The biggest FPS is Counterstrike GO, at least among big gamers. People want to play it, people want to watch it, and it’s huge in the competitive seen. GO has no sprint. Halo 2/3 were very big deals in the world of gaming, they have no sprint. Anybody else see the correlation.
Side note: the most successful sprint shooter is COD. Let’s look at the numbers. On an average day GO usually has 40-50k viewers. COD usually as 3-6k viewers. Halo usually has1-4k viewers (going off of Twitch). What does that tell us about sprint?
Would you rather have AT&T or BELL in Halo 5? 
And yet, in CS:GO you can pull out a knife and move at a much higher speed than someone with a rifle.
Counter-Strike does not have traditional sprint.
However, everyone can switch to a knife which raises your base movement speed at the cost of having a gun, although you can melee.
Halo 5 Sprint takes away your ability to fire a ranged weapon, but lets you launch into melee.
So its the same net effect, it’s just created differently.
No one’s really said that Sprint was non-competitive though. Only that it can negatively affect map design(I argue that that’s just poor implementation/design rather than a fault of the actual Sprint) and takes away from the golden triangle, even though dual-wielding did the same thing in Halo 2 by removing your ability to use grenades or zoom in.
the knife raises the base movement speed like the sword gives you a large lunge. you cant sprint though, theres a big difference
I’ve seen this “point” brought up quite a bit throughout the past weeks. Underlining fact people tend to not recognize is the absolutely LOW population both Halo 2 and Halo 3 had after Halo Reach came out. During its prime Halo 3 had around 400k people playing at one point. After Halo Reach came out and I went back I saw around 20k. Once Halo 4 came out the lowest i ever experienced on a Friday night was 200 people. The only spikes it had were when it was released for free on the Xbox Store (which boosted it to about 45k (i think). As of right now I’m surprised to see that Halo 3 ONLY HAS 2760 people online.
Face it “Sprint” isn’t doing anything to lower population count. PC games will ALWAYS have a higher player count than consoles. This Counter-Strike argument is completely invalid when it comes to population. It becomes even more invalid when you take into account that CoD and Halo are primarily played on Console. PC games are the most highly streamed games on the market.
This would be a valid argument if 4million people were watching streams of Halo 3/MCC…but no…they aren’t. Want to know why? Because Halo isn’t as big nor will likely ever be again as large as CS:GO.
The logic behind this “Counter Strike argument” is just to mind boggling. I can barely think straight when processing it.
May be a bit too analytic there Recon.
> 2533274828579555;6:
> I’ve seen this “point” brought up quite a bit throughout the past weeks. Underlining fact people tend to recognize is the absolutely LOW population both Halo 2 and Halo 3 had after Halo Reach came out.
> The new shiny game is always gonna have the most people playing it, that’s just natural
>
> Once Halo 4 came out the lowest i ever experienced on a Friday night was 200 people.
> Can be an example of why Halo 4 isn’t such a good game in the Halo series
>
>
> The only spikes it had were when it was released for free on the Xbox Store (which boosted it to about 45k (i think). As of right now I’m surprised to see that Halo 3 ONLY HAS 2760 people online.
> Of course now it’d have less, the MCC has it’s own servers for it’s matchmaking despite featuring previous released games.
>
> Face it “Sprint” isn’t doing anything to lower population count.
> It definitely raised controversy among the fanbase, you cannot deny that.
>
> PC games will ALWAYS have a higher player count than consoles. This Counter-Strike argument is completely invalid when it comes to population.
> It becomes even more invalid when you take into account that CoD and Halo are primarily played on Console. PC games are the most highly streamed games on the market.
> **It wasn’t about platform I’m pretty sure but how little the game has changed yet it’s still great and played, while the devs feel Halo has to be drastically different (Reach and 4).**This would be a valid argument if 4million people were watching streams of Halo 3/MCC…but no…they aren’t. Want to know why? Because Halo isn’t as big nor will likely ever be again as large as CS:GO.
>
> The logic behind this “Counter Strike argument” is just to mind boggling. I can barely think straight when processing it.
> 2533274808578327;7:
> May be a bit too analytic there Recon.
>
>
>
> > 2533274828579555;6:
> > I’ve seen this “point” brought up quite a bit throughout the past weeks. Underlining fact people tend to recognize is the absolutely LOW population both Halo 2 and Halo 3 had after Halo Reach came out.
