Explanation: Why (some) people like Sprint

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

I’ve been following the Sprint discussions in this board for months – we’ve had some huge, sophisticated threads that went into great detail why Sprint is bad for the series.
One recurring (and very popular) theme I read is the notion that there are no advantages to Sprint (at all) or that the sole argument for Sprint is ‘because it’s modern’.

And with all due respect, I’ll try to explain why that proposition is not very tolerant.

> Please note:
> This thread is not meant as a comparison or as a ‘proof’ of superiority for Sprint in any way or form.
> As there are many and very detailed contra-threads in this board already, I’ve consciously concentrated on the positive side as I firmly believe that we can all have our preferences AND a fair understanding of other perspectives at the same time.

Before I start…

1.) Ask yourself this question: Are there really no arguments for sprint or are there just no arguments that you regard as viable?
Matter of point is: If you feel strongly for something and/or have a specific set of preferences (competitive player) other arguments will very likely mean nothing to you either way. Based on your world view you might of course ‘prove’ how wrong these other perspectives are, completely disregarding the underlying fundamentally different needs and values.
In the end it all comes down to what different subgroups of players perceive as rewarding (e.g. ‘competitive’ and ‘fun’ players), there simply is no ‘wrong’ or ‘right’ in this debate.

2.) ‘Soft’ concepts such as ‘feel like a Spartan’, ‘higher speed’ or ‘more natural’ are easy to be brushed aside. They are in fact complex concepts that are based on human psychology and are like all perceptions subjective.
Explaining how Sprint is detrimental to an existing gameplay system is the much easier task, as the effects can be easily described and even factually documented.
But how do you prove that Sprint makes people feel more powerful (like an actual supersoldier)?
Or how do you prove that Sprint feels more ‘natural’ [aka immersive] as it’s closer to humans’ basic instincts (fight – flight)?
The truth is you can’t, as you would need a well-balanced and scientific (psychological) survey/experiment to provide any sort of evidence. However just because something is hard to quantify doesn’t mean it’s irrelevant. I think there is a reason why this mechanism is so popular in (console) FPS per se and why (some) people actually like it and want it in their games.

With that out of the way here are the reasons why I think (some) people like Sprint:

A) Small rewards:
In videogames even small (sometimes even subconscious) rewards are part of the overall fun. The most important aspect is the feeling that you achieved something, whether or not it’s big (getting a kill, returning the flag) or small (dashing through the map to get back to your team, sprinting and making that long jump). The weightings of these rewards are highly subjective and also dependent on a player’s skill.
However the point is that the traversal system does have a worth of it’s own, it can be fun independent from the combat mechanics and that is often overlooked.
Also a previously neutral motoric action (pressing the left stick) can become inherently rewarding by repeatedly linking it with (subjectively perceived) desired outcomes (conditioning – LINK).

B) Getting out of trouble is satisfying (and not always unfair)
There is no arguing that an escaping prey is frustrating for the hunter. But what’s the other side of the coin? It also feels good to get away, especially if the initial combat conditions have been quite one-sided to begin with.
My video analysis showed, that Sprint is mainly used as a means of escape in situations, in which the prey had a very little (to non-existent) chance to successfully fight back (e.g. fire from an unknown position, enemy camping,…).
While it is of course correct, that the bad situation might be the prey’s fault to begin with it’s also an illusion that it’s possible to oversee the battlefield all of the time. Part of the skill is to quickly react to unforeseen events and Halo always fostered that ‘second chance’ (longer kill times, grenades).

C) Subjective perception of speed
Irrespective of the question whether or not you’re actually getting somewhere faster (or if that is just an illusion) what’s important is the player’s perception of speed.
That perception is created through:

  • contrast between base speed and sprint speed (i.e. you’re actually moving much faster)
  • visual cues: shaking screen, rapid arm movements, flow of air (white stripes), movement of surroundings
  • auditory cues: higher frequency of footsteps, rushing wind
  • kinesthetic cues: controller vibrations
    There’s a natural human fascination for all things fast.
    Note: While FOV or higher base speed also create a similar experience Sprint is the only mechanism that allows for a combination of a higher traversal speed with a slower (aka ‘Halo’) combat speed.
2

D) Feeling powerful
The whole ‘feeling like a supersoldier’ argument has been discussed to death. This is again about a player’s perception and not necessarily tied to the question what a fictional Spartan would be able to do in a certain situation (not everyone knows the lore in and out). People just love to feel powerful (games/books sell that illusion) per se and that is only amplified by their avatar’s role.

