> 2585548714655118;5891:
> Generally during combat I am no longer trying transverse the map so the only speed that is important is the one that I use to traverse the area of engagement.
>
> The initial engagement can take many forms. Sprint / slide provide options. I may (or may not) be forced to sprint across the map. But I am not forced to sprint into the actual engagement. That gives me options. How I round that corner into an area where the enemy is waiting is important. I may (or may not) be slowing - but where we disagree is that either speed is sub-optimal. The important bit for me is that I have options.
Options in Halo 3:
- Move at 100% speed while not shooting
- Move at less than 100% speed while shooting
- Move at 100% speed while shooting
Options in H5G:
- Move at 100% speed while not shooting
- Move at less than 100% speed while shooting
Sprint doesnât give you more options. All it does is take them away. Thatâs a fact and completeley independent of whether or not either of those speeds is considered âoptimalâ or not.
Even if you were to redesign classic Halo so that 75% movement speed were âoptimalâ for combat (by adding arbitrary restrictions, such as a blurred screen to simulate fast movement or whatever) you could still chose to move at a so-called âsub-optimal speedâ any time you wanted to, including during combat. H5G (and any other Halo game with sprint) takes that choice away from you and forces you to move at <100% for combat.
Now, itâs okay to actually prefer this version of gameplay. There is nothing inherently wrong with liking something and I will never try to convince someone that they are wrong for enjoying something I donât (or vice versa). However, it is wrong to try and justify your own preference with something that isnât actually there, and I will correct false statements without batting an eye.
> 2533274842046585;5908:
> When people say it slows down the game, I just feel that theyâve perhaps never viewed it from the other perspective. I try to see both sides.
Itâs not an issue of perspective. It can be objectively measured that the last few games were slower than the original trilogy in various aspects, depending on what criteria you choose to determine âfastâ.
In terms of kills, H5G matches take longer to finish with less kills being made than Halo 3.
However, it has already been mentioned that kills arenât necessarily a good measure for overall engagement between players, because not every encounter needs to end with a kill; and I fully agree with that statement.
Which is why I have personally measured the time between encounters across multiple games several years ago (some time around 2015). I defined âencounterâ as every time I took an action that would directly affect another player, such as melee, shooting, throwing a grenade, etc. or such an action was taken against me. My dataset included 40 matches from each of the Halo titles available to me at that time (Halo CE and Halo 2 via XBC/XLK, Halo 3, Reach and 4 on the 360), played in 4v4 on vanilla maps.
Downtime between two encounters increased from an average 5-10 seconds in the original trilogy to 15-20 seconds in the âmodernâ games.
EDIT: One small addendum - I did not count respawn timers as part of downtime, so Halo 4âs instant respawn (or the other titlesâ lack thereof) did not affect the results.
Again, itâs perfectly fine to actually prefer the slower pace in the new games. But claiming to like the new mechanics because they allegedly make the game âfasterâ is not only false but a blatant misrepresentation of objectively verifyable facts.
> 2614366390849210;5905:
> Sprint doesnât remove fluid gameplay at all, it just adds button combos into movement much like H2 had button combos for some combat.
Yes it does, and it does so by definition.
In games without sprint, in order to reach top speed, you move the stick forwards and the game gradually accelerates your character until you have reached the maximum BMS.
In games with sprint, in order to reach top speed, you move the stick forwards and the game gradually accelerates your character until you have reached the maximum BMS, and then you press an additional button that just instantly raises your speed from 60-80% (depending on the game) to 100%.
There is no other way to reach top speed without this sudden jump, and the game actively locks you out of any movement speeds in between (say, 90%). And you will experience that stutter multiple times per minute, because you have to flip-flop between movement-mode and combat-mode repeatedly, as the game arbitrarily strips your of your combat abilities during sprint.
That is objectively not fluid but abrupt, disjointed and flat out janky.
> 2614366390849210;5910:
> I posted this next opinion in this thread a looooong time ago, and no one seemed to care. I almost guarantee Infinite will have playlists both with and without sprint.
Nobody cares because itâs still nothing but a band-aid solution.
The vanilla maps will be once again designed for sprint with respect to size, distance between covers, object placement (like team bases, etc.) so any classic gametype will either play like crap or be once more relegated to nothing but forge maps.
Weapons and vehicles will be tuned for sprint gameplay in terms of damage, spread, magazine size, vehicle speed and health, and unlike maps - which can be at least be forged - none of this can be individually(!) modified in the first place in custom settings.
Itâs also completely useless for PvE modes such as campaign, firefight or whatever else 343 might implement this time.
> 2533274823394867;5933:
> i think and i am sure a lot off people going to disagree with it but i think its time to make a end on this discusion more about sprint and other mechanics and that thread can be closed.
So youâre not gonna answer any of the questions that I asked you almost one week ago, instead ingnoring them and demanding the thread being closed?
Why doesnât that surprise meâŚ?
