The return of classic movement mechanics?

Games Halo Infinite
5362

> 2533274793250636;5360:
> i can try…
> although i liked H4, i myself feel it strays from the OG Halo flair.
>
> What i dont like started with Reach.
> - jet pack
> hated it. no skill involed, not needed at all, just a gimmick for the kids - thruster pack
> dont like it, but has some merits for the skill gap - loadouts
> i liked it alot. but i can see how other dislike it for “uneaqual” starting weapons. - ordonance drops
> in general i dont care. but the ramdomnes was what bothered me. to get a rocket launcher by luck is plain stupid. - sprint
> wasnt too impactful but it speeds up the gameplay whatsoever. and thats a big one for me since Halo always had some chilling vibe. - sounds
> it somehow was a tiny bit too much. to much clicks&clacks. took away some of the OG atmosphere. It was just too much unnecessary noise. - Armor customisation
> although i liked it (could live without i though) it took away the spartan vibe. some did look ugly, some from another universe. but not the halo universe. - maps
> that was my biggest one. like most BTB map but hate most of the small one. This clustered hallway map were never mine. no room for teamshooting, flanking too to long, less alternative route, no overview, no possible shoot from one end to the other like in many OG maps. - playlists
> just too many “stupid” ones that thinned out the overal population. - gametypes
> too often f.e. one flag/bomb with a) to little time or b) unfair advantages for one side due to non geometric (is this the right word?) maps.Most of this things arent bad on itself.
> But in mass they are distracting and fulfil no purpose.
> The game does not need them to be good. Some even hurt em.
> That is why im a big supporter of reduce to the max.
>
> In design they say:
> its not perfect if you cant add anything.
> Its perfect if you cant cut out anything.

Halo 4 is Unique in my View. Love it. =D

5363

> 2533274793250636;5360:
> i can try…
> although i liked H4, i myself feel it strays from the OG Halo flair.
>
> What i dont like started with Reach.
> - jet pack
> hated it. no skill involed, not needed at all, just a gimmick for the kids - thruster pack
> dont like it, but has some merits for the skill gap - loadouts
> i liked it alot. but i can see how others dislike it for “unequal” starting weapons. - ordonance drops
> in general i dont care. but the randomness was what bothered me. to get a rocket launcher by luck is plain stupid. - sprint
> wasnt too impactful but it speeds up the gameplay whatsoever. and thats a big one for me since Halo always was a bit leisurely. - sounds
> too much clicks & clacks. took away some of the atmosphere. It was just too much unnecessary noise. - Armor customization
> although i liked it (could live without it though) it took away the spartan vibe. some did look ugly, some like from another universe. but not the halo universe. - maps
> that was my biggest one. like most BTB map but hate most of the small ones. This clustered hallway maps were never mine. no room for teamshooting, flanking took too long, less alternative route, no overview, no possible shoot from one end to the other like in many OG maps. - playlists
> just too many “stupid” ones that thinned out the overall population. - gametypes
> f.e. one flag/bomb with a) to little time or b) unfair advantages for one side due to non geometric (is this the right word?) maps.Most of these arent bad on itself.
> But in mass they are distracting and fulfill no purpose.
> The game does not need them to be good.
> Thats why im a big supporter of reduce to the max.
>
> In design they say:
> Its not perfect if you cant add anything.
> Its perfect if you cant cut out anything.

• Quote me so I know I am being referred to
• Jetpack was one of the more skill intensive abilities, way more skill based than active Camo or any and I mean any equipment in Halo 3
• Thruster pack: saying I don’t like is very vague and hard to rebut since I have no clue why you don’t?
• Ordnance had some wacky RNG but does that make halo bad?
• Reach had sprint and no one made a bug fuss so why in halo 4 is it a fuss?
• The sound one I think we can both see how this is just very very very inconsequential.
• Maps: What are some maps you feel this is strongest on?
• Stupid playlist: like what? I thought they were rather fun.
• If you have to little time it means your team is unable to complete the objective and thus should loose. The word is Asymmetrical maps. What are some examples?

