Is this a joke?
How is Nobody seeing this he’s just trying to get a rise out of people.
> 2535411919953126;62:
> The point they are making is that. Halo 4 and 5 had heaps of visual noise that resulted in a less legible game.
Got examples for that? Because this - as with most things - boil down to personal taste and asthetic tolerance. Not an objective fact, especially with the tossed-in qualifier that Halo Infinite would have flopped if more of the Reclaimer asthetic was retained.
> The use of negative space in prior titles allowed for a better conveyancing of information.
Or made for bland and boring uses of space, usually due to hardware shortcomings but it’s been grandfathered in as “Iconic”.
> Situations are immediately intelligible without risk of visual overload to players from much more complex geometry.
Can’t say that problem was ever present for me, in either Halo 4 or Halo 5. Bullets coming at you and threat indicators are a pretty big heads-up as well. And even Halo 3 and Reach had “complex geometry” in both their campaigns and their multiplayer, so this is a really weak argument.
> 2533274876991706;63:
> The evidence is obvious - MMC has a higher player count than Halo 5
Because it’s the “New Hotness” with all the content being added. That’s the only thing that is evident from that. If it’s what you’re suggesting, that it’s somehow objectively better than Halo 5, then it would have overshadowed Halo 5 from the beginning. But it didn’t.
> Infinite appears to ne a mix of Halo 3/Reach.
And Halo 4/5. Neither Halo 3 nor Halo Reach had ADS, Sprint, Clamber, and Slide.
> Furthermore, the revert to the classic art style.
Partially. And even at that, from what we’ve seen so far.
> The fact there’s only one thread like this?
There isn’t. Not to mention support for the Halo 4/5 artwork in threads on “Classic” asthetics.
You have no facts, you have a perception bias.
> Or made for bland and boring uses of space, usually due to hardware shortcomings but it’s been grandfathered in as “Iconic”.
I take issue with this because it implies that they couldn’t have made something that looks like halo 4 at the time, which is patently false. There’s nothing about Halo 4/5’s art style that couldn’t have been represented with less polygons and lower texture quality, and in fact Halo 3 is only starting to look truly dated NOW. For a 14 year old game that’s impressive.
Everyone’s entitled to their own opinion, but… LOL!
I think too many people (myself included) are happy to have a Halo that looks like Halo again to agree with you.
Honestly if Halo 5 was it’s own IP, as opposed to a Halo game, I’d appreciate it’s art style more but it isn’t and I don’t.
> 2535411347511088;84:
> I take issue with this because it implies that they couldn’t have made something that looks like halo 4 at the time, which is patently false. There’s nothing about Halo 4/5’s art style that couldn’t have been represented with less polygons and lower texture quality, and in fact Halo 3 is only starting to look truly dated NOW. For a 14 year old game that’s impressive.
If you’re going to quote me, quote me.
Got any examples of this “negative space conveying information”? Because to be frank, that sounds like so much word salad.
Ewww please no. Don’t bring back either art style. Those halo armor styles were terrible. Please bring back Halo 3 style of armor. The best sleek armors in Halo to exist in my opinion.
> 2535470395434446;13:
> > 2533274817345506;3:
> > Shame you feel this way. Halo 5 MP is good, but Halo 3 / Halo Reach were the prime of the series. Halo 4 / Halo 5 art was not well received because was too clunky and abstract. Halo Infinite is trying to find a balance between modern and classic, and they did this because the majority wanted this. I think they did a great job.
> >
> > In comparison on MP experience, Halo 5 is currently complete. While Halo 5 is a very good experience; you can’t compare Halo Infinite quite yet just based on a slice in a technical preview. In terms of feel Halo Infinite is more Halo 3 / Reach era.
>
> Don’t make me laugh, Reach was garbage and the beginning of Halo’s decline. The prime of Halo lasted from 1 to 3. You must be like 18 or something
Reach is my favorite and I’ve been playing since CE
I much prefer the Bungie Art style of pre-Halo 4.
I couldn’t agree less with you, the art style is a perfect blend of old and new and feels fresh and great.
Spartans finally look like original real spartans and the graphics even at this stage are very satisfying. (Lighting and reflections are looking impressive)
Although perhaps we need more alieny looking colorful futuristic environments. I mean come one… its the future!
Halo 4 and 5 looks were tiresome
This will be an instant classic
> 2533274804813082;54:
> I disagree in the scope that you have zero evidence to back up your claim that it’s a majority that prefer the “Classic Style”. Telling me to “do my own research” on the matter supports this. Surveys are also horribly inaccurate, especially for something like this. Poll in an echo chamber, and you’ll always get the result you want. And really, I think folk like you are the only ones who care to poll for this sort of nonsense, to try and lend validity to your claim that Halo should have stagnated in 2007.
>
> Personally I hope there are Campaign armors, and we get the option to wear something more reminiscent of the MJOLNIR GEN2, if we so desire.
Zero evidence? Have you not been on the internet for the last 6 years? It’s been WIDELY discussed about how the majority of fans have not like the art style. You can keep “wanting proof” all you want, but it’s been being shown for years already.
Edit: You know what, nevermind. Looking at your posts it’s clear you are just in denial of anything criticizing Halo 4 or 5. Continue your blissful denialism.
I hated how 4 and 5 looked. The slim bodysuits covered in a mix-mash of oddly shaped plates and metal tumors with cyber-ninja kinds of helmets was just way way way waaaaay too far away from Halo’s traditional style of relatively flat, kind of shiny metal surfaces. It brought a whole different kind of feel for me. I was no longer a walking juggernaut but a plastic gnat flopping around the battlefield and clicking and clacking against other players like dice.
