So here it is. Halo 5 will have sprint it’s 99% sure. Does not depend on the community or 343 because Microsoft WILL impose sprint in Hal 5. Back in the good ol’ days, multiplayer shooter were much different, all of them were arena fps and there was no sprint, but now that every shooter has sprint, Halo 5 would have an outdated gameplay to not feature sprint. Halo 5 will have sprint and probably sliding and other kind of stuff. Not saying i liked sprint in halo 4 but I guess it will be tweaked/nerfed. Share your thoughts
thats actually not how games work lol. microsoft isnt calling the shots of what has to be in a halo game. sprint will prob be in h5 because that is the nature of shooters today.
That is the nature of games today because they are not arena based shooters. Sprint really should not be in arena style combat,(BTB is a different story as it moves beyond arena based combat.).
I don’t think shooters have to have sprint to be successful and feel modern enough. I mean look at CS:GO. I just think the way Halo plays it doesn’t call for sprint.
another sprint topic? I’m still voting no! No sprint!
> 2533274803267398;2:
> thats actually not how games work lol. microsoft isnt calling the shots of what has to be in a halo game. sprint will prob be in h5 because that is the nature of shooters today.
Well technically publishers have a shocking amount of influence on the games they publish, because they’re the ones paying for it.
Sprint with other augmentations like jet pack or thruster could be fun. Even evade could be resurrected.
> 2533274798011936;7:
> > 2533274803267398;2:
> > thats actually not how games work lol. microsoft isnt calling the shots of what has to be in a halo game. sprint will prob be in h5 because that is the nature of shooters today.
>
>
>
> Well technically publishers have a shocking amount of influence on the games they publish, because they’re the ones paying for it.
Exactly, tbh I think Microsoft are the reason behind a lot of Halo 4’s flaws. Unfortunately big gaming publishers like Microsoft only care about selling, and due to their twisted logic they say: “hmmm, what’s the biggest selling contemporary shooter? Ah yes, Call of Duty. Halo is a shooter that we own. 343, make Halo like Call of Duty, or it won’t sell.”
I recommend watching Jim Sterling’s video on “the unholy trinity of gaming.” I know the guy is full of arrogance, but he does speak the truth when it comes to the points he makes…
Anyway, on topic, I think they should get rid of sprint, and make the movement speed increase when using side arms, therefore weapons like the SMG and pistol might have a better role in the game… Just a thought.
> 2533274894984232;1:
> So here it is. Halo 5 will have sprint it’s 99% sure.
Source or the claim is meaningless.
> 2533274902304093;9:
> Exactly, tbh I think Microsoft are the reason behind a lot of Halo 4’s flaws.
Microsoft has owned the rights to Halo and Has published Halo since CE. Nothing has changed except the developer.
The developer, not the publisher, makes gameplay decisions anyway. The publisher only decides how to market and sell the game.
> 2533274805712917;10:
> > 2533274902304093;9:
> > Exactly, tbh I think Microsoft are the reason behind a lot of Halo 4’s flaws.
>
>
> Microsoft has owned the rights to Halo and Has published Halo since CE. Nothing has changed except the developer.
>
> The developer, not the publisher, makes gameplay decisions anyway. The publisher only decides how to market and sell the game.
While the first statement does hold some gravity, the second, not so much. While the developer does make the game yes, the publisher doesn’t exactly just decide how to market and sell it. Especially when it’s a company like Microsoft, when it comes down to it, they have to final say on what’s in and what’s not. They’re the ones who would have pushed for H4s November 2012 release date despite the fact the game was clearly not ready. They’re the ones who probably badgered 343 into adding loadouts, armour abilities, sprint and other not well received features to make it more like COD (and I’m in no way saying that H4 was a COD copy, or that in my eyes some of those features where bad, BUT they are features that proved unsuccessful in the community after them being in Reach, AND do make the game more accessible for the COD market). And yes, Microsoft has always been the publisher. But in the H3 days, halo was bigger than COD. However during the Reach and H4 days COD was the biggest game on the market (and still is) and it was in those games that features from COD where implemented.
Coincidence?
Probably. It’s all a conspiracy. And more importantly, it’s all trivial.
The thing is, trying to make Halo appeal to other fanbases doesn’t work. It didn’t work in Halo 4, and it won’t work in Halo 5.
