I know know there are many whom love the classic arcade Halo and thats ok to like that. Same with those who like the new advaned movement. I for one enjoy consistency, I like it when we can do things in game that are in the books or comics. It helps draw me in. Now not everything needs to be exactly like the books, because a measure of balance needs to happen for gameplay. Keeping it as close to the lore as possible is a good thing in my book.
They used the Thrusters in one book so far, and buck referances the thrusters being separate from the rest of the armor. Heres a quote of him discribing the removal of the armor process. āAll you have to do is stand there and let the machine do its job. It takes away the armor plating, fusion generator, THRUSTERS, and helmet and eventually leaves you standing there in your techsuit, a fancy form-factor exoskeleton that enhances a Spartanās strength and speed.ā
Referancing the Thrusters as a seperate unit, and seeing Armor Abilities in the new Halo Collateral Damage comic. This leaves an opening for AAās to return in later Halo games, right? If anyone like me likes the consistency in their entertainment like I do.
The books also referance Spartans rolling, Evade style, out of incoming fire. Iād prefer this over thrusters and would rather save classic movement for a mobile Halo shooter.
> 2781911019823810;1442:
> I know know there are many whom love the classic arcade Halo and thats ok to like that. Same with those who like the new advaned movement. I for one enjoy consistency, I like it when we can do things in game that are in the books or comics. It helps draw me in. Now not everything needs to be exactly like the books, because a measure of balance needs to happen for gameplay. Keeping it as close to the lore as possible is a good thing in my book.
> They used the Thrusters in one book so far, and buck referances the thrusters being separate from the rest of the armor. Heres a quote of him discribing the removal of the armor process. āAll you have to do is stand there and let the machine do its job. It takes away the armor plating, fusion generator, THRUSTERS, and helmet and eventually leaves you standing there in your techsuit, a fancy form-factor exoskeleton that enhances a Spartanās strength and speed.ā
> Referancing the Thrusters as a seperate unit, and seeing Armor Abilities in the new Halo Collateral Damage comic. This leaves an opening for AAās to return in later Halo games, right? If anyone like me likes the consistency in their entertainment like I do.
> The books also referance Spartans rolling, Evade style, out of incoming fire. Iād prefer this over thrusters and would rather save classic movement for a mobile Halo shooter.
I understand the desire to keep things consistent across different mediums and I get how it can feel good to pull off things that characters can do in the ālore.ā The problem is that what one considers ākeeping as close to the lore as possibleā is completely arbitrary. Going prone, cover mechanics, extended hand to hand combat, where does it end and why? Why are some important and not others? At the end of the day it comes down to opinion on what is an is not worth cutting out and without essentially demolishing the foundations of Halo gameplay it will never come close to fitting nicely with the āloreā
No piece of Halo media regardless of form can ever be 100% ārepresentativeā of the events they are portraying because there is no objective baseline with which to judge any of them. The āLoreā is merely a collection of works from a number of different artists in a variety of disciplines with sometimes vastly different visions for what āHaloā is supposed to be. Again, what is and isnāt given more weight or dismissed as āartistic licenseā is completely arbitrary.
There are some franchises where the āloreā and the gameplay go hand in hand or at least try to. Halo, by its nature of its creation just isnāt one of those. Halo is ultimately a shooter series, not a 1:1 spartan simulator.
If people can allow for inconsistencies with regards to artistic licence, then I donāt think giving that same leniency with regards to gameplay is too much to ask. Of course, if you prefer āadvanced mobilityā mechanics then that is perfectly fine, but that is a gameplay preference which doesnāt carry any additional weight due to ālore.ā
Would be nice, too many games these days are fast paced.
> 2533274825830455;1438:
> This is fun. The maximal horizontal jumps I have tested areā¦
Those are good numbers. I didnāt go so crazy with my test as to combine various abilities, and was mainly focusing on the simple things. But I feel that this somewhat feeds into my point.
If we can already jump (simply) around 60-70 feet, why would there be a need - hypothetically - for wall running? So far as jumps in Halo being super long, the only one I can think of that needed extreme measures was to get the Mythic Skull on Swords of Sanghelios. Most were a distance able to be reached with relatively simple jumps.
> In the past when Spartan Abilities didnāt exist, the largest gaps that were frequently used were no more than 37 feet. Now, in Halo 5 the basic sprintāthrust combo can frequently be useful. If players can regularly cross 60 feet gaps, then 60 feet gaps can be the norm. If wall running was added to the mix, players would be able to cross gaps up to 90 feet at ease.
The problem being that wall running requires a wall. Itās easy to say that gaps in the playspace could increase to 90 feet (though that is an extreme distance to be wall running), but when that increase must also include a wall, it shoehorns the mechanic and makes it a gimmick. All the jumps in Halo 5 that are necessary can be done without even using sprint or thrusters; they certainly help, and they allow the player to get an upper hand in battle, but thereās no point where the game forces you to use them. Wall running would be effective and relevant, but only given a wall.
> The real thing one should be concerned about when it comes to movement mechanics is how much freedom is too much freedom.
Which is somewhat the point Iāve been getting at with redundancy. Ground Pound and Spartan Charge run into this issue in that theyāre really just Melee +1. Assassinations hold relevancy in that they have a level of humiliation and uniqueness, and are more than just a melee. Would wall running hold that uniqueness as well, or would it just be nothing more than Jump +1?
> No one but you has said that wall running would require the player lower their weapon, and I have reason to believe that the people youāre discussing with would be very much against that.
Perhaps they would, but I didnāt really say that it would require it, but that I imagine it would. A Spartan could use their thrusters to stabilize themselves, keeping their weapon up, but then weāre back to āWhy not just thruster jump it?ā
> There are many, many ways of implementing a wall run. Some of them are exactly as you think, but many of them arenāt.
Undoubtedly, and your scenario is plausible. In fact, there was a wall running segment in Halo 5 that I had forgotten about. And while your scenario is functionally sound (thatās pretty much how it works in games like Mirrorās Edge,) I personally donāt see it having a solid place in gameplay. Like a Spartan jumping off and enemy to kick them in the chin, vaulting off a wall while grappling an enemy, or any number of other really cool things that weāve seen Spartans do, I think theyāre best left to cutscenes.
> 2781911019823810;1442:
> Now not everything needs to be exactly like the books, because a measure of balance needs to happen for gameplay. Keeping it as close to the lore as possible is a good thing in my book.
