> 2535455681930574;5405:
> Why does sprint just have to be eliminated? In halo 4, there were those who hated it and those who loved it, so 343 made a compromise for halo 5. You guys still aren’t happy after the compromise. Besides its removal, how else will you compromise?
You know all those sprint polls you say don’t matter because they’re old? Well, they were made after Halo 4 released and showed that the majority did not like it. It wasn’t even close.
They added a mechanic most people didn’t like. No compromise was necessary, they should’ve just removed it. No game can be built as everything for everyone.
> 2533275035781111;5418:
> > 2535455681930574;5416:
> > > 2533275035781111;5415:
> > > > 2535455681930574;5414:
> > > > > 2533275035781111;5409:
> > > > > > 2535455681930574;5405:
> > > > > > Why does sprint just have to be eliminated? In halo 4, there were those who hated it and those who loved it, so 343 made a compromise for halo 5. You guys still aren’t happy after the compromise. Besides its removal, how else will you compromise?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Keeping thruster and clamber, having 120/115 BMS instead of 100/110 (everyone benefits from that, 120 is just a little slower than sprint) and probably keeping micro transactions. Probably not everyone pro sprint wants those things but that seems pretty good
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That’s not sprint, those are other new mechanics, and unfortunately, your idea would remove it (and there’s a lot of people who don’t want that). I’m trying to get a compromise on sprint, not the other Spartan Abilities.
> > >
> > >
> > > The ability to sprint in any direction without facing it, and have full use of melee guns and grenades while sprinting and a control layout that keeps sprint permanently on.
> >
> >
> > That’s not sprint it’s just the base speed.
>
>
> No, it’s sprint speed
We want another movement option, not just a faster base speed.
> 2535455681930574;5423:
> > 2533275035781111;5418:
> > > 2535455681930574;5416:
> > > > 2533275035781111;5415:
> > > > > 2535455681930574;5414:
> > > > > > 2533275035781111;5409:
> > > > > > > 2535455681930574;5405:
> > > > > > > Why does sprint just have to be eliminated? In halo 4, there were those who hated it and those who loved it, so 343 made a compromise for halo 5. You guys still aren’t happy after the compromise. Besides its removal, how else will you compromise?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Keeping thruster and clamber, having 120/115 BMS instead of 100/110 (everyone benefits from that, 120 is just a little slower than sprint) and probably keeping micro transactions. Probably not everyone pro sprint wants those things but that seems pretty good
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > That’s not sprint, those are other new mechanics, and unfortunately, your idea would remove it (and there’s a lot of people who don’t want that). I’m trying to get a compromise on sprint, not the other Spartan Abilities.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The ability to sprint in any direction without facing it, and have full use of melee guns and grenades while sprinting and a control layout that keeps sprint permanently on.
> > >
> > >
> > > That’s not sprint it’s just the base speed.
> >
> >
> > No, it’s sprint speed
>
>
> We want another movement option, not just a faster base speed.
We have thruster, another major movement speed just makes gameplay more shallow, especially when it requires you to lower your weapon
> 2535455681930574;5423:
> > 2533275035781111;5418:
> > > 2535455681930574;5416:
> > > > 2533275035781111;5415:
> > > > > 2535455681930574;5414:
> > > > > > 2533275035781111;5409:
> > > > > > > 2535455681930574;5405:
> > > > > > > Why does sprint just have to be eliminated? In halo 4, there were those who hated it and those who loved it, so 343 made a compromise for halo 5. You guys still aren’t happy after the compromise. Besides its removal, how else will you compromise?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Keeping thruster and clamber, having 120/115 BMS instead of 100/110 (everyone benefits from that, 120 is just a little slower than sprint) and probably keeping micro transactions. Probably not everyone pro sprint wants those things but that seems pretty good
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > That’s not sprint, those are other new mechanics, and unfortunately, your idea would remove it (and there’s a lot of people who don’t want that). I’m trying to get a compromise on sprint, not the other Spartan Abilities.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The ability to sprint in any direction without facing it, and have full use of melee guns and grenades while sprinting and a control layout that keeps sprint permanently on.
> > >
> > >
> > > That’s not sprint it’s just the base speed.
> >
> >
> > No, it’s sprint speed
>
>
> We want another movement option, not just a faster base speed.
Who are we and why do “we” want another movement option?
