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

Games Halo Infinite
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.

21

> 2533274812652989;14:
> Retcons aren’t inherently a bad thing, so I’m not seeing the problem.

They are when they’re 100% needless, as is the case with Chief’s armor.

As with the new Elite, Jackal, and Grunt designs, prior to Halo 4’s launch, all of these changes were specifically labeled as “design choices” on the part of the art team, by 343, directly; they were never “canonical” changes. They explicitly stated that they wanted to put “their own mark” on the game, and that’s exactly what their art team did, which is *fine.*All they had to do, starting with Halo 4 (and all they should have done), is simply say “we’re going with a new art style,” and leave it at that. Which is exactly what they should do with Infinite; forget all the retcon -Yoink-, and move on. Armor, Covenant designs, all of it. All it is is a new art style, and that’s all they need to say.

Also, even as it stands, currently, the only canon “proof” behind Chief’s retconned armor is an art book. As far as I can find, there is no other media that addresses Chief’s total armor overhaul, let alone explains it- including the games, themselves! If we’re gonna “retcon” anything, I think it makes far more sense to retcon a single point of contention, as opposed to dozens and dozens of other Halo literature, going forward.

22

> 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’m all for explanations, I think they need to stick to being more vocal about it story wise. When I introduce people into the Halo timelines, I’d rather them not be like “why did master chief’s armor change?” lol

23

I think there is a good explanation. Master chiefs Hlmet was damaged in Halo 5 and His armour was vulnerable to Cortana (The Betrayal cutscene) His Mark Vi could be there because he has to downgrade to prevent the created from hacking his armour.

24

To he honest I always saw the changes in armor appearance basically were inherited as a design choice based on limitations at the time. As we’ve progressed through the ages the chiefs armor alterations can be explained by the fact that the parent company has more to work with and can make their envisioned Chief look how he couldn’t a decade ago.

With that said, I feel the Halo universe needs a realistic art style comparable to Reach, but still more real-life oriented. Right now, the graphics, color styles, and art choices come across to me as childish, outlandish, and subpar for a franchise that can be exciting, suspenseful, and loved. We need that realism depth in models like the cutscenes are in H5. Cut the extreme colors and give visual life to the characters.

25

A good canon reason would be that since the armor Chief wears in 4 and 5 was personally designed by Cortana, Chief wouldn’t trust to wear it now that she is out to get him and the UNSC. Since the UNSC is enveloped in chaos because of Cortana, the Mark VI might be the only armor he has available to him.

26

I loathe the nanobot excuse for Chief’s armor design, to me it was just a ridiculous way to explain Chief’s armor change instead of saying it was a creative decision to change it.

27

> 2533274917158807;26:
> I loathe the nanobot excuse for Chief’s armor design, to me it was just a ridiculous way to explain Chief’s armor change instead of saying it was a creative decision to change it.

I’m not a fan of the nanobots either, as someone said previously, it’s essentially like saying “magic” and moving on, but what’s done is done.