The return of classic movement mechanics?

Games Halo Infinite
1822

> 2779900484279609;1819:
> > 2592250499807011;1818:
> > > 2533274801176260;1817:
> > > You just admitted to the definiton being incomplete.
> >
> > In battlefront’s case, it doesn’t even matter. It’s a class based loadout shooter. My definition doesn’t need to change to exclude battlefront.
> >
> > The only real point of substance in your post is the quake player models, and I already told you I disagree with you that the different models negates a design of even player starts. It’s not the same as Invasion, where elites had different abilities etc than spartans (and the entire game mode was asymmetrical objective).
> >
> > The rest of your post is pure “no true scotsman” at its best… You’re just asserting “halo can’t be a true arena shooter because [arbitrary reason]”.
> >
> > This whole discussion is off topic anyway.
>
> I applaud your patience, Primus. I would have lost mine a long time ago. Most of the arguments I’ve seen lately end up devolving into semantics and don’t help the overall cause here, trying to get classic movement mechanics back. Whatever is being said, Halo was an arena shooter at the most basic level. I don’t understand how that is even being argued.
>
> Halo has lost popularity, it isn’t fun anymore for loads of players who used to love the series, and sprint and the other mechanics added to it have devalued the importance of the arena shooter tactics and strategy Halo chose to incorporate from their inception.

I feel like I’ve had nine years of patience on discussions like this. They’ve been going on for a long time. I still love this franchise and want to see it live up to its potential - which I still believe it has - to be the best multiplayer shooter on the market. There are elements of Halo 5 that are the best in the series. But the game is so crippled at the most fundamental levels of its game design by the inclusion of movement mechanics that it has never lived up to its potential (a content-lacking launch and bad campaign didn’t help either). I want to see Halo ditch bad game design decisions, which are only present to chase trends and please focus testers, and return to greatness. And I do not think games which include fundamentally contradictory design mechanics can ever be great, especially in a competitive market.

The devolution of the sprint discussion is mostly because there aren’t any solid arguments for why sprint (or other movement mechanics) ought to be in Halo (maybe because sprint is objectively bad design in a game like this). There are a lot of players who like sprint in Halo, but I’ve yet to see any cogent argumentation for why it is good design and makes a better game. In nine years I have never seen that kind of argument set forth. It’s interesting to note that I am unaware of any debate - ever - about the inclusion of sprint in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield or Fortnite or the like. But it’s been a hot topic since 2010 in Halo because most veteran Halo players instinctively recognize that it doesn’t work with the core design of the game - even if they fail to articulate exactly why.

4v4 Halo multiplayer will never be great when designed around movement mechanics. And when it lacks popularity and gets tepid reception, lots of folks will go on continuing to blame the market, the stiff competition, make up all kinds of excuses, and miss the reality that bad game design makes a game worse, and presses it down towards mediocrity, no matter how well that flawed design is executed. Sprint isn’t necessarily a magic bullet - they could certainly make a mediocre or bad Halo game without sprint, but they cannot make a great one with sprint.