E) Basic human instincts & perception of urgency
It has been argued that players can differentiate between a game and reality. So just because a game lays down artificial (‘unnatural’) rules (there is only one speed at which you can move) doesn’t mean that it feels limiting for a player.
As a psychologist I have to agree and disagree at the same time. I think a player can adapt to any system (and have fun) yet the more immersive games always establish a connection with our basic human needs and instincts (e.g. looting systems in MMO’s).
I believe that Sprint is closer to the way we as humans think/react especially in situations of urgency (flight instinct, getting back to the flag). It might not only be satisfying in these situations it might also create a better sense of urgency per se (e.g. it feels more dramatic to sprint into battle).

F) BTB, campaign & more
There have been countless hints that H5 might offer bigger MP battles on larger battlefields with more players than ever before. While we obviously don’t have any concrete info yet, we should not forget that ‘Arena’ will be just one part of the whole H5 MP suite.

> Josh Holmes talking about Sprint:
> I think for the beta we really focused on the arena portion of the experience, but as with past Halos, it’s important for us to have a consistency in the gameplay speed between all different modes. […]
> So as you can imagine, we’re building a foundation of gameplay that translates over to the other larger experiences we have planned for multiplayer, that we haven’t revealed yet, as well as our campaign. So we’re trying to find the balance within the mobility that works well for all of these different modes.

Even in the past people who disliked Sprint in competitive 4 vs 4 settings often argued that Sprint felt better in BTB.
Even with vehicles and shortcuts there’s no denying that traversing big maps can sometimes be a tiresome experience.
If 343i wants to create vast landscapes for Campaign too (which is also very likely), having a constant set of mechanics does make sense.
While this whole point is of course weak until we know more, you don’t have to be a genius to anticipate what’s coming.

3

Precisely.

> B) Getting out of trouble is satisfying (and not always unfair)
> There is no arguing that an escaping prey is frustrating for the hunter. But what’s the other side of the coin? It also feels good to get away, especially if the initial combat conditions have been quite one-sided to begin with.
> My video analysis showed, that Sprint is mainly used as a means of escape in situations, in which the prey had a very little (to non-existent) chance to successfully fight back (e.g. fire from an unknown position, enemy camping,…).
> While it is of course correct, that the bad situation might be the prey’s fault to begin with it’s also an illusion that it’s possible to oversee the battlefield all of the time. Part of the skill is to quickly react to unforeseen events and Halo always fostered that ‘second chance’ (longer kill times, grenades).

I was playing a game of Halo 3 in TMMC and this idea suddenly sprung to my mind. The only way in Halo 3 to win a battle if the enemy fired shots on you before you did is to throw grenades, strafe, melee or hope that their aim is horrible. Yes it is extremely satisfying when you counteract an attack, but generally whoever fires the first shot wins. And since you can’t sprint away, halo 3 is more of a twitch based game than Halo 5.

4

I honestly think it’s “vast majority” rather than “some”. 343i did it’s sprint poll after beta, and whenever vocal minority likes it or not, results were clear. In Reach 80% of players (that’s Bungie/343i data) used sprint as their AA. Other AAs were much more useful (e.g. jetpack was much more useful for traveling through Reach’s maps, and armor lock was absolute, overpowered disaster), but still 80% of people wanted to be able to run.

Reason is simple: people want to get to action faster - and that’s why sprint became genre’s standard. Would faster base movement do the trick? Nope. With aiming done with analog stick and with Halo’s killtimes it would became just more chaotic.

