So I have had a lot of friends say that the landscape design in the demo looked a lot like a Minecraft world (when he’s going up the lift), which is kinda done, but after some serious thinking, I think it was chosen for lore reasons.
I noticed in the Halo Wars 2 cutscenes you’d see that the ring map was made out of a whole lot of hexagons, I’m guessing this is how the ring is interconnected with each other, and once again when Anders draws a barrier around the banished before throwing them into space, the barrier corrects itself to the outline of the hexagons of the ring.
In the Infinite demo, there was a lot of mountainous terrain, which some of it consisted of the oddly shaped square-hexagon beams; furthermore, the shape was also shown on the map which was opened by the player in the demo, I believe the ring is just made out of a huge number of hexagon pillars interconnected with each other or some related theory.
Just a theory that I thought, trying to make myself feel better after watching the trailer.
Do you guys think it’s there to stay or just too early to tell?
In Halo Wars 2 and in the terminals for Halo CEA, we’ve seen Anders and Guilty Spark eject parts of the terrain from the rings they were on - what if that’s what has happened here, and the hexagonal pillars are just what is left behind when exposed? Sort of like the skeleton of a mountain of something
It doesn’t matter if it’s lore related. Lore is nothing but what people at 343 make up, people act like lore is some sort of scientific law that we can not change…
Truth is: these columns/cliffs look boring and remind a lot of people (including me) of Minecraft, which is not a good look. Making up a semi decent lore reason as to why something looks bad doesn’t change the fact that it looks bad…
> 2533274801973487;3:
> It doesn’t matter if it’s lore related. Lore is nothing but what people at 343 make up, people act like lore is some sort of scientific law that we can not change…
> Truth is: these columns/cliffs look boring and remind a lot of people (including me) of Minecraft, which is not a good look. Making up a semi decent lore reason as to why something looks bad doesn’t change the fact that it looks bad…
There are natural structures in real life that are comprised of (completely natural) hexagons. Basalt pillars look almost exactly like what we’ve seen. Check out the Giant’s Causeway in the UK, for example. Reality can be surprising sometimes when we expect chaos in nature, but see order.
The rings are huge, so there’s no reason to expect that the Halos are all one climate/biome, either. Those basalt pillars might just be in that one region, and the terrain changes up elsewhere on the ring.
> 2533274959906785;1:
> So I have had a lot of friends say that the landscape design in the demo looked a lot like a Minecraft world (when he’s going up the lift), which is kinda done, but after some serious thinking, I think it was chosen for lore reasons.
>
> I noticed in the Halo Wars 2 cutscenes you’d see that the ring map was made out of a whole lot of hexagons, I’m guessing this is how the ring is interconnected with each other, and once again when Anders draws a barrier around the banished before throwing them into space, the barrier corrects itself to the outline of the hexagons of the ring.
>
> In the Infinite demo, there was a lot of mountainous terrain, which some of it consisted of the oddly shaped square-hexagon beams; furthermore, the shape was also shown on the map which was opened by the player in the demo, I believe the ring is just made out of a huge number of hexagon pillars interconnected with each other or some related theory.
>
> Just a theory that I thought, trying to make myself feel better after watching the trailer.
>
> Do you guys think it’s there to stay or just too early to tell?
Makes perfect sense the Forerunners would do this given the individual and collective load-bearing ability of hexagonal structures. The ring has clearly been very damaged and even has some sort of field holding it together in the DH trailer - maybe the Sentinels are in the process of rebuilding/ repairing the ring, hence the sub-structure showing?
The forerunner designs of Halo 4 and H5G also had lore reasons behind them.
(More precisely: There were lore reasons shoehorned in after the fact as a rationalization.)
They still looked atrocious.
> 2533274801973487;3:
> It doesn’t matter if it’s lore related. Lore is nothing but what people at 343 make up, people act like lore is some sort of scientific law that we can not change…
> Truth is: these columns/cliffs look boring and remind a lot of people (including me) of Minecraft, which is not a good look. Making up a semi decent lore reason as to why something looks bad doesn’t change the fact that it looks bad…
But then given the setting of the game and the condition of the ring, it would make even less sense of it simply looked pristine and perfect around where bits have been lost/ damaged.
