Does 343i Have to Explain Chief's Armour Redesign?

Games Halo Infinite
1

No. The answer is no.

Here’s the thing. They should have explained the change from Halo 3 to Halo 4, but they didn’t. The change is purely visual and not at all canon. Canonically, the Chief’s armour never changed from Halo 3 to Halo 4. Now that they’re changing his armour back to something more akin to Halo 2/3’s MJOLNIR, what do they have to explain? Essentially, they’re almost returning to the original artstyle. If the Halo 3 and 4 armour is technically the same, why can’t the Halo 5 and Infinite armour be the same?

What’s important right now is that 343i understand how Halo should look (as mentioned in the other thread I posted today). They’ve already missed their opportunity for such in-universe explanations.

Agreed? Yes / No?

MASSIVE EDIT
After | Dr Halsey | (the first commenter) kindly mentioned the out-of-game explanation for the change in appearance of the Mark VI between Halos 3 and 4, I did a bit of research and have put this together:

Having done a bit of looking around, the best canonical explanation I’m happy with for all the armour changes was one presented by HaloCanon. He proposes that there wasn’t simply a Mark IV, V, VI, VII and Gen 2 with multiple permutations as we’ve believed for so long, but rather that the armour has been constantly updated since the beginning. I believe that canonically we have something along the lines of this:

Mark IV

Mark V

2

You’re wrong though. 343 Industries did explain the change, not in-game, but they did. Cortana utilized nanomachines in Chief’s armor to change it and used an old variant of Mk. IV MJOLNIR as the basis for the new design. Explained by Frank O’Connor and reconfirmed in the Halo 4 Essential Visual Guide. So, no, the Chief’s armor did canonically change.

They need to broach the change CORRECTLY this time. Having Chief start in the modified Mk.VI and changing to the older-looking armor can easily be done multiple ways.

3

> 2533274812652989;2:
> You’re wrong though. 343 Industries did explain the change, not in-game, but they did. Cortana utilized nanomachines in Chief’s armor to change it and used an old variant of Mk. IV MJOLNIR as the basis for the new design. Explained by Frank O’Connor and reconfirmed in the Halo 4 Essential Visual Guide. So, no, the Chief’s armor did canonically change.
>
> They need to broach the change CORRECTLY this time. Having Chief start in the modified Mk.VI and changing to the older-looking armor can easily be done multiple ways.

I see. Well, can you explain these moments then?
Master Chief versus Brute ChieftainKeep in mind that prior to fighting them on High Charity, the Master Chief had only ever encountered the Brutes once, on the Unyielding Hierophant, which means this particular encounter has to be on Earth during Halo 3.
Master Chief Being Outfitted with MJOLNIR Mark IV or V We know this has to be the Mark IV or V outfitting on Reach because it takes place before Halo 4 and it’s not on the Cairo Station armoury, as far as we can tell.
Spartan Team Sky DiveLastly, the Chief’s armour wasn’t the only thing that was redesigned. In that cutscene alone, all the Covenant are redesigned as well as the Forward Unto Dawn. Did Cortana use nanomachines to alter their appearances as well?

4

Its nice to see someone finally acknowledging that Chief’s armor in the Infinite trailer isn’t the same as his 2-3 armor. Also, while they did explain what happened to his armor, it was obviously just a quick not well thought answer to stop people from asking, i don’t think its a true answer. They would of mentioned it if it was planned, then again, 343 (or whoever writes these book) has a tendency of writing important story info that players require to know whats going on in the games, inside of a book, instead of the games, so less players will know what happened. This may have been the case for Chiefs new armor in Halo 4 but they never got around to writing it, i’m probably wrong though. (I forgot to quote Dr. Halsey before i wrote the second paragraph, oops)

5

It’ll be explained in a natural way if they wrote a decent story.

6

> 2533274812652989;2:
> You’re wrong though. 343 Industries did explain the change, not in-game, but they did. Cortana utilized nanomachines in Chief’s armor to change it and used an old variant of Mk. IV MJOLNIR as the basis for the new design. Explained by Frank O’Connor and reconfirmed in the Halo 4 Essential Visual Guide. So, no, the Chief’s armor did canonically change.
>
> They need to broach the change CORRECTLY this time. Having Chief start in the modified Mk.VI and changing to the older-looking armor can easily be done multiple ways.

So I’ve done a bit of research, and you’re right. I like that they took the time to come up with some decent explanations for the change between Halo 3 and 4. However, if those explanations were explained outside of the game, then Infinite’s should as well. Had the initial explanation been in-game, that’d be a different case entirely.

