Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Why it is wrong to use old designs

OP Enrico 117

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 8
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Trick question, It's not wrong.
There's really no question at all.
Exactly, it's definitely not wrong.

Glad we could see eye to eye on this, for a moment I thought you were serious!!
I see, you like to make jokes then.
I do, but using it to make a point as well.

As much as I liked the realism of 4&5, the older art direction was better, peaked at 3.

Plus, it's what the community at large want and they're not about to change the entire art style, so really the argument is irrelevant.
That's not making your point, that just sharing your subjective opinion on what you like. It's just like saying I love pizza. I can respect the fact that you like Bungie's art style and, in some ways, I prefer it too over 343's art style, but there's instances where Halo 4 and Halo 5 have better art style hands down. Yet I'm talking about designs, the covenant in particular. This post is not supposed to change anything in the game at all, it's made to give some objective reasons on why some desings are bad, so people in the Halo community can have more tools to discuss design constructively, and not just live in the past and say "I wanna go backward because I liked it better".
If you can't see the point of the discussion, I'm sorry for you, but that's your problem. The fact that most of the comments about the gameplay trailer are about the graphics, (including design) clearly means there still needs to be discussion around it. The hundreds of topics about this argument in this forum you mention ed are fourther proof of people willing to discusso the topic. At one point 343 changed the art style and design of Halo Infinite because of these disussions. You had it your way when the Halo community was at its lowest, it was easy then for a few hundreds of people to be called a majority and sway 343 into adopting the old art style. Which, by the way, they didn't manager to pull off at all, some design are old style, yes, but the art style is different from any Bungie's Halo. The flat color without contrast in the new trailer are a far cry from the older very contrasty art style. But the reality is: now that Halo has all this hype and this attention around it, the majority of comments from the expanded community about the art style are negative. While I think 343 would never go back on their decision of using dated design, because it would look stupid at this point, it will always worth it to point out their mistakes. Not for 343 to learn from those (343 only makes stupid decisions, always), but for the rest of the community to realize 343's mistakes.
The fact that 343 felt the need to revert back to the classic style should speak volumes on how bad their ''rendition'' of Halo's art style was. Again, the art style of 4 and 5 did not feel like a natural evolution of the original art style, it felt like one second, Master Chief had this awesome, sleek, and simple armor and the next he woke up looking like he entered a Chinese knockoff of Halo. If 343 had eased us into it, over time, maybe people would have given it a chance, but you can't tell me that this armor was the same as this armor, no amount of lore is going to convince me, that was the same Mark 6 armor. The art style change was too abrupt and most if not all of it was unnecessary change. It was changed for the sake of change rather than something that needed to change. Also yes its not back 100 percent, (well at least for the grunts, the Jackels, and Elites do seem to have reverted back from what I could see) this is a very good middle ground and could have been what 343 used to ease us into their art style but they didn't. Also, I am certain it would have taken a lot more than a "Few hundred" people to have swayed 343 to finally change the art style. I mean, they did not listen to us, throughout 4 and 5, so we had to -Yoink- for years to finally get it back, and it seems a little frustrating, that there are people -Yoinking!- that the art style looks classic when that is what it should have always looked like. Also, I can agree with the issues of the pop-ins and the fact that there is no grit on the armor's or weapons, so they look shiny, but that is just the lack of detail and textures, that is not the fault of the classic art style, it has always looked brighter, that was the vibrant feel of the classic art style that 343's style lost.
I can't respond point for point to what you wrote because it would take too long, but I can see most of what you wrote is just some subjective opinion without any meaningful reasons to corroborate your point. For example instead of: "it felt like one second, Master Chief had this awesome, sleek, and simple armor and the next he woke up looking like he entered a Chinese knockoff of Halo" some body else just as subjective, just with the same lack of real motivations, could write "it felt like one second, Master Chief had this bare bone, oversimplified, detailless armor and the next he woke up looking like a true to life supersoldier from the future". I'm not standing by neither statements, but the lack of reasons makes me think it was even more of a mistake to go back to the old design. Let me say, if 343 walked back on the art style is not because "the new one was bad", without any logical reason, as every other thing you wrote, they went back because enough fans asked for it. The only thing I can agree on is that the 343's art style lost the brightness of the classic art style, but, first of all that was already lost with Reach, secondly the art style in Halo Infinite is different than the classic art style too, all the missing wear and tear, all the flatness of the colors, is not part of the graphic fidelity, it's all art style choiches. For example textures appear of very high resolution in the Halo Infinite gameplay demo, that's an example of high graphical fidelity, however those same textures are objectively flat and without many scratches, that's an example of art style choice. Particles are not too many and disappear in the air relatively quikly compared to some previous Halos, that's Halo Infinite graphical fidelity. However those particles and VFX look flat and look like splahes instead of explosions, that's another art style choice. Lighting casts some very low resolution shadows, almost no ambient occlusion and some basic level bounch lighting, those are graphic fidelity settings. The light casts a single warm color on everything it touches, shadows have not a lot of variety in their value, not a lot of variety of colors in the shadows caused by bounching lights, assets and enemies color hue are not affected a lot by light and shadows (I said hue, not value and I do not necessarily mean it as a negative), art style chices. Notice I didn't express any judgement, I didn't say that's good because I like it or that's bad because I don't like it.
I think most people don't like the look of the shotgun and pistol in the new design because its very generic. It would make sense to use the old designs because they said the UNSC were using older tech which is why the battle rifle looks more classic.
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Trick question, It's not wrong.
There's really no question at all.
Exactly, it's definitely not wrong.

