I'm fairly certain that Halo CE—the game people most often refer to when they talk about blood in old Halo games—only has such absurd blood splatters because of texture detail limitations. The decrease in sizes of blood splatters over the years correlates with the increase in console perfromance. I don't think Bungie were particularly going for any sort of absurdist violence.
Ultimately, what 343i decides to do with the blood, unless it's completely silly, I probably won't care. I just find the discussion surrounding the topic incredibly frustrating for a couple of reasons. One is the people thinking that Halo should be this gritty, dark, violent game about the horrors of war, which I inherently disagree with. Another are the people who seemingly only want more blood, apparently because it's the edgy grown up thing they remember from their childhood. Third are the people thinking it has anything to do with realism. The fourth are the people who confuse the ESRB rating into the discussion, as if it mattered.
If everyone could reasonably argue for the narrative purposes of their particular point o
This observation would carry more weight if the social status of Grunts was a significant plot point of the games. But as it, I don't know if this is ever even hinted at in the games, and it's certainly never raised as an issue the player should be aware of when we mow down endless waves of Grunts. As far as the games go, it's all about humans fighting genocidial religious nuts. The best we get to see the other side is in Halo 2. And even there it's not like there's any nuance to the war (because there really isn't), but more like a portion of the religious nuts learning the truth while simultaneously losing their high status in the nut club, which causes them to make friends with the good guys. It's pretty black and white as it gets: good guys fight bad guys, some of the bad guys become good guys, the good guys win with the help of the new good guys.
Nah, not really. Then again, I've grown up in a society where there is a whole popular genre of media glorifying violence, so I couldn't really tell how the alternative is.
But I have yet to see anything that would counterargue adding blood/gore to the game/series either in way of seeking "realistic" or "humorous" goals.I don't inherently think there's any issue with blood and gore. I just don't think the Halo I enjoy benefit anything from it. As I've already said, Halo isn't a gritty dark game about war, and I don't want it to be. On the other hand, it's also not a parodic game that uses absurd violence for humorous effect. The truth is, I value Halo as a fairly mild, fairly easily digestible action adventure game. I'm not bothered by significant amounts of blood, but I don't need it either. As for gore, I don't see value in limbs flying off, and I'm afraid it would change the tone of the game, so I'm against it. Generally, people looking for more gore aren't looking for a similar tone as I am.
Portal doesn't have other humans to observe & mario doesn't have beginning in it's history where it would have had blood in it.
Quite something to compare a puzzle game with only robots being observable & a platformer for the whole family to an FPS with it's own twists in lore & somekind of history with classic videogame hitmarker, basically.
And like you said, it's up to the personal view what people seek from a game, I could primarily go for older Halo type (Halo 2, most likely) but I wouldn't mind grittier version either though I think it's unlikely.
And Bungies games didn't definitely take themselves seriously but it's more about the future with Infinite & what type of setting would fit it's storytelling. I just dont think it's the best way to portray a game set in war by cherry picking the most toned down bits.
And horrors of the disease? Thats pretty shallow observation of flood given they do gain intelligence with the gravemind with it's own twisted sence of morality.
"Do I take life or give it? Who is victim, and who is foe?"
It makes it seem like gravemind is going through it's own things & what exactly happens to the victims after the assimilation otherwise? Would you also categorize that it's not an act of war if one nation attacks others with unmanned drones?
And how would things end if flood theoretically wins? Some form of dormant flood or intelligent network of graveminds?
And does gravemind care of all it's assimilated beings like humans would of others, would gravemind see killing flood as atrocity?
The parasitic horror is just part of the story of flood.
And the humor has definitely been of the latter type but the question is, should there be in any point, the former type? Even maybe as a method of saving those crazy/suicidal marines?
And I dont think there is just much value in simply believing what Bungie wanted or not, it could be the truth, partial truth, or not at all. Bungie as a studio consists of various people with likely various viewpoints so I dont think believing that other people though in some way adds anything really.
So im not claiming otherwise either but from here, there is really going nowhere. Unless you happen to be somekind of mindreader focused on every Bungie employee in the past.
And if something something along Halo 2 isn't something "completely silly" in your mind then my primary goal would meet with your "being fine with" state, dark & gritty would be my secondary which is where we part ways on opposite sides.
But, likely unsurprisingly, I stand by that in my view Halos setting would fit for darker visualization better than what some would refer as "peashooter". But primarily, I hope for something Halo 2 type. In case of blood effects on covenant.
And I think grunt genocide has been mentioned in a terminal which is not "rub in your face" type information but still, in-game.
Though for long time, it has been just basic shooter but in later games, it seems like some emotion has been put into the story, even in case of enemies. Such empathy, though hasn't become too influential in gameplay.
But then was then, with little available lore, there is form of innocence, but now lore has expanded in quite a gray zone without the visuals matching it creating form of imbalance.
Though if the setting gets lighter & more black & white again, something less in gameplay would fit in again, though I wouldn't go lower than Halo 3. Thats pretty much the treshold for me.
And Im not certain what you would classify as "glorifying violence form of media" but if you watched 80's action films set on war, then I don't think they would be much different from what I saw as a kid.
But the question is, do you mean something of serious tone or something like "commando" which was perhaps glorifying violence but with a humorous twist?
But in most cases that I recall, those movies all showed some form of effects or consequences (body imaginery), unlike anything that is toned down now in Halo.
But I can respect that ending, in the end, it's a discussion about personal preferences & thoughts of what would fit the brand we care about & in what situation.
Though, in the case of flood, I hope you can agree that limbs could fly off as it's additionally a form of tactical gameplay aspect of literally disarming them, that is, if they could hypothetically return at some point.
Though for them, there is their own discussion.
Also, had to snip a bit because of character limit.