Noble Map Pack is too fancy.

Ok, I skipped about half the comments...

Here's what I have to say...keep in mind I am a level designer...not nonprofessional, and not just in halo. I make maps completely from scratch for games. I can offer some insight.

1.Simple textures...this wasn't their choice, those were the some of the best graphics back in Halo CE. They didn't just do simple textures for the heck of it, that's all the hardware could allow.

2.Aesthetics...all this stuff helps build the atmosphere of the map. Atmosphere is very important in a map, it can give it a variety of different feels. The atmosphere can solely affect the players experience on a map.

3.(This is a big one) The details do NOT ruin the map. What kind of crack are you smoking man( im not being serious on the crack smoking thing by the way)....

They have no affect on game-play what so ever. You know the before and after pictures??? Guess what...it's the same map!!!!! WOW!

They just made it look pretty, and changed some parts of the map for better flow. It's still the same basic map though, it won't affect your game-play experience what-so-ever.

4.Games are a form of art...so it stands to reason that the maps should be too.

Too me it's offensive that you don't appreciate the art. Do you know how much work goes into making these maps? Months and months of work...it's takes a lot of talent. You complaining about their art-form just isn't right.

Who are you to judge art?

 

Have you ever walked in on a conversation that your friends or family are having and try to jump in, but found out that what they're talking about is different than what you thought they were talking about? It helps if you read the discussion, is what I'm trying to say.

This thread isn't about one or more people bashing Reach's graphics. It's about map style - physical design and/or aesthetic design. Impressionism and Modernism are two very different styles of art, but they are both art and there's nothing wrong with a frank discussion over the artistic merits of either. Canvases and brushes have evolved over time. Same here. Halo Reach's maps and Halo CE's maps are very different stylistically, and this is more of a discussion about those styles.

Imagine looking at a wall, that has an incredibly detailed texture up close. You can see all the rivets, bolts, dirt, and scrapes in crystal clear perfection. The surface itself has an incredibly complex design. Now back your game character away from this wall, and throw a grenade at it. Depending on the game, it might ricochet like it should. But, it might catch on a detail in the wall, and bounce at an extremely unpredictable angle.

To put it in your 'level designer' terms, in some games the geometry of the level and the bounding boxes of that geometry mesh, and players/projectiles can get caught on little details. Yes, details can ruin maps and do affect gameplay, but Bungie has taken a lot of extra steps to ensure that the bounding boxes of the level geometry are smooth and allow for predictable physics. This a good thing, and some players who weren't aware of this were simply voicing their concern.

They are not the same maps. In some before/after shots, the level geometry is radically different, particularly the ones on Breakpoint and Tempest. This hearkens back to my earlier point about level detail possibly constricting gameplay. The players who preferred the "before" images did so out of their simplicity, and the complexity of the "after" images worried them. And again, it's all a matter of personal taste.

You don't have to be a chef to be able to decide if a dish isn't good. Everyone has their own tastes. Some like their maps different styles than others. Some like multi-level walkways and winding passages. Others like big, open valleys with rolling terrain. There's no doubting that Bungie did work extremely hard on these maps, and I can't wait to play on them myself. But as with all art, each consumer is entitled to their critique of it, and as long as they present it respectfully, I ask you not to ridicule them for thinking differently than you.

~TitanC005

 

1. I read everything except the 2nd page. Not a big deal, most of the comments were the saying the same thing.

2.This isn't about graphics...in fact I don't believe I said any thing about graphics...

Anyway, style has everything to do with art. My comment stated that you should't bash Bungie's art. They make each map with a different style, just like they did with every halo map.

The maps weren't different in style. They all boil done to the same blocky mess at their simplest form. Then details are applied, back when CE was released...those maps had a lot of detail, they still do. It may not seem like much compared to now, but it was there. The style hasn't changed, the maps were detailed then, and they are now.

3. First of all...a very detailed wall wouldn't necessarily that complex. The details would be in a texture. Most game engines can't support the number of polygons it would take to make large wall sections with realistic depth.

Second...given the size of the grenade models, and their collision volumes (In most games), it would be IMPOSSIBLE to get one...caught...on a small detail. If you look at most maps...small details are...well...small. -.-

Now sometimes there are places a grenade could be lodged, but those are simply crevices in geometry, or static meshes, where their is no blocking volume. Those are details.

If you also pay attention to maps. The details are never in the way. Details are outside of the map...behind a window, under the floor. Or they are inside the map but out of the way...on the wall, part of the wall, surrounded by a cage...etc.

This means that it is unlikely for players, or their projectiles to get stuck on these details.

