> 2535448942406310;3721:
> > 2779900484279609;3720:
> > I’m against any mechanic that takes away “gun-always-up” gameplay. That needs to be retained for Halo to feel as it once did.
>
> Well, so much for switching and reloading weapons.
Don’t be purposefully stupid.
> 2779900484279609;3722:
> > 2535448942406310;3721:
> > > 2779900484279609;3720:
> > > I’m against any mechanic that takes away “gun-always-up” gameplay. That needs to be retained for Halo to feel as it once did.
> >
> > Well, so much for switching and reloading weapons.
>
> Don’t be purposefully stupid.
So scathing, truly I’ll never recover.
I also like that you instantly jumped to name calling, instead of pointing out any differences in the mechanics that explains your perspective.
> 2535448942406310;3723:
> > 2779900484279609;3722:
> > > 2535448942406310;3721:
> > > > 2779900484279609;3720:
> > > > I’m against any mechanic that takes away “gun-always-up” gameplay. That needs to be retained for Halo to feel as it once did.
>
> So scathing, truly I’ll never recover.
>
> I also like that you instantly jumped to name calling, instead of pointing out any differences in the mechanics that explains your perspective.
Reload and weapon draw times are characteristics of the weapons themselves. A rocket launcher takes longer to reload or draw than a BR, and longer still than a pistol. These are simply weapon traits that exist among several others to ensure balance within the weapon sandbox.
Spartan abilities are outside limitations placed on any weapon usage (among many other things).
> 2535448942406310;3721:
> > 2779900484279609;3720:
> > I’m against any mechanic that takes away “gun-always-up” gameplay. That needs to be retained for Halo to feel as it once did.
>
> Well, so much for switching and reloading weapons.
Cool it, Sage. You’re deliberately misinterpreting the statement there. Does not put you in a favourable light.
Sprint and Clamber prevent a player from firing, because gun is not up. Walking at maximum speed and crouch jumping allow a player to fire at all times. Advanced mobility sounds more advanced when you can actually be offensive while moving. Otherwise, “advanced mobility” really isn’t more advanced.
> 2533274823699327;3725:
> > 2535448942406310;3721:
> > > 2779900484279609;3720:
> > > > 2535444514063000;3724:
> > > > > 2535448942406310;3723:
> > > > > > 2779900484279609;3722:
> > > > > > > 2535448942406310;3721:
> > > > > > > > 2779900484279609;3720:
> > > > > > > > I’m against any mechanic that takes away “gun-always-up” gameplay. That needs to be retained for Halo to feel as it once did.
> > > > >
> > > > > So scathing, truly I’ll never recover.
> > > > >
> > > > > I also like that you instantly jumped to name calling, instead of pointing out any differences in the mechanics that explains your perspective.
> > > >
> > > > Reload and weapon draw times are characteristics of the weapons themselves. A rocket launcher takes longer to reload or draw than a BR, and longer still than a pistol. These are simply weapon traits that exist among several others to ensure balance within the weapon sandbox.
> > > >
> > > > Spartan abilities are outside limitations placed on any weapon usage (among many other things).
> > >
> > > I’m against any mechanic that takes away “gun-always-up” gameplay. That needs to be retained for Halo to feel as it once did.
> >
> > Well, so much for switching and reloading weapons.
>
> Cool it, Sage. You’re deliberately misinterpreting the statement there. Does not put you in a favourable light.
>
> Sprint and Clamber prevent a player from firing, because gun is not up. Walking at maximum speed and crouch jumping allow a player to fire at all times. Advanced mobility sounds more advanced when you can actually be offensive while moving. Otherwise, “advanced mobility” really isn’t more advanced.
What does any of that have to do with what I said? I never mentioned anything about sprint or clamber, I merely joked about two other mechanics already taking away from that supposed gun-always-up gameplay.
There’s clearly existing elements in ‘classic Halo’ that remove the player from this desired ‘gun-always-up’ state (switching weapons, reloading ammo, entering/exiting a vehicle, driving certain vehicles, entering/exiting a turret, deploying equipment, not to mention throwing grenades, or meleeing - I may be forgetting more) so why are these examples accepted as exceptions to the rule; more so than clamber for instance?
> 2533274808548953;3727:
> There’s clearly existing elements in ‘classic Halo’ that remove the player from this desired ‘gun-always-up’ state (switching weapons, reloading ammo, entering/exiting a vehicle, driving certain vehicles, entering/exiting a turret, deploying equipment, not to mention throwing grenades, or meleeing - I may be forgetting more) so why are these examples accepted as exceptions to the rule; more so than clamber for instance?
