![]() The 'to' would apply to the files themselves, currently being shared to the user, and that are to be unshared. The 'from' would apply to the 'unsharing', as if you're taking something away from the user. Roz and I talked about it and she made the point that either one seems correct, but that the two mean different things. 'unshare files from user' sounds better to me than 'unshare files to user'. I also want to have SoulseekQt memorize downloads that have been explicitly removed by the user to make sure they're not queued again when the uploading client retries them. I suppose there's no real reason not to offer a 'remove upload' feature for that scenario. While SoulseekQt has a way of differentiating between uploads that are requested by the downloader and uploads that are initiated by the uploader, the old client doesn't. I remember after Halo 3 came out, the general consensus was that the games' ending essentially left Master Chief in statis to symbolize putting his story on hold until the time was ready for a Halo 4.My understanding is that the only situation in which your uploads can't easily be rid of by the downloader is when they're set to accept uploads from you. In fact, I remember most agreeing that we wouldn't be seeing Chief again in a very long time, so it was pretty surprising to see him return in a game on the same console. And while the legendary ending shows us what is now known to be Requiem, I remember all the speculation that it was either the planet Onyx, a Dyson sphere or a planet of Forerunners. the Master Chief and Cortana, is seen drifting into the Legendary ending of Halo 3. I know Bungie considered making Halo 4 instead of Reach, but just how much of a direction did they have planned between Halo 3 and Reach's development? Was Requiem a 343 idea? Was it something Joseph Staten came up with as a possibility while writing up Halo 3 before relaying it to Frank O'Connor? Halo Infinite Legendary Ending Explained In Detail. Requiem was originally seen in the Legendary epilogue to Halo 3. The ending shows the year 97,368 BCE written on the screen. From what I believe this is the continuation of the ending prelude I discussed above. ![]() A new foreign character is shown in the scene called the ‘Grand Edict’. Paul Russel's testimony is actually very different to what others have said about Bungie's involvement with Halo 4. I wanted the contract with Microsoft to be a very simple thing. It ended up being that we also needed to give them Halo 4. That wasn’t a bad thing-we needed more money to be independent. This is the Halo Infinite Legendary Ending after the cutscenes. But there was also a middle game that was going to happen between Halo 3 and Halo 4. This is unique as the ending changes depending on which difficulty you play on. This is the Halo Infinite Secret Ending that is. There was a period where we were going to work on a game with Peter Jackson. We had what we called the three buckets-Halo 3, the Peter Jackson game, and Halo 4. We had to fill those three buckets in order to be completely independent, and own our own IP. ![]() We officially became our own business around then, but we still had our contractual obligations with Microsoft. Jackson first came to visit the studio in 2005, and we kept talking to him during the next year. Joe and Paul were primarily the guys he spoke with, while the rest of us were thinking about whatever Halo 4 was going to be. It wasn’t going to feature Master Chief, and it’d be a short story, just an expansion pack. You know, some new multiplayer maps and a whole bunch of things that had been scattered through the entire series, all in one package. That would fulfill our contract with Microsoft. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |