I wouldn´t mind if they take the sprint away, halo is good without it.
I love the h3 mechanics where u trick jump with crouch and to boost ur speed using ramps etc on the map.
I’m liking the movement personally. Glad that ground pound and the jet boosters are gone. Sprint was always a concern for me but its more of a jog than a sprint and i think that works absolutely fine and at least gives you the impression you aren’t some overweight asthmatic like i think it would if it wasn’t there. I’m all for OG halo movement but the extra little bits in Infinite work as far as i am concerned and the Cod/Overwatchy movement from H5 can do one! 
> 2533274856169067;6056:
> Quite simply, it is very obvious that movement options increase the depth of gameplay. You can’t go back to the old halo games because they are so incredibly boring after playing halo reach, 4, and 5. Everything is so very simple in the old halo games. They really show they’re age. Sprint is a super important part of the dynamics of shooters. I noticed people have said “it affects map and vehicle design!” That’s fine, you can design maps and vehicles around sprint, that’s not a bad thing. If you want the classic, old timey halo design, just go play the old halo’s. New games offer new mechanics that make the game have greater depth as technology and ideas develop. Halo grew up, it’s time the community did too.
Username checks out.
> 2533274856169067;6056:
> Quite simply, it is very obvious that movement options increase the depth of gameplay.
Complexity doesn’t mean more gameplay depth.
If it was obvious you could easily explain how it increases the depth.
> 2533274856169067;6056:
> You can’t go back to the old halo games because they are so incredibly boring after playing halo reach, 4, and 5. Everything is so very simple in the old halo games. They really show they’re age.
Plenty of popular games today are simple in nature. You don’t see the grand strategy games getting huge audiences.
> 2533274856169067;6056:
> Sprint is a super important part of the dynamics of shooters.
Yet plenty of games do fine without it.
> 2533274856169067;6056:
> I noticed people have said “it affects map and vehicle design!” That’s fine, you can design maps and vehicles around sprint, that’s not a bad thing.
Sure you can, but that design have other requirements which some do not like making it into the maps.
Noticed anything else people have been saying?
> 2533274856169067;6056:
> If you want the classic, old timey halo design, just go play the old halo’s.
The irony.
If you want the “modern halo” you can play Halo Reach, 4 and 5.
> 2533274856169067;6056:
> New games offer new mechanics that make the game have greater depth as technology and ideas develop. Halo grew up, it’s time the community did too.
What new mechanics have become available in the last decade due to technological advancements? Which technological advacements to be exact?
Not even sure what new ideas there are today compared to the late 90’s and early 00’s.
Duke Nukem 3D pretty much featured equipment. ( Which we also saw in Halo 3 )
First Tomb Raider had clamber.
GTA3, I think it was featured sprint akin to what we see today.
Grappling hook, earliest I can think of is Worms.
Halo grew up?
Seems like another way to say “evolved” in a way to “positively” say the changes were good, negatively showcase anyone against those changes, while not even going any deeper on anything.
All that does is imply all games strive for one single goal, one type of experience. What’s the next thing every shooter now need? Battle Royal?
Where’s the point in several different games if the end game is one gameplay experience?
> 2535428082496463;6061:
> They already removed ground pound, and booster dodge, and that boost charge attack. The sprint and slide in this game isn’t even that fast. If you turn off all of the visual on screen effects you’re going to quickly realize you’re just walking 5% faster.
Check the creation date of the thread.
> 2533274902469708;5820:
> > 2533274889489936;2:
> > As in we all have to walk around really slowly and such?
>
> you do know that the maps are extended for sprint right? And the base movement is slowed down to accommodate for sprint?
They are now, yes, but wandering slowly through huge maps on the old ones didn’t do much in the way of replay ability for me.
> 2533274800264382;6057:
> > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > Quite simply, it is very obvious that movement options increase the depth of gameplay. You can’t go back to the old halo games because they are so incredibly boring after playing halo reach, 4, and 5. Everything is so very simple in the old halo games. They really show they’re age. Sprint is a super important part of the dynamics of shooters. I noticed people have said “it affects map and vehicle design!” That’s fine, you can design maps and vehicles around sprint, that’s not a bad thing. If you want the classic, old timey halo design, just go play the old halo’s. New games offer new mechanics that make the game have greater depth as technology and ideas develop. Halo grew up, it’s time the community did too.
