I’m curious to hear some feedback on this subject regarding Artistic liberties vs canon consistency. In your guy’s opinion which one is more important? I personally feel Canon consistency is more important. It really adds to the immersion of the universe. But it seems when there isn’t consistencies there are a lot of conflicts with the story and it really makes the whole thing unjoyable. What do you guys think? What is more important?
As an artist myself, I’m going to have a biased viewpoint here. I understand how some things generally wear their charm, or the flaws in certain designs, and instantly want to change them. I get that feeling, and when I do, it really bugs me.
I’d say take as many liberties as desired so long as the general profile of a weapon is met, unless the said original was god-awful. (Ex. Halo 2 BR-Halo 4 BR).
Since none of the models disappear from the lore and meld as different models of the acknowledged same design, liberties do not bother me a trifle.
What about unnecessary changes? Like if a model looked just fine but it was replaced with something new that may or may not be better? Not using any particular examples since it’s all a matter of opinion.
I’m in favor of canon consistency. I find it annoying when something in a video game/movie/show is changed, and there’s no story reason for the change. When something is changed for artistic liberty, it raises the question “so if in-story it didn’t actually change, then which version is the actual canonical version?”
> 2533274877162049;4:
> I’m in favor of canon consistency. I find it annoying when something in a video game/movie/show is changed, and there’s no story reason for the change. When something is changed for artistic liberty, it raises the question “so if in-story it didn’t actually change, then which version is the actual canonical version?”
Exactly. Especially when it comes too Ships, Armor, Weapons and vehicles. I’m pretty sure the Halo 1 and 2 designs have been retconned with the appearance of the designs in the anniversaries. But even between the 2 updated anniversaries there is conflict between the designs.
> 2533274975398392;1:
> I’m curious to hear some feedback on this subject regarding Artistic liberties vs canon consistency. In your guy’s opinion which one is more important?
That’s a very biased and one-sided way to ask the question.
The question implies that any change in art is inherently a break from canon, and that isn’t always true. In-universe facts and characters may be canon, but I don’t believe artistic designs are. In the late 90s, a person’s idea of a cyborg suit looked something like this. In the early 2010s, that same idea looks more like this. This is for two reasons: common perceptions of what certain things should look like change over time, and higher-quality graphics influence what is capable of being drawn. Notice how much more believable and tank-like Master Chief looks going from pre-Xbox Halo to Halo 4. I would much rather have a more believable and “modern sci-fi” look to Halo like in Halo 4 than everything still look like this and this.
I do care about the art, but not because of canon. The looks of Elite armor, Grunt armor, SPARTAN-IV armor, and other things in Halo 4 just didn’t suit my taste, and I preferred Halo 2 and Halo 3-style art. I don’t care if art changes over time, as long as that change is for the better and not for the worse.
Depends on if the new art direction lends itself to the greater work I guess.
> 2533274805712917;6:
> > 2533274975398392;1:
> > I’m curious to hear some feedback on this subject regarding Artistic liberties vs canon consistency. In your guy’s opinion which one is more important?
>
>
> That’s a very biased and one-sided way to ask the question.
>
> The question implies that any change in art is inherently a break from canon, and that isn’t always true. In-universe facts and characters may be canon, but I don’t believe artistic designs are. In the late 90s, a person’s idea of a cyborg suit looked something like this. In the early 2010s, that same idea looks more like this. This is for two reasons: common perceptions of what certain things should look like change over time, and higher-quality graphics influence what is capable of being drawn. Notice how much more believable and tank-like Master Chief looks going from pre-Xbox Halo to Halo 4. I would much rather have a more believable and “modern sci-fi” look to Halo like in Halo 4 than everything still look like this and this.
>
> I do care about the art, but not because of canon. The looks of Elite armor, Grunt armor, SPARTAN-IV armor, and other things in Halo 4 just didn’t suit my taste, and I preferred Halo 2 and Halo 3-style art. I don’t care if art changes over time, as long as that change is for the better and not for the worse.
+10
> 2533274805712917;6:
> > 2533274975398392;1:
> > I’m curious to hear some feedback on this subject regarding Artistic liberties vs canon consistency. In your guy’s opinion which one is more important?
