So after Chiefs fight with Locke, his helmet was messed up. There were probably some events that happened a little bit after Halo 5, that made his armor damaged. Which means he would have to find a way to replace his old armor. He likely went to a military base, where they had old spartan armor, Chief not wanting a crack in his helmet; just switched to the old version.
I mean does it really matter why? It’s a video game. How do you explain the in-game lore behind improved visuals in each game?
His new armor isnt the old Gen 1 Mark 6. It’s a Gen 3 armor. It says so during its system boot up.
> 2533274870762420;2:
> I mean does it really matter why? It’s a video game. How do you explain the in-game lore behind improved visuals in each game?
Yes. When you’re telling a story, you need continuity. This is why a lot of people didn’t like how Chief’s Mk VI armour changed from Halo 3 to 4, because it wasn’t explained.
There’s obviously no explanation for improved visuals because that isn’t an in-universe thing.
> 2533274825160595;3:
> His new armor isnt the old Gen 1 Mark 6. It’s a Gen 3 armor. It says so during its system boot up.
The software is Gen III, but the armour may be upgraded Gen I MJOLNIR Mk IV, as it strikes a pretty similar resemblance (aside from the helmet) to Chief’s Mk IV armour from Halo Legends: The Package, and Forward Unto Dawn.
In 2012 I wished they gave a meaningful explanation for the change in armor besides Nanomachines in a Frankie interview.
Over time I just accepted the art style change and didn’t expect a meaningful in game explanation to come. Because of this I don’t need an explanation for Halo Infinite.
I’m okay with it just changing.
> 2535419441797248;4:
> > 2533274870762420;2:
> > I mean does it really matter why? It’s a video game. How do you explain the in-game lore behind improved visuals in each game?
>
> Yes. When you’re telling a story, you need continuity. This is why a lot of people didn’t like how Chief’s Mk VI armour changed from Halo 3 to 4, because it wasn’t explained.
>
> There’s obviously no explanation for improved visuals because that isn’t an in-universe thing.
It seems like the majority of the community were more upset of the change to a new art style. The artstyle had already been established by Bungie. I couldn’t care less about if it would make sense from a lore perspective. It’s all made up anyway.
I mean, they gave a BS reason for why his armor changed in Halo 4 to justify the new artstyle. So why? Becsuse.
> 2533274870762420;7:
> > 2535419441797248;4:
> > > 2533274870762420;2:
> > > I mean does it really matter why? It’s a video game. How do you explain the in-game lore behind improved visuals in each game?
> >
> > Yes. When you’re telling a story, you need continuity. This is why a lot of people didn’t like how Chief’s Mk VI armour changed from Halo 3 to 4, because it wasn’t explained.
> >
> > There’s obviously no explanation for improved visuals because that isn’t an in-universe thing.
>
> It seems like the majority of the community were more upset of the change to a new art style. The artstyle had already been established by Bungie. I couldn’t care less about if it would make sense from a lore perspective. It’s all made up anyway.
If it was just an art style change, and this is how they’ve always meant to look, then yes. But it isn’t. The new looking Pelican, Elites, Chief, etc, from Halo 4 and 5 are new in-universe too. They aren’t just reimagined versions of their classic Halo counterparts. This is new armour for Chief. So the changes need explanation, for continuity sake.
> 2535419441797248;5:
> > 2533274825160595;3:
> > His new armor isnt the old Gen 1 Mark 6. It’s a Gen 3 armor. It says so during its system boot up.
>
> The software is Gen III, but the armour may be upgraded Gen I MJOLNIR Mk IV, as it strikes a pretty similar resemblance (aside from the helmet) to Chief’s Mk IV armour from Halo Legends: The Package, and Forward Unto Dawn.
I dont think so. It say specifically that it was created by Materials Group in 2559. It also say it’s full armor designation as MJOLNIR POWERED ASSAULT ARMOR SYSTEM // GENERATION III. Source. While it looks similar to both Mark IV and Mark VI it still has many differences and even if it used Mark IV as a base and upgraded it to Gen III that would still make the armor Gen III.
> 2533274825160595;10:
> > 2535419441797248;5:
> > > 2533274825160595;3:
> > > His new armor isnt the old Gen 1 Mark 6. It’s a Gen 3 armor. It says so during its system boot up.
> >
> > The software is Gen III, but the armour may be upgraded Gen I MJOLNIR Mk IV, as it strikes a pretty similar resemblance (aside from the helmet) to Chief’s Mk IV armour from Halo Legends: The Package, and Forward Unto Dawn.