So you like reducing. That is not how games work. The more halos the more features because if it was vice versa we would be playing cyber punk or Halo 3 which is one of the greatest of al time but I am sure 6 Halo 3s will get really boring. I have an architect as I friend I sent that quote to and I found that is only used by minimalist, which is a very niche field. Let’s add so we can see what works and doesn’t and after adding enough we can synthesize this and start taking away

5364

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not flame or attack other members. This includes stat-flaming.</mark>

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

> 2535422763112957;5363:
> • Jetpack was one of the more skill intensive abilities, way more skill based than active Camo or any and I mean any equipment in Halo 3

How can one with a 0.5 K/D have the balls to talk about skill?

Other than that i dont want to get into an argument about every single point.
Everyone can have his opinion and taste is individual. All fine.

5365

> 2535422763112957;5363:
> So you like reducing. That is not how games work.

Actually, it is.
Games aim to create the maximum amount of depth from the minimum amount of complexity.
Introducing new mechanics always increases complexity, but if it doesn’t add (enough) depth, it’s a bad addition.

> 2535422763112957;5363:
> Let’s add so we can see what works and doesn’t and after adding enough we can synthesize this and start taking away

What marks the point when it’s time to synthesize?
Halo has added sprint into three games by now and it hasn’t worked in a single one. The only difference was how large the drawbacks were.
Is it finally okay to “start taking away” after a decade? Or do we need to wait another one?

5366

> 2533274801176260;5365:
> > 2535422763112957;5363:
> > So you like reducing. That is not how games work.
>
> Actually, it is.
> Games aim to create the maximum amount of depth from the minimum amount of complexity.
> Introducing new mechanics always increases complexity, but if it doesn’t add (enough) depth, it’s a bad addition.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535422763112957;5363:
> > Let’s add so we can see what works and doesn’t and after adding enough we can synthesize this and start taking away
>
> What marks the point when it’s time to synthesize?
> Halo has added sprint into three games by now and it hasn’t worked in a single one. The only difference was how large the drawbacks were.
> Is it finally okay to “start taking away” after a decade? Or do we need to wait another one?

  1. If you are going to rebut me please respond to all my points and don’t pick and choose. This is not a buffet line.
  2. I see what that video tries to say but it A. Is not from a game studio and B. Fails to make its points well. Games to not need to be simple. You have failed to show that in an effective manner
  3. To what end has sprint failed. That is a claim you will have to back up, 343 gets to decide when to synthesize so be a little patient.
5367

> 2533274793250636;5364:
>

Please try not to stat flame, it’s kinda rude

But I do agree with you, everyone does have their own opinions, no need to get too aggressive :slight_smile:

5368

> 2535422763112957;5366:
> 1. If you are going to rebut me please respond to all my points and don’t pick and choose. This is not a buffet line.

I am cutting quotes down for readibility to make it clear which part of the statement I’m replying to. I had nothing to say to your bullet-point list, so I didn’t quote it.

> 2535422763112957;5366:
> 2. I see what that video tries to say but it A. Is not from a game studio

So? Neither are you or I. Neither is your architect friend which you referred to for confirmation.

> 2535422763112957;5366:
> and B. Fails to make its points well.

How so? This is an empty statement without giving a reason as to why.

> 2535422763112957;5366:
> Games to not need to be simple. You have failed to show that in an effective manner

I haven’t failed because that wasn’t my goal. Games don’t need to be simple but they also don’t need to be complex.

> 2535422763112957;5366:
> 3. To what end has sprint failed. That is a claim you will have to back up

Being a balanced addition to the gameplay. It encourages hit-and-run tactics and allows for easy escapability of bad players after making mistakes in a match. That’s the reason why sprint was nerfed from each game to the next in the hopes of diminishing its drawbacks, so far without success.

> 2535422763112957;5366:
> 343 gets to decide when to synthesize so be a little patient.

You just replaced one arbitrary statement with another one.
What marks the point for how long to be patient?
Is it finally okay to “not be patient” after a decade? Or do we need to wait another one?

5369

> 2533274801176260;5368:
> > 2535422763112957;5366:
> > 3. To what end has sprint failed. That is a claim you will have to back up
>
> Being a balanced addition to the gameplay. It encourages hit-and-run tactics and allows for easy escapability of bad players after making mistakes in a match. That’s the reason why sprint was nerfed from each game to the next in the hopes of diminishing its drawbacks, so far without success.

Plus casuals would actually need MORE time before rushing into action.
Sprinting reduces their limited capability to make good decisions even more.

