The Real Reason Infinite Seems Flat/Plastic Like

This post isn’t meant as a complaint or hate for Halo Infinite and I normally don’t go out of my way to post this stuff, but I feel like theres a point that needs to be said here. I’m posting in hope that if 343 reads this they can actually use it as guidance.

Alright, so let’s start. Now, maybe I’ve just been reading the response in Infinite Inquiries wrong, but I don’t think it’s understood that the lighting is not the entire culpret behind the flat look in Infinite. Matter of fact, this is also shown with Halo 4 and Halo 5. The flat and plastic look people have been complaing about for years doesn’t have to do with just the lighting, and it still has alot to do with the textures. I’m aware 343 have acknowledged the Digital Foundaries lighting video, but I feel the textures might have been glossed over and ignored.

This flatness we keep talking about is because objects seem to be way too clean, new, and perfect. There’s no contrast within the colours and finer details. That’s where people are getting the plastic looking idea from and this was something present with Halo 4 and more so Halo 5. The best real life example I can give would be this. Think about cosplayers. When they make costumes or props, everything looks fake up until they add the weathering aspect you so often see. The base colours are usually flat and solid making the costume look fake and almost like plastic. The weathering they add after their main colours is what ends up selling the design in the end and keeps things from feeling cheap or fake.

Despite my opinion on the new weapons and lack of legacy weapons which scream Halo and define the franchise, so far I feel they’ve got every part of this “classic” style correct except this and 343 mentioned in the post “classic” involved “cleaner”. I don’t really believe this is true and I think many would say the same. The less “noise” part was true however. (AKA busy and way too complex of designs.) The biggest reason Halo 4, Halo 5, and now Infinite were called plastic looking is because much of the archetecture and weapons didn’t have enough grit, grime, edge, and wear to them. This made everything thing look new off the shelf and fresh out of the factory. (And I know they’re probably not a finished product, but this clean and new look was very obvious with the Mark VII Red Spartan action figure 343 teased a while back. Especially when you compare it to figures from the past. The armour looked like the UNSC got it brand new out of the factory.) The architecture showed weathering the best in the reveal, but when it’s lacking on weapons and some of the races like the Grunts and Elites, people are gonna notice that immediatley. People will almost always focus first on “whats happening now” (The combat) versus “whats going on in the background” (The environment).

Also, before straying to far off topic from the weapon design comment please understand this 343. Everyone loves the new weapon designs and the real reason people are getting furious about the change is that you are completely replacing the ones that define Halo. Theres one idea you should take from the voices of the fandom like HiddenXperia and HaloFollower because they have directly talked about enjoying this. Them and many other fans have mentioned that they are more than happy with the idea of having tons of weapon variety. This is one of the things most players say they enjoy about Halo 5. Leave your design mark as a studio on this game, make it yours, but don’t destroy the franchise’s defining pieces in the process. Please don’t pull another Rocket Launcher or Shotgun situation on us again.

Now, back to the point. Halo used to be dark, gritty, and worn. Not “cleaner” like 343 had mentioned in their response to the campaign reveal. I also wouldn’t call “classic” Halo having a vibrant palette either, and I have no idea how that came up in the first place since Halo has always been dark and almost desaturated. I feel as though the vibrant palette they talked about sticking with is probably an underlying cause of this flat look as well, regardless of the lighting and textures. Realistically speaking though, a vibrant or brightly coloured object can be made to look worn and aged with some weathering. It’s just gonna take more work to do than sticking with a more desaturated palette, which I believe would be a better description for a “classic” colour palette in the first place. Despite all that, I will say this. I like the vibrant palette because it kind of sets the difference between 343 and Bungie and honestly I don’t think this should go away because it did wonders in Halo Wars 2 and the little we’ve seen from Infinite.

