Scraping the new mechanics and completely reverting to the classic movement system would honestly discourage me from playing the multiplayer.
Letâs be honest, when it comes to gameplay and movement 343i are in a very bad spot. If they try to please both group of fans the game will fail due to everything being messy. If 343i makes Infinite play like classic halo the modern fans will be mad/pushed away, and the same goes for if Infinite plays like H5G (or similar to it). So what should 343i do? I think (not fully into said thought) 343i should focus more on the classic halo fans by 80% or 90% in Infinite and up, while in pushing/keeping away modern halo fans.
> 2533274936074323;1063:
> Letâs be honest, when it comes to gameplay and movement 343i are in a very bad spot. If they try to please both group of fans the game will fail due to everything being messy. If 343i makes Infinite play like classic halo the modern fans will be mad/pushed away, and the same goes for if Infinite plays like H5G (or similar to it). So what should 343i do? I think (not fully into said thought) 343i should focus more on the classic halo fans by 80% or 90% in Infinite and up, while in pushing/keeping away modern halo fans.
Best course of action is making Halo Infinite a massive ARPG / MOBA / Racing game with elements from space simulators and Farming Simulator, and keep the maximum amount of players at 17.
Frankly, itâd be interesting knowing how many outside the forums, who simply do not care about what is in a game, as long as the game is enjoyable to them.
I have played Halo 5 despite my gripes with the movement abilities and I have had fun in it and occasionally with the abilities. Doesnât change that I think Iâd enjoy a classic gamestyle, not on the current development path, more than what weâve got now.
So, while there are those who said they wonât buy Halo Infinite if it has or lacks advanced movement, I wouldnât be surprised if theyâre numbered in two digit numbers, perhaps low three digit numbers. Not to mention they kind of take each other out. There could be 10 which wonât buy if it has X, and 10 who wonât buy if it doesnât have X.
People will most likely buy and play as long as the game is good.
> 2533274798957786;1060:
> I read all your posts. The only way to acknowledge them is to like them. I have issues with them soooâŚ
No. Thatâs a cop-out answer. It doesnât require you to agree with posts in order to acknowledge them. Besides, people wouldnât know who liked their responses if they got two or more likes in a row, as waypoint only notifies you of the number.
The easiest way is just to reference the points being made. Even if only indirectly. âIt has been mentioned thatâŚâ
> 2533274798957786;1060:
> I donât know what has been disproven (which is not even a word).
disproven.
English
Verb
Alternative irregular form of the past participle of disprove
> 2533274798957786;1060:
> My allegations have definitely been disputed, which is different.
==>>
> 2533274798957786;908:
> A new Halo game that has no Abilities, Spartan or otherwise, will be dull and boring and only appealing to esports enthusiasts.
> 2533274801176260;911:
> On a side note: I donât give two -Yoink- about eSports, in fact, I donât really care about multiplayer in general. 343 could reduce the multiplayer to one map, one gun, have blue team walk on the ceiling and the only method of movement be by moonwalking backwards, and I wouldnât mind. I play almost exclusively PvE modes like campaign, firefight and even some Spartan Ops while it was new. And I want my fluid gameplay back, that was butchered in the last few games. I am living proof that the preference for classic movement is not restricted to âesports enthusiastsâ.
Ignored once:
> 2533274798957786;935:
> I said âclassic movementâ would only appeal to esports enthusiasts. Thatâs my opinion and it remains so. The only way I could be wrong is if Halo: Infinite releases with only âclassic movementâ and itâs a huge runaway success the likes of which Microsoft has never seen before. Until then itâs just speculation on my part and I canât claim it to be true any more than you can claim it to be false.
> 2533274801176260;941:
> Yes we can. I donât care about eSports. I want classic movement. Ergo, your statement is false.