This sounds more like a contradiction than anything, or just inconsistent.
Things have to be as close to the lore as possible, but not too close! You have to leave room for gameplay balance.
But if you accept that some things exist purely for gameplay balance, then any other X mechanic can exist purely for gameplay and the whole āloreā reason becomes completely arbitrary.
If classic movement works more as a game than an actual story, why try to push it out of games and into the mobile market, where controls are a lot less intuitive? Might as well let the story element continue to exist in stories where it excels instead of pushing it into the game. Thatās what cutscenes are for anyway.
> 2533274819446242;1443:
> > 2781911019823810;1442:
> > I know know there are many whom love the classic arcade Halo and thats ok to like that. Same with those who like the new advaned movement. I for one enjoy consistency, I like it when we can do things in game that are in the books or comics. It helps draw me in. Now not everything needs to be exactly like the books, because a measure of balance needs to happen for gameplay. Keeping it as close to the lore as possible is a good thing in my book.
> > They used the Thrusters in one book so far, and buck referances the thrusters being separate from the rest of the armor. Heres a quote of him discribing the removal of the armor process. āAll you have to do is stand there and let the machine do its job. It takes away the armor plating, fusion generator, THRUSTERS, and helmet and eventually leaves you standing there in your techsuit, a fancy form-factor exoskeleton that enhances a Spartanās strength and speed.ā
> > Referancing the Thrusters as a seperate unit, and seeing Armor Abilities in the new Halo Collateral Damage comic. This leaves an opening for AAās to return in later Halo games, right? If anyone like me likes the consistency in their entertainment like I do.
> > The books also referance Spartans rolling, Evade style, out of incoming fire. Iād prefer this over thrusters and would rather save classic movement for a mobile Halo shooter.
>
> I understand the desire to keep things consistent across different mediums and I get how it can feel good to pull off things that characters can do in the ālore.ā The problem is that what one considers ākeeping as close to the lore as possibleā is completely arbitrary. Going prone, cover mechanics, extended hand to hand combat, where does it end and why? Why are some important and not others? At the end of the day it comes down to opinion on what is an is not worth cutting out and without essentially demolishing the foundations of Halo gameplay it will never come close to fitting nicely with the āloreā
>
> No piece of Halo media regardless of form can ever be 100% ārepresentativeā of the events they are portraying because there is no objective baseline with which to judge any of them. The āLoreā is merely a collection of works from a number of different artists in a variety of disciplines with sometimes vastly different visions for what āHaloā is supposed to be. Again, what is and isnāt given more weight or dismissed as āartistic licenseā is completely arbitrary.
>
> There are some franchises where the āloreā and the gameplay go hand in hand or at least try to. Halo, by its nature of its creation just isnāt one of those. Halo is ultimately a shooter series, not a 1:1 spartan simulator.
>
> If people can allow for inconsistencies with regards to artistic licence, then I donāt think giving that same leniency with regards to gameplay is too much to ask. Of course, if you prefer āadvanced mobilityā mechanics then that is perfectly fine, but that is a gameplay preference which doesnāt carry any additional weight due to ālore.ā
I did say not everything because of gameplay. However, taking the games to classic is the minimum you need to have a playable game. Iām not even a fan of the current movement, I personally would prefer tweeks to Thrusters as Iāve stated above. Iāve played Halo since day one CE, in all my years playing Halo only in H5 have I had to study Youtube tips to be able to hold my own. Whether from the advanced movement or what ever, I donāt know. I feel the āadvanced movementā is set up only for the competitive players only. But going back to the minimum amount of movement for a game just to function seems like a bad idea. Iād prefer something in the middle.
One reason I brought up the consistency between mediums is that a lot of the arguements in this thread use ālore vs. gameplayā or āclassic games vs. modernā. As lore vs gameplay goes I expessed that Iād perfer elements to be similar. Do I want loadouts because, Master Chief uses an AR, Fred carries a DMR, Kelly rolls with a Shotty and Linda rocks the Snipes? No, not in fair starts multi player. Would I like them in the campaign, I donāt know maybe, they did it in Spartan Ops and I liked some of it, hated the mods they took out fair starts. So lore vs gameplay is important but not everything needs to match up because this is the game and not the book, but there is nothing wrong with similarities across the mediums.
The classic vs. modern I believe is irrelevant if people reference Bungieās vision of the Halo games. If Halo CE came out today vs years ago Iām fairly certain Bungie would have had Sprint and ADS if not Clamber and Slide in it. Although referencing Bungies ideas for the art and sound designs or what their original ideas for what the feel of the game " five seconds of fun" or whatever. Is ok, but not envoking āthis is what the original game hadā, because the original game was made then and not now. Common sense says if it was now it would be different from then. But ideals about what the feel of the games is a little more timeless. Fair starts, party feel, enjoying the game even if you die, the art, the sound, the lore, in my opinion these trump any arguement over classic vs modern gameplay.
Who decides whats in the next Halo? Ultimately 343i, but hopefully the fans get a voice and can have better arguements than, thats the way it was before or modern people want modern gameplay. I feel the proper way is to make all the mediums similar, not 100%, but close and discuss ways to make that happen. Going back to the minimum for gameplay is too far from the rest of the feel the lore has. Keeping the games, books and movies completely seperate is a mistake, and keeping a certain feel is usually a good idea for a franchise.
> 2533274804813082;1445:
> If we can already jump (simply) around 60-70 feet, why would there be a need - hypothetically - for wall running? So far as jumps in Halo being super long, the only one I can think of that needed extreme measures was to get the Mythic Skull on Swords of Sanghelios. Most were a distance able to be reached with relatively simple jumps.
Donāt forget that youāre discussing with someone whose starting point is the assumption that no Spartan Ability needs to be kept, and Iām not even convinced about wall running. This whole discussion has been a giant hypothetical for me. With that out of the way, itās clear to me that if wall running was implemented, some Spartan Abilities would have to go. Since sprint and Clamber are on my cutting board anyway, those to me are an obvious choice. Ground Pound and Stabilizer can also go. All this already gets us below 50 feet without wall running. Switching from Thruster Pack to Evade (assuming we didnāt get rid of short horizontal boosts entirely) would nerf the jumping capabilities of the mechanic while still keeping many of its other attributes. At this point the jump distance would be short enough that wall running (or at least a wall jump) could be considered.