I would argue that most of that list is a limitation of the weapon/vehicle sandbox, not a limitation of the player.
Switching weapons and reloading ammo are different per weapon because they are obviously meant to balance the weapon in question. That’s why you never see anyone say “I need to shoot at all times, even when I’m out of ammo! I also need to shoot even while shooting, low fire rate is not Halo!” Otherwise the apex of this logic is everyone running around with Sentinel Beams that don’t run out of ammo - and calling that the classicist of classic.
Throwing a grenade is the same vein as “drawing” a weapon and firing it. You can’t shoot a weapon while you’re already shooting a different weapon, so the same is expected by “shooting” a grenade. Equipment follows the same logic. Melee is probably the only outlier, but it still follows the “fire rate” logic because it’s dealing damage to another player. The people who hate Spartan Charge usually don’t have it because their guns are down, they hate it for a bunch of other reasons.
Vehicles are a whole sandbox entirely, you’re wielding a huge weapon with wheels, or part of a huge weapon that requires multiple people. The entering and exiting part is the draw time (and I’m pretty sure you can still aim while that animation is taking place too), the fire rate is taken into account as well. Being the driver of a Warthog means you have no gun so you are always “guns down”, but you are also the thing that moves the turret in the first place.
“I want to have my gun available” isn’t always meant to be taken in its most literal form of “always,” the Spartan abilities are abilities of the player, things expected of you to do to succeed in a traditional match. Also out of that list, you can’t do any of that while using a Spartan ability anyway except reload and switch weapons.
> 2535448942406310;3723:
> > 2779900484279609;3722:
> > > 2535448942406310;3721:
> > > > 2779900484279609;3720:
> > > > I’m against any mechanic that takes away “gun-always-up” gameplay. That needs to be retained for Halo to feel as it once did.
> > >
> > > Well, so much for switching and reloading weapons.
> >
> > Don’t be purposefully stupid.
>
> So scathing, truly I’ll never recover.
>
> I also like that you instantly jumped to name calling, instead of pointing out any differences in the mechanics that explains your perspective.
Because you were being intentionally obtuse. In Halo’s 1-3 there weren’t movement mechanics that took your gun away (i.e. clamber, sprint). You could move strategically while engaging simultaneously. This changed starting with Reach and 343 decided to add to it further disrupting the flow of combat that Halo was known for.
What if sprint in Halo Infinite is just speed boost. Like your speed increases at the push of a button but you can still strafe and shoot.
> 2535409463752070;3730:
> What if sprint in Halo Infinite is just speed boost. Like your speed increases at the push of a button but you can still strafe and shoot.
Sounds like the Half Life 2 system, could work like an AA!
> 2533274833081329;3728:
> > 2533274808548953;3727:
> > There’s clearly existing elements in ‘classic Halo’ that remove the player from this desired ‘gun-always-up’ state (switching weapons, reloading ammo, entering/exiting a vehicle, driving certain vehicles, entering/exiting a turret, deploying equipment, not to mention throwing grenades, or meleeing - I may be forgetting more) so why are these examples accepted as exceptions to the rule; more so than clamber for instance?
>
> I would argue that most of that list is a limitation of the weapon/vehicle sandbox, not a limitation of the player.
>
> Switching weapons and reloading ammo are different per weapon because they are obviously meant to balance the weapon in question. That’s why you never see anyone say “I need to shoot at all times, even when I’m out of ammo! I also need to shoot even while shooting, low fire rate is not Halo!” Otherwise the apex of this logic is everyone running around with Sentinel Beams that don’t run out of ammo - and calling that the classicist of classic.
>
> Throwing a grenade is the same vein as “drawing” a weapon and firing it. You can’t shoot a weapon while you’re already shooting a different weapon, so the same is expected by “shooting” a grenade. Equipment follows the same logic. Melee is probably the only outlier, but it still follows the “fire rate” logic because it’s dealing damage to another player. The people who hate Spartan Charge usually don’t have it because their guns are down, they hate it for a bunch of other reasons.
>
> Vehicles are a whole sandbox entirely, you’re wielding a huge weapon with wheels, or part of a huge weapon that requires multiple people. The entering and exiting part is the draw time (and I’m pretty sure you can still aim while that animation is taking place too), the fire rate is taken into account as well. Being the driver of a Warthog means you have no gun so you are always “guns down”, but you are also the thing that moves the turret in the first place.
