The Common Misunderstanding in a Sprint Discussion

The many reasons why people argue against Sprint being in Halo are very well known: It increases map size, those maps then become useless with no sprint, CQC combat is lacking in Halo games with sprint, Sprint makes gunfights random, Sprint is an unnecessary implementation that disrupts what an Arena Shooter is. AND, many know the common points of the benefits of Sprint in Halo: “immersion,” realism, convenience, conformity/standard in Console shooters. But I’m going to progress from those common arguments. Instead, I’m going to acknowledge the overarching negative impact that Sprint has on Halo, not on gameplay, but something bigger-- the incentive in playing Halo, at all. Lastly, this problem arises because Sprint is not needed for success in the market, conformity for Halo makes it pointless to play on a long-term scale, and Sprint in Halo hasn’t worked well in the past. Hear me out here:

To start: People who argue for no Sprint in Halo aren’t asking for a Halo 1-3 reskin. This is the most common misconception that those who approve sprint in Halo use. In actuality, having a Halo 1-3 reskin will be making the game stagnant and stale. On the other hand, the way Halo 5: Guardians plays also makes Halo stale due to it following so many other shooters’ mechanics. For example, Halo 5-- in comparison to Call of Duty, TitanFall, Destiny, and many other shooters-- has an advanced movement system that works pretty uniquely. In fact, it introduces many cool experiences to the gameplay that are also present in competing shooters. Yet, here are all of the movement mechanics that overlap across Halo 5, COD AW, COD BO3, Destiny, and Titanfall: Sprint, Slide, Dash/Thrust, Clamber/Mantle, and Some form of Spartan Charge. The sheer list of common gameplay mechanics in current shooters includes all of Halo 5’s mechanics except for Ground Pound and Stabilizers-- even then, Call fo Duty: Advanced Warfare had both a Stabilizer-type Exo ability and every player could do a move such as ground pound and kill players.

Now some could argue that Halo 5 is unique because it gives all players even starts and has competitive aspects to the gameplay… But just being competitive and having even-starts for all players is NOT ALL of what Halo is. For myself, the fact that Halo played so differently in Halo 1-3 compared to its competitors was the primary reason why I invested so much time into the game. So, answer me this: Nowadays, what is the point of buying current Halo’s, APART FROM ITS CAMPAIGN, over other shooters if many shooters, including Halo 5, contain the same fast-pace, run, or don’t run, and shoot, gameplay?

Prior to Halo, I used to play Call of Duty and other average shooters. During that period, I never found anything special or memorable in their gameplay because, for example, they all had a Sprint-like mechanic. Yes, the sprint between Gears of Wars and Call of Duty could be used differently, but many of times, the similarities in the gameplay werw isible. However, when I came to Halo, it was SO much different and held unique and unforgettable experiences in my memories for years. Grenade jumps, Rocket jumps, no sprint, Man cannons, power ups, power weapons, viable Vehicular Gameplay, Gravity Lifts out the wazzoo, cover was viable, Ninja assassinations, viable stickies, rewarding gunfights, unavoidable grenades, CQC and intense gameplay, and so much more were what Halo had and other games didn’t. It wasnt the fact that Bungie was making the games, it was because it provided a unique experience at the player’s disposal.

During this time, Halo set the trends for other shooters to take notes from, and now it just follows other shooters. Right now, Halo doesn’t “WOW” me like it used to. I want Halo to be it’s own type of game. If that were the case, It will give me an incentive to play it over and over again instead of other titles. As a result, it will attract many die-hard fans who will consistently play the game, due to it having a gameplay experience never before seen in another shooter. That when anyone goes to a store to pick up a shooter, they buy Halo, play it consistently, and contribute to the community. There are countless other movement systems that aren’t in current games, that isn’t even thought of yet, that can innovate the Gaming Industry and Halo, as well.