1823

> 2592250499807011;1822:
> > 2779900484279609;1819:
> > > 2592250499807011;1818:
> > > > 2533274801176260;1817:
> > > > You just admitted to the definiton being incomplete.
> > >
> > > In battlefront’s case, it doesn’t even matter. It’s a class based loadout shooter. My definition doesn’t need to change to exclude battlefront.
> > >
> > > The only real point of substance in your post is the quake player models, and I already told you I disagree with you that the different models negates a design of even player starts. It’s not the same as Invasion, where elites had different abilities etc than spartans (and the entire game mode was asymmetrical objective).
> > >
> > > The rest of your post is pure “no true scotsman” at its best… You’re just asserting “halo can’t be a true arena shooter because [arbitrary reason]”.
> > >
> > > This whole discussion is off topic anyway.
> >
> > I applaud your patience, Primus. I would have lost mine a long time ago. Most of the arguments I’ve seen lately end up devolving into semantics and don’t help the overall cause here, trying to get classic movement mechanics back. Whatever is being said, Halo was an arena shooter at the most basic level. I don’t understand how that is even being argued.
> >
> > Halo has lost popularity, it isn’t fun anymore for loads of players who used to love the series, and sprint and the other mechanics added to it have devalued the importance of the arena shooter tactics and strategy Halo chose to incorporate from their inception.
>
> I feel like I’ve had nine years of patience on discussions like this. They’ve been going on for a long time. I still love this franchise and want to see it live up to its potential - which I still believe it has - to be the best multiplayer shooter on the market. There are elements of Halo 5 that are the best in the series. But the game is so crippled at the most fundamental levels of its game design by the inclusion of movement mechanics that it has never lived up to its potential (a content-lacking launch and bad campaign didn’t help either). I want to see Halo ditch bad game design decisions, which are only present to chase trends and please focus testers, and return to greatness. And I do not think games which include fundamentally contradictory design mechanics can ever be great, especially in a competitive market.
>
> The devolution of the sprint discussion is mostly because there aren’t any solid arguments for why sprint (or other movement mechanics) ought to be in Halo (maybe because sprint is objectively bad design in a game like this). There are a lot of players who like sprint in Halo, but I’ve yet to see any cogent argumentation for why it is good design and makes a better game. In nine years I have never seen that kind of argument set forth. It’s interesting to note that I am unaware of any debate - ever - about the inclusion of sprint in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield or Fortnite or the like. But it’s been a hot topic since 2010 in Halo because most veteran Halo players instinctively recognize that it doesn’t work with the core design of the game - even if they fail to articulate exactly why.
>
> 4v4 Halo multiplayer will never be great when designed around movement mechanics. And when it lacks popularity and gets tepid reception, lots of folks will go on continuing to blame the market, the stiff competition, make up all kinds of excuses, and miss the reality that bad game design makes a game worse, and presses it down towards mediocrity, no matter how well that flawed design is executed. Sprint isn’t necessarily a magic bullet - they could certainly make a mediocre or bad Halo game without sprint, but they cannot make a great one with sprint.

Well I personally enjoyed Halo 5’s implementation and felt Halo 5 overall had good game design. So it is more preference than any objective reason. I also know people that enjoyed Halo: Reach and Halo 4 a lot who were fans of the classic gameplay. So instead of saying lets pick a winning formula, maybe the focus should be lets find a formula that can appease people who’s favorite Halo game is any of the Halo games. Just a thought.

1824

> 2535423239872731;1823:
> > 2592250499807011;1822:
> > > 2779900484279609;1819:
> > > > 2592250499807011;1818:
> > > > > 2533274801176260;1817:
> > > > > You just admitted to the definiton being incomplete.
> > > >
> > > > In battlefront’s case, it doesn’t even matter. It’s a class based loadout shooter. My definition doesn’t need to change to exclude battlefront.
> > > >
> > > > The only real point of substance in your post is the quake player models, and I already told you I disagree with you that the different models negates a design of even player starts. It’s not the same as Invasion, where elites had different abilities etc than spartans (and the entire game mode was asymmetrical objective).
> > > >
> > > > The rest of your post is pure “no true scotsman” at its best… You’re just asserting “halo can’t be a true arena shooter because [arbitrary reason]”.
> > > >
> > > > This whole discussion is off topic anyway.
> > >
> > > I applaud your patience, Primus. I would have lost mine a long time ago. Most of the arguments I’ve seen lately end up devolving into semantics and don’t help the overall cause here, trying to get classic movement mechanics back. Whatever is being said, Halo was an arena shooter at the most basic level. I don’t understand how that is even being argued.
> > >
> > > Halo has lost popularity, it isn’t fun anymore for loads of players who used to love the series, and sprint and the other mechanics added to it have devalued the importance of the arena shooter tactics and strategy Halo chose to incorporate from their inception.
> >
> > I feel like I’ve had nine years of patience on discussions like this. They’ve been going on for a long time. I still love this franchise and want to see it live up to its potential - which I still believe it has - to be the best multiplayer shooter on the market. There are elements of Halo 5 that are the best in the series. But the game is so crippled at the most fundamental levels of its game design by the inclusion of movement mechanics that it has never lived up to its potential (a content-lacking launch and bad campaign didn’t help either). I want to see Halo ditch bad game design decisions, which are only present to chase trends and please focus testers, and return to greatness. And I do not think games which include fundamentally contradictory design mechanics can ever be great, especially in a competitive market.
> >
> > The devolution of the sprint discussion is mostly because there aren’t any solid arguments for why sprint (or other movement mechanics) ought to be in Halo (maybe because sprint is objectively bad design in a game like this). There are a lot of players who like sprint in Halo, but I’ve yet to see any cogent argumentation for why it is good design and makes a better game. In nine years I have never seen that kind of argument set forth. It’s interesting to note that I am unaware of any debate - ever - about the inclusion of sprint in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield or Fortnite or the like. But it’s been a hot topic since 2010 in Halo because most veteran Halo players instinctively recognize that it doesn’t work with the core design of the game - even if they fail to articulate exactly why.
> >
> > 4v4 Halo multiplayer will never be great when designed around movement mechanics. And when it lacks popularity and gets tepid reception, lots of folks will go on continuing to blame the market, the stiff competition, make up all kinds of excuses, and miss the reality that bad game design makes a game worse, and presses it down towards mediocrity, no matter how well that flawed design is executed. Sprint isn’t necessarily a magic bullet - they could certainly make a mediocre or bad Halo game without sprint, but they cannot make a great one with sprint.
>
> Well I personally enjoyed Halo 5’s implementation and felt Halo 5 overall had good game design. So it is more preference than any objective reason. I also know people that enjoyed Halo: Reach and Halo 4 a lot who were fans of the classic gameplay. So instead of saying lets pick a winning formula, maybe the focus should be lets find a formula that can appease people who’s favorite Halo game is any of the Halo games. Just a thought.

