Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Bring blood back in halo infinite.

OP WillyMcFly

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3
Halo 5 lacked human blood in it. I’m guessing they did it to lower the ESRB rating to T. I don’t believe, the lower the age rating is, the more it will sell. Alot of parents buy GTA V for their 8 year olds lol. My point is, most parents these days don’t look at the ESRB rating so the sales increase because of the T rating would be very little.

I want to see blood return to halo infinite. It just doesn’t feel right when you shoot another player and no blood comes out.
My parents got me CE back when I was 10. I can't speak for everyone, but for me at least, I wouldn't mind doing the same for my hypothetical kids. Though I might adjust to 12 because games are so realistic now compared to the days of CE that I would want at least a year or two of maturity under their belts before they got exposed to that.

Personally, I want blood in this game, because shooting someone with no blood coming out makes me feel like I'm just playing airsoft. At the end of the day though, I just hope 343 will focus more on making a good game and less on what rating they can get. If that means blood, then great! If not, then oh well I'll deal with it.
Yeah, bring blood back and make it rated M. For me, shooting someone and no blood comes out is like power rangers. Halo needs to be realistic again.
AMA4N wrote:
Yeah, bring blood back and make it rated M. For me, shooting someone and no blood comes out is like power rangers. Halo needs to be realistic again.
Actually, no blood would fly out of the entry hole, because the blood doesn't magically start flying opposite to the bullet's direction of travel. A little blood would leak out afterwards, but you wouldn't see this because it's contained within the armor. Assuming the bullet makes an exit, a small amount of blood might come out with the bullet, but since most of the damage is contained in the armor, the amount of blood that would exit the armor would be droplets. In that respect, Halo 5 is the most realistic with respect to the amount of blood.

You're all free to wish for more blood, but don't pretend it's for realism, because huge showers of blood are not realistic.
BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD.
tsassi wrote:
AMA4N wrote:
Yeah, bring blood back and make it rated M. For me, shooting someone and no blood comes out is like power rangers. Halo needs to be realistic again.
Actually, no blood would fly out of the entry hole, because the blood doesn't magically start flying opposite to the bullet's direction of travel. A little blood would leak out afterwards, but you wouldn't see this because it's contained within the armor. Assuming the bullet makes an exit, a small amount of blood might come out with the bullet, but since most of the damage is contained in the armor, the amount of blood that would exit the armor would be droplets. In that respect, Halo 5 is the most realistic with respect to the amount of blood.

You're all free to wish for more blood, but don't pretend it's for realism, because huge showers of blood are not realistic.
That would be the case with SPARTANs and projectile weapons.

Though with the marines that have less protection, some wearing regular hats/caps or nothing at all occasionally being the case, it would be a bit different story depending on weapon.
Covenant species, Flood & such could be their own thing but thats different thing alltogether.

Though even with SPARTAN armor, how to handle all of the sci-fi weapons & their effect to said armor (shielded)?
Likely something of forerunner design would leave some major damage upon impact, likely not blood but just burnt hole on point of impact.
Then there is the neck/jointshots, those shots that don't hit the plates or other hardpoints of the armor, that would likely look different depending how would the undersuit react to different types of futuristic bullets.
Likely, if the shot would hit an artery blood would spurt out of the armor after being shot, resulting in puddles & somekind of afterspraying.

And the question is that what type of damage would futuristic weaponry do to a futuristic helmet? Obviously likely not a massive spray, so I would go with your line of small spray of blood that travels with the bullet.

So I would think depending on the type of shot & point of impact the resulting "realistic" (using term loosely in sci-fi) amount of blood would vary even significantly though mortal shots would likely result in puddles from arteries being open.
While alien weaponry could result in more burn type damage with minimal blood.

Explosives would be exception with more noticeable damage, if defence has evolved, so has offence.

So if "realism" would be to take away more early game type bloodsplatters, it would also bring with it explosive damage & other rather gory aspects.
Halo 5 does have blood though.