7

> 2535415876049274;3:
> > 2533274812652989;2:
> > You’re wrong though. 343 Industries did explain the change, not in-game, but they did. Cortana utilized nanomachines in Chief’s armor to change it and used an old variant of Mk. IV MJOLNIR as the basis for the new design. Explained by Frank O’Connor and reconfirmed in the Halo 4 Essential Visual Guide. So, no, the Chief’s armor did canonically change.
> >
> > They need to broach the change CORRECTLY this time. Having Chief start in the modified Mk.VI and changing to the older-looking armor can easily be done multiple ways.
>
> I see. Well, can you explain these moments then?
> Master Chief versus Brute ChieftainKeep in mind that prior to fighting them on High Charity, the Master Chief had only ever encountered the Brutes once, on the Unyielding Hierophant, which means this particular encounter has to be on Earth during Halo 3.
> Master Chief Being Outfitted with MJOLNIR Mark IV or V We know this has to be the Mark IV or V outfitting on Reach because it takes place before Halo 4 and it’s not on the Cairo Station armoury, as far as we can tell.
> Spartan Team Sky DiveLastly, the Chief’s armour wasn’t the only thing that was redesigned. In that cutscene alone, all the Covenant are redesigned as well as the Forward Unto Dawn. Did Cortana use nanomachines to alter their appearances as well?

They explained that they didn’t have time to make unique designs for the prologue, so they really weren’t all wearing that armor, just reused assets. Same goes for FuD.

8

> 2535415876049274;3:
> > 2533274812652989;2:
> > You’re wrong though. 343 Industries did explain the change, not in-game, but they did. Cortana utilized nanomachines in Chief’s armor to change it and used an old variant of Mk. IV MJOLNIR as the basis for the new design. Explained by Frank O’Connor and reconfirmed in the Halo 4 Essential Visual Guide. So, no, the Chief’s armor did canonically change.
> >
> > They need to broach the change CORRECTLY this time. Having Chief start in the modified Mk.VI and changing to the older-looking armor can easily be done multiple ways.
>
> I see. Well, can you explain these moments then?
> Master Chief versus Brute ChieftainKeep in mind that prior to fighting them on High Charity, the Master Chief had only ever encountered the Brutes once, on the Unyielding Hierophant, which means this particular encounter has to be on Earth during Halo 3.
> Master Chief Being Outfitted with MJOLNIR Mark IV or V We know this has to be the Mark IV or V outfitting on Reach because it takes place before Halo 4 and it’s not on the Cairo Station armoury, as far as we can tell.
> Spartan Team Sky DiveLastly, the Chief’s armour wasn’t the only thing that was redesigned. In that cutscene alone, all the Covenant are redesigned as well as the Forward Unto Dawn. Did Cortana use nanomachines to alter their appearances as well?

  1. Chief fighting Brutes has been retconned, especially with their earlier appearance in Contact Harvest. The re-releases of First Strike amend this.
  2. It’s just Mk. IV.
  3. It’s just Mk. IV, the Covenant gear was just one of many used throughout and after the war, and the Dawn was changed for level-design reasons. I mean, the Pillar of Autumn’s size changed to accommodate the Warthog run, it’s the same concept simply taken more aesthetically.
9

> 2533274812652989;8:
> > 2535415876049274;3:
> > > 2533274812652989;2:
> > > You’re wrong though. 343 Industries did explain the change, not in-game, but they did. Cortana utilized nanomachines in Chief’s armor to change it and used an old variant of Mk. IV MJOLNIR as the basis for the new design. Explained by Frank O’Connor and reconfirmed in the Halo 4 Essential Visual Guide. So, no, the Chief’s armor did canonically change.
> > >
> > > They need to broach the change CORRECTLY this time. Having Chief start in the modified Mk.VI and changing to the older-looking armor can easily be done multiple ways.
> >
> > I see. Well, can you explain these moments then?
> > Master Chief versus Brute ChieftainKeep in mind that prior to fighting them on High Charity, the Master Chief had only ever encountered the Brutes once, on the Unyielding Hierophant, which means this particular encounter has to be on Earth during Halo 3.
> > Master Chief Being Outfitted with MJOLNIR Mark IV or V We know this has to be the Mark IV or V outfitting on Reach because it takes place before Halo 4 and it’s not on the Cairo Station armoury, as far as we can tell.
> > Spartan Team Sky DiveLastly, the Chief’s armour wasn’t the only thing that was redesigned. In that cutscene alone, all the Covenant are redesigned as well as the Forward Unto Dawn. Did Cortana use nanomachines to alter their appearances as well?
>
> 1. Chief fighting Brutes has been retconned, especially with their earlier appearance in Contact Harvest. The re-releases of First Strike amend this.
> 2. It’s just Mk. IV.
> 3. It’s just Mk. IV, the Covenant gear was just one of many used throughout and after the war, and the Dawn was changed for level-design reasons. I mean, the Pillar of Autumn’s size changed to accommodate the Warthog run, it’s the same concept simply taken more aesthetically.

