The great SPRINT debate - all pros/cons & analysis

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

With so many heated debates in dozens of threads I think it’s time to gather the most prominent arguments regarding sprint of both sides. I really have to say that it’s a joy to dig into because the arguments get more and more defined and well-thought-out.

On the other hand, it’s hard to keep track of all the things floating around and you have to read hundreds of posts to get even a half-decent overview of what’s going on.
This thread is meant to inform everyone interested in the discussion.
I’ve tried to think of as many arguments as possible (and added some of mine as well) yet I’m sure there are a lot of points I’ve missed. Forgive my bad english from time to time, it’s not my first language.

The pro- and contra-list below is just a start – please help me flesh out and/or complement it. I’ve tried to keep the arguments as concise as possible for better readability.

CONS
- Stretches maps, loss of compact / comfortable feeling
- Cheap way to escape when you should have actually died (encourages sloppy individual play) – this also prolongs kill times
- Run OR gun instead of run AND gun (hindrance for gunplay)
- Takes away punishment of defeat (easy to get back where you died)
- Easy to get power weapons without controlling spawns, easy to get to an advantageous position with power weapon
- Higher speed is actually an illusion because
… maps are relatively larger
… and base speed is reduced
That could also be achieved by increasing base speed or reducing the time to kill.

PROS
+ Actually makes you feel like a Spartan super-soldier (immersion)
+ Highly beneficial for campaign and BTB (larger maps) (Homogeneity of design in both SP and MP is a Halo tradition (bridging function))
+ Fair chance to fight back
+ Adds to the perception of speed / dynamics / urgency (doesn’t matter whether or not it’s an illusion)
+ Does have a worth in and of itself (independent of gunplay)
There’s a natural fascination for speed and (skilled) movement (this is NOT about sprint alone but about all mobility options in combination)
Not being able to run feels limiting from a psychological point of view (flight instinct)
Traversing is not shooting’s ugly stepchild anymore, it’s it’s own joy (think Titanfall) and THE field of innovation right now
+ Invites other players to Halo that didn’t grow up with the series

Please read my analysis / opinion regarding these arguments in post #2 and #3 - sry for the long text but I’ve really put a lot of thought into it!

2

I’ll try to add to the discussion and also hope that I can contribute as a psychologist with another point of view.

CONS

> - Stretches maps, loss of compact / comfortable feeling

Really don’t know what to think about that. Does it really feel worse or just different?
As we don’t really know to what degree the maps are actually larger and how they feel when actually playing all I can do is to look at the available H5 beta videos.
I didn’t notice any never-ending corridors or empty spaces, on the contrary the environments seemed to encourage directional changes or other movements (jumping, strafing, climbing) quite often, there was always something to see or to do.

> - Cheap way to escape where you should have died (encourages sloppy individual play)

I think there are at least three aspects mixed up here:
A) fairness
B) psychological aspects (aka how it “feels”)
C) flow of the map / gameplay

Ad A) fairness: I don’t see a problem here at all. It’s not unfair to escape a disadvantageous situation unless every player does have the same ability (which is the case in H5). It’s just one of the many battle skills you have to master.

Ad B) psychological aspects: Now it’s getting interesting. Seeing a prey escape (as a hunter) is highly frustrating. This induces feelings of anger and disappointment – even more so when a formally prey successfully strikes back. However the strength and the nature of these feelings are also depending on our attribution. If we think the prey ‘earned it’ there’s less anger, yet a feeling of disappointment probably still lingers.
In any case this isn’t unproblematic from a psychological point of view: Even an anticipated reward that is taken away from you is always perceived as a punishment.
On the other side successfully fleeing and/or fighting back is highly satisfactory for the prey.
My theses is that players who more often find themselves in the role of the aggressor and/or who have a lower frustration tolerance are more likely to dislike fleeing (and thus sprinting) as the balance of punishment/reward is somewhat skewed.

Ad C) I also think that fleeing in the narrower sense (conscious action) is an event that isn’t as frequent as people make it out to be. I’ve watched a couple of the H5 beta videos and sprinting to cover was an absolute exception, people however used the Thruster pack to hide behind obstacles or corners. Once in a battle situation sprint was in fact neglected altogether as it should be.
The probably bigger problem is seeing someone in the distance (who is more than often not aware of you at all) and knowing there is only a very small chance to get the kill because the target is moving too fast. While this is frustrating (see B)) I don’t think that the target should be as brutally punished for a ‘lack of awareness’ in this scenario in comparison to a closer distance (use of radar, sighting less likely a result of luck as opposed to skill).