Third, most players, as well as people I know...don't think about this stuff, because they expect a grenade to bounce off a wall. Or for them to be running next to a wall, and not pass by a crack and get sucked in or something. The game developers don't just forget this stuff. They know the players expect this, so they need to create smooth environments in order for good game-play and flow.

OK I am bored talking about this point, although I could continue....moving on!

4. You can't be serious? The not the same? They are very much the same. Like I said, the layout, and design remained mostly the same. The only changes shouldn't worry anyone no matter one. For one large reason. To improve game-play.

When I make a map I constantly make adjustments to improve the flow.

This bridge isn't wide enough? No problem, make it bigger.

End result: Map looks slightly different, layout remains the same, game-play remains the same, flow of the map improves drastically.

The maps are very much the same, the changes you see are either small adjustments to improve flow, or the boatloads of artistic detail dumped on.

Personal taste has nothing to do with this...that goes to your preferred art style, which is either medieval or renaissance...which were both equally good for their periods.

5. What are you a monk? That was one of the silliest things I've ever heard. Not completely stupid though

When I made my initial post I was merely talking to the creator of this thread. I wasn't really addressing anyone else's thoughts.

One thing he disliked was all the details. The thing I am trying to convey is that they are just as detailed as the Halo: CE maps. That was one of the most graphically impressive games back then. Just like this one is now.

I am tired while writing this, sorry if I seem unclear...anyway I don't feel like writing more, so I Will leave a last point.

It's perfectly fine for him to like something different. I love Halo: CE dearly, and I still play it. I love the maps and everything.

In my observations...of playing halo since the first one. The style of Bungie's maps haven't really changed that much.

The thing is...he complained about all the details and what not. The complaints weren't needed, he could just say he prefers Halo: CE maps...maybe even started a poll.

Everyone is in-titled to their opinion, I agree...but when you complain about something like that...I think you should show some video evidence that it clearly affects game-play, Then I wouldn't be so quick to disagree.

Anyway, no more arguing. Peace. Be happy again. In fact...this whole thread has been back and forth arguing, please just stop.

I am almost mad I started it again

Anyway I like all the maps, from all the halo games, except Narrows (-.0) what about you guys?

For the maps, their atmosphere, fun level? Not for details, and all that ka-blooie.

 

Touche.

And I despised Narrows as well. XP

My favorite Reach levels include Sword Base and Powerhouse. Forge World in general is beautiful, and I really love the alpine environment. I think Reflection is the most gorgeous level ever built, but plays horribly. That, or I just don't do well on it ever.

 

My favorite maps in Reach are:
-SwordBase
-Countdown (closest thing to lockout)
-ForgeWorld(for forging)
-Reflection

I like them all, but these are my favorites.

Tempest, and Anchor 9 may be added to my favorite maps.

 

Aesthetics are important as details are the easiest way to orient a new player. They also keep players into the map because who wants to be fighting in a gray box? Functionallity though is a priority so I usually go for that first.

 

I waited to actually play the new maps before I said anything but the new maps are awfully busy. There's no accounting for taste but I think there is something to be said for subtractive design, only using the aesthetics you think are necessary.

Look at blackout and lockout. Lockout stylzied an entire map by essentially using the contrast of blue and orange light. I think that's really effective and impressive. Doing more with less is generally good design in my opinion.

Blackout is a mess, a explosion of random objects, geometry, and lighting strewn aimlessly across a map. I don't think the layout benefited from this design decision. In fact I think Halo in general is suited more towards clean layouts. Call of duty is suited more for dirty, real locations. Halo maps should reflect the clean arena gameplay it exists in.

 

I love the changes they made to noble map pack. Looking at before and afters there is no way I would have paid for those in-development quality initial versions. I buy new games so that I can get new looking graphics not the same old bland stuff. To me, and it's totally my opinion the initial versions looked like garbage and something anyone could cleave, cut and texture with map designing software. I loved Halo CE, Halo 2, Halo 3, but they were what they were at the time and now that I've gone forward I don't want to go back.
I have to agree however with not feeling alien but really after so many years of halo it doesn't seem like there is much new they can throw at us.

 

exactly what i was thinking

 

Tell, me: why didn't you read my post on that update? 'Cause you just expressed EXACTLY how I think about that. It's just... better with simple graphics. Especially on Tempest. When looking at the old graphics, it just reminded me so much of Death Island from Halo CE. I loved it!
Anyway, glad i'm not the only one

 

Couldn't agree more.

Halo 2 maps are considered by many to be the best maps ever made by Bungie. They were also the last maps made without unnecessary objects everywhere.

Getting stuck on some door trim and then killed in Sword Base, or shooting into a pole instead of someones unshielded head on Powerhouse is pretty frustrating.

You mentioned blackout. In the center under the glass, they added a bunch of things sticking out of the angled walls that restrict movement. What were they thinking when they did that?