You donāt need to agree with anything I just suggested above. The point is just that the sandbox can always be changed to adapt it to new mechanics. This has been done in the past, and will probably be done in the future (though not necessarily with wall running).
> 2533274804813082;1445:
> The problem being that wall running requires a wall. Itās easy to say that gaps in the playspace could increase to 90 feet (though that is an extreme distance to be wall running), but when that increase must also include a wall, it shoehorns the mechanic and makes it a gimmick. All the jumps in Halo 5 that are necessary can be done without even using sprint or thrusters; they certainly help, and they allow the player to get an upper hand in battle, but thereās no point where the game forces you to use them. Wall running would be effective and relevant, but only given a wall.
I can imagine multiple pieces of geometry where some kind of wall run or wall jump would be useful, and the number blows up if you make it chainable (in which case it would definitely have to be a wall jump rather than a full fledged wall run). Iām sure there are even plenty of jumps on existing Halo maps that arenāt possible now but would be possible with a wall run, and thatād be on maps that havenāt been designed with the mechanic in mind. Really, how often a movement mechanic can be used effectively only depends on the creativity of the map designer.
In fact, I see the requirement to have a wall as an advantage. As far as Iām concerned, one of the issues with Spartan Abilities is precisely that they can be used anywhere and everywhere, which gives the player too much freedom. Now, binding the mechanic to some piece of map geometry gives significantly more control to the designer over where the mechanic can be used, which eliminates some of the issues Spartan Abilities bring to map design.
> 2533274804813082;1445:
> > No one but you has said that wall running would require the player lower their weapon, and I have reason to believe that the people youāre discussing with would be very much against that.
>
> Perhaps they would, but I didnāt really say that it would require it, but that I imagine it would. A Spartan could use their thrusters to stabilize themselves, keeping their weapon up, but then weāre back to āWhy not just thruster jump it?ā
If thruster jump is not long enough, but a jump + wall run + jump is. And ultimately, as I suggested above: what if there are no thrusters?
> 2533274804813082;1445:
> I personally donāt see it having a solid place in gameplay. Like a Spartan jumping off and enemy to kick them in the chin, vaulting off a wall while grappling an enemy, or any number of other really cool things that weāve seen Spartans do, I think theyāre best left to cutscenes.
If you canāt think interesting ways to make use of wall running, youāre not imagining hard enough. My concerns about wall running are quite the opposite: Iām afraid it could be too powerful if implemented in a way that also makes it interesting.
> 2533274833081329;1446:
> > 2781911019823810;1442:
> > Now not everything needs to be exactly like the books, because a measure of balance needs to happen for gameplay. Keeping it as close to the lore as possible is a good thing in my book.
>
> This sounds more like a contradiction than anything, or just inconsistent.
>
> Things have to be as close to the lore as possible, but not too close! You have to leave room for gameplay balance.
>
> But if you accept that some things exist purely for gameplay balance, then any other X mechanic can exist purely for gameplay and the whole āloreā reason becomes completely arbitrary.
>
> If classic movement works more as a game than an actual story, why try to push it out of games and into the mobile market, where controls are a lot less intuitive? Might as well let the story element continue to exist in stories where it excels instead of pushing it into the game. Thatās what cutscenes are for anyway.
Its not a contradiction when Iām talking about similarities.
Lore is not arbitrary to mechanics. Everything people could do in a book could be done in a game, the question is does it need to be? Do we need prone in a Halo game, maybe. I could list some reasons I would like it. Do we need to reload half spent clips of ammo when we reload after 2 shots, maybe. Would that be fun in a shooter? Probably not.
Do I feel a game with extended lore about futuristic super soldiers fighting aliens that could crush a normal human in close quarters be played with minimum mobility functions? No. Walk, Jump, Shoot, Reload, Melee, Grenade. Does it function, yes. Does it draw in the audiance, does it keep people buying all the extra products the brand releases? Companies want us to feel emotions in order to get us to by their products and spend our money on them. Keeping the similaries across the mediums is what is in the best interest of the brand, the franchise and the business putting the game out.
Its not about what you want only in the game.
> 2781911019823810;1447:
> > 2533274819446242;1443:
> > > 2781911019823810;1442:
> > > Isnip
> >
> > I understand the desire to keep things consistent across different mediums and I get how it can feel good to pull off things that characters can do in the ālore.ā The problem is that what one considers ākeeping as close to the lore as possibleā is completely arbitrary. Going prone, cover mechanics, extended hand to hand combat, where does it end and why? Why are some important and not others? At the end of the day it comes down to opinion on what is an is not worth cutting out and without essentially demolishing the foundations of Halo gameplay it will never come close to fitting nicely with the āloreā
> >
> > No piece of Halo media regardless of form can ever be 100% ārepresentativeā of the events they are portraying because there is no objective baseline with which to judge any of them. The āLoreā is merely a collection of works from a number of different artists in a variety of disciplines with sometimes vastly different visions for what āHaloā is supposed to be. Again, what is and isnāt given more weight or dismissed as āartistic licenseā is completely arbitrary.
> >
> > There are some franchises where the āloreā and the gameplay go hand in hand or at least try to. Halo, by its nature of its creation just isnāt one of those. Halo is ultimately a shooter series, not a 1:1 spartan simulator.
> >
> > If people can allow for inconsistencies with regards to artistic licence, then I donāt think giving that same leniency with regards to gameplay is too much to ask. Of course, if you prefer āadvanced mobilityā mechanics then that is perfectly fine, but that is a gameplay preference which doesnāt carry any additional weight due to ālore.ā
>
> I did say not everything because of gameplay. However, taking the games to classic is the minimum you need to have a playable game. Iām not even a fan of the current movement, I personally would prefer tweeks to Thrusters as Iāve stated above.
I apologize, it wasnāt really my intent to imply that "advanced mobility was your preference. I was speaking more generally at that point.
> Iāve played Halo since day one CE, in all my years playing Halo only in H5 have I had to study Youtube tips to be able to hold my own. Whether from the advanced movement or what ever, I donāt know. I feel the āadvanced movementā is set up only for the competitive players only.
It really isnāt though, advanced movement as seen in Halo 5 is not what you get if you asked competitive Halo players what they wanted out of a sequel. Nor is it necessarily setup for everything casual players like either. Its full of compromises that only work on paper, but I digress. Letās just get away from blaming any one group for any particular portion of Halo 5ās design as i think all sorts of different groups got hosed for one reason or another.
