It doesn’t matter if halo 6 has sprint or not people will still buy the game because it’s halo halo reach had sprint but nobody had a problem with that
> 2533274819567236;5758:
> > 2535466914543129;5753:
> > > 2533274819567236;5751:
> > > > 2535466914543129;5748:
> > > > > 2533274846700578;5747:
> > > > > > 2535466914543129;5746:
> > > > > > > 2533274846700578;5745:
> > > > > > > > 2535466914543129;5744:
> > > > > > > > > 2533274846700578;5743:
> > > > > > > > > > 2535466914543129;5742:
> > > > > > > > > > > 2533274846700578;5741:
> > > > > > > > > > > > 2535466914543129;5740:
> > > > > > > > > > > > If you don’t like sprint don’t sprint.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Horrible argument. Stop.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Did you watch the video?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I literally couldn’t get past the first 3 minutes. It was painful.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Painfully true.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Are you a joke account.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just because I make light of stupid arguments doesn’t mean this is a joke account.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > How is it a stupid argument.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Because it’s a -Yoinking!- video game and you shouldn’t take things so seriously!
> > >
> > >
> > > Calm down, cowboy, you’re getting awfully mad. Take a breather, it’s just a game.
> > >
> > > While you do that, we’ll be discussing the matters at hand. Do you have any questions on issues that haven’t been covered?
> >
> >
> > So because I had an exclamation point on the end of my sentence that means I was angry?
>
>
> Well, that, the swearing and this:
>
>
> > Try getting a life, it might help you cope with the internet!
>
>
> You’re obviously very angry. Perhaps you can ask some questions about issues that you don’t understand. Do you have any that haven’t been covered?
>
> Just remember that it’s a game forum, it’s not serious business. Maybe take a few minutes to cool down.
You must not understand sarcasm.
> 2535407416891079;5762:
> It doesn’t matter if halo 6 has sprint or not people will still buy the game because it’s halo halo reach had sprint but nobody had a problem with that
Considering that sprint was one of the reasons that I didn’t buy Reach and 4, It might matter to some.
> 2535407416891079;5762:
> It doesn’t matter if halo 6 has sprint or not people will still buy the game because it’s halo halo reach had sprint but nobody had a problem with that
Because back then Bungie had a reputation for producing quality products. Over the years 343 Industries has developed a reputation for making less than stellar products then rushing off to make their next one while leaving their last one in the dirt with little to no support.
> 2533275035781111;5732:
> > 2533274855279867;5730:
> > > 2533274801176260;5686:
> > > > 2533274855279867;5684:
> > > > Correct. Repetition does not make something true. Being true makes something true.
> > > > But the implementation of sprint in h5 is a compromise. It is tied to shields to make it harder to escape, per complaints. Is this what people wanted? Not necessarily. Thats sorta the catch with compromising, involved parties rarely get what they want.
> > > > I’m sorry if you cannot understand or accept this.
> > >
> > >
> > > I’m sorry if you live in a fairy tale world in which keeping something is a compromise for removing it, but reality does not work that way. A compromise would be if both parties get what they want, not if one party gets thrown overboard in favor of the other. H5G’s nerf for sprint is not a compromise, regardless which definition of that word you use. You can repeat the same claim ad nauseam but it will not make it true, even after the millionth iteration…
> >
> >
> > Again, I didn’t say it was a good compromise. A compromise doesn’t need to be perfect or even in order to be a compromise. What definition of compromise are you using?
> >
> > The only argument for H5 sprint not being a compromise would be that the dispute is not yet settled. In which case we would consider sprint in halo still in debate and the changes in H5 simply a concession. However, with regard to sprint in Halo 5, the debate is settled. Its in and not coming out any time soon, hence the changes being the compromise. In this scenario anti-sprint players ended up giving up WAAAAY more than the pro-sprint. Its a raw deal, but a deal nonetheless.