343i already made sprint useless in Halo 5 and I rarely seen someone running in beta. They’ll make it even less useful in final game (they’re decreasing sprint speed and increasing base movement speed), but sprint threads are just coming and coming, made by angry vocal minority, who don’t want anyone to use this feature.

Never.

Ever.

What’s wrong with you people?

5

> 2533274820093296;4:
> I honestly think it’s “vast majority” rather than “some”. 343i did it’s sprint poll after beta, and whenever vocal minority likes it or not, results were clear. In Reach 80% of players (that’s Bungie/343i data) used sprint as their AA. Other AAs were much more useful (e.g. jetpack was much more useful for traveling through Reach’s maps, and armor lock was absolute, overpowered disaster), but still 80% of people wanted to be able to run.
>
> Reason is simple: people want to get to action faster - and that’s why sprint became genre’s standard. Would faster base movement do the trick? Nope. With aiming done with analog stick and with Halo’s killtimes it would became just more chaotic.
>
> 343i already made sprint useless in Halo 5 and I rarely seen someone running in beta. They’ll make it even less useful in final game (they’re decreasing sprint speed and increasing base movement speed), but sprint threads are just coming and coming, made by angry vocal minority, who don’t want anyone to use this feature.
>
> Never.
>
> Ever.
>
> What’s wrong with you people?

These people have shown that Sprint does negatively interfere with other mechanics - and I really believe that was important to make H5 a better game.

Please, don’t make this another ‘we’re the majority’ discussion.
This thread was meant to bring people closer not to bring up old stereotypes and trench warfare.

6

> 2533274928710760;3:
> Precisely.
>
> > B) Getting out of trouble is satisfying (and not always unfair)
> > There is no arguing that an escaping prey is frustrating for the hunter. But what’s the other side of the coin? It also feels good to get away, especially if the initial combat conditions have been quite one-sided to begin with.
> > My video analysis showed, that Sprint is mainly used as a means of escape in situations, in which the prey had a very little (to non-existent) chance to successfully fight back (e.g. fire from an unknown position, enemy camping,…).
> > While it is of course correct, that the bad situation might be the prey’s fault to begin with it’s also an illusion that it’s possible to oversee the battlefield all of the time. Part of the skill is to quickly react to unforeseen events and Halo always fostered that ‘second chance’ (longer kill times, grenades).
>
>
>
> I was playing a game of Halo 3 in TMMC and this idea suddenly sprung to my mind. The only way in Halo 3 to win a battle if the enemy fired shots on you before you did is to throw grenades, strafe, melee or hope that their aim is horrible. Yes it is extremely satisfying when you counteract an attack, but generally whoever fires the first shot wins. And since you can’t sprint away, halo 3 is more of a twitch based game than Halo 5.

I would like to note that sprint wouldn’t have helped in your situation. If your situation was a CQC situation. To run away would most likely mean to turn the other way and then run. You’d be dead. Sprint would save you if the distance between you and your foe was greater.

7

I’m anti-sprint, and I understand every single argument made for sprint. To demonstrate, I loved dual wielding, it felt empowering picking up another weapon and use it to mow down any opposition. It looked cool both using it first person and in screenshots. Gameplay mechanically I understand and accept why they removed it. Bloated single handed weapon sandbox with little variation between what the weapons could actually do. Other two handed weapons were more viable options and you sacrificed the ability to melee and throw grenades thus dual wielding wasn’t used that much if you were to melee or throw a grenade because you dropped your weapon, frustrating.

As I understand every argument that has been presented to me, I do not agree that they are viable arguments for justifying sprint as a gameplay mechanic, simply because gameplay trumps reality and how the player should feel. Simulations are entirely different games than “arcade” games.

Now that I think of it, the only gameplay related argument I’ve seen was one where the debater argued for the positive of having to choose having your weapon down or not at the expense of speed. You need to make a choice if you want to be ready for a fight or not. But with the nature of sprint and so forth it’s not in my opinion a that good argument.

Abilities should be explained by lore.
Abilities should not be implemented because of lore.

Players need to find what’s rewarding in a game.
Games should not smack things that may be rewarding into a players face.