>
> I dont think so. It say specifically that it was created by Materials Group in 2559. It also say it’s full armor designation as MJOLNIR POWERED ASSAULT ARMOR SYSTEM // GENERATION III. Source. While it looks similar to both Mark IV and Mark VI it still has many differences and even if it used Mark IV as a base and upgraded it to Gen III that would still make the armor Gen III.
Yes, it would, which is what i believe to be the case. The 2559 date could just be when it was upgraded…I just don’t see this as the next evolution of Spartan armour, because it looks like a downgrade.
I’m biased against the armour already though, because I didn’t like Chief’s Mk IV armour, compared to the Mk IV seen in Halo Wars and Halo Wars 2.
> 2535419441797248;11:
> > 2533274825160595;10:
> > > 2535419441797248;5:
> > > > 2533274825160595;3:
> > > > His new armor isnt the old Gen 1 Mark 6. It’s a Gen 3 armor. It says so during its system boot up.
> > >
> > > The software is Gen III, but the armour may be upgraded Gen I MJOLNIR Mk IV, as it strikes a pretty similar resemblance (aside from the helmet) to Chief’s Mk IV armour from Halo Legends: The Package, and Forward Unto Dawn.
> >
> > I dont think so. It say specifically that it was created by Materials Group in 2559. It also say it’s full armor designation as MJOLNIR POWERED ASSAULT ARMOR SYSTEM // GENERATION III. Source. While it looks similar to both Mark IV and Mark VI it still has many differences and even if it used Mark IV as a base and upgraded it to Gen III that would still make the armor Gen III.
>
> Yes, it would, which is what i believe to be the case. The 2559 date could just be when it was upgraded…I just don’t see this as the next evolution of Spartan armour, because it looks like a downgrade.
How does it look like a down grade? In Halo: Official Spartan Field Manual it says
> The conceptual design framework incorporates lessons from the MJOLNIR [GEN2] line of Mjolnir, while also using performance and higher levels of projection given by the MJOLNIR [GEN1] line of Mjolnir.
This would explain why it looks more like Gen I than Gen II.
> 2535419441797248;9:
> > 2533274870762420;7:
> > > 2535419441797248;4:
> > > > 2533274870762420;2:
> > > > I mean does it really matter why? It’s a video game. How do you explain the in-game lore behind improved visuals in each game?
> > >
> > > Yes. When you’re telling a story, you need continuity. This is why a lot of people didn’t like how Chief’s Mk VI armour changed from Halo 3 to 4, because it wasn’t explained.
> > >
> > > There’s obviously no explanation for improved visuals because that isn’t an in-universe thing.
> >
> > It seems like the majority of the community were more upset of the change to a new art style. The artstyle had already been established by Bungie. I couldn’t care less about if it would make sense from a lore perspective. It’s all made up anyway.
>
> If it was just an art style change, and this is how they’ve always meant to look, then yes. But it isn’t. The new looking Pelican, Elites, Chief, etc, from Halo 4 and 5 are new in-universe too. They aren’t just reimagined versions of their classic Halo counterparts. This is new armour for Chief. So the changes need explanation, for continuity sake.
But they are just reimagined versions though… 343i wanted to remake the Halo franchise into their own image. And they failed spectacularly, almost killing the entire franchise in the process.
But now it seems like they are starting to listen to the community. Bringing Halo back to its roots, and they are making Halo relevant again.
> 2533274825160595;12:
> > 2535419441797248;11:
> > > 2533274825160595;10:
> > > > 2535419441797248;5:
> > > > > 2533274825160595;3:
> > > > > His new armor isnt the old Gen 1 Mark 6. It’s a Gen 3 armor. It says so during its system boot up.
> > > >
> > > > The software is Gen III, but the armour may be upgraded Gen I MJOLNIR Mk IV, as it strikes a pretty similar resemblance (aside from the helmet) to Chief’s Mk IV armour from Halo Legends: The Package, and Forward Unto Dawn.
> > >
> > > I dont think so. It say specifically that it was created by Materials Group in 2559. It also say it’s full armor designation as MJOLNIR POWERED ASSAULT ARMOR SYSTEM // GENERATION III. Source. While it looks similar to both Mark IV and Mark VI it still has many differences and even if it used Mark IV as a base and upgraded it to Gen III that would still make the armor Gen III.
> >
> > Yes, it would, which is what i believe to be the case. The 2559 date could just be when it was upgraded…I just don’t see this as the next evolution of Spartan armour, because it looks like a downgrade.