Glad we could see eye to eye on this, for a moment I thought you were serious!!
I see, you like to make jokes then.
I do, but using it to make a point as well.

As much as I liked the realism of 4&5, the older art direction was better, peaked at 3.

Plus, it's what the community at large want and they're not about to change the entire art style, so really the argument is irrelevant.
That's not making your point, that just sharing your subjective opinion on what you like. It's just like saying I love pizza. I can respect the fact that you like Bungie's art style and, in some ways, I prefer it too over 343's art style, but there's instances where Halo 4 and Halo 5 have better art style hands down. Yet I'm talking about designs, the covenant in particular. This post is not supposed to change anything in the game at all, it's made to give some objective reasons on why some desings are bad, so people in the Halo community can have more tools to discuss design constructively, and not just live in the past and say "I wanna go backward because I liked it better".
I can't respond point for point to what you wrote because it would take too long, but I can see most of what you wrote is just some subjective opinion without any meaningful reasons to corroborante your point. For example instead of: "it felt like one second, Master Chief had this awesome, sleek, and simple armor and the next he woke up looking like he entered a Chinese knockoff of Halo" some body else just as subjective, just with the same lack of real motivations, could write "it felt like one second, Master Chief had this bare bone, oversimplified, detailless armor and the next he woke up looking like a true to life supersoldier from the future". I'm not standing by neither statements, but the lack of reasons makes me think it was even more of a mistake to go back to the old design. Let me say, if 343 walked back on the art style is not because "the new one was bad", without any logical reason, as every other thing you wrote, they went back because enough fans asked for it. The only thing I can agree on is that the 343's art style lost the brightness of the classic art style, but, first of all that was already lost with Reach, secondly the art style in Halo Infinite is different than the classic art style too, all the missing wear and tear, all the flatness of the colors, is not part of the graphic fidelity, it's all art style choiches. For example textures appear of very high resolution in the Halo Infinite gameplay demo, that's an example of high graphical fidelity, however those same textures are objectively flat and without many scratches, that's an example of art style choice. Particles are not too many and disappear in the air relatively quikly compared to some previous Halos, that's Halo Infinite graphical fidelity. However those particles and VFX look flat and look like splahes instead of explosions, that's another art style choice. Lighting casts some very low resolution shadows, almost no ambient occlusion and some basic level bounch lighting, those are graphic fidelity settings. The light casts a single warm color on everything it touches, shadows have not a lot of variety in their value, not a lot of variety of colors in the shadows caused by bounching lights, assets and enemies color hue are not affected a lot by light and shadows (I said hue, not value and I do not necessarily mean it as a negative), art style chices. Notice I didn't express any judgement, I didn't say that's good because I like it or that's bad because I don't like it.
Just because I have a ''opinion'' on something, that should not override the fact of the point. I already pointed out issues with 343 art style. It took away the iconic look of Master Chief, it took the vibrant color pallet out of the environments, sleek Forerunner structures that were simple and elegant became bloated with to much noise and sharp edges that did not do justice to the elegance of the original Forerunner structures. Even in infinite, it still isn't 100 percent but its a lot better than it was. The Covenants designs broke the lore of the individual characters, also, just because the Covenant fell, does not mean that they would have a loss that armor, weapons, and vehicles, I mean they had worn this kind of armor and used these weapons for several hundred to 1000 years, why would they suddenly just stop wearing them and change into armor that despite supposedly being a downgrade, still looks upgraded despite the Storm Covenant being scavengers, so 343's design doesn't even fit the lore they created. Yes, it was fan feedback that got them to backtrack, we should not have had to -Yoink- to keep them from alienating the already established designs and art style Bungie created. It's one thing for them to make new characters or create new stories or areas, that change up things, but when you stick to popular characters that have had a distinct look, it is expected that that ''look'' to be maintained. Again, the art style should not have changed that drastically, especially give Halo 4 was a direct sequel to Halo 3. Also again, things like particles, lighting, effects, those things can be fixed, the art style does not dictate how good a game looks, that is the graphics, the details added, like grit, scratches, dirt, age, ect. Bungie used textures out the -Yoink- to give Halo 3 the grit it had, if it did not have that it would have been as bright and plasticity as Infinite.
Enrico 117 wrote:
