> 2533274815711361;2797:
> I had a fun idea, although extremely unlikely it’s ever to be implemented.
>
> If sprint is to return there should be drawbacks. Preventing your shields from recharging in Halo 5 was good, but we can go further. What if your shields drained as you sprinted or you took increased damage when sprinting? Or both!
>
> People that want to sprint around can sprint around, but if they want to win they’ll have to slow down and not use the mechanic. They’ll have to learn how to handle engagements besides just bolting out of there.
>
> I know it won’t ever happen, but I thought it was a silly/interesting idea.
The thing is, why are we including Sprint if we’re just going to add all these drawbacks just so you won’t use it? Why include the option if you don’t want them to actually take the option?
People who actually do want to Sprint would just find it completely unenjoyable to do so. From an “expected game mechanic” standpoint, they’re being punished for doing something natural. From a “lore” standpoint, moving your legs shouldn’t increase the damage you take.
It’s like the game is telling you “Go ahead and Sprint, it’ beneficial for you!”, and then when you listen it goes “How dare you, I’m punishing you for that.”
> 2533274825830455;2804:
> > 2666640315087182;2803:
> > this thread needs to go
>
> If you feel that way, you can ignore it. That’s what I do with threads I don’t like.
Yeah but the pile on mentality keeps bumping this thread to the top.
> 2666640315087182;2805:
> > 2533274825830455;2804:
> > > 2666640315087182;2803:
> > > this thread needs to go
> >
> > If you feel that way, you can ignore it. That’s what I do with threads I don’t like.
>
> Yeah but the pile on mentality keeps bumping this thread to the top.
That’s the great thing about forums: no one’s forcing you to click on threads.
> 2666640315087182;2805:
> > 2533274825830455;2804:
> > > 2666640315087182;2803:
> > > this thread needs to go
> >
> > If you feel that way, you can ignore it. That’s what I do with threads I don’t like.
>
> Yeah but the pile on mentality keeps bumping this thread to the top.
Replying to this thread in any matter puts it at the top.
> 2533274833081329;2807:
> > 2666640315087182;2805:
> > > 2533274825830455;2804:
> > > > 2666640315087182;2803:
> > > > this thread needs to go
> > >
> > > If you feel that way, you can ignore it. That’s what I do with threads I don’t like.
> >
> > Yeah but the pile on mentality keeps bumping this thread to the top.
>
> Replying to this thread in any matter puts it at the top.
>
> It’s a topic that people (including you) discuss.
Which is why I only reply to this thread when it is already on top, and then simply move to other threads to reply to them, but it is the same people who keep posting to this thread. Well I am going to talk to other threads, I am sure this will get another 2 quotes or something after I reply to some better threads.
> 2666640315087182;2809:
> > 2533274833081329;2807:
> > Replying to this thread in any matter puts it at the top.
> >
> > It’s a topic that people (including you) discuss.
>
> Which is why I only reply to this thread when it is already on top, and then simply move to other threads to reply to them, but it is the same people who keep posting to this thread. Well I am going to talk to other threads, I am sure this will get another 2 quotes or something after I reply to some better threads.
Yes, that’s how conversations work. People make an opinion, people make opinions about other people’s opinions, people reply to other people’s replies, people make observations and statements from those conversations. It wouldn’t be much of a discussion if people only post a few times and never appear again, and then new people show up to repeat the cycle.
We’re doing this right now, two people constantly bringing this thread to the top, regardless of intention.
You keep painting yourself as above the thread or outside of the forums, but you will without fail, come back to this thread that apparently fails to live up to your standards, attempt to participate with said thread, and then shift to making a sweeping generalization about the forum’s members.
I mean this is one of the hottest topics about the upcoming game, of course people are gonna talk about it. I honestly don’t feel like letting a new thread about movement mechanics pop up every day/week would be better. Also it’s probably more convenient for devs to have everything grouped in one place in case they wanna check out feedback or what the community thinks.