> 2533274825830455;942:
> Declaring a statement an opinion does not make it unable to be wrong. In particular, the opinion you presented is quite a definite statement: âclassic movement would only appeal to esports enthusiastsâ. Therefore, if we can find a single person who is not an esports enthusiast but likes classic movement, your statement is false. Even if you weaken it sufficiently, it is still a statement, the thruthfulness of which could be decided fairly unambiguously by simply polling people. It is not a subjective statement in the sense that you can in principle definitively find out how many Halo players identify as âesports enthusiastsâ and how many like classic Halo, and what is the overlap between these two sets.
Ignored twice:
> 2533274798957786;956:
> Or, I could be right.
And that is only the first example that comes to mind. The have been othersâŚ
> 2533274798957786;1060:
> Many times you simply missed my point.
All the more reason to clear up a misunderstandingâŚ
> 2533274798957786;1060:
> Some say âclassic movementâ disappeared with Reach, but Reach had all the movements labeled as âclassicâ. So do Halo 4 and 5.
Thatâs strange. I could not shoot while moving at max speed in either of those games. We must have played different games then.
> 2533274798957786;1060:
> They want the new game to play âlikeâ Halo 2 and 3, but without the Reach Plus stuff, which would then make the game play like Halo 2 and 3, and Halo 2 and 3 still exist.
No. Thereâs your misconception. People say they want to move like in Halo 2 and 3, but they donât want the game to play like in Halo 2 or 3. There have been numerous posts of giving examples what could be improved and/or changed instead, while leaving the movement alone. So in order to not reference myself once again, hereâs another post from about three weeks ago:
> 2535473481267884;866:
> You literally have no clue about gameplay.
> People (the ones you try to attack / make fun of in your posts) donât want âanother H3â (like you stated in countless posts). A lot of people would appreciate a new game, heavily focussed on the run & gun formular, a one-gear movement system w. improvements.
>
> How it could be different? Have you ever heard something about weapon sandbox improvements? Maps? Campaign, Multiplayer designed around a one gear movement system? Balancing? Vehicles? Balanced Dual Wielding? Theater? Physics / Environment? Soundtracks? Improve forge? Gamemodes? Projectile / Hitscan? Vehicles? Customization? Matchmaking / Servers? Improved map pick ups? Improved graphics? And tons of other stuff.
>
> But I donât expect you to understand anything of this anyway. People like to ignore every argument, every post, every feedback to make another âhehehe, u ppl want another Halo 3, heheheâ joke, because they are not able to discuss.
Gameplay is much more than just movement. People want their RunânâGun back, but that doesnât mean that they want a copypaste of everything else that the original trilogy did (and in some cases even did wrong).
> 2533274798957786;1060:
> People say this âclassic movementâ thing will improve Haloâs popularity, yet no one has provided any citation from Microsoft that it believes the franchise is in trouble. No citation of any kind indicating that Microsoft is concerned about the health of one of its flagship games.
Obviously Microsoft wouldnât want to draw attention to an underperforming product. They instead try to spin everything in a positive light to convince the consumers and particularly the investors that everything is alright. You know, how they did with, say, Windows 8:
> Microsoft says that 4 million users upgraded to Windows 8 over the weekend after its release,[171][172] which CNET says was well below Microsoftâs internal projections and was described inside the company as disappointing.[173]On November 27, 2012, Microsoft announced that it has sold 40 million licenses of Windows 8 in the first month, surpassing the pace of Windows 7.[174]However, according to research firm NPD, sales of devices running Windows in the United States have declined 21 percent compared to the same time period in 2011.[175] As the holiday shopping season wrapped up, Windows 8 sales continued to lag, even as Apple reported brisk sales.[176] The market research firm IDC reported an overall drop in PC sales for the quarter, and said the drop may have been partly due to consumer reluctance to embrace the new features of the OS and poor support from OEM for these features.[177] This capped the first year of declining PC sales to the Asia Pacific region, as consumers bought more mobile devices than Windows PCs.[178]
> 2533274798957786;1060:
> Iâm not convinced Halo is in trouble
Halo 5 Is the Least Selling Main Halo Game in UK History.