I understand the argument, but I don’t see people making the same argument about visible damage on vehicles etc that’s been around since 2004 - it’s exactly the same thing. Something damaged, should look damaged. I can completely understand if people would prefer it to be dialled back a bit as it’s a bit OTT the way it is literally everywhere from the small part we’ve seen so far - again, this is only a small area of what is apparently a much larger map - maybe it won’t be visible or as visible in other areas?
Regardless, the argument for wanting it removed because it “looks silly & un-realistic” is ironic, enhanced realism may well be the reason it’s there to begin with, which kind of renders the argument void and tbh, funny, imo.
TL;DR - Lore aside, this fits perfectly well in terms of common sense - damaged ares shouldn’t look lovely, and the undamaged areas look lovely in comparison. I think people need to chill out. I understand not liking how the damage looks…but that’s kind of the whole point?
> 2533274799621457;8:
> > 2533274801973487;3:
> > It doesn’t matter if it’s lore related. Lore is nothing but what people at 343 make up, people act like lore is some sort of scientific law that we can not change…
> > Truth is: these columns/cliffs look boring and remind a lot of people (including me) of Minecraft, which is not a good look. Making up a semi decent lore reason as to why something looks bad doesn’t change the fact that it looks bad…
>
> But then given the setting of the game and the condition of the ring, it would make even less sense of it simply looked pristine and perfect around where bits have been lost/ damaged.
>
> I understand the argument, but I don’t see people making the same argument about visible damage on vehicles etc that’s been around since 2004 - it’s exactly the same thing. Something damaged, should look damaged. I can completely understand if people would prefer it to be dialled back a bit as it’s a bit OTT the way it is literally everywhere from the small part we’ve seen so far - again, this is only a small area of what is apparently a much larger map - maybe it won’t be visible or as visible in other areas?
>
> Regardless, the argument for wanting it removed because it “looks silly & un-realistic” is ironic, enhanced realism may well be the reason it’s there to begin with, which kind of renders the argument void and tbh, funny, imo.
>
> TL;DR - Lore aside, this fits perfectly well in terms of common sense - damaged ares shouldn’t look lovely, and the undamaged areas look lovely in comparison. I think people need to chill out. I understand not liking how the damage looks…but that’s kind of the whole point?
I’m afraid you don’t understand the argument…
If you want to portray a damaged car, then there are clear physical and mechanical “rules” that are dictated by the real world. Everyone knows how scratched paint on steel, twisted metal and shattered glass looks like.
But Halo is not real… “we” make up the rules of Halo. 343 cannot change how scorch marks on steel should look, but they make up how a unfinished/damaged Halo looks like.
And the design they went for doesn’t look good. They could have made up dozens other ways to portray the state the ring is in, but they didn’t…
> 2533274801973487;9:
> > 2533274799621457;8:
> > > 2533274801973487;3:
> > > It doesn’t matter if it’s lore related. Lore is nothing but what people at 343 make up, people act like lore is some sort of scientific law that we can not change…
> > > Truth is: these columns/cliffs look boring and remind a lot of people (including me) of Minecraft, which is not a good look. Making up a semi decent lore reason as to why something looks bad doesn’t change the fact that it looks bad…
> >
> > But then given the setting of the game and the condition of the ring, it would make even less sense of it simply looked pristine and perfect around where bits have been lost/ damaged.
> >
> > I understand the argument, but I don’t see people making the same argument about visible damage on vehicles etc that’s been around since 2004 - it’s exactly the same thing. Something damaged, should look damaged. I can completely understand if people would prefer it to be dialled back a bit as it’s a bit OTT the way it is literally everywhere from the small part we’ve seen so far - again, this is only a small area of what is apparently a much larger map - maybe it won’t be visible or as visible in other areas?
> >
> > Regardless, the argument for wanting it removed because it “looks silly & un-realistic” is ironic, enhanced realism may well be the reason it’s there to begin with, which kind of renders the argument void and tbh, funny, imo.
> >
> > TL;DR - Lore aside, this fits perfectly well in terms of common sense - damaged ares shouldn’t look lovely, and the undamaged areas look lovely in comparison. I think people need to chill out. I understand not liking how the damage looks…but that’s kind of the whole point?