As you can see from my Halo 5 Spartan I chose classic CQB and Decimator to make the least Halo 5 looking spartan I could.
I hope the 4 and 5 aesthetic is largely buried and forgotten. This new style is a very competent middle ground.
> 2533274804813082;87:
> > 2535411347511088;84:
> > –
>
> If you’re going to quote me, quote me.
>
> Got any examples of this “negative space conveying information”? Because to be frank, that sounds like so much word salad.
firstly, I did quote you but for some reason when I backspaced the 90% of your comment I didn’t care about it got rid of your name for some reason, and secondly, I’m not the guy who said that, I simply took issue with your statement about Halo 3’s graphics being dated. They actually hold up extremely well and it has nothing to do with their art style. I mean really, it wasn’t a PS1 game, it had good enough hardware that they really could’ve rendered whatever they wanted within reason, and H4/5’s art style is completely in-reason.
Well except maybe the extremely aggressive bloom, it probably wouldn’t have had that. Don’t know if that’s a bad thing though.
This is the best style since Reach honestly, 4 was to clunky and the less said about 5 the better
> 2533274804813082;83:
> > 2535411919953126;62:
> > The point they are making is that. Halo 4 and 5 had heaps of visual noise that resulted in a less legible game.
>
> Got examples for that? Because this - as with most things - boil down to personal taste and asthetic tolerance. Not an objective fact, especially with the tossed-in qualifier that Halo Infinite would have flopped if more of the Reclaimer asthetic was retained.
>
>
>
>
> > The use of negative space in prior titles allowed for a better conveyancing of information.
>
> Or made for bland and boring uses of space, usually due to hardware shortcomings but it’s been grandfathered in as “Iconic”.
>
>
>
>
> > Situations are immediately intelligible without risk of visual overload to players from much more complex geometry.
>
> Can’t say that problem was ever present for me, in either Halo 4 or Halo 5. Bullets coming at you and threat indicators are a pretty big heads-up as well. And even Halo 3 and Reach had “complex geometry” in both their campaigns and their multiplayer, so this is a really weak argument.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274876991706;63:
> > The evidence is obvious - MMC has a higher player count than Halo 5
>
> Because it’s the “New Hotness” with all the content being added. That’s the only thing that is evident from that. If it’s what you’re suggesting, that it’s somehow objectively better than Halo 5, then it would have overshadowed Halo 5 from the beginning. But it didn’t.
>
>
>
>
> > Infinite appears to ne a mix of Halo 3/Reach.
>
> And Halo 4/5. Neither Halo 3 nor Halo Reach had ADS, Sprint, Clamber, and Slide.
>
>
>
>
> > Furthermore, the revert to the classic art style.
>
> Partially. And even at that, from what we’ve seen so far.
>
>
>
>
> > The fact there’s only one thread like this?
>
> There isn’t. Not to mention support for the Halo 4/5 artwork in threads on “Classic” asthetics.
>
> You have no facts, you have a perception bias.
bro we get it, you like halo 4/5 better. But give it a rest my guy. There is a reason 343 switched art styles for this game, it’s because they are running a BUSINESS and it would not be a wise business decision to continue doing things that majority of their customers did not like. That’s all the proof and the facts you’re going to find
> 2535449665894532;92:
> Zero evidence? Have you not been on the internet for the last 6 years? It’s been WIDELY discussed about how the majority of fans have not like the art style. You can keep “wanting proof” all you want, but it’s been being shown for years already.
>
> Edit: You know what, nevermind. Looking at your posts it’s clear you are just in denial of anything criticizing Halo 4 or 5. Continue your blissful denialism.
No, I have several criticism of my own regarding Halo 4 and Halo 5. That does not give leniency to your lack of evidence - verifiable, quantifiable evidence - that the art style of Halo 4 and 5 are hated by the majority. A topic widely discussed in an echo chamber for 6 years doesn’t make for the majority view.
I like that they are going back to the old art style and i dislike 343 art style i have to agree it does not look like a 2021 game it looks like a triple a game got ported to the switch
1 Like
> 2533274804813082;97:
> > 2535449665894532;92:
> > Zero evidence? Have you not been on the internet for the last 6 years? It’s been WIDELY discussed about how the majority of fans have not like the art style. You can keep “wanting proof” all you want, but it’s been being shown for years already.
> >
> > Edit: You know what, nevermind. Looking at your posts it’s clear you are just in denial of anything criticizing Halo 4 or 5. Continue your blissful denialism.
>
> No, I have several criticism of my own regarding Halo 4 and Halo 5. That does not give leniency to your lack of evidence - verifiable, quantifiable evidence - that the art style of Halo 4 and 5 are hated by the majority. A topic widely discussed in an echo chamber for 6 years doesn’t make for the majority view.
Lmao. You have a very strange way of denying reality. Many MANY years of people complaining about the art style. No, I am not going to bother linking anything to you because I can already tell you have seen them. You will undoubtedly find some way to didcredit them anyway as you already are doing that.
It takes all of 1 google search on the art style of 4 and 5 to see btw. Can’t wait for the “you have no evidence!” Reply for this one.
1 Like
> 2535449665894532;99:
> Lmao. You have a very strange way of denying reality.
I don’t deny or reject that people [REDACTED] about the art style. Prove that it’s the majority.