That is one huge reason why in most Multiplayers only the best survive over longer periods.
They simply have their positive feedback loop which casuals dont have.

So to make a game more casual friendly it needs

  • a ranking system which does not mix good and bad players. - weapons that does not rely on good aiming or reflexes (f.e. the AR, sword, rockets, etc) - visual & audio hints to where attention is required (damage markers, radar, surround sound) - powerful vehicles (not a must, but a factor) - time to think before they act. Speed limits this. - and sadly (dont like that) a bit randomness. otherwise skill would always prevail
5370

> 2533274795098161;5361:
> > 2535415744086631;5353:
> > Loadouts weren’t that big of a deal to be honest. Everyone ran DMR or BR (after buff), thrust, boltshot, and the grenade perks. Not saying that I want loadouts. I just didn’t mind them in h4 that much. If you wanted to be dumb enough to spawn with a lightrifle or an AR it just made you an easy kill.
> >
> > Again not saying h4 was that great, but I still think it was much better than Reach.
>
> Couldn’t disagree more. Having sprint as a base mechanic in lieu of being a power up just breaks the game-flow too much. That’s the one thing that just never works well in an arena shooter and the reason why I still got HUGE doubts about Halo Infinite. Put personalised loadouts and twitch like mechanics on top of that (killcams, insta-spawns, ordinance-doprs…) and you sway the whole focus of the gameplay on movement rather than the sandbox. For all its mistakes, Reach never went that far. Hence why to me its multiplayer still felt like a Halo game, while H4’s main slayer modes just don’t.

Never said that I wanted sprint as a base mechanic. I don’t. I also don’t think loadouts, killcams, insta spawn, drops, etc should have ever been in Halo.

Don’t confuse my apathy for H4 as endorsement.
I just don’t think Reach should get a pass considering it’s problems were arguably worse than 4.

5371

> 2535422763112957;5363:
> • Jetpack was one of the more skill intensive abilities, way more skill based than active Camo or any and I mean any equipment in Halo 3

That’s a low bar to cross, and not working in Jetpack’s favour, especially considering the impact it had on map traversal.

> 2535422763112957;5363:
> • Ordnance had some wacky RNG but does that make halo bad?

Depends on what you’re looking for.

Ordnance caused actual unpredictability and served extremely useful power ups to players anywhere on the map as long as they got points. Or, in cases, not so useful powerups.

The game could favour one team in one way or another, making the other team have to fight harder for the same rewards.

Matches could snowball with the right ordnance for one team.
I mean, a warthog and the gunner with a damage boost?
Or collaborating to get a SAW and a damage boost.

So, if you’re fine with the game randomly tipping the board in favour of one team, then no, it’s probably not making Halo bad.
However, wanting the game to be a stable platform on which you play against others without one team getting treated differently by the game, then random Ordnance does the game no favour, and thus, to those who want the stable platform, it makes Halo bad.

> 2535422763112957;5363:
> • Reach had sprint and no one made a bug fuss so why in halo 4 is it a fuss?

Yes, there was fuss about sprint in Reach, as there was fuss about Armor Lock and Armor Abilities in general.
Halo 4 is just more recent and easier to remember

> 2535422763112957;5363:
> So you like reducing. That is not how games work.

The AAA industry overall disagree with that.

> 2535422763112957;5363:
> The more halos the more features because if it was vice versa we would be playing cyber punk or Halo 3 which is one of the greatest of al time but I am sure 6 Halo 3s will get really boring.

Yet, a lot of features have been cut between games.
Just adding features does not work because you start complicating the game with high risks of inbalance.
Also, input. Halo 5’s controller felt extremely crowded. Dual wielding and armor abilities on top of that would’ve been too much.

Furthermore, there aren’t many who want a copy of Halo 3.
Few are against change overall, but many feel that Halo 4 etc took a bad turn. Deviating from Halo 3.

Heck, CS is some 20 years old and hasn’t seen much gameplay change, atleast not to the extent Halo has seen.

Even without looking at actual gameplay mechanics and features there’s a huge list of things to add to a game.

New weapons, grenades, vehicles and maps.
Then new enemies and allies.
Improved AI, more game modes ( Slayer, CTF etc), new gameplay modes ( Firefight, Warzone and so forth).
Then utilities such as Theatere and Forge which can see improvements and additions, even potentially seeing new utility modes.
Customisation is always something which can be improved.

