Seems like there are a lot of topics about art design ,30fps, 60fps, 720, 1080, 4k, bla bla bla. So i have to ask, would Halo still be Halo if it looked realistic?
Yes. Why wouldn’t it be?
Usually, graphics and resolution do not define a game. Halo is defined by its mechanics, features, and characters. To me, Halo is a great game because it constantly changes its features and characters while maintaining its identity. Many people have a problem with mechanics changing, such as movement speed animations (sprint), zoom-in animations (smart-link), and abilities (Halo Reach’s/Halo 4’s Armor Abilities and Halo 5’s Spartan Abilities). I am speaking from a multi-player perspective.
From a campaign perspective, Halo is defined by its plot and characters. Halo is well known for “killing off” many characters. People have been generally “okay” with that, as it dramatizes and advances the story. However, people seem to have an issue with “replacing” (for the lack of a better word) the Master Chief. While I understand why people patronize the Chief as the identity of Halo, since he is our protagonist for the game series, Halo is expanding. In my opinion, this is good. Unfortunately, a human can only live for so long (thankfully, this a work of science-fiction, so maybe this will not be an issue), and the Chief is already given the constraints of age and a story that is spanning in years. Eventually, the Master Chief might not be our protagonist. Depending on how the lore and story direct us, this might change the way people identify Halo.
Graphics don’t define a game. The game can be the most beautiful thing in the world but still be trash if you mess up.
Here’s a quote from a bungie employee back in the H3 days.
> This is pretty but what does this have to do with the player and is it fun to play?
Depends. I find the more realistic a game looks the more players expect realistic things to happen. This is a problem because sometimes (I would say always , it is a game after all , but that’s just me) game-play has to trump immersion. When science fantasy tries to go all realistic , the results are not always the best.
Well it should not be so “plastic” realistic like Halo 5 or Halo 4…
> 2533274847627340;5:
> Depends. I find the more realistic a game looks the more players expect realistic things to happen. This is a problem because sometimes (I would say always , it is a game after all , but that’s just me) game-play has to trump immersion. When science fantasy tries to go all realistic , the results are not always the best.
This is well said. More realism in the graphics definitely does lead to more expectations of realistic gameplay. And realistic gameplay can be in direct contradiction to good gameplay. Just look at the sprint argument(I know, I know. this again). People applaud sprint and defend it for the sake of realism, and they do this without any regard for how much it has hurt the gameplay.
Some of the most popular games on the market right now with the best gameplay reject a “realistic” graphics model. World of Warcraft, which has dominated the MMORPG market for years is one of the most stylized games out there, and that gives it the freedom to do pretty much anything they want with the gameplay. Overwatch is another one with stylized graphics that don’t constrain its gameplay mechanics. And there are countless others that benefit from not trying for realism: Minecraft, Borderlands, Dishonered, and Bioshock, just to name a few. These games don’t strive for realism in their graphics, and so their gameplay benefits greatly from it.
The classic Halo games pushed graphical fidelity as far as their technology was capable. And, they did push for some level of realism. But they didn’t push for realism where it wasn’t necessary. Locations and objects in the games that weren’t made by humans had a lack of detail and function that really worked in the game’s world. The Forerunner structures truly looked “alien” and like nothing a human would every build, and they played great because of it. Just look at the map, Hang 'em High. It makes no logical sense as a structure. In fact, it looks like something from an M. C. Escher painting. Bungie threw realism out the window, focused on gameplay, and ended up with a map that plays fantastic. Another example is the vehicles in the game(human or otherwise). We have warthogs with unlimited ammo because gamplay trumps realism. We have covenant vehicles that defy physics because gameplay trumps realism. Granted, these vehicle examples aren’t things that relate to a realistic appearance. But if they were made to look hyper-realistic(with visible ammo boxes and whatnot), it would take away from the ability to immerse ourselves in a vehicle that never runs out of ammo.
Who cares about graphic xD
Yes, but as long as they keep the feel of the game.