>
>
> So if I ask for orange sherbet, and you want to give me cookie dough, you giving me a swirl is a compromise, no it’s not. They made sprint infinite and to balance that they tied it to shields. That’s not a compromise, it’s game balancing.
Balance is a form of compromise. You give concessions on power levels.
Your analogy isnt apt either. Lets say you have orange sherbet but there are salted peanuts in it. You ask for the nuts to come out as they ruin the orangy goodness. Instead you get unsalted nuts. Thats a concession. The orange sherbet vendor obviously thinks salty nuts are the best, but they’re willing to give up salt so long as you keep eating their nuts.
Thats a better analogy of the compromise i think.
I think the market would reject a game without sprint. With the direction the FPS genre/market has evolved (Call of Duty with wall running, thruster boost jumps, thruster power slides, etc.) and even most 3rd person shooters have sprint (Ghost Recon, GTA V, etc.) We as players have done this to Halo because we have supported a market of “sprinting” titles. Now there is no undoing what has been done. It’s simple economics. Adam Smith always spoke about the market being “laize faire” and we are now reaping the benefits. Most titles have sprint/dynamic movement and as long as we keep buying them they will continue to be made.
Sprint or no sprint I just hope they don’t aim for a date they can’t hit, this has happened with 4, MCC and now 5, hopefully with Halo Wars being delayed Microsoft/353 have learnt their lessons, the yearly Halo plan hasn’t worked and the quality control has really suffered because of it trying to meet and pushing for unrealistic deadlines.
> 2533274855279867;5730:
> Again, I didn’t say it was a good compromise. A compromise doesn’t need to be perfect or even in order to be a compromise. What definition of compromise are you using?
>
> The only argument for H5 sprint not being a compromise would be that the dispute is not yet settled. In which case we would consider sprint in halo still in debate and the changes in H5 simply a concession. However, with regard to sprint in Halo 5, the debate is settled. Its in and not coming out any time soon, hence the changes being the compromise. In this scenario anti-sprint players ended up giving up WAAAAY more than the pro-sprint. Its a raw deal, but a deal nonetheless.
> compromise - Wiktionary
> compromise
> Verb
> compromise (third-person singular simple present compromises, present participle compromising, simple past and past participle compromised)
> (intransitive) To find a way between extremes.
Extreme 1: Have Sprint.
Extreme 2: Don’t have Sprint.
343’s “compromise”: Have Sprint.
I’m sorry, but that’s no middle ground between two extremes, that’s just picking one of the extremes, then running with it. (Pun intended.) It’s not a compromise, good, bad or otherwise…
Have sprint.
Don’t have sprint.
Have sprint, but severely diminish its presence and frequency of use in the game through an assortment of nerfs.
I’d say it could be considered a compromise. Though a bad compromise.
> 2533274801176260;5723:
> > 2533274825830455;5714:
> > > 2533274801176260;5708:
> > > On a side note: I also just measured The Pit vs Pitfall, and I can now definitely attest that the maps are not the same size. I get at least an entire second time difference from one end to another, which results in a 7% discrepancy. Pitfall is smaller thant The Pit, even if the BMS had stayed the same 7m/s.
> > > The Pit - Tunnel: 16.14 seconds
> > > Pitfall - Tunnel: 14.57 seconds
> > > The Pit - Alley: 13.82 seconds.
> > > Pitfall - Alley: 12.61 seconds
> >
> >
> > We’ll this is strange. I did the same thing and got near identical times for Halo 3 and 4 with an average of 13.9 for both on Alley and 16.1 and 16.0 on Tunnel. I also measured the distances with hill markers to be 31 and 36 units in Halo 3 and 30 and 35 in Halo 4. These distances appear to be consistent with ones calculated from the average times knowning the movement speed, within my margin of error.