>
> Adding more crap to a game doesn’t always make it better. Just makes it harder to balance the game
You’re right but adding a basic mechanic that is widely accepted in the shooter genre as a good thing shouldn’t be so controversial. There is no good argument against adding sprint. It just makes the game have more depth.
> 2533274856169067;6067:
> > 2533274800264382;6057:
> > > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > > Quite simply, it is very obvious that movement options increase the depth of gameplay. You can’t go back to the old halo games because they are so incredibly boring after playing halo reach, 4, and 5. Everything is so very simple in the old halo games. They really show they’re age. Sprint is a super important part of the dynamics of shooters. I noticed people have said “it affects map and vehicle design!” That’s fine, you can design maps and vehicles around sprint, that’s not a bad thing. If you want the classic, old timey halo design, just go play the old halo’s. New games offer new mechanics that make the game have greater depth as technology and ideas develop. Halo grew up, it’s time the community did too.
> >
> > Adding more crap to a game doesn’t always make it better. Just makes it harder to balance the game
>
> You’re right but adding a basic mechanic that is widely accepted in the shooter genre as a good thing shouldn’t be so controversial. There is no good argument against adding sprint. It just makes the game have more depth.
Ofc there is a solid argument they could just buff the movement speed sufficiently and there would be no need for Sprint whatsoever.
> 2533274795123910;6065:
> > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > Quite simply, it is very obvious that movement options increase the depth of gameplay.
>
> Complexity doesn’t mean more gameplay depth.
> If it was obvious you could easily explain how it increases the depth.
>
>
>
> > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > You can’t go back to the old halo games because they are so incredibly boring after playing halo reach, 4, and 5. Everything is so very simple in the old halo games. They really show they’re age.
>
> Plenty of popular games today are simple in nature. You don’t see the grand strategy games getting huge audiences.
>
>
>
> > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > Sprint is a super important part of the dynamics of shooters.
>
> Yet plenty of games do fine without it.
>
>
>
> > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > I noticed people have said “it affects map and vehicle design!” That’s fine, you can design maps and vehicles around sprint, that’s not a bad thing.
>
> Sure you can, but that design have other requirements which some do not like making it into the maps.
> Noticed anything else people have been saying?
>
>
>
> > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > If you want the classic, old timey halo design, just go play the old halo’s.
>
> The irony.
> If you want the “modern halo” you can play Halo Reach, 4 and 5.
>
>
>
> > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > New games offer new mechanics that make the game have greater depth as technology and ideas develop. Halo grew up, it’s time the community did too.
>
> What new mechanics have become available in the last decade due to technological advancements? Which technological advacements to be exact?
> Not even sure what new ideas there are today compared to the late 90’s and early 00’s.
> Duke Nukem 3D pretty much featured equipment. ( Which we also saw in Halo 3 )
> First Tomb Raider had clamber.
> GTA3, I think it was featured sprint akin to what we see today.
> Grappling hook, earliest I can think of is Worms.
>
> Um, pretty sure you don’t know how development works. We aren’t all still playing Pong because technology has advanced… so this was a weird statement. Advances in gaming technology (CPUs and GPUs) to add things like sprinting and sliding and jumping. I thought that would be self-explanatory. Seriously, just think about it for a second.
>
> Halo grew up?
> Seems like another way to say “evolved” in a way to “positively” say the changes were good, negatively showcase anyone against those changes, while not even going any deeper on anything.
>
> I’ve already dived pretty deep simply put, sprinting adds more depth which is good.
>
> All that does is imply all games strive for one single goal, one type of experience. What’s the next thing every shooter now need? Battle Royal?
> Where’s the point in several different games if the end game is one gameplay experience?
>
>
> Isn’t that your argument? You just want halo to stay the same without innovating or changing? Why do you even want a new halo?
>
>
>
> > 2535428082496463;6061:
> > They already removed ground pound, and booster dodge, and that boost charge attack. The sprint and slide in this game isn’t even that fast. If you turn off all of the visual on screen effects you’re going to quickly realize you’re just walking 5% faster.
>
> Check the creation date of the thread.
“Complexity doesn’t mean more gameplay depth.
If it was obvious you could easily explain how it increases the depth.”
It adds depth by adding an option that gives you a disadvantage and an advantage. You get increased movement speed at the penalty of not being able to look around freely and shoot right away. This is good because it rewards game awareness and increases the skill ceiling. There, easily explained. As I said, it’s very simple but you aren’t even bothering to give it nay thought.