> - Run OR gun instead of run AND gun

This argument builds upon the premise that shooting is at the core of the gameplay and that any kind of movement is just a means to the end. More on that below.

> - Takes away punishment of defeat (easy to get back where you died)
> - Easy to get power weapons without controlling spawns, easy to get to an advantageous position with power weapon

These are actually great points in games in which maps aren’t designed around sprint (see Halo Reach). I don’t see a problem here in H5 at all.

> - Higher speed is actually an illusion because
> … maps are relatively larger
> … and base speed is reduced.
> That could also be achieved by increasing base speed or reducing time to kill.

These arguments completely miss the point. It’s not the question whether the game is actually faster (e.g. time to get from spawn to power weapon or get into action) – the question is how it is perceived. The visual information alone tricks your brain into thinking that there is a lot more going on which in turn makes the game feel more dynamic.
That base speed is reduced is an assumption not a fact. But even if that would actually be true (which I’m skeptical of) the problem in Halo was never the speed of movement in gunfights (there’s Thruster pack now), it was the perception of slowness in between those encounters.
I agree that increasing base speed would also help but what people don’t realize is that Halo’s slower base speed and longer kill times just work in tandem and thus can’t be separated. While it does sound paradoxical at first run OR gun actually preserves what makes Halo Halo as you can offer both a more engaging traversal system without sacrificing the iconic gunplay.

3

PROS

> + Highly beneficial for campaign and BTB (larger maps)

That Halo means small arena is a sentiment spread by the numerically small but vocal competitive community that you find in a lot of dedicated discussion boards. While there’s nothing wrong in articulating one’s desires I really don’t like some people’s attitude that bases on a lack of tolerance.
Halo is as much about larger maps (or Big Team) and campaign as it is about 4 vs 4 arena maps. Sprint does make a hell lot of sense under these other circumstances.
Halo also does have a tradition of not segmenting gameplay over different modes (bridging function). If that is worth it is a subject for debate.

> + Fair chance to fight back

This is a simple counter-argument regarding the ‘cheap way out of trouble’ accusation. If you catch me by surprise why shouldn’t I be allowed to get a small chance to fight back (as unlikely as that is with the shield recharge delay)? There are other skills (reaction time, quick problem solving,…) that are important beside awareness of surroundings (if it wasn’t just luck in the first place).
Sometimes fleeing and striking back at a more favorable time is not cowardice but in fact cleverness.

> + Does have a worth in and of itself (independent of gunplay)

This is probably the most overlooked and important argument of all.
Sprint does have a worth in and of itself that is entirely independent of gunplay. Really think about that for a second.
People have a natural fascination for (skilled) movement and speed.
Think about all kinds of sports. Think about Jump & Runs or Racing games.

Yes, one can separate between a videogame and real life, however the urge to run (get back into action, flight, tempting spaces) just can’t be denied.
343i called all the movement options the fourth pillar for a purpose as traversal is now more than a space filler. It’s not only about what’s natural but about what is fun, what is satisfying. It’s not about sprinting alone, it’s about having options, it’s about getting from A to B in a skillful way.
And it’s got nothing to do with CoD. It’s the field of innovation in FPS as a whole as the limits of gunplay have been exhausted. The best example is probably Titanfall. It’s a FPS yes, but most people (including me) actually prefer the traversal over the shooting.

Does Halo have to be the same as all other games? Of course not.
But as a pure shooter Halo was and is perfect as it is. So why not expand the formula and try something new?

> + Invites other players to Halo that didn’t grow up with the series

This is always listed as some kind of huge drawback. But there’s a side to it that those people tend to ignore.
Halo needs those new players otherwise it would die someday. Yeah, the old fans are as important as ever, but without those new faces there would be a constant decline. For everyone that wants a Halo 2 2.0 there’s another one who wouldn’t give the franchise a real chance otherwise or who wants a breath of fresh air in the series. Probably they aren’t as well represented in discussion boards or tend to not support MP the way Halo fans did in the past. But they buy games. And thus should be welcomed (we weren’t born as Halo fans either).