>
> “I want to have my gun available” isn’t always meant to be taken in its most literal form of “always,” the Spartan abilities are abilities of the player, things expected of you to do to succeed in a traditional match. Also out of that list, you can’t do any of that while using a Spartan ability anyway except reload and switch weapons.
Great explanations. I still hold onto the understanding of clamber in a similar manner as I do driving a mongoose. Both actions sacrifice the players ability to shoot their gun with the added reward of easier map traversal.
Looking at things from another angle - I’ve been reading what people want or think should be included in/removed from Infinite in terms of movement mechanics; but since 343 has already decided upon movement mechanics at this point, what do you think we will see in Infinite?
> 2533274808548953;3732:
> > 2533274833081329;3728:
> > > 2533274808548953;3727:
> > > There’s clearly existing elements in ‘classic Halo’ that remove the player from this desired ‘gun-always-up’ state (switching weapons, reloading ammo, entering/exiting a vehicle, driving certain vehicles, entering/exiting a turret, deploying equipment, not to mention throwing grenades, or meleeing - I may be forgetting more) so why are these examples accepted as exceptions to the rule; more so than clamber for instance?
> >
> > I would argue that most of that list is a limitation of the weapon/vehicle sandbox, not a limitation of the player.
> >
> > Switching weapons and reloading ammo are different per weapon because they are obviously meant to balance the weapon in question. That’s why you never see anyone say “I need to shoot at all times, even when I’m out of ammo! I also need to shoot even while shooting, low fire rate is not Halo!” Otherwise the apex of this logic is everyone running around with Sentinel Beams that don’t run out of ammo - and calling that the classicist of classic.
> >
> > Throwing a grenade is the same vein as “drawing” a weapon and firing it. You can’t shoot a weapon while you’re already shooting a different weapon, so the same is expected by “shooting” a grenade. Equipment follows the same logic. Melee is probably the only outlier, but it still follows the “fire rate” logic because it’s dealing damage to another player. The people who hate Spartan Charge usually don’t have it because their guns are down, they hate it for a bunch of other reasons.
> >
> > Vehicles are a whole sandbox entirely, you’re wielding a huge weapon with wheels, or part of a huge weapon that requires multiple people. The entering and exiting part is the draw time (and I’m pretty sure you can still aim while that animation is taking place too), the fire rate is taken into account as well. Being the driver of a Warthog means you have no gun so you are always “guns down”, but you are also the thing that moves the turret in the first place.
> >
> > “I want to have my gun available” isn’t always meant to be taken in its most literal form of “always,” the Spartan abilities are abilities of the player, things expected of you to do to succeed in a traditional match. Also out of that list, you can’t do any of that while using a Spartan ability anyway except reload and switch weapons.
>
> Great explanations. I still hold onto the understanding of clamber in a similar manner as I do driving a mongoose. Both actions sacrifice the players ability to shoot their gun with the added reward of easier map traversal.
>
> Looking at things from another angle - I’ve been reading what people want or think should be included in/removed from Infinite in terms of movement mechanics; but since 343 has already decided upon movement mechanics at this point, what do you think we will see in Infinite?
Except clamber doesn’t actually do that, because if the developers want you to make a jump you will, and if they don’t want you to make it then you won’t. All clamber does is make you feel like you can move easier when in reality it just slows you down with an animation for jumps that have been purposefully made to require the animation instead of simply making the jump smaller or increasing how far and high you can jump. Clamber is a waste of time in Halo, while vehicles are essentially variable upgrades to the player’s armor, speed, and firepower which they can get in and out of, not something that they always have.
> 2533274808548953;3732:
> > 2533274833081329;3728:
> > > 2533274808548953;3727:
> > > There’s clearly existing elements in ‘classic Halo’ that remove the player from this desired ‘gun-always-up’ state (switching weapons, reloading ammo, entering/exiting a vehicle, driving certain vehicles, entering/exiting a turret, deploying equipment, not to mention throwing grenades, or meleeing - I may be forgetting more) so why are these examples accepted as exceptions to the rule; more so than clamber for instance?
> >
> > I would argue that most of that list is a limitation of the weapon/vehicle sandbox, not a limitation of the player.
> >
> > Switching weapons and reloading ammo are different per weapon because they are obviously meant to balance the weapon in question. That’s why you never see anyone say “I need to shoot at all times, even when I’m out of ammo! I also need to shoot even while shooting, low fire rate is not Halo!” Otherwise the apex of this logic is everyone running around with Sentinel Beams that don’t run out of ammo - and calling that the classicist of classic.
