Halo CEA: Gun models

Yes, I’m back again with another concern about Halo CEA and staying faithful to the original. I would like to present you with three sets of two images each:

Halo: Combat Evolved; Assault Rifle first person view
Halo: Combat Evolved; Assault Rifle model

Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary; Assault Rifle first person view
Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary; Assault Rifle model

Halo: Reach; Assault Rifle first person view
Halo: Reach; Assault Rifle model

As you can see, the CEA Assault Rifle clearly resembles the Reach Assault Rifle more. The model is exactly the same, from first person it is simply more slanted and given a 60 round magazine. HOWEVER, most people would think this is not a problem. But I present you with this:

MA5B Assault Rifle (Halo: Combat Evolved)

MA37 Assault Rifle (Halo: Reach)

From this, it is evident the Assault Rifle in Anniversary clearly looks more like the MA37 and is thus a variant of the MA37, NOT the MA5B. How did all those MA5B’s magically get replaced with MA37 variants? The Anniversary Assault Rifle that we’ve seen looks nothing like the original MA5B. I’m just curious, if all of the weapon models we saw at E3 were final cut? I have no problem with this model being used, I’d just like to know why they’re using it and why they didn’t actually make it look, you know, like the original.Thank you.

/nerdrage

This is getting ridiculous with all of these threads. 343 KNOWS THIS. They’re probably doing something to “remedy” for this horrible sin they have committed. If not, get it through your head THAT IT LOOKS GOOD.
You’re basically saying that you’d rather have inferior weapon designs in favor of following the “canon”.

> You’re basically saying that you’d rather have inferior weapon designs in favor of following the “canon”.

Dude, it looks like crap. Plain and simple. I am simply expressing my concern in a thought out post presented in a clean and understandable manner. The fact is I have no problem with this model being used, I’d just like to know why they’re using it and why they didn’t actually make it look, you know, like the original.

> > Jesus Christ, this is getting ridiculous.
> > You’re basically saying that you’d rather have inferior weapon designs in favor of following the “canon”.
>
> You think I’m bad? I’ve already seen worse, and I’m sure we will both see worse. Dude, it looks like crap. Plain and simple.

The trailer was still in the early stages of development. Since when did the weapon design changing a TAD become such a dilemma?
And also don’t try to tell me that the old looks better than the new, because that’s just your nostalgia talking for you.

> The trailer was still in the early stages of development

I know this. But that doesn’t mean that everything will be different.

> Since when did the weapon design changing a TAD become such a dilemma?

It’s not a “tad”. Take another look.

> > You’re basically saying that you’d rather have inferior weapon designs in favor of following the “canon”.
>
> Dude, it looks like crap. Plain and simple. I am simply expressing my concern in a thought out post presented in a clean and understandable manner. The fact is I have no problem with this model being used, I’d just like to know why they’re using it and why they didn’t actually make it look, you know, like the original.

I’m sick of these pointless threads. Isn’t the answer obvious, anyway? 343 were either using it as a placeholder, or they looked at it and decided that it looked better than the outdated model of the old AR.
Think of it this way: Let’s just call this the MA5B. Since Reach breaks the canon established by the novels, it could be considered non-canon by you. Therefore, you’re able to block Reach out completely, and act like it never existed.

Or better yet, just ignore Reach without doing any of that stuff. Consider this the new MA5B. This is a remake. They can change things. This is the new MA5B. Deal with it.

> Consider this the new MA5B. This is a remake. They can change things. This is the new MA5B. Deal with it.

I can live with that. I just don’t see the point in changing it when the original looked just fine. In my (I’m about to say a bad word) opinion, the Halo CE Assault Rifle looks much better than Reach’s and in turn Halo CEA’s. As stated before, I’d just like to know why.

> > Consider this the new MA5B. This is a remake. They can change things. This is the new MA5B. Deal with it.
>
> I can live with that. I just don’t see the point in changing it when the original looked just fine. In my (I’m about to say a bad word) opinion, the Halo CE Assault Rifle looks much better than Reach’s and in turn Halo CEA’s. As stated before, I’d just like to know why.

Well if it’s your honest opinion, then I can’t argue with that. Who knows? Maybe they changed it to fit in with the new graphics layer. Maybe the old model would have looked out of place?

> Well if it’s your honest opinion, then I can’t argue with that. Who knows? Maybe they changed it to fit in with the new graphics layer. Maybe the old model would have looked out of place?

