Talk:Halo: The Flood

Opinion

Personally, i found the book interesting. His depictions of the UNSC Marines and Helljumpers were enthralling, his book was the first to give an insight into Covenant hierarchy and politics, and his Cortana was spot-on. the only fault i found was with his version of the Master Chief, but that was only a minor thing for me. Kora 'Morhekee 04:44, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I didn't like Master chief but i agree that his marines were great. It also explains alot about the parts of the story in the game that didn't make sense, like where the marines went and what the covenant were doing. User:Sir aaron

Semper Fi

Semper Fi, means loyal to the core, the marine core. So we can assume that the UNSC would want loyal marines. Am I right? I could be wrong...--H*bad ^(talk) 22:50, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

No,it means always faithful.Heres a latin lesson for you,semper means always, and Fi means faithful.

(This means always vigilant)

Semper Vigilans,

Grievous797^Comm

Marine Corps, not marine core. Smoke ^{My page}_{My talk}^{My Editcount} 03:52, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Question

Am I the only one who when reading the book was dissapointed every time it switched back to the Chief, and only really caring about what happened to the marines?

Spartan 501 06:08, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Nope, same for me. The author did a good job, it's just that his idea of what a Spartan is isn't what people want them to be. His Marines were absolutely awesome, and I personally hope he does another! Specops306, Kora 'Morhek

when i read this book, i seem to think thats its just like a walkthrough for the halo: combat evolved. I know that it ovious but its annoying after a while since i played the game and i know whats coming next.. --H92 17:39, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

He gave the masterchief too many emotions in the book.

you know why.its becuce chief parts are just about eneamys thare and here and the constit daceripshon of ervey battle.its like reading someone play the game.--Noname the hero 22:50, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Criticism

Am i the only one who thinks the artical is a little unfairly critical on the book. i thought it was a very good book and i dont want people to not read the book because of what this artical says about it. User:Sir aaron

I agree, the criticism also seems very biased, I suggest shorting down and rephrasing the entire section, as no other of the books had a "criticism" section. Baryon15 16:50, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Halo movie

If there the halo movie is going to be based on the halo 1 game, they must use this book for the movie

i don't understand why they don't just make a game, even if it's animated,it's gonna make SOOO much money. and i heard it's gonna be about the 1st book. (Fall of Reach)

I'd actually hope that if they ever make a Halo Movie, they'd base it off The Fall of Reach. To me, it'd be pointless to have a movie of any of the games. They've been done; we can just play the game and experience it for ourselves. However, with a movie based off Fall of Reach, it would enable us (the audience) to dig deeper into the origins of Master Chief and the entire Spartan-II program that was basically non-existent in the games. -Kamikaze102

Discrepancies from "Trivia" to "Inconsistencies"

I propose we move all the mistakes noted in the trivia to the inconsistencies section, so that they are correctly categorized. --KickButtUnggoy 00:44, October 6, 2009 (UTC)

Horrible book

It makes no sense and sucks. Really, who gives a flip what happened to Jenkins. He is just a bit character, but no, he had to be made into some flood hero. 173.79.185.96 21:43, October 30, 2009 (UTC)