> But going back to the minimum amount of movement for a game just to function seems like a bad idea. Iād prefer something in the middle.
Why?
> One reason I brought up the consistency between mediums is that a lot of the arguements in this thread use ālore vs. gameplayā or āclassic games vs. modernā. As lore vs gameplay goes I expessed that Iād perfer elements to be similar. Do I want loadouts because, Master Chief uses an AR, Fred carries a DMR, Kelly rolls with a Shotty and Linda rocks the Snipes? No not in fair starts multi player. Would I like them in the campaign, I donāt know maybe, they did it in Spartan Ops and I liked some of it, hated the mods they took out fair starts. So lore vs gameplay is important but not everything needs to match up because this is the game and not the book, but there is nothing wrong with similarities across the mediums.
Again, I have a problem with what constitutes āconsistencyā as it varies from person to person and is totally arbitrary. Trying to match up across from different mediums is all fine and dandy until it starts dictating game design. Frankly IRL concerns of āI got this game for X type of gameplayā should always trump trying to match the narrative. If having a more āloreā oriented style of gameplay is what someone wants than good for them, but this doesnāt really give them any higher ground to stand on.
> The classic vs. modern I believe is irrelevant if people reference Bungieās vision of the Halo games. If Halo CE came out today vs years ago Iām fairly certain Bungie would have had Sprint and ADS if not Clamber and Slide in it. Although referencing Bungies ideas for the art and sound designs or what their original ideas for what the feel of the game " five seconds of fun" or whatever. Is ok, but not envoking āthis is what the original game hadā, because the original game was made then and not now. Common sense says if it was now it would be different from then. But ideals about what the feel of the games is a little more timeless. Fair starts, party feel, enjoying the game even if you die, the art, the sound, the lore, in my opinion these trump any arguement over classic vs modern gameplay.
All sorts of things would be ādifferentā if they came out today, but that is totally irrelevant short of some fantastic dimension/time hoping powers. āIf the past was different things today would be differentā isnāt an argument or a meaningful observation. It also assumes that Todayās gaming landscape is an inevitability or that game development is a linear path. Beyond moving from 2d to 3d I donāt think there is much about the modern gaming landscape can be counted on with any certainty.
As for what you mentioned at the end, what you consider essential is not the same as what someone else may consider to be intrinsic to Haloās identity.
> Who decides whats in the next Halo? Ultimately 343i, but hopefully the fans get a voice and can have better arguements than, thats the way it was before or modern people want modern gameplay. I feel the proper way is to make all the mediums similar, not 100%, but close and discuss ways to make that happen. Going back to the minimum for gameplay is too far from the rest of the feel the lore has. Keeping the games, books and movies completely seperate is a mistake, and keeping a certain feel is usually a good idea for a franchise.
As I keep mentioning, one personās version of different mediums being ācloseā to one another can vary wildly. The portrayal of the Halo universe varies from medium to medium and creator to creator and deciding any one of those to be more definitive is based on personal preference.
> 2781911019823810;1441:
> > 2533274804813082;1434:
> > >
>
> This wall running topic is tiring. If they want it in gameplay Iād have to live with it, but its nearly impossible for a Spartan WITH shields in lore. Hereās a quote from the Fall of Reach Book when John first activates the first set of Mjilnor with shields. āThe Master Chief slipped off the platform. He skiddedāthen came to a halt. His Movements felt oiled. His contact with the floor felt tentative.ā
> So shields reduce friction/traction, a shielded Spartan has slippery boots the rubber is not touching the ground the shields are. So a wall run is too slippery, and wall jump may be possible for a slip second but a slide is totally canon.
You missed the part not long after that where Chief has Cortana reduce the shield protection on the bottom of his feet to nearly nothing, so that he could get a grip. This hasnāt been addressed as an issue with MJOLNIR ever since, because it isnāt. There is no traction problem with shielded MJOLNIR, because they keep the protection minimal on the bottom of their feet.
I could go either way on this topic. I am a big fan of Halo games with classic movement, primarily H2C and H2A. I have also quite enjoyed just having sprint as an addition. I am not really a huge fan of everything Halo 5 has, I think it comes out to be a bit too much. I am a fan of the hover when ADS, but thatās about it. And if Sprint were kept, I hope they use the animations from Reach and 4, I hate how much sway there is in the Halo 5 sprint animation.
> 2533274819446242;1450:
> The portrayal of the Halo universe varies from medium to medium and creator to creator and deciding any one of those to be more definitive is based on personal preference.
I though I was sharing my preferance. Isnāt that what forums are for?
Why donāt you come up with a better solution than trying to pick apart my opinion, which in my opinion, my whole point is, āWhat is the standard for arguments in this thread? Is it lore is more important than gameplay? Or is it classic vs modern?ā I know everyone has likes and dislikes, thanks for telling me againā¦
Iām just commenting on generalizations in the forums I read. In my opinion invoking āBungie did it like thisā is not an point anyone can make that carries much weight because even Bungie would do things differently for the next game, they always did. Besides has anyone heard a new quote from Bungie about what they think about the 343iās games, I havenāt, and I probably wouldnāt give it much weight. As we all know everyone has a personal preference, right? Even those inside the studio working on the game.
As to your question, Why? Why would going back to classic mechanics be a bad idea? Halo is a AAA game that is trying to draw people to buy more products other than the game (just like merchandise with Star Wars) and we all pay full price for it, do I want the minimum functional movement in the game? No. Would I be a little more accepting of a minimal movement mobile game? Maybe. Is Haloās fair play something I love about the games? Yes. Halo has extented lore with Spartans doing amazing feats! Do I want to be able to do some of those things in a game? Yes. Are these all of my opinions? No. These are just some of my preferences, if you donāt feel the same thats fine.
However, instead of talking around in circles with arguments that donāt carry much weight. Shouldnāt we maybe agree on a core set of ideals that Halo has? To maybe actually get some thoughts moving, rather than just bashing each others opinions. That way when someone starts saying they want wall-running in the game maybe it wonāt go on, and on and onā¦
Finding a core piece of common ground and establishing where to pull from is kind of important to this agrument of, returning to classic movement mechanics?
If the gloves are off and you pull arguments from anywhere, maybe it doesnāt effect me because I say what does that have to do with the price of butter?