Halo has to fight to stay relevant in these days. It’s not the only grand FPS-franchise on the market anymore. It’s not about betraying the loyal fans, it’s about finding a balance that works (which 343i got wrong in H4).

4

> 2533274793332039;1:
> PROS
> + Highly beneficial for campaign and BTB (larger maps) (Homogeneity of design in both SP and MP is a Halo tradition (bridging function))
> + Fair chance to fight back
> + Adds to the perception of speed / dynamics / urgency (doesn’t matter whether or not it’s an illusion)
> + Does have a worth in and of itself (independent of gunplay)
> There’s a natural fascination for (skilled) movement and speed
> Not being able to run feels limiting from a psychological point of view (flight instinct)
> Traversing is not shooting’s ugly stepchild anymore, it’s it’s own joy (think Titanfall) and THE field of innovation right now
> + Invites other players to Halo that didn’t grow up with the

  • For the Campaign, I am fine with it. However, Sprint is pointless in BTB if there are already vehicles and shortcuts in the maps.
  • People should not be able to fight back if they made piss-poor decisions.
  • Like what? Besides making these unnecessary huge maps seem smaller by sprinting them.
  • That bolded sentence almost made me facepalm. I which people would stop using running in the same context as sprinting. Look at your feet in Halo 2 and 3, push the analog stick to its extents, and then tell me if that is not running. There is nothing “innovated” about a mechanic that has been in gaming for decades.
  • How is that a good thing, exactly?
5

> 2533274806427910;4:
> - People should not be able to fight back if they made piss-poor decisions.

Correct me if I have gone insane, but isn’t that a staple Halo concept, since it does not have CoD’s ridiculously low kill-times and thus allows them plenty of decisions in combat?

> 2533274806427910;4:
> - How is that a good thing, exactly?

I am not of the opinion that a fanbase should have a closed-door policy towards other people from other games; after all the more the merrier for a fanbase. Is there an opinion that we must “shut off the infidels” or am I off the tangent again?

6

> 2533274873310828;5:
> > 2533274806427910;4:
> > - People should not be able to fight back if they made piss-poor decisions.
>
>
>
> Correct me if I have gone insane, but isn’t that a staple Halo concept, since it does not have CoD’s ridiculously low kill-times and thus allows them plenty of decisions in combat?
>
>
>
> > 2533274806427910;4:
> > - How is that a good thing, exactly?
>
>
> I am not of the opinion that a fanbase should have a closed-door policy towards other people from other games; after all the more the merrier for a fanbase. Is there an opinion that we must “shut off the infidels” or am I off the tangent again?

No, I think someone has already told you that is not a stable of Halo’s concept. If you are close to cover while you are about to die, then that is not the same as just sprinting away from your enemy. And I am not saying that it is an absolute terrible idea to have people from Shooters to come to Halo, but Halo should not just mimic other games just to appeal to people.

7

> Correct me if I have gone insane, but isn’t that a staple Halo concept, since it does not have CoD’s ridiculously low kill-times and thus allows them plenty of decisions in combat?

Not sure I understand your argument. Halo, and all other arena-shooter-likes, have slower killtimes so fights are more meaningful, so there are plenty of decisions going on in any given fight, yet making bad decisions is still supposed to be punishable to some degree.

> I am not of the opinion that a fanbase should have a closed-door policy towards other people from other games; after all the more the merrier for a fanbase. Is there an opinion that we must “shut off the infidels” or am I off the tangent again?

In real world terms we have an open door policy, but we expect immigrants to assimilate into our culture instead of trying to change it. SWAT and other gametypes would be like Little China, Little Italy, etc.

8

Pretty well balanced list. I think on the whole, the cons far outweigh the pros for Halo.

Only thing I sort of disagree with in the OP is that movement is the field of innovation right now; most of these movement mechanics were done 20 years ago, and I don’t really see much innovation going on - just rehashing old ideas.

9

> I agree that increasing base speed would also help but what people don’t realize is that Halo’s slower base speed and longer kill times just work in tandem and thus can’t be separated. While it does sound paradoxical at first run OR gun actually preserves what makes Halo Halo as you can offer both a more engaging traversal system without sacrificing the iconic gunplay.