>
>
> That’s a very biased and one-sided way to ask the question.
>
> The question implies that any change in art is inherently a break from canon, and that isn’t always true. In-universe facts and characters may be canon, but I don’t believe artistic designs are. In the late 90s, a person’s idea of a cyborg suit looked something like this. In the early 2010s, that same idea looks more like this. This is for two reasons: common perceptions of what certain things should look like change over time, and higher-quality graphics influence what is capable of being drawn. Notice how much more believable and tank-like Master Chief looks going from pre-Xbox Halo to Halo 4. I would much rather have a more believable and “modern sci-fi” look to Halo like in Halo 4 than everything still look like this and this.
>
> I do care about the art, but not because of canon. The looks of Elite armor, Grunt armor, SPARTAN-IV armor, and other things in Halo 4 just didn’t suit my taste, and I preferred Halo 2 and Halo 3-style art. I don’t care if art changes over time, as long as that change is for the better and not for the worse.
I apologize, I didn’t intend on the question sounding biased/ one-sided. I didn’t intend it to come off that way at all… Also you said “The question implies that any change in art is inherently a break from canon,” I was just more thinking about design changes without explanation, or designs that didn’t really need to be changed/updated. For example the Forward unto Dawn’s appearance was retconned and was completely changed without explanation. It was just simply retconned so that it always looked that way. I understand why, so we could have that introduction level but it was sad to see an iconic ship changed. Like if the enterprise on star trek’s appearance changed over a season break and it was completely re-imagined it and said it always looked that way.
I should have added that i’m all for Artistic Liberties. I actually really enjoyed the art design in Halo 4. I guess it’s along the lines of If it isn’t broken don’t fix it. If a design is really good then it doesn’t really need to be changed.
> 2533274805712917;6:
> > 2533274975398392;1:
> > I’m curious to hear some feedback on this subject regarding Artistic liberties vs canon consistency. In your guy’s opinion which one is more important?
>
>
> That’s a very biased and one-sided way to ask the question.
>
> The question implies that any change in art is inherently a break from canon, and that isn’t always true. In-universe facts and characters may be canon, but I don’t believe artistic designs are. In the late 90s, a person’s idea of a cyborg suit looked something like this. In the early 2010s, that same idea looks more like this. This is for two reasons: common perceptions of what certain things should look like change over time, and higher-quality graphics influence what is capable of being drawn. Notice how much more believable and tank-like Master Chief looks going from pre-Xbox Halo to Halo 4. I would much rather have a more believable and “modern sci-fi” look to Halo like in Halo 4 than everything still look like this and this.
>
> I do care about the art, but not because of canon. The looks of Elite armor, Grunt armor, SPARTAN-IV armor, and other things in Halo 4 just didn’t suit my taste, and I preferred Halo 2 and Halo 3-style art. I don’t care if art changes over time, as long as that change is for the better and not for the worse.
They should be and 343 should make up their minds on what they will be. There are several major issues across all the games. It makes it confusing and breaks immersion. Here are just a few examples off the top of my head.
- ODST’s New Mombassa is completely different from Halo 2’s. Also, all game assets resemble Halo 3’s. It also appears Halo 2A will not fix the issue by just making the cities look similar.
- The Covenant in Halo 3 get a massive redesign. Grunts and Jackals specifically. This is normally not a problem, but then you have the issue above.
- Halo CEA’s and Halo 3’s 343 GS design are nearly identical. Now, Halo 2A is using a completely different model. Do you see the issue?
- High Charity’s interior in Halo 3 is completely different from Halo 2 (this is ignoring all of the Flood Biomass). Again, all models are used from Halo 3. The first time I played it I thought “I did not fight these guys last game, they were different.”
- The Forward Unto Dawn is completely different in Halo 4.I am all good with moving forward and seeing new things but this is annoying. All these retcons started with ODST and I think we have more to come. Especially in 2017. Having consistency with art and canon is important. I would rather have a clearer picture than this jumbled mess. Did you also realize the beakless Jackals and cute blue Grunts are officially non canon now? I honestly prefer the newer designs, but this is what happens when you lack consistency.
