I can understand "bad" because that relates to personal preference, but what makes you say "lazy"?

The design looks lazy to me, it looks more simplistic with a simplistic color palet, in comparison to older Grunt versions. This is one of my dislikes with 343, not much about gameplay or story wise, but the art department, it's really not appealing and seems lazy to me. Myself like many other of my character design and animation classmates, we've come up with some fun fan art designs, not to mention other artists all over the internet with amazing Grunt and Elite designs, compared to 343 artists, this one looks very lazy, lack of elaboration, just very simplistic. Bungie tried to make them as attractive as possible, with bright colors, and interesting features, very distinctive. This design looks like an generic "orc" with not appealing tank color.

All I see is opinions. Nothing that indicates 343i was lazy with designing the Grunts.

Like I said before, it's lazy design in my opinion, maybe you missed that.

I didn't miss that, the hard part I'm following is how you think the design is lazy. Since you did not contribute to the design, or do not know the level of effort put in by 343i, how can it be an opinion the design was lazy? It's like me saying it's my opinion you were born in Antarctica.

I design 2d and 3d character designs and do animations, I have a good idea the process it takes to develop this characters, I've seen students with better and more creative designs than this. That being said, Bungie already left nice and well done previous designs and templates, 343 didn't have to create them from scratch, Bungie already gave them the designs of their anatomy, skin color and body armor types, 343 did their own version of them (I'm not against their own interpretation), yet they seem more simplistic, and less elaborated, seem more lazy since their design doesn't look very complicated the color armor seems very boring to watch and doesn't catch my attention and that's my point of view, whether you agree or not.

[quote]I design 2d and 3d character designs and do animations, I have a good idea the process it takes to develop this characters, I've seen students with better and more creative designs than this.[/quote]That's all an opinion about how good/interesting something looks. Nothing about the effort put in by developers. Just because you don't like the look of something doesn't mean no effort was put into it. [quote]seem more lazy since their design doesn't look very complicated[/quote]I'm pretty sure complicated design =/= lots of effort put into something. [quote] that's my point of view, whether you agree or not.[/quote]Alright, well then it's my point of view you were born in Antarctica.

[quote]Just because you don't like the look of something doesn't mean no effort was put into it. [/quote] I don't like the design and in comparison with other art work out there, yes, I found the design very lazy. Part of my class is to design characters for animation and video game character design. In my honest opinion they could have done better, but they went lazy with the design. Don't like my point of view? Deal with it.

[quote]I don't like the design and in comparison with other art work out there, yes, I found the design very lazy.[/quote]Going off of the definition of [url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lazy]lazy[/url], you really can't say the design is lazy unless you have proof that 343i did not put effort or time into making it. [quote]Don't like my point of view? Deal with it.[/quote]It's not that I don't like it, it's more that I'm trying to comprehend how you are making a claim based on evidence, with no evidence at all. I totally and completely understand why you don't like Halo 4's Grunts. But I'm having trouble with the fact you're stating the design is lazy when you have no idea how hard the developers worked on the design.

[quote]Going off of the definition of lazy, you really can't say the design is lazy unless you have proof that 343i did not put effort or time into making it. [/quote] Sigh... Lazy design means that they wanted a simplistic and less elaborated design, not that they didn't put effort on what they did.

You should stop using words that you don't understand. lazy isn't a subjective term.

A lazy design in art doesn't necessarily mean that they put little time and effort into making it. For example, I can spend several days whittling a wooden ball. Now, that wasn't lazy as I put a lot of time and effort into it, but at the same time it's lazy in design because at the end of the day, all I have is just a regular wooden ball. There was no creativity in making a wooden ball.

[quote]There was no creativity in making a wooden ball.[/quote]Now apply this to the new Unggoy design. Where's the proof that there's little to no creativity?

[quote]Sigh... Lazy design means that they wanted a simplistic and less elaborated design, not that they didn't put effort on what they did.[/quote][url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lazy]That's not what lazy means at all.[/url] And since when is a simplistic design something to be criticized? [spoiler]It seems elaborated enough to me. You can see veins, wrinkles, saggy skin, and the textures do a great job on indicating what is glossy smooth, and what isn't. [/spoiler]

I'm pretty sure what he's saying is that the design is lazy in terms of creativity, not actual effort and time put into it.

But the creative process is entirely subjective. Not just that, but again, he has nothing to prove whether or not they were lazy with their creativity.

I believe one of his examples was making it look more monstrous, like an Orc or something. Another was the lack of color with the design that catches the eye. While the latter is more subjective, the first one has a stronger point. The generic, "scary monster" look does show a lack of creativity to a degree.

I don't see the "scary monster" look. Sure, 343i made their maw look a bit frightening/creepy, but it still looks like a Grunt.

They combined Mammalian and Reptilian features into its design to create something unnatural and "scary". The jaw was changed to look more like a reptile, large scales were added on the arms&legs, they gained 6-pack abs, had a tube going through the nose, and for some reason had a Human/Ape-like butt. If these changes don't hint that they were trying to make something that looked like a hideous amalgamation of parts, and a Wretch from GoW, then I don't know what does.