Lastly, under-the-hood improvements are always made for all aspects of the game.

I feel like there’s a massive misconception floating around that games need to drastically change between iterations.
Yet we have games like CS, DotA, LoL, sports and racing games which remain insanely popular despite seeing little gameplay changes over longer periods of time.

> 2535422763112957;5363:
> I have an architect as I friend I sent that quote to and I found that is only used by minimalist, which is a very niche field. Let’s add so we can see what works and doesn’t and after adding enough we can synthesize this and start taking away

You do realise that any creative field does exactly that before the finished product?
During game development, they add, test, tweak and cut things.
Taking your architect friend as an example, does he design a building, get it built, add more, and then start removing once he feel things he added doesn’t work anymore?

Minimalist doesn’t work in this case either.
Because simple gameplay can be extremely rich, fulfilling and enjoyable, especially when it is in a game environment with a lot of content. At least I’m not seeing anyone asking for a 2 hour campaign, some three MP maps and two simple modes.

5372

> 2535415744086631;5370:
> > 2533274795098161;5361:
> > > 2535415744086631;5353:
> > > Loadouts weren’t that big of a deal to be honest. Everyone ran DMR or BR (after buff), thrust, boltshot, and the grenade perks. Not saying that I want loadouts. I just didn’t mind them in h4 that much. If you wanted to be dumb enough to spawn with a lightrifle or an AR it just made you an easy kill.
> > >
> > > Again not saying h4 was that great, but I still think it was much better than Reach.
> >
> > Couldn’t disagree more. Having sprint as a base mechanic in lieu of being a power up just breaks the game-flow too much. That’s the one thing that just never works well in an arena shooter and the reason why I still got HUGE doubts about Halo Infinite. Put personalised loadouts and twitch like mechanics on top of that (killcams, insta-spawns, ordinance-doprs…) and you sway the whole focus of the gameplay on movement rather than the sandbox. For all its mistakes, Reach never went that far. Hence why to me its multiplayer still felt like a Halo game, while H4’s main slayer modes just don’t.
>
> Never said that I wanted sprint as a base mechanic. I don’t. I also don’t think loadouts, killcams, insta spawn, drops, etc should have ever been in Halo.
>
> Don’t confuse my apathy for H4 as endorsement.
> I just don’t think Reach should get a pass considering it’s problems were arguably worse than 4.

I know? The focus of my statement was why I disagree with you about Reach vs H4, not your opinions about sprint and so on.

I’m just claiming that Reach was a much better Halo experience for the reasons stated before. Long story short: I get AL, reduced strafe, prefab loadouts and bloom any day over all the H4 nonsense! And to stay in topic yes, sprint AS A BASE MECHANIC is on top of my “worst additions in any Halo ever” list. So sorry if I’m sounding biased, but frankly that’s because I am! :joy:

The art-style, weapon designs, over-all balancing, reduced ammo capacities, level designs, sound direction and music didn’t helped either though. So there is that…

5373

> 2533274795098161;5372:
> > 2535415744086631;5370:
> > > 2533274795098161;5361:
> > > > 2535415744086631;5353:
> > > > Loadouts weren’t that big of a deal to be honest. Everyone ran DMR or BR (after buff), thrust, boltshot, and the grenade perks. Not saying that I want loadouts. I just didn’t mind them in h4 that much. If you wanted to be dumb enough to spawn with a lightrifle or an AR it just made you an easy kill.
> > > >
> > > > Again not saying h4 was that great, but I still think it was much better than Reach.
> > >
> > > Couldn’t disagree more. Having sprint as a base mechanic in lieu of being a power up just breaks the game-flow too much. That’s the one thing that just never works well in an arena shooter and the reason why I still got HUGE doubts about Halo Infinite. Put personalised loadouts and twitch like mechanics on top of that (killcams, insta-spawns, ordinance-doprs…) and you sway the whole focus of the gameplay on movement rather than the sandbox. For all its mistakes, Reach never went that far. Hence why to me its multiplayer still felt like a Halo game, while H4’s main slayer modes just don’t.
> >
> > Never said that I wanted sprint as a base mechanic. I don’t. I also don’t think loadouts, killcams, insta spawn, drops, etc should have ever been in Halo.
> >
> > Don’t confuse my apathy for H4 as endorsement.
> > I just don’t think Reach should get a pass considering it’s problems were arguably worse than 4.
>
> I know? The focus of my statement was why I disagree with you about Reach vs H4, not your opinions about sprint and so on.
>
> I’m just claiming that Reach was a much better Halo experience for the reasons stated before. Long story short: I get AL, reduced strafe, prefab loadouts and bloom any day over all the H4 nonsense! And to stay in topic yes, sprint AS A BASE MECHANIC is on top of my “worst additions in any Halo ever” list. So sorry if I’m sounding biased, but frankly that’s because I am! :joy:
>
> The art-style, weapon designs, over-all balancing, reduced ammo capacities, level designs, sound direction and music didn’t helped either though. So there is that…