> 2533274825830455;2794:
> > 2533274805175435;2793:
> > 2) Maps increase in length, both vertically and horizontally, to compensate for this mechanic. Just as the maps in Reach/4/5 were built with sprint in mind, so too would these maps need to keep double jump in mind. This is inherently problematic because it would greatly slow down gameplay. Maps would be far too large for the players they hold. Imagine playing Halo 5 maps, designed longer horizontally to compensate for sprint, but then take sprint away. Then, also add more verticality. That’s what these maps would look like. The result would be a game more akin to hide and seek than Halo.
>
> This isn’t entirely accurate, because you wouldn’t have those long open spaces that sprint necessitates since a double jump doesn’t make you any faster. What would be immediately affected is what kind of gaps and walls are needed to form impassable obstacles (and likewise what would make for difficult jumps). Of course this has a bit of knock-on effect on the rest of map design, but it doesn’t inherently lead to wider more open maps the same way sprint does.
Actually it does inherently lead to wider maps in the way that sprint does, it just varies in degrees based on the amount of jumps there are. The only instance in which it wouldn’t is a map where every possible path involves not a single jump, and as far as I know there is no such map.
And yes, I was exaggerating to illustrate the point.
> 2533274805175435;2793:
> > 2592250499819446;2792:
> > > 2533274805175435;2767:
> > > > 2592250499819446;2766:
> > > > > 2533274825830455;2750:
> > > > > > 2592250499819446;2749:
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > No I’m not a strict supporter of classic movement. I play DOOM and I used to play Quake, I prefer that style and I remember Halo being similar at one time. As stated, I don’t usually bother about game movement, I’ve stated before that mechanics are something to get used to. I just prefer the gun up and run style more. However it’s not a make or break thing for me. Just an observation and preference really. Some things like double jump could and thruster could get added without restricting play imo.
> > >
> > > Double jump would be as bad as clamber is and thruster is already an unnecessary gimick which lowers the skill ceiling. A change in mechanics are more than something to just “get used to”, they have real implications on gameplay and game quality - Reach, 4 and 5 made that abundantly clear.
> >
> > I think double jump and thruster could be added without restricting the ability to shoot while doing them, clamber is different as it does stop the ability to shoot, why not replace clamber with double jump ? And I think changes are something to get used to, it’s something that I do every time I buy or boot up a different game. My preference has been stated, but movement is not a deal breaker for me.
>
> Tsassi touched on the point of the difficulty of the jumps and how each jump on a map would need to be reevaluated both horizontally and vertically because of this new ability. Perhaps something this point doesn’t make clear is that by adding double jump, one of two things will happen as a consequence:
>
> 1) You make each part of the map far more accessible. This might sound like a positive but it’s actually a huge negative. If you can get any place at any time you greatly diminish the importance of good map positioning. Taking the correct paths or holding the right position is a core fundamental of any fps and if not balanced appropriately, double jump could destroy this fundamental (in a similar way to sprint). This issue can be combated in only one way, which leads me to the other potential consequence,
>
> 2) Maps increase in length, both vertically and horizontally, to compensate for this mechanic. Just as the maps in Reach/4/5 were built with sprint in mind, so too would these maps need to keep double jump in mind. This is inherently problematic because it would greatly slow down gameplay. Maps would be far too large for the players they hold. Imagine playing Halo 5 maps, designed longer horizontally to compensate for sprint, but then take sprint away. Then, also add more verticality. That’s what these maps would look like. The result would be a game more akin to hide and seek than Halo.
On the first part. We’ll still have map control, regardless of double jump, we have it now with clamber.
I don’t agree on the 2nd point. Double Jump does not make you faster.
Like I said, I would prefer a faster bsm and an adjustable FoV. I prefer guns up always moving and shooting, I think double jump could make it quicker, but I won’t lose sleep if it’s left out. I’ll be ok with whatever 343i decide to go with. Movement is not a deal breaker for me.