“Plenty of popular games today are simple in nature. You don’t see the grand strategy games getting huge audiences.”
Grand strategy games have some of the biggest audiences so I have absolutely no clue what you are talking about. Please see League of Legends and or Dota 2. A games with more depth tend to have greater longevity.
“Yet plenty of games do fine without it.”
SOME games do do fine without it but that doesn’t mean it’s bad to add.
“Sure you can, but that design have other requirements which some do not like making it into the maps.
Noticed anything else people have been saying?”
Completely meaningless statement.
“The irony.
If you want the “modern halo” you can play Halo Reach, 4 and 5.”
There isn’t Irony here you just aren’t thinking very much. I like halo 5 because it is new and innovative. I like infinite because it will be new and innovative. You don’t like that halo is new and innovative so why would you want them to make a new halo that is the same as the old halos? that doesn’t make any sense. I don’t want halo infinite to be like 5, I want it to be a new experience.
“What new mechanics have become available in the last decade due to technological advancements? Which technological advacements to be exact?
Not even sure what new ideas there are today compared to the late 90’s and early 00’s.
Duke Nukem 3D pretty much featured equipment. ( Which we also saw in Halo 3 )
First Tomb Raider had clamber.
GTA3, I think it was featured sprint akin to what we see today.
Grappling hook, earliest I can think of is Worms.”
Um, pretty sure you don’t know how development works. We aren’t all still playing Pong because technology has advanced… so this was a weird statement. Advances in gaming technology (CPUs and GPUs) to add things like sprinting and sliding and jumping. I thought that would be self-explanatory. Seriously, just think about it for a second.
“Halo grew up?
Seems like another way to say “evolved” in a way to “positively” say the changes were good, negatively showcase anyone against those changes, while not even going any deeper on anything.”
I’ve already dived pretty deep simply put, sprinting adds more depth which is good.
“All that does is imply all games strive for one single goal, one type of experience. What’s the next thing every shooter now need? Battle Royal?
Where’s the point in several different games if the end game is one gameplay experience?”
Isn’t that your argument? You just want halo to stay the same without innovating or changing? Why do you even want a new halo?
> 2533274856169067;6067:
> > 2533274800264382;6057:
> > > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > > Quite simply, it is very obvious that movement options increase the depth of gameplay. You can’t go back to the old halo games because they are so incredibly boring after playing halo reach, 4, and 5. Everything is so very simple in the old halo games. They really show they’re age. Sprint is a super important part of the dynamics of shooters. I noticed people have said “it affects map and vehicle design!” That’s fine, you can design maps and vehicles around sprint, that’s not a bad thing. If you want the classic, old timey halo design, just go play the old halo’s. New games offer new mechanics that make the game have greater depth as technology and ideas develop. Halo grew up, it’s time the community did too.
> >
> > Adding more crap to a game doesn’t always make it better. Just makes it harder to balance the game
>
> You’re right but adding a basic mechanic that is widely accepted in the shooter genre as a good thing shouldn’t be so controversial. There is no good argument against adding sprint. It just makes the game have more depth.
No good argument? Or just not a one that your willing to accept or be open to? People don’t need to agree but it’s straight up obnoxious to act like there can’t be a reason why so many people oppose a games feature and such. You say it adds depth, I can say it complicates things🤷♀️ It’s that easy. I’m a simple person, I don’t like 500 buttons doing all these things when 50 will make the gameplay that much better by being simple. I also don’t believe it makes the game “faster” when it takes away combat readiness and has animations that get in the way.
and here’s the thing, you can say sprint “shouldn’t “ be controversial but the fact is it HAS been just that for over a decade now, there’s no getting around that and there’s a reason each halo game with sprint has changed how it works each sequel after and that’s because they’re trying to make it something that will work and not be so controversial. There’s a reason sprint has been like the top subject of halo discussion on here as well for years and years after the subject of playable elites, there’s a reason it’s not so widely accepted here👍 And clearly 343 sees that being how again, they keep changing how it works game after game.
to me it’s very clear you like sprint, and that’s fine. But you’re clearly showing you’re not even open for a debate on this controversy when you say there’s not a good reason not to have it, and I’d ask why even look in these threads when you’re set on your own preferences? Cause you’re not trying to convince people of much doing what you’re doing.