>
>
> Weird. Maybe my results are skewed as I started using the MCC for the measurements in order to make use of the record-feature. Will repeat the measurements with vanilla H3 and H4 on the 360…
I figured out what the problem with your results it. You used Infinite Rumble whereas I used Forge. All the custom gametypes in Halo 4 (MCC version at least) are set to 110% movement speed. Indeed, if you multiply your Halo 4 times by 1.1 (so as to match the BMS) you get roughly the same times as for Halo 3.
> 2533274801176260;5723:
> > 2533274825830455;5714:
> > > 2533274801176260;5708:
> > > On a side note: I also just measured The Pit vs Pitfall, and I can now definitely attest that the maps are not the same size. I get at least an entire second time difference from one end to another, which results in a 7% discrepancy. Pitfall is smaller thant The Pit, even if the BMS had stayed the same 7m/s.
> > > The Pit - Tunnel: 16.14 seconds
> > > Pitfall - Tunnel: 14.57 seconds
> > > The Pit - Alley: 13.82 seconds.
> > > Pitfall - Alley: 12.61 seconds
> >
> >
> > We’ll this is strange. I did the same thing and got near identical times for Halo 3 and 4 with an average of 13.9 for both on Alley and 16.1 and 16.0 on Tunnel. I also measured the distances with hill markers to be 31 and 36 units in Halo 3 and 30 and 35 in Halo 4. These distances appear to be consistent with ones calculated from the average times knowning the movement speed, within my margin of error.
>
>
> Weird. Maybe my results are skewed as I started using the MCC for the measurements in order to make use of the record-feature. Will repeat the measurements with vanilla H3 and H4 on the 360…
EDIT: Ignore this post, it has been debunked.
Okay, I just repeated the same comparison on my 360 and I basically got the same results. This time, I could not film it since both games are not backwards compatible and I can’t make use of the XBone’s Capture function, but it basically would have been the same video from above.
Pit Tunnel: 16.09s / 16.03s / 16.08s -> Average: 16.07s (112.49m)
Pitfall Tunnel: 14.58s / 14.47s / 14.60s -> Average: 14.55s (96.03m)
Pit Alley: 13.82s / 13.76s / 13.81s -> Average: 13.80s (96.6m)
Pitfall Alley: 12.42s / 12.57s / 12.64s -> Average: 12.54s (82.76m)
Ratio (Time):
Tunnel: 90.54%
Alley: 90.87%
Ratio (Length):
Tunnel: 85.37%
Alley: 85.67%
The lengths were calculated using the speeds that I’ve measured (7m/s, 6.6m/s) so ignore them if you don’t believe these values. But Pitfall is still 9% smaller than The Pit, even by time alone.
So there goes that myth that sprint elongates maps, huh?
> 2533274825830455;5771:
> I figured out what the problem with your results it. You used Infinite Rumble whereas I used Forge. All the custom gametypes in Halo 4 (MCC version at least) are set to 110% movement speed. Indeed, if you multiply your Halo 4 times by 1.1 (so as to match the BMS) you get roughly the same times as for Halo 3.
…
Well -Yoink- me. Okay, then feel free to ignore the previous post altogether… -.-
EDIT: Wait… if Halo 4 Infinity Rumble is set to 110% movement speed… shouldn’t you divide by 1.1 in order to get BPS?
EDIT²: Okay, forget it. Of course time scales reciprocal in speeds. Excuse me, I just woke up… -.-
> 2535440283237581;5068:
> > 2533274865607515;5065:
> > > 2535440283237581;5022:
> > > > 2533274865607515;5019:
> > > >
> >
> >
> > I don’t like the idea of choosing either faster shield regen or sprint because that could lead back into loadouts. We had both those options in Halo 4. Granted there were more options overall, but they were present. If players are given those two options they are either going to hate that feature, or ask for more options to expand the customization. I feel having weapons always up will most likely scratch the itch for most people, but I know it won’t do it for all.
> >
> > Honestly this is a really hard one to figure out. We have the tech to allow a colossal amount of new features that just weren’t available back in 2001, versus what makes the game truly halo.