The quote from Josh Holmes I see as a confirmation that the mechanics we used in the Beta will be in the whole game, regardless of mode. Meaning no inconsistencies in gameplay.

For sprint working well in BTB, sure it works better there, but seeing as there are many different ways to transport a player a long distance quite fast, sprint isn’t exactly needed for BTB, neither would I say it’s a compelling argument. There are man cannons, teleporters and vehicles. Of course vehicles may not always be available, but that’s either a fault of the map for not spawning a proper amount of vehicles, player fault for not letting all team mates on or for letting the enemy take/destroy your vehicles.

Campaign again, a proper made campaign with a steady stream of encounters and enough breathers is everything that matters. Where vehicles are needed, they should be. Again, if you suddenly find yourself without a vehicle in a vehicle part of the campaign, I’d say that’s your fault. If you choose to travel a vehicle area by foot, that’s your choice.

I can see exploration as an argument for Sprint but then again, that’s quite a side track for why you’re in campaign in the first place. That and I wouldn’t want to have multiplayer or any other mode be affected because sprint was implemented due to something as trivial as exploration in a game mode where tour main objective is to kill stuff. Minecraft has exploring. Indeed, even Minecraft has sprint. With the drawback that you get hungry ridiculously fast while sprinting and that there’s only one ranged mob in the main land.

8

> 2533274793332039;5:
> > 2533274820093296;4:
> > I honestly think it’s “vast majority” rather than “some”. 343i did it’s sprint poll after beta, and whenever vocal minority likes it or not, results were clear. In Reach 80% of players (that’s Bungie/343i data) used sprint as their AA. Other AAs were much more useful (e.g. jetpack was much more useful for traveling through Reach’s maps, and armor lock was absolute, overpowered disaster), but still 80% of people wanted to be able to run.
> >
> > Reason is simple: people want to get to action faster - and that’s why sprint became genre’s standard. Would faster base movement do the trick? Nope. With aiming done with analog stick and with Halo’s killtimes it would became just more chaotic.
> >
> > 343i already made sprint useless in Halo 5 and I rarely seen someone running in beta. They’ll make it even less useful in final game (they’re decreasing sprint speed and increasing base movement speed), but sprint threads are just coming and coming, made by angry vocal minority, who don’t want anyone to use this feature.
> >
> > Never.
> >
> > Ever.
> >
> > What’s wrong with you people?
>
>
> These people have shown that Sprint does negatively interfere with other mechanics - and I really believe that was important to make H5 a better game.
>
> Please, don’t make this another ‘we’re the majority’ discussion.
> This thread was meant to bring people closer not to bring up old stereotypes and trench warfare.

But actually we’re the majority - just very few of us see sprint as such a big deal to even discuss it on Halo forums.

I’ve seen many arguments about how sprint makes gameplay worse. However people who are making them don’t see the difference between opinion and fact. Most people enjoy fps with sprint and Halo isn’t some kind of holy cow that’s far beyond anything else in the genre.

There are several ways to compromise between vast majority who is pro-sprint (and who will pay for this AAA playground for all) and vocal minority who is against and 343i did the job well in Halo 5. In here sprint is useless and on competitive level noone will use it on 4v4 maps (and will not interfere with other mechanics at all).

However vocal minority doesn’t want compromise - they want to erase it. Like there was nothing else in Halo, other than 4v4 (and even for 4v4 fanbase majority is ok with sprint - as I mentioned earlier).

9

> 2533274820093296;4:
> I honestly think it’s “vast majority” rather than “some”. 343i did it’s sprint poll after beta, and whenever vocal minority likes it or not, results were clear. In Reach 80% of players (that’s Bungie/343i data) used sprint as their AA. Other AAs were much more useful (e.g. jetpack was much more useful for traveling through Reach’s maps, and armor lock was absolute, overpowered disaster), but still 80% of people wanted to be able to run.
>
> Reason is simple: people want to get to action faster - and that’s why sprint became genre’s standard. Would faster base movement do the trick? Nope. With aiming done with analog stick and with Halo’s killtimes it would became just more chaotic.

