The return of classic movement mechanics?

Games Halo Infinite
461

> 2533274804813082;458:
> > 2535440283237581;452:
> >
>
> - The two are nowhere near the same. Sliding is more rapid, crouching and moving obviously less so. Moving slower also makes you more of a target, so this isn’t a replacement at all. Sliding is also very temporary, lasting no more than a few seconds. It can be used to ambush an opponent while reducing the threat to yourself (and it’s not always effective), or it can be used to quickly dodge under a rocket. - Yes, gaps can be shortened and ledges lowered so that clamber is made useless. The question is why shoudl they be? What is the negative to clambering so that it should be removed? - Damage may have been nerfed, but it remains an attack while sprinting, allowing some offense without slowing down. There’s also still the knockback, but if it’s to be replaced by a “longer hold down for charge-up” (assuming it’s not from behind, as that’s the trigger for assassinations,) then that slows down the gameplay even more than sprinting does. So why change it? - Easier to perform and more effective than trying to drop down for an assassination? Yes. Much. - I - and others - have given many examples in argument for sprint. It’s now time to hear about why it should be removed, beyond “it’s not classic”.

  • Crouching can and has been used while strafing to make the player a harder target to hit/headshot, is a great utility for ambushing (don’t show up on motion tracker), and can obviously be used to duck under a rocket without having to sprint beforehand. - Because artificially elevating ledges to justify a mechanic is pointless? Because clambering requires you to face the ledge and lower your weapon, thus taking the player out of combat just to navigate the map that they’re supposed to fight on? - Isn’t the point of Sprint that you can’t fight while using it? Isn’t the point to require slowing down to allow offensive abilities? I didn’t say that I liked the idea of a chargeable melee, only that it’d be an alternative to SC if the knockback aspect added depth. I was anticipating an argument for why it might do so, - So easier to perform kills is preferrable? - I thought I already answered this one…Benefits of removing Sprint:
  • No movement interrupts combat readiness.You are able to make every maneuver while engaged in a firefight and without facing the direction you’re moving. - Players can pursue/attack opponents at the same speed as their opponents can flee. With effort, players can retreat effectively without turning away from their opponents. - Maps are designed with more diverse/interesting layouts, rather than pocketed arenas connecting to one another through lanes/corridors.
462

> 2535440283237581;453:
> Reloading is not a movement mechanic, nor does it affect/restrict movement.
>
> You can absolutely jump and turn simultaneously even with the default control layout, especially if you use the “claw grip”. Even if it weren’t possible, that would be a fault of the control scheme.

Reloading still affects combat readiness. While you can jump and turn simultaneously with a difficult and uncomfortable grip (or another controler scheme) with the default control scheme it is not quite possible. You can jump and then turn, but that second between interrupts about as much as clambering does.

In this regard, neither sprint nor clamber are “blatantly” built around interruption any more so than other mechanics. Clambering takes as much time and interruption as jumping or reloading. Sprinting still even allows you to attack through Spartan Charge, and it doesn’t take that long at all to drop out of Sprint in order to fire at an opponent. So why should they be removed?

> Players can attack while moving at the same speed as their sprinting opponent? No.

You can pursue your opponent at the same speed, and if you cut them off you can Spartan Charge them. Or you can shoot them; their shields aren’t going to be recharging.

> That there are maps in the original trilogy that fit that description doesn’t invalidate what I said.

Yes, it does. If there are maps that have existed without sprint, but could have accomodated it, then sprint isn’t having as big an effect on map design as you’d make it to be. Verticle travel in other Halo maps has previously been through the use of ramps and grav-lifts (something that is still evident), both of which have their downsides. You can camp a lift, and ramps offer no cover for a long way up that you’re able to be shot on the entire way. So why get rid of clamber?