> 2533274913913392;1451:
> > 2781911019823810;1441:
> > > 2533274804813082;1434:
> > > >
> >
> > This wall running topic is tiring. If they want it in gameplay Iād have to live with it, but its nearly impossible for a Spartan WITH shields in lore. Hereās a quote from the Fall of Reach Book when John first activates the first set of Mjilnor with shields. āThe Master Chief slipped off the platform. He skiddedāthen came to a halt. His Movements felt oiled. His contact with the floor felt tentative.ā
> > So shields reduce friction/traction, a shielded Spartan has slippery boots the rubber is not touching the ground the shields are. So a wall run is too slippery, and wall jump may be possible for a slip second but a slide is totally canon.
>
> You missed the part not long after that where Chief has Cortana reduce the shield protection on the bottom of his feet to nearly nothing, so that he could get a grip. This hasnāt been addressed as an issue with MJOLNIR ever since, because it isnāt. There is no traction problem with shielded MJOLNIR, because they keep the protection minimal on the bottom of their feet.
I didnāt miss it. Its just irrelevent, they didnāt nullify the traction issue they just reduced it on flat surfaces. It would then multiple back up on a vertical surface. They would probably have to address this with mag boots and only wall-run on certain surfaces. If you needed a magnetic surface with grip tape just to do it, why do it?
> 2781911019823810;1454:
> > 2533274913913392;1451:
> > > 2781911019823810;1441:
> > > > 2533274804813082;1434:
> > > > >
> >
> > You missed the part not long after that where Chief has Cortana reduce the shield protection on the bottom of his feet to nearly nothing, so that he could get a grip. This hasnāt been addressed as an issue with MJOLNIR ever since, because it isnāt. There is no traction problem with shielded MJOLNIR, because they keep the protection minimal on the bottom of their feet.
>
> I didnāt miss it. Its just irrelevent, they didnāt nullify the traction issue they just reduced it on flat surfaces. It would then multiple back up on a vertical surface. They would probably have to address this with mag boots and only wall-run on certain surfaces. If you needed a magnetic surface with grip tape just to do it, why do it?
Depends on how we are believing they would come into contact with the vertical surface. If the bottom of their feet are whatās connecting to the surface, the traction would be a nonissue again as that is the same surface that has the least amount of shielding in order to allow for traction. If they are at an angle then the traction might be a problem. Also the quote in the book is regarding MJOLNIR Gen 1. MK V, a whole generation behind the current Halo gamesā MJOLNIR, and potentially two behind Infiniteās MJOLNIR. This gives plenty of room to allow for Infiniteās Spartanās to wall-run lore-wise, as the system couldāve been updated to allow for that and not even factor in traction-related issues.
Regardless, though I donāt believe lore would keep it out, I sure hope wall-running isnāt implemented.
> 2533274913913392;1455:
> > 2781911019823810;1454:
> > > 2533274913913392;1451:
> > > > 2781911019823810;1441:
> > > > > 2533274804813082;1434:
> > > > > >
> >
> > they didnāt nullify the traction issue they just reduced it on flat surfaces. It would then multiple back up on a vertical surface. They would probably have to address this with mag boots and only wall-run on certain surfaces. If you needed a magnetic surface with grip tape just to do it, why do it?
>
> Depends on how we are believing they would come into contact with the vertical surface. If the bottom of their feet are whatās connecting to the surface, the traction would be a nonissue again as that is the same surface that has the least amount of shielding in order to allow for traction. If they are at an angle then the traction might be a problem. Also the quote in the book is regarding MJOLNIR Gen 1. MK V, a whole generation behind the current Halo gamesā MJOLNIR, and potentially two behind Infiniteās MJOLNIR. This gives plenty of room to allow for Infiniteās Spartanās to wall-run lore-wise, as the system couldāve been updated to allow for that and not even factor in traction-related issues.
>
> Regardless, though I donāt believe lore would keep it out, I sure hope wall-running isnāt implemented.
Is there any info on the differance between Gen 1 and Gen 2 armor? They both and use Armor abilities and have shields. Besides the look is the a differance?
> 2781911019823810;1453:
> > 2533274819446242;1450:
> > The portrayal of the Halo universe varies from medium to medium and creator to creator and deciding any one of those to be more definitive is based on personal preference.
>
> I though I was sharing my preferance. Isnāt that what forums are for?
>
> Why donāt you come up with a better solution than trying to pick apart my opinion, which in my opinion, my whole point is, āWhat is the standard for arguments in this thread? Is it lore is more important than gameplay? Or is it classic vs modern?ā I know everyone has likes and dislikes, thanks for telling me againā¦
What Iām trying to get is the actual meat of said opinion. If someone says they want consistency then I want to know what does consistency mean to both them and the myriad of other folks who may have a different opinion on what that means. I also want to know what effect that might have on the games design.
Like you said this is a forum for active discussion, its not an op-ed.
> Iām just commenting on generalizations in the forums I read. In my opinion invoking āBungie did it like thisā is not an point anyone can make that carries much weight because even Bungie would do things differently for the next game, they always did. Besides has anyone heard a new quote from Bungie about what they think about the 343iās games, I havenāt, and I probably wouldnāt give it much weight. As we all know everyone has a personal preference, right? Even those inside the studio working on the game.
By that same token, invoking āBungie would do it differently nowā is equally meaningless as you both have no way of knowing exactly what ways they would be different. I donāt much care for appeals to authority like that either. The issue is it doesnāt really matter what they would have done differently or why they did things the way they did in the first place. People enjoyed and continue to enjoy classic Halo regardless of its designers original intents or even their regrets after the fact.
> As to your question, Why? Why would going back to classic mechanics be a bad idea? Halo is a AAA game that is trying to draw people to buy more products other than the game (just like merchandise with Star Wars) and we all pay full price for it, do I want the minimum functional movement in the game? No. Would I be a little more accepting of a minimal movement mobile game? Maybe. Is Haloās fair play something I love about the games? Yes. Halo has extented lore with Spartans doing amazing feats! Do I want to be able to do some of those things in a game? Yes. Are these all of my opinions? No. These are just some of my preferences, if you donāt feel the same thats fine.
Cool, now we are getting somewhere. I think its kind of shallow to relegate standard movement as being something for only āmobile gamesā because of the number of inputs involved, I would also argue that changing the core gameplay is one of the least impactful ways to add to a sequel in a long running franchise but I digress. The point is there is something tangible to discuss, not just endless citing of page numbers and time stamps.