The reason I truly felt the need to bring all this up is because there was so much hate to bring these points up after the reveal, but I think fans and employees are still missing out on some of the other causes behind these issues and I wanna help 343. Even if they never read my post I think this should be said. Now, not everything in the trailer obviousley looked flat. The Banished buildings and Master Chief specifically had obvious wear and tear to them. The enemies however did not and thats the true “graphical” issue I’m sure many people were having a problem with. “Classic” Halo is simpler, less busy, and edgey instead of smooth, but it’s not really “cleaner”. The lighting is an issue on it’s own and while it can somewhat fix the flat look, the overall issue here is this lack of grit. My biggest issue with the lighting was that I’m assuming its what was causing the shields to look too “solid” for many people.

Please 343 understand this. It’s the textures too, not just the lighting making the game feel flat in these areas. Give the objects in this world some grit. Weapons and characters in the game should have an asthetic that says they’ve been through a war and coincidentally they have been for roughly half a year. Your canon reasoning behind the “classic” look was that characters in the universe were using old technology. If thats the case then make it look that way.

There are quite of few instances that do look done right as I’ve mentioned. Chief, brohammer, and the archetecture seemed to be the best at showing the weathering, but it stood out with the grunts and elites. Their armour just seemed way too perfect. The Warthog seemed a little too clean in my opinion as well, but I’d like to say the model looks amazing. Now I’m hoping because of this it means what 343 was talking about when the game still had a lot of work in some areas. I just pray these flat/plastic asthetics get the same treatment as the other objects visible in the demo. I know it’s wierd to point that out after everything I’ve said, but I truly just want the best for this game since many fans have been upsept over the past few years. I’ve been here since the beginning of Halo through thick and thin and I don’t plan on going anywhere.

So as a closing statement, I would like to thank you 343 for listening to the Halo fanbase. Regardless of everything I’ve said above, I personally believe Infinite is the right direction for the franchise and I hope any style changes from here on out are miniscule with future games. You’re on the right track to a beautiful future and relathionship with the Halo community. Remember, third times a charm. Stay frosty, and I can’t wait for this awesome game to release! :slight_smile: <3

As much as I agree with you regarding textures I have to say there were issues with lighting too (objects that were in a shadow area and yet looked too bright). To me, the biggest issues were textures and clipping

> 2533274933098855;1:
> I normally don’t go out of my way to post this stuff, but I feel like theres a point that needs to be said here. Maybe I’ve been reading everything wrong, but I don’t think it’s understood that the lighting is not the culpret behind the flat look in Infinite. Matter of fact this is also shown with Halo 4 and Halo 5. The flat look has nothing to do with the lighting, and has everything to do with the textures. They’ve got every part of this “classic” style correct except this and 343 mentioned in the post “classic” involved “cleaner”. This is not true. The less “noise” was true. AKA busy and too comples designs. Halo 4, Halo 5, and now Infinite were called plastic looking just like Infinite is now because much of the archetecture and weapons didn’t have enough grit, grime, edge, and wear to them. This made everything thing look new off the shelf and fresh out of the factory. Objects looked like they were freshly painted. The Spartans and a few other specific areas had that grit but not enough of the game as a whole. Halo used to be dark, gritty, and worn. Not “cleaner” like you guys had mentioned in your response. I bring this up because there was so much hate to bring these points up, but people have understood it in the wrong way. Now, not everything in the trailer obviousley looked flat. The banished buildings and Master Chief specifically had obvious wear and tear to them. The enemies however did not and thats the true “graphical” issue many people had an issue with. “Classic” Halo is simpler and less busy, but it’s not clean. The lighting is not the real issue here. The lighting was actually one up the best parts. So much so I could see physical texture in the weapons and on Chiefs armour, The bump/specular mapping was amazing. The true reason people were complaining was because the characters and weapons didn’t have enough wear and tear to them. Please 343 understand that. It’s the textures, not the lighting making the game feel flat in these areas.

I somewhat agree, there’s a lot of factors that come into play.