> >
> > Throwing a grenade is the same vein as “drawing” a weapon and firing it. You can’t shoot a weapon while you’re already shooting a different weapon, so the same is expected by “shooting” a grenade. Equipment follows the same logic. Melee is probably the only outlier, but it still follows the “fire rate” logic because it’s dealing damage to another player. The people who hate Spartan Charge usually don’t have it because their guns are down, they hate it for a bunch of other reasons.
> >
> > Vehicles are a whole sandbox entirely, you’re wielding a huge weapon with wheels, or part of a huge weapon that requires multiple people. The entering and exiting part is the draw time (and I’m pretty sure you can still aim while that animation is taking place too), the fire rate is taken into account as well. Being the driver of a Warthog means you have no gun so you are always “guns down”, but you are also the thing that moves the turret in the first place.
> >
> > “I want to have my gun available” isn’t always meant to be taken in its most literal form of “always,” the Spartan abilities are abilities of the player, things expected of you to do to succeed in a traditional match. Also out of that list, you can’t do any of that while using a Spartan ability anyway except reload and switch weapons.
>
> Great explanations. I still hold onto the understanding of clamber in a similar manner as I do driving a mongoose. Both actions sacrifice the players ability to shoot their gun with the added reward of easier map traversal.
>
> Looking at things from another angle - I’ve been reading what people want or think should be included in/removed from Infinite in terms of movement mechanics; but since 343 has already decided upon movement mechanics at this point, what do you think we will see in Infinite?
What I want: Thrusters, Hover, (Clamber can stay or go)
What I expect: Sprint, Thruster, Hover, Clamber, maybe modified Ground Pound
> 2533274832360281;3491:
> > 2533274825101441;3483:
> > Well, I see the same old tired arguments being made to keep Halo in the past. I truly hope 343 completely disregards this forum. Halo was my first FPS. But now having spent hundreds of hours on other games, I have concluded that Halo is without a doubt DATED. IT plays like a 15 year old game. People are disillusion to think that the dated gameplay from Halo 3 will make for successful game. To appease those players, 343 should add one or two gametypes with the old game mechanics and see how popular it is. They can always add more gametypes if it becomes overwhelmingly the preferred gametype. As of now though, I have lost all faith that 343 can deliver a good game that has mass appeal.
> >
> > Side note: DICE has figured out the hard way with BFV that mainly appealing to the hardcore crowd is not going to make a game successful.
>
> This is gonna be the second time I post this. CS:GO is a “dated” game (2012) and has that “dated” gameplay and as of 5:56PMET CS:GO is the top ranked game on Steam with 841,941 current players and a max of 1,110,015. To sit there and say that people like me or everyone else advocating for classic gameplay are delusional when theirs literal proof in the pudding that people enjoy that style of gameplay is beyond ridiculous. Heck even Valorant is the top Twitch viewed game and its a basic movement game like CSGO with Overwatch type of abilities. People are sick and tired of the Titanfall trend of gameplay, thats why games aren’t going for it anymore.
>
> I would also like to point out the failure of BFV was because they didn’t appeal to the hardcore crowd and refused to listen to their fans.
I have observed that what PC players like generally speaking is more often than not very different than what console players like. I can’t speak to CS:GO at all but that game much like Team fortress 2 continue to do incredibly well on PC while completely dead on console. Which shows as two examples what PC players like is different than console. I will say this, I have predicted at least 4 different games failures and have been right every single time: Battleborn, TitanFall 2, and Paragon, and BFV to name a few. Each, I played the Beta and said they would fail. It will be interesting to see what 343 does and what happens. IF, IF they get it wrong, the series will be done for at least 10 years.
> 2533274825830455;3487:
> > 2533274825101441;3483:
> > I truly hope 343 completely disregards this forum.
>
> Thanks. I hope they completely disregard you. Does that sound reasonable or am I being a bit of a jerk?
>
>
> > 2533274893364107;3486:
> > Games these days are all about more fast pace. While I agree that the slower classic movement MADE Halo, I think 343 knows they have to adapt if they want to attract the casuals AKA cash $.
> > I am all for fast pace, it took awhile to warm up to but it still is great. I just hope they increase the number of players to at least 32.