There’s a few different ways for me to interpret this. Let me just pick the one I think is most accurate.

You’re basically saying sprint allows crossing the map faster without affecting combat speed (i.e. how fast one can strafe forward, and side to side), thus gunplay remains unharmed. Your supplementary argument would then be that increasing base speed as an alternative tampers with gunplay. I understand this perspective, yet I also disagree with it.

> If you catch me by surprise why shouldn’t I be allowed to get a small chance to fight back (as unlikely as that is with the shield recharge delay)?

I’ve seen people refuse to stick with their team, wander off into enemy controlled parts of the map without a care in the world, then they die and learn absolutely nothing from the experience. The guy below me provides another good example. I’ve seen people do all kinds of stupid -Yoink-. Then they defend sprint because it allows them to get out of these “unfair” situations. If people stopped to think, they wouldn’t find themselves being ambushed so often.

If someone is able to flee from me using clever means, I’ll admit that they outsmarted me. Perhaps someone uses map knowledge to jump down a nearby hole, or they sacrifice their gravity lift to fly up to a nearby edge. Perhaps they (and this is an extremely common tactic at low levels of Halo play) turn a corner, bait the person to chase them, only for the person chasing them to find a grenade in their face right around that same corner. Perhaps the guy jumps up, thrusts to the side while turning around to face me, and styles all over me while my aim is thrown off.

Simply running away in the opposite direction faster than I could possibly kill them is not what I would consider “clever means”.

> People have a natural fascination for (skilled) movement and speed.

I love skillful movement. Quake has an entire learning curve revolving around movement, everything from strafe jumping to rocket pogoing. Or creative -Yoink-, like how on Damnation someone can throw a grenade at the overshield, use the grenade to grenade jump to the very top of the map, while the overshield not only refills their shields, but STILL gives an extra layer of shielding due to the mechanics of overshield itself.

Holding the x button to move faster is not skillful movement. It’s about as mundane as you could possibly get.

10

> 2533274873310828;5:
> > 2533274806427910;4:
> > - People should not be able to fight back if they made piss-poor decisions.
>
>
>
> Correct me if I have gone insane, but isn’t that a staple Halo concept, since it does not have CoD’s ridiculously low kill-times and thus allows them plenty of decisions in combat?

What he means, I assume, isn’t so much “whoever saw whoever first instantly wins”, but if you made a bad decision and got yourself into a sticky situation, the other team deserves the kill because you chose to put yourself in that situation in the first place.
Walking out to the bridge to sword room on The Pit while somebody is on snipe tower is borderline suicide; you should have known better than to go there at that time. With sprint, you have the option of just pressing a button and making your escape. This doesn’t teach people to avoid bad situations, only to know how to escape when they’ve gotten themselves in one.

11

> 2533274819302824;9:
> > People have a natural fascination for (skilled) movement and speed.
>
>
> I love skillful movement. Quake has an entire learning curve revolving around movement, everything from strafe jumping to rocket pogoing. Or creative -Yoink-, like how on Damnation someone can throw a grenade at the overshield, use the grenade to grenade jump to the very top of the map, while the overshield not only refills their shields, but STILL gives an extra layer of shielding due to the mechanics of overshield itself.

Classic Halo CE at its finest

12

I know it’s probably much to ask because there is so much text but some of you should read my thoughts in post #2 and #3 before commenting on something I’ve already explained in a way more detailed fashion…

The initial post is just for orientation - i didn’t want to mix my personal opinion with the pros and cons (everyone should be allowed to form his/her own opinion).

Just one thing regarding ‘innovation and movement’: Does it really matter if it’s a real innnovation (is there actually such a thing these days?) or just a rediscovery?
The point is: It’s definitely a trend right now (and again: it’s not about sprint alone - just read my third post).

13

> 2533274913448583;10:
> > 2533274873310828;5:
> > > 2533274806427910;4:
> > > - People should not be able to fight back if they made piss-poor decisions.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Correct me if I have gone insane, but isn’t that a staple Halo concept, since it does not have CoD’s ridiculously low kill-times and thus allows them plenty of decisions in combat?
>
>
> What he means, I assume, isn’t so much “whoever saw whoever first instantly wins”,

Not at all.