> 2535449076192416;1:
> In my opinion, this game has a really high chance of bringing back the classic gameplay so many old Halo fans have adored! I am so pumped for this!
>
> EDIT: Wow, I didn’t expect such diverse opinions on this subject. The Halo community really is split in half. I’m sorry you have to deal with us, 343
>
> EDIT: 1100comments. __What have I done?__FINAL EDIT: I’m just going to stop counting at this point. The level of which this thread has grown is simply ridiculous.
>
> POINTLESS EDIT: Hey, 117 likes. Good for me.
Hey so this thread is massive and rather than repeat others I’m gonna say if you haven’t already check out favyn on YouTube his videos on classic movement sums up my sentiments quite well. I would like a middle ground however where map design allows for a conserved momentum and the option of insane speed with under water sections providing spaces for slower combat and a base speed of halo2 MLG in normal circumstances. Slide could be an actual mechanic that way and mantling should be made location specific and create and obvious distinction between high and low level players traversal pattern in maps.
> 2592250499819446;2813:
> > 2533274805175435;2793:
> > > 2592250499819446;2792:
> > >
>
> On the first part. We’ll still have map control, regardless of double jump, we have it now with clamber.
>
> I don’t agree on the 2nd point. Double Jump does not make you faster.
>
> Like I said, I would prefer a faster bsm and an adjustable FoV. I prefer guns up always moving and shooting, I think double jump could make it quicker, but I won’t lose sleep if it’s left out. I’ll be ok with whatever 343i decide to go with. Movement is not a deal breaker for me.
Yes, current maps are built with clamber in mind. I’m referring to the scenario where the mechanic is not properly accounted for in map design, resulting in double jump allowing people to get anywhere at any time.
Clearly you don’t understand the point I’m making here. If you make jumps longer both vertically and horizontally, then every other part of the map has to compensate for that extension as well (by becoming longer horizontally or vertically).
If you want a good example, think of a re-imagining of the map Wizard from Halo CE (or Warlock in H2), but for double jump. Imagine if both the flag to plat jump and the plat to top mind jump were both doubled in length to compensate for double jump for each corner of the map (a total of 8 jumps). The map would become almost twice as wide, meaning fewer interactions throughout the game and therefore slower gameplay.
> 2533274805175435;2815:
> > 2592250499819446;2813:
> > > 2533274805175435;2793:
> > > > 2592250499819446;2792:
> > > >
> >
> > On the first part. We’ll still have map control, regardless of double jump, we have it now with clamber.
> >
> > I don’t agree on the 2nd point. Double Jump does not make you faster.
> >
> > Like I said, I would prefer a faster bsm and an adjustable FoV. I prefer guns up always moving and shooting, I think double jump could make it quicker, but I won’t lose sleep if it’s left out. I’ll be ok with whatever 343i decide to go with. Movement is not a deal breaker for me.
>
> 1) Yes, current maps are built with clamber in mind. I’m referring to the scenario where the mechanic is not properly accounted for in map design, resulting in double jump allowing people to get anywhere at any time.
>
> 2) Clearly you don’t understand the point I’m making here. If you make jumps longer both vertically and horizontally, then every other part of the map has to compensate for that extension as well (by becoming longer horizontally or vertically).
>
> If you want a good example, think of a re-imagining of the map Wizard from Halo CE (or Warlock in H2), but for double jump. Imagine if both the flag to plat jump and the plat to top mind jump were both doubled in length to compensate for double jump for each corner of the map (a total of 8 jumps). The map would become almost twice as wide, meaning fewer interactions throughout the game and therefore slower gameplay.
I do get what you mean. I don’t see it as an issue. If they design maps to account for clamber, they can design them to account for double jump. As for Warlock / Wizard, how about if double jump is disabled for a map that was never designed for it ?
> 2592250499819446;2816:
> > 2533274805175435;2815:
> > > 2592250499819446;2813:
> > > > 2533274805175435;2793:
> > > > > 2592250499819446;2792:
> > > > >
>
> If they design maps to account for clamber, they can design them to account for double jump.