Also, throw some paragraphs in there. Was super hard to read

> 2533274865778947;3:
> > 2533274933098855;1:
> > I normally don’t go out of my way to post this stuff, but I feel like theres a point that needs to be said here. Maybe I’ve been reading everything wrong, but I don’t think it’s understood that the lighting is not the culpret behind the flat look in Infinite. Matter of fact this is also shown with Halo 4 and Halo 5. The flat look has nothing to do with the lighting, and has everything to do with the textures. They’ve got every part of this “classic” style correct except this and 343 mentioned in the post “classic” involved “cleaner”. This is not true. The less “noise” was true. AKA busy and too comples designs. Halo 4, Halo 5, and now Infinite were called plastic looking just like Infinite is now because much of the archetecture and weapons didn’t have enough grit, grime, edge, and wear to them. This made everything thing look new off the shelf and fresh out of the factory. Objects looked like they were freshly painted. The Spartans and a few other specific areas had that grit but not enough of the game as a whole. Halo used to be dark, gritty, and worn. Not “cleaner” like you guys had mentioned in your response. I bring this up because there was so much hate to bring these points up, but people have understood it in the wrong way. Now, not everything in the trailer obviousley looked flat. The banished buildings and Master Chief specifically had obvious wear and tear to them. The enemies however did not and thats the true “graphical” issue many people had an issue with. “Classic” Halo is simpler and less busy, but it’s not clean. The lighting is not the real issue here. The lighting was actually one up the best parts. So much so I could see physical texture in the weapons and on Chiefs armour, The bump/specular mapping was amazing. The true reason people were complaining was because the characters and weapons didn’t have enough wear and tear to them. Please 343 understand that. It’s the textures, not the lighting making the game feel flat in these areas.
>
> I somewhat agree, there’s a lot of factors that come into play.
>
> Also, throw some paragraphs in there. Was super hard to read

Agreed and fixed the paragraphs.

> 2533274933098855;1:
> I normally don’t go out of my way to post this stuff, but I feel like theres a point that needs to be said here. Maybe I’ve been reading everything wrong, but I don’t think it’s understood that the lighting is not the culpret behind the flat look in Infinite. Matter of fact this is also shown with Halo 4 and Halo 5. The flat look has nothing to do with the lighting, and has everything to do with the textures.
>
> So far I feel they’ve got every part of this “classic” style correct except this and 343 mentioned in the post “classic” involved “cleaner”. This is not true. The less “noise” was true. AKA busy and way too complex designs. Halo 4, Halo 5, and now Infinite were called plastic looking is because much of the archetecture and weapons didn’t have enough grit, grime, edge, and wear to them. This made everything thing look new off the shelf and fresh out of the factory. (And I know they’re probably not final, but this was obvious with the Mark 6 Red Spartan action figure you guys teased a while back. The armour looked like the UNSC got it brand new out of the factory.) Objects looked like they were freshly painted. The Spartans and a few other specific areas had that grit but not enough of the game as a whole.
>
> Halo used to be dark, gritty, and worn. Not “cleaner” like you guys had mentioned in your response. I bring this up because there was so much hate to bring these points up, but people have understood it in the wrong way I feel. Now, not everything in the trailer obviousley looked flat. The banished buildings and Master Chief specifically had obvious wear and tear to them. The enemies however did not and thats the true “graphical” issue many people had an issue with. “Classic” Halo is simpler and less busy, but it’s not clean. The lighting is an issue on it’s own, but the real issue here is this lack of grit. The lighting was actually one of my favourite parts actually. So much so I could see physical texture on the weapons and on Chief’s armour, The bump/specular mapping was amazing.
>
> The true reason people were complaining about this flat look was because the characters and weapons didn’t have enough wear and tear to them. Please 343 understand that. It’s the textures, not the lighting making the game feel flat in these areas. Give the objects in this world some grit.

Im pretty sure they didnt mean literally looking cleaner… i think they meant cleaner with respect to the details. I think cleaner the way it was used was just another way to say less noisy.