> 2533274923562209;6070:
> > 2533274856169067;6067:
> > > 2533274800264382;6057:
> > > > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > > > Quite simply, it is very obvious that movement options increase the depth of gameplay. You can’t go back to the old halo games because they are so incredibly boring after playing halo reach, 4, and 5. Everything is so very simple in the old halo games. They really show they’re age. Sprint is a super important part of the dynamics of shooters. I noticed people have said “it affects map and vehicle design!” That’s fine, you can design maps and vehicles around sprint, that’s not a bad thing. If you want the classic, old timey halo design, just go play the old halo’s. New games offer new mechanics that make the game have greater depth as technology and ideas develop. Halo grew up, it’s time the community did too.
> > >
> > > Adding more crap to a game doesn’t always make it better. Just makes it harder to balance the game
> >
> > You’re right but adding a basic mechanic that is widely accepted in the shooter genre as a good thing shouldn’t be so controversial. There is no good argument against adding sprint. It just makes the game have more depth.
>
> No good argument? Or just not a one that your willing to accept or be open to? People don’t need to agree but it’s straight up obnoxious to act like there can’t be a reason why so many people oppose a games feature and such. You say it adds depth, I can say it complicates things🤷♀️ It’s that easy. I’m a simple person, I don’t like 500 buttons doing all these things when 50 will make the gameplay that much better by being simple. I also don’t believe it makes the game “faster” when it takes away combat readiness and has animations that get in the way.
>
> and here’s the thing, you can say sprint “shouldn’t “ be controversial but the fact is it HAS been just that for over a decade now, there’s no getting around that and there’s a reason each halo game with sprint has changed how it works each sequel after and that’s because they’re trying to make it something that will work and not be so controversial. There’s a reason sprint has been like the top subject of halo discussion on here as well for years and years after the subject of playable elites, there’s a reason it’s not so widely accepted here👍 And clearly 343 sees that being how again, they keep changing how it works game after game.
>
> to me it’s very clear you like sprint, and that’s fine. But you’re clearly showing you’re not even open for a debate on this controversy when you say there’s not a good reason not to have it, and I’d ask why even look in these threads when you’re set on your own preferences? Cause you’re not trying to convince people of much doing what you’re doing.
It’s only been controversial because a lot of halo fans haven’t even tried the new halo’s. If you don’t like it, play older halos. They are what you are looking for. Why would you want a new game that’s a carbon copy of the old games?
Argument: Sprint just complicates things.
Counter-argument: It does complicate things but it only complicates the dynamics of combat and not actual inputs. Sprinting is a simple input, 1 button press. By allowing it to be an option you are keeping all previous engagement options and opening up new ones. By getting rid of it, you are closing off engagement options and making the combat have less depth.
A lot of halo fans don’t know what they actually want. “I want halo infinite to be exactly like the old games. it should feel jsut like them!” Just play the old games and let us have our new game that offers a different experience!
I am very open to debate but I have seen 0 good arguments for taking out sprint.
I don’t want to spam a bunch of posts about it but if anyone actually thinks they are capable of making a sound argument for why sprint should be removed, they can call/message me on Discord. TheeSheep#2225
Huge anti-sprint post, good thing I didn’t read all of it.
Give it a rest, Covenant can evade, Prometheans can teleport, let the Spartans run. As a fan of older and newest Halos, I accept change and try to evolve with the game. Just try doing that too.
I missed the thruster from H5 in this Flight, wish it was there, but seeing the many things that can be done with sprint, slide, clamber and the grapple shot, I understand why they took thrusters out.
> 2533274856169067;6071:
> > 2533274923562209;6070:
> > > 2533274856169067;6067:
> > > > 2533274800264382;6057:
> > > > > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > > > > Quite simply, it is very obvious that movement options increase the depth of gameplay. You can’t go back to the old halo games because they are so incredibly boring after playing halo reach, 4, and 5. Everything is so very simple in the old halo games. They really show they’re age. Sprint is a super important part of the dynamics of shooters. I noticed people have said “it affects map and vehicle design!” That’s fine, you can design maps and vehicles around sprint, that’s not a bad thing. If you want the classic, old timey halo design, just go play the old halo’s. New games offer new mechanics that make the game have greater depth as technology and ideas develop. Halo grew up, it’s time the community did too.