And before Halo 5, Halo 3 was the game with the least amount of blood, and everyone seemed fine then.
Halo 5 does have blood though.And before Halo 5, Halo 3 was the game with the least amount of blood, and everyone seemed fine then.
Man I miss the g(l)ory days.
So if "realism" would be to take away more early game type bloodsplatters, it would also bring with it explosive damage & other rather gory aspects.
Sure, it might. I'm just saying that trying to justify your craving for absurd blood splatters with realism is disingenuous. People should just be honest and say that they want more blood because that's what all the games for grown ups have, or whatever. I've never actually heard a sensible explanation for this obsession with violence for sake of violence and high age ratings.
tsassi wrote:
AMA4N wrote:
Yeah, bring blood back and make it rated M. For me, shooting someone and no blood comes out is like power rangers. Halo needs to be realistic again.
Actually, no blood would fly out of the entry hole, because the blood doesn't magically start flying opposite to the bullet's direction of travel. A little blood would leak out afterwards, but you wouldn't see this because it's contained within the armor. Assuming the bullet makes an exit, a small amount of blood might come out with the bullet, but since most of the damage is contained in the armor, the amount of blood that would exit the armor would be droplets. In that respect, Halo 5 is the most realistic with respect to the amount of blood.

You're all free to wish for more blood, but don't pretend it's for realism, because huge showers of blood are not realistic.
If anyone wants blood, go and play Gears of War. I understand how people want to see more blood but it's not needed nor necessary and it's by no means realistic. Playing Halo 5 matchmaking can be frustrating because weapons disappear so quickly once you die. I'm no expert but I think thats to avoid loading issues within the game. I would think that if blood splatters, puddles, smearing, or whatever was included in every game, the overall experience would suffer from various issues.
Well, the Blood is what makes most of the Halo games 'M' for mature. Maybe they'll just list it as 'Animated Blood' like in Destiny and Garden Warfare.
AMA4N wrote:
Yeah, bring blood back and make it rated M. For me, shooting someone and no blood comes out is like power rangers. Halo needs to be realistic again.
Yes, we’ll explained. Most of the community wants to see a return in blood. Hopefully 343 will add blood back in halo infinite.
Bring back blood Xbox style. Blood everywhere
tsassi wrote:
So if "realism" would be to take away more early game type bloodsplatters, it would also bring with it explosive damage & other rather gory aspects.
Sure, it might. I'm just saying that trying to justify your craving for absurd blood splatters with realism is disingenuous. People should just be honest and say that they want more blood because that's what all the games for grown ups have, or whatever. I've never actually heard a sensible explanation for this obsession with violence for sake of violence and high age ratings.
In Halo CE, I always liked the blood because it was comically exaggerated. You could melee an Elite once and it would instantly produce buckets of blood. It's just kind of funny. There are plenty of movies (Django Unchained) that do similar things just for comedic effect.
tsassi wrote:
So if "realism" would be to take away more early game type bloodsplatters, it would also bring with it explosive damage & other rather gory aspects.
Sure, it might. I'm just saying that trying to justify your craving for absurd blood splatters with realism is disingenuous. People should just be honest and say that they want more blood because that's what all the games for grown ups have, or whatever. I've never actually heard a sensible explanation for this obsession with violence for sake of violence and high age ratings.
Hoping that "your" part wasn't aimed toward person given I did state that, as the first thing in fact, that I agreed with such being unrealistic in case of a SPARTAN headshot.

And later on in the original reply I agreed on realistic bloodsplatters being small but you just cut the rest of the reply off but it can still be seen in original reply for those that are interested.

And one of my reasoning for some form of blood and/or gore in games set on war is pretty much that there should be some visuals that show some form of consequences to the killings performed in said setting, the blood/gore shows the horrors of war instead of showing puppets cleanly falling over.
And for some, it can add visual emotional moments. Like seeing ally in vulnerable or dying situation creates weight & sadness instead of endless senseless killing.
It even shows the shade of grey in situations where enemy has been injured.

As for the rating itself, I agree that there is no sense in craving for certain ratings for games but that also means that lower ratings shouldn't be aimed towards if it restricts artistic choices. Best would be to design a game & see what rating it gets.