>
>
> Perhaps I didn’t explain the idea well enough, because I don’t see how you could draw a comparison to loadouts.
>
> In my proposal, players would have the ability to switch between faster movement or faster shield recovery on the fly. No menu selections, no pick-ups, and no perks; just a toggle from one to the other with a button press. If you’ve played Overwatch, think of Lucio’s healing/speeding “Crossfade” ability being applied only to the individual (as opposed to the individual and nearby allies).
Oh, see on the fly would be different. It’s not something set in stone before a match. That could be interesting.
> 2533274819302824;5770:
> Have sprint.
> Don’t have sprint.
> Have sprint, but severely diminish its presence and frequency of use in the game through an assortment of nerfs.
> I’d say it could be considered a compromise. Though a bad compromise.
Again, I don’t see how that is a compromise. That’s still just sprint with a paintjob.
I’ve already given examples of actual compromises:
- Not having sprint in every gamemode.
- Sprint being a map pickup.
- Delivering two different player characters, S-IIs vs S-IVs, similarly to how S-IIIs and Elites played differently in Reach.
- Introducing a mechanic that serves the same purpose as sprint (getting places faster) without meddling with run’n’gun. (Blink, or a charge-up thruster.)
- Or, if it absolutely has to be sprint, then actually addressing the issues people had with it. (Run’n’gun, get-out-of-jail-free, map design, etc.)
Tying sprint to shields does not address any of those complaints, it just balances out infinisprint, as has already been pointed out. Desprint briefly touches on the GOOJF-aspect of it, then immediately gets countermanded by the inclusion of thruster.
So no, I do not consider a different version of the same mechanic anything even close to a compromise. Not according to said definition of the word.
Arena would be better without sprint (exception for infection), but Warzone maps are too big, especially with large respawn timers on Warzone:FF
> 2533274814192150;5767:
> I think the market would reject a game without sprint. With the direction the FPS genre/market has evolved (Call of Duty with wall running, thruster boost jumps, thruster power slides, etc.) and even most 3rd person shooters have sprint (Ghost Recon, GTA V, etc.) We as players have done this to Halo because we have supported a market of “sprinting” titles. Now there is no undoing what has been done. It’s simple economics. Adam Smith always spoke about the market being “laize faire” and we are now reaping the benefits. Most titles have sprint/dynamic movement and as long as we keep buying them they will continue to be made.
You’re absolutely right, I’m extremely glad Halo followed the trend and added sprint in Reach and they continued to add sprint ever since. Halo as a game has flourished with this new life changing mechanic and the game sales have gone through the roof. What would have we done if CoD never introduced this amazing ability in out lives? The horror…
Market rejecting something just because other games have it? No, actually it’s buying the same thing over and over that gets people tired. Every game in the market is starting to play the same. If I’d like to play a good game with sprint, I’d buy CoD. One day when they remove Halos shield system and lower the TTK to 0,4s, that’ll be the day sprint works with Halo. But can you call it halo at that point?
Edit. We never supported this. We wanted sprint and abilites gone from Reach. Just because CoD players buy a sprinting game, we get sprint added to a game where is doesn’t work in any sort of way.
> 2533275034135038;5776:
> Arena would be better without sprint (exception for infection), but Warzone maps are too big, especially with large respawn timers on Warzone:FF
Which is exactly the issue. With sprint in arena you can clear most maps in a manner of seconds on maps like torque and its remix you can literally sprint back to where you died and re-engage the guy who just killed you. That’s awful map design. I’m not a fan of maps with engagements every 2-3 feet which is why I never really liked Midship either. I think the only smaller map I can tolerate is Lockout and that’s because it is separated well enough and there are Cleary defined engagement points.
But the when you play war zone or anything it’s sprint around looking for something unless you fight in one of the 3 generic and constantly re-used base designs. Then it’s die and keep spawning to defend a point or go right back to sprinting around looking for people or AI to kill.