Are we about to have a gasp mature discussion? I think so…

It’s certainly possible. I mean, with all the other character models, weapons and vehicles being hauled into the new graphics, it’s possible a ported Assault Rifle would look too out of place and bland compared with the level of detail in the other weapons. But we both know that that footage was early development so it can change. keeping my fingers crossed

> > Well if it’s your honest opinion, then I can’t argue with that. Who knows? Maybe they changed it to fit in with the new graphics layer. Maybe the old model would have looked out of place?
>
> Are we about to have a gasp mature discussion? I think so…
>
> It’s certainly possible. I mean, with all the other character models, weapons and vehicles being hauled into the new graphics, it’s possible a ported Assault Rifle would look too out of place and bland compared with the level of detail in the other weapons. But we both know that that footage was early development so it can change. keeping my fingers crossed

I’m pretty much happy with anything. Just so long as the Assault Rifle NEVER goes back to shudders… 32 rounds…
Seriously, that has to be the worst weapon design I’ve ever seen. No wonder the Marines got killed all of the time, they always used that god-awful weapon in 3, ODST, and Reach.

> I’m pretty much happy with anything. Just so long as the Assault Rifle NEVER goes back to shudders… 32 rounds…
> Seriously, that has to be the worst weapon design I’ve ever seen. No wonder the Marines got killed all of the time, they always used that god-awful weapon in 3, ODST, and Reach.

Seriously… 32 rounds was just a disgrace. Plus it had the range of a pea shooter and the power of a battery operated popcorn machine. Thankfully CEA will be running on Halo 1’s gameplay and physics engine.

Relax the game is not finished. It´s probably just a placeholder.

> Jesus Christ, this is getting ridiculous with all of these threads. 343 KNOWS THIS. They’re probably doing something to “remedy” for this horrible sin they have committed. If not, get it through your head THAT IT LOOKS GOOD.
> You’re basically saying that you’d rather have inferior weapon designs in favor of following the “canon”.

it breaks game canon since the model in reach is a differnt version of the assault riffle. not to mention the MA5B from this was also in halo wars and the one in halo wars looks like the original model.

There is already essentially a seven-page thread going on about this. 343 has commented; they know about the discrepancies. I would say there’s no reason for further discussion, as it seems to be resulting in a contest to see which group of fans can prove the other “wrong”.

> There is already essentially a seven-page thread going on about this. 343 has commented; they know about the discrepancies. I would say there’s no reason for further discussion, as it seems to be resulting in a contest to see which group of fans can prove the other “wrong”.

Teehee.

> Jesus Christ, this is getting ridiculous with all of these threads.

Agreed. People need to accept and understand that some parts of their oh-so-precious canon can and do get altered retrospectively. So what? It’s only minor discrepancies; slight differences to how a weapon looks like, for Pete’s sake!

> > Jesus Christ, this is getting ridiculous with all of these threads.
>
> Agreed. People need to accept and understand that some parts of their oh-so-precious canon can and do get altered retrospectively. So what? It’s only minor discrepancies; slight differences to how a weapon looks like, for Pete’s sake!

welll, that depends in how loyal you are to the classic game, in you are one of those guys wo look for cool graphics well… BUT if you really care for the classic assault rifle then think about this:

  1. the halo 1 ar may look simple, builky, heavy, complex, and useless, but what do you prefer?, this fat, useless and canonical rifle http://www.halopedian.com/File:AR.jpg , or this one with only “minor discrepancies”: http://images.wikia.com/halo/images/3/3f/MA37_Assault_Rifle.png

  2. canonicaly think carefully in this: the pillar of autum was in a highly dangerous ASSAULT mission, witch means that they nedeed all the firepower they could get so they might have stocked mainly MA5B rifles because of their larger magazine, supresive fire and overall resistance and minimal maintance even in the weight the marine increased as well. (i got the feeling we should talk of the marine armor too)

  3. Halo is full of canonical errors, and replacing the assault rifle would only create more useless threads don´t you agree?

  4. I know this remake is a tribute to the classic one (as a devoted fan, don´t see this game like a sustitute) and that they will use the reach engine, so doesn´t make sense use some elements from reach (marines, armor, assault rifle) as place holders while they make the final product?

When I first saw it I didn’t like it saying those models should stay in reach… Now I’ve gotten used to them and even started to like them more. So 343 could you make a skull that would turn on different gun models from the reach ones to the new improved classic high poly ones? But one thing that needs a new model is the marines. You should make the classic high poly one and add the reach models with the skull.

Did it ever cross your mind, that this new one, is basically the same gun? Bungie modded the AR down after CE, because it was overpowered.

And as for design, Bungie made it like that in reach, because the engine allowed for more detail.

The MA37, like the MA5B has been in service for well over 50 years.

It also states that it’s called MA5B by the navy. But has another name in other branches.

> Halo: Combat Evolved; Assault Rifle first person view
> Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary; Assault Rifle first person view
> Halo: Reach; Assault Rifle first person view
> As you can see, the CEA Assault Rifle clearly resembles the Reach Assault Rifle more.

You posted this 1.5 months ago - either they swapped the images in the meantime, or you are completely blind.

The CEA rifle clearly - clearly - resembles the CE model over the Reach model… it just doesn’t look like smooth metal anymore…