> > > >
> > > > Adding more crap to a game doesn’t always make it better. Just makes it harder to balance the game
>
> It’s only been controversial because a lot of halo fans haven’t even tried the new halo’s. If you don’t like it, play older halos. They are what you are looking for. Why would you want a new game that’s a carbon copy of the old games?
What makes you think Sprint is controversial because lots of Halo fans haven’t played the newer games? Anything to back that up? I can make baseless speculations too: “What if lots of Halo fans haven’t played the newer games… because they don’t like how Sprint changes the gameplay?” Seriously though, what if they (like me) have played the newer games and prefer the older games’ style of gameplay?
You say fans like me should just stick to the older games then, but we could just as easily say that you should stick to the more recent games, as they’re what you’re looking for. Why would you want a carbon copy of an already existing game?
You might object to that statement, arguing that the presence of Sprint doesn’t make Infinite a carbon copy of Halo 4 or Halo 5 (and you’d be right). So why do you think a Halo game without Sprint would make it a carbon copy of one of the original trilogy games? Just as there are plenty of differences between 4 and 5, there are plenty of differences between those games.
> A lot of halo fans don’t know what they actually want. “I want halo infinite to be exactly like the old games. it should feel jsut like them!” Just play the old games and let us have our new game that offers a different experience!
Who have you heard say that? This reads like an obvious strawman you fabricated to prove a false point. We want a different experience, we just don’t want Sprint to be a part of it. Why is that so hard to understand? There are other ways for Halo to change than incorporating a generic arm-swinging animation to move forward faster.
I like the way 343i has incorporated Equipment in Infinite. I like the way the AR is an actually viable weapon at mid-range with a competitive TTK. I like just about everything I’ve seen about Infinite and it’s obviously not a carbon copy of any previous Halo game.
> I am very open to debate but I have seen 0 good arguments for taking out sprint.
It’s incongruous with Halo’s gameplay style that not only allows but encourages free movement in combat. Whereas virtually every other contemporary FPS penalizes the player using ADS by slowing their movement and penalizes the player for moving by increasing weapon recoil/bloom, Halo’s combat can be likened to a dance.
A mechanic where the player can choose to forgo weapon usage in exchange for faster forward movement fits thematically with the balancing act between lethality and mobility that some games have, but Halo is not one such game.
> I don’t want to spam a bunch of posts about it but if anyone actually thinks they are capable of making a sound argument for why sprint should be removed, they can call/message me on Discord. TheeSheep#2225
That’s what this thread is for. Stop acting like no one with a different opinion has any sound reasoning for why. People might suspect you’re projecting… or just unpleasant.
Move base speed up to sprint speed as there isn’t much difference. Then remove sprint and change the radar back to how it used to work.
> 2533274856169067;6067:
> > 2533274800264382;6057:
> > > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > >
>
> You’re right but adding a basic mechanic that is widely accepted in the shooter genre as a good thing shouldn’t be so controversial. There is no good argument against adding sprint. It just makes the game have more depth.
Simple question for you. Does more gameplay depth always make a better game?
> 2533274856169067;6071:
> > 2533274923562209;6070:
> > > 2533274856169067;6067:
> > > > 2533274800264382;6057:
> > > > > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > > > > Quite simply, it is very obvious that movement options increase the depth of gameplay. You can’t go back to the old halo games because they are so incredibly boring after playing halo reach, 4, and 5. Everything is so very simple in the old halo games. They really show they’re age. Sprint is a super important part of the dynamics of shooters. I noticed people have said “it affects map and vehicle design!” That’s fine, you can design maps and vehicles around sprint, that’s not a bad thing. If you want the classic, old timey halo design, just go play the old halo’s. New games offer new mechanics that make the game have greater depth as technology and ideas develop. Halo grew up, it’s time the community did too.
> > > >
> > > > Adding more crap to a game doesn’t always make it better. Just makes it harder to balance the game
> > >
> > > You’re right but adding a basic mechanic that is widely accepted in the shooter genre as a good thing shouldn’t be so controversial. There is no good argument against adding sprint. It just makes the game have more depth.
> >
> > No good argument? Or just not a one that your willing to accept or be open to? People don’t need to agree but it’s straight up obnoxious to act like there can’t be a reason why so many people oppose a games feature and such. You say it adds depth, I can say it complicates things🤷♀️ It’s that easy. I’m a simple person, I don’t like 500 buttons doing all these things when 50 will make the gameplay that much better by being simple. I also don’t believe it makes the game “faster” when it takes away combat readiness and has animations that get in the way.