Halo 5 Sold Fewer Xbox Consoles Than Any Other Game in the Main Halo Series.
H5Gâs average playtime in 2015 is lower than Tomb Raider (an offline game) and Gears (a remake) in spite of earlier release.
And these are just news releases from the gameâs launch window.
(Oh, before you ask, the last picture was released by Major Nelson at the end of 2015 as a new yearâs summary through official Microsoft channels.)
> 2533274798957786;1060:
> Iâm not convinced âclassic movement mechanicsâ is the answer, or that movement mechanics is even the problem.
âŚwhich is why people have suggested to release one game with those mechanics and see how it performs. It could have even been an arcade game Ă la âHalo Onlineâ that doesnât require much work, launches with a few maps and modes and if it does well could be supported with DLC to expand it beyond its original scope. In fact, people have even asked Microsoft to release Halo Online specifically (minus the Pay2Win systme, of course), a game that already exists but is kept under wraps at 343. The announcement trailer has people just agitated that they might get a triple-A game adhering to their wishes instead.
i like the spartan abilities of halo 5 but not happy with the spartan charge!
> 2727626560040591;1061:
> > 2725616024486561;1058:
> > You are missing the point as well. It does not matter what you, or I, or anyone else thinks Halo needs to succeed in Pro-gaming. What matters is that which the decision makers believe Halo requires to succeed and their decisions will affect the design of Halo Infinite PvP. I think classic movement and play, not Call of Halo would succeed tremendously on a world circuit but that likely isnât the decision of the suits. The evolution of their thinking has been to make the gameplay as fast as possible, twitch twitch twitch and I am not referring to a streaming service.
>
> Not really. Although I didnât address your points directly, I knew exactly what you were talking about, but people can still voice their opinion about why Halo doesnât need to be Call of Halo to succeed in eSports.
>
> For my opinion, I do agree that theyâre focusing more on eSports, but I donât really agree that itâs some suits at MS influencing 343 to design the majority of their game for eSports or even 343 doing that. Frankly, that would be a bad business decision for different reasons, but mainly because modern Halo has a history of not doing well in the eSports scene. Iâm assuming you donât follow the competitive scene, but if you did, you would know that eSports in Reach was average to mediocre and H4 was a total disaster outside of the initial launch event and 343âs 1v1 tourney and both games had abilities in them. Why would suits at MS or 343 put all their eggs in that basket when modern Halo eSports had a history of doing badly compared to other games? H5 isnât much different either. The Worldâs events get good viewership, but outside of that and a couple other events, the viewership hasnât been that great which Iâm assuming would come at no surprise if there were smart people at MS.
>
> 343 made H5 competitive by doing things like equal starts, tighter skill matching, Breakout and the HCS playlist for example, but things like Spartan abilities, the overall weapon sandbox, map designs, etc. are all just things 343 thinks Spartans should do and how their world should be which is largely influenced by said abilities. The by-product of all of that combined with more HCS coverage is a game that feels faster, more competitive and understandably makes some people think itâs all about eSports when itâs really not imo.
The suits affect and direct major game design areas. It works in that manner in most major production companies of which Microsoft is one. Halo 5 made more money in the first 6 months on microtransactions than any previous gamesâ DLC. Things such as REQ, how and when, and what drives a player to use REQ are directed from above. They do not design specific areas but provide direction and approval authority. How the game is marketed (eSports) are decided by Microsoft. This is a billion dollar franchise. This is not an IP that a company looks at a subsidiary and says, âJust come up with something.â Whether or not it is a good direction or a smart implementation isnât the issue. They have stumbled numerous times. Pinning the eSports implementation on 343 or Bungie is like blaming Dice for Loot Box decisions made by EA. No one at Dice says, âEA made us do itâ but that is the manner in which game development operates. Developers do things directed by the individuals that control the purse strings and when it backfires the developers have to stand there and take the blame for corporate decisions.