I think 343i knows mate, but at the same I kinda disagree with you: To me frankly it seems like lighting has a lot to do with it, but also I doubt it has to do with the textures as much as what composes them. In fact some textures like the skin on the Brutes arms have a crazy level of detail! If something what made the models look flat had to do with the shaders, speculars and the normals imho. Also it seems like the textures where made with PBR in mind, so without ray-tracing it will almost certainly look flat. And that is going to be a big issue during its launch on SX, because 343i already confirmed RT is only coming later with an update and the Xone version will be screwed in any case. Really makes you think why they went for a full PBR approach for a cross gen title instead of a mixed process like we saw in Metro. But maybe they are actually aiming for such an approach, however the Covid situation pushed them back big times - in that case I would prefer to postpone the launch though. Nobody with a brain would fault them after a freaking pandemic!

So long story short, imho it’s both lighting and texture composition - but the textures themselves. Just my two cents on the matter!

That said, I do would like to see more grid; sketches, bloods splatters, tarnished paint and such on every model. They just survived a freaking war! One sided or not, the Banished just slaughtered a whole UNSC frigate. Heck! MC was floating in space. Space! how does he look so clean?! Armor, weapons and buildings are not supposed to look so clean after all… well, this! Here I’m fully on your side OP, but that’s more of an artistic critique than a technical one. :slight_smile:

I expressed this same sentiment when the Infinite Inquiries article was published. Like any single word, “clean” is an inaccurate description of the classic art style. I can’t help but feel like something was lost in translation from the fan feedback regarding the Halo 5 art style which led to Infinite looking like it does. Arguably, “clean” was probably what many people used for describing the classic art style in the context of the Halo 5 aesthetics. But what I find odd is that even a cursory glance at the Bungie games reveals that the art style isn’t literally “clean”, but in fact often quite the opposite.

> 2533274814945686;5:
> Im pretty sure they didnt mean literally looking cleaner… i think they meant cleaner with respect to the details. I think cleaner the way it was used was just another way to say less noisy.

But the issue here is that Halo Infinite does look literally clean, which makes one question how 343i interprets “clean”. And when it’s in the context of “legacy aesthetics”, as they put it, Halo Infinite misses the mark because of this. But, I mean, the language here is besides the point. The language of the article was vague, but really, t’s not about the language. The meaning of “clean” isn’t the important point here. It’s about how the game looks, and how it’s not faithful to the classic aesthetic despite 343i leaning heavily on that as justification.

> 2533274825830455;7:
> I expressed this same sentiment when the Infinite Inquiries article was published. Like any single word, “clean” is an inaccurate description of the classic art style. I can’t help but feel like something was lost in translation from the fan feedback regarding the Halo 5 art style which led to Infinite looking like it does. Arguably, “clean” was probably what many people used for describing the classic art style in the context of the Halo 5 aesthetics. But what I find odd is that even a cursory glance at the Bungie games reveals that the art style isn’t literally “clean”, but in fact often quite the opposite.
>
>
> > 2533274814945686;5:
> > Im pretty sure they didnt mean literally looking cleaner… i think they meant cleaner with respect to the details. I think cleaner the way it was used was just another way to say less noisy.
>
> But the issue here is that Halo Infinite does look literally clean, which makes one question how 343i interprets “clean”. And when it’s in the context of “legacy aesthetics”, as they put it, Halo Infinite misses the mark because of this. But, I mean, the language here is besides the point. The language of the article was vague, but really, t’s not about the language. The meaning of “clean” isn’t the important point here. It’s about how the game looks, and how it’s not faithful to the classic aesthetic despite 343i leaning heavily on that as justification.

Agreed, it does look too clean literally. And I hope that isnt what 343i intended. I have faith that they might fix that or improve it before launch.

I might repeating myself, but I doubt the textures look “clean” because of stylistic choices as much as (I think) it has to do with the PBR approach. With physic based real time light rendering you don’t need to bake light effects into an object and its textures anymore, because the flat Diffuses alone on a basic geometry should be able to render a model realistically. If you bake the light into the model and push PBR on top of it, what you get is a dissonance between the objects and the GI used in the world. Which is even more noticeable in a open world setting with night and day cycles.

That’s why it’s “clean”, that doesn’t mean we won’t get more grid on a diffuse level at launch. Especially after the concerning feedback!