I have not made this forum to change those that like Sprint and make them not like sprint. I’m here to acknowledge why a Halo with Sprint ultimately destroys Halo’s franchise due to the negative effects of conformity it has on titles. Due to the effects I’ve outlined, I believe Halo doesn’t need sprint. Although it may be a convenience for some players, and it is an easy, short-term way for 343 Industries to appeal to other games’ fan bases, like Call of Duty-- those other fan bases will go back to their original game in a heartbeat. A system apart from sprint AND no sprint in Halo can also supplement the movement system, like Speed Boosts on the map, or fleshed-out Button Combinations. We, as the community, must find what other movement systems can bring the positives of Sprint AND the positives of not having Sprint to meet a common ground in the community and make Halo better than it already is. Those possibilities are endless, new, original, innovative, and stay true to what made Halo great: being different from other shooters.

What do you think about what I’ve said? You are free to say anything you desire but please give a well thought out and constructive response.

Edit: Removed the analogy, looking back, I can agree it made no sense. The rest of the post and the point still stands: Halo needs something new and innovative that will make it stand out from other games, in the gameplay sense. If we follow sprint, it will only be following the trends of other games and leave the incentive to play Halo less profound.

“If you walked into a restau_”

Immediately stopped reading. Can’t stand these, usually terrible and unrelated, analogies. Sorry man.

The glaring problem with this treatise is that it fails to link the degradation of Halo to the Sprint mechanic in a way that does not resemble “Correlation = Causation.”
Counter arguments that will undoubtedly result from this failure include:

  • Halo 5’s Sprint and new features have just added to that list of things old Halo was able to accomplish. - The game is still highly unique and you miss the forests for the trees. - Halo 5 wow’s the pants off of me. - What negatives of Sprint? You haven’t mentioned any. - Lol, what’s wrong with Halo 1-3 now? If they’re stale, why should we take cues from them as we build our next game? - Pancakes. <— (Always one.)The best way to approach the Sprint discussion is to keep away from the binary narratives the other side cooks up, and rather illustrate the contradictions in their internal logic and bring down their black & white universe from the inside.

Example:
343Rocks117: "I can’t believe you want Halo 3 again. Halo has to be unique…"
You: “…Unique from what? Halo?”

A strawman, perhaps, but an example of a similar point being conveyed in a much more precise and argumentatively water-tight structure. They will then deny what they’ve said and go on the defensive. You will then press harder with your point of view, exploiting the -Yoink- in their logical armor and pressing with all of your might there until they eventually give way.

The other option is to educate the balls off of yourself regarding the design of the games with and without Sprint - their properties and the variations thereupon between games that share Sprint functionality or lack it entirely. It will provide you with extensive ammunition for arguing the merits of the mechanic and allowing a significantly clearer image of your enemy. For example, removing Sprint will undoubtedly increase player agency when traversing a map, but it will not inherently make the game faster, despite being one of the millions of causes for its slowness. Weapon balance would be the principal agent when considering this, and an understanding of where and how its been used in the past will do nothing but strengthen your ability to converse on this topic.

> 2535421619942348;3:
> The glaring problem with this treatise is that it fails to link the degradation of Halo to the Sprint mechanic in a way that does not resemble “Correlation = Causation.”
> Counter arguments that will undoubtedly result from this failure include:
>
> - Halo 5’s Sprint and new features have just added to that list of things old Halo was able to accomplish.
> - The game is still highly unique and you miss the forests for the trees.
> - Halo 5 wow’s the pants off of me.
> - What negatives of Sprint? You haven’t mentioned any.
> - Lol, what’s wrong with Halo 1-3 now? If they’re stale, why should we take cues from them as we build our next game?
> - Pancakes. <— (Always one.)
> The best way to approach the Sprint discussion is to keep away from the binary narratives the other side cooks up, and rather illustrate the contradictions in their internal logic and bring down their black & white universe from the inside.
>
> Example:
> 343Rocks117: "I can’t believe you want Halo 3 again. Halo has to be unique…"
> You: “…Unique from what? Halo?”
>
> A strawman, perhaps, but an example of a similar point being conveyed in a much more precise and argumentatively water-tight structure. They will then deny what they’ve said and go on the defensive. You will then press harder with your point of view, exploiting the -Yoink- in their logical armor and pressing with all of your might there until they eventually give way.
>
> The other option is to educate the balls off of yourself regarding the design of the games with and without Sprint - their properties and the variations thereupon between games that share Sprint functionality or lack it entirely. It will provide you with extensive ammunition for arguing the merits of the mechanic and allowing a significantly clearer image of your enemy. For example, removing Sprint will undoubtedly increase player agency when traversing a map, but it will not inherently make the game faster, despite being one of the millions of causes for its slowness. Weapon balance would be the principal agent when considering this, and an understanding of where and how its been used in the past will do nothing but strengthen your ability to converse on this topic.