> However, instead of talking around in circles with arguments that donāt carry much weight. Shouldnāt we maybe agree on a core set of ideals that Halo has? To maybe actually get some thoughts moving, rather than just bashing each others opinions. That way when someone starts saying they want wall-running in the game maybe it wonāt go on, and on and onā¦
>
> Finding a core piece of common ground and establishing where to pull from is kind of important to this argument of, returning to classic movement mechanics?
> If the gloves are off and you pull arguments from anywhere, maybe it doesnāt effect me because I say what does that have to do with the price of butter?
I think we are on the same page then you seem to realize. If it feels like I am picking at certain things it is because I also want to get down to the core of discussion. I was also frustrated by the wall running discussion as one party cites and instance of X thing happening while another attempts to minimize it by pointing out inconsistencies in Y and Zā¦ It just led me to the point wanting to leave the lore on the backburner when it comes to gameplay as it just seems to obfuscate the real discussion of game design preference. That is why I am so stuck on bringing up āconsistencyā as it distracts from the tangible effects said attempts at āconsistencyā can have. When something as simple as sprint can be so contentious, one personās preference can destroy what someone else considers a vital part of the gameplay.
I would much prefer to see a in depth discussion on what effects wall running would have on gameplay rather than whether it was ālore friendly.ā
> 2533274795123910;1439:
> Conceded or not, itās part of history, something that can and is being used.
> I can sure take it into consideration, but I canāt promise anything, because the point you made isnāt the relevant thing, itās the transition from it to another which is important.
Absolutely ridiculous, and that all but renders this entire exchange tedious to the point of absurdity if no matter what sound issues I put forward against wall running, youāre going to run back to an objection that I admitted was wrong as though itās still relevant. Especially in that the post where I recognized I got the weights wrong, I clearly stated that a Spartan knocking down walls isnāt my biggest issue, but the fitting of parkour in with Haloās gameplay. And even beyond that, in the original post that spawned this whole thing, my statement was that at some point mechanics should make sense within the game universe theyāre set in. That has not changed, two-ton armor or not.
> There are a few things here youāve missed.
> No one here has been asked how wall running would work, and you havenāt asked.
I donāt have to rely on being asked to provide objections to the notion, thank you.
> The thing youāve done is taken how long of a gap a spartan can clear with the current available tools, and then decided an implemented wall run has to be able to clear all of that and some more.
As stated, to avoid redundancy. If a wall run canāt clear a gap that you can simply jump over, what good is it? Why use it? What would help here is - if you are a proponent to wall running (and if not, why are we doing this?) - for you to provide implementations in which wall running would be relevant and useful, or have some place in Haloās gameplay. Tsassi provided a few examples - strong examples - where wall running could be implemented beyond clearing a gap. I still donāt quite agree that it fits Halo, but itās something beyond nettling my arguments with nothing but nay-saying.
> Additionally, as you later down the post cut out,
Weāre working on a 7,500 character limit here, naqser. I already donāt like cutting a single composed post into multiple posts; Iām not going to include every line of a quote block that is still there to show you said it for whatever reason.
As for adding onto a Spartanās jump distance, that was addressed. One can only go so far with map design in that regard to accommodate this hypothetical before maps become unplayable. With an easy distance of 70 feet, to have enough areas at 80-90 feet to keep your vision of wall running relevant, I think maps would become an unplayable mess that all but forces players into wall running, drawing focus from combat engagement.
> Now youāve added another trait ontop of how youāve decided wall running would work, removed combat capabilities. Without ever asking anyone howād it work.
Again, I donāt need to ask for anything. If you have an idea as to how it would work, then provide it. Iām not going to wait for your permission to make an argument, so spare me the trumped up indignity. And as I pointed out previously, what I said in the quoted was I imagine. For a hypothetical situation in and of itself (no, Iām not sitting on āinsider informationā, but given that we know next to nothing about Halo Infinite, everything is a hypothetical) there is no definite āthis is how it would/would not workā.
Again, if youāve got a better vision than bring it to the table, rather than nettling me with nothing.
> Running on a wall for a brief period of time would be time youāre not on floor level, which would play in on player readiness for encounters.
Do you turn invisible? Youāre still very present while wall running. Cancelling the wall run, thrusting around; youāre still in the same area, assumedly not behind cover (unless weāre wall running around corners now), so Iām brought back to what point would it have?
> What are you going to do when the gap is 60 feet?
Use thrusters. And if you keep uping the gap foot by foot to try and reach some outside-maximum to shoehorn in wall running, well Iāll probably just assume that area feet beyond is out of limits and go a different way. And if the map forces players to go down that super-long, then itās really poor map design.
> Why am I as a weakened player looking for an escape, not going to āsprintā away as well, to not allow the gap to close?
I really donāt know what youāre asking here.
> If I were to go check my Halo 3 medals,
Youād find something that doesnāt match up, because Halo 3 doesnāt have sprint. So the situation presented - along with advantages and drawbacks to sprint - isnāt going to be properly compared. Your Halo 3 medals are irrelevant to any discussion about sprint.
> 2533274795123910;1440:
> Canon are events, reactions to those and the results, in any order or chain. Right?
> As such, sprinting spartans not able to fire, are not canon, neither are top speed / pin point accuracy spartans, as those are visuals accounts only for the events that transcribed during these events.
Iām not seeing a whole lot of justification for visual elements of The Package that clearly ignore canon. I have also never said that Spartans cannot fire while sprinting, so thatās not even an issue.
> A fiery explosion from a Spartan laser is not that far from reality.
> As long as the laser heats the material up fast enough, the vaporisation and sublimation, can cause a shockwave of sorts in the similar fashion of a bomb.
The laser would need to be far more powerful than the Spartan Laser currently is. So as such, a Spartan Laser cannot cause a fiery explosion like what we saw in The Package. Ergo, it presents an unrealistic, uncannonical depiction. It doesnāt matter what lasers can hypothetically do, Spartan Lasers donāt.
> So?
So, if itās human error on part of the player, itās not bad game design.
> If we already have grenade jumping, and standing on othersā heads, then we wouldnāt need clamber.
And if you suck at grenade jumping, or donāt have someone else to stand on?
> So, as I asked, why would these suddenly be made easily accessible to the player just because a new mechanic is added to the game?
> Are these places going to be accessible or not?