Using the Sprint AA as a poll for default sprint brings up two things. First, would armor lock have been default in Halo 4 if 80% had used it in Reach? Second, that’s a Sprint AA vs Other AA’s poll, not sprint vs non-sprint gameplay. Furthermore, very few reach maps made the jetpack beneficial to use and armor lock, while powerful, wasn’t nearly as useful as sprint. You move more horizontal than vertically, that’s why it’s beneficial over the Jetpack, not to mention that maps were made to function horizontally as it’s how all players traverse the map, regardless of jetpack or not. Armor Lock prevented movement when used and was more a situational armor ability than anything else. You gained nothing from using it when you were alone, while sprint granted you benefits both when you were alone as well as in engagements and when disengaging engagements.

When people suggest faster movements speeds, they’re not wishing for a ridiculous speed increase like 200%. Even then, all previous Halos in my experience, and what I’ve read, were playable at 150%, but 120% speeds were good enough, MLG used that. On the other hand, if we talk chaotic and messy. I can’t find the link anymore, but I’ve read that Bungir supposedly implemented and tested Sprint for Halo 2, but cut it out because the matches became messy and chaotic, they lacked structure.

10

> Naqser
> As I understand every argument that has been presented to me, I do not agree that they are viable arguments for justifying sprint as a gameplay mechanic, simply because gameplay trumps reality and how the player should feel. Simulations are entirely different games than “arcade” games.

Gameplay can’t ‘trump’ how the player should feel as both are inevitably linked.
In the end it’s all about how the player feels.
There is no ‘perfect gameplay’ per se just different systems that are more or less rewarding for different kind of people.

The point you’re actually making is that these arguments do not justify sprint as a gameplay mechanic for you – and that is perfectly fine.
Probably sprint doesn’t feel as rewarding for you as for others, but the point is: You just can’t generalize either way.

I don’t know where you got that ‘simulation’ argument from.

> Naqser
> Players need to find what’s rewarding in a game.
> Games should not smack things that may be rewarding into a players face.

Games always offer systems that may or may not be rewarding for the player.

Again, this statement is more about how you feel (and for you it feels forced).

> Naqser
> The quote from Josh Holmes I see as a confirmation that the mechanics we used in the Beta will be in the whole game, regardless of mode. Meaning no inconsistencies in gameplay.

Yes, but he also argues that they had to find mobility options that are fitting for all these modes. If you read it in context (the question was about player’s reactions regarding infinite Sprint) it’s pretty obvious that he understands that it might not be the perfect choice for Arena but that they had to find a middle ground because of the other, not yet revealed and larger experiences.

If you combine that with the many small and not so small teases and rumors regarding bigger battlefields and it’s pretty obvious (at least for me).
But again, I understand if you’re skeptical as we know very little of H5’s campaign and other MP modes yet. Just keep that in mind until we know for certain.

> Naqser
> There are man cannons, teleporters and vehicles. Of course vehicles may not always be available, but that’s either a fault of the map for not spawning a proper amount of vehicles, player fault for not letting all team mates on or for letting the enemy take/destroy your vehicles.
>
> Campaign again, a proper made campaign with a steady stream of encounters and enough breathers is everything that matters. Where vehicles are needed, they should be. Again, if you suddenly find yourself without a vehicle in a vehicle part of the campaign, I’d say that’s your fault. If you choose to travel a vehicle area by foot, that’s your choice.

I think it doesn’t matter whether it’s the fault of the map or that of the player (I believe from time to time it’s neither), the point is, that these situations occur and that they are frustrating for the player.

I’m fully aware that shortcuts and vehicles help but the bigger the map gets the more of these problems arise. And the thought that you can solve everything that way is a nice one but it’s rather unrealistic as well.

I also think that to a certain degree it’s an apple to oranges comparison. Using a vehicle and going by foot just isn’t the same thing and design-wise you don’t want the player to use a vehicle all the time just because he’s exploring a vast landscape / large map.