> >
> > and here’s the thing, you can say sprint “shouldn’t “ be controversial but the fact is it HAS been just that for over a decade now, there’s no getting around that and there’s a reason each halo game with sprint has changed how it works each sequel after and that’s because they’re trying to make it something that will work and not be so controversial. There’s a reason sprint has been like the top subject of halo discussion on here as well for years and years after the subject of playable elites, there’s a reason it’s not so widely accepted here👍 And clearly 343 sees that being how again, they keep changing how it works game after game.
> >
> > to me it’s very clear you like sprint, and that’s fine. But you’re clearly showing you’re not even open for a debate on this controversy when you say there’s not a good reason not to have it, and I’d ask why even look in these threads when you’re set on your own preferences? Cause you’re not trying to convince people of much doing what you’re doing.
>
> It’s only been controversial because a lot of halo fans haven’t even tried the new halo’s. If you don’t like it, play older halos. They are what you are looking for. Why would you want a new game that’s a carbon copy of the old games?
>
> Argument: Sprint just complicates things.
> Counter-argument: It does complicate things but it only complicates the dynamics of combat and not actual inputs. Sprinting is a simple input, 1 button press. By allowing it to be an option you are keeping all previous engagement options and opening up new ones. By getting rid of it, you are closing off engagement options and making the combat have less depth.
>
> A lot of halo fans don’t know what they actually want. “I want halo infinite to be exactly like the old games. it should feel jsut like them!” Just play the old games and let us have our new game that offers a different experience!
> I am very open to debate but I have seen 0 good arguments for taking out sprint.
> I don’t want to spam a bunch of posts about it but if anyone actually thinks they are capable of making a sound argument for why sprint should be removed, they can call/message me on Discord. TheeSheep#2225
Or we can remove sprint and you can play older halos. Why would you want a carbon copy of the old games?
Sprint does not get you anywhere faster. The game and maps are scaled because of it.
Why would you not want the base movement to be moved up to sprint speed then remove sprint?
> 2533274856169067;6056:
> Quite simply, it is very obvious that movement options increase the depth of gameplay. You can’t go back to the old halo games because they are so incredibly boring after playing halo reach, 4, and 5. Everything is so very simple in the old halo games. They really show they’re age. Sprint is a super important part of the dynamics of shooters. I noticed people have said “it affects map and vehicle design!” That’s fine, you can design maps and vehicles around sprint, that’s not a bad thing. If you want the classic, old timey halo design, just go play the old halo’s. New games offer new mechanics that make the game have greater depth as technology and ideas develop. Halo grew up, it’s time the community did too.
I think adding sprint and the other mechanics loses depth in the gameplay. no point in crouch jumping, grenade jumping or any other sort of technique because now you just clamber. Want to shoot, strafe, throw grenades and move forward and objective all while at max speed? Can’t because of sprint. You can’t go back to 4 or 5 because they are so incredibly boring and annoying to play after the ease, yet complexity of the previous games. They really show why they defined a generation.
It is not fine that it affects map design. First the maps are bigger so you are not getting anywhere faster than you were, second the weapons have to be more lethal and have more aim assist, which results in a lower skill gap and the game turning into a cover shooter. If you want the bad Halo games with sprint, go play them. Halo can still have new mechanics without it affecting the play. CE, 2 and 3 aren’t the same game.
> 2535440283237581;6073:
> > 2533274856169067;6071:
> > > 2533274923562209;6070:
> > > > 2533274856169067;6067:
> > > > > 2533274800264382;6057:
> > > > > > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > > > > > Quite simply, it is very obvious that movement options increase the depth of gameplay. You can’t go back to the old halo games because they are so incredibly boring after playing halo reach, 4, and 5. Everything is so very simple in the old halo games. They really show they’re age. Sprint is a super important part of the dynamics of shooters. I noticed people have said “it affects map and vehicle design!” That’s fine, you can design maps and vehicles around sprint, that’s not a bad thing. If you want the classic, old timey halo design, just go play the old halo’s. New games offer new mechanics that make the game have greater depth as technology and ideas develop. Halo grew up, it’s time the community did too.
> > > > >
> > > > > Adding more crap to a game doesn’t always make it better. Just makes it harder to balance the game
> >
> > It’s only been controversial because a lot of halo fans haven’t even tried the new halo’s. If you don’t like it, play older halos. They are what you are looking for. Why would you want a new game that’s a carbon copy of the old games?