I feel sprint and advanced movement actually helped the gameplay in halo 5 especially. It feels like gunfights take much more skill than they ever have. It really separates the good players from the bad players. When I go back to games past such as Halo 3. I get frustrated with how I die to players who I beat in every other gunfight just because they got a lucky nade. Which I can usually compensate for in a game such as H5.

5374

> 2535422763112957;5366:
> > 2533274801176260;5365:
> > > 2535422763112957;5363:
> > > So you like reducing. That is not how games work.
> >
> > Actually, it is.
> > Games aim to create the maximum amount of depth from the minimum amount of complexity.
> > Introducing new mechanics always increases complexity, but if it doesn’t add (enough) depth, it’s a bad addition.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2535422763112957;5363:
> > > Let’s add so we can see what works and doesn’t and after adding enough we can synthesize this and start taking away
> >
> > What marks the point when it’s time to synthesize?
> > Halo has added sprint into three games by now and it hasn’t worked in a single one. The only difference was how large the drawbacks were.
> > Is it finally okay to “start taking away” after a decade? Or do we need to wait another one?
>
> 1. If you are going to rebut me please respond to all my points and don’t pick and choose. This is not a buffet line.
> 2. I see what that video tries to say but it A. Is not from a game studio and B. Fails to make its points well. Games to not need to be simple. You have failed to show that in an effective manner
> 3. To what end has sprint failed. That is a claim you will have to back up, 343 gets to decide when to synthesize so be a little patient.

I was kinda with you so far but around here you’re kinda just doing what you say commando544 did but in the other direction. How does the video fail to make its point? This is starting to be a claim that you now have to back up, but you chose not to. The producer is not from a game studio, but that wasn’t an issue when you referred to your architect friend over how game design should work. It’s an arbitrary rule that you just made up and used it so you didn’t have to confront the point at all.

Someone can only feel a need to respond to one part of your comment, and take no issue with or actually agree with another part. It kinda is a buffet line when you have multiple points. You know this to be true because you deflected from his final question and went from “we can synthesize” to “343i decides when to synthesize.”

Because now I want the answer to that question. Is 10 years too long, or not enough? Are we capable of influencing anything, or is it 343’s job to do everything?

5375

> 2533274822068856;5358:
> You know, I’ve been thinking about the Grappling Hook, specifically in campaign. Will it be possible to play through Campaign without it? I like the Just Cause series, but what if I want to go through Infinite the old fashioned way?

I’d think so, I hope the grapple hook is just an optional attachment. Not saying I don’t like it, but I wanna go through the campaign like the older ones at least once.

5376

> 2535449076192416;5341:
> > 2533274793006817;5337:
> > Accurately tracking slow moving targets is too easy for most players these days. Leaving it at the old settings would lead to an imbalance because the player skill level has changed in the 20 years since Halo CE.
>
> I’d argue that it would make the game better, as the gameplay is more casual and comprehensible and thus more accessible to the newer player. I certainly enjoy not having to excrete 18 gallons of sweat during every encounter.

OK but at the expense of movement in general. I would argue since you’ve slowed movement to Halo 3 speeds you would make the game so slow compared to the skill today that it’s a sweaty campfest in a game that already only has radar when you move. If you want less sweat, play Social. Because lowering the movement speed is only going to result in making it easier to track targets and thus punish people for moving.

> 2535449076192416;5341:
> Also, if the evolution of player skill is a common factor in game development, then things like double jump and wall run would never have been removed from Call of Duty because “2-dimensional combat would be too easy for players these days”.

