> 2533274855279867;7924:
> > 2533274816931642;7909:
> > > 2533274855279867;7878:
> > > i dont mean that these things cant exist, but that they dont always make sense. Narrows is a fine map, so was beaver creek. But there are a number of maps where these two things would be out of place.
> > >
> > > As an aside, the teleporters on beaver creek were not about crossing large spaces, they were about tactics and multiple pathways.
> > >
> > > An example of an awkward teleporter is headlong. There is no reason for it in the original. Its out of place in the city setting. A man cannon is likewise not appropriate thematically, hence the remake using an engine of a crashed vehicle. you can only get so far with this kind of stuff before you really start limiting the kinds of large maps and spaces you can create and still feel natural.
> >
> >
> > That’s fair, but do you think that sprint is the best answer? Why?
> >
> > You’re right about that.
> >
> > That teleporter wasn’t awkward during objective games, like One Bomb Assault, or Two Flag CTF. It wasn’t put there for the map to feel more natural, it was there to provide tactics for objective-based gametypes. The only slayer variant that worked well with Headlong was Snipers. High Ground was another asymmetrical map that was objective-focused, but it was smaller, and much more linear. The teleporters on Wetworks were tactical and natural: they were one route, of several, that you could take the flag, and they made sense. As for the creative limit of teleporters and man-cannons, I don’t feel that it has been reached, by a longshot.
>
>
> do I think Sprint is the best answer for what? Creating large maps that can support a great number of people but for which teleporters, mancannons, and/or vehicles might not be the best solution? Then yeah… the set up sorta puts sprint as the best solution.
>
> That shouldn’t be the question you ask though. the issue is if sprint is good for the Halo that 343 has created and will likely create. And my answer to that is, again, the problems we have are not necessarily sprints fault. Rather, they are a failing of 343 to create ideal maps.
>
> But still, we haven’t gotten to the heart of the matter. What we should be asking: Is 343 capable of incorporating sprint into a halo game and still maintain the level of quality we’ve come to expect?
>
> To this I would answer, “Probably not.”
>
> And yet… is this even the issue? Would 343 be able to create a halo without sprint that manages to recapture the feel and fun of the originals? Again, I don’t think Sprint is the issue. I rather think what we’re seeing is an inherent problem with taking an IP and giving it to another group. Passions and Visions change and so the product is going to be a very different beast no matter what you do.
>
> I will say that I think 343 has done admirably with weapon balance. I thought Halo 4 played very well under the right settings (umm… get that ordnance crap outta there! Instant respawn? GARBAGE!!!), but suffered from maps that were uninspired at best (though I think a couple were verging on being decent. I couldn’t name them though). Halo 5 is much the same. Despite the gameplay overhaul I still think we’re dealing with subpar maps. I don’t know what their process is, but its not putting out the same stuff as Bungie did. Even the “boring maps” of halo 2- colossus and burial grounds are two that come to mind- were wonderful with the right gametypes and could be fantastic playgrounds for the gameplay of halo 2.
>
> So, is the teleporter in Headlong awkward? Yes. Not gameplay wise, but thematically. What business does a teleporter have sitting in the middle of a construction zone? Can we justify the existence of these things? Sure. Forerunners and covenant tech can explain away a lot… but what in the world are man cannons doing in the middle of the Halo 5 warzone maps? These things would kill just about any non-spartan that uses them. Sure they play well, but now we’ve already started hitting walls where the coherence of gameplay and theme breaks down. We’ve seen two games where 343 can’t create a standout map.
>
> but yeah… lets blame sprint for ruining halo rather than consider that the IP just isn’t going to survive the changeover well
Thank you for taking it upon yourself to elaborate, I was losing stamina. =P I thought that Terminal was a large map that was set up well despite having no teleporters, man-cannons, nor sprint. Anyway, I guess my question would then be: would it work better if sprint was only available for certain maps, or in certain playlists that were designed to cater to the pro-sprint crowd? Having your cake and eating it too, so to say.
I agree, and I think that there’s a middle ground that could be created if maps weren’t scaled to sprint–but that would create different problems with pacing.
Once again, I agree.
Yes, 343i is doing a pretty good job with weapon balance. I remember the Sword and Shotgun being overpowered in Halo 2. Halo 4 had its moments, but unfortunately, they were too far and few in-between. The only map that was close to being okay was Haven. Oh man, Burial Mounds One Bomb Assault, now that was fun. CTF was pretty good, too. Colossus had some intense CTF matches, but what I remember the most was grenading people from across the map. I was so good with grenades in H2.
Gotcha, thematically, yeah, I would agree. As for man-cannons in Warzone, the maps are so large that sprint by itself isn’t a viable option in certain situations, like trying to get back into the fight in a Firefight match.
Well, sprint is obviously going to affect pacing, that’s why Bungie didn’t include it in Halo 2. So, that just goes back to my two-part question above. I think that catering to both sides of the Halo community would work really well, but is 343i willing to put that much effort into the next Halo title?