Regarding the topic at hand, movement speed, gamers also need to consider the vast alterations and additions in mobility methods versus more classic titles and that has also had an affect on the game. Map design also plays directly into perception and affects matters such as time to contact.
Personally I would love a new Halo with mechanics similar to the classic Halo games. I really loved Halo 5âs multiplayer but I wouldnât miss the Spartan abilities if they were removed from Infinite. I can see quite a lot of people saying that sprint should stay, and while I wouldnât mind a game without sprit I think that 343 should really get creative with map design. Maybe they could make maps that are small and open where you would need to keep your weapon up all the time anyway or if they made maps a little bigger then they could compensate with vehicles and power ups. Something I do think should be taken away though is ADS, I wasnât a fan. The classic art style coming back makes me so happy and based on what Iâve seen of other peopleâs reactions, I think the majority of people are happy with that well. Infinite has huge potential to be the game that brings everybody back after the disappointment some fans had with 4 and 5, and as long as the game is a fun game that stays true to what people love about Halo, I think thatâs all that really matters. 
Well, outside of the fact that a number of journalists and bloggers have been predicting the demise of Halo since the release of Halo 2, I have yet to see any credible evidence that Microsoft is concerned about the health of the franchise. The fact that they have secured a deal with Showtime and are now producing episodes with the likes of Steven Spielberg at the helm suggests that Microsoft still has some faith in their product. You donât do that sort of thing for a dead game.
I wonder, then, what overall difference would it make in their next release if it had Spartan Charge or not?
> 2533274798957786;1070:
> Well, outside of the fact that a number of journalists and bloggers have been predicting the demise of Halo since the release of Halo 2, I have yet to see any credible evidence that Microsoft is concerned about the health of the franchise. The fact that they have secured a deal with Showtime and are now producing episodes with the likes of Steven Spielberg at the helm suggests that Microsoft still has some faith in their product. You donât do that sort of thing for a dead game.
>
> I wonder, then, what overall difference would it make in their next release if it had Spartan Charge or not?
It would likely do fine as long as it has most of the content halo 5 has now at launch. Believe it or not but the reason halo 5 failed so bad at launch wasnât because of Spartan abilities it was because it had less content than halo 2.
> 2533274798957786;1070:
> I wonder, then, what overall difference would it make in their next release if it had Spartan Charge or not?
Probably nothing at all, but it would sure make the game more bearable for me.
As of spartan abilities, get rid of everything except thrust.
> 2533274798957786;1070:
> Well, outside of the fact that a number of journalists and bloggers have been predicting the demise of Halo since the release of Halo 2, I have yet to see any credible evidence that Microsoft is concerned about the health of the franchise. The fact that they have secured a deal with Showtime and are now producing episodes with the likes of Steven Spielberg at the helm suggests that Microsoft still has some faith in their product. You donât do that sort of thing for a dead game.
>
> I wonder, then, what overall difference would it make in their next release if it had Spartan Charge or not?
What you have to consider is this. The Halo âfranchiseâ is healthy enough, but from what I recall hearing a few years back that isnât because of the game alone. If memory serves, they [MS] started combining a lot of the products like toys/figures and such into the units sold numbers. Basically meaning you canât differentiate those sales from actual game sales. Memory is foggy on the details, but it was something like that. Guess I shouldâve bookmarked that at the time, but never thought about it then.
Regardless of that, the thing is the more products you have in a franchise, the less important it becomes to have one that isnât selling so well. So between the books, toys, TV series, movie or whatever, the game doesnât have to be doing that well in order for the franchise to be fine. You donât do that sort of thing for a dead franchise. But it just makes sense to me, that if you have the capitol to invest and you can branch out in order to bring in more revenue, why wouldnât you? Especially considering that the more products you have in the line, the less impact it will have if/when one of those products has a slump.
