The return of classic movement mechanics?

Games Halo Infinite
1082

> 2533274795123910;1081:
> Question is, what is that staying power?

Staying power is just the fact that some form of sprint has been in 3 iterations of FPS Halo. As far as mechanics go, it’s stuck around longer than most.

> 2533274795123910;1081:
> As far as I’m concerned, the reasons for its implementation wasn’t gameplay reasons, more about “player expectations”.

Hey, that could very well be a reason behind it’s staying power.

> 2533274795123910;1081:
> 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 wasn’t at a Pax, there were at least something going around about i343 contemplating not using sprint again.

I wouldn’t call the changes to it strictly “nerfs”; at least not across the games. From Halo Reach to Halo 4, you saw it going from being only available through a particular armor mod to being an inherent ability for every player, but it was changed so that it ran out faster(?) (unless you had a particular armor mod in Halo 4 for unlimited sprint). With respect to sprint’s availability, it was buffed from Reach to 4, but nerfed in it’s usability (but not by much since in ran out in Reach, too). From 4 to 5, you see a buff in usability as sprint is now unlimited for everyone, but it saw a nerf in functionality in that sprint prevented shield recharging, and you could get shot out of sprint. So again, both some give and take between 4 and 5. And I’m sure there is always internal discussion about whether to add certain mechanics or not. But ultimately, sprint made it into Reach, 4, and 5, so it must not have been an even split, or some reason popped up that led it to be included as opposed to discluded.

> 2533274795123910;1081:
> I’d say that Sprint’s “usefullness” 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 won’t 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?

We have no idea if or how sprint will be featured in Infinite. It could return, which I think is likely given that despite all controversy behind it, it’s stuck around this long. Whatever has kept it in the games thus far, I imagine could very well keep it in the next installment. And if it does show up, I would expect it to change somewhat from how it was presented in Halo 5, both giving and taking from it as a feature. Whether it would be more or less useful than it currently is in 5 is unknown.
Or, it could be taken out. That’s always an option. This is all speculation and looking at precedent to imagine possible scenarios. I think it’s very possible that sprint could return. But it may not. Honestly, I don’t care all that much. I play devil’s advocate for both camps.

1083

[deleted]

1084

> 2535464451695009;1083:
> > 2533274817408735;1082:
> > > 2533274795123910;1081:
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533274795123910;1081:
> > > As far as I’m concerned, the reasons for its implementation wasn’t gameplay reasons, more about “player expectations”.
> >
> > Hey, that could very well be a reason behind it’s staying power.
>
> I’m not sure if it was this video or a Frankie NeoGAF post, but one of the GDC videos or posts stated that sprint was partly kept in Halo 5 due to player expectations. That line of thinking led into the change of default control schemes as well, if I remember right.

Here’s the relevant quote from the GDC presentation:

> And our final mobility upgrade didn’t help with this escapability problem either, infinite sprint. First, let me mention that second of whether or not we included descope for Halo 5 the inclusion of sprint was one of the most contentious discussions within the studio. Specifically, because of this escapability problem I just mentioned. But in 2015, sprint is a staple for the modern FPS gamer. Leaving it out of Halo 5 would’ve been ignoring a huge portion of the gaming demographic’s expectations, so the call was made to include it.

1085

Get rid of sprint, advanced mobility and armour abilitiesYou never needed these gimicky features back in the OG Halo games because of intelligent map design and the use of all the neat traversal tools. Back then, Bungie made the use of: Teleporters, mancannons and grav lifts, vehicles and equipment. These tools to move around not only made the games more fast paced, but also added a layer of competitive strategy to them.Halo 4 and 5 replaced these cool gameplay tools with armour abilities which are not only a detriment to the core Halo gameplay experience, but also rip the soul and creativity out of any map 343i decide to make.The identity of the Halo franchise is at risk here. 343i seems to have realised that we want the classic art style back, but I hope they have also realised we NEED the classic gameplay back too, otherwise Halo Infinite will just be another disappointing installment in my favourite video game franchise

1086

For me personally, I don’t mind classic or advanced movement both are good in their own ways. As long as they don’t go crazy like Halo 4 and there’s no spartan charge.