463

[deleted]

464

> 2533274804813082;462:
> > 2535440283237581;453:
> > Reloading is not a movement mechanic, nor does it affect/restrict movement.
> >
> > You can absolutely jump and turn simultaneously even with the default control layout, especially if you use the “claw grip”. Even if it weren’t possible, that would be a fault of the control scheme.
>
> Reloading still affects combat readiness. While you can jump and turn simultaneously with a difficult and uncomfortable grip (or another controler scheme) with the default control scheme it is not quite possible. You can jump and then turn, but that second between interrupts about as much as clambering does.
>
> In this regard, neither sprint nor clamber are “blatantly” built around interruption any more so than other mechanics. Clambering takes as much time and interruption as jumping or reloading. Sprinting still even allows you to attack through Spartan Charge, and it doesn’t take that long at all to drop out of Sprint in order to fire at an opponent. So why should they be removed?

Yes, reloading affects combat readiness. What’s your point?

Again, the argument about the default control scheme is an issue with the control scheme. We’ve both mentioned ways around this issue (pro controller, admittedly uncomfortable grip, using an alternative control scheme, changing the default control scheme).

Sprint and Clamber are mechanically designed to have this effect. Nothing short of the devs changing how these mechanics work will make a difference. I’ve very recently replied to you with why I feel they should be removed, but let me ask you something and receive a sincere answer, okay? If you can attack through Spartan Charge and quickly drop out of Sprint to fire/throw grenades, what’s the point in disabling weapons/grenades while sprinting? And what’s the point in limiting the “Sprint speed” to forward movement? We both know that saying “why not?” gets us nowhere.

> > That there are maps in the original trilogy that fit that description doesn’t invalidate what I said.
>
> Yes, it does. If there are maps that have existed without sprint, but could have accomodated it, then sprint isn’t having as big an effect on map design as you’d make it to be. Verticle travel in other Halo maps has previously been through the use of ramps and grav-lifts (something that is still evident), both of which have their downsides. You can camp a lift, and ramps offer no cover for a long way up that you’re able to be shot on the entire way. So why get rid of clamber?

If there are maps that have existed without Sprint but would play alright with it, then the mechanic isn’t really providing much of a benefit either, is it? Mind you, that’s an astronomical “if”. I’m sure I don’t need to tell you the problem in counting the massive vehicle-focused/BTB maps in that either.

You can camp ledges where players must clamber. Ramps can have as much or as little cover as the map designers decide to give it. Both ramps and lifts can be navigated while combat-ready and facing any direction.

Again, what’s the point in disabling weapons/grenades to get around the map? What’s the point in limiting vertical movement to forward?

465

> 2533274923562209;456:
> Why do you not see it different from other games when it comes to sprint?

Because it’s really not?

> What other game PUNISHES you for sprinting?

Well, for comparison, Battlefield does not let you sprint and fire. It’s been a while since I’ve played it, but I’m fairly certain that neither does Call of Duty. Medal of Honor does not let you sprint and shoot. Fallout 4 does not let you sprint and shoot. What other game “punishes” for sprinting? I’d dare say all of them.

> If you don’t hit max speed when taking off in H5, it knocks you oug of the animation.

That takes less than a second to reach top sprint speed. Who’s sprinting for less than that?

> Furthermore your shields don’t recharge when using sprint.

Other games don’t have shields. However of the game with regenerating health that I have to test, Battlefield 3 doesn’t restore health until you stop moving. Pretty sure that’s how CoD works too. So it’s no different.

466

> 2533274804813082;465:
> > 2533274923562209;456:
> > If you don’t hit max speed when taking off in H5, it knocks you oug of the animation.
>
>
>
> > Furthermore your shields don’t recharge when using sprint.
>
> Other games don’t have shields. However of the game with regenerating health that I have to test, Battlefield 3 doesn’t restore health until you stop moving. Pretty sure that’s how CoD works too. So it’s no different.

BF3 doesn’t prevent health regen based on movement. It starts to regenerate 16 seconds after taking damage. Link and link.