I preface this by saying, even though I already made up my mind and won't buy, nor play Halo Infinite, I still have cared about Halo for the longest time. One of the many different reasons I won't play HI is the character design. I am not the biggest expert in design, but I like to think I know a thing or two, and one of the things I know quite well is storytelling is a fundamental aspect of good design. In particular, the old Covenant design was simple, purple and shiny because the religious cult of the Covenant values uniformity, rules, rigor, elegance, luxury and power (and things like that). The Banished are a high-tech, brutal, tactical coalition that uses rough edges, scrap metal and red color (if I'm not mistaken). The old design is out of place and confusing in this context. The old design tells the wrong story. This is bad design, it's fundamentally flawed. As much as you don't care about the lore, it's wrong and disrespectful to completely ignore it and tell a different story with your design. I'd like to hear from another concept artist or a character designer their take on this topic.
How does the old design not fit with the banished? Were the banished not using almost all the same stuff as the (original h1-h3) covenant but slightly altered? Did the banished not ally with a once covenant ship master? And why would the elites and other troops under the ship master change up their armor and weaponry drastically if it is already effective? I do not see how I’m anyway mixing the old and new art style doesn’t make any sense seeing as though the banished have survived both the Old era of the covenant and the new.
I think most people don't like the look of the shotgun and pistol in the new design because its very generic. It would make sense to use the old designs because they said the UNSC were using older tech which is why the battle rifle looks more classic.
I agree, there are places whet the old design works and places where it doesn't, human weapons is definitely a place where the old design would have worked.
jjfree1 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
I preface this by saying, even though I already made up my mind and won't buy, nor play Halo Infinite, I still have cared about Halo for the longest time. One of the many different reasons I won't play HI is the character design. I am not the biggest expert in design, but I like to think I know a thing or two, and one of the things I know quite well is storytelling is a fundamental aspect of good design. In particular, the old Covenant design was simple, purple and shiny because the religious cult of the Covenant values uniformity, rules, rigor, elegance, luxury and power (and things like that). The Banished are a high-tech, brutal, tactical coalition that uses rough edges, scrap metal and red color (if I'm not mistaken). The old design is out of place and confusing in this context. The old design tells the wrong story. This is bad design, it's fundamentally flawed. As much as you don't care about the lore, it's wrong and disrespectful to completely ignore it and tell a different story with your design. I'd like to hear from another concept artist or a character designer their take on this topic.
How does the old design not fit with the banished? Were the banished not using almost all the same stuff as the (original h1-h3) covenant but slightly altered? Did the banished not ally with a once covenant ship master? And why would the elites and other troops under the ship master change up their armor and weaponry drastically if it is already effective? I do not see how I’m anyway mixing the old and new art style doesn’t make any sense seeing as though the banished have survived both the Old era of the covenant and the new.
The Banished design has been established in Halo Wars 2 (that same design that everybody praised a few years ago) and it doesn't look anything like the design we saw in the Halo Infinite trailer. All the assets the banished use is not slightly altered, but heavily modified. So much so that the Storn Covenant design in H5 is in some ways more similar to the old Covenant design than the Banished design is. Making up excuses to cover a bad design isn't the right way to go imo, so the main reason why the enemies should not wear Covenant armor (even though it's working) is because they are not Covenant any more, they are Banished and the design in the trailer does not convey it. Banished wearing Covenant armor is just confusing. Another valid reason I think the enemy shouldn't wear Covenant armor is that the Covenant was disbanded many years before, so those armors should not be around anymore, they haven't worn for years and may they don't even function anymore. Who knows? But if we have to make up excuses... There's no problem in mixing old and new designs, I would have used old designs too but in different places, but you have to be thoughtful in which case makes sense the new and in which other makes sense to use the old design. Halo Infinite is a display of how not to use old designs imo for the reasons I described a few times at this point. I don't want to sound repetitive, so if you go back a few comments I described in more detail what I mean for "good designs tell a story" and elaborated my point of view on how the design should tie in the lore, it's my last comment on the third page of this thread, I think that's gonna give you more answers.
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Trick question, It's not wrong.
There's really no question at all.
Exactly, it's definitely not wrong.