1087

> 2533274817408735;1082:
> > 2533274795123910;1081:
> > Question is, what is that staying power?
>
> Staying power is just the fact that some form of sprint has been in 3 iterations of FPS Halo. As far as mechanics go, it’s stuck around longer than most.
>
>
> > 2533274795123910;1081:
> > As far as I’m concerned, the reasons for its implementation wasn’t gameplay reasons, more about “player expectations”.
>
> Hey, that could very well be a reason behind it’s staying power.
>
>
> > 2533274795123910;1081:
> > 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 wasn’t at a Pax, there were at least something going around about i343 contemplating not using sprint again.
>
> I wouldn’t call the changes to it strictly “nerfs”; at least not across the games. From Halo Reach to Halo 4, you saw it going from being only available through a particular armor mod to being an inherent ability for every player, but it was changed so that it ran out faster(?) (unless you had a particular armor mod in Halo 4 for unlimited sprint). With respect to sprint’s availability, it was buffed from Reach to 4, but nerfed in it’s usability (but not by much since in ran out in Reach, too). From 4 to 5, you see a buff in usability as sprint is now unlimited for everyone, but it saw a nerf in functionality in that sprint prevented shield recharging, and you could get shot out of sprint. So again, both some give and take between 4 and 5. And I’m sure there is always internal discussion about whether to add certain mechanics or not. But ultimately, sprint made it into Reach, 4, and 5, so it must not have been an even split, or some reason popped up that led it to be included as opposed to discluded.
>
>
> > 2533274795123910;1081:
> > I’d say that Sprint’s “usefullness” 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 won’t 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?
>
> We have no idea if or how sprint will be featured in Infinite. It could return, which I think is likely given that despite all controversy behind it, it’s stuck around this long. Whatever has kept it in the games thus far, I imagine could very well keep it in the next installment. And if it does show up, I would expect it to change somewhat from how it was presented in Halo 5, both giving and taking from it as a feature. Whether it would be more or less useful than it currently is in 5 is unknown.
> Or, it could be taken out. That’s always an option. This is all speculation and looking at precedent to imagine possible scenarios. I think it’s very possible that sprint could return. But it may not. Honestly, I don’t care all that much. I play devil’s advocate for both camps.

Simple response bring back classic gameplay nuff said.

1088

> 2533274848833728;1087:
> > 2533274817408735;1082:
> > > 2533274795123910;1081:
> > > Question is, what is that staying power?
> >
> > Staying power is just the fact that some form of sprint has been in 3 iterations of FPS Halo. As far as mechanics go, it’s stuck around longer than most.
> >
> >
> > > 2533274795123910;1081:
> > > As far as I’m concerned, the reasons for its implementation wasn’t gameplay reasons, more about “player expectations”.
> >
> > Hey, that could very well be a reason behind it’s staying power.
> >
> >
> > > 2533274795123910;1081:
> > > 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 wasn’t at a Pax, there were at least something going around about i343 contemplating not using sprint again.
> >
> > I wouldn’t call the changes to it strictly “nerfs”; at least not across the games. From Halo Reach to Halo 4, you saw it going from being only available through a particular armor mod to being an inherent ability for every player, but it was changed so that it ran out faster(?) (unless you had a particular armor mod in Halo 4 for unlimited sprint). With respect to sprint’s availability, it was buffed from Reach to 4, but nerfed in it’s usability (but not by much since in ran out in Reach, too). From 4 to 5, you see a buff in usability as sprint is now unlimited for everyone, but it saw a nerf in functionality in that sprint prevented shield recharging, and you could get shot out of sprint. So again, both some give and take between 4 and 5. And I’m sure there is always internal discussion about whether to add certain mechanics or not. But ultimately, sprint made it into Reach, 4, and 5, so it must not have been an even split, or some reason popped up that led it to be included as opposed to discluded.
> >
> >
> > > 2533274795123910;1081:
> > > I’d say that Sprint’s “usefullness” 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 won’t 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?
> >
> > We have no idea if or how sprint will be featured in Infinite. It could return, which I think is likely given that despite all controversy behind it, it’s stuck around this long. Whatever has kept it in the games thus far, I imagine could very well keep it in the next installment. And if it does show up, I would expect it to change somewhat from how it was presented in Halo 5, both giving and taking from it as a feature. Whether it would be more or less useful than it currently is in 5 is unknown.
> > Or, it could be taken out. That’s always an option. This is all speculation and looking at precedent to imagine possible scenarios. I think it’s very possible that sprint could return. But it may not. Honestly, I don’t care all that much. I play devil’s advocate for both camps.
>
> Simple response bring back classic gameplay nuff said.