That’s just wrong. Advanced movement was removed because they made three of the same games in a row and people got sick of it and demanded boots on the ground again. The only reason double jump and wall running were added in the first place was because COD was being extremely repetitive. If the games had maintained variety, we would have seen these things on and off to this day. That all said, Black Ops 3 has the least amount of camping and has a higher skill ceiling than the rest of the series, and the recent games have been easier or dumbed down compared to Black Ops 3.

> 2535449076192416;5341:
> Also also, games like DOOM and Quake had wicked-fast movement speed and people still flocked to Halo CE despite its many arguable “downgrades” to the formula. Why did this happen? Because Halo’s simplicity made it more accessible to the casual audience.

Halo CE and Doom/Quake didn’t occupy the same gamespace. Doom and Quake were essentially PC only. The Doom SNES port doesn’t even have multiplayer. Quake was on Dreamcast, ran terribly, and people with kbm dominated. Halo was a controller only game, ran smoother than the others, added aim assist and was essentially the third major console FPS title people played competitively against one another behind Goldeneye and Perfect Dark if they had played anything.

You’re not even comparing apples and oranges. This is apples and bicycles.

> 2535449076192416;5341:
> Also also also, games like Fortnite have pretty slow movement even with sprint, and that doesn’t stop anyone from enjoying it in the modern era.

Fortnite also has extremely absurdly long battles and because you can create your own cover, it means you are never actually out in the open because you can always build cover in a moments notice. Halo doesn’t let you build forts around you to escape gunfire.

Also, Fortnite is obnoxious and frankly a bad, tedious game unless you like 5 minute encounters. And it’s a game for preteens.

5377

> 2533274828579555;5348:
> > 2533274793006817;5337:
> > Accurately tracking slow moving targets is too easy for most players these days. Leaving it at the old settings would lead to an imbalance because the player skill level has changed in the 20 years since Halo CE.
>
> This is objectively false. Games like CSGO, Overwatch(depending on hero), and Valorant, all have slower or around the same movement speed as classical Halo gameplay. Two of those also have much higher kill times as well.

How is that objectively false? Are people getting dumber? Explain how that is objectively false. Cite your sources. Because as I see it, the vast majority of Halo players back in 2001 had minimal experience playing competitive FPS and it was mostly just Goldeneye and Perfect Dark, whereas in the 20 years since then, we’ve had tens of millions of kids born into and literally grow up playing console first person shooters in competitive multiplayer their entire lives and are now adults, something that is quite literally impossible to say about when Halo CE was released. Explain how any of that is objectively false.
Do you want to turn Halo into a 1 life per round, no regenerating health, incredibly short ttk game? Because that’s the argument you just gave about CSGO, which also has plenty of camping. Do you want to turn Halo into a hero shooter where there are only objective gametypes? Because that’s why Overwatch can get away with having slower heroes, which is only half true because there are so many heroes and aspects that allow mobility that Halo doesn’t have.

> 2533274828579555;5348:
> It’s an entirely separate game that has succeeded in the past up until a point

That point being the release of Call of Duty 4 which was the point the COD franchise ate its lunch and Halo never recovered.

5378

> 2533274793250636;5347:
> > 2535407747275549;5346:
> > I think people fail to realize that sprint and movement speed can be two very separate things
>
> They are both part of the discussion.
> Movement speed has higher impact than particular sprints.
>
> This is not a general discussion if “more speed is bad” rather then “does HALO needs more speed?”
> I say no. All that say yes have very little arguments in my eyes because a faster pace isnt casual friendly.
> And halo is a casual game.
>
> The core gamers get there battle of skills only at higher ranked matches.
> And they are free to start their own custom games like it was in Halo 2 & 3. Even in eSport like MLG they used custom settings.
> Another reason not to put in the game on default. Make it an option and all are happy.

Agreed but for the people saying sprint means speed that’s simply a bad argument assuming halo needed more speed Sprint isn’t necessarily the solution the solution is increasing the fov just look at halo 3s Terrible FOV and also increasing the movement speed. Sprint is merely an animation but it seems people are failing to understand this.