Glad we could see eye to eye on this, for a moment I thought you were serious!!
I see, you like to make jokes then.
I do, but using it to make a point as well.

As much as I liked the realism of 4&5, the older art direction was better, peaked at 3.

Plus, it's what the community at large want and they're not about to change the entire art style, so really the argument is irrelevant.
That's not making your point, that just sharing your subjective opinion on what you like. It's just like saying I love pizza. I can respect the fact that you like Bungie's art style and, in some ways, I prefer it too over 343's art style, but there's instances where Halo 4 and Halo 5 have better art style hands down. Yet I'm talking about designs, the covenant in particular. This post is not supposed to change anything in the game at all, it's made to give some objective reasons on why some desings are bad, so people in the Halo community can have more tools to discuss design constructively, and not just live in the past and say "I wanna go backward because I liked it better".
I can't respond point for point to what you wrote because it would take too long, but I can see most of what you wrote is just some subjective opinion without any meaningful reasons to corroborante your point. For example instead of: "it felt like one second, Master Chief had this awesome, sleek, and simple armor and the next he woke up looking like he entered a Chinese knockoff of Halo" some body else just as subjective, just with the same lack of real motivations, could write "it felt like one second, Master Chief had this bare bone, oversimplified, detailless armor and the next he woke up looking like a true to life supersoldier from the future". I'm not standing by neither statements, but the lack of reasons makes me think it was even more of a mistake to go back to the old design. Let me say, if 343 walked back on the art style is not because "the new one was bad", without any logical reason, as every other thing you wrote, they went back because enough fans asked for it. The only thing I can agree on is that the 343's art style lost the brightness of the classic art style, but, first of all that was already lost with Reach, secondly the art style in Halo Infinite is different than the classic art style too, all the missing wear and tear, all the flatness of the colors, is not part of the graphic fidelity, it's all art style choiches. For example textures appear of very high resolution in the Halo Infinite gameplay demo, that's an example of high graphical fidelity, however those same textures are objectively flat and without many scratches, that's an example of art style choice. Particles are not too many and disappear in the air relatively quikly compared to some previous Halos, that's Halo Infinite graphical fidelity. However those particles and VFX look flat and look like splahes instead of explosions, that's another art style choice. Lighting casts some very low resolution shadows, almost no ambient occlusion and some basic level bounch lighting, those are graphic fidelity settings. The light casts a single warm color on everything it touches, shadows have not a lot of variety in their value, not a lot of variety of colors in the shadows caused by bounching lights, assets and enemies color hue are not affected a lot by light and shadows (I said hue, not value and I do not necessarily mean it as a negative), art style chices. Notice I didn't express any judgement, I didn't say that's good because I like it or that's bad because I don't like it.
Just because I have a ''opinion'' on something, that should not override the fact of the point. I already pointed out issues with 343 art style. It took away the iconic look of Master Chief, it took the vibrant color pallet out of the environments, sleek Forerunner structures that were simple and elegant became bloated with to much noise and sharp edges that did not do justice to the elegance of the original Forerunner structures. Even in infinite, it still isn't 100 percent but its a lot better than it was. The Covenants designs broke the lore of the individual characters, also, just because the Covenant fell, does not mean that they would have a loss that armor, weapons, and vehicles, I mean they had worn this kind of armor and used these weapons for several hundred to 1000 years, why would they suddenly just stop wearing them and change into armor that despite supposedly being a downgrade, still looks upgraded despite the Storm Covenant being scavengers, so 343's design doesn't even fit the lore they created. Yes, it was fan feedback that got them to backtrack, we should not have had to -Yoink- to keep them from alienating the already established designs and art style Bungie created. It's one thing for them to make new characters or create new stories or areas, that change up things, but when you stick to popular characters that have had a distinct look, it is expected that that ''look'' to be maintained. Again, the art style should not have changed that drastically, especially give Halo 4 was a direct sequel to Halo 3. Also again, things like particles, lighting, effects, those things can be fixed, the art style does not dictate how good a game looks, that is the graphics, the details added, like grit, scratches, dirt, age, ect. Bungie used textures out the -Yoink- to give Halo 3 the grit it had, if it did not have that it would have been as bright and plasticity as Infinite.
Now I can appreciate your comment way more, there are way more practical examples and less personal feelings or opinions. I'll go one step ahead and say I think most of the things you say in this comment are right to me, 343's art style had plenty of issues. My thoughts are different in one way though, while I wanted 343's art style kind of gone, I do not think everything should go backward and return to 2006 with the old design, at least not for so many things as they did in the Halo Infinite trailer. Yeah, the old designs are welcome, but in my personal opinion, the best solution was to take the new art style and fix it making assets with brighter colors and then remodeling assets just enough to make them reminisce the iconic design. and then make new designs too that could fit in the Halo universe. That would have been a better solution and would have kept the few good parts of the new art style too. Now Halo Infinite looks like Halo 3 with a bit worse art style (is more flat and enemies design just isn't as good) and more details. I also disagree on your statement about the art style not influencing how good a game looks. First of all, how many details there are around, at least until the point where the hardware can't handle it anymore, is definitely an art style choice. Secondly, the art style determine if a game should look realistic, cartoony, contrasty, bright, dark, flat, stylized, bizarre, unique, minimal, cell-shaded, etc. and everybody has a preference in this, so one art style can make a game look good to someone and bad to someone else based on personal preferences.
Enrico 117 wrote:
ronnie42 wrote:
It's difficult to pass judgement on a game without actually playing it first OP. If you're going to openly announce that you won't be playing 343's game, what incentive does 343 have to listen to your suggestions about how to improve their game?
Op is talking about graphics and art style....not the same as 'gameplay'. Yes some people may choose to avoid Infinite but valid criticism should be listened to since it can effect the general fanbase, future sales. Playing a game doesn't suddenly change how a game looks.
Yes, right, although there are way more issues I have with that trailer besides graphics, ronnie42 is right in saying I'm just talking about the design here. Because it's the only thing I can more "objectively" (design is still a subjective matter, but when design rules are broken it becomes somewhat objective) talk about.
Maybe, though I find the issues about graphics are a bit more of complicated compared previous games problems.
Look at the Elites for example...there using the old 'art style' which is sort of better than the H4/5 designs but the problem is there not as well detailed as they should be, don't feel like a successful evolution of what an Elite should look like plus the lack of blood is concerning. I think 343i should also look at the HW1 Elite design for reference since it looked pretty detailed. I think the main issue that effect all the models is the designs just look too 'clean' since there's no rust or extra detail to make the designs look unique.

Then we have the Brutes where some of the faces look like they were rushed since there pretty basic even for an Indie Studio, I know 343i can do better.
Plus the Brutes armour just doesn't look right since the armour was supposed to be based on the new HW2 art style.

