> > For the love of all things good, please do not put sprint (or any AAs) in Halo 4. Halo is not the type of game to have sprint in it. It works out in Call of Duty because kill times are short. It doesn’t work in Halo because kill times are longer, giving bad players an easy chance to escape.
> >
> > Bring Halo back to the basics. Same movement speed for everyone, no AAs, maybe equiptment (only if it was like Halo 3, meaning one time use after pickup, and not an AA).
> >
> > Reach failed. That’s a fact. Why would you keep anything that was new from the game? Sprint is terrible and does not belong in Halo. Feel free to make movement speed faster, like it was in Halo 1/2, but please DO NOT put sprint in Halo 4.
>
> CoD =/= Sprint
>
> Halo has some pretty big and open maps, much more so than Call of Duty. To balance the size of the maps, there are vehicles, but those aren’t always available. So having the ability to sprint on large maps would be great to get from point A to point B.
>
> You say that the kill times are longer, having sprint would help shorten kill times, would it not? People have been complaining how long kill times in Halo: Reach are. But if you use sprint to take up a tactical position, you’ll have the drop on your opponents. Or, if you know where the action happens on large maps, you can sprint to get their faster to provide support for teammates.
>
> If sprint gives “bad” players an easy chance to escape, then it should also allow “good” players the ability to pursue those “bad” players and take them out. A player sprinting is a player not shooting at you, and a player running away provides a beautiful target on their back.
>
> You say “Reach failed” and that it is a “fact”, but Halo: Reach is the best selling (in some respects) Halo game to date. Fact. Biggest launch day, and is steadily coming up to Halo 3’s sales numbers in a shorter amount of time. Hardly a failure.
>
> Also, what does “belong in Halo”? There isn’t a definitive list of what does and doesn’t belong in Halo, or any game for that matter. Through trial and error, developers must take risk when furthering the development of a franchise. Only the developer can determine what works and what doesn’t, and not by using the word of a small group of disgruntled “fans”. Most of whom can’t make a decent argument aside from “Reach suckzors” or mindlessly replying “100% agree” without actually thinking for themselves and typing their own opinion and not riding on the coattails of another poster.
I don’t even know where to begin with this post. You obviously have never played a competitive, high level game of Halo in your life.
Most CoD maps are bigger than Halo maps. Even the small CoD maps are still pretty big, in comparison to Halo maps.
The fact that you can get to places faster is not going to shorten the kill times. I’m pretty sure it’s still a 5 shot kill whether you sprint there or not. I mean, I COULD BE WRONG, but I’m preeeeetty sure using sprint doesn’t magically make your DMR a 3 or 4 shot kill. It’s going to be a 5 shot either way. If you’re saying it could speed up the entire gameplay? Then sure, maybe. But it’s a tradeoff. You can get places faster, but people can get away faster.
And in the third paragraph, you prove you’ve never played a competitive, high skill level game. Sprint in games with slow kill times does not work. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve gotten someone one shot on, say, Sanctuary, and they sprint around a corner. But you say “good players can use sprint to pursue bad players!” No. Anyone with a brain knows not to chase. That’s just asking to die, no matter how weak the person you’re chasing is. Do you realize how easy it is to drop a grenade, turn around and shoot one shot to kill someone who’s chasing you? When someone sprints away around a corner or anything like that, they pretty much just got a free life thanks to a stupid gimmick (sprint). (I’m writing this current sentence after I wrote this entire post. I just checked your Halo 3 service record. You were a first lt. and didn’t even make it past level 17 after 1,300 games. I’m not trying to put you down or anything, but you simply have not experienced and don’t understand competitive Halo, so please don’t make posts as if you know what you’re talking about, in that regard.)
Reach failed the fans, the players, and the series. The only way you could say Reach was a success would be to say it was a success based off sales, and it was a success to Microsoft. If Reach was a success to the fans, then why are there less than 100,000 people on at any given time, when Halo 3 had 250,000 people online at any given time all the way up to early 2010, 2 1/2 years after release? Reach was under 100,000 in January 2011, 6 months after release. And to even say that based on sales it was a success to Microsoft is debatable. Sure, they made some money, but they also ruined the name of Halo. Gamers see the next halo game come out, think back to the old one, think “yeah I didn’t like Halo Reach that game was buns” and then are less likely to buy the next Halo game.
What “belongs” in Halo is what Halo has always had in it. Halo 1-3 were immensely successful. Reach was a colossal failure. What “belongs” in Halo is what was in Halo 1-3.