>
> You say fans like me should just stick to the older games then, but we could just as easily say that you should stick to the more recent games, as they’re what you’re looking for. Why would you want a carbon copy of an already existing game?
No, you can’t just as easily tell me to stick to the older games because that argument doesn’t work in reverse. What I want is new and innovative gameplay. For example, one of the ways I want them to innovate is to make some maps that are still at normal scale while allowing players to have full sprint. This would be ideal. Some maps can be made bigger if they want but they don’t have to do that just for sprint. What you want is for them to make a copy of the old halos. I don’t want a game like halo 5, I want them to take Halo 5 and make a different and better game. You just want them to take away the good features that have added. Do you see how your argument doesn’t work?
You’ve basically proven that you certainly don’t have sound reasoning on the topic so you just lost the anti-sprint team some points there with that unthoughtful argument.
> 2533274905541250;6077:
> > 2533274856169067;6056:
> >
>
> I think adding sprint and the other mechanics loses depth in the gameplay. no point in crouch jumping, grenade jumping or any other sort of technique because now you just clamber. Want to shoot, strafe, throw grenades and move forward and objective all while at max speed? Can’t because of sprint. You can’t go back to 4 or 5 because they are so incredibly boring and annoying to play after the ease, yet complexity of the previous games. They really show why they defined a generation.
> It is not fine that it affects map design. First the maps are bigger so you are not getting anywhere faster than you were, second the weapons have to be more lethal and have more aim assist, which results in a lower skill gap and the game turning into a cover shooter. If you want the bad Halo games with sprint, go play them. Halo can still have new mechanics without it affecting the play. CE, 2 and 3 aren’t the same game.
Halo 5 had some of the hardest and most intricate movement mechanics of any shooter, let alone halo. There are so many jumps on each map that go beyond crouch jumping which still exists in halo 5. A combination of multiple mechanics need to be used to make many of the skill jumps. They are harder to learn than the halo 3 ones and have a higher impact on the game itself. Clamber is an extension of the movement. It can help you kill momentum from times you would be launched. You can clamber small ledges instead of jumping really high over them and leaving yourself vulnerable in the air.
Sprint is an ability and the magnum specifically was able to be shot instantly out of sprint. Still, it is a significant speed boost and sprinting alone was not how halo 5 was played. Playing it with all of its abilites allowed you to shoot at speeds higher than sprinting.
Halo 3 is one of my favorite games of all time. It did define a generation and was complex for it’s time. It had depth and was complex enough to keep people coming back. Halo 5 is more complex and to say it’s boring is not true. Some people don’t like it as a Halo game but no one says it’s multiplayer is bad or boring, just not halo which is subjective and will different from person to person.
Not all maps are bigger because of sprint. Halo 5 had many maps that were not bigger than the average halo 3 map. Empire, The Rig, Fathom, coliseum, and overgrowth were all similar in size to some halo 3 maps. You can also cross most of halo 5’s maps faster than you could halo 3’s maps, specially using all of its movement mechanics.
The weapons were not more lethal in halo 5 and the skill gap grew. There is more aim assist but it was much harder to shoot people because they were moving way too fast. Halo 3 had alot of aim assist as well but you were shooting at people moving incredibly slow. It is way harder to duel someone in halo 5 than halo 3.
Halo 3 was a cover shooter. Due to its lack of mobility, map control was incredibly important. Most of the games were spent peaking from covers. Once someone had their weapons, taking a position of power was too common and powerful. Getting the high ground on The Pit or on High Ground made you incredibly difficult to kill due to a lack of movement mechanics such as clamber. It was easy to protect yourself up there because there was very limited access. This lead to shootouts over a distance around cover. Don’t say it was not a cover shooter or easy to protect the area across from sniper on Blackout.
> 2533274820483063;6079:
> > 2533274905541250;6077:
> > > 2533274856169067;6056:
> > >
> >
> > I think adding sprint and the other mechanics loses depth in the gameplay. no point in crouch jumping, grenade jumping or any other sort of technique because now you just clamber. Want to shoot, strafe, throw grenades and move forward and objective all while at max speed? Can’t because of sprint. You can’t go back to 4 or 5 because they are so incredibly boring and annoying to play after the ease, yet complexity of the previous games. They really show why they defined a generation.