> 2533274814945686;8:
> Agreed, it does look too clean literally. And I hope that isnt what 343i intended. I have faith that they might fix that or improve it before launch.

Realistically, they might improve the lighting which would help show some of the existing detail in the textures, but that’s about it. The art style we saw is the art style we’re going to get.

> 2533274933098855;1:
> The true reason people were complaining about this flat look was because the characters and weapons didn’t have enough wear and tear to them. Please 343 understand that. It’s the textures, not the lighting making the game feel flat in these areas. Give the objects in this world some grit. Weapons and characters in the game should have an asthetic that says they’ve been through a war. And coincidentally they have been for roughly half a year.
>
> As a closing statement though, I would like to thank you 343 for listening to the Halo fanbase. I think Infinite is the right direction for the franchise and I hope any changes from here on out are miniscule with future games.

You’re totally right. IMO.

Although the lighting does need to be fixed (that being said I’m not on the side that think it looks bad and have been b--------ching and moaning for the last 2 weeks).

Everything looks new. Now if they don’t change this, I won’t care too much. I’m still playing on Day 1. But I do think they need to add some scuff marks and dirt and grime and WEAR to everything.

With Master Chief’s armor being new it doesn’t make much sense to have marks, but it would be DOPE if over time marks got added with play progression. I’m sure that’s too much to ask for but it would be super cool IMO.

> 2533274795098161;9:
> I might repeating myself, but I doubt the textures look “clean” because of stylistic choices as much as (I think) it has to do with the PBR approach. With physic based real time light rendering you don’t need to bake light effects into an object and its textures anymore, because the flat Diffuses alone on a basic geometry should be able to render a model realistically. If you bake the light into the model and push PBR on top of it, what you get is a dissonance between the objects and the GI used in the world. Which is even more noticeable in a open world setting with night and day cycles.
>
> That’s why it’s “clean”, that doesn’t mean we won’t get more grid on a diffuse level at launch. Especially after the concerning feedback!

PBR isn’t magic, and diffuse vs. specular detail isn’t the only detail there is in a texture. Scratches, corrosion, discoloration, dirt are all properties that exist and are visible irrespective of the lighting conditions because they have to do with the color, not the angular distribution, of scattered light. The choice to not paint in such detail, or make such detail very subtle, is an artistic choice.

> 2533274825830455;12:
> > 2533274795098161;9:
> > I might repeating myself, but I doubt the textures look “clean” because of stylistic choices as much as (I think) it has to do with the PBR approach. With physic based real time light rendering you don’t need to bake light effects into an object and its textures anymore, because the flat Diffuses alone on a basic geometry should be able to render a model realistically. If you bake the light into the model and push PBR on top of it, what you get is a dissonance between the objects and the GI used in the world. Which is even more noticeable in a open world setting with night and day cycles.
> >
> > That’s why it’s “clean”, that doesn’t mean we won’t get more grid on a diffuse level at launch. Especially after the concerning feedback!
>
> PBR isn’t magic, and diffuse vs. specular detail isn’t the only detail there is in a texture. Scratches, corrosion, discoloration, dirt are all properties that exist and are visible irrespective of the lighting conditions because they have to do with the color, not the angular distribution, of scattered light. The choice to not paint in such detail, or make such detail very subtle, is an artistic choice.

That’s basically what I already said in my first comment and pretty much what I meant when I said “that doesn’t mean we won’t get more grid on a diffuse level at launch” in first place. I’m just trying to find a reason for why things look like they do in Hi and I’m pretty sure it’s because everything was build with RT in mind and we saw a demo without real time lighting and far from finished textures on top of that. My conclusion? The game is in rough state, a lot of assets might not even be 100% fixed and therefore a lot of textures might be placeholders and therefore still lacking details. We saw something similar with GoW4 after all - never at this, well, “rough” levels though, but still. I doubt 343i didn’t knew the graphics had issues before presenting the demo!