Sprint is only useful when getting some where, shields don’t charge when you sprint so you are forced into close quarters combat.

> 2535409489305717;4:
> Sprint is only useful when getting some where, shields don’t charge when you sprint so you are forced into close quarters combat.

The inherent ease of entering cover, regenerating shields…and health, and the relatively long kill-times also highly discourage ranged combat. I agree.

> 2535421619942348;5:
> > 2535409489305717;4:
> > Sprint is only useful when getting some where, shields don’t charge when you sprint so you are forced into close quarters combat.
>
>
> The inherent ease of entering cover, regenerating shields…and health, and the relatively long kill-times also highly discourage ranged combat. I agree.

You forgot to mention H5 has the shortes TTK of all halo games;)

anyway. sprint is a part of halo, like it always should’ve been.

if you want to kill aliens without sprint, go play doom.

without sprint halo i no longer viable as a competitive game. The population will die.

Besides, if you don’t like sprint, dont use it.
Nobody forces anyone to use sprint. i rarely use it in swat for example.

> 2533274913498763;6:
> You forgot to mention H5 has the shortes TTK of all halo games;)

You’re right. I forgot to mention it. Because I’m not delusional.

> 2533274913498763;6:
> anyway. sprint is a part of halo, like it always should’ve been.

Explain why immediately:

  • Without empty claims that Sprintless Halo is slow.
  • Using actual problems with the games and without warping the definition of Sprint to allow it to solve anything.
  • Without claiming that your subjective preferences should be accepted by the grander whole.
  • Illustrating, in meticulous detail, what Sprint does to the game, and how it breeds a more competitive experience.
    Oh wait, you can’t.

> 2533274913498763;6:
> if you want to kill aliens without sprint, go play doom.

Arguments like these are always flawed as hell, but this is a special case. First off, if you don’t want me to make your sacred cow of a game as good as it once was and better for everyone involved, including you, then go to some other fail-state of a Halo community and languish there in your semi-professional, really still casual, FaZe worshiping stupor. Moreover, you’re telling me to play the damn perfect example of my argument. Doom is a fantastic game because it removed Sprint, flipped the middle finger to modern shooter conventions and pretended like crappy reboot with modern mechanics never existed - all things Halo could easily do, and with market evidence that it works. You’re telling me to play a better shooter that’s doing Halo better than Halo does Halo.

> 2533274913498763;6:
> without sprint halo i no longer viable as a competitive game.

Try, genius. Try to explain yourself here.

> 2533274913498763;6:
> The population will die.

What, you mean like it is now? The game sits behind Black Ops 1. And takes up its familiar mantle of just less popular than Tom Clancy’s Rainbow Six: Siege.

> 2533274913498763;6:
> Besides, if you don’t like sprint, dont use it.
> Nobody forces anyone to use sprint. i rarely use it in swat for example.

This is the part where I give you a link to the millionth time I’ve educated some wide-eyed idealist who thinks themselves Aristotle debating Plato in the forum, not realizing that he’s a child debating Socrates. There’s a link within this linked post. Make sure you read that too. Learn what Sprint does before you argue about it.