> 2533274855279867;5419:
> > 2533274808669104;5383:
> > Safe to assume this is a rather controversial topic in the scope of this franchise. Outside of feeling immersed in the lore, is there a competent argument for sprints continued inclusion? Lets avoid talking about how COD and “all modern” shooters have it, why should halo have it?
>
>
> what makes an argument competent?
Anything based outside of the general if x has it y must too mindset. I’d wager people saying “I like it” is a completely valid reason for why it should be included (for them). I would like to incite any argument that avoids a direction towards market trends, and rather how halo as a separate entity should or should not include mechanic x going forward.
P.S. Its not an attack, rather a redirection towards focusing solely on the halo brand.
> 2533275035781111;5420:
> > 2533274855279867;5419:
> > > 2533274808669104;5383:
> > > Safe to assume this is a rather controversial topic in the scope of this franchise. Outside of feeling immersed in the lore, is there a competent argument for sprints continued inclusion? Lets avoid talking about how COD and “all modern” shooters have it, why should halo have it?
> >
> >
> > what makes an argument competent?
>
>
> Not being a one line biased opinion with no reasoning behind it, no “I don’t like sprint” or “sprint is cool”.
ok. Fair enough, though public opinion is itself an argument for doing something. If players expect sprint, not having it can lead to issues. But a good game should be able to overcome a expectation like that.
But, if I had to argue for sprint in a game like halo, I would say that sprint offers…
greater play engagement in the game- you feel more like you’re there. Clamber is similar. It can be an effective tool in telling stories.
Sprint allows for larger maps that dont necessarily depend on vehicles or gimmicky teleporters. Larger maps, in turn, allow for more players in a given match and thus a greater scale to combat.
Sprint facilitates combat engagement, and can create frenetic bouts of combat- you get back into the fray faster.
Sprint affords designers with more options when creating routes through a map or stage and It can be used to reward player knowledge of a levels design- that is, which jumps need to be made at a sprint to be successful, which gaps in cover must be sprinted to be safely crossed.
Sprint allows for additional attack/movement options (shoulder charge and sliding).
-2a. Sprint is a stop gap for when vehicles are unavailable (a minor point different from design options in 2).
Sprint can be used to promote different tactical movements- crouching takes you off of radar, normal movement you are visible within a range, sprinting you are perceptible at further ranges- even potentially tagging a player temporarily.
Sprint can be used to create meaningful risks if tied into other systems- shields, thrusters, sprint can all make use of a “stamina” that recharges, meaning sprinting can render your shields vulnerable or you unable to juke most effectively.
Sprint can make objective games have additional/alternate depth. Carrying a payload negates the ability to sprint.
-1a. Temporary removal of sprint can be used to convey story elements, possibly damages to the player character.
> 2533274808669104;5426:
> > 2533274855279867;5419:
> > > 2533274808669104;5383:
> > > Safe to assume this is a rather controversial topic in the scope of this franchise. Outside of feeling immersed in the lore, is there a competent argument for sprints continued inclusion? Lets avoid talking about how COD and “all modern” shooters have it, why should halo have it?
> >
> >
> > what makes an argument competent?
>
>
> Anything based outside of the general if x has it y must too mindset. I’d wager people saying “I like it” is a completely valid reason for why it should be included (for them). I would like to incite any argument that avoids a direction towards market trends, and rather how halo as a separate entity should or should include mechanic x going forward.
>
> P.S. Its not an attack, rather a redirection towards focusing solely on the halo brand.
you edited…
As for the halo brand… I’m not sure what would be best. marjet trends are important, but they shouldnt dictate. being slavish to trends seems dangerous. Given the types of games that use the halo brand I dont think halo needs to revert to a more classic feel, or emulate trends. i think the brand just needs quality.
that might be best served by breaking it up into campaign focused games and competitive shooter games. I never though a game like overwatch, one without a true single player could be successful at full price, but it is. maybe halo cant do what blizzard has done, but if priced at $40? with an epic campaign sister game at 40… I dunno.
> 2533274855279867;5429:
> > 2533274808669104;5426:
> > > 2533274855279867;5419:
> > > > 2533274808669104;5383:
> > > > Safe to assume this is a rather controversial topic in the scope of this franchise. Outside of feeling immersed in the lore, is there a competent argument for sprints continued inclusion? Lets avoid talking about how COD and “all modern” shooters have it, why should halo have it?
> > >
> > >
> > > what makes an argument competent?
> >
> >
> > Anything based outside of the general if x has it y must too mindset. I’d wager people saying “I like it” is a completely valid reason for why it should be included (for them). I would like to incite any argument that avoids a direction towards market trends, and rather how halo as a separate entity should or should include mechanic x going forward.