> 2594261035368257;1074:
> > 2533274798957786;1070:
> > Well, outside of the fact that a number of journalists and bloggers have been predicting the demise of Halo since the release of Halo 2, I have yet to see any credible evidence that Microsoft is concerned about the health of the franchise. The fact that they have secured a deal with Showtime and are now producing episodes with the likes of Steven Spielberg at the helm suggests that Microsoft still has some faith in their product. You donât do that sort of thing for a dead game.
> >
> > I wonder, then, what overall difference would it make in their next release if it had Spartan Charge or not?
>
> What you have to consider is this. The Halo âfranchiseâ is healthy enough, but from what I recall hearing a few years back that isnât because of the game alone. If memory serves, they [MS] started combining a lot of the products like toys/figures and such into the units sold numbers. Basically meaning you canât differentiate those sales from actual game sales. Memory is foggy on the details, but it was something like that. Guess I shouldâve bookmarked that at the time, but never thought about it then.
>
> Regardless of that, the thing is the more products you have in a franchise, the less important it becomes to have one that isnât selling so well. So between the books, toys, TV series, movie or whatever, the game doesnât have to be doing that well in order for the franchise to be fine. You donât do that sort of thing for a dead franchise. But it just makes sense to me, that if you have the capitol to invest and you can branch out in order to bring in more revenue, why wouldnât you? Especially considering that the more products you have in the line, the less impact it will have if/when one of those products has a slump.
Exactly. In fact, Microsoft sold the Xbox itself at a loss for years because they made up the difference with game sales and Xbox Live. Therefore, in order to squeeze as much money as they can from just the game, it has to appeal to the widest possible audience, not the most passionate. The most important thing about Halo is that the game is the story, and everything else stems from that: multiplayer, books, toys, all of it. Thatâs why theyâve been wanting to do a movie. Thatâs why they have the Showtime series. They need more people to want to see âthe next episodeâ, which will always be the game.
You canât tailor a game to be more popular. Thatâs a statistic thatâs too hard to nail down. You can make a game that has wide appeal. That was Halo CE. In order to hold that appeal, the next release offered more story and more game mechanics, not all of which were available in multiplayer (no fuel rod cannons 'cause, explosions). Thatâs pretty much how it goes. Each new release offers more story and new game mechanics, in order to appeal to a growing/wider audience. Halo is not unique in this respect. Therefore, the current movement mechanics are not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip them out in a custom game. The alternative is to replace them with something. I donât know what that would be, but it would have to be something Halo never had before in multiplayer. If thereâs nothing new, then whatâs the incentive to buy a new game?
> 2533274798957786;1075:
> Therefore, the current movement mechanics are not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip them out in a custom game.
Hold on, let me try a few things on this sentence.
âTherefore, armor abilities are not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip them out in a custom game.â
No, that doesnât seem to work. How about:
âTherefore, bloom is not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip it out in a custom game.â
Nope, still not working. MaybeâŚ
âTherefore, ordnance drops are not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip them out in a custom game.â
No, still nothing. Why do you expect that Spartan Abilities are here to stay, again?
> 2533274798957786;1075:
> If thereâs nothing new, then whatâs the incentive to buy a new game?
New story? New campaign? New multiplayer maps? New vehicles? New weapons? New gametypes? More powerful Forge? Better custom games? Because the gameplay wonât feel exactly the same even if there arenât brand new game changing mechanics? There are plenty of new things, even if there arenât new mechanics.
Besides, why are we even talking about new mechanics in the context of Spartan Abilities? Ttheyâre old already. Theyâre so 2015. Theyâre not new anymore, theyâre not going to pass off as a new gimmick. Theyâre not going to help Halo Infinite feel new. So why keep them? What purpose do they serve in making the game appeal to a wider audience when we already know that they didnât help achieve that for Halo 5 (based on the gameâs fairly modest performance)? What purpose do they serve when the last bit of novelty has worn off?
