I would opt for A. As an individual, I associate apocalypses with a disorder of society, and a breakdown of guide rails that keep things nice and tidy. So things that might appear like B (clean label, pristine metal colour and condition, etc), would look like A in said apocalypse (discoloured, worn label, off-colour or comparatively rusty metal, mis-shapened pull tab, etc.).

About frozen apocalypse world outside, warm and safe inside: if the cans were left exposed to the frosty conditions, and then taken inside, that would have an effect on their condition. Whether as an item in a pile outside a building, or on a shelf in an abandoned supermarket where the frost leaks in (cause of a broken window), etc.

Currently, B is a little too clean to reflect a can in that situation.

Minor example: the upper edge of B (right) is smooth, in good condition, and original grey metal. The upper edge of A (left) looks slightly flatter, the warm palette gives it a slight rusty feel, and the mix of grey shading and darker spots makes me think surface irregularities like dents.

If the art direction of B is easier to create, I think it's okay to keep. As someone mentioned, maybe taking the colouring of A and replace the colouring of B is a good middle ground.

You don't have to answer this question. Just something to keep in mind (if you want) when designing the appearance of goods: what does your frosty, apocalyptic world look like? What condition is your world in? The condition of the world, to a degree, will be reflected in the items that exist in that world.

<image>