11

> 2533274928710760;3:
> Precisely.
>
> > B) Getting out of trouble is satisfying (and not always unfair)
> > There is no arguing that an escaping prey is frustrating for the hunter. But what’s the other side of the coin? It also feels good to get away, especially if the initial combat conditions have been quite one-sided to begin with.
> > My video analysis showed, that Sprint is mainly used as a means of escape in situations, in which the prey had a very little (to non-existent) chance to successfully fight back (e.g. fire from an unknown position, enemy camping,…).
> > While it is of course correct, that the bad situation might be the prey’s fault to begin with it’s also an illusion that it’s possible to oversee the battlefield all of the time. Part of the skill is to quickly react to unforeseen events and Halo always fostered that ‘second chance’ (longer kill times, grenades).
>
>
> I was playing a game of Halo 3 in TMMC and this idea suddenly sprung to my mind. The only way in Halo 3 to win a battle if the enemy fired shots on you before you did is to throw grenades, strafe, melee or hope that their aim is horrible. Yes it is extremely satisfying when you counteract an attack, but generally whoever fires the first shot wins. And since you can’t sprint away, halo 3 is more of a twitch based game than Halo 5.

What? Halo 3 has drastically slower kill times, what game were you playing?

12

I rather enjoyed reading this post, as it’s both informative, understanding and constructive. Perhaps it will allow people to clearly see from one side to the other in terms of the sprint debate.

13

> 2533274795123910;9:
> > 2533274820093296;4:
> > I honestly think it’s “vast majority” rather than “some”. 343i did it’s sprint poll after beta, and whenever vocal minority likes it or not, results were clear. In Reach 80% of players (that’s Bungie/343i data) used sprint as their AA. Other AAs were much more useful (e.g. jetpack was much more useful for traveling through Reach’s maps, and armor lock was absolute, overpowered disaster), but still 80% of people wanted to be able to run.
> >
> > Reason is simple: people want to get to action faster - and that’s why sprint became genre’s standard. Would faster base movement do the trick? Nope. With aiming done with analog stick and with Halo’s killtimes it would became just more chaotic.
>
>
> Using the Sprint AA as a poll for default sprint brings up two things. First, would armor lock have been default in Halo 4 if 80% had used it in Reach? Second, that’s a Sprint AA vs Other AA’s poll, not sprint vs non-sprint gameplay. Furthermore, very few reach maps made the jetpack beneficial to use and armor lock, while powerful, wasn’t nearly as useful as sprint. You move more horizontal than vertically, that’s why it’s beneficial over the Jetpack, not to mention that maps were made to function horizontally as it’s how all players traverse the map, regardless of jetpack or not. Armor Lock prevented movement when used and was more a situational armor ability than anything else. You gained nothing from using it when you were alone, while sprint granted you benefits both when you were alone as well as in engagements and when disengaging engagements.
>
> When people suggest faster movements speeds, they’re not wishing for a ridiculous speed increase like 200%. Even then, all previous Halos in my experience, and what I’ve read, were playable at 150%, but 120% speeds were good enough, MLG used that. On the other hand, if we talk chaotic and messy. I can’t find the link anymore, but I’ve read that Bungir supposedly implemented and tested Sprint for Halo 2, but cut it out because the matches became messy and chaotic, they lacked structure.

IF. But it didn’t happened because AL isn’t sprint. Why do 80% used sprint instead? Yup, for faster vertical movement. Why it was important? Because even in 2010 all the other shooters had this mechanics, and until someone’s playing Halo exclusively, it felt much more natural than casting holograms, being invisible or even immortal. If jump was AA, most probably it would be used even more often.

It’s not that vertical movement was THAT useful in Reach - even for “flat” maps, there still were multiple levels and escaping/getting to these were much faster with jetpack, while player had full offensive capabilities with it (unlike sprint that makes players vulnerable even seconds after). And AL? Yes, it feel awkward and unnatural, but the fact is, that it literally saves lives in 4v4, as few seconds of immortality makes a huge difference in here.