> 2533274814192150;5767:
> I think the market would reject a game without sprint. With the direction the FPS genre/market has evolved (Call of Duty with wall running, thruster boost jumps, thruster power slides, etc.) and even most 3rd person shooters have sprint (Ghost Recon, GTA V, etc.) We as players have done this to Halo because we have supported a market of “sprinting” titles. Now there is no undoing what has been done. It’s simple economics. Adam Smith always spoke about the market being “laize faire” and we are now reaping the benefits. Most titles have sprint/dynamic movement and as long as we keep buying them they will continue to be made.
Blizzard reported Yesterday that Overwatch now boasts a player-base of over 15,000,000. Does that sound like rejection to you? Completely unlike traditional shooters and not designed around mechanics like sprinting.
> 2533274855279867;5766:
> > 2533275035781111;5732:
> > > 2533274855279867;5730:
> > > > 2533274801176260;5686:
> > > > > 2533274855279867;5684:
> > > > > Correct. Repetition does not make something true. Being true makes something true.
> > > > > But the implementation of sprint in h5 is a compromise. It is tied to shields to make it harder to escape, per complaints. Is this what people wanted? Not necessarily. Thats sorta the catch with compromising, involved parties rarely get what they want.
> > > > > I’m sorry if you cannot understand or accept this.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I’m sorry if you live in a fairy tale world in which keeping something is a compromise for removing it, but reality does not work that way. A compromise would be if both parties get what they want, not if one party gets thrown overboard in favor of the other. H5G’s nerf for sprint is not a compromise, regardless which definition of that word you use. You can repeat the same claim ad nauseam but it will not make it true, even after the millionth iteration…
> > >
> > >
> > > Again, I didn’t say it was a good compromise. A compromise doesn’t need to be perfect or even in order to be a compromise. What definition of compromise are you using?
> > >
> > > The only argument for H5 sprint not being a compromise would be that the dispute is not yet settled. In which case we would consider sprint in halo still in debate and the changes in H5 simply a concession. However, with regard to sprint in Halo 5, the debate is settled. Its in and not coming out any time soon, hence the changes being the compromise. In this scenario anti-sprint players ended up giving up WAAAAY more than the pro-sprint. Its a raw deal, but a deal nonetheless.
> >
> >
> > So if I ask for orange sherbet, and you want to give me cookie dough, you giving me a swirl is a compromise, no it’s not. They made sprint infinite and to balance that they tied it to shields. That’s not a compromise, it’s game balancing.
>
>
> Balance is a form of compromise. You give concessions on power levels.
> Your analogy isnt apt either. Lets say you have orange sherbet but there are salted peanuts in it. You ask for the nuts to come out as they ruin the orangy goodness. Instead you get unsalted nuts. Thats a concession. The orange sherbet vendor obviously thinks salty nuts are the best, but they’re willing to give up salt so long as you keep eating their nuts.
>
> Thats a better analogy of the compromise i think.
So I take my ice cream and demand a refund, because i didn’t get what I payed for. balancing is not a compromise for removing something, either it goes or it stays. There’s no inbetween
Edit: the last Lin of that analogy was really weird
> 2533274831961512;5779:
> > 2533274814192150;5767:
> > I think the market would reject a game without sprint. With the direction the FPS genre/market has evolved (Call of Duty with wall running, thruster boost jumps, thruster power slides, etc.) and even most 3rd person shooters have sprint (Ghost Recon, GTA V, etc.) We as players have done this to Halo because we have supported a market of “sprinting” titles. Now there is no undoing what has been done. It’s simple economics. Adam Smith always spoke about the market being “laize faire” and we are now reaping the benefits. Most titles have sprint/dynamic movement and as long as we keep buying them they will continue to be made.
>
>
> Blizzard reported Yesterday that Overwatch now boasts a player-base of over 15,000,000. Does that sound like rejection to you? Completely unlike traditional shooters and not designed around mechanics like sprinting.
Assuming they used the MAU for a multi platform game, that’s not that impressive