The maps haven’t just been designed for clamber, they’ve been designed for sprint, thruster, clamber and whatever other trash has been implemented in H5. The comparison you’re trying to draw doesn’t exist. Also, the maps are trash.
> As for Warlock / Wizard, how about if double jump is disabled for a map that was never designed for it ?
I’ve never been a fan of having separate mechanics in separate gametypes as it divides the player base too much. Dividing the player base (usually by having too many playlists or having competitive settings too different to vanilla settings) has been an issue since H3 I believe, but was most noticeable during Reach and H4.
> 2533274805175435;2817:
> > 2592250499819446;2816:
> > > 2533274805175435;2815:
> > > > 2592250499819446;2813:
> > > > > 2533274805175435;2793:
> > > > > > 2592250499819446;2792:
> > > > > >
> >
> > If they design maps to account for clamber, they can design them to account for double jump.
>
> The maps haven’t just been designed for clamber, they’ve been designed for sprint, thruster, clamber and whatever other trash has been implemented in H5. The comparison you’re trying to draw doesn’t exist. Also, the maps are trash.
>
>
>
>
> > As for Warlock / Wizard, how about if double jump is disabled for a map that was never designed for it ?
>
> I’ve never been a fan of having separate mechanics in separate gametypes as it divides the player base too much. Dividing the player base (usually by having too many playlists or having competitive settings too different to vanilla settings) has been an issue since H3 I believe, but was most noticeable during Reach and H4.
Maps being trash is an opinion, some will like them some won’t. I see no reason why the player base would be divided anymore than it is now. I only play slayer, I don’t touch any other modes, and I do it because I prefer slayer. The mechanics are irrelevant to me. As stated, I prefer gun up always able to shoot, and I think double jump could be added without affecting that, but I won’t lose sleep over 343i’s decisions with movement.
> 2533274833081329;2802:
> The thing is, why are we including Sprint if we’re just going to add all these drawbacks just so you won’t use it? Why include the option if you don’t want them to actually take the option?
>
> People who actually do want to Sprint would just find it completely unenjoyable to do so. From an “expected game mechanic” standpoint, they’re being punished for doing something natural. From a “lore” standpoint, moving your legs shouldn’t increase the damage you take.
>
> It’s like the game is telling you “Go ahead and Sprint, it’ beneficial for you!”, and then when you listen it goes “How dare you, I’m punishing you for that.”
Adding some consequences to an action doesn’t automatically make it useless. Applied appropriately you are just balancing the risk vs reward. The drawbacks would have to be fairly substantial to punish you to the point where is completely unenjoyable.
From a lore point of view… surely not being able to sprint at all is more unloreful (sic) then applying a bit of a power drain while doing so.
> 2585548714655118;2820:
> > 2533274833081329;2802:
> > The thing is, why are we including Sprint if we’re just going to add all these drawbacks just so you won’t use it? Why include the option if you don’t want them to actually take the option?
> >
> > People who actually do want to Sprint would just find it completely unenjoyable to do so. From an “expected game mechanic” standpoint, they’re being punished for doing something natural. From a “lore” standpoint, moving your legs shouldn’t increase the damage you take.
> >
> > It’s like the game is telling you “Go ahead and Sprint, it’ beneficial for you!”, and then when you listen it goes “How dare you, I’m punishing you for that.”
>
> Adding some consequences to an action doesn’t automatically make it useless. Applied appropriately you are just balancing the risk vs reward. The drawbacks would have to be fairly substantial to punish you to the point where is completely unenjoyable.
>
> From a lore point of view… surely not being able to sprint at all is more unloreful (sic) then applying a bit of a power drain while doing so.
Pretty sure it’s been said in the lore that spartans can maintain accuracy at very high speeds, we even saw this in both Halo legends and forward unto dawn. If anything, it makes less sense that a spartan would even have to lower his gun while running in the first place.