I feel like this isn't about modern vs classic art styles but more about 'quality control' since I don't feel like the recent demo build should have been shown since it clearly wasn't ready for the general public.
wow all i can say op is you really stick to your guns huh. Just because you dont like something you wont play infinite at all? damn lol
I get where you are going, but we know nxt to nothing about halo infinite story yet. its set quite abit after halo 5 so we just don't know what has happened since. I'll play it b4 i give up on halo after an 8min videol lol
Enrico 117 wrote:
I preface this by saying, even though I already made up my mind and won't buy, nor play Halo Infinite, I still have cared about Halo for the longest time. One of the many different reasons I won't play HI is the character design. I am not the biggest expert in design, but I like to think I know a thing or two, and one of the things I know quite well is storytelling is a fundamental aspect of good design. In particular, the old Covenant design was simple, purple and shiny because the religious cult of the Covenant values uniformity, rules, rigor, elegance, luxury and power (and things like that). The Banished are a high-tech, brutal, tactical coalition that uses rough edges, scrap metal and red color (if I'm not mistaken). The old design is out of place and confusing in this context. The old design tells the wrong story. This is bad design, it's fundamentally flawed. As much as you don't care about the lore, it's wrong and disrespectful to completely ignore it and tell a different story with your design. I'd like to hear from another concept artist or a character designer their take on this topic.
I think because people think that it´s like fortnite. Those designs were kind of cartonish since Halo CE. I loved the designs, is a mix between the old and the new.
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
I preface this by saying, even though I already made up my mind and won't buy, nor play Halo Infinite, I still have cared about Halo for the longest time. One of the many different reasons I won't play HI is the character design. I am not the biggest expert in design, but I like to think I know a thing or two, and one of the things I know quite well is storytelling is a fundamental aspect of good design. In particular, the old Covenant design was simple, purple and shiny because the religious cult of the Covenant values uniformity, rules, rigor, elegance, luxury and power (and things like that). The Banished are a high-tech, brutal, tactical coalition that uses rough edges, scrap metal and red color (if I'm not mistaken). The old design is out of place and confusing in this context. The old design tells the wrong story. This is bad design, it's fundamentally flawed. As much as you don't care about the lore, it's wrong and disrespectful to completely ignore it and tell a different story with your design. I'd like to hear from another concept artist or a character designer their take on this topic.
I don’t give a -Yoink- about the lore, the game looks like it’s supposed to, and it looks fantastic and not whatever the -Yoink- the last two games were supposed to be, so I plan on buying it unless some other horrible news comes out regarding multiplayer or micro transactions
If you don't care about the lore, why do you care about the campaign at all? You should just play the multiplayer and enjoy older Halo campaigns, not hold back the new Halo for some nostalgic reasons. Imo Halo Infinite souldn't keep looking and feeling exactly like it's a game from 2006, there's already Halo MCC for that.
No, I like the spirit of the Bungie era games, and I loved the way that universe was represented through that style of art. I like their simplicity of storytelling while alluding to deeper lore, but I never wanted a -Yoink- load of deeper lore. Now it’s such a complicated multimedia presentation that you have to do a bunch of homework outside of just main campaign modes to get full context of what is happening in those stories. Furthermore, the in game reasoning for changing the art style was super lame, and a very poor cop-out explanation for things like Chief’s armor being different, etc. Going back to what the game is supposed to stylistically look like, while continuing to evolve the gameplay is exactly what should be happening. I just hope the campaign tells a complete story that you can understand with no additional novels, comic books, etc. 343’s visual reboot never should’ve happened. Instead, they should’ve continued to slowly evolve the overall formula. It’s not about “Nostalgia holding it back,” it’s about brand consistency. And I am quite frankly sick of being told to just “enjoy the older games.” There’s only so many of them, and there’s only so many times that you can play them through before you get bored of them, and then want more of that, with different little new twists or locations or characters. Reach was the last Bungie art style game, and that was TEN YEARS AGO. I’ve been playing the crap out of 1,2,3, ODST and Reach for TEN YEARS, because I don’t enjoy 4-5 at all. That’s what fans who are like me want. Some old and some new. A constant stream of the new, but also familiar. The way 4-5 look are not familiar to me—-couple that with the massive gameplay changes and it doesn’t even seem like I’m playing games in the same series. The Banished and quite frankly any other traditional species of Halo style enemy can fit in the original art style, it’s the Prometheans that will likely not fit in very well. And I’m ok with that too, because I don’t like fighting them. They are a chore and a slog to fight through in campaign, there’s no interesting or fun elements of facing them and it feels even further removed from Halo. I would MUCH rather have a new twist on something old, for example: flying suicide grunts thrown by brutes, than have some boorish new enemies.
I'm not going to argue about the gameplay with you on this thread. We may agree or not on that, but I sudgest you find another thread for gameplay. I may be objective or subjective, but I won't say "this and that is what's supposed to be right" and everyone else is wrong. Let's be clear, when I say the old design is wrong, I do not mean 343 should keep the recent designs. Nor am I saying they should keep the Halo 4 and 5 art style. Not even the recent gameplay (or maybe yes, it depends on which parts of the gameplay we're talking about). The only reason I can find, in your comment, on why you want to keep the old desings is because of brand consistency. The rest is just "because I like it" or "because I don't like the other design". You're giving really no reason at all to use the old designs. You can still have new designs and keep the brand recognition in a few other designs, but you need to do it in a good way, not like in Halo Infinite where the weapons look from CoD, the Banished are gone, replaced by the Covenant again, the environment is no alien-like at all, but just a normal forest mixed with Minecraft blcks. The old art style you like so much is not back in Halo Infinite, surfaces were already worn out in Halo CE, there was more contrast, and in Halo Reach the art style is completely different from any previous Halo game, Reach is very dull and washed out. Halo 5's art style was in some ways closer to the older art style than Halo Reach's art style. The art style shown in the new Halo Infinite trailer is very flat instead. Not only that, I'd also argue that, if they were really trying to copy the old designs of the Covenant, then they didn't pull that off either. The Elites in the trailer don't look scary and big enough, the Brutes don't look ferocious enough, Grunts are a bit less clunky and less awkward, Jakals are skinnier than the originals. To me it keeps looking like people are attached to the old art style for no good reason other than nostalgia, I really didn't read any good reason.
Instead of the approach I’ve been taking, which is defending my position, let me try to communicate the idea to you by instead asking you a question, which is : Why change anything or stray too far from the Bungie era designs in the first place? 343 picked up a continuation of a series but treated the art, gameplay, music, and story almost as if it were a reboot, which it’s not. I can’t think of a any reason anything should’ve been that drastically overhauled in the first place. And it would seem 343s only reasoning was “they didn’t want to be Bungie,” but that’s a rather conceited way to enter into a project where you are carrying on with what some other studio started.
I understand your point, but I think you're jumping the gun a bit since we know so little about the story at this point, so it seems pretty baseless to me to assume that the visual storytelling here isn't in line with the game.