Point is, that in Halo 5 sprint is useless. Maps are small, sprint isn’t much faster than walking and it makes you more vulnerable than ever. It’s basically a gimmick that may (or may not) be any useful only for big, BTB maps (and campaign). However vocal minority still says it should be erased because they don’t like how it (more theoratically than practically) affects THEIR game. That just isn’t right.

14

> 2533274929479318;11:
> > 2533274928710760;3:
> > Precisely.
> >
> > > B) Getting out of trouble is satisfying (and not always unfair)
> > > There is no arguing that an escaping prey is frustrating for the hunter. But what’s the other side of the coin? It also feels good to get away, especially if the initial combat conditions have been quite one-sided to begin with.
> > > My video analysis showed, that Sprint is mainly used as a means of escape in situations, in which the prey had a very little (to non-existent) chance to successfully fight back (e.g. fire from an unknown position, enemy camping,…).
> > > While it is of course correct, that the bad situation might be the prey’s fault to begin with it’s also an illusion that it’s possible to oversee the battlefield all of the time. Part of the skill is to quickly react to unforeseen events and Halo always fostered that ‘second chance’ (longer kill times, grenades).
> >
> >
> >
> > I was playing a game of Halo 3 in TMMC and this idea suddenly sprung to my mind. The only way in Halo 3 to win a battle if the enemy fired shots on you before you did is to throw grenades, strafe, melee or hope that their aim is horrible. Yes it is extremely satisfying when you counteract an attack, but generally whoever fires the first shot wins. And since you can’t sprint away, halo 3 is more of a twitch based game than Halo 5.
>
>
> What? Halo 3 has drastically slower kill times, what game were you playing?

I think the main differences are the automatic weapons, because those are much more potent in H5.

Aside from that?
Not so much. I think H5 is comparable to H1 when it comes to TTK (on average).

But aside from that you’re right.

15

I also like Sprint because its fun. Since when has games been more about competitiveness than having fun? That’s why Halo 5 should be tailored to all players.

16

> 2533274877056440;15:
> I also like Sprint because its fun. Since when has games been more about competitiveness than having fun? That’s why Halo 5 should be tailored to all players.

Didn’t work with h4. 343 needs to focus on making a game that makes sense, not adding pointless mechanics that negatively effect the game.

17

> 2533274793332039;14:
> > 2533274929479318;11:
> > > 2533274928710760;3:
> > > Precisely.
> > >
> > > > B) Getting out of trouble is satisfying (and not always unfair)
> > > > There is no arguing that an escaping prey is frustrating for the hunter. But what’s the other side of the coin? It also feels good to get away, especially if the initial combat conditions have been quite one-sided to begin with.
> > > > My video analysis showed, that Sprint is mainly used as a means of escape in situations, in which the prey had a very little (to non-existent) chance to successfully fight back (e.g. fire from an unknown position, enemy camping,…).
> > > > While it is of course correct, that the bad situation might be the prey’s fault to begin with it’s also an illusion that it’s possible to oversee the battlefield all of the time. Part of the skill is to quickly react to unforeseen events and Halo always fostered that ‘second chance’ (longer kill times, grenades).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I was playing a game of Halo 3 in TMMC and this idea suddenly sprung to my mind. The only way in Halo 3 to win a battle if the enemy fired shots on you before you did is to throw grenades, strafe, melee or hope that their aim is horrible. Yes it is extremely satisfying when you counteract an attack, but generally whoever fires the first shot wins. And since you can’t sprint away, halo 3 is more of a twitch based game than Halo 5.
> >
> >
> >
> > What? Halo 3 has drastically slower kill times, what game were you playing?
>
>
> I think the main differences are the automatic weapons, because those are much more potent in H5.
>
> Aside from that?
> Not so much. I think H5 is comparable to H1 when it comes to TTK (on average).
>
> But aside from that you’re right.

Well I was talking about h3, h5 has kill times only slightly faster than h2, which is a good thing. My point was that h3 was not more twitchy, as that’s literally impossible lol.