5379

> 2533274793006817;5377:
> > 2533274828579555;5348:
> > > 2533274793006817;5337:
> > > Accurately tracking slow moving targets is too easy for most players these days. Leaving it at the old settings would lead to an imbalance because the player skill level has changed in the 20 years since Halo CE.
> >
> > This is objectively false. Games like CSGO, Overwatch(depending on hero), and Valorant, all have slower or around the same movement speed as classical Halo gameplay. Two of those also have much higher kill times as well.
>
> How is that objectively false? Are people getting dumber? Explain how that is objectively false. Cite your sources. Because as I see it, the vast majority of Halo players back in 2001 had minimal experience playing competitive FPS and it was mostly just Goldeneye and Perfect Dark, whereas in the 20 years since then, we’ve had tens of millions of kids born into and literally grow up playing console first person shooters in competitive multiplayer their entire lives and are now adults, something that is quite literally impossible to say about when Halo CE was released. Explain how any of that is objectively false.
> Do you want to turn Halo into a 1 life per round, no regenerating health, incredibly short ttk game? Because that’s the argument you just gave about CSGO, which also has plenty of camping. Do you want to turn Halo into a hero shooter where there are only objective gametypes? Because that’s why Overwatch can get away with having slower heroes, which is only half true because there are so many heroes and aspects that allow mobility that Halo doesn’t have.
>
>
> > 2533274828579555;5348:
> > It’s an entirely separate game that has succeeded in the past up until a point
>
> That point being the release of Call of Duty 4 which was the point the COD franchise ate its lunch and Halo never recovered.

Halo was on one console cod wasn’t so don’t use such awful logic and halo stayed relatively just as popular as cod up until halo 4 came out. Cod didn’t kill halo it never had a chance simply because these two games were very different halo hurt itself. Btw sprint had absolutely nothing to do with cal of duty’s success.

5380

> 2533274795098161;5372:
> > 2535415744086631;5370:
> > > 2533274795098161;5361:
> > > > 2535415744086631;5353:
> > > > Loadouts weren’t that big of a deal to be honest. Everyone ran DMR or BR (after buff), thrust, boltshot, and the grenade perks. Not saying that I want loadouts. I just didn’t mind them in h4 that much. If you wanted to be dumb enough to spawn with a lightrifle or an AR it just made you an easy kill.
> > > >
> > > > Again not saying h4 was that great, but I still think it was much better than Reach.
>
> I know? The focus of my statement was why I disagree with you about Reach vs H4, not your opinions about sprint and so on.
>
> I’m just claiming that Reach was a much better Halo experience for the reasons stated before. Long story short: I get AL, reduced strafe, prefab loadouts and bloom any day over all the H4 nonsense! And to stay in topic yes, sprint AS A BASE MECHANIC is on top of my “worst additions in any Halo ever” list. So sorry if I’m sounding biased, but frankly that’s because I am! :joy:
>
> The art-style, weapon designs, over-all balancing, reduced ammo capacities, level designs, sound direction and music didn’t helped either though. So there is that…

I assumed you thought I was for sprint since my original post was simply about loadouts.

We seem to agree on more than we disagree, so at least we have common ground.

While yes H4 had sprint as a base mechanic, I found the AAs much less obtrusive.
Most people just ran with thruster which is similar to what we have in h5. I don’t like loadouts, but realistically everyone was still running the same class. With Reach you had people choosing AAs which were able to impact the flow of gameplay much greater than h4’s sprint.

Maybe if Reach didn’t have bloom I would agree with you, but having to deal with that along side Jetpack, Sprint, Armor Lock, and Camo was just too much of a departure from what Halo was originally.

Unfortunately sprint is here to stay it seems. I don’t know what infinite will end up being, but having the AAs on the map with what seems to be a toned down version of sprint is at least a step in the right direction. Knowing 343 though I’m sure they found something else to “fix”.

5381

> 2533274793006817;5376:
> OK but at the expense of movement in general. I would argue since you’ve slowed movement to Halo 3 speeds you would make the game so slow compared to the skill today that it’s a sweaty campfest in a game that already only has radar when you move.

You do know that H5G is actually slower than Halo 3 (in terms of kill frequency), despite the higher movement speed, right?

> 2533274793006817;5377:
> That point being the release of Call of Duty 4 which was the point the COD franchise ate its lunch and Halo never recovered.

Uuuuuh… no.
The point was the release of Reach, when Bungie decided to try and beat CoD at its own game (and failed, just like 343 later would). I have already shown you that Halo 3 did extremely well against CoD4 and its next two successors, as the playerbases are mostly disjunct.