> > The new shiny game is always gonna have the most people playing it, that’s just natural
> >
> > Once Halo 4 came out the lowest i ever experienced on a Friday night was 200 people.
> > Can be an example of why Halo 4 isn’t such a good game in the Halo series
> >
> > The only spikes it had were when it was released for free on the Xbox Store (which boosted it to about 45k (i think). As of right now I’m surprised to see that Halo 3 ONLY HAS 2760 people online.
> > Of course now it’d have less, the MCC has it’s own servers for it’s matchmaking despite featuring previous released games.
> >
> > Face it “Sprint” isn’t doing anything to lower population count.
> > It definitely raised controversy among the fanbase, you cannot deny that.
> >
> > PC games will ALWAYS have a higher player count than consoles. This Counter-Strike argument is completely invalid when it comes to population.
> > It becomes even more invalid when you take into account that CoD and Halo are primarily played on Console. PC games are the most highly streamed games on the market.
> > **It wasn’t about platform I’m pretty sure but how little the game has changed yet it’s still great and played, while the devs feel Halo has to be drastically different (Reach and 4).**This would be a valid argument if 4million people were watching streams of Halo 3/MCC…but no…they aren’t. Want to know why? Because Halo isn’t as big nor will likely ever be again as large as CS:GO.
> >
> > The logic behind this “Counter Strike argument” is just to mind boggling. I can barely think straight when processing it.
Your 2nd and 3rd posts have some validity to it. As for the new shiny game yea it will have more players. But responding to the OP’s comment, that wouldn’t matter if the one before was as good as it was said to be. If players really did want that type of gameplay they would willingly abandon which was new and go back to what is now considered old.
As for your 4th point, platform definitely plays a role when it comes to Twitch streaming. PC games will always dominate that area.
> 2533274828579555;8:
> > 2533274808578327;7:
> > May be a bit too analytic there Recon.
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533274828579555;6:
> > > I’ve seen this “point” brought up quite a bit throughout the past weeks. Underlining fact people tend to recognize is the absolutely LOW population both Halo 2 and Halo 3 had after Halo Reach came out.
> > > The new shiny game is always gonna have the most people playing it, that’s just natural
> > >
> > > Once Halo 4 came out the lowest i ever experienced on a Friday night was 200 people.
> > > Can be an example of why Halo 4 isn’t such a good game in the Halo series
> > >
> > > The only spikes it had were when it was released for free on the Xbox Store (which boosted it to about 45k (i think). As of right now I’m surprised to see that Halo 3 ONLY HAS 2760 people online.
> > > Of course now it’d have less, the MCC has it’s own servers for it’s matchmaking despite featuring previous released games.
> > >
> > > Face it “Sprint” isn’t doing anything to lower population count.
> > > It definitely raised controversy among the fanbase, you cannot deny that.
> > >
> > > PC games will ALWAYS have a higher player count than consoles. This Counter-Strike argument is completely invalid when it comes to population.
> > > It becomes even more invalid when you take into account that CoD and Halo are primarily played on Console. PC games are the most highly streamed games on the market.
> > > **It wasn’t about platform I’m pretty sure but how little the game has changed yet it’s still great and played, while the devs feel Halo has to be drastically different (Reach and 4).**This would be a valid argument if 4million people were watching streams of Halo 3/MCC…but no…they aren’t. Want to know why? Because Halo isn’t as big nor will likely ever be again as large as CS:GO.
> > >
> > > The logic behind this “Counter Strike argument” is just to mind boggling. I can barely think straight when processing it.
>
>
> Your 2nd and 3rd posts have some validity to it. As for the new shiny game yea it will have more players. But responding to the OP’s comment, that wouldn’t matter if the one before was as good as it was said to be. If players really did want that type of gameplay they would willingly abandon which was new and go back to what is now considered old.
>
> As for your 4th point, platform definitely plays a role when it comes to Twitch streaming. PC games will always dominate that area.
Perhaps, but again, I don’t think this thread was about platform but just the game(s).
As for people going back to H3, I can recall there was a pretty good player base around that time, but there’s also other factors like people leaving Halo after the differences Reach had, getting into other shooters like COD and some probably just stopped playing in general.
NO MORE OF THESE SPRINT ARGUING TOPICS
> 2533274857398125;3:
> And yet, in CS:GO you can pull out a knife and move at a much higher speed than someone with a rifle.
That’s not sprint though, and it works with CS’s gameplay. It sticks to what makes it great. Unlike Halo.