That said textures and art direction aren’t the only issues I had with the trailers and I strongly doubt 343i will be able to iron out all those issues in time. Pop-ins, lod, lack of movement in the vegetation, lack of expressions among enemies, bland skyboxes, weird artistic incoherencies by mixing different styles together, human weapons looking like something out of Deus Ex rather than Halo, clipping issues, floating bodies before they fall, weird physics with the grappling hook, particle effects are in certain places are terrible or good at best, shields overcharging lack transparency, AI getting stuck after throwing a frag… I could go on. It’s kind of a mess to say it bluntly!

> 2533274933098855;1:
> I normally don’t go out of my way to post this stuff, but I feel like theres a point that needs to be said here. Maybe I’ve just been reading the response in Infinite Inquiries wrong, but I don’t think it’s understood that the lighting is not the entire culpret behind the flat look in Infinite. Matter of fact this is also shown with Halo 4 and Halo 5. The flat look doesn’t have to do with just the lighting, and still has alot to do with the textures. I’m aware you guys have acknowledged the Digital Foundaries lighting video, but I feel the textures might have been glossed over and ignored.
>
> So far I feel they’ve got every part of this “classic” style correct except this and 343 mentioned in the post “classic” involved “cleaner”. This is not true. The less “noise” was true. AKA busy and way too complex designs. The reson Halo 4, Halo 5, and now Infinite were called plastic looking is because much of the archetecture and weapons didn’t have enough grit, grime, edge, and wear to them. This made everything thing look new off the shelf and fresh out of the factory. (And I know they’re probably not final, but this was obvious with the Mark 6 Red Spartan action figure you guys teased a while back. The armour looked like the UNSC got it brand new out of the factory.) Objects looked like they were freshly painted. The Spartans and a few other specific areas had that grit but not enough of the game as a whole.
>
> Halo used to be dark, gritty, and worn. Not “cleaner” like you guys had mentioned in your response. I bring this up because there was so much hate to bring these points up, but people have understood it in the wrong way I feel. Now, not everything in the trailer obviousley looked flat. The banished buildings and Master Chief specifically had obvious wear and tear to them. The enemies however did not and thats the true “graphical” issue many people were having a problem with. “Classic” Halo is simpler and less busy, but it’s not clean. The lighting is an issue on it’s own, but the real issue here is this lack of grit.
>
> The true reason people were complaining about this flat look was because the characters and weapons didn’t have enough wear and tear to them. Please 343 understand that. It’s the textures, not the lighting making the game feel flat in these areas. Give the objects in this world some grit. Weapons and characters in the game should have an asthetic that says they’ve been through a war. And coincidentally they have been for roughly half a year.
>
> As a closing statement though, I would like to thank you 343 for listening to the Halo fanbase. I think Infinite is the right direction for the franchise and I hope any changes from here on out are miniscule with future games.

Yay, someone that understands that better lighting on bad or missing textures doesn’t magically improve their resolution or detail. Plus the materials looked like PVC plastic instead of armor. They need to adjust the specualr highlights or at least put a generic reflection effect over it to give it a more metallic look. Something. Anything.

> 2533274912514872;2:
> As much as I agree with you regarding textures I have to say there were issues with lighting too (objects that were in a shadow area and yet looked too bright). To me, the biggest issues were textures and clipping

If you look at the picture of Gregory the Brute (one of the teaser pictures from Infinite) his helmet doesn’t add any shade to his face, and it looks off-putting.

> 2533274847563380;15:
> > 2533274912514872;2:
> > As much as I agree with you regarding textures I have to say there were issues with lighting too (objects that were in a shadow area and yet looked too bright). To me, the biggest issues were textures and clipping
>
> If you look at the picture of Gregory the Brute (one of the teaser pictures from Infinite) his helmet doesn’t add any shade to his face, and it looks off-putting.

This is also a good image for the wear and tear issue I’m talking about. Look at the Brutes armour, while not done that extreme, it actualy looks worn and somewhat gritty. This grit isn’t really seen on the grunts that are in the background. I’m hoping thats proof that most objects just haven’t had their textures finalized.