What's more, I would actually reject the idea that the convenient had a unifying visual identity in the first place. The typical covenant scenery we're familiar with are all ships run and operated originally by Elites, and such follows their design language of soft, curved lines and purple colouring. The vehicles and weapons likewise were made by armories located on Sanghelios, run by elites. The brutes have a very harsh, aggressive look completely in contrast with the Elites look, and I would argue that Grunts, Skirmishers and hunters also have their own distinct look and visual identities. From a logical standpoint as well it makes little sense for me for the banished to unnecessarily paint and modify covenant weapons they've salvaged just for the vanity of making them all red.

Another point is that visual story telling is just one objective of the design, the designs also have a gameplay purpose. Different colours have always been used to represent different levels of difficulty amongst enemies, and is an important, clear differentiator between different enemy types, I think it would feel strange and muddled if every unit in Halo Infinite had the same red theme applied to it.

I don't expect you to agree with me, and thats fine, but I think its a bit arrogant to assume that your opinion on this topic is law when in fact to me what your suggesting as a superior direction would actually make significantly less sense in my view.
ronnie42 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
ronnie42 wrote:
It's difficult to pass judgement on a game without actually playing it first OP. If you're going to openly announce that you won't be playing 343's game, what incentive does 343 have to listen to your suggestions about how to improve their game?
Op is talking about graphics and art style....not the same as 'gameplay'. Yes some people may choose to avoid Infinite but valid criticism should be listened to since it can effect the general fanbase, future sales. Playing a game doesn't suddenly change how a game looks.
Yes, right, although there are way more issues I have with that trailer besides graphics, ronnie42 is right in saying I'm just talking about the design here. Because it's the only thing I can more "objectively" (design is still a subjective matter, but when design rules are broken it becomes somewhat objective) talk about.
Maybe, though I find the issues about graphics are a bit more of complicated compared previous games problems.
Look at the Elites for example...there using the old 'art style' which is sort of better than the H4/5 designs but the problem is there not as well detailed as they should be, don't feel like a successful evolution of what an Elite should look like plus the lack of blood is concerning. I think 343i should also look at the HW1 Elite design for reference since it looked pretty detailed. I think the main issue that effect all the models is the designs just look too 'clean' since there's no rust or extra detail to make the designs look unique.

Then we have the Brutes where some of the faces look like they were rushed since there pretty basic even for an Indie Studio, I know 343i can do better.
Plus the Brutes armour just doesn't look right since the armour was supposed to be based on the new HW2 art style.