> 2533274805712917;6:
> > 2533274975398392;1:
> > I’m curious to hear some feedback on this subject regarding Artistic liberties vs canon consistency. In your guy’s opinion which one is more important?
>
>
> That’s a very biased and one-sided way to ask the question.
>
> The question implies that any change in art is inherently a break from canon, and that isn’t always true. In-universe facts and characters may be canon, but I don’t believe artistic designs are. In the late 90s, a person’s idea of a cyborg suit looked something like this. In the early 2010s, that same idea looks more like this. This is for two reasons: common perceptions of what certain things should look like change over time, and higher-quality graphics influence what is capable of being drawn. Notice how much more believable and tank-like Master Chief looks going from pre-Xbox Halo to Halo 4. I would much rather have a more believable and “modern sci-fi” look to Halo like in Halo 4 than everything still look like this and this.
>
> I do care about the art, but not because of canon. The looks of Elite armor, Grunt armor, SPARTAN-IV armor, and other things in Halo 4 just didn’t suit my taste, and I preferred Halo 2 and Halo 3-style art. I don’t care if art changes over time, as long as that change is for the better and not for the worse.
If the designs for something are changed, and there’s no in-universe explanation for the change, that is a break from canon. His question was not biased or one-sided.
Artistic liberties are to be expected, but need to be limited in certain areas. Either that, or if more artistic liberties are taken, then the burden is on the story to compensate for them. That said, I give priority to canon consistency over artistic liberty when a conflict arises. The example that sticks out the most in my mind and bothers me the most with the Halo universe is Master Chief’s armor in Halo 4. As far as canon is concerned, that’s supposed to be the same armor he wore in Halo 2 and Halo 3. Yet, the only similarities are the shade of green and the battle scar on his chest. Since there really wouldn’t be a good way to fit a brand new armor set into the canon while MC is floating through space in cry-sleep, then that means the art team just has to deal with that fact and keep his armor the same style that it had been up to that point.
> 2811398874529013;12:
> Artistic liberties are to be expected, but need to be limited in certain areas. Either that, or if more artistic liberties are taken, then the burden is on the story to compensate for them. That said, I give priority to canon consistency over artistic liberty when a conflict arises. The example that sticks out the most in my mind and bothers me the most with the Halo universe is Master Chief’s armor in Halo 4. As far as canon is concerned, that’s supposed to be the same armor he wore in Halo 2 and Halo 3. Yet, the only similarities are the shade of green and the battle scar on his chest. Since there really wouldn’t be a good way to fit a brand new armor set into the canon while MC is floating through space in cry-sleep, then that means the art team just has to deal with that fact and keep his armor the same style that it had been up to that point.
The armor has already been explained through nano-bots within Mark VI. Cortana manipulated the bots to change Chief’s armor.
> 2533274866528846;13:
> > 2811398874529013;12:
> > Artistic liberties are to be expected, but need to be limited in certain areas. Either that, or if more artistic liberties are taken, then the burden is on the story to compensate for them. That said, I give priority to canon consistency over artistic liberty when a conflict arises. The example that sticks out the most in my mind and bothers me the most with the Halo universe is Master Chief’s armor in Halo 4. As far as canon is concerned, that’s supposed to be the same armor he wore in Halo 2 and Halo 3. Yet, the only similarities are the shade of green and the battle scar on his chest. Since there really wouldn’t be a good way to fit a brand new armor set into the canon while MC is floating through space in cry-sleep, then that means the art team just has to deal with that fact and keep his armor the same style that it had been up to that point.
>
>
> The armor has already been explained through nano-bots within Mark VI. Cortana manipulated the bots to change Chief’s armor.
- That wasn’t explained in the games
- That makes no sense because if the nano-bots are capable of rebuilding the entire suit while it is frozen in a cryogenic chamber and while it is being worn by somebody, there’s no reason they can’t fix that gash in his chestpiece. I’ve heard the nano-bot theory too, and it reeks of “OK, people have pointed out how we disregarded canon and we need to pull an explanation out of our -Yoinks!-”.