> 2533274798957786;1075:
> > 2594261035368257;1074:
> > > 2533274798957786;1070:
> > >
>
> Exactly. In fact, Microsoft sold the Xbox itself at a loss for years because they made up the difference with game sales and Xbox Live. Therefore, in order to squeeze as much money as they can from just the game, it has to appeal to the widest possible audience, not the most passionate. The most important thing about Halo is that the game is the story, and everything else stems from that: multiplayer, books, toys, all of it. Thatâs why theyâve been wanting to do a movie. Thatâs why they have the Showtime series. They need more people to want to see âthe next episodeâ, which will always be the game.
>
> You canât tailor a game to be more popular. Thatâs a statistic thatâs too hard to nail down. You can make a game that has wide appeal. That was Halo CE. In order to hold that appeal, the next release offered more story and more game mechanics, not all of which were available in multiplayer (no fuel rod cannons 'cause, explosions). Thatâs pretty much how it goes. Each new release offers more story and new game mechanics, in order to appeal to a growing/wider audience. Halo is not unique in this respect. Therefore, the current movement mechanics are not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip them out in a custom game. The alternative is to replace them with something. I donât know what that would be, but it would have to be something Halo never had before in multiplayer. If thereâs nothing new, then whatâs the incentive to buy a new game?
See, hereâs the part I think youâre missing. They do not âneed more people to want to see the ânext episodeâ,â. They just need enough people to buy enough overall merchandise to support the franchise and keep it profitable. A move like starting a TV series does look like a big âtheyâre making enough to do thatâ move and obviously they have to have enough capitol to invest in it, but it is also an insurance policy to help keep things afloat if/when the game suffers fatigue that comes naturally as game seriesâ age. It may help them be able to play around with the game and try things that may or may not work out since they arenât relying on the game itself completely to keep the cash coming in.
As for them having to make the game appeal to a wider audience and having little choice but to follow that, even if it disgruntles the more passionate, I believe that to be⌠well⌠yesterdayâs thinking. And I believe so mostly because of MTs. It has been pointed out previously, that Halo 5 was played for less time than Tomb Raider was, by the majority of Xbox players. I actually recall visiting that web page (when it was still up). Halo 5 had an average play time of about 10 hours and Tomb Raider had about 11. The majority would also be known as the bigger part of the âwidest possible audienceâ. About 10 hours is also around how long it would take the average gamer to complete the campaign on heroic IMO. So where is the majority of that widest possible audience now? Moved on after about 10 hours would be the most obvious answer. That tells me that their contribution, via game sales, was a one time âbuy the game and play it while itâs super hot and everyone else is doing itâ injection of money. But we all know that brief injections of money (even if theyâre large) donât equate to sustainable income. For that, they need regular, sustained cash flow. MTs provide that. But whoâs buying the MTs? You can bet it isnât the widest possible audience. Itâs the people who stayed longer than the average XBL player. The people who felt the game was/is worth the investment and/or worth the enjoyment they got out of it, so theyâre willing to put in more. Those who are more passionate about the game⌠and if I were 343, Iâd damn well want to keep them happy. Even if it meant swallowing some pride and backing off a little bit on what is IMO, enhanced movement overkill.
You do realize that there is incredibly little to nothing that hasnât been done already in regards to ânewâ things in video games. Whether it be FPS, RPG, etc. Even if you look at Halo: CE, a game that was known widely for not following trends, youâll see that the things they did had already been done in other games. It wasnât the ingredients, it was the mixture. You donât have to win a pie baking contest by coming up with a new pie that has never been tried/done before ingredients. You can win it with a good old classic apple pie. You just have to have the right mixture of the right ingredients to make the judges say âWow!â. Now Iâm hungry for apple pie⌠great.
> 2533274825830455;1076:
> Why do you expect that Spartan Abilities are here to stay, again?