I feel like this isn't about modern vs classic art styles but more about 'quality control' since I don't feel like the recent demo build should have been shown since it clearly wasn't ready for the general public.
If you want my take on the art style I think they chose purposefully a less detailed, less gritty, less worn out, brighter and simpler art style because people asked to go back to the old art style, but they took it back too far. That's my opinion. As for graphic fidelity, there's plenty of issues there explained by Digitale Foundry and other Tech channells on Youtube too. Like the low res shadows, every sport of stuff posp-in late, VFX and dead bodies disappear early and abruptly, lighting is mediocre, facial animatons are mediocre (in game, not in cutscenes, i.e. Craig), some textures are low resolution and many more issues. The most obvious connection between design, art style and graphic fidelity is detail and how realistic it makes or doesn't make the game look. So 343 chose a less complex, less cluttered, less detailed art style in general (bad choice imo), assets designs all have to be less busy and simpler, simpler and less detailed many times can easily make up for a less realistic looking game. In realistic games, the amount of details is capped by graphical fidelity and what the hardware allows, but in this case the hardware allows much more than that. I blame the lack of details all on the old art style, but it's my personal opinion. Design, art style and graphic fidelity are entertwined, but I just don't wanna mix them up in this thread, because there are rabbid fans who would kill everyone who says graphics look bad because of bad design, or bad art style. I'm just pointing out the biggest, more objective flaws in going back to the old art style, that is: there are bad designs going around.
una yp wrote:
wow all i can say op is you really stick to your guns huh. Just because you dont like something you wont play infinite at all? damn lol
I get where you are going, but we know nxt to nothing about halo infinite story yet. its set quite abit after halo 5 so we just don't know what has happened since. I'll play it b4 i give up on halo after an 8min videol lol
Those designs are just one of the many things I didn't like about the trailer, but those other things are my personal opinion and would be meaningless to most of you, I only pointed out what I feel is one of the most "objective" flaws. As I replied to another user before, only fools never change their mind and I will change my mind if something major changes, but given 343 track record I don't have any hope it will happen.
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
I preface this by saying, even though I already made up my mind and won't buy, nor play Halo Infinite, I still have cared about Halo for the longest time. One of the many different reasons I won't play HI is the character design. I am not the biggest expert in design, but I like to think I know a thing or two, and one of the things I know quite well is storytelling is a fundamental aspect of good design. In particular, the old Covenant design was simple, purple and shiny because the religious cult of the Covenant values uniformity, rules, rigor, elegance, luxury and power (and things like that). The Banished are a high-tech, brutal, tactical coalition that uses rough edges, scrap metal and red color (if I'm not mistaken). The old design is out of place and confusing in this context. The old design tells the wrong story. This is bad design, it's fundamentally flawed. As much as you don't care about the lore, it's wrong and disrespectful to completely ignore it and tell a different story with your design. I'd like to hear from another concept artist or a character designer their take on this topic.
I don’t give a -Yoink- about the lore, the game looks like it’s supposed to, and it looks fantastic and not whatever the -Yoink- the last two games were supposed to be, so I plan on buying it unless some other horrible news comes out regarding multiplayer or micro transactions
If you don't care about the lore, why do you care about the campaign at all? You should just play the multiplayer and enjoy older Halo campaigns, not hold back the new Halo for some nostalgic reasons. Imo Halo Infinite souldn't keep looking and feeling exactly like it's a game from 2006, there's already Halo MCC for that.
Instead of the approach I’ve been taking, which is defending my position, let me try to communicate the idea to you by instead asking you a question, which is : Why change anything or stray too far from the Bungie era designs in the first place? 343 picked up a continuation of a series but treated the art, gameplay, music, and story almost as if it were a reboot, which it’s not. I can’t think of a any reason anything should’ve been that drastically overhauled in the first place. And it would seem 343s only reasoning was “they didn’t want to be Bungie,” but that’s a rather conceited way to enter into a project where you are carrying on with what some other studio started.
Well, from "why change anything? " to "why stray too far?" there's quite the difference. It is a mater of interpretation, many fans see the old Halo games and see a cartoony game, but when I see the old Halo games I see an attempt to make a realistic game holded back by dated hardware. With the exception of Halo 3, it looks like to me that all Bungie's Halo got progressively darker and darker, and always more detailed and complex in art style. That may likely have been caused by advancements in console technology and game development. If you interpret Bungie's path in that way, it's almost expected to make the seequels darker, more detailed and realistic. (Halo 4 was not darker than Reach and that's a very good choice imo) . With the more realistic art style, the designs had to be more realistic too, so 343 tryed to design things in a more grounded way, almost like if those designs were taken from what they would looks like if they were present in real life. Did they take it too far? Yeah, a bit imo, but the direction was good. The biggest mistep was the design of the Prometheans. By the way Halo Reach designs were already quite different from classic designs. Change is always needed in some capacity unless you want the new game to be a copy of the previous one. A 19 years old design, held back by technology, kind of begs for some innovation.
GLNK1 wrote:
I understand your point, but I think you're jumping the gun a bit since we know so little about the story at this point, so it seems pretty baseless to me to assume that the visual storytelling here isn't in line with the game.

What's more, I would actually reject the idea that the convenient had a unifying visual identity in the first place. The typical covenant scenery we're familiar with are all ships run and operated originally by Elites, and such follows their design language of soft, curved lines and purple colouring. The vehicles and weapons likewise were made by armories located on Sanghelios, run by elites. The brutes have a very harsh, aggressive look completely in contrast with the Elites look, and I would argue that Grunts, Skirmishers and hunters also have their own distinct look and visual identities. From a logical standpoint as well it makes little sense for me for the banished to unnecessarily paint and modify covenant weapons they've salvaged just for the vanity of making them all red.

Another point is that visual story telling is just one objective of the design, the designs also have a gameplay purpose. Different colours have always been used to represent different levels of difficulty amongst enemies, and is an important, clear differentiator between different enemy types, I think it would feel strange and muddled if every unit in Halo Infinite had the same red theme applied to it.

I don't expect you to agree with me, and thats fine, but I think its a bit arrogant to assume that your opinion on this topic is law when in fact to me what your suggesting as a superior direction would actually make significantly less sense in my view.
Design is mostly subjective, my take on what's wrong with the old design is subjective too, but, as you correctly understood from my post, when design follows some rules it's usually better. If it doesn't, it's not quite as good anymore. If the trailer actually followed those good design rules or not may be a subjective opinion. I think up until this point we can agree on that, right? I did not actually suggest an alternative design to the one used in the trailer, I merely stated a few key aspects of the Banished design established in Halo Wars 2 and how they're all completely absent. It may not be the case to take every single one of those features into consideration, you instead are suggesting to completely dismiss them, even though the enemy is the Banished after all. I would suggest something like adding a few metal plates on the armor where it makes sense following the overall shape of the classic design and dyeing it with the classic colors, then put a few small red accents here and there maybe. It is the concept artist's job to figure that stuff out and I might sketch a few concepts too. Knowing those enemies are defending Banished AA cannons and knowing the Covenant has been disbanded almost a decade before should be enough, in my opinion, to assume those enemies are Banished and should wear Banished equipment like all the other Banished enemies in Halo Wars 2. We could keep finding reasons in the lore about why that's the enemy's design, but in the end, what does that design convey to you? are your enemies the Covenant or the Banished? If your answer is I'm fighting the same old aliens but with a different name, then that's fine, but then that should make "finishing the fight" in Halo 3 feel just as pointless as when Cortana died in H4 just to come back in H5. I shared my point of view in more detail on what the design should tell in a comment on page 3, it's my last comment on that page, I think everyone would appreciate me not repeating myself in these comments. For you is logical than every species has its own design and it's not completely dyed in red, you think it's correct from a lore standpoint and it's functional from a gameplay standpoint. For me is not about logic, lore, nor functionality, for me, it's about sending the correct message in spite of that, and there's little to no reason why you can't show a bit of Banished design while maintaining al that logical diversity, lore and functionality.
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Enrico 117 wrote:
Trick question, It's not wrong.
There's really no question at all.
Exactly, it's definitely not wrong.