14

> I think there are at least three aspects mixed up here:
> A) fairness
> B) psychological aspects (aka how it “feels”)
> C) flow of the map / gameplayAd A) fairness: I don’t see a problem here at all. It’s not unfair to escape a disadvantageous situation unless every player does have the same ability (which is the case in H5). It’s just one of the many battle skills you have to master.Ad B) psychological aspects: Now it’s getting interesting. Seeing a prey escape (as a hunter) is highly frustrating. This induces feelings of anger and disappointment – even more so when a formally prey successfully strikes back. However the strength and the nature of these feelings are also depending on our attribution. If we think the prey ‘earned it’ there’s less anger, yet a feeling of disappointment probably still lingers.
> In any case this isn’t unproblematic from a psychological point of view: Even an anticipated reward that is taken away from you is always perceived as a punishment.
> On the other side successfully fleeing and/or fighting back is highly satisfactory for the prey.
> My theses is that players who more often find themselves in the role of the aggressor and/or who have a lower frustration tolerance are more likely to dislike fleeing (and thus sprinting) as the balance of punishment/reward is somewhat skewed.Ad C) I also think that fleeing in the narrower sense (conscious action) is an event that isn’t as frequent as people make it out to be. I’ve watched a couple of the H5 beta videos and sprinting to cover was an absolute exception, people however used the Thruster pack to hide behind obstacles or corners. Once in a battle situation sprint was in fact neglected altogether as it should be.
> The probably bigger problem is seeing someone in the distance (who is more than often not aware of you at all) and knowing there is only a very small chance to get the kill because the target is moving too fast. While this is frustrating (see B)) I don’t think that the target should be as brutally punished for a ‘lack of awareness’ in this scenario in comparison to a closer distance (use of radar, sighting less likely a result of luck as opposed to skill).

Fairness depends on how we are defining the word fair. In the context of games, its typically the ratio of reward to effort.

If someone can nullify all my effort with a single button press, it’s not fair in this sense. It’s not fair that they get more reward for much, much less effort. What’s easier, landing headshots or bee-lining to nearby cover?

Saying “well everyone has access to it” isn’t relevant to the actual argument being made. You’re using a different definition of fairness than the other person is.

Point B is related to Point A. You aren’t wrong. Though might I point out the game is a shooter. The goal is to be the aggressor as often as you possibly can.

C. The convenient “fleeing isn’t as common as you think it is” argument. I flee all the time in-game. I experience first hand how common it is. But okay, let’s assume fleeing isn’t common. Then why do you insist that sprint is a good way to live to fight another day? To be brutally honest, I find this to be an inconsistently applied cop-out argument.

15

> 2533274819302824;14:
> Fairness depends on how we are defining the word fair. In the context of games, its typically the ratio of reward to effort.
>
> If someone can nullify all my effort with a single button press, it’s not fair in this sense. It’s not fair that they get more reward for much, much less effort. What’s easier, landing headshots or bee-lining to nearby cover?
>
> Saying “well everyone has access to it” isn’t relevant to the actual argument being made. You’re using a different definition of fairness than the other person is.
>
> Point B is related to Point A.
>
> C. The convenient “fleeing isn’t as common as you think it is” argument. I flee all the time in-game. I experience first hand how common it is.

Good input thank you.

You’re right, it’s important to define the meaning of the word. I didn’t think about ratio of reward to effort. For me fairness was having the same set of possibilites as my enemy (equal starts / equal abilities) - what you can do to me, I can do to you.
But to comment on your definition: I think I really get what you want to say but I’m sceptical regarding some of your points.
1.) ‘nullify all my effort’: This is the first thing I disagree with. What does nullify mean? In which cases (probability) can we really speak about nullifying? You’re right that my effort is increasing - but it’s only nullified if neither me nor my team gets the kill.

2.) ‘with a single button press’: You make it all sound so easy which it isn’t. You have to react quickly otherwise fleeing isn’t even an option anymore. You have to decide what’s the best option: To fight or to flight - and in case you decide to flight you have to find an efficient route to escape or an object to hide (which also affords awareness of your surroundings). Then you have to move which can be easy (run in the direction you first headed to) or tricky (hideout behind you and not in your line of sight - other obstacles entering the scene) depending on the situation. Last but not least you have to keep the aggressor away from you in order to bring your shields back up - four seconds (in H5) can be a lot of time!
Only if you can achieve all of these little tasks fleeing is actually successful. I don’t want to say that it’s the most complicated task but it’s definitely not just ‘press button for win’.