Well, at least for sprint, itâs been around for 3 games despite how controversial itâs been the entire time. Based on that, Iâd expect that ability to stay. True enough, some (most, even) new mechanics make an appearance for only one game and are phased out in the next, but some form of sprint has remained. 3 games is a long time to be in the franchise. Even dual wielding didnât last that long. But at the end of the day, the amount of time a mechanic has been in the franchise doesnât mean much; anything could be removed at any point. I imagine core mechanics are safe from removal, like being able to look in 2 dimensions or being able to move and shoot at the same time. I suppose then the question for sprint becomes, does 343 consider sprint a core mechanic? The other abilities seem like they could be transient, but sprint has staying power that the others lack.
> 2533274825830455;1076:
> > 2533274798957786;1075:
> > Therefore, the current movement mechanics are not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip them out in a custom game.
>
> Hold on, let me try a few things on this sentence.
>
> âTherefore, armor abilities are not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip them out in a custom game.â
>
> No, that doesnât seem to work. How about:
>
> âTherefore, bloom is not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip it out in a custom game.â
>
> Nope, still not working. MaybeâŚ
>
> âTherefore, ordnance drops are not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip them out in a custom game.â
>
> No, still nothing. Why do you expect that Spartan Abilities are here to stay, again?
Well, what I said was THE CURRENT MOVEMENT MECHANICS are not LIKELY to disappear. Reading is fundamental.
> > 2533274798957786;1075:
> > If thereâs nothing new, then whatâs the incentive to buy a new game?
>
> New story? New campaign? New multiplayer maps? New vehicles? New weapons? New gametypes? More powerful Forge? Better custom games? Because the gameplay wonât feel exactly the same even if there arenât brand new game changing mechanics? There are plenty of new things, even if there arenât new mechanics.
>
> Besides, why are we even talking about new mechanics in the context of Spartan Abilities? Ttheyâre old already. Theyâre so 2015. Theyâre not new anymore, theyâre not going to pass off as a new gimmick. Theyâre not going to help Halo Infinite feel new. So why keep them? What purpose do they serve in making the game appeal to a wider audience when we already know that they didnât help achieve that for Halo 5 (based on the gameâs fairly modest performance)? What purpose do they serve when the last bit of novelty has worn off?
What I said was NEW TO MULTIPLAYER. Because thatâs how itâs always been done with practically all games.
You might talk exclusively about Spartan Abilities. I tend to speak of âAbilitiesâ because I include Reachâs Armor Abilities, some of which were just renamed for the next release. Itâs the Ability, not what itâs called, that is likely to remain. Or resurface. Dual wielding could return if they can figure out the balance issues, if thatâs even possible. Maybe thatâs no longer necessary, I donât know. I also donât know what kind of audience the new âgimmicksâ garnered, and you donât either because MS isnât telling and anything else is speculation. Internet stats to support either one of us are fake news. One thing thatâs probably for certain is that the demographics have changed. There are a bunch of people that never, ever played CE or 2 or even 3. I canât give a definitive answer to why keep the current abilities, but my guess would be that they appeal more to the new audience theyâre after. Theyâve pretty much wrung the old audience dry. I canât provide any citations from the future, but I speculate that whatever else happens with the next release, âclassicâ movement mechanics or not it will not be any more appealing for veteran players than Halo 5, but might be more appealing for players that cut their teeth from Reach onwards.