But it’s not “nuff said” otherwise this entire thread would not exist. Not every OG Halo fan wants classic gameplay just as new fans don’t all want advanced mobility. Anyone who tries to say that the entire community wants something is always going to be wrong in their assertion.

1089

> 2533274798957786;1079:
> > 2594261035368257;1077:
> > See, here’s the part I think you’re missing. They do not “need more people to want to see the “next episode”,”
>
> No, I didn’t miss that. I used a familiar phrase and, as usual, it got taken literally. They don’t “need” 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 CE’s 18 year olds are now, what, 25 years old? The 34 year olds are now in their 50’s. I was 47 when CE came out. The game still appeals to me because I’m ignoring the differences and playing each new release as if it was my first time. There are things about every game that’s come out from CE onward that I didn’t like. Still, the overall package was appealing enough to get me to buy the new game. I only buy Xbox consoles because they’re 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. I’ve bought myself several Xboxes. For Halo and no other reason. I think Spartan Strike is the only Halo game I’ve never played. My enjoyment of the game does not center around movement mechanics, “classic” or otherwise. I understand why people who’s 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 “new” for FPS movement mechanics, but there may be lots of things that would be new to Halo multiplayer. I don’t think other mechanics are going to be rejected just because they are in other games. That’s 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. “Returning” to “classic” mechanics will not matter. Adding a whiz-bang new mechanic won’t matter. Taking away “gimmick” mechanics won’t matter. What would matter more, for example, is if the next game is released when it is actually completely ready and not “the game was made to run on servers but we don’t actually have the servers so sorry about that” (Halo 4) or “you get this part now and the rest will come some undetermined time later” (Halo 5). If you like the game enough, the mechanics don’t really matter. If enough other things suck about the game, mechanics can’t save it.

Since I was in the ‘34 year olds’ when Halo: CE released, apparently neither of us are in the target demographic. That being said… The game is less appealing to me as time goes by, H5 was the first that I wish I’d never preordered / bought until the price came down. I also play each new game like it was my first time, but [previous] experiences aren’t typically something we can just ignore. If I find something less fun, I start thinking about why. That’s basic human nature and nobody is immune to it. I only bought my first Xbox because of Halo, but each iteration thereafter has been less about Halo and more about other things. My enjoyment doesn’t necessarily “center” around movement mechanics, but I’m fully aware that they are a fundamental part of how the gameplay flows. That’s important regardless of how much emphasis one puts on it for their personal enjoyment.

My argument has never been that “some” mechanics won’t remain.

“I don’t think other mechanics are going to be rejected just because they are in other games. That’s never stopped any developer.” - heh… that’s painfully obvious in 343’s case.

In that regard, care to list some movement mechanics out there that haven’t been thrown at Halo willy-nilly over the past two games? I mean I can think of going prone and pick up a grenade / throw it back. But seriously, let’s think about it. Since Reach, we’ve seen; Sprint go from equipment to a permanent mechanic, Spartan Charge, Ground Pound, thrusters, clamber, Spartan Slide. Did I miss any? My biggest problem is that 343 has thrown a -Yoink- load of mechanics at Halo in a short period of time and it’s just too much. Individually they may not have a huge impact on the game but throw them all together at the same time and now it’s quite different. Is it any wonder some say that “Halo doesn’t feel like Halo anymore”? Is it any wonder some blame mechanic “X” while others blame “Y” for it? That’s OK though, right? They had a bunch of e-sports pros test it all in house before it got approved to ship in the game, so the rest of the Halo fans should love it… Only now, we have a bunch of people who want classic mechanics back arguing with those who don’t want Halo to go back to being “dull and boring”… and since 343 apparently didn’t exercise much prudence in adding multiple mechanics, we can’t even figure out which ones are the biggest culprit(s) amongst ourselves, let alone tell 343.

““Returning” to “classic” mechanics will not matter. Adding a whiz-bang new mechanic won’t matter. Taking away “gimmick” mechanics won’t matter.” - Speculation… but if that’s the case, then I hope we gravitate towards more classic gameplay. You do have a fair point. Adding a “whiz-bang” new mechanic probably won’t matter. Adding another 3 or 4 at a time, or even more in just a couple of games will though IMO… if there are even that many left to add lol.