467

Okay the site has crashed in me four times while trying to post this and I’m really angry so this is probably gonna have some grammatical errors. I know we’re all sick of hearing “oh just increase the bms and FoV” but please hear me out, this isn’t gonna be news to most people here but hopefully it’ll help show the benefits of no sprint in Halo to at least one person.

Let’s say you have a hallway in Halo 3 that takes 5 seconds to walk from one end to the other. In Halo 5, that same hallway should also take 5 seconds to cross because that’s what the designers intended. The catch is that the map will be stretched to make sure it takes 5 seconds to cross while sprinting. In Halo 3, I can move forward, backwards, and sideways all at top speed while being able to shoot, melee and throw nades. In Halo 5, I’m locked in an animation that takes away my combat capabilities(excluding Spartan charge) and can only be used moving forward. Without sprint the player isn’t as restricted, and the devs aren’t either because it would mean one less mechanic to design their game around. I also feel that putting more emphasis on speed through man cannons and teleporters will lead to more unique maps and encounters.

I can’t figure out how to link on mobile but I should also mention there is a video by kkhan that shows the world of difference that a wider FoV makes, seriously it’s a short vid and it’s definitley worth the time, or at least the first 45 seconds lol.

Anyways, I just believe that increasing the bms would be the perfect compromise as it offers the faster pace Halo 5 fans love without a mechanic that drastically changes the moment to moment gameplay. Just my thoughts on the matter, keep in mind I’m not as knowledgable on the subject as a lot of people here. Much love.

468

> 2533274822366750;457:
> when a mechanic needs to shut down pre-existing mechanics in order to function properly with the rest of the game

Only that’s just the thing; sprinting doesn’t need to shut down those mechanics to function properly. It functions well enough, just for some reason some people don’t want it in at all. Those reasons are apparently vague, and most thus far seem to rely on preference over negative impact.

> COD, Battlefield, Titanfall etc. all have blatantly shorter TTK’s, and that is in large part due to the fact they their mechanics and sandboxes don’t have to take energy shields into consideration.

Gameplay that is more akin to SWAT, in that regard. So this falls to the question, then, of why remove sprint entirely rather than disable it in certain playlists? Why punish the campaign and gametypes that aren’t negatively affected by sprint? Why are shorter TTK’s absolutely needed, and how much longer of a kill time are we talking here?

> And that’s the precise problem I have with it, it separates mobility and utility.

Not really. While sprinting you can still jump, turn, and through use of Spartan Charge you can even attack. Also “The Trilogy” did not always have mobility and utility; if you wanted to use a turret in Halo 3, you lost mobility. It might not be mobility, but in Halo 2 if you dual wielded weapons, you lost function of grenades. There has always been some level of trade-off to what strategy you look to employ. With sprint, at least, the “separation” is far from permanent.

So again, why remove it?

> Except if you watched a bit of the video that I linked, then you would see that it doesn’t increase the pace at all.

You linked a video to Quake. Not a video truly related to sprint or how it affects Halo. A video that showed dizzying and over-stimulating gameplay; do tell, how is that attractive for a competitive game? I’m trying to play a game, not give myself a heart attack.

> And I’m not arguing that the game must be faster, but that the claim that it does is false

Only it’s not. Not always. As I said, it’s one of those circumstantial things. I see an opponent running down a hallway. I can chase after him, or I can sprint ahead to where I know he’s going to come out and ambush him. Sprint, in that instance, has minimized the time that it took me to kill an enemy. Also comparing that to my own - and other people that I’ve seen in this thread - experience replaying Halo 3 mathcmaking and feeling like the whole thing was at a crawl. It’s all circumstantial and subjective, so you can’t really say that it’s “false”.

469

Yes, please. You can’t seamlessly blend movement and combat like the original games did if you have to constantly lower your weapon to reasonably traverse the terrain without dying. Halo 5 had the quickest movement system yet ironically felt the most sluggish to play.