> 2533274902304093;11:
> Especially when it’s a company like Microsoft, when it comes down to it, they have to final say on what’s in and what’s not. They’re the ones who would have pushed for H4s November 2012 release date despite the fact the game was clearly not ready.
An example of Microsoft making a decision on how to sell (not develop) the game. Microsoft may have said, “have it ready by November 2012,” but 343i made the decisions on what to cut to meet that deadline.
> 2533274902304093;11:
> They’re the ones who probably badgered 343 into adding loadouts, armour abilities, sprint and other not well received features to make it more like COD
I highly doubt it. Microsoft is not the developer; 343i is. If Microsoft makes the decisions on such small-scale decisions like what features and mechanics should be in the multiplayer, then 343i would not need their own lead designers and executives.
sprint? why yes i do want it in my halo 5. =)
This is even more likely given that free movement is coming back in a big way to fps. Both Titanfall and CoD: AW have movement systems which allow the player much more freedom than has been allowed in recent memory. Most of the games which did things like this (Tribes, unreal) were PC exclusives. To the console generation, this is a new big thing - In a way it’s been coming since AC started spreading the free-running concept.
By comparison, Halo’s movement is much more traditional and some would argue clunky - especially if you’re comparing the jetpack to the equivalent boosters in, say, CoD. you really have to ask how popular a game which doesn’t offer any extra movement options will be - not everyone will be satisfied with an arena shooter. Even games like unreal Tournament had ways to move about quickly and if you go right back to quake then it’s all map routes and bunny hopping.
It’s a very serious consideration for the developers - on the one hand there’s keeping the formula and on the other there’s stagnation. Right now it’s not leveling up or killstreaks which is sought after - but fun ways of movement. I honestly don’t know what I’d do in their position, I don’t think that if they released a game like halo 3 right now that it would sell all that well, the market’s just not there…
But I’m not a developer and I have no stats to back up my thoughts - I’ll be very interested to see what changes in halo 5.
No sprint. You should pay for your mistakes.
> 2533274805712917;13:
> > 2533274902304093;11:
> > Especially when it’s a company like Microsoft, when it comes down to it, they have to final say on what’s in and what’s not. They’re the ones who would have pushed for H4s November 2012 release date despite the fact the game was clearly not ready.
>
>
>
>
> An example of Microsoft making a decision on how to sell (not develop) the game. Microsoft may have said, “have it ready by November 2012,” but 343i made the decisions on what to cut to meet that deadline.
>
>
>
> > 2533274902304093;11:
> > They’re the ones who probably badgered 343 into adding loadouts, armour abilities, sprint and other not well received features to make it more like COD
>
>
>
>
> I highly doubt it. Microsoft is not the developer; 343i is. If Microsoft makes the decisions on such small-scale decisions like what features and mechanics should be in the multiplayer, then 343i would not need their own lead designers and executives.
As the owner Microsoft has of course a significant voice and impact on the project but in the end the studio is designing the game, is making the (detailed) design decisions (like Vektor already touched on) and not the owner.
Even when assuming that MS did not give 343i “complete freedom” in regards to the game’s design but gave 343i the clear direction to give Halo more of a “CoD-character” then it is still 343i who is to blame when things like loadouts are just badly and unimaginatively designed and incorporated into the game.
MS has very likely pushed for the specific release date but it is again (mainly) 343i fault when they fail to organize and time the schedule properly.
That you will have very rough schedules in all kinds of design industries is after all nothing new and special. It is one of the first things you will even learn/experience on every proper college, when studying faculties that focus on a certain kind of design, and either you are competent enough to manage them successfully or you are simply not.
I think you can fairly blame publishers for controversial DLC policies but blaming a publisher for a bad designed game is not right.
After all how will a publisher profit in regards to future sales when the latest or first major title loses/disappointes more people than it wins/inspires because of its gameplay? How will MS make significant profit with the game Halo, can successfully use it as a main attraction to convince people to buy their new console (which has already suffered from failed concepts) when the interest/trust in it is not really high/deep after the last title?
However, my point is that MS, as the publisher and owner of the franchise, very likely just lays down the basic guidelines/directions for the game’s design and of course provides the resources but then passes the responsibility of what happens with Halo to 343i and hence eventually the studio, 343i, either gets the credits or the blame for the game’s final form and not MS.