[quote]They combined Mammalian and Reptilian features into its design to create something unnatural and "scary".[/quote]They're xenoarthropods. Of course they're unnatural. [quote]The jaw was changed to look more like a reptile,[/quote]They do lay clutches of eggs. [quote] large scales were added on the arms&legs,[/quote]Not scales. Tough skin, like an alligator. [quote]they gained 6-pack abs[/quote]They did evolve from primate-amphibians living in Balaho's aphotic zones. [quote]had a tube going through the nose[/quote]Different breathing apparatus similar to Unggoy diving equipment. [quote]and for some reason had a Human/Ape-like butt.[/quote]Unggoy means monkey in Tagalog. [quote]If these changes don't hint that they were trying to make something that looked like a hideous amalgamation of parts[/quote]Aliens man. All the Covenant are weird conglomerates of parts from species on Earth. [quote]Wretch from GoW[/quote]Mostly due to the pale coloration methinks.

Okay, you really think that the above image does not have scales at all, anywhere on its body? That the hardened, overlapping plates are simply tough skin? I'm sorry, but if that's what you think then I'm just gonna give up after this post. [quote]They're xenoarthropods. Of course they're unnatural.[/quote] Something tells me you're missing the point. Something does not need to be an amalgamation of parts in a disgusting-looking manner to be unnatural or alien. For an example, look at Asari in Mass Effect. They are clearly alien and unnatural-looking to us. However, they are not a combination of various creatures designed to look scary. Grunts weren't either. If you were scared of Grunts back in Halo CE, then you clearly had some problems. [quote]They did evolve from primate-amphibians living in Balaho's aphotic zones. [/quote] Lore explanation=/=Art explanation [quote]Different breathing apparatus similar to Unggoy diving equipment.[/quote] Wh..wha..what? First off, who the hell sticks a tube up their nose and down their trachea to go diving. Second, this doesn't refute that the art style makes them look like monsters. [quote]Unggoy means monkey in Tagalog.[/quote] Lore explanation=/=Art explanation Seriously, did you forget what we were arguing about? [quote]Mostly due to the pale coloration methinks.[/quote] And the claws, and the scales, and jaw/face, and the abs and butt.

[quote]Okay, you really think that the above image does not have scales at all, anywhere on its body? That the hardened, overlapping plates are simply tough skin? I'm sorry, but if that's what you think then I'm just gonna give up after this post.[/quote]I don't see any of those plates overlapping [quote]Something tells me you're missing the point. Something does not need to be an amalgamation of parts in a disgusting-looking manner to be unnatural or alien.[/quote]If you want to think realistically on what an actual alien would look like, it would actually look really unnatural. [quote]For an example, look at Asari in Mass Effect. They are clearly alien and unnatural-looking to us. However, they are not a combination of various creatures designed to look scary. Grunts weren't either.[/quote]Asari are 95% human with blue skin and head tendrils. Hardly alien. (Yes, I'm aware they are aliens and have different biology, but from an external viewpoint, they do look very human) [quote]If you were scared of Grunts back in Halo CE, then you clearly had some problems.[/quote]When did I say I was scared of them? I wasn't even scared of the grunts in Halo 4. In fact, I've never thought the Covenant were scary. [quote]Lore explanation=/=Art explanation[/quote]Nope. But they do go hand in hand when contextualizing the universe. And Bungie very clearly wanted to take a similar path since they named them 'monkeys' in Tagalog. [quote]Wh..wha..what? First off, who the hell sticks a tube up their nose and down their trachea to go diving. Second, this doesn't refute that the art style makes them look like monsters.[/quote]Never said it is a diving apparatus. Just that it was based on one. No, but I don't think it makes them look monstrous. Is it weird, yeah, but it's just a breathing apparatus connected to their nose instead of their mouth. Nothing really "scary" about that. [quote]Lore explanation=/=Art explanation Seriously, did you forget what we were arguing about?[/quote]What the shit? That's not even a lore explanation. Canonically, Unggoy is the Sangheili word for Grunt. We don't even know what humans call them, other than "Grunt". The latin name of monachus frigus is a translation of what the Forerunners called them. Unggoy meaning monkey in Tagalog is a real life explanation. It's pretty obvious that Bungie was influenced by monkeys when designing the grunt. Or, after they created it, they looked at it and thought it looked a lot like a monkey. [quote]And the claws, and the scales, and jaw/face, and the abs and butt.[/quote][url=http://th08.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/f/2013/276/2/6/266c257cfaccddd6181cb6611128a206-d6p3ym9.jpg]Wretches don't have abs, or scales, and the face, well the face is basically just a giant jaw, nothing else.[/url] Only similarities are the mottled skin and buttocks.

Jesus Christ, you're making me want to shoot up a preschool here, mang. While scales don't always overlap, you can see the Grunt's scales overlapping on the legs. Yeah, sure, whatever. I mean we have no idea how life would form on other worlds, therefore it's definitely monstrous and scarwy. ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THE ART DESIGN OR ARE WE MAKING EXCUSES FOR IT LOOKING HOW IT DOES WITH LORE? -blam!- it, I'm done with you. Shouldn't have even bothered, Masta couldn't explain it to you, and you can't even stay on topic.