> >
> > P.S. Its not an attack, rather a redirection towards focusing solely on the halo brand.
>
>
> you edited…
>
> As for the halo brand… I’m not sure what would be best. marjet trends are important, but they shouldnt dictate. being slavish to trends seems dangerous. Given the types of games that use the halo brand I dont think halo needs to revert to a more classic feel, or emulate trends. i think the brand just needs quality.
>
> that might be best served by breaking it up into campaign focused games and competitive shooter games. I never though a game like overwatch, one without a true single player could be successful at full price, but it is. maybe halo cant do what blizzard has done, but if priced at $40? with an epic campaign sister game at 40… I dunno.
I edit all the time, here I edited should or should not, simple edit really. Much like how I would edit marjet to market if I noticed, writing 3+ pages on economics a day can lead to lazy posts on waypoint.
I think if we ignore how halo got popular and focus only on the competition we isolate the market base for this franchise. Products can change and there is good there, however if brand x steers too far from what brought brand x success there is an issue. Were simply debating how much an alteration in the mechanics led to the declining sales, pop etc halo is seeing today - and - whether it matters.
> 2533274808669104;5430:
> > 2533274855279867;5429:
> > > 2533274808669104;5426:
> > > > 2533274855279867;5419:
> > > > > 2533274808669104;5383:
> > > > > Safe to assume this is a rather controversial topic in the scope of this franchise. Outside of feeling immersed in the lore, is there a competent argument for sprints continued inclusion? Lets avoid talking about how COD and “all modern” shooters have it, why should halo have it?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > what makes an argument competent?
> > >
> > >
> > > Anything based outside of the general if x has it y must too mindset. I’d wager people saying “I like it” is a completely valid reason for why it should be included (for them). I would like to incite any argument that avoids a direction towards market trends, and rather how halo as a separate entity should or should include mechanic x going forward.
> > >
> > > P.S. Its not an attack, rather a redirection towards focusing solely on the halo brand.
> >
> >
> > you edited…
> >
> > As for the halo brand… I’m not sure what would be best. marjet trends are important, but they shouldnt dictate. being slavish to trends seems dangerous. Given the types of games that use the halo brand I dont think halo needs to revert to a more classic feel, or emulate trends. i think the brand just needs quality.
> >
> > that might be best served by breaking it up into campaign focused games and competitive shooter games. I never though a game like overwatch, one without a true single player could be successful at full price, but it is. maybe halo cant do what blizzard has done, but if priced at $40? with an epic campaign sister game at 40… I dunno.
>
>
> I edit all the time, here I edited should or should not, simple edit really. Much like how I would edit marjet to market if I noticed, writing 3+ pages on economics a day can lead to lazy posts on waypoint.
>
> I think if we ignore how halo got popular and focus only on the competition we isolate the market base for this franchise. Products can change and there is good there, however if brand x steers too far from what brought brand x success there is an issue. Were simply debating how much an alteration in the mechanics led to the declining sales, pop etc halo is seeing today - and - whether it matters.
nope i take it back. i was looking at another person who answered not you. i didnt notice any edit from you. i wasnt checking the user names of who replied.
> 2533274855279867;5432:
> > 2533274808669104;5430:
> > > 2533274855279867;5429:
> > > > 2533274808669104;5426:
> > > > > 2533274855279867;5419:
> > > > > > 2533274808669104;5383:
> > > > > > Safe to assume this is a rather controversial topic in the scope of this franchise. Outside of feeling immersed in the lore, is there a competent argument for sprints continued inclusion? Lets avoid talking about how COD and “all modern” shooters have it, why should halo have it?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > what makes an argument competent?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Anything based outside of the general if x has it y must too mindset. I’d wager people saying “I like it” is a completely valid reason for why it should be included (for them). I would like to incite any argument that avoids a direction towards market trends, and rather how halo as a separate entity should or should include mechanic x going forward.
> > > >
> > > > P.S. Its not an attack, rather a redirection towards focusing solely on the halo brand.
> > >
> > >
> > > you edited…
> > >
> > > As for the halo brand… I’m not sure what would be best. marjet trends are important, but they shouldnt dictate. being slavish to trends seems dangerous. Given the types of games that use the halo brand I dont think halo needs to revert to a more classic feel, or emulate trends. i think the brand just needs quality.
