From Halopedia, the Halo wiki
Where were you able to get the first screenshot for this image?
I figured it was for a profile pic
Srry for the message. I got confused and thought that subtank's board was mine..... heh. srry.
Can't really agree on that, but I guess everyone can interpret that facial expression differently. But again, the current introductory image is more neutral than the previous.
Actually, I only changed their names for simplicity's sake; I'm trying to have most of the E3 images under a simple numerical naming system to make editing easier. I've checked the upload log - only two of your uploads, Halo4 Warthog.jpeg and UNSC Infinity E32012.jpeg were actually deleted, since I have already uploaded higher-res version three hours before you did. And since I'm not an admin, I can't personally delete files even if I wanted to.
High-res screens and artwork for Halo 4 can be downloaded at the Xbox Press Center.
Uh, not to be rude, but I'm not sure what it is you're trying to get at. Could you try being a little less vague? And FYI, I generally do use the "upload new file" button option, unless the image I intend to replace is either in the wrong format (e.i., JPG to PNG), or if the image in question has been mislabeled, and requires a new name, since there presently isn't the option to rename an existing file. Does that answer your vague question, or was there something else?
*shrugs* I really don't know if we should restore it. Still a very grey area. Let's just wait till the end of the week (21st April sounds nice?). By then, we could say that the usage should constitute as fair use since it has been two weeks since the publication and that the period is a reasonable duration to share it with those who did not subscribe to the digital subscription.
The concept art? Yes. In-game screenshot? I believe that's still an exclusive content for digital subscribers. GamesRadar have posted these screenshots on their coverage of Halo 4 but it is likely that they've obtained permission; IGN and Gamespot has none. So do Xplay of G4TV and Wired (but the latter is a general tech magazine).
Because I have other stuff I have to attend to in real life. :|
Already saved that one into my computer.. :)
I can render it. If you can find one, please capture an image of it and link it. :)
The one showing the whole body is nicer. Could you perhaps get one without a weapon?
I think it is possible to get them in standing position, rather than combat position. Perhaps try capturing a screenshot of them while being in the Spirit/Phantom dropship?
That wasn't too hard, was it? All that is needed is specific details and others will understand. I've updated the file to something larger and clearer, since you've pointed out the details.
Also, please stop edit-warring on H:A's map articles and refer to this talk page to reach a consensus. The majority, for now, is of the opinion that it looks better without the section.
Oh, there's a reason why H3's Heretic deserve its own article; it has its own title. Reach's Beaver Creek on the other hand is simply a Forge variant, using H2's title as its own. Unless it has its own title, such as "Awesome remake 2.0", it stays not having its own section. I am more inclined to give it its own article if we have some actual information... but since there are none, the article should be reverted to the previous revision... with no section.
Regarding the AR rifle file, the reason why I reverted your file to the previous file is because the previous file is more brighter, allowing readers to see the rifle properly, and is larger in pixels. Do tell how the ammo counter is displayed incorrectly (the fact that it has fired 41 rounds already) or how the rifle is low poly (the fact that the image is 1600 pixels wide... better than your 800 pixel image). Other than the fact that the image itself is not of high quality, I don't see how your file is better than the previous file. I will proceed with reverting your file within 30 minutes unless something convinces me to do otherwise.
For a number of reasons:
Now since there is "sufficient" information those pages have been created. Happy now?
The video does in fact say beaver creek but that is most likely a typo as beaver creek is from halo 2 and battle creek is from Halo CE and CE is the one being remade
It has been confirmed a mistake it only says 700+ ships once in the reprint while all other instances say 314 ships
About your edit on the fall of reach the reprint change was only once and therefore a mistake as all other times the number of ships is mentioned it is 314 ships.