> > It is not fine that it affects map design. First the maps are bigger so you are not getting anywhere faster than you were, second the weapons have to be more lethal and have more aim assist, which results in a lower skill gap and the game turning into a cover shooter. If you want the bad Halo games with sprint, go play them. Halo can still have new mechanics without it affecting the play. CE, 2 and 3 aren’t the same game.
>
> Halo 5 had some of the hardest and most intricate movement mechanics of any shooter, let alone halo. There are so many jumps on each map that go beyond crouch jumping which still exists in halo 5. A combination of multiple mechanics need to be used to make many of the skill jumps. They are harder to learn than the halo 3 ones and have a higher impact on the game itself. Clamber is an extension of the movement. It can help you kill momentum from times you would be launched. You can clamber small ledges instead of jumping really high over them and leaving yourself vulnerable in the air.
>
> Sprint is an ability and the magnum specifically was able to be shot instantly out of sprint. Still, it is a significant speed boost and sprinting alone was not how halo 5 was played. Playing it with all of its abilites allowed you to shoot at speeds higher than sprinting.
>
> Halo 3 is one of my favorite games of all time. It did define a generation and was complex for it’s time. It had depth and was complex enough to keep people coming back. Halo 5 is more complex and to say it’s boring is not true. Some people don’t like it as a Halo game but no one says it’s multiplayer is bad or boring, just not halo which is subjective and will different from person to person.
>
> Not all maps are bigger because of sprint. Halo 5 had many maps that were not bigger than the average halo 3 map. Empire, The Rig, Fathom, coliseum, and overgrowth were all similar in size to some halo 3 maps. You can also cross most of halo 5’s maps faster than you could halo 3’s maps, specially using all of its movement mechanics.
>
> The weapons were not more lethal in halo 5 and the skill gap grew. There is more aim assist but it was much harder to shoot people because they were moving way too fast. Halo 3 had alot of aim assist as well but you were shooting at people moving incredibly slow. It is way harder to duel someone in halo 5 than halo 3.
>
> Halo 3 was a cover shooter. Due to its lack of mobility, map control was incredibly important. Most of the games were spent peaking from covers. Once someone had their weapons, taking a position of power was too common and powerful. Getting the high ground on The Pit or on High Ground made you incredibly difficult to kill due to a lack of movement mechanics such as clamber. It was easy to protect yourself up there because there was very limited access. This lead to shootouts over a distance around cover. Don’t say it was not a cover shooter or easy to protect the area across from sniper on Blackout.
I am well aware of Halo 5’s movement mechanics and do respect the people who are good at it. Halo 3 had so many skill jumps that go way beyond the basic crouch jump as well. I disagree that they are harder to learn than the halo 3 ones but that’s subjective. No point in arguing that. My point there was that things like clamber kill a lot of the skill gap there.
Yes, the magnum can shoot straight out of sprint, but that’s still not in it and only one weapon. Yes if you combine some abilities you can move even faster than sprint, but you are forced into a single direction. There is no strafing like that, and that is how you play in gunfights.
I do think Halo 5 is boring. Just because it has a lot of mechanics doesn’t mean it’s fun. It’s like watching an action movie with only explosions.
All those maps you listed are absolutely bigger than the maps in Halo 3. I think you’re just used to playing them at halo 5 speeds so they seem smaller.
The weapons are way more lethal. What I mean by that is they are all hyper-accurate, can fire at a long range and all have competitive ttk. This is what I meant by cover shooter. It feels like the second you leave you get lasered down from a million directions at once. That’s not the case in Halo 3. you spawn with the BR which is pretty accurate but at longer ranges you have to lead your shots. And a lot of the sandbox was built to be inaccurate, because that’s what makes the campaign fun. You can run and jump and shoot doing these crazy things but in Halo 5, enemies have extremely accurate weapons with fast travel times and even some that track you.
Controlling the map is good. It makes for great competitive play. If a team has sniper tower on lockout, you need to communicate as a team to push and take them down so you can have control. and in casual you can do whatever you want, just like campaign where you run and jump through bottom mid and have the freedom to move at max speed and do anything you want at the same time without having to worry about the hyper-lethal sandbox trying to kill you because of sprint.
After playing the tech preview I’m very happy with the current itteration of sprint. It strikes a balance between core halo play and permits modern FPS movent mechanics.
I think we’re getting 304 pages into something that 343 has hit on the head perfectly with Halo Infinite.