Trying to appease people, without reference to good game design and without focus on the distinguishing design principles of Halo, is how Halo fell apart in the first place. Bungie started it with bloom and armor abilities. 343i doubled down on it with Halo 4 and its design focus on “accessibility” leading to all sorts of garbage like loadouts and ordinance drops along with abilities and sprint, just to name a few. 343 backtracked a bit on some of their terrible ideas for Halo 4 but haven’t recognized/addressed the design flaws inherent in movement abilities in Halo. In essence, Reach implemented some bad design ideas with bad to mediocre execution. Halo 4 implemented a LOT of bad design ideas with bad execution. Halo 5 implements some bad design ideas with good execution.

To return to my food analogy: Sprint and movement abilities are the high fructose corn syrup of Halo. Lots of people like it, but it’s bad for the game.

But I wouldn’t worry too much - 343i isn’t going to drop movement abilities in Halo:Infinite, so you will get the game you like. And the ceiling for its quality will be “good”, not “great”, just like Halo 5.

1825

I’ve got an idea, why not have two separate slayer game modes where one is classic game play and the other is the new game play? This would resolve so many issues with the community being split down the middle.

1826

> 343i isn’t going to drop movement abilities in Halo:Infinite

How do you know this?

1827

> 2533274921439839;1825:
> I’ve got an idea, why not have two separate slayer game modes where one is classic game play and the other is the new game play? This would resolve so many issues with the community being split down the middle.

While I appreciate the incentive, that would just lead to a worse experience for everyone. It would require 343 to have two completely separate weapon sandbox’s and maps designed for two different styles of gameplay, which leads to less content for everybody, and they’d have to decide whether the campaign has classic or modern gameplay as well. 343 would essentially be creating half of two games instead of one complete game.

1828

> 2533274894112092;1827:
> > 2533274921439839;1825:
> > I’ve got an idea, why not have two separate slayer game modes where one is classic game play and the other is the new game play? This would resolve so many issues with the community being split down the middle.
>
> While I appreciate the incentive, that would just lead to a worse experience for everyone. It would require 343 to have two completely separate weapon sandbox’s and maps designed for two different styles of gameplay, which leads to less content for everybody, and they’d have to decide whether the campaign has classic or modern gameplay as well. 343 would essentially be creating half of two games instead of one complete game.

What’s your thoughts on a solution?

1829

> 2533274921439839;1828:
> > 2533274894112092;1827:
> > > 2533274921439839;1825:
> > > I’ve got an idea, why not have two separate slayer game modes where one is classic game play and the other is the new game play? This would resolve so many issues with the community being split down the middle.
> >
> > While I appreciate the incentive, that would just lead to a worse experience for everyone. It would require 343 to have two completely separate weapon sandbox’s and maps designed for two different styles of gameplay, which leads to less content for everybody, and they’d have to decide whether the campaign has classic or modern gameplay as well. 343 would essentially be creating half of two games instead of one complete game.
>
> What’s your thoughts on a solution?