And on the flipside, I haven't really heard sensible points from people who want to remove the blood/gore from games, it's mostly "all this blood from the things I shoot in a game looks obnoxious".
Talking about twisted morality, killing in games is fine but showing any visual consequence for it is not okay.

It's a game about war and I would personally like to avoid glorifying it with too much of a clean environment.
tsassi wrote:
So if "realism" would be to take away more early game type bloodsplatters, it would also bring with it explosive damage & other rather gory aspects.
Sure, it might. I'm just saying that trying to justify your craving for absurd blood splatters with realism is disingenuous. People should just be honest and say that they want more blood because that's what all the games for grown ups have, or whatever. I've never actually heard a sensible explanation for this obsession with violence for sake of violence and high age ratings.
Hoping that "your" part wasn't aimed toward person given I did state that, as the first thing in fact, that I agreed with such being unrealistic in case of a SPARTAN headshot.

And later on in the original reply I agreed on realistic bloodsplatters being small but you just cut the rest of the reply off but it can still be seen in original reply for those that are interested.

And one of my reasoning for some form of blood and/or gore in games set on war is pretty much that there should be some visuals that show some form of consequences to the killings performed in said setting, the blood/gore shows the horrors of war instead of showing puppets cleanly falling over.
And for some, it can add visual emotional moments. Like seeing ally in vulnerable or dying situation creates weight & sadness instead of endless senseless killing.
It even shows the shade of grey in situations where enemy has been injured.

As for the rating itself, I agree that there is no sense in craving for certain ratings for games but that also means that lower ratings shouldn't be aimed towards if it restricts artistic choices. Best would be to design a game & see what rating it gets.

And on the flipside, I haven't really heard sensible points from people who want to remove the blood/gore from games, it's mostly "all this blood from the things I shoot in a game looks obnoxious".
Talking about twisted morality, killing in games is fine but showing any visual consequence for it is not okay.

It's a game about war and I would personally like to avoid glorifying it with too much of a clean environment.
Well said. Good job.
in fact, unlike what many people believe, when you get shot, blood does not come instantly from the wound like a hole in a pressure hose, what can happen is that pieces of tissue, skin, muscle come out or material of the armor and clothing along with some dust from the impact, the blood comes out slowly or in case of an artery in small and short bursts of blood, but never during the shot, but later, that of the huge explosions of blood splashing all because of a small bullet or sudden and instantaneous deaths when shot in the stomach are just Hollywood inventions.

PD: THERE'S BLOOD SPLATTER ON HALO 5 BUT IT'S VERY SMALL.
WillyMcFly wrote:
AMA4N wrote:
Yeah, bring blood back and make it rated M. For me, shooting someone and no blood comes out is like power rangers. Halo needs to be realistic again.
Yes, we’ll explained. Most of the community wants to see a return in blood. Hopefully 343 will add blood back in halo infinite.
but There's blood on halo 5, i'll never undertand why people think that halo 5 has 0% blood ingame human or Covenant because the T rating, when the lack of blood is just an engine problem because the dynamic Resolution (even the fire, dust and smoke dissapears when you are close), otherwise you will not see blood on the beta or in the terminal Velocity assasination.
WillyMcFly wrote:
AMA4N wrote:
Yeah, bring blood back and make it rated M. For me, shooting someone and no blood comes out is like power rangers. Halo needs to be realistic again.
Yes, we’ll explained. Most of the community wants to see a return in blood. Hopefully 343 will add blood back in halo infinite.
but There's blood on halo 5, i'll never undertand why people think that halo 5 has 0% blood ingame human or Covenant because the T rating, when the lack of blood is just an engine problem because the dynamic Resolution (even the fire, dust and smoke dissapears when you are close), otherwise you will not see blood on the beta or in the terminal Velocity assasination.
I mean there is blood but it’s very hard to notice. I want to shoot someone and a blood goes everywhere
If flood is to return i would like to see it be grotesque again with gory body horror like 1 and 2 than the rather tame take from Halo 3. Covenant should be bloodier, though i'm against dismemberment, maybe drones though. Flood should be all filters off, very visceral.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3