The issue here was you saying that clambering was redundant; an ability without purpose. You claimed that it was artificially given a purpose by the designers raising ledges just above jump height. I pointed out that those type of areas have always existed in Halo, and that clamber is not redundant because it has a purpose that is not conventionally replicated. Those areas were accessible, but not conventionally. Are you going to bust my balls for four pages over not saying ānearly inaccessibleā?
> Actually it doesnāt,
Using a feature thatās not in the game as an argument against a feature that is does make the example irrelevant. Itās neither here nor there that double jumping was considered but cut; itās not in the game, so who cares?
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Okay, first off, this is a quote-reply between me and tsassi.
So? You post on a public forum, so all your replies are up for scrutiny. Otherwise you might as well go to PM. Everybody else is welcome to reply to my posts as well, what do I care?
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Secondly, Iāve given quite a bit of evidence against Legends and even arguments trying to use Forward Unto Dawn.
So where is it? Again ādisagreeingā is not āevidenceā. Quotes are evidence, screenshots and movie clips are evidence.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> For FUD, I made mention how frame by frame, the Jackals are shot through their chests - evident through blood spatter locations.
Yes, you āmade mentionā. Thatās the point. As said before, thatās not evidence. To be quite honest: I donāt see where the blood exits the jackals, and I watched that scene about twenty times or so by now, so Iād need some screenshots if you want to convince me.
Besides, there is only one spot on a jackal that results in an immediate kill with one pistol bullet (and we hear the number of gunshots pretty clearly) which is the head. What was that again about āvisual inconsistenciesā? So if itās kosher with you claiming that on The Package, I could just as well make the same claim hereā¦
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> we do see him taking fire,
What does ātaking fireā have to do with anything, by the way?
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> so to try and use that scene as supporting evidence for Spartans sprinting and firing with accuracy is fallacious at best.
Well, I did have another proof before that, but you didnāt accept Package either, so we could go through the entire Expanded Material and youād probably find made-up issues with every one of them as they contradict your point of view of what Spartans āshould be able to doāā¦
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Thirdly, I never said that Forward Unto Dawn was an anime. Thisāll go a lot better for everyone if my arguments arenāt misrepresented.
ā1. Legends has many visual inconsistencies that pander to anime-style action.ā
Correct, you technically didnāt, you just said that it panders to Anime. Then again, I technically never claimed you didā¦
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> If memory serves, he is named as āThelā in subtitles and in the credits.
I donāt know about the subtitles, never used those, but heās not mentioned by name in the credits. Actually, none of the Covenant are.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> The name āThelā wasnāt just pulled from thin air. That coupled with Luro 'Taralumeeās foreshadowing of āHis only path now is death, or Arbiterā is clearly meant to indicated the Arbiter Thel 'Vadamee.
I didnāt doubt that. Yes, at that point it was meant to be a connection, but since it was never directly mentioned, itās still no contradiction.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Nice snark. Firstly, Yanmeāe blood is white, with a green tint.
So in other words, itās light green. Like, the article you quoted even has a screenshot linked at the bottom. (Not that the one that I already had posted didnāt suffice to drive that point home.)
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> so even while you acknowledge that it is correctly identified as a visual inconsistency, this whole bit of your post was completely unnecessary and uncalled for.
No, it would have been unnecessary and uncalled for, had I tried to shift the focus on that mistake in order to divert attention from Halo Legendsā wrong blood color. I have done no such thing and I have admitted the visual inconsistency in the Package (which, again, I never even claimed to not exist in the first place, so I donāt know why weāre still talking about this). Donāt want to be corrected? Donāt make faulty statements.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> And why, pray tell, would a Spartan care about something like that?
Dunno. Why would a Spartan care for bright armor colors when all they do is make you more visible and stick out in combat?
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Even allowing it, why would she dye her hair so briefly?
Maybe she hated it after it was finished?
The point was that your line of thought seems to be: āThis is different than it was shown elsewhere, therefore it is automatically noncanonā. Thatās not how it works. Authors try to reconcile as much content as as possible with one another using retcons before they decanonize any story or element. In-universe explanations are always preferred to throwing stuff out of the window. This doesnāt always work, such as in the case with Covenant in the Package having green blood, but itās not a carte blance to extrapolate from one mistake to everything that is tangentially associated with it as equally invalid.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Problematic as noted above and throughout.
And still never decanonized.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Iām disputing that scene as evidence because it cannot be told - for a fact - that John was sprinting while shooting those three Jackals. He very well could have killed them, drawn attention to himself, and then began to run. You cannot tell me for a fact that he was sprinting while he killed them - with center-mass shots, mind you - because we plain do not see that.
I showed you proof in the Package and you still didnāt accept that. And no, I donāt care for you parroting āproblematicā for the umphteenth time, itās officially canon unless you have a quote to the contrary.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Mind you, Iāve never said that they canāt.
āAnd especially considering that were it possible or practical, what youāre citing there (weapon lowering) is a gameplay mechanicā Naqser mentioned Spartans lowering their weapons in order to go faster. To which you relplied with the past subjunctive (āwere it possibleā). Was this not implying that you donāt consider it possible for Spartans to run at max speed and still firing?
Same with this quote:
āI disagree, itās entirely relevant for a game thatās built around the canon.ā I was talking about canonicity of gameplay mechanics, and how theyāre irrelevant given past inclusion of sprint. Which you disagreed upon, saying that the game is ābuilt around the canonā. Since Spartans cannot sprint and shoot in the games, by extension you claimed that this is canon. Or am I missing something here?
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Okay seriously. If you want to continue this little back-and-forth, this needs to come full stop.
I donāt. What I want is for you to stop trying to decanonize expanded material based on personal preference.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> What I have brought to this is from lore and canon coupled with common sense and practicality in fitting with the norms of the Halo Universe.
Bull. You dismiss The Package solely on the premise that it "pander to anime-style action". The problem was never that you pointed out inconsistencies in certain scenes (and sometimes even correctly) but that you use this as a justification to completely dismiss unrelated parts of the content because they contradict your headcanon.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> You have two. One from an over-the-top anime short and the other from an unclear situation. Reach further before you claim several direct.
Well, thatās still two more than you have, soā¦
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> What Iāve presented doesnāt require a quote.
Yes it does. Claiming something isnāt canon requires a source from somebody who actually has the authority to make this decision.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Brutes didnāt suddenly start having green blood for one encounter.
Has nothing to do with Spartans sprinting.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> I already told you; rife through there and find inconsistencies that are visual in nature.