>
> How does it look like a down grade? In Halo: Official Spartan Field Manual it says
>
>
> > The conceptual design framework incorporates lessons from the MJOLNIR [GEN2] line of Mjolnir, while also using performance and higher levels of projection given by the MJOLNIR [GEN1] line of Mjolnir.
>
> This would explain why it looks more like Gen I than Gen II.
I did say I was biased against the armour. But yes, that would make more sense. An explanation like that needs to be in the game though.
> 2535419441797248;14:
> > 2533274825160595;12:
> > > 2535419441797248;11:
> > > > 2533274825160595;10:
> > > > > 2535419441797248;5:
> > > > > > 2533274825160595;3:
> > > > > > His new armor isnt the old Gen 1 Mark 6. It’s a Gen 3 armor. It says so during its system boot up.
> > > > >
> > > > > The software is Gen III, but the armour may be upgraded Gen I MJOLNIR Mk IV, as it strikes a pretty similar resemblance (aside from the helmet) to Chief’s Mk IV armour from Halo Legends: The Package, and Forward Unto Dawn.
> > > >
> > > > I dont think so. It say specifically that it was created by Materials Group in 2559. It also say it’s full armor designation as MJOLNIR POWERED ASSAULT ARMOR SYSTEM // GENERATION III. Source. While it looks similar to both Mark IV and Mark VI it still has many differences and even if it used Mark IV as a base and upgraded it to Gen III that would still make the armor Gen III.
> > >
> > > Yes, it would, which is what i believe to be the case. The 2559 date could just be when it was upgraded…I just don’t see this as the next evolution of Spartan armour, because it looks like a downgrade.
> >
> > How does it look like a down grade? In Halo: Official Spartan Field Manual it says
> >
> >
> > > The conceptual design framework incorporates lessons from the MJOLNIR [GEN2] line of Mjolnir, while also using performance and higher levels of projection given by the MJOLNIR [GEN1] line of Mjolnir.
> >
> > This would explain why it looks more like Gen I than Gen II.
>
> I did say I was biased against the armour. But yes, that would make more sense. An explanation like that needs to be in the game though.
Agreed. I really hope they have something akin to the intro to Halo 2 where it’s very clear he’s getting new Armor. It says it was last modified by Halsey in 2561 so maybe we will get to see that.
> 2533274870762420;13:
> > 2535419441797248;9:
> > > 2533274870762420;7:
> > > > 2535419441797248;4:
> > > > > 2533274870762420;2:
> > > > > I mean does it really matter why? It’s a video game. How do you explain the in-game lore behind improved visuals in each game?
> > > >
> > > > Yes. When you’re telling a story, you need continuity. This is why a lot of people didn’t like how Chief’s Mk VI armour changed from Halo 3 to 4, because it wasn’t explained.
> > > >
> > > > There’s obviously no explanation for improved visuals because that isn’t an in-universe thing.
> > >
> > > It seems like the majority of the community were more upset of the change to a new art style. The artstyle had already been established by Bungie. I couldn’t care less about if it would make sense from a lore perspective. It’s all made up anyway.
> >
> > If it was just an art style change, and this is how they’ve always meant to look, then yes. But it isn’t. The new looking Pelican, Elites, Chief, etc, from Halo 4 and 5 are new in-universe too. They aren’t just reimagined versions of their classic Halo counterparts. This is new armour for Chief. So the changes need explanation, for continuity sake.
>
> But they are just reimagined versions though… 343i wanted to remake the Halo franchise into their own image. And they failed spectacularly, almost killing the entire franchise in the process.
>
> But now it seems like they are starting to listen to the community. Bringing Halo back to its roots, and they are making Halo relevant again.
In reality, yes. But I’m not talking about that. In-universe, the classic and new are different models of Pelicans, not the same one. The same way that Chief’s Mk VI armour from Halo 2 isn’t just a reimagined version of his Mk V armour from Halo: CE, in-universe.
Halo wasn’t nearly killed…It wasn’t close to where it used to be, but killed is an exaggeration.
It was changed cuz chief’s visor broke in halo 5.
> 2535419441797248;16:
> > 2533274870762420;13:
> > > 2535419441797248;9:
> > > > 2533274870762420;7:
> > > > > 2535419441797248;4:
> > > > > > 2533274870762420;2:
> > > > > > I mean does it really matter why? It’s a video game. How do you explain the in-game lore behind improved visuals in each game?
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes. When you’re telling a story, you need continuity. This is why a lot of people didn’t like how Chief’s Mk VI armour changed from Halo 3 to 4, because it wasn’t explained.
> > > > >
> > > > > There’s obviously no explanation for improved visuals because that isn’t an in-universe thing.