Get rid of sprint

1830

> 2592250499807011;1829:
> > 2533274921439839;1828:
> > > 2533274894112092;1827:
> > > > 2533274921439839;1825:
> > > > I’ve got an idea, why not have two separate slayer game modes where one is classic game play and the other is the new game play? This would resolve so many issues with the community being split down the middle.
> > >
> > > While I appreciate the incentive, that would just lead to a worse experience for everyone. It would require 343 to have two completely separate weapon sandbox’s and maps designed for two different styles of gameplay, which leads to less content for everybody, and they’d have to decide whether the campaign has classic or modern gameplay as well. 343 would essentially be creating half of two games instead of one complete game.
> >
> > What’s your thoughts on a solution?
>
> Get rid of sprint

It’s not just sprint. Spartan abilities also need to go.

1831

> 2533274977253120;1830:
> > 2592250499807011;1829:
> > > 2533274921439839;1828:
> > > > 2533274894112092;1827:
> > > > > 2533274921439839;1825:
> > > > > I’ve got an idea, why not have two separate slayer game modes where one is classic game play and the other is the new game play? This would resolve so many issues with the community being split down the middle.
> > > >
> > > > While I appreciate the incentive, that would just lead to a worse experience for everyone. It would require 343 to have two completely separate weapon sandbox’s and maps designed for two different styles of gameplay, which leads to less content for everybody, and they’d have to decide whether the campaign has classic or modern gameplay as well. 343 would essentially be creating half of two games instead of one complete game.
> > >
> > > What’s your thoughts on a solution?
> >
> > Get rid of sprint
>
> It’s not just sprint. Spartan abilities also need to go.

Of course. My point is simply that i agree it’s impossible to design the game for both, and the solution for a better game is to get rid of sprint/abilities.

1832

<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not create alternate accounts to bypass forum bans. Alternate accounts will be permanently banned, and offending users will be subject to both temporary and permanent bans.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

To Monitors: This is an alternate account to get around a ban that I do not deserve. I made an account for the sole intention of use on Halo Waypoint to avoid bullying that I have experienced personally in the past. I fully expect the monitors to ban this even though I urge them to understand why I am doing this.

Now unto what I want to discuss. If Halo Infinite goes strictly classic it will be damaging to the community. The reason Halo: Reach, Halo 4, and Halo 5 were considered by some as bad was because they delivered the desires of part of the community and screwed the rest of the community, so for those who want only classic gameplay, you are choosing to spitefully hurt a portion of the Halo communities desires. It is like the difference between a feminist and a SJW. A feminist wants equality for women. A SJW wants to make up for the time of male dominance by creating female dominance. Likewise, those asking for explicitly classic only, you are the SJW of halo.

Now, clearly two gameplay styles will split development resources will lead to a mediocre game right? No, Slipspace Engine is created by the Forge team. The Forge Community(A group that is a part of Halo too) has actively wanted things like in-game assets, adding textures, and using parts of the campaign AND would love if there work is added to Halo Infinite’s main playlists. The key to a great game is community and this is an effective way for 343 to support the entire community regardless of different tastes.

Now, some might suggest that will split the playerbase, right? Well a more robust version of match composer would alleviate that. I personally switch between Halo 5 and MCC quite a bit even if Halo 5 is my preferred game. I would love to be able to do the same in Infinite in game.

1833

> 2533274977253120;1826:
> > 343i isn’t going to drop movement abilities in Halo:Infinite
>
> How do you know this?

Because this discussion has been going on ever since 343 has existed and they’ve never once even hinted that they agree with - or even understand - the “no sprint” side of the argument.

The arguments for pro-sprint are nothing more substantial than “a portion of the community likes sprint”, but arguments against sprint appear by all counts to fall on deaf ears for the people who actually develop the game.