> 2533274825830455;12:
> > 2533274795098161;9:
> > I might repeating myself, but I doubt the textures look “clean” because of stylistic choices as much as (I think) it has to do with the PBR approach. With physic based real time light rendering you don’t need to bake light effects into an object and its textures anymore, because the flat Diffuses alone on a basic geometry should be able to render a model realistically. If you bake the light into the model and push PBR on top of it, what you get is a dissonance between the objects and the GI used in the world. Which is even more noticeable in a open world setting with night and day cycles.
> >
> > That’s why it’s “clean”, that doesn’t mean we won’t get more grid on a diffuse level at launch. Especially after the concerning feedback!
>
> PBR isn’t magic, and diffuse vs. specular detail isn’t the only detail there is in a texture. Scratches, corrosion, discoloration, dirt are all properties that exist and are visible irrespective of the lighting conditions because they have to do with the color, not the angular distribution, of scattered light. The choice to not paint in such detail, or make such detail very subtle, is an artistic choice.

It is not an artistic choice. You can can go frame by frame in Infinites 4k trailer and spot textures, close to camera, that are so low resolution they looked like they were pulled form a PS2 game.

Further, the specular highlights are WAY off for materials, everything looks like plastic. That’s not “artistic choice” that’s bad art. There’s been what, 7 games setting the precedent for how materials should look and behave in the Halo verse and all of the sudden, everything looks like a Lego game and we’re supposed to accept that its “artistic style”? No. Someone at the wheel of the ship doesn’t know what Halo is and how it should look.

Halo has never (repeat NEVER) been simplistic, plastic or “cartoony”, only limited by the technology of the time. Halo 1 was a showcase game in its time. I know because I was there for each games demo and launch. They were all technically impressive in their day for different reasons, and you’ll never convince me otherwise because I was there, I know what people were saying about those games.

The textures are clearly low rez, the details that do exist look late 360 era, there’s zero shadows being cast on anything outside of the cinematics, almost every material in the game looks flat shaded and plastic, etc, etc. There’s been nearly 2 decades of precedent, you can’t just throw that away and say “We’re Apex Legends now, get used to it”.

It’s bad art and 343i need to fix it.

I think it’s a combination of a lot of elements all working together to make it look flat. From the wonky animations and low res texturing, to the over use of effects that blow out and obscure detail…oh and far too many hexagons everywhere.

Hexagons in the BG, hexagons in the shield, hexagons in the textures. The Metal Gear franchise doesn’t even use that many Hex patterns in their art, and MG is notorious for overuse of Hex designs.

> 2533274798525923;17:
> It is not an artistic choice. You can can go frame by frame in Infinites 4k trailer and spot textures, close to camera, that are so low resolution they looked like they were pulled form a PS2 game.
>
> Further, the specular highlights are WAY off for materials, everything looks like plastic. That’s not “artistic choice” that’s bad art. There’s been what, 7 games setting the precedent for how materials should look and behave in the Halo verse and all of the sudden, everything looks like a Lego game and we’re supposed to accept that its “artistic style”? No. Someone at the wheel of the ship doesn’t know what Halo is and how it should look.
>
> Halo has never (repeat NEVER) been simplistic, plastic or “cartoony”, only limited by the technology of the time. Halo 1 was a showcase game in its time. I know because I was there for each games demo and launch. They were all technically impressive in their day for different reasons, and you’ll never convince me otherwise because I was there, I know what people were saying about those games.
>
> The textures are clearly low rez, the details that do exist look late 360 era, there’s zero shadows being cast on anything outside of the cinematics, almost every material in the game looks flat shaded and plastic, etc, etc. There’s been nearly 2 decades of precedent, you can’t just throw that away and say “We’re Apex Legends now, get used to it”.
>
> It’s bad art and 343i need to fix it.

Not sure why you decided to quote my post in a rant that has no relation to anything I said.

Maybe it was truly intended as to help sell more mega blocks and appeal to a much more youthful market .