18

> 2533274929479318;11:
> > 2533274928710760;3:
> > Precisely.
> >
> > > B) Getting out of trouble is satisfying (and not always unfair)
> > > There is no arguing that an escaping prey is frustrating for the hunter. But what’s the other side of the coin? It also feels good to get away, especially if the initial combat conditions have been quite one-sided to begin with.
> > > My video analysis showed, that Sprint is mainly used as a means of escape in situations, in which the prey had a very little (to non-existent) chance to successfully fight back (e.g. fire from an unknown position, enemy camping,…).
> > > While it is of course correct, that the bad situation might be the prey’s fault to begin with it’s also an illusion that it’s possible to oversee the battlefield all of the time. Part of the skill is to quickly react to unforeseen events and Halo always fostered that ‘second chance’ (longer kill times, grenades).
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I was playing a game of Halo 3 in TMMC and this idea suddenly sprung to my mind. The only way in Halo 3 to win a battle if the enemy fired shots on you before you did is to throw grenades, strafe, melee or hope that their aim is horrible. Yes it is extremely satisfying when you counteract an attack, but generally whoever fires the first shot wins. And since you can’t sprint away, halo 3 is more of a twitch based game than Halo 5.
>
>
>
> What? Halo 3 has drastically slower kill times, what game were you playing?

Right it did but that doesn’t change the fact that whoever shot first in Halo 3 was probably going to win. He never said anything about TTK, he did say however that battles still came down to whoever shot first because of the slowness of the movement making outmaneuvering the other player almost impossible. Now reversals are possible in all Halo games, but the new movement mechanics make reversing a battle much more interesting and possible given the ability to not only outshoot them but outmaneuver them.

That “shoot first, first kill” quality is what defines twitch shooters.

19

> 2533274798011936;18:
> > 2533274929479318;11:
> > > 2533274928710760;3:
> > > Precisely.
> > >
> > > > B) Getting out of trouble is satisfying (and not always unfair)
> > > > There is no arguing that an escaping prey is frustrating for the hunter. But what’s the other side of the coin? It also feels good to get away, especially if the initial combat conditions have been quite one-sided to begin with.
> > > > My video analysis showed, that Sprint is mainly used as a means of escape in situations, in which the prey had a very little (to non-existent) chance to successfully fight back (e.g. fire from an unknown position, enemy camping,…).
> > > > While it is of course correct, that the bad situation might be the prey’s fault to begin with it’s also an illusion that it’s possible to oversee the battlefield all of the time. Part of the skill is to quickly react to unforeseen events and Halo always fostered that ‘second chance’ (longer kill times, grenades).
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I was playing a game of Halo 3 in TMMC and this idea suddenly sprung to my mind. The only way in Halo 3 to win a battle if the enemy fired shots on you before you did is to throw grenades, strafe, melee or hope that their aim is horrible. Yes it is extremely satisfying when you counteract an attack, but generally whoever fires the first shot wins. And since you can’t sprint away, halo 3 is more of a twitch based game than Halo 5.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > What? Halo 3 has drastically slower kill times, what game were you playing?
>
>
>
>
> Right it did but that doesn’t change the fact that whoever shot first in Halo 3 was probably going to win. He never said anything about TTK, he did say however that battles still came down to whoever shot first because of the slowness of the movement making outmaneuvering the other player almost impossible. Now reversals are possible in all Halo games, but the new movement mechanics make reversing a battle much more interesting and possible given the ability to not only outshoot them but outmaneuver them.
>
> That “shoot first, first kill” quality is what defines twitch shooters.

If you are bad at the game yes, whoever shoots you first will win, kill times is what makes a game twitch or not FOR THE MOST PART, slower kill times and a random spread in h3s case allow for more time to react and fight back, no halo has ever been a twitch shooter in any sense of the word. The fact that he didn’t bring up kill times is a hole it his argument, it isn’t the only factor in twitch gameplay, but it is the most important, which is why I brought it up.

20

The big issue anti sprinters have with pro sprint arguements is that everything they want can be achieved without sprint.

Momentum based speed increases(for large map traversal) combined with high base movement speed, additions of “speed” visual and audio cues and adjustments to FOV, aspect ratios and map scaling would achieve all the pros of spring without the negatives.