>
> But classic movement isn’t the same as slow movement. Slow isn’t the point of classic movement, and it isn’t what people who want classic movement are asking for. (In general, I mean. I’m sure there are some people who just want slower movement.) Many advocates of classic movement are okay with fast, and like fast as much as anyone else. And you can have fast classic movement—as has been suggested many times—just by having a higher base movement speed.
>
> Speed is entirely irrelevant for whether or not the movement is classic. The main defining feature of classic movement is the ability to use your weapons at any moment, regardless of your speed, or whether you’re jumping onto a platform. It is about the simplicity of movement mechanics, and minimizing the time spent in animations that pull you out of combat. If none of that appeals to you, that’s fine, but I just want you to have the right idea about classic movement because it’s not about the speed.
You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I don’t get offended by that. In fact I appreciate brutal honesty. As I said to another post, IF, and that’s a big IF, IF 343 gets it wrong, the series will probably be done for at least 10 years. After the failure of the MCC launch and Halo 5 being mediocre at best, Halo can’t really afford to have a game that does not have mass appeal, if interest in the series has not already been destroyed. So we will see…
> 2533274825101441;3736:
> > 2533274825830455;3487:
> > > 2533274825101441;3483:
> > > I truly hope 343 completely disregards this forum.
> >
> > Thanks. I hope they completely disregard you. Does that sound reasonable or am I being a bit of a jerk?
> >
> >
> > > 2533274893364107;3486:
> > > Games these days are all about more fast pace. While I agree that the slower classic movement MADE Halo, I think 343 knows they have to adapt if they want to attract the casuals AKA cash $.
> > > I am all for fast pace, it took awhile to warm up to but it still is great. I just hope they increase the number of players to at least 32.
> >
> > But classic movement isn’t the same as slow movement. Slow isn’t the point of classic movement, and it isn’t what people who want classic movement are asking for. (In general, I mean. I’m sure there are some people who just want slower movement.) Many advocates of classic movement are okay with fast, and like fast as much as anyone else. And you can have fast classic movement—as has been suggested many times—just by having a higher base movement speed.
> >
> > Speed is entirely irrelevant for whether or not the movement is classic. The main defining feature of classic movement is the ability to use your weapons at any moment, regardless of your speed, or whether you’re jumping onto a platform. It is about the simplicity of movement mechanics, and minimizing the time spent in animations that pull you out of combat. If none of that appeals to you, that’s fine, but I just want you to have the right idea about classic movement because it’s not about the speed.
>
> You are certainly entitled to your opinion. I don’t get offended by that. In fact I appreciate brutal honesty. As I said to another post, IF, and that’s a big IF, IF 343 gets it wrong, the series will probably be done for at least 10 years. After the failure of the MCC launch and Halo 5 being mediocre at best, Halo can’t really afford to have a game that does not have mass appeal, if interest in the series has not already been destroyed. So we will see…
343i gets it wrong when they make something technically broken and socially inept, not adding/removing a game mechanic that some people like/don’t like. BFV’s failures was largely because of that and you didn’t need to be a fortune teller to see that ship go down in flames.
Removing Splitscreen in this game and playable elites for like half a decade didn’t kill the series, removing something as “simple” as sprint isn’t going to do it either.
> 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: A few things that have already been thoroughly discussed in favor of the removal of sprint, as said by commenters in this thread.
>
> 1. Just because sprint is not present does not mean the game is going to be slow. There are many ways to give the player a feeling of speed without the inclusion of sprint, such as higher field of view, smaller maps, or just an increase in the base movement speed.
> In terms of BTB-sized maps, the designers could be encouraged to implement more creative ways to traverse the map on foot, like the previously used teleporters, man-cannons, speed boosts, and vehicles, making each map far more unique than if they were all wide-open plains you simply run across to reach your destination. Sprint is arguably the laziest and least entertaining form of map traversal.
>
> 2. You can’t just split the game in half, with one ‘modern’ side that has enhanced mobility and a ‘classic’ side that does not. the difference between the two are far too large to reuse any assets, there would have to be separate maps, extensively tweaked weapons and enemies, and much more. The massive differences essentially create two games in one, and 343 would not be able to support either side enough to satisfy both.
> That being said, you also can’t create a game around Spartan Abilities and then provide a little playlist that just doesn’t have them. The balancing of the game around the enhanced movement will not flow smoothly if they just removed the abilities, when explosion radii are balanced around players thrusting out of the way, and tracking weapons to more strongly track to counter constant movement.
Sprint is fine it makes it better to get from place to place. I don’t see what the problem with it is. Now boosting, and all the melee mechanics can go, but I don’t want to only be able walk around the map again.