>
> I’m afraid you don’t understand the argument…
> If you want to portray a damaged car, then there are clear physical and mechanical “rules” that are dictated by the real world. Everyone knows how scratched paint on steel, twisted metal and shattered glass looks like.
> But Halo is not real… “we” make up the rules of Halo. 343 cannot change how scorch marks on steel should look, but they make up how a unfinished/damaged Halo looks like.
> And the design they went for doesn’t look good. They could have made up dozens other ways to portray the state the ring is in, but they didn’t…
I do understand…what I’m saying is not liking how it looks, while understandable, is a bit of a non-issue. Especially when it makes sense in the real world, when you consider the points made above r.e inherent properties of a hexagonal structure. Just because you don’t think it looks nice, doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense. By that logic we may as well re-imagine and re-draw everything when groups of people don’t like it…shall we now re-design the energy sword since that’s not real? Or Banshees?
To put it another way; I would much prefer damage of some exotic object to look ugly and make sense both canonically and in terms of real-world physics, than to have something very pretty that doesn’t make sense. The latter would bother me more.
If that’s the only real gripe people have about the game, or even how it looks, then I think that speaks volumes.
> 2533274799621457;10:
> I do understand…what I’m saying is not liking how it looks, while understandable, is a bit of a non-issue.
It really isn’t. Art Design is quite important for a visual medium like a game. And those columns are not just huge, they are everywhere. If I want to enjoy something, I cannot be looking at stuff, thinking “holy -Yoink- that’s ugly” all the time.
> 2533274799621457;10:
> Especially when it makes sense in the real world
But it doesn’t because Halo is not the real world, sorry to break it to you…
It makes sense to you, because 343 told you so, someone has cherrypicked a single example from the real world (that doesn’t even fit a 100% considering he’s talking about natural structures whilst this is a supposed to be a Forerunner-made structure) and you choose to believe it.
343 could have taken a different design with the same lore behind it and it would make just as much sense.
> 2533274799621457;8:
> > 2533274801973487;3:
> > It doesn’t matter if it’s lore related. Lore is nothing but what people at 343 make up, people act like lore is some sort of scientific law that we can not change…
> > Truth is: these columns/cliffs look boring and remind a lot of people (including me) of Minecraft, which is not a good look. Making up a semi decent lore reason as to why something looks bad doesn’t change the fact that it looks bad…
>
> But then given the setting of the game and the condition of the ring, it would make even less sense of it simply looked pristine and perfect around where bits have been lost/ damaged.
>
> I understand the argument, but I don’t see people making the same argument about visible damage on vehicles etc that’s been around since 2004 - it’s exactly the same thing. Something damaged, should look damaged. I can completely understand if people would prefer it to be dialled back a bit as it’s a bit OTT the way it is literally everywhere from the small part we’ve seen so far - again, this is only a small area of what is apparently a much larger map - maybe it won’t be visible or as visible in other areas?
>
> Regardless, the argument for wanting it removed because it “looks silly & un-realistic” is ironic, enhanced realism may well be the reason it’s there to begin with, which kind of renders the argument void and tbh, funny, imo.
>
> TL;DR - Lore aside, this fits perfectly well in terms of common sense - damaged ares shouldn’t look lovely, and the undamaged areas look lovely in comparison. I think people need to chill out. I understand not liking how the damage looks…but that’s kind of the whole point?
If the point really is to portray the ring as “damaged” (I don’t know if it is), then Halo Infinite isn’t doing a very good job with it, because all these floating hexagons look completely pristine. It looks more unfinished that damaged to me. But even if, for sake of argument, the point is to show an unfinished Halo, the thing is that there are many ways of going about that. And I don’t think repeating hexagonal columns is the best way. It doesn’t look interesting, it doesn’t look believable, and it isn’t even congruous with what we know about the structure of these rings. There is no substructure, no parts at different scales, no sign of the underlying network of tunnels that circle the entire ring. When Halo 3 showed us an unfinished ring, it looked interesting and well motivated. You had different parts serving different functions. You had the surface tiles to support the terrain. You had structural beams connecting them in every direction. You had these huge walls disappearing into the distance that formed the large scale structure of the ring. It was detailed, it was interesting, it showed purpose, it showed scale, structure, variation. It was a satisfying answer to “what lies beneath the surface?” Halo Infinite is just hexagons.