1090

> 2533274798957786;1079:
> 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. “Returning” to “classic” mechanics will not matter. Adding a whiz-bang new mechanic won’t matter. Taking away “gimmick” mechanics won’t matter. What would matter more, for example, is if the next game is released when it is actually completely ready and not “the game was made to run on servers but we don’t actually have the servers so sorry about that” (Halo 4) or “you get this part now and the rest will come some undetermined time later” (Halo 5). If you like the game enough, the mechanics don’t really matter. If enough other things suck about the game, mechanics can’t save it.

You’ve got it completely backwards. Why on earth would I buy and play a game whose base mechanics I despise?

I’ve disliked moving around in Halo basically ever since Reach, but especially since Halo 4. Having to constantly flip between “fight mode” and “run mode” makes the game feel disjointed and running around like a headless chicken without being able to defend myself does not fit my idea of “fun”. So there’s already one main pillar of gameplay at the very least tainted to me. (Now, 343 has managed to stain another main pillar of FPS games, that is shooting, by adding ADS which messes with hip-fire accuracy while at the same time shoving a huge gun barrel in my face every time I try to zoom in order to get an unobstructed view of the battlefield. But that’s a topic for another thread.)

Why would I care how much of the game is functional and/or available when the moment-to-moment-gameplay already drives me away? In what way are ten working game modes I don’t like more appealing than three glitchy ones I don’t like?

On the other hand, the Master Chief Collection was released completely broken and it is still broken to this day (yes, even after the latest update) but that doesn’t stop me from playing the game every weekend with my friends (except the rare occasion when we play different games, such as Halo Wars 1/2). Every weekend. For two-and-a-half years now, ever since I’ve gotten myself an XBone. (And before that, we played the 360 games ever weekend.) Why? Because even close to two decades later the gameplay is still excellent and unfortunately despite its shortcomings and issues it is still the most enjoyable version of Halo available on the console.

I don’t give two -Yoink- about P2P vs servers, glitches or delayed content as long as I enjoy the content that is there.

1091

> 2533274817408735;1082:
> We have no idea if or how sprint will be featured in Infinite. It could return, which I think is likely given that despite all controversy behind it, it’s stuck around this long. Whatever has kept it in the games thus far, I imagine could very well keep it in the next installment. And if it does show up, I would expect it to change somewhat from how it was presented in Halo 5, both giving and taking from it as a feature. Whether it would be more or less useful than it currently is in 5 is unknown.
> Or, it could be taken out. That’s always an option. This is all speculation and looking at precedent to imagine possible scenarios. I think it’s very possible that sprint could return. But it may not. Honestly, I don’t care all that much. I play devil’s advocate for both camps.

Well said. Mainly, any post-Halo 3 mechanics that return will not work precisely the way they do now or ever did.

> 2594261035368257;1089:
> But seriously, let’s think about it. Since Reach, we’ve seen; Sprint go from equipment to a permanent mechanic, Spartan Charge, Ground Pound, thrusters, clamber, Spartan Slide. Did I miss any? My biggest problem is that 343 has thrown a -Yoink- load of mechanics at Halo in a short period of time and it’s just too much. Individually they may not have a huge impact on the game but throw them all together at the same time and now it’s quite different. Is it any wonder some say that “Halo doesn’t feel like Halo anymore”? Is it any wonder some blame mechanic “X” while others blame “Y” for it? That’s OK though, right? They had a bunch of e-sports pros test it all in house before it got approved to ship in the game, so the rest of the Halo fans should love it… Only now, we have a bunch of people who want classic mechanics back arguing with those who don’t want Halo to go back to being “dull and boring”… and since 343 apparently didn’t exercise much prudence in adding multiple mechanics, we can’t even figure out which ones are the biggest culprit(s) amongst ourselves, let alone tell 343.

Agreed. I blame FireFight Arcade. That was the first or second thing 343i did to Reach to make it “better”. It was an instant success for new players. It was nearly impossible to get a real Firefight match, and forget it if you had any skulls turned on. Am I the only one that sees similarity between FireFight Arcade and Halo 4 multiplayer? If anything, I would call Halo 5 343i’s attempt to get back to a more “classic” game.

You are correct. Most threads of this type since Reach have been either, “Get rid of everything except X” or “Keep everything except Y”. The, “Get Rid of All of It” posts are always obligatory (lets people know that there’s no need for a discussion on the subject, cause that’s what a real Halo fan would say. We get it).

@Celestis I read your post.

1092

Bungie developed Reach, to the best of my knowledge, 343 had nothing to do with the game. Firefight was a just for fun mode IMO and had its own problems, I’ll give it that. But at least it was there from launch… come to think of it, there was enough there at launch for me to find things to do when I didn’t feel like playing FF. But I digress. Reach may have had its share of problems, but basic movement mechanics weren’t among them IMO.