<p></p>
> 2535469260126350;3738:
> > 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: A few things that have already been thoroughly discussed in favor of the removal of sprint, as said by commenters in this thread.
> >
> > 1. Just because sprint is not present does not mean the game is going to be slow. There are many ways to give the player a feeling of speed without the inclusion of sprint, such as higher field of view, smaller maps, or just an increase in the base movement speed.
> > In terms of BTB-sized maps, the designers could be encouraged to implement more creative ways to traverse the map on foot, like the previously used teleporters, man-cannons, speed boosts, and vehicles, making each map far more unique than if they were all wide-open plains you simply run across to reach your destination. Sprint is arguably the laziest and least entertaining form of map traversal.
> >
> > 2. You can’t just split the game in half, with one ‘modern’ side that has enhanced mobility and a ‘classic’ side that does not. the difference between the two are far too large to reuse any assets, there would have to be separate maps, extensively tweaked weapons and enemies, and much more. The massive differences essentially create two games in one, and 343 would not be able to support either side enough to satisfy both.
> > That being said, you also can’t create a game around Spartan Abilities and then provide a little playlist that just doesn’t have them. The balancing of the game around the enhanced movement will not flow smoothly if they just removed the abilities, when explosion radii are balanced around players thrusting out of the way, and tracking weapons to more strongly track to counter constant movement.
>
> Sprint is fine it makes it better to get from place to place. I don’t see what the problem with it is. Now boosting, and all the melee mechanics can go, but I don’t want to only be able walk around the map again.
> <p></p>
What do you mean by the melee mechanics can go? You don’t want to be able to punch someone? Melee has been a core component of Halo since Halo CE. I definitely don’t want melee to go.
If you don’t like the melee component of Halo, I hate saying it, but maybe Halo, at least the MP part, maybe isn’t for you then.
> 2535469260126350;3738:
> > 2535449076192416;1:
> >
>
> Sprint is fine it makes it better to get from place to place. I don’t see what the problem with it is. Now boosting, and all the melee mechanics can go, but I don’t want to only be able walk around the map again.
> <p></p>
This looks like the comment of someone who hasn’t read more than a few pages of the thread.
> 2533274808548953;3732:
> > 2533274833081329;3728:
> > > 2533274808548953;3727:
> > >
> >
> > I would argue that most of that list is a limitation of the weapon/vehicle sandbox, not a limitation of the player.
>
> I still hold onto the understanding of clamber in a similar manner as I do driving a mongoose.
Clamber is a base trait, mongoose exists as a part of the sandbox. They are not similar.
> 2533274815533909;3739:
> > 2535469260126350;3738:
> > > 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: A few things that have already been thoroughly discussed in favor of the removal of sprint, as said by commenters in this thread.
> > >
> > > 1. Just because sprint is not present does not mean the game is going to be slow. There are many ways to give the player a feeling of speed without the inclusion of sprint, such as higher field of view, smaller maps, or just an increase in the base movement speed.
> > > In terms of BTB-sized maps, the designers could be encouraged to implement more creative ways to traverse the map on foot, like the previously used teleporters, man-cannons, speed boosts, and vehicles, making each map far more unique than if they were all wide-open plains you simply run across to reach your destination. Sprint is arguably the laziest and least entertaining form of map traversal.
> > >
> > > 2. You can’t just split the game in half, with one ‘modern’ side that has enhanced mobility and a ‘classic’ side that does not. the difference between the two are far too large to reuse any assets, there would have to be separate maps, extensively tweaked weapons and enemies, and much more. The massive differences essentially create two games in one, and 343 would not be able to support either side enough to satisfy both.
> > > That being said, you also can’t create a game around Spartan Abilities and then provide a little playlist that just doesn’t have them. The balancing of the game around the enhanced movement will not flow smoothly if they just removed the abilities, when explosion radii are balanced around players thrusting out of the way, and tracking weapons to more strongly track to counter constant movement.
> >
> > Sprint is fine it makes it better to get from place to place. I don’t see what the problem with it is. Now boosting, and all the melee mechanics can go, but I don’t want to only be able walk around the map again.
> > <p></p>
>
> What do you mean by the melee mechanics can go? You don’t want to be able to punch someone? Melee has been a core component of Halo since Halo CE. I definitely don’t want melee to go.
>
> If you don’t like the melee component of Halo, I hate saying it, but maybe Halo, at least the MP part, maybe isn’t for you then.
Uhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm I meant ground pound and spartan charge