3.) My ‘convenient argument’: I invite you to watch the videos yourself. I didn’t even say that it couldn’t be any other way. What you forget to say is that fleeing was not a solution for every situation in the past and it will be even less so in H5 with a four second shield recharge delay. Both of us can choose examples that undermine our point of view and it won’t get us anywhere - that is why I watched the videos because I was really interested if it was a problem in these games. Turns out - Thruster pack was way more of a problem than that.

16

> 2533274806427910;13:
> > 2533274913448583;10:
> > > 2533274873310828;5:
> > > > 2533274806427910;4:
> > > > - People should not be able to fight back if they made piss-poor decisions.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Correct me if I have gone insane, but isn’t that a staple Halo concept, since it does not have CoD’s ridiculously low kill-times and thus allows them plenty of decisions in combat?
> >
> >
> >
> > What he means, I assume, isn’t so much “whoever saw whoever first instantly wins”,
>
>
> Not at all.

I dunno, I kinda felt that as long as your “speed-chess” game was good, there was always potential to reverse the situation by taking advantage of the environment. Whether sprint extends or dulls that aspect though, I cannot and will not say for certain.

17

This thread made me realize that there are only few people how are really interested in a fruitful disuccsion - there are lot of people hellbent on spreading their agenda however.
Look, everyone can read my posts and can see that I’m pro sprint. What I don’t do however is neglecting arguments that are well thought out and challenge my beliefs. In fact, I try to really understand why other people feel or think this or that way.
It’s perfectly fine to agree to disagree however most arguments are terribly one-sided or stencils that are wide-spread but never really brought into question.

There are instances where both sides regularly talk past each other. Some verbalizations make perfect sense for one side, yet there’s no language that both understand.
One such field is the ‘cheap way out of trouble’ discussion which for me feels as though it is at the core of the whole debate.

I’ve said that getting out of trouble via sprint is not unfair per se as all players have the same options/abilities.
I’ve also said that psychological effects can perfectly explain why people feel it’s frustrating. Even an anticipated reward that is taken away from you (attributed to sprint) always means punishment and thus anger/disappointment.

Ramir3z77 added to the discussion by saying that for him fairness is about the ratio reward to effort. He basically says that a fleeing player gains a lot while doing nothing of worth. For me he exaggerated to make a point to which I responded. However I do understand where he is coming from.

Upon further thinking I have to do a follow up.
Our language has to be as precise as possible to not muddy the waters.
I think that ‘fairness’ is a very bad word for what Ramir3z77 described. Cheating is unfair. Taking a gun to a fist fight is unfair.Using the same abilities my rival does also have is not. In the end you get the same rewards for the same actions.
What Ramir3z77 and others probably want to say is that the balancing of the reward system is all wrong. It’s not unfair per se but they disagree with the weightings.Fundamentally it’s a discussion about what actions should be considered skilled.

Ramir3z77 and others argue that fleeing (or other uses of sprint) requires no skill and thus shouldn’t be rewarded.

Others (including me) argue that there is skill involved, that it just rewards other abilities (see my last post).

It’s easy to find examples for both point of views and I think it’s fair to say that the truth probably lies in the middle.

Ultimately it’s about what style of gameplay you prefer. Neither is objectively better, they’re just different.

1.) The methodical player prefers slower and more systematical combat. It’s most important to be aware of your sourroundings (e.g. exposed spaces), to plan in advance, to control certain advantegeous positions. There is more emphasis on team-coordination.

2.) The arena player prefers a faster paced combat. His most important skills are a good reaction time, aiming (faster moving targets, aiming while moving) and the tactical use of his traversal options to out-maneuver his opponents.

I’ve called the second type ‘arena player’ because for me ‘arena shooters’ are Unreal Tournament and Quake. Halo 5 does have elements of both styles but it seems to have more in common with UT/Quake.