> > >
> > > that might be best served by breaking it up into campaign focused games and competitive shooter games. I never though a game like overwatch, one without a true single player could be successful at full price, but it is. maybe halo cant do what blizzard has done, but if priced at $40? with an epic campaign sister game at 40… I dunno.
> >
> >
> > I edit all the time, here I edited should or should not, simple edit really. Much like how I would edit marjet to market if I noticed, writing 3+ pages on economics a day can lead to lazy posts on waypoint.
> >
> > I think if we ignore how halo got popular and focus only on the competition we isolate the market base for this franchise. Products can change and there is good there, however if brand x steers too far from what brought brand x success there is an issue. Were simply debating how much an alteration in the mechanics led to the declining sales, pop etc halo is seeing today - and - whether it matters.
>
>
> nope i take it back. i was looking at another person who answered not you. i didnt notice any edit from you. i wasnt checking the user names of who replied.
Lol, well I do edit all the time if I find something obviously amiss. No worries man.
> 2533274808669104;5434:
> > 2533274855279867;5432:
> > > 2533274808669104;5430:
> > > > 2533274855279867;5429:
> > > > > 2533274808669104;5426:
> > > > > > 2533274855279867;5419:
> > > > > > > 2533274808669104;5383:
> > > > > > > Safe to assume this is a rather controversial topic in the scope of this franchise. Outside of feeling immersed in the lore, is there a competent argument for sprints continued inclusion? Lets avoid talking about how COD and “all modern” shooters have it, why should halo have it?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > what makes an argument competent?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Anything based outside of the general if x has it y must too mindset. I’d wager people saying “I like it” is a completely valid reason for why it should be included (for them). I would like to incite any argument that avoids a direction towards market trends, and rather how halo as a separate entity should or should include mechanic x going forward.
> > > > >
> > > > > P.S. Its not an attack, rather a redirection towards focusing solely on the halo brand.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > you edited…
> > > >
> > > > As for the halo brand… I’m not sure what would be best. marjet trends are important, but they shouldnt dictate. being slavish to trends seems dangerous. Given the types of games that use the halo brand I dont think halo needs to revert to a more classic feel, or emulate trends. i think the brand just needs quality.
> > > >
> > > > that might be best served by breaking it up into campaign focused games and competitive shooter games. I never though a game like overwatch, one without a true single player could be successful at full price, but it is. maybe halo cant do what blizzard has done, but if priced at $40? with an epic campaign sister game at 40… I dunno.
> > >
> > >
> > > I edit all the time, here I edited should or should not, simple edit really. Much like how I would edit marjet to market if I noticed, writing 3+ pages on economics a day can lead to lazy posts on waypoint.
> > >
> > > I think if we ignore how halo got popular and focus only on the competition we isolate the market base for this franchise. Products can change and there is good there, however if brand x steers too far from what brought brand x success there is an issue. Were simply debating how much an alteration in the mechanics led to the declining sales, pop etc halo is seeing today - and - whether it matters.
> >
> >
> > nope i take it back. i was looking at another person who answered not you. i didnt notice any edit from you. i wasnt checking the user names of who replied.
>
>
> Lol, well I do edit all the time if I find something obviously amiss. No worries man.
i do wonder sometimes what made halo so popular. if my memory serves it was the first game to bring melee, grenades, shooting, and vehicles into a singular experience. And the shooting was intensified by only having 2 weapons with the need to swap out because of ammo limitations. Recharging shields kept the action going forward, rather than turning things into health pack fetch quests… then you have style in art and story. yeah, it was a retread of aliens, but it was a quirky retread with a badass cyborg.
These things are all taken for granted these days. whats a halo dev to do, eh?
> 2533274855279867;5428:
> > 2533275035781111;5420:
> > > 2533274855279867;5419:
> > > > 2533274808669104;5383:
> > > > Safe to assume this is a rather controversial topic in the scope of this franchise. Outside of feeling immersed in the lore, is there a competent argument for sprints continued inclusion? Lets avoid talking about how COD and “all modern” shooters have it, why should halo have it?
> > >
> > >
> > > what makes an argument competent?
> >
> >
> > Not being a one line biased opinion with no reasoning behind it, no “I don’t like sprint” or “sprint is cool”.
>
>
> ok. Fair enough, though public opinion is itself an argument for doing something. If players expect sprint, not having it can lead to issues. But a good game should be able to overcome a expectation like that.
>
> But, if I had to argue for sprint in a game like halo, I would say that sprint offers…
> 1. greater play engagement in the game- you feel more like you’re there. Clamber is similar. It can be an effective tool in telling stories.
> 2. Sprint allows for larger maps that dont necessarily depend on vehicles or gimmicky teleporters. Larger maps, in turn, allow for more players in a given match and thus a greater scale to combat.
> 3. Sprint facilitates combat engagement, and can create frenetic bouts of combat- you get back into the fray faster.
> 4. Sprint affords designers with more options when creating routes through a map or stage and It can be used to reward player knowledge of a levels design- that is, which jumps need to be made at a sprint to be successful, which gaps in cover must be sprinted to be safely crossed.
> 5. Sprint allows for additional attack/movement options (shoulder charge and sliding).
> -2a. Sprint is a stop gap for when vehicles are unavailable (a minor point different from design options in 2).
> 6. Sprint can be used to promote different tactical movements- crouching takes you off of radar, normal movement you are visible within a range, sprinting you are perceptible at further ranges- even potentially tagging a player temporarily.
> 7. Sprint can be used to create meaningful risks if tied into other systems- shields, thrusters, sprint can all make use of a “stamina” that recharges, meaning sprinting can render your shields vulnerable or you unable to juke most effectively.
> 8. Sprint can make objective games have additional/alternate depth. Carrying a payload negates the ability to sprint.
> -1a. Temporary removal of sprint can be used to convey story elements, possibly damages to the player character.
>
> I’m sure there are more. Are these “competent”?
I don’t agree with them, especially sprint allowing bigger maps (CE maps were huge). But they are presented in a reasonable way that is not purely opinion based, so yea
> 2533274855279867;5435:
> > 2533274808669104;5434:
> > > 2533274855279867;5432:
> > > > 2533274808669104;5430:
> > > > > 2533274855279867;5429:
> > > > > > 2533274808669104;5426:
> > > > > > > 2533274855279867;5419:
> > > > > > > > 2533274808669104;5383:
> > > > > > > > Safe to assume this is a rather controversial topic in the scope of this franchise. Outside of feeling immersed in the lore, is there a competent argument for sprints continued inclusion? Lets avoid talking about how COD and “all modern” shooters have it, why should halo have it?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > what makes an argument competent?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Anything based outside of the general if x has it y must too mindset. I’d wager people saying “I like it” is a completely valid reason for why it should be included (for them). I would like to incite any argument that avoids a direction towards market trends, and rather how halo as a separate entity should or should include mechanic x going forward.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > P.S. Its not an attack, rather a redirection towards focusing solely on the halo brand.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > you edited…
> > > > >
> > > > > As for the halo brand… I’m not sure what would be best. marjet trends are important, but they shouldnt dictate. being slavish to trends seems dangerous. Given the types of games that use the halo brand I dont think halo needs to revert to a more classic feel, or emulate trends. i think the brand just needs quality.
> > > > >
> > > > > that might be best served by breaking it up into campaign focused games and competitive shooter games. I never though a game like overwatch, one without a true single player could be successful at full price, but it is. maybe halo cant do what blizzard has done, but if priced at $40? with an epic campaign sister game at 40… I dunno.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I edit all the time, here I edited should or should not, simple edit really. Much like how I would edit marjet to market if I noticed, writing 3+ pages on economics a day can lead to lazy posts on waypoint.
> > > >
> > > > I think if we ignore how halo got popular and focus only on the competition we isolate the market base for this franchise. Products can change and there is good there, however if brand x steers too far from what brought brand x success there is an issue. Were simply debating how much an alteration in the mechanics led to the declining sales, pop etc halo is seeing today - and - whether it matters.
> > >
> > >
> > > nope i take it back. i was looking at another person who answered not you. i didnt notice any edit from you. i wasnt checking the user names of who replied.
> >
> >
> > Lol, well I do edit all the time if I find something obviously amiss. No worries man.
>
>
> i do wonder sometimes what made halo so popular. if my memory serves it was the first game to bring melee, grenades, shooting, and vehicles into a singular experience. And the shooting was intensified by only having 2 weapons with the need to swap out because of ammo limitations. Recharging shields kept the action going forward, rather than turning things into health pack fetch quests… then you have style in art and story. yeah, it was a retread of aliens, but it was a quirky retread with a badass cyborg.
>
> These things are all taken for granted these days. whats a halo dev to do, eh?