1834

> 2592250499807011;1831:
> > 2533274977253120;1830:
> > > 2592250499807011;1829:
> > > > 2533274921439839;1828:
> > > > > 2533274894112092;1827:
> > > > > > 2533274921439839;1825:
> > > > > > I’ve got an idea, why not have two separate slayer game modes where one is classic game play and the other is the new game play? This would resolve so many issues with the community being split down the middle.
> > > > >
> > > > > While I appreciate the incentive, that would just lead to a worse experience for everyone. It would require 343 to have two completely separate weapon sandbox’s and maps designed for two different styles of gameplay, which leads to less content for everybody, and they’d have to decide whether the campaign has classic or modern gameplay as well. 343 would essentially be creating half of two games instead of one complete game.
> > > >
> > > > What’s your thoughts on a solution?
> > >
> > > Get rid of sprint
> >
> > It’s not just sprint. Spartan abilities also need to go.
>
> Of course. My point is simply that i agree it’s impossible to design the game for both, and the solution for a better game is to get rid of sprint/abilities.

Dash is all I wouldn’t mind seeing back because it doesn’t require sprint to be used

1835

> 2592250499807011;1829:
> > 2533274921439839;1828:
> > > 2533274894112092;1827:
> > > > 2533274921439839;1825:
> > > > I’ve got an idea, why not have two separate slayer game modes where one is classic game play and the other is the new game play? This would resolve so many issues with the community being split down the middle.
> > >
> > > While I appreciate the incentive, that would just lead to a worse experience for everyone. It would require 343 to have two completely separate weapon sandbox’s and maps designed for two different styles of gameplay, which leads to less content for everybody, and they’d have to decide whether the campaign has classic or modern gameplay as well. 343 would essentially be creating half of two games instead of one complete game.
> >
> > What’s your thoughts on a solution?
>
> Get rid of sprint

I mean that would be my ideal situation too but is it likely? If they wanted to keep sprint, at least get rid of the clamber bs.

1836

> 2533274921439839;1835:
> > 2592250499807011;1829:
> > > 2533274921439839;1828:
> > > > 2533274894112092;1827:
> > > > > 2533274921439839;1825:
> > > > > I’ve got an idea, why not have two separate slayer game modes where one is classic game play and the other is the new game play? This would resolve so many issues with the community being split down the middle.
> > > >
> > > > While I appreciate the incentive, that would just lead to a worse experience for everyone. It would require 343 to have two completely separate weapon sandbox’s and maps designed for two different styles of gameplay, which leads to less content for everybody, and they’d have to decide whether the campaign has classic or modern gameplay as well. 343 would essentially be creating half of two games instead of one complete game.
> > >
> > > What’s your thoughts on a solution?
> >
> > Get rid of sprint
>
> I mean that would be my ideal situation too but is it likely? If they wanted to keep sprint, at least get rid of the clamber bs.

Clamber is easily the worst executed mechanic in halo 5. It makes it really clunky to navigate maps since many jumps/ledges make it mandatory, so you’re frequently dropping your gun. Also, it radically alters the vertical scale of the maps. Spartans in H5 appear to be about 4 feet tall because every object is so stretched vertically to accommodate clamber. All the movement mechanics are bad design in halo but clamber is also badly executed.

1837

> 2535407747275549;1834:
> > 2592250499807011;1831:
> > > 2533274977253120;1830:
> > > > 2592250499807011;1829:
> > > > > 2533274921439839;1828:
> > > > > > 2533274894112092;1827:
> > > > > > > 2533274921439839;1825:
> > > > > > > I’ve got an idea, why not have two separate slayer game modes where one is classic game play and the other is the new game play? This would resolve so many issues with the community being split down the middle.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > While I appreciate the incentive, that would just lead to a worse experience for everyone. It would require 343 to have two completely separate weapon sandbox’s and maps designed for two different styles of gameplay, which leads to less content for everybody, and they’d have to decide whether the campaign has classic or modern gameplay as well. 343 would essentially be creating half of two games instead of one complete game.
> > > > >
> > > > > What’s your thoughts on a solution?
> > > >
> > > > Get rid of sprint
> > >
> > > It’s not just sprint. Spartan abilities also need to go.
> >
> > Of course. My point is simply that i agree it’s impossible to design the game for both, and the solution for a better game is to get rid of sprint/abilities.
>
> Dash is all I wouldn’t mind seeing back because it doesn’t require sprint to be used

Neither does hover.

1838

> 2592250499807011;1822:
> > 2779900484279609;1819:
> > > 2592250499807011;1818:
> > > > 2533274801176260;1817:
> > > > You just admitted to the definiton being incomplete.
> > >
> > > In battlefront’s case, it doesn’t even matter. It’s a class based loadout shooter. My definition doesn’t need to change to exclude battlefront.
> > >
> > > The only real point of substance in your post is the quake player models, and I already told you I disagree with you that the different models negates a design of even player starts. It’s not the same as Invasion, where elites had different abilities etc than spartans (and the entire game mode was asymmetrical objective).
> > >
> > > The rest of your post is pure “no true scotsman” at its best… You’re just asserting “halo can’t be a true arena shooter because [arbitrary reason]”.
> > >
> > > This whole discussion is off topic anyway.
> >
> > I applaud your patience, Primus. I would have lost mine a long time ago. Most of the arguments I’ve seen lately end up devolving into semantics and don’t help the overall cause here, trying to get classic movement mechanics back. Whatever is being said, Halo was an arena shooter at the most basic level. I don’t understand how that is even being argued.
> >
> > Halo has lost popularity, it isn’t fun anymore for loads of players who used to love the series, and sprint and the other mechanics added to it have devalued the importance of the arena shooter tactics and strategy Halo chose to incorporate from their inception.
>
> I feel like I’ve had nine years of patience on discussions like this. They’ve been going on for a long time. I still love this franchise and want to see it live up to its potential - which I still believe it has - to be the best multiplayer shooter on the market. There are elements of Halo 5 that are the best in the series. But the game is so crippled at the most fundamental levels of its game design by the inclusion of movement mechanics that it has never lived up to its potential (a content-lacking launch and bad campaign didn’t help either). I want to see Halo ditch bad game design decisions, which are only present to chase trends and please focus testers, and return to greatness. And I do not think games which include fundamentally contradictory design mechanics can ever be great, especially in a competitive market.
>
> The devolution of the sprint discussion is mostly because there aren’t any solid arguments for why sprint (or other movement mechanics) ought to be in Halo (maybe because sprint is objectively bad design in a game like this). There are a lot of players who like sprint in Halo, but I’ve yet to see any cogent argumentation for why it is good design and makes a better game. In nine years I have never seen that kind of argument set forth. It’s interesting to note that I am unaware of any debate - ever - about the inclusion of sprint in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield or Fortnite or the like. But it’s been a hot topic since 2010 in Halo because most veteran Halo players instinctively recognize that it doesn’t work with the core design of the game - even if they fail to articulate exactly why.
>
> 4v4 Halo multiplayer will never be great when designed around movement mechanics. And when it lacks popularity and gets tepid reception, lots of folks will go on continuing to blame the market, the stiff competition, make up all kinds of excuses, and miss the reality that bad game design makes a game worse, and presses it down towards mediocrity, no matter how well that flawed design is executed. Sprint isn’t necessarily a magic bullet - they could certainly make a mediocre or bad Halo game without sprint, but they cannot make a great one with sprint.

Do you seriously believe that the package we got with Halo 5 would have been more popular without “advanced movement”? While everything else stayed the same?

Yes, competition, the market and trends play a huge role. Period. Arena shooters are not a hot topic right now, as much as i like them. Maybe they will be more popular again in the future, but right now…nah. With or without sprint.
Apparently Arena, BtB or Warzone simply did not hit a nerve in the current condition, and i don´t think that squabbling over sprint, clamber and thrusters will fix this.

It´s an issue that can make for a heated discussion, but movement is a sideshow that will not necessarily increase or even decrease the popularity of Halo on a grand scale.