Glad we could see eye to eye on this, for a moment I thought you were serious!!
I see, you like to make jokes then.
I do, but using it to make a point as well.

As much as I liked the realism of 4&5, the older art direction was better, peaked at 3.

Plus, it's what the community at large want and they're not about to change the entire art style, so really the argument is irrelevant.
That's not making your point, that just sharing your subjective opinion on what you like. It's just like saying I love pizza. I can respect the fact that you like Bungie's art style and, in some ways, I prefer it too over 343's art style, but there's instances where Halo 4 and Halo 5 have better art style hands down. Yet I'm talking about designs, the covenant in particular. This post is not supposed to change anything in the game at all, it's made to give some objective reasons on why some desings are bad, so people in the Halo community can have more tools to discuss design constructively, and not just live in the past and say "I wanna go backward because I liked it better".
Now I can appreciate your comment way more, there are way more practical examples and less personal feelings or opinions. I'll go one step ahead and say I think most of the things you say in this comment are right to me, 343's art style had plenty of issues. My thoughts are different in one way though, while I wanted 343's art style kind of gone, I do not think everything should go backward and return to 2006 with the old design, at least not for so many things as they did in the Halo Infinite trailer. Yeah, the old designs are welcome, but in my personal opinion, the best solution was to take the new art style and fix it making assets with brighter colors and then remodeling assets just enough to make them reminisce the iconic design. and then make new designs too that could fit in the Halo universe. That would have been a better solution and would have kept the few good parts of the new art style too. Now Halo Infinite looks like Halo 3 with a bit worse art style (is more flat and enemies design just isn't as good) and more details. I also disagree on your statement about the art style not influencing how good a game looks. First of all, how many details there are around, at least until the point where the hardware can't handle it anymore, is definitely an art style choice. Secondly, the art style determine if a game should look realistic, cartoony, contrasty, bright, dark, flat, stylized, bizarre, unique, minimal, cell-shaded, etc. and everybody has a preference in this, so one art style can make a game look good to someone and bad to someone else based on personal preferences.
While I can agree that, art style is based on preference, and everyone can have a different preference, it does not change the fact that the art style also serves as both the asthetic look of a game, but also the defined look of that games universe. Halo has always had a form of cartoonish looking art style, that was how Bungie stylized it, but in them doing so, they also defined that as the "Look" of Halo. Those designs became what people expected, these characters, weapons, vehicles and even enviroments to look like going forward. I would hate it, if 343 ever took us back to some of the missions in say Halo 3 (maybe their was a reason for MC to return, I don't know) and instead of seeing a graphically updated, version of those levels, it would instead, be a bastardized rendition of those levels, to the point you would hardly recognize it. When you change the art style that drastically, but then keep the old art style as part of the lore, you create issues, where you either have to retcon everything that came before, or simply leave it behind because it will conflict with the new art style, where as simply sticking to the established art style does not cause this issue. Also I understand that adding to many textures can be straining on an engine, but at the same time, the kind of details that would really be needed to take away that plastic feel of Infinite really would not be that hard, heck most of the models already have the textures and grit, its just the lighting and effects that are the issue, they don't allow the details to ''pop'' correctly, but things like that can be fixed.
Well if we actually look at HW2 the only things that were given the banished look were the brutes an
their vehicles/weapons and structures (which infinite could do better on structures) The elites and grunts still sported their original look just with shades of red and grey, and some art even depicted them as blue. Elites in the banished were just hired mercenaries with the shipmaster dude as their leader. So technically did they really have to follow the looks? I like the colors its easy to tell the ranks again and know when you are about to get dead.
Infinite seems to be a mixture of old and new, truly. Just look at the enemy models. Grunts and elite minor, the red brute looks Halo 3 esque. You can’t win them all bro, this isn’t your game and you have to also keep in mind that creative people must express their creative liberties
0
“Soon Halo’s reclamation will begin, but when it does, the weight of your denial will stay your feet, and you shall be left behind ”
surfer45 wrote:
Well if we actually look at HW2 the only things that were given the banished look were the brutes an
their vehicles/weapons and structures (which infinite could do better on structures) The elites and grunts still sported their original look just with shades of red and grey, and some art even depicted them as blue. Elites in the banished were just hired mercenaries with the shipmaster dude as their leader. So technically did they really have to follow the looks? I like the colors its easy to tell the ranks again and know when you are about to get dead.
Yeah, not to mention, most of the color scheme in that game, was due to keep things consistent, and to keep from confusing the player as to which units they can control. You can't just take a design in an RTS and bring it into the game, that was the only mistake (so far) I can see 343 doing by bringing in the Banished Phantom. You kind of have to( to a degree) redesign some things to get them to fit better in an fps setting. So the armor from that game was never going to be a point by point recreation.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. ...
  9. 8