470

> 2535464451695009;459:
> Clambering currently breaks momentum and reduces the skill-ceiling for more difficult jumps,

How does clambering break momentum any more than jumping does? If anything, it eliminates a break in flow for if you just miss a jump. As for reducing the skill-ceiling, a) this is a bad thing, why? And b), with how you have to get the Mythic skull, I greatly disagree. There’s a lot of skill and strategy to be had with inclusion of clambering.

> One aspect is that map design changed a lot. Now maps are larger, the places for movement have been enclosed, and there are a lot more places that breaks your line-of-sight compared to the original trilogy.

How is this a bad thing, though? “Not feeling like a playground” is subjective; to some people it might feel like one. They’re not meant to be a playground, though, they’re meant to be an arena for battle. Halo doesn’t compare combat-wise to MOBA’s or Fighter games.

471

> 2533274804813082;468:
> > 2533274822366750;457:
> >
>
> Only that’s just the thing; sprinting doesn’t need to shut down those mechanics to function properly. It functions well enough, just for some reason some people don’t want it in at all. Those reasons are apparently vague, and most thus far seem to rely on preference over negative impact.

But like I said earlier, if shield regen wasn’t nerfed and spartan charge introduced, then sprint would be heavily imbalanced and cause other issues. While sprint may be balanced now, such balancing came at the cost of castrating other mechanics making the game flow janky.

So I have to ask: why keep a mechanic that the game has to make compromises in order to accommodate it without it being overpowered when probably 90% of the audience doesn’t about it’s inclusion and potentially 5% or more are irked by it?

> 2533274804813082;468:
> Gameplay that is more akin to SWAT, in that regard. So this falls to the question, then, of why remove sprint entirely rather than disable it in certain playlists? Why punish the campaign and gametypes that aren’t negatively affected by sprint? Why are shorter TTK’s absolutely needed, and how much longer of a kill time are we talking here?

Sprint works better with games with faster TTK’s because it’s near unlikely for cat-and-mouse to happen and people can’t run up and melee you nearly as easily.

As for why remove it entirely: because it’s better for a game to be mostly/entirely cohesive throughout all modes so as to prevent disorientation and awkwardness. Seriously, no other game out there removes significant movement mechanics between modes.

> 2533274804813082;468:
> Not really. While sprinting you can still jump, turn, and through use of Spartan Charge you can even attack. Also “The Trilogy” did not always have mobility and utility; if you wanted to use a turret in Halo 3, you lost mobility. It might not be mobility, but in Halo 2 if you dual wielded weapons, you lost function of grenades. There has always been some level of trade-off to what strategy you look to employ. With sprint, at least, the “separation” is far from permanent.
>
> So again, why remove it?

Dual wielding and especially turrets were occasional, and did not effect the pacing of an entire match or the game flow in general. Sprint is a fundamental gameplay mechanic that every player has and is meant to be used for a significant part of the match.

> 2533274804813082;468:
> You linked a video to Quake. Not a video truly related to sprint or how it affects Halo. A video that showed dizzying and over-stimulating gameplay; do tell, how is that attractive for a competitive game? I’m trying to play a game, not give myself a heart attack.

Ok, but that video proves that you don’t need sprint for a fast game. One of the biggest arguments in favor of sprint is that it increases the pace of the game, and I’m saying that isn’t entirely true.

> 2533274804813082;468:
> Only it’s not. Not always. As I said, it’s one of those circumstantial things. I see an opponent running down a hallway. I can chase after him, or I can sprint ahead to where I know he’s going to come out and ambush him. Sprint, in that instance, has minimized the time that it took me to kill an enemy. Also comparing that to my own - and other people that I’ve seen in this thread - experience replaying Halo 3 mathcmaking and feeling like the whole thing was at a crawl. It’s all circumstantial and subjective, so you can’t really say that it’s “false”.

I’ve been playing Halo Online a lot lately and I can safely say that Halo 3 was only slow on poorly designed maps and specific game modes that belong in action sack. Play on Narrows, Guardian, the Pit, or even Valhalla, and you’ll be at a good pace.