And I already said, Iām not talking about visual inconsistencies.
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Maintaining a level for their weapon would require immobilization of their hand while allowing compensating movement to counter their bodyās sway and bounce from their arms. It would render them unable to aim but for straight forward. But accuracy, right?
In what way would that limit them to aiming straight forward? Aiming in the y-axis isnāt affected at all, and aiming to the side would just require the arms to be locked in a positon that has no imbalance (for example in front of the torso, just like Fred holds his SMG in this shot).
> 2533274804813082;1436:
> Try to lock your arms, run forward as fast as you can, and maintain pinpoint accuracy. Hold a laser pointer just so you can see how all-over-the-place your aim is.
Give me a metal armor with a built-in gyroscope and hydraulics to compensate and Iāll gladly test it out.
> 2533274804813082;1437:
> Given the electronic nature of those HUD elements, I would assume thatās a microelectromechanical system (MEMS gyroscope) being used to provide that. Not exactly what Iām talking about; think a vehicles shocks compared to (as given by you) their compass.
I wasnāt talking about the compass. Also, what difference does it make if itās an electronic or a physical system? The point is that itād be able to determine the orientation of the Spartansā arms and weapons in 3D space and adjust accordingly.
> 2533274804813082;1437:
> I canāt believe youāre being so abrasive and unnecessary for something thatās given clear indication. When I say what happened - clarified as the events - Iām not talking about the visuals of those events being carried out.
Yes, you just incorrectly separate what is an event and what is a visual.
EDIT: Hell, even if it were a visual (which it isnāt), it still wouldnāt change a thing: Having completely unrelated visuals being noncanon does not make every one of them noncanon. Halo 4ās depiction of the Forward Unto Dawn is officially noncanon, hovever the new designs of Grunts, Jackals and Elites still arenāt. As long as you cannot prove that this specific instance of Spartans sprinting and shooting at max accuracy is noncanon, your point is moot.
> 2533274804813082;1437:
> Jumping 50 feet requires the pressing of two buttons and forward movement. No real skill is involved, so explain how wall running would thus not be a redundant mechanic? Explain how itās more streamlined, given the prerequisite wall?
Thatās assuming that wall running will only allow you to cross the same distance that regular jumping has. If you compare it to the āevolvedā variant, it is more streamlined and allows inexperienced players to reach these distances that they wouldnāt otherwise. If they want to make wall running not redundant, they just need to give it reach beyond what normal jumping can achieve. Would it be over-the-top and ridiculous? Yeah, probably. But again, thatās a decision made for gameplay reasons, not realism or lore consistency reasons, just like they have always been made in the past.
> 2533274804813082;1437:
> First off, Titanfall is Titanfall, not Halo.
I know. It was you who referenced other games that have wallrunning in the first place.
> 2533274804813082;1437:
> Secondly, it does not, so far as I can find; wall running lasts 1.75 seconds, upped to 3.5 with an add-on kit.
Not in one go. However, you can immediately continue wallrunning if you jump onto an opposite wall on the other side of an alley or chasm or whatever. This can be exploited on curved surfaces and lets you even hover in place in a corner (though youāre limited to facing the wall it seems).
> 2781911019823810;1456:
> > 2533274913913392;1455:
> > > 2781911019823810;1454:
> > > > 2533274913913392;1451:
> > > > > 2781911019823810;1441:
> > > > > > 2533274804813082;1434:
> > > > > > >
>
> Is there any info on the differance between Gen 1 and Gen 2 armor? They both and use Armor abilities and have shields. Besides the look is the a difference?
Here are a few pages regarding Gen 2 Armor, and some relevant info regarding Mk VII of Gen 1.
From Halopedia:
- Gen 2 - Mk VII - Waypoint Page for MJOLNIRGen 2 upgraded and streamlined most hardware aspects of the armor, though no extensive list of all the upgrades exist. Some of the upgrades include increased strength modification, further integration of many hardware systems into the techsuit (explaining why it is less bulky), and just being stronger and lighter. An important detail regarding Gen 2, is that it incorporated many-if not all-of the advancements in MK VII as that model of armor wasnāt produced extensively. One of the most important aspects of MK VII in regards to our topic is something called āShield Shapingā. This isnāt explained as far as what it actually does in either the Waypoint or Halopedia pages, though it could be explained in more detail in either one of the Kilo 5 books or Halseyās journal (neither of which I have access to at this moment). This could be the solution to what we are discussing, but it also may not be. Also, it is quite possible the issue was rectified in any of the MJOLNIR updates without being mentioned specifically.
Ultimately, the thing is that the traction issue is never mentioned again after Fall of Reach, in any Halo media at all. Ever. This leads me to believe it is a non-issue for just about any circumstance. On top of that, the fact that there were two Gen 1 upgrades after MK V (which is the suit having the traction issue in Fall of Reach): MK VI and MK VII, and then a whole new generation of MJOLNIR (potentially 2). If traction was an existing issue, it is likely that it would be rectified over the course of all of these upgrades in order to give the Spartans the most tactical options possible and not limit them based on the shielding system.
Also going back to Cortana controlling the shield power on the soles of the feet as well, it displays that she has the capability to modify the power of the shields in specific areas. She, and other Smart AIs assigned to Spartans, are plugged right into their brain in order to speed up their reaction time and even further increase their connection with the armor. Gen 2 armor systems are equipped with a variety of low-level AI as well to help Spartans in a variety of scenarios, as well as further their connection with their armor in a similar way to Smart AIs. These low-level AIs are directly on display in use by Fred in either Last Light or Retribution, the AI reacting to his very thoughts, almost before he realizes he thinks them. If traction continued to be an existing problem with the shield system, it stands to reason that if Chief, or any Spartan with either a Gen 2 suit or a Smart AI, were to attempt a maneuver (such as wall running), that may be compromised by said traction issue, that their Smart AIs or low-level onboard armor AI would be able to modify the shield power in the affected area in real-time, allowing the Spartan to attempt the maneuver without issue.
The initial shield tech in the Mk V suit was also based on captured Covenant tech, specifically Jackal arm-shields. It is quite possible that further iterations of the armor would be updated based on further discovered tech, such as Forerunner tech, or the shield systems of captured Elite combat-harnesses. While MJOLNIR is mentioned once in the entire Halo series to potentially have a traction problem with the shield system, Elite combat harnesses are never mentioned to have that issue.