I don’t know if you saw my later reply to you. ?

In regards to the retcon in the new releases of First Strike, I only have the original. Do you remember the changes?

10

I believe they half heartedly explained the redesign from 3 to 4 outside of the game. Some -Yoink- about nanomachines because apparently they can do that (thanks Frank lol). As far as 5 to Infinite though, I don’t think they need a canon reason. If there is one, cool, if not, I don’t care. They can change the way things look without needing some lore behind it in my opinion, it’s a game.

11

They definitely should. Even if it’s as simple as saying his old armor was damaged beyond repair so he had to switch to his new classic looking armor in the Infinite trailer.

12

Nanomachines! Your favorite “because magic” excuse in a sci-fi setting! X’D

13

Anyone who tries to explain Chief’s armor redesign as anything other than just an art style change is lying to themselves. For that same reason, since Infinite is also just changing art styles, they literally don’t have to explain anything; canonically, it could still be the same exact armor from 5.

Yes, following the launch of Halo 4, certain canonical references have been made to further justify the “nanobot” explanation behind Chief’s armor completely changing. But even then, every single one of those explanations are themselves retcons. The only reference we had to these nanobots prior to H4’s launch was in the Kilo-Five trilogy… which also specifically mentions that said nanobots were only ever added to Mark VII Mjolnir, developed well after Chief was stuck in cryo. So, even in their attempt to pre-emptively justify the nanobots, the armor change STILL breaks canon, according to every reference prior to Halo 4. It’s embarrassing.

And, as for the equally canon-breaking armor usage in Halo 4’s opening cutscene; the “we didn’t have resources for proper armor assets” excuse is also a joke. If that was the case, then how can they justify the fact that they had the resources for a Brute in that same cutscene, which also wasn’t even in the game? Not to mention the fact that even having those Spartans fighting Brutes in the first place ALSO breaks canon!?

Retcon, retcon, canon contradiction, retcon, etc… Halo 4’s opening cutscene alone craps so hard on all preexisting canon, that it’s utterly mystifying to me that so many apparently “hardcore” fans of the EU don’t seem to even care. I mean, Reach retconned the timeline by a few weeks and people lost their minds, even when the events themselves were essentially the same, but what do I know.

To be clear, there is absolutely nothing wrong with preferring the 343 art style, that’s perfectly understandable. I’m specifically flustered by the amount of people who will argue so vehemently about the new armor being canon, despite the fact that everything surrounding its introduction broke canon, at the time.

Even now, the only “sources” we have to support the nanobots are, what? An artbook, and because Frank “said so?” Either way, it still breaks previous canon, and exists as a total retcon; that’s fact. Simply accepting that it was just an art style change makes things way simpler, and removes an immense amount of division among the fanbase. It also makes Chief’s “classic” armor in Infinite a non-canon issue, because it’s just a new art style. That’s all the explanation 343 needs to give, if they’re smart about it.

14

Retcons aren’t inherently a bad thing, so I’m not seeing the problem. The whole hang up people have about Chief fighting a Brute is especially weird since it Brutes being engaged by the UNSC has been corrected long before Halo 4. I mean, it doesn’t really make sense that they’d only have fought Grunts and Jackals for 30 years and never encounter an Elite, Hunter, Brute or whatever as made evident in the original Fall of Reach and First Strike. Sometimes a retcon is necessary and one like the introduction of Covenant species being encountered earlier than before doesn’t actually harm the story. You don’t have to like the reasons, heck I’m still not a fan of the whole nanobot angle, but it is what it is and yet it doesn’t break any prior canon. All I see is mountains being made out of mole hills.

15

Im thinking Chief gets a new set of armor because if im correct, A.I.s can control the Gen 2 armor suits. Maybe John switches back to Gen 1 ? or maybe its a new MK entirely ? Maybe it’s a final product of the MK VII since Naomi 010 wore a prototype MK VII. Who knows ? I just hope the reason is for the lore.

16

> 2533274936891954;15:
> Im thinking Chief gets a new set of armor because if im correct, A.I.s can control the Gen 2 armor suits. Maybe John switches back to Gen 1 ? or maybe its a new MK entirely ? Maybe it’s a final product of the MK VII since Naomi 010 wore a prototype MK VII. Who knows ? I just hope the reason is for the lore.