472

Of course this post is going to have very diverse opinions. Most of the people who still frequent the forums of Halo Waypoint actually like the new Halo games. All 5000 of them. Its very misleading considering there are tens of millions of Halo fans who left because Halo turned into a blend of every other console shooter in the last 5 years.

473

> 2533274803493024;5:
> > 2535449076192416;1:
> > the oldest of Halo fans have adored! I am so pumped for this!
>
> I think the first part of this statement is biased based on the second part. There are plenty of older Halo fans that like the new mechanics.

“Plenty of older Halo fans that like the new mechanics?” Compared to what? You’re comparing < 5000 daily players of today to the 10 million daily players of the past. There will always be some people who like whatever 343 puts out there. Question is do they want to put up Indy numbers or Halo 2 numbers. Tell me where I’m wrong here

474

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.</mark>

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

> 2533274987955547;15:
> I doubt that classic game mechanics will be abruptly added in just like that. There is such a split in the community about classic versus new halo, such that if they went either direction they would lose half of their community. So they have to do something in the middle, personally I would be fine with classic Halo, but I would also be fine with the removal of just Spartan charge and ground pound. I would be annoyed if both of those are still in the game, but all I really want is classic art style and good campaign.

The community is not “split.” The overwhelming majority of people think the modern 343/Reach era mechanics are dog -Yoink-. Just look at the numbers. Just you people who still get on these forums and actively play Halo like the new Halo. That should be self evident… It really should. Look at the number’s if you don’t believe me. How do they kill it in sales every time they release a game, and a week later no one is playing it? Because all the old die hards like me quit playing the minute we buy it and realize they made another generic -Yoink- console shooter and not a Halo game.

The opinions of the people who still get on these forums daily are SKEWED towards modern “Halo,” and it only takes 3 seconds of reasoning to come to that conclusion.

Crazy thing is, 343 HAS to know this. They have to know if they want an honest opinion of what people think about their game, they probably shouldnt do the poles **on Halo’s forums.**They either know that, and want to get the skewed data in order to justify their terrible decisions, or they don’t know that, in which case I’d say they have got to be the most incompetent group of yes-men in the entire free world. Which could be true. Anyone who knows how to code games can sell millions of copies of anything if they slap “Halo” on it.

475

> 2533274804813082;444:
>

Most arguments since this thread began have been arguing how advanced mechanics have a negative impact on gameplay, i don’t think there has been 1 comment made by anti-sprinters in this thread where it boiled down to “i like it” yet half of the pro-sprint comments (most that aren’t made by evilkeny) do boil down to “i like it”

so to keep it in one place i’ll do you a favour and list them from the anti-sprint perspective, all will talk about its negative impact on the mechanics

  • Sprint forces run OR gun, halo was always run AND gun, in reach and 4 players lobbied both times just to get a mode to be able to run AND gun

  • Sprint is a catch-all solution to escaping death, in prior halo games or stripped down reach and 4, where you were positioned on the map gave you the options you had to work with. With sprint any time where you feel like you can live without fighting a press of the button and simply moving solves that answer and allows the player to escape more consistently and confidently than any other game with sprint by FAR.

  • If you were weak and in an inferior situation the dominant player would pressure you to get the kill, players had to be more creative since you only had weapons and map geometry to avoid death, with sprint if you try to back off around corners not sprinting, then the dominant player just has to sprint to see you to kill you, while you remain prepared to fight at the cost of the slower speed of not sprinting…since that would be dumb to not sprint knowing you will die otherwise any moment where you are put in the inferior position (healthy vs 1-shot) sprint is always the best choice if you can escape…sprint necessitates itself.

  • Sprint makes us exchange the power we had to look around and make actions on the fly for boosted forward movement, which impacts how many tactics are viable as any moment escape, defence or chase is the goal (anything aside from attack really) sprint is now the answer.

