1,151
edits
Forum:The retcons made by 343i: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Imrane-117 (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
Soul reaper (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
:I don't really have a lot of issues with the new design, it's just that I think it was designed specifically for the ''Dawn'' wreckage as featured in the first level of ''Halo 4'', not for the intact ship, let alone the whole class. Such a concept art hardly matches with the ''Charon''-class frigate's description, which is dubbed for example "a heavy cargo" in ''Halo: The Essential Visual Guide'' (and it's generally an accepted fact). Maybe I should have mentioned it earlier, but in ''Awakening: The Art of Halo 4'', Sparth also mentions that he needed to draw the full ship only for the sake of breaking it later, this is why my interpretation is that the ''Dawn'' is an exception. As I said it multiple times, I think it was essentially for the sake of creating a new design for the ''Dawn'' wreckage, no more no less. Still... In the end, I guess you guys decide it. [[User:Imrane-117|Imrane-117]] ([[User talk:Imrane-117|talk]]) 10:54, 24 July 2013 (EDT) | :I don't really have a lot of issues with the new design, it's just that I think it was designed specifically for the ''Dawn'' wreckage as featured in the first level of ''Halo 4'', not for the intact ship, let alone the whole class. Such a concept art hardly matches with the ''Charon''-class frigate's description, which is dubbed for example "a heavy cargo" in ''Halo: The Essential Visual Guide'' (and it's generally an accepted fact). Maybe I should have mentioned it earlier, but in ''Awakening: The Art of Halo 4'', Sparth also mentions that he needed to draw the full ship only for the sake of breaking it later, this is why my interpretation is that the ''Dawn'' is an exception. As I said it multiple times, I think it was essentially for the sake of creating a new design for the ''Dawn'' wreckage, no more no less. Still... In the end, I guess you guys decide it. [[User:Imrane-117|Imrane-117]] ([[User talk:Imrane-117|talk]]) 10:54, 24 July 2013 (EDT) | ||
::What do you mean by "doesn't mean we have to accept" it? Do you mean personally, if so, then yeah, kind of goes without saying. But if you mean as a wiki then I'd have to disagree with you. As a wiki, we have to accept it and present things as they are, without bias, though I'm sure you're aware of that. As for your feelings of the redesigns creating a disconnect with previous games, well, those are your feelings and I'm sure as hell not going to try and take them away from you, but for me, personally, I felt it was one of the stronger continuations. When Halo 2 game out I remember feeling like it didn't connect properly, mostly due to visual changes (now it's my favourite game), likewise I always felt weird about Halo Wars, and Reach still feels like a different universe to the original trilogy. But they're all different takes on a universe and that's something you have to expect with any art form. Personally I felt that Halo 4 was an appropriate continuation and a good start to a new era. As for the ship specifically. Each time there's a class of ships they all look the same, so while we may have only seen the redesign applied to the Dawn within the game, past examples would suggest that the change exists for the entire class of ships.--[[User:Soul reaper|Soul reaper]] ([[User talk:Soul reaper|talk]]) 11:30, 24 July 2013 (EDT) | |||