.

            • reply
              November 30, 2011 12:22 PM

              I did play it in 2005, to give it a (relatively) fair shake, and because the Silent Caetographer demo was rather good. Unfortunately it was the second best map of the campaign, and the only one not repeated in the campaign arc (or should I say "campaign halo").

              In an alternate dimension in the space-time continuum, you're bitching at me for never having played Halo after 10 years.

              • reply
                December 1, 2011 9:09 AM

                So. You played a groundbreaking game from 2001 four years late. And you think that among other things doesn't play a part in your perception?

            • reply
              November 30, 2011 3:42 PM

              I like to read it as Master Chef, and have interpretted Halo as Under Siege in space.

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 12:00 PM

            if you think those names are pretentious sci-fi names, i wonder what crappy sci-fi you've read to give you that idea

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 1:53 PM

            archville post

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 4:10 PM

            hahaha. I on the other hand think the names are great and all my hard drives bear names of some ships from Halo Universe.

            Pillar of Autumn, Dawn Under Heaven, Spirit of Fire, Heart of Midlothian, Forward Unto Dawn, In Amber Clad and Truth and Reconciliation.

            I see it as in the future with so many ships you run out of names to give it. Look at some of the names of ships we had in WWII.

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 4:21 PM

            What do you think of the naming scheme in Warcraft? Just curious. The Horde? Jaina Proudmore (Srsly, SO PRETENTIOUS!)? The Burning Legion?

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 4:54 PM

            [deleted]

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 6:12 PM

            Man what the names were the best part of Halo 1

      • reply
        November 30, 2011 10:40 AM

        i found its tone refreshing in 2001 when most sci-fi was borderline scatological humor, or stupid faux-satanic stuff like quake 3. it was a nice change, cool and reverent and yeah, overly serious sometimes, but with some humor to temper things (the sergeant; the grunts; the monitor).

        • reply
          November 30, 2011 10:42 AM

          in fact, most sci-fi shooters today are either ridiculously macho bordering on self-parody (bulletstorm) or faux-realistic with an bro-tone (resistance; killzone).

          i'll take high sci-fi with some pretense over crap like gears of war any day. halo always seemed a bit more mature to me (discounting the multiplayer base).

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 12:11 PM

            Wait, so Bulletstorm was just bordering on parody?

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 4:35 PM

            honestly I think pretty much all of those pale to Valve's stuff. I just... don't like the way any of those games do things. They may even have a decent concept or setting but they piss it all away with the way in poor execution. Too many boring-ass context-less voice overs and cutscenes and lame expository comm chatter. The integration of gameplay with story elements/narrative is extremely poor, and the story and gameplay both suffer as a consequence.

            Thinking about it, I'm pretty much convinced the games would have been a lot more interesting if just nobody talked, ever, and you were left to draw your own conclusions about this area you were fighting through... which is why this idea of a silent master chief might actually be a good thing.

    • reply
      November 30, 2011 9:19 AM

      I honestly care as much about the character of master chief as i do about doom guy.

    • reply
      November 30, 2011 9:34 AM

      Have the stated that Halo 4 is for the 360? There's rumors that the next Xbox would be around Holiday 2012, which is when Halo 4 is suppose to be released. Seems like Microsoft would want the next Halo to debut with the console.

    • reply
      November 30, 2011 9:45 AM

      If they make a new game with new enemies then I am on board. The story was resolved by Halo 3 - there is peace with the Covenant, the Flood are gone, the Halos are gone.

      If they come up with some contrivance so that you're fighting the Covenant again then they can get fucked.

    • reply
      November 30, 2011 10:07 AM

      can't stop laughing at how sad this sounds

    • reply
      November 30, 2011 10:46 AM

      [deleted]

      • reply
        November 30, 2011 10:47 AM

        how so? the've cranked out sequels regularly. i don't see why that would change. they are targeting the xbox 360 which the bungie team knows intimately. reach was a huge hit and probably their best halo game since 1. they have an incredible multiplayer foundation to build on.

        i have no idea what you mean?