1093

> 2594261035368257;1092:
> Bungie developed Reach, to the best of my knowledge, 343 had nothing to do with the game. Firefight was a just for fun mode IMO and had its own problems, I’ll give it that. But at least it was there from launch… come to think of it, there was enough there at launch for me to find things to do when I didn’t feel like playing FF. But I digress. Reach may have had its share of problems, but basic movement mechanics weren’t among them IMO.

Bungie developed Reach, yes, during the transition phase of Halo from Bungie to 343i. 343i made updates after getting full control of the franchise in 2012. The Reach title update did add some new arcade modes to Firefight. That could be what he was referencing.

1094

> 2533274817408735;1093:
> > 2594261035368257;1092:
> > Bungie developed Reach, to the best of my knowledge, 343 had nothing to do with the game. Firefight was a just for fun mode IMO and had its own problems, I’ll give it that. But at least it was there from launch… come to think of it, there was enough there at launch for me to find things to do when I didn’t feel like playing FF. But I digress. Reach may have had its share of problems, but basic movement mechanics weren’t among them IMO.
>
> Bungie developed Reach, yes, during the transition phase of Halo from Bungie to 343i. 343i made updates after getting full control of the franchise in 2012. The Reach title update did add some new arcade modes to Firefight. That could be what he was referencing.

Yes. 343i’s first mission was to “fix” Reach. They added FireFight Arcade and then started in on the movement mechanics, resulting in the Title Update. They also changed some rules in Arena.

1095

> 2533274817408735;1093:
> > 2594261035368257;1092:
> > Bungie developed Reach, to the best of my knowledge, 343 had nothing to do with the game. Firefight was a just for fun mode IMO and had its own problems, I’ll give it that. But at least it was there from launch… come to think of it, there was enough there at launch for me to find things to do when I didn’t feel like playing FF. But I digress. Reach may have had its share of problems, but basic movement mechanics weren’t among them IMO.
>
> Bungie developed Reach, yes, during the transition phase of Halo from Bungie to 343i. 343i made updates after getting full control of the franchise in 2012. The Reach title update did add some new arcade modes to Firefight. That could be what he was referencing.

Thanks, didn’t realize it happened that way. Took awhile for my ‘old man’ brain to recall back that far, but now that I think about it, I can remember how the update to FF may have caused the problems Stardriver907 mentioned.

EDIT: Stardriver’s post wasn’t there when I responded to this, wasn’t ignoring it.

1096

> 2594261035368257;1095:
> > 2533274817408735;1093:
> > > 2594261035368257;1092:
> > > Bungie developed Reach, to the best of my knowledge, 343 had nothing to do with the game. Firefight was a just for fun mode IMO and had its own problems, I’ll give it that. But at least it was there from launch… come to think of it, there was enough there at launch for me to find things to do when I didn’t feel like playing FF. But I digress. Reach may have had its share of problems, but basic movement mechanics weren’t among them IMO.
> >
> > Bungie developed Reach, yes, during the transition phase of Halo from Bungie to 343i. 343i made updates after getting full control of the franchise in 2012. The Reach title update did add some new arcade modes to Firefight. That could be what he was referencing.
>
> Thanks, didn’t realize it happened that way. Took awhile for my ‘old man’ brain to recall back that far, but now that I think about it, I can remember how the update to FF may have caused the problems Stardriver907 mentioned.
>
> EDIT: Stardriver’s post wasn’t there when I responded to this, wasn’t ignoring it.

Yeah. I got one 'o them old brains mself. Its just Reach is my favorite Halo game for a number of reasons beyond movement mechanics. Jorge is my favorite Spartan.

I remember Reach, I remember everything that happened to Reach, and I remember everything that happened because of Reach.

Of course, remembering and recalling are two different things :wink:
Cause I’m old.

1097

Once again, almost nobody here gets the point of returning to the classic formula. The point is not to change it to the classic formula because that would be better, it’s simply because it was what halo was supposed to be in the first place. I don’t care whether or not sprint, clamber, ADS, or Spartan abilities of any kind make the game more fun for some people. It’s not that the classic formula would be better, it’s simply because it was what Halo was supposed to be in the first place. That should be all that matters but people don’t seem to care, even some people on my side arguing for a return to the classic formula say they wanted because it’s better. That is relative. That’s not what matters, what matters is that that’s not what halo is. I’m not talking legally, I’m talking gameplay wise.