18

> 2533274793332039;17:
> This thread made me realize that there are only few people how are really interested in a fruitful disuccsion - there are lot of people hellbent on spreading their agenda however.
> Look, everyone can read my posts and can see that I’m pro sprint. What I don’t do however is neglecting arguments that are well thought out and challenge my beliefs. In fact, I try to really understand why other people feel or think this or that way.
> It’s perfectly fine to agree to disagree however most arguments are terribly one-sided or stencils that are wide-spread but never really brought into question.
>
> There are instances where both sides regularly talk past each other. Some verbalizations make perfect sense for one side, yet there’s no language that both understand.
> One such field is the ‘cheap way out of trouble’ discussion which for me feels as though it is at the core of the whole debate.
>
> I’ve said that getting out of trouble via sprint is not unfair per se as all players have the same options/abilities.
> I’ve also said that psychological effects can perfectly explain why people feel it’s frustrating. Even an anticipated reward that is taken away from you (attributed to sprint) always means punishment and thus anger/disappointment.
>
> Ramir3z77 added to the discussion by saying that for him fairness is about the ratio reward to effort. He basically says that a fleeing player gains a lot while doing nothing of worth. For me he exaggerated to make a point to which I responded. However I do understand where he is coming from.
>
> Upon further thinking I have to do a follow up.
> Our language has to be as precise as possible to not muddy the waters.
> I think that ‘fairness’ is a very bad word for what Ramir3z77 described. Cheating is unfair. Taking a gun to a fist fight is unfair.Using the same abilities my rival does also have is not. In the end you get the same rewards for the same actions.
> What Ramir3z77 and others probably want to say is that the balancing of the reward system is all wrong. It’s not unfair per se but they disagree with the weightings.Fundamentally it’s a discussion about what actions should be considered skilled.
>
> Ramir3z77 and others argue that fleeing (or other uses of sprint) requires no skill and thus shouldn’t be rewarded.
>
> Others (including me) argue that there is skill involved, that it just rewards other abilities (see my last post).
>
> It’s easy to find examples for both point of views and I think it’s fair to say that the truth probably lies in the middle.
>
> Ultimately it’s about what style of gameplay you prefer. Neither is objectively better, they’re just different.
>
> 1.) The methodical player prefers slower and more systematical combat. It’s most important to be aware of your sourroundings (e.g. exposed spaces), to plan in advance, to control certain advantegeous positions. There is more emphasis on team-coordination.
>
> 2.) The arena player prefers a faster paced combat. His most important skills are a good reaction time, aiming (faster moving targets, aiming while moving) and the tactical use of his traversal options to out-maneuver his opponents.
>
> I’ve called the second type ‘arena player’ because for me ‘arena shooters’ are Unreal Tournament and Quake. Halo 5 does have elements of both styles but it seems to have more in common with UT/Quake.

I really like how you’re looking at this from a psychological point of view, but, unfortunately, most people on these forum won’t get what you’re talking about.

They keep saying sprint encourages running away from combat without providing a reasonable points or solid ground for their argument. Your opponent runs away? run after him (his shields won’t recharge anyway), wait till he get’s in the right place and start shooting him (he’ll get slower) or shoulder charge him. If he got away, good on him, he deserved it.

I’ve never seen a situation where someone could sprint out of death using solely sprint. Most people who get away are already in a position that allowed them to retreat with or without sprint or use their skills to outsmart the opponent. Can someone who’s standing in the open sprint away from combat? No. Can someone who’s going lone-wolf style and gets outnumbered by opponents sprint away without good positioning? No. Can someone with depleted shields run away from his enemy without using cover (if he’s not near an exit that’d allow him to slip anyway)? No.

Conclusion: if the player doesn’t have an escape path already, there’s no way sprint would inflict the result of the combat (as his shields won’t recharge if he kept sprinting).

19

> + Highly beneficial for campaign and BTB (larger maps) (Homogeneity of design in both SP and MP is a Halo tradition (bridging function))

This is why I’m optimistic about Halo 5. The acceleration makes it seem mostly useless on smaller maps and probably useful in BTB and campaign. In all the gameplay videos people rarely sprint and the base movement looks great. I’m willing to give the Beta a chance even if the bigger midship is questionable.

20

> 2533274793332039;1:
> Highly beneficial for campaign and BTB (larger maps) (Homogeneity of design in both SP and MP is a Halo tradition (bridging function))

So, what about making it active only in campaign and BTB? I don’t know much about map design, but there’s a ton of people freaking out about the midship remake being so spread out. From what I’ve seen, I have to agree; those small maps just don’t go with sprint.