      • reply
        November 30, 2011 12:00 PM

        I've enjoyed the hell out of every single Halo game to date. Some were weaker than others to be sure, but the franchise as a whole has been of consistently high quality. I really doubt that will change with Halo 4.

      • reply
        November 30, 2011 5:38 PM

        I've played Halo 1 and DNF. I'd rather play DNF without question.

    • reply
      November 30, 2011 1:50 PM

      Master Chief wouldn't have fit the Reach timeline... If you completely ignore The Fall of Reach, which they did. Master Chief and the other Spartans certainly were active in the battle at Reach but they Retconned so much of that story.

      • reply
        November 30, 2011 2:00 PM

        I figured he was just in orbit the whole time, but never finished playing reach to find out

        • reply
          November 30, 2011 5:40 PM

          Yup, he was fighting on an orbital MAC cannon, iirc. I wonder how long the time between them leaving Reach's orbit and finding the first Halo was? Seeing as he was already in cryo when they were leaving Reach.

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 6:06 PM

            It was a period of a couple weeks IIRC. FTL is fast but not instantaneous. Hence the need for cryo tubes.

            Reach fell in August with Pillar of Autumn fleeing and Halo was found in mid September.

            • reply
              November 30, 2011 6:15 PM

              Yeah, I think you've read the books but they go semi-insane with the timeline between Halo 1 and 2 with First Strike and time travel. In any case like you pointed out, slipspace FTL travel in Halo isn't instantaneous.

              • reply
                November 30, 2011 6:22 PM

                Yeah, It's been a while since I've read the first 3 books. Never really took much note to the dates though.

    • reply
      November 30, 2011 4:17 PM

      I can't wait for this compelling well fleshed out character to return. He has one of the most interesting personalities of all video game characters.

    • reply
      November 30, 2011 4:43 PM

      i wish they would release all the halo games on the pc :(

    • reply
      November 30, 2011 5:11 PM

      I don't think leaning on Master Chief even more, as a focus to carry the new trilogy, is a good idea. He was mostly a mute placeholder anyway. I would rather they focus on a team/squad/cast of characters that MC is a part of for Halo 4, kind of like what Reach did. Frankly I'd rather play a few levels in the shoes of the elite spec ops commander "Halfjaw" than Master Chief. I always liked the elites over the spartans.

      • reply
        November 30, 2011 5:42 PM

        I hope they keep the Reach theme of being in a squad as well. They *really* need to have MC team up with his old Blue Team from the novels that are still alive. Fred, Linda, Kelly and really flesh out their characters. Been hoping for them to be in a game since Halo 2 :(

        • reply
          November 30, 2011 6:17 PM

          Totally this. That is exactly what I am hoping they do. There are still a few of John's old squad mates alive (Fred, Kelly) and Halsey is with them. It would also be a good way to work Jun back into the games. I think a squad of characters would serve the new trilogy so much better than another Master Chief love fest. Halo 1 and 3 are still my favorites but Reach did a lot of things right, especially in terms or story, atmosphere, and presentation.

        • reply
          November 30, 2011 6:19 PM

          I've given up hoping for such a thing. It took a while for me to get it but they (or at least Bungie) just weren't interested in doing any type of storytelling like that in their games. Instead we got the weak ass characters of Reach.

          • reply
            November 30, 2011 6:26 PM

            I wonder if Bungie just didn't want to introduce John squad into the games randomly. Since they are so close throughout the books, and then to have them just appear would be difficult to flesh out in the middle of the trilogy. I don't think they wanted the books to be a requirement to enjoy the story told in the games. I'm rambling and not making the point I want to...

    • reply
      November 30, 2011 5:40 PM

      MASTER CHIEF IS....MASTER CHEF..... CHOP CHOP CHOP!!!!

Hello, Meet Lola