> > > >
> > > > It seems like the majority of the community were more upset of the change to a new art style. The artstyle had already been established by Bungie. I couldn’t care less about if it would make sense from a lore perspective. It’s all made up anyway.
> > >
> > > If it was just an art style change, and this is how they’ve always meant to look, then yes. But it isn’t. The new looking Pelican, Elites, Chief, etc, from Halo 4 and 5 are new in-universe too. They aren’t just reimagined versions of their classic Halo counterparts. This is new armour for Chief. So the changes need explanation, for continuity sake.
> >
> > But they are just reimagined versions though… 343i wanted to remake the Halo franchise into their own image. And they failed spectacularly, almost killing the entire franchise in the process.
> >
> > But now it seems like they are starting to listen to the community. Bringing Halo back to its roots, and they are making Halo relevant again.
>
> In reality, yes. But I’m not talking about that. In-universe, the classic and new are different models of Pelicans, not the same one. The same way that Chief’s Mk VI armour from Halo 2 isn’t just a reimagined version of his Mk V armour from Halo: CE, in-universe.
>
> Halo wasn’t nearly killed…It wasn’t close to where it used to be, but killed is an exaggeration.
They could just redesign the new models if they wanted to. Nothing is set in stone.
When a game franchise stops to attract enough customers the funding gets cut, and the franchise gets terminated and put in storage. Halo 5 was the last straw for me unless they returned Halo to its roots again. And looking at 343i’s new direction I know for a fact that I was far from alone. It’s clear as day to me that Halo’s days were numbered. And Microsoft probably intervened to force 343i’s hand.
A lot of people are saying that it should not matter why the design changed. I disagree with that, because as someone who is so iconic, changing their battle armor, which they are known for is going to cause controversy without explanation. Especially because that armor is not cheap. “How did he get this new armor and why” because its not like chief has too much time to rest and go shopping.
> 2533274870762420;18:
> > 2535419441797248;16:
> > > 2533274870762420;13:
> > > > 2535419441797248;9:
> > > > > 2533274870762420;7:
> > > > > > 2535419441797248;4:
> > > > > > > 2533274870762420;2:
> > > > > > > I mean does it really matter why? It’s a video game. How do you explain the in-game lore behind improved visuals in each game?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes. When you’re telling a story, you need continuity. This is why a lot of people didn’t like how Chief’s Mk VI armour changed from Halo 3 to 4, because it wasn’t explained.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There’s obviously no explanation for improved visuals because that isn’t an in-universe thing.
> > > > >
> > > > > It seems like the majority of the community were more upset of the change to a new art style. The artstyle had already been established by Bungie. I couldn’t care less about if it would make sense from a lore perspective. It’s all made up anyway.
> > > >
> > > > If it was just an art style change, and this is how they’ve always meant to look, then yes. But it isn’t. The new looking Pelican, Elites, Chief, etc, from Halo 4 and 5 are new in-universe too. They aren’t just reimagined versions of their classic Halo counterparts. This is new armour for Chief. So the changes need explanation, for continuity sake.
> > >
> > > But they are just reimagined versions though… 343i wanted to remake the Halo franchise into their own image. And they failed spectacularly, almost killing the entire franchise in the process.
> > >
> > > But now it seems like they are starting to listen to the community. Bringing Halo back to its roots, and they are making Halo relevant again.
> >
> > In reality, yes. But I’m not talking about that. In-universe, the classic and new are different models of Pelicans, not the same one. The same way that Chief’s Mk VI armour from Halo 2 isn’t just a reimagined version of his Mk V armour from Halo: CE, in-universe.
> >
> > Halo wasn’t nearly killed…It wasn’t close to where it used to be, but killed is an exaggeration.
>
> They could just redesign the new models if they wanted to. Nothing is set in stone.
>
> When a game franchise stops to attract enough customers the funding gets cut, and the franchise gets terminated and put in storage. Halo 5 was the last straw for me unless they returned Halo to its roots again. And looking at 343i’s new direction I know for a fact that I was far from alone. It’s clear as day to me that Halo’s days were numbered. And Microsoft probably intervened to force 343i’s hand.
Halo has been and continues to be one of Microsofts most profitable franchises to date. We have yet to have a single halo game flop. Halo 5s launch was its biggest problem. It launched with less content than Halo CE and removed things like split screen for no reason. But even with those problems it is still one of the top played game on Xbox one. Halos days were never numbered. There has been a large and very vocal number of people who dont like the direction halo was going sure but that has in no way stop halo from being very profitable.