  • The same goes for clamber, someone mentioned earlier that classic halo had spring jumping and nade jumping…both take time to do, with clamber you can ascend what in older games would of been ‘map control’ and diminish any power it could of had by making it easy access, while running away it allows for a quick and easy way to block line of sight and escape, quicker and easier than any other game with advanced movement due to the long killtimes and closer range map design.

  • Thruster is a neat idea, but when given off spawn, any situation in a gunfight where it is even, thruster is always the answer to get the edge in closer range combat, limiting variety of play, a map pick-up and limited access would make playing with or against it more interesting than 2 players waiting for their time to pop it, like an always available flash from LoL.

  • A bad player and a good player play at a similar speed (decision making becomes the key difference), the advanced movement determines the pace of the game, look at a bad player and a good player in classic halo and you will find a drastic change in pace.

  • Advanced movement is mechanically difficult for bad players, but their basic ‘1 button solution’ style limits the depth of top level play making the casual game harder and the competitive game less skillful.

  • The constant inactive time brought on when sprinting, clambering, thrusting, sliding, ground pounding creates stop / start gameplay. I would define classic halo as fluid and smooth in that it is steady, continuous, consistent, without jerkiness; you are always at all times capable of making adjustments…i would define the gameplay of H5 as being rigid and clunky, full of interruptions, dead time, jerky, less agile and harder to make small on the fly adjustments…since all the advanced movement are more drastic animations.

  • Advanced movement makes map layouts and geometry far less important mainly due to sprint and clamber. someone mentioned earlier that while halo 5 maps have a lot of open space there is still plenty of more tight or enclosed areas, aside from Truth, most maps aren’t super open in 4v4. Sprint completely ruins these tight spaces; tight areas are more powerful, as open areas are easy to kill opponents (lack of escapes). Sprint treats these tighter areas like a jungle gym, making otherwise powerful map positions much less significant. Power positions are harder to control but yield the benefit of being a superior position, clamber makes strong positions easy to contest, yet again weakening any sense of design the map may / could of had.

  • Aside from 1 shot kill weapons the string of movement is hard to punish when used evasively, sprint was hard enough now clamber, GP, slide, stabilize and thrust are added to the mix.

  • To the point that, because of the movement, the movement decides how the game is played far more than the map or weapons ever could.

  • Halo in all instances without sprint is a more methodical and observational game, whether played seriously or casually, these 1-button answers really strip that down and bring it far closer to the more reactive and reflexive style of play CoD aligns with.

  • In classic halo if i search in a group of 4 i could end games on small maps in around 3 minutes at its fastest rather often, i don’t know if i have played a game that went less than 5 with sprint.

  • All multiplayer games with sprint either have near instant kill times or kill abilities to keep it in line, what does halo have to keep advanced movement in check?

  • You cant shoot while sprintng, the faster move speed can only be used evasively since sprinting into someone who sees you will lose you the fight…its sole purpose is an escape tool, if it’s to get into action quicker then a faster base movement solves that.

  • Allowing players to shoot while sprinting would make the slow speed redundant, making sprint faster than BMS would allow for easier escapes, making it closer to BMS would make it sluggish, less useful and ultimately pointless…what other properties does sprint have that aren’t an escape tool that can’t be solved with a BMS increase?

  • Because if escape tool is the key property of sprint, then spawning with a 1 button escape mechanic that doesn’t have the same tools to punish escaping like other games with sprint… is the crux of the problem in relation to gameplay NOT ‘cuz i like it’

2 weapon limit
general map size
general weapon damage and mechanics
weapon roster
general movement and speed
health, shield and hitpoints

Generally set in stone and essentially what makes halo HALO, these things are not accommodating to sprint and sprint abuses these by making it hard to punish, it gives an easy solution to many problems on a play by play basis and lessens the variety and tactics of the game by being a more optimal solution than what we have without sprint.

Now give me a list of how not having sprint negatively affects the mechanics of the game, most benefits listed so far (for pro-sprint) in this thread have been rebuked so list the flaws of having no sprint in relation to Halo gameplay.