To be very honest, I’m not sure. The model used between 1-3 was wildly successful, can it be now? That’s to be seen. Purely from an economic POV, a product that deviates too far from its core identity tends to die, as does one that doesn’t innovate properly over time. Innovation can be good or bad. I always say, the argument should be based around proportionality. How much change, and in what direction is enough? Being an Austrian myself, I see the benefits in retaining a core identity of a product throughout it’s era of profitability.
I do not think that it will bring out the more strategic side of combat. In truth, it will simply make a very slow shootout in which both players saunter towards each other. This will simply decrease the speed of the game and could be a danger to losing players. There may be other forms of combat in the game that could improve the strategic aspects of the game if taken out. But right now, the sprint ability is not one of them. Currently the status quo is working great, and the danger of removing the sprint ability could potentially result in some loss in interest in Halo from fans. From a marketing standpoint, the risk is too high, and the reward is little to none.
> 2535455681930574;5413:
> > 2535440283237581;5406:
> > > 2535455681930574;5405:
> > > Why does sprint just have to be eliminated? In halo 4, there were those who hated it and those who loved it, so 343 made a compromise for halo 5. You guys still aren’t happy after the compromise. Besides its removal, how else will you compromise?
> >
> >
> > For there to be a meaningful discussion on further compromising, I think it’d be best to lay out what each side wants.
> >
> > With that said, what aspects of Sprint do you like in Halo?
> >
> > I also can’t help but think it’s ironic that we’re talking about compromising on a mechanic that fundamentally compromises part of how Halo worked.
>
>
> Alright here are the things I like about it:
> -The risk-reward factor of it
> -How you can move faster than the base speed to reach to a tactical position faster
> -Mainly just the fact that their are now 3 speeds (crouching, base, and sprint) which adds variety and more strategies that can be implemented into the game.
>
> I don’t really think that sprint compromises how halo works, but anyways, what do you not like about sprint?
Found my proposal from earlier
> Consider the following: the player is able to toggle between faster movement speed and faster shield recharge rate (a 10-20% increase perhaps?), maintaining all omni-directional / combat capabilities regardless of which “mode” the player is using. Maps would be tuned to allow proper navigation regardless of which “mode” players are using (no jumps that can only be made with the speed boost, etc.). Shields would be able to recharge while in the “Sprint mode”, but at a slower rate than the “Shield mode” (naturally).
>
> I think this would act as a suitable compromise, given that it:
>
> - offers a faster speed to players
> - provides a “tactical” choice for players to think about
> - resolves the pursuit issues brought on by Sprint’s current iteration
> - allows players to operate at optimal speed (in all directions) with all combat abilities (shoot, melee, throw grenade)
> 2533274795123910;5425:
> > 2535455681930574;5423:
> > > 2533275035781111;5418:
> > > > 2535455681930574;5416:
> > > > > 2533275035781111;5415:
> > > > > > 2535455681930574;5414:
> > > > > > > 2533275035781111;5409:
> > > > > > > > 2535455681930574;5405:
> > > > > > > > Why does sprint just have to be eliminated? In halo 4, there were those who hated it and those who loved it, so 343 made a compromise for halo 5. You guys still aren’t happy after the compromise. Besides its removal, how else will you compromise?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Keeping thruster and clamber, having 120/115 BMS instead of 100/110 (everyone benefits from that, 120 is just a little slower than sprint) and probably keeping micro transactions. Probably not everyone pro sprint wants those things but that seems pretty good
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That’s not sprint, those are other new mechanics, and unfortunately, your idea would remove it (and there’s a lot of people who don’t want that). I’m trying to get a compromise on sprint, not the other Spartan Abilities.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The ability to sprint in any direction without facing it, and have full use of melee guns and grenades while sprinting and a control layout that keeps sprint permanently on.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > That’s not sprint it’s just the base speed.
> > >
> > >
> > > No, it’s sprint speed
> >
> >
> > We want another movement option, not just a faster base speed.
>
>
> Who are we and why do “we” want another movement option?
We as in the people who want sprint. It’s easier to understand if you look at our whole conversation.
> 2535440283237581;5401:
> > 2533274935970644;5394:
> > Dude what is wrong with you? whats wrong with having sprint in campaign???
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274935970644;5395:
> > And another thing sprint makes the campaign more fun as well!!!
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274870414249;5396:
> > The game need to evolve ,sprint is ok …
>
>
> How does Sprint make the Campaign (or any of the gameplay) more fun? How is it an evolution?
it makes it better because its less frustrating being able to sprint instead of walking everywhere