I’m not too sure that this ring is supposed to look damaged. I think it’s supposed to perhaps look like a ring “under construction” maybe?
Based on how Eschurum spoke, that the ring was “already” under their control, as if they’ve swept in and almost taken it, and that we saw from the E3 trailer last year, a halo ring set at the beginning but damaged, i wonder if this is supposed to be a different ring, one that’s meant to replace the ring first destroyed in last years trailer? Thematically could make sense as there appears to be a grand scale fight at the start of Infinite over a ring.
On the infinite blogpost, 343 also mention that Eschurum is in control of “a ring”. Speculating ofc, but might that make sense lore-wise? Creating a new ring would potentially make the clean, hexagonal and disjointed style of this ring a smart move, no?
Yea it looks like a ring under construction or repair. Regardless at points the background just looked like a clipping error. It kinda kills my curiosity to find out why it’s under construction.
I was thinking about it in a similar fashion, and then it dawned on me. There was considerable evidence of the damaged section of this Halo ring shown. With this in mind, that may be the boundary lines in which we explore.
The landscape architecture may also prove this theory in that the “megablox/lego” look may be the result Halo’s unstable super structure. Halo Wars 2 showed the more hexagonal design, as well as Halo 3’s warthog run, that this architecture element is evident.
> 2533274825830455;12:
> > 2533274799621457;8:
> > > 2533274801973487;3:
> > > It doesn’t matter if it’s lore related. Lore is nothing but what people at 343 make up, people act like lore is some sort of scientific law that we can not change…
> > > Truth is: these columns/cliffs look boring and remind a lot of people (including me) of Minecraft, which is not a good look. Making up a semi decent lore reason as to why something looks bad doesn’t change the fact that it looks bad…
> >
> > But then given the setting of the game and the condition of the ring, it would make even less sense of it simply looked pristine and perfect around where bits have been lost/ damaged.
> >
> > I understand the argument, but I don’t see people making the same argument about visible damage on vehicles etc that’s been around since 2004 - it’s exactly the same thing. Something damaged, should look damaged. I can completely understand if people would prefer it to be dialled back a bit as it’s a bit OTT the way it is literally everywhere from the small part we’ve seen so far - again, this is only a small area of what is apparently a much larger map - maybe it won’t be visible or as visible in other areas?
> >
> > Regardless, the argument for wanting it removed because it “looks silly & un-realistic” is ironic, enhanced realism may well be the reason it’s there to begin with, which kind of renders the argument void and tbh, funny, imo.
> >
> > TL;DR - Lore aside, this fits perfectly well in terms of common sense - damaged ares shouldn’t look lovely, and the undamaged areas look lovely in comparison. I think people need to chill out. I understand not liking how the damage looks…but that’s kind of the whole point?
>
> If the point really is to portray the ring as “damaged” (I don’t know if it is), then Halo Infinite isn’t doing a very good job with it, because all these floating hexagons look completely pristine. It looks more unfinished that damaged to me. But even if, for sake of argument, the point is to show an unfinished Halo, the thing is that there are many ways of going about that. And I don’t think repeating hexagonal columns is the best way. It doesn’t look interesting, it doesn’t look believable, and it isn’t even congruous with what we know about the structure of these rings. There is no substructure, no parts at different scales, no sign of the underlying network of tunnels that circle the entire ring. When Halo 3 showed us an unfinished ring, it looked interesting and well motivated. You had different parts serving different functions. You had the surface tiles to support the terrain. You had structural beams connecting them in every direction. You had these huge walls disappearing into the distance that formed the large scale structure of the ring. It was detailed, it was interesting, it showed purpose, it showed scale, structure, variation. It was a satisfying answer to “what lies beneath the surface?” Halo Infinite is just hexagons.
Damaged & being rebuilt.
Not liking hexagons as such is fine…but things are being spun weirdly here.