1839

> 2535457879420220;1838:
> > 2592250499807011;1822:
> > > 2779900484279609;1819:
> > > > 2592250499807011;1818:
> > > > > 2533274801176260;1817:
> > > > > You just admitted to the definiton being incomplete.
> > > >
> > > > In battlefront’s case, it doesn’t even matter. It’s a class based loadout shooter. My definition doesn’t need to change to exclude battlefront.
> > > >
> > > > The only real point of substance in your post is the quake player models, and I already told you I disagree with you that the different models negates a design of even player starts. It’s not the same as Invasion, where elites had different abilities etc than spartans (and the entire game mode was asymmetrical objective).
> > > >
> > > > The rest of your post is pure “no true scotsman” at its best… You’re just asserting “halo can’t be a true arena shooter because [arbitrary reason]”.
> > > >
> > > > This whole discussion is off topic anyway.
> > >
> > > I applaud your patience, Primus. I would have lost mine a long time ago. Most of the arguments I’ve seen lately end up devolving into semantics and don’t help the overall cause here, trying to get classic movement mechanics back. Whatever is being said, Halo was an arena shooter at the most basic level. I don’t understand how that is even being argued.
> > >
> > > Halo has lost popularity, it isn’t fun anymore for loads of players who used to love the series, and sprint and the other mechanics added to it have devalued the importance of the arena shooter tactics and strategy Halo chose to incorporate from their inception.
> >
> > I feel like I’ve had nine years of patience on discussions like this. They’ve been going on for a long time. I still love this franchise and want to see it live up to its potential - which I still believe it has - to be the best multiplayer shooter on the market. There are elements of Halo 5 that are the best in the series. But the game is so crippled at the most fundamental levels of its game design by the inclusion of movement mechanics that it has never lived up to its potential (a content-lacking launch and bad campaign didn’t help either). I want to see Halo ditch bad game design decisions, which are only present to chase trends and please focus testers, and return to greatness. And I do not think games which include fundamentally contradictory design mechanics can ever be great, especially in a competitive market.
> >
> > The devolution of the sprint discussion is mostly because there aren’t any solid arguments for why sprint (or other movement mechanics) ought to be in Halo (maybe because sprint is objectively bad design in a game like this). There are a lot of players who like sprint in Halo, but I’ve yet to see any cogent argumentation for why it is good design and makes a better game. In nine years I have never seen that kind of argument set forth. It’s interesting to note that I am unaware of any debate - ever - about the inclusion of sprint in games like Call of Duty or Battlefield or Fortnite or the like. But it’s been a hot topic since 2010 in Halo because most veteran Halo players instinctively recognize that it doesn’t work with the core design of the game - even if they fail to articulate exactly why.
> >
> > 4v4 Halo multiplayer will never be great when designed around movement mechanics. And when it lacks popularity and gets tepid reception, lots of folks will go on continuing to blame the market, the stiff competition, make up all kinds of excuses, and miss the reality that bad game design makes a game worse, and presses it down towards mediocrity, no matter how well that flawed design is executed. Sprint isn’t necessarily a magic bullet - they could certainly make a mediocre or bad Halo game without sprint, but they cannot make a great one with sprint.
>
> Do you seriously believe that the package we got with Halo 5 would have been more popular without “advanced movement”? While everything else stayed the same?
>
> Yes, competition, the market and trends play a huge role. Period. Arena shooters are not a hot topic right now, as much as i like them. Maybe they will be more popular again in the future, but right now…nah. With or without sprint.
> Apparently Arena, BtB or Warzone simply did not hit a nerve in the current condition, and i don´t think that squabbling over sprint, clamber and thrusters will fix this.
>
> It´s an issue that can make for a heated discussion, but movement is a sideshow that will not necessarily increase or even decrease the popularity of Halo on a grand scale.

Absolutely halo 5 would have been a better game without movement mechanics. It’s not a sideshow, it’s a core part of the game design which strongly affects the weapon sandbox, balance, and map design. Even the campaign would have been better without them since you wouldn’t have to give every enemy homing projectiles.

While you are wrong in your evaluation of advanced movement, you are correct that halo’s popularity is a more complex problem than just “get rid of sprint”. The issue with this line of thinking is that 343 cannot really control rather their game is popular or not. All they can control is the quality of the game they make. And if they make the best halo game they can, it is more likely to be popular than if they fail to do so.

Halo has a difficult road back to popularity in part because 343 explicitly decided with Halo 4 to try to attract an audience halo did not have. And in doing so, they made an inferior game which chased away a huge portion of Halo’s established playerbase. It’s a mistake to chase popularity over quality or to overly focus on it as a goal during development.

1840

Halo 5 is literally about being good with a pistol and all the other crap they added in. Strip it back to classic movements and balance the use of guns out again!

1841

We just gotta wait and see which fan base will hate Infinite gameplay/movement when 343i shows us the gameplay/movement