> 2594261035368257;1077:
> See, hereâs the part I think youâre missing. They do not âneed more people to want to see the ânext episodeâ,â
No, I didnât miss that. I used a familiar phrase and, as usual, it got taken literally. They donât âneedâ more people. Actually, what they should be after is different people. The target demographic of old was the 18-34 year old age group. Halo CEâs 18 year olds are now, what, 25 years old? The 34 year olds are now in their 50âs. I was 47 when CE came out. The game still appeals to me because Iâm ignoring the differences and playing each new release as if it was my first time. There are things about every game thatâs come out from CE onward that I didnât like. Still, the overall package was appealing enough to get me to buy the new game. I only buy Xbox consoles because theyâre the only console you can play Halo on. There was a time when I had access to an Xbox and a Playstation, but no game has been compelling enough to get me to buy a Playstation. Iâve bought myself several Xboxes. For Halo and no other reason. I think Spartan Strike is the only Halo game Iâve never played. My enjoyment of the game does not center around movement mechanics, âclassicâ or otherwise. I understand why people whoâs experience has everything to do with movement mechanics are upset. I only argue that some things that have been added are probably going to remain, like Sprint. There might not be anything ânewâ for FPS movement mechanics, but there may be lots of things that would be new to Halo multiplayer. I donât think other mechanics are going to be rejected just because they are in other games. Thatâs never stopped any developer. What I have been trying to say all along is that the movement mechanics in the next release will not be what makes or breaks it. âReturningâ to âclassicâ mechanics will not matter. Adding a whiz-bang new mechanic wonât matter. Taking away âgimmickâ mechanics wonât matter. What would matter more, for example, is if the next game is released when it is actually completely ready and not âthe game was made to run on servers but we donât actually have the servers so sorry about thatâ (Halo 4) or âyou get this part now and the rest will come some undetermined time laterâ (Halo 5). If you like the game enough, the mechanics donât really matter. If enough other things suck about the game, mechanics canât save it.
> 2533274798957786;1079:
> > 2533274825830455;1076:
> > > 2533274798957786;1075:
> > > Therefore, the current movement mechanics are not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip them out in a custom game.
> >
> > Hold on, let me try a few things on this sentence.
> >
> > âTherefore, armor abilities are not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip them out in a custom game.â
> >
> > No, that doesnât seem to work. How about:
> >
> > âTherefore, bloom is not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip it out in a custom game.â
> >
> > Nope, still not working. MaybeâŚ
> >
> > âTherefore, ordnance drops are not likely to disappear, especially since you can just strip them out in a custom game.â
> >
> > No, still nothing. Why do you expect that Spartan Abilities are here to stay, again?
>
> Well, what I said was THE CURRENT MOVEMENT MECHANICS are not LIKELY to disappear. Reading is fundamental.
And? Tsassi pointed out that people have made the same kinds of statements about other additions/changes in the past and turned out to be wrong.
You used the word âlikelyâ because youâre speculating (thatâs all any of us can do at this point) but when someone responds by speculating in the other direction, you think repeating your speculation in all caps and acting like they didnât understand it the first time is warranted/constructive?
> 2533274817408735;1078:
> > 2533274825830455;1076:
> > Why do you expect that Spartan Abilities are here to stay, again?
>
> Well, at least for sprint, itâs been around for 3 games despite how controversial itâs been the entire time. Based on that, Iâd expect that ability to stay. True enough, some (most, even) new mechanics make an appearance for only one game and are phased out in the next, but some form of sprint has remained. 3 games is a long time to be in the franchise. Even dual wielding didnât last that long. But at the end of the day, the amount of time a mechanic has been in the franchise doesnât mean much; anything could be removed at any point. I imagine core mechanics are safe from removal, like being able to look in 2 dimensions or being able to move and shoot at the same time. I suppose then the question for sprint becomes, does 343 consider sprint a core mechanic? The other abilities seem like they could be transient, but sprint has staying power that the others lack.
Question is, what is that staying power?
As far as Iâm concerned, the reasons for its implementation wasnât gameplay reasons, more about âplayer expectationsâ.
It has seen several nerfs, and on top of that, I think it was at a Pax when they were showcasing the abilities, they talked about the studio being split on actually implementing sprint, or if that wasnât at a Pax, there were at least something going around about i343 contemplating not using sprint again.
Iâd say that Sprintâs âusefullnessâ has decreased since Halo 4. Your chances of escapes are smaller as shield recharge is tied to sprinting, the bms-sprint speed delta decreased, and if we count in the radar thing, not sprinting wonât show you on radar.
At what point is it enough?
How much resources need to be spent on sprint which itself becomes more and more useless for the user, outside of habitual usage?