“it’s boring”, “it’s slow”, “it’s not modern”, “other games have it”, “we expect it now”, “it would be jarring”, “it would devolve” with no concrete mechanical arguments and just that opinion by itself is the exact same as “i like it”

476

> 2535440283237581;461:
> Crouching can and has been used while strafing to make the player a harder target to hit/headshot, is a great utility for ambushing (don’t show up on motion tracker), and can obviously be used to duck under a rocket without having to sprint beforehand.

Crouching significantly slows down the gameplay. While it may be good for infiltration, it’s hardly a better substitiute for evasion. I disagree that it makes a player harder to hit or headshot, as you’re moving significantly slower. To which, it also can be used to duck under a rocket, yes, but that does you no good if you’re already sprinting. This is an instance of “why not both?”

> Because artificially elevating ledges to justify a mechanic is pointless?

They’re not articifically elevated. That’s how the map is designed.

> Because clambering requires you to face the ledge and lower your weapon, thus taking the player out of combat just to navigate the map that they’re supposed to fight on?

The time to clamber is literally 34 milliseconds. That’s nothing.

> Isn’t the point of Sprint that you can’t fight while using it?

No, the point of sprint is temporary elevated mobility. People seem to be expecting to attack while sprinting, to which there is an option.

> So easier to perform kills is preferrable?

That’s not what I said. 4 hours ago you asked “What options does Ground Pound provide that jumping down for an assassination/beatdown doesn’t?” I answered, and with what you’ve quoted here I stated that it’s certainly easier than jumping down to assassinate. A ground pound is also not a guaranteed kill unless you’re dead-on-center, which against moving targets is challenging.

> Benefits of removing Sprint:
> - No movement interrupts combat readiness.You are able to make every maneuver while engaged in a firefight and without facing the direction you’re moving. - Players can pursue/attack opponents at the same speed as their opponents can flee. With effort, players can retreat effectively without turning away from their opponents. - Maps are designed with more diverse/interesting layouts, rather than pocketed arenas connecting to one another through lanes/corridors.

  1. As argued, sprinting doesn’t interrupt combat readiness more than any other function or feature. Removing sprint would remove the effect of not being able to fire while sprinting (obviously) but you are still able to maneuver and fire in Halo 5. Sprinting in and of itself does not hinder this, only while sprinting. So this isn’t so much a “benefit” of removing sprint, as it’s not something absent from the game already. Removing sprint would just… remove sprint. So why?
  2. Granted, you can’t attack opponents at the same speed. However this is another example where the “benefits” of removing sprint is… removing sprint. You can already fire at someone using sprint, you can already retreat while firing. __How does sprint damage those things?__3. I already gave you examples from the MC Trilogy that this is not the case. Removing sprint doesn’t affect or allow for this, and maps can be diverse and interesting even with sprint included.
477

I am of the opinion that as no Halo game has been identical to one before it, Infinite shouldn’t be identical to an existing one either. So even if it mainly calls back to “classic” gameplay, there should be new and changed up aspects to make it unique. There are some people that want a direct copy of HCE, or of H2, or of H3. There might even be those in the Reach, 4, or 5G camps that want all gameplay elements to remain intact to whatever specific entry they cherish the most.
I think we should be more like the original trilogy than different from it, but that doesn’t mean that all difference is bad.
There’s another post that I feel goes hand-in-hand with this topic, dealing with compromise. Ultimately, every Halo game has had to try and find a balance between what standards are in the series, and what makes this game unique. Some have done better than others at executing this balance, but it’s a struggle regardless.
Specifically in regards to the gameplay mechanics, I’m assuming you’re referring to Spartan Abilities? If so, I’ll give my two cents here on them in a condensed format.