1098

I really cannot believe that Sprint, after the countless post on various Sprint threads in which it was PROVEN to be a game-breaking mechanic that added nothing to the gameplay besides the illusion of going faster, is STILL being defended!? I don’t want to sound like a jerk, but there’s enough evidence against Sprint by now that it makes those who defend it factually wrong. Sprint can never be balanced to work as effectively as single-movement speed. I know all of this sounds harsh and arrogant, but it’s the hard truth. This thread shows that there are still many people not willing to accept that.

1099

> 2535430289047128;1097:
> Once again, almost nobody here gets the point of returning to the classic formula. The point is not to change it to the classic formula because that would be better, it’s simply because it was what halo was supposed to be in the first place. I don’t care whether or not sprint, clamber, ADS, or Spartan abilities of any kind make the game more fun for some people. It’s not that the classic formula would be better, it’s simply because it was what Halo was supposed to be in the first place. That should be all that matters but people don’t seem to care, even some people on my side arguing for a return to the classic formula say they wanted because it’s better. That is relative. That’s not what matters, what matters is that that’s not what halo is. I’m not talking legally, I’m talking gameplay

Halo was supposed to be an RTS game.
I think you are making an assertion that the original game (Halo CE) was purposely built to play the way it did. If you research you will find that the original game, as was every Halo game Bungie produced, was heavily influenced by Microsoft timetables. Things they didn’t have time to put into CE went into 2, Same with 3. Reach was the one that got most of what Bungie wanted in the game. This is why every new release was different. No one was satisfied with CE, or 2, or 3. The “classic formula” never went away. It just got buried. The zeal for “new” trumped the zeal for “improve”. I’m not saying it was a good thing. It certainly wasn’t necessary. There’s no way we would never have seen the changes, though. They are inevitable. Halo is not supposed to be anything. It is what it is.

1100

> 2533274825830455;1084:
> Here’s the relevant quote from the GDC presentation:
>
>
> > But in 2015, sprint is a staple for the modern FPS gamer. Leaving it out of Halo 5 would’ve been ignoring a huge portion of the gaming demographic’s expectations, so the call was made to include it.

That kind of thinking is so freaking terrible and needs to die out. Instead of being our own unique game by creating our own ideas and offering something different, we’re just gonna follow the crowd and be another sheep even if it hurts our gameplay.

1101

> 2533274968894951;1098:
> I really cannot believe that Sprint, after the countless post on various Sprint threads in which it was PROVEN to be a game-breaking mechanic that added nothing to the gameplay besides the illusion of going faster, is STILL being defended!? I don’t want to sound like a jerk, but there’s enough evidence against Sprint by now that it makes those who defend it factually wrong. Sprint can never be balanced to work as effectively as single-movement speed. I know all of this sounds harsh and arrogant, but it’s the hard truth. This thread shows that there are still many people not willing to accept that.

Not to curb your enthusiasm or anything, but there are few things about sprint that have been proven beyond reasonable doubt. The statement “sprint is game-breaking” certainly hasn’t been proven, because it’s far too vague. What does it mean that a mechanic is game-breaking? Can you define it using clear terminology in a way that everybody can agree with the definition? If your definiton is vague, or people don’t find it reasonable, any proof relying on it (even supposing you had a valid one) is useless to them.

In any case, the question “should sprint stay?” is not an objective question, it’s just a matter of opinion. When you talk about “evidence against Sprint” you assume that everybody values the same type of gameplay that you value. For someone else, your “evidence” might be completely irrelevant. No one is “factually wrong” by virtue of defending sprint. I could throw a ton of defenses of sprint your way that cannot be factually wrong because they are not falsifiable, for instance, “I like sprint because it makes me feel faster, therefore it should stay”. Regardless of what I think about that statement, it’s not factually wrong because it never asserts anything factual. Therefore someone who defends sprint on that basis is not factually wrong.

I’m a great advocate of discussing the objective aspects of sprint. However, in order to properly have that discussion, we need to understand where the line between subjective and objective is drawn. That’s why i don’t appreciate when people come here throwing around words like “proven”, “factually”, and “truth” about something that is clearly subjective. By all means, if you can find the line between subjective and objective, feel free to talk about the objective aspects of sprint, but if you can’t, please don’t act like you’re some bastion of truth and everybody who disagrees with you is wrong.