A.Is can still control Gen 1 even if every spartan wears MK 4 gen 1, but even then they arn’t safe. Any armor that can have a A.I in it has the risk of a A.I controlling the armor. Also we say MK 7 prototype in a H5G multiplayer armor.

17

While Halo 4 was in production, 343i posted a picture of an Unggoy they were making. A thread appeared asking 343i “where was the exoskeleton?” At first 343i was like “what exoskeleton?” Our response was, “The exoskeleton they were described as having according to all the available documentation provided by Bungie.” 343i’s response was, “Bungie got it wrong.” Yes, you read that right. 343i asserted that Bungie both described and drew the characters they made up incorrectly in Halo CE-3, ODST and Reach. Apparently Ensemble got it wrong as well when they made Halo Wars.

The sad part is that they could have come up with dozens of plausible reasons, and didn’t. The real reason things like this happen is because they don’t think we’ll notice, or care. Just like when they changed the Japanese voice actor for Master Chief. Caused a big stink in Japan.

18

Having done a bit of looking around, the best canonical explanation I’m happy with for all the armour changes was one presented by HaloCanon. He proposes that there wasn’t simply a Mark IV, V, VI, VII and Gen 2 with multiple permutations as we’ve believed for so long, but rather that the armour has been constantly updated since the beginning. I believe that canonically we have something along the lines of this:

Mark IV

Mark V

19

> 2533274798957786;17:
> While Halo 4 was in production, 343i posted a picture of an Unggoy they were making. A thread appeared asking 343i “where was the exoskeleton?” At first 343i was like “what exoskeleton?” Our response was, “The exoskeleton they were described as having according to all the available documentation provided by Bungie.” 343i’s response was, “Bungie got it wrong.” Yes, you read that right. 343i asserted that Bungie both described and drew the characters they made up incorrectly in Halo CE-3, ODST and Reach. Apparently Ensemble got it wrong as well when they made Halo Wars.
>
> The sad part is that they could have come up with dozens of plausible reasons, and didn’t. The real reason things like this happen is because they don’t think we’ll notice, or care. Just like when they changed the Japanese voice actor for Master Chief. Caused a big stink in Japan.

Again, and again, this.

Spartan armor, Elites, Grunts, Jackals, etc.; during development, when the community understandably reacted to these very obvious changes in design, 343’s reaction never made any references to “nanobots,” or “phenotypes,” or any of that nonsense. They simply (and explicitly, iirc) stated that they were a “new” studio, and the team wanted to put a “new” take on the design; cut and dry, it was that simple.

However, when the game launched, there was a understandably a huge amount of backlash at how different everything looked, which 343 assumingely didn’t expect. It was only after launch that they realized people wouldn’t stop bringing it up, which ultimately lead them to “explain” everything canonically, hence the “nanobots” and covenant “phenotypes.”

20

> 2533274813244926;19:
> > 2533274798957786;17:
> > While Halo 4 was in production, 343i posted a picture of an Unggoy they were making. A thread appeared asking 343i “where was the exoskeleton?” At first 343i was like “what exoskeleton?” Our response was, “The exoskeleton they were described as having according to all the available documentation provided by Bungie.” 343i’s response was, “Bungie got it wrong.” Yes, you read that right. 343i asserted that Bungie both described and drew the characters they made up incorrectly in Halo CE-3, ODST and Reach. Apparently Ensemble got it wrong as well when they made Halo Wars.
> >
> > The sad part is that they could have come up with dozens of plausible reasons, and didn’t. The real reason things like this happen is because they don’t think we’ll notice, or care. Just like when they changed the Japanese voice actor for Master Chief. Caused a big stink in Japan.
>
> Again, and again, this.
>
> Spartan armor, Elites, Grunts, Jackals, etc.; during development, when the community understandably reacted to these very obvious changes in design, 343’s reaction never made any references to “nanobots,” or “phenotypes,” or any of that nonsense. They simply (and explicitly, iirc) stated that they were a “new” studio, and the team wanted to put a “new” take on the design; cut and dry, it was that simple.
>
> However, when the game launched, there was a understandably a huge amount of backlash at how different everything looked, which 343 assumingely didn’t expect. It was only after launch that they realized people wouldn’t stop bringing it up, which ultimately lead them to “explain” everything canonically, hence the “nanobots” and covenant “phenotypes.”

Yeah. I have a vague memory of Frank O’Connor saying that the only reason the MJOLNIR armour looked different in Bungie’s games is because they had limited polygons to work with, which I never bought. That said, I think 343i have started to understand they had the wrong attitude and are now going out of their way to make amends.