  • Sprint: No. Slightly increase movement speed instead - Thruster: Yes. Metered. Thrusts only available on X and Y axes (no up or down capabilities). - Clamber: Yes. Decrease clamber speed. Map designs mostly overlook this ability. - Spartan Charge: No. Thrusting into a player head-on knocks them back slightly. Two players thrusting head-on into each other knocks shields out. - Spartan Slide: No, unless option to initiate during Thrust. - Ground Pound: No. Thrust in air stuns player on landing. Far enough fall after Thrust creates small pulse that knocks out all shields within close proximity (including self) - Smart Scope: Yes. No extra assists/boosts. View on HUD via camera on scope/rails. A system for preference, not added benefit. - Stabilizer: No.Essentially, this list is just blending H2A and H5G movements, which I think would work very well. However, this list does nothing to really add anything new, like every other Halo game has. I have no clue what they could add to make things better, but I’m sure they’re being very careful and cautious when discussing what additions to make.
478

[deleted]

479

> 2535464451695009;463:
> The thing is we already had vehicles, teleporters, and all that other stuff to get around, making it kind of reundant in my opinion.

At that point movement is reduntant. Vehicles don’t fit on every map, or in every space. Teleporters are also not a good inclusion for this issue, as they have a set Point A to Point B; the player doesn’t have a choice as to the path that is taken. If you’re to increase map size to accomodate a vehicle because you’re taking sprint out… Well that’s just a Medium to Large map with vehicles. Nothing has been done, really.

480

> 2533274822366750;471:
> why keep a mechanic that the game has to make compromises in order to accommodate it without it being overpowered when probably 90% of the audience doesn’t about it’s inclusion and potentially 5% or more are irked by it?

You’re making up numbers, and that’s wholy unhelpful. You’re also asking the question that’s been asked and answered throughout, so we’re back to square one. Whether or not the gameplay is “janky” is also completely a matter of personal opinion or preference. There are many in this thread - myself included - that don’t consider Halo 5 as-is “janky” or difficult to manage.

> Sprint works better with games with faster TTK’s because it’s near unlikely for cat-and-mouse to happen and people can’t run up and melee you nearly as easily.

I get meleed quite commonly in SWAT. But as to other gamemodes, Spartan Charge is a thing. Have you tried SC’ing your opponent and then gunning them down?

> As for why remove it entirely: because it’s better for a game to be mostly/entirely cohesive throughout all modes so as to prevent disorientation and awkwardness.

And there’s where the big problem is. You’re looking to remove it entirely, which affects campaign, when I wager your only real concern is multiplayer, right? I would still play if Sprint was removed from matchmaking, but if you’re gunning for Campaign as well then I have significant issue with that. Pulling examples from Multiplayer is one thing, I have infinitely more argument for not only Sprint but Spartan Abilities as well when it comes to Campaign.

> Dual wielding and especially turrets were occasional, and did not effect the pacing of an entire match or the game flow in general.

Neither does sprint–not truly. Sprint is just as occasional, and just as affecting to the player’s pace and combat options.

> Ok, but that video proves that you don’t need sprint for a fast game. One of the biggest arguments in favor of sprint is that it increases the pace of the game, and I’m saying that isn’t entirely true.

I can’t speak for others, but I’ve only said that it situationally increases the kill time. The pace of the game is what it will be, with or without sprint. Even with the fastest movement out there, games can still get bogged down by one team hoarding all the power weapons, or by an entire team of campers. You’re laying pace of the game entirely at the feet of Sprint, but there’s so much more that affects it than sprint alone.

There is also no reason that games need to be that fast. That’s just neurotic.

> I’ve been playing Halo Online a lot lately and I can safely say that Halo 3 was only slow on poorly designed maps and specific game modes that belong in action sack. Play on Narrows, Guardian, the Pit, or even Valhalla, and you’ll be at a good pace.

Halo Online is based off Halo 3, but is not Halo 3. Maps in question as to Halo 3’s pace were High Ground, Narrows, Avalanche, Valhalla and The Pit, with gamemodes of CTF and Slayer 4v4.

Replies past this’ll wait until tomorrow.