The sprint discussion thread

Celoin · December 2, 2016, 5:41pm

Why did they change the gameplay when Halo was at it’s highest population with Halo 3?
We don’t want change.
The reason people don’t play old Halo’s is because their successors came out. If Halo 5 stuck to the original formula it would probably have a much healthy population.

thy_ReaperMC · December 2, 2016, 5:51pm

> 2535455477282651;12904:
> Why did they change the gameplay when Halo was at it’s highest population with Halo 3?
> We don’t want change.
> The reason people don’t play old Halo’s is because their successors came out. If Halo 5 stuck to the original formula it would probably have a much healthy population.

H3’s mechanics were not very well received by, at least some of the very best, in competitive/MLG Halo. As such, Halo3 wasn’t as popular as you think it was

Though, H3 was still popular.
If Reach & Sprint were so bad (and Armour Lock, shivers) to Halo, Halo3 could’ve quickly repopulated in the same manner that CoD can have BOIII ahead of Infinite Warfare in the top 5 XBL played.
Battlefield isn’t #1 played right now because it’s WWII themed specifically, and it sure isn’t using classic loadout or sandbox settings beyond archetype titles (you don’t know classic BF gameplay if you’re not jumping into aerial prone position from a sprint to counter-snipe).
And I really hope you don’t think BF became popular with Bad Company.
If there are things are detrimental to Halo’s population, it’s far from Sprint being the issue for the top 1-10%.

Kell_of_Salt · December 3, 2016, 12:55am

> 2533275035781111;12888:
> > 2535410901623492;12871:
> > > 2533274932512744;12870:
> > > > 2535455681930574;12869:
> > > > > 2594261035368257;12862:
> > > > > > 2535455681930574;12834:
> > > > > > > 2535455477282651;12829:
> > > > > > > Some guy on Twitter said that Bravo said at rtx that Halo 6 will have Halo 5’s core gameplay. Can someone confirm that he said this because if it’s true then Halo might just die.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don’t have link, but I can confirm that this was said. Of course it’s going to be tweaked (like Spartan charge for instance), but it’s mostly going to be the same. Think of it like the change from 2 to 3. All I can say is please don’t just write it off. Get a good day in there before just writing it off because it has sprint in it.
> > > > >
> > > > > Halo 6 has been written off for me. Ever since the abysmal failure they tried to pass off as BTB released, which was when I quit the MP altogether. Shortly after that, I made up my mind that 6 would be the first Halo I didn’t bother to pre-order and it would be a mere rental… unless some major changes happened, that were much more than just the retention of sprint. A rental will still allow me to give it its ‘good day’ but I hold out little confidence it’ll get more than the amount of time it takes me to finish the campaign… if… I can stomach it.
> > > >
> > > > They have stated that halo 6 will have actual BTB maps.
> > >
> > > Thank god for actual BTB maps
> >
> > Implying 343 Dev BTB maps will be any better than forger maps
>
> The forge maps are fine, when 343 uses them on the settings they were made for and not whatever settings they feel like using, then they ignore the community complaining about them and ignore the forgers explaining how the settings are wrong and the maps were not made for BR starts.

I know

But there are people who seem to think 343 are capable of making good, let alone intresting maps

Celoin · December 3, 2016, 4:38am

> 2603643534597848;12905:
> > 2535455477282651;12904:
> > Why did they change the gameplay when Halo was at it’s highest population with Halo 3?
> > We don’t want change.
> > The reason people don’t play old Halo’s is because their successors came out. If Halo 5 stuck to the original formula it would probably have a much healthy population.
>
> H3’s mechanics were not very well received by, at least some of the very best, in competitive/MLG Halo. As such, Halo3 wasn’t as popular as you think it was
>
>
>
>
>
> > 2603643534597848;119:
> > Please understand, Halo3, as popular as it was, was not a standalone juggernaut once CoD4 released. CoD rivaled Halo on the Xbox as an individual platform and released multiplatform.
> > CoD’s success is its own and does not diminish Halo’s.
> > http://majornelson.com/2007/11/17/live-activity-for-week-of-11-12/Halo3, COD4, GoW
> > http://majornelson.com/2008/01/22/live-activity-for-week-of-1-14/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > http://majornelson.com/2008/02/13/live-activity-for-week-of-2-4/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > http://majornelson.com/2008/02/19/live-activity-for-week-of-2-11/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > http://majornelson.com/2008/02/26/live-activity-for-week-of-2-18/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > http://majornelson.com/2008/04/23/live-activity-for-week-of-4-14/COD4, Halo3, GoW
> > http://majornelson.com/2008/05/06/live-activity-for-week-of-4-28-gta-is-1/
>
>
>
>
> Though, H3 was still popular.
>
> If Reach & Sprint were so bad (and Armour Lock, shivers) to Halo, Halo3 could’ve quickly repopulated in the same manner that CoD can have BOIII ahead of Infinite Warfare in the top 5 XBL played.
>
> Battlefield isn’t #1 played right now because it’s WWII themed specifically, and it sure isn’t using classic loadout or sandbox settings beyond archetype titles (you don’t know classic BF gameplay if you’re not jumping into aerial prone position from a sprint to counter-snipe).
> And I really hope you don’t think BF became popular with Bad Company.
>
> If there are things are detrimental to Halo’s population, it’s far from Sprint being the issue for the top 1-10%.

As soon as they added Sprint the population decreased. 343 have never given no sprint Halo a chance.

Given_To_Fly_93 · December 3, 2016, 5:43am

> 2533274866652866;12626:
> > 2533274812413921;12612:
> > > 2533274866652866;12588:
> > > > 2533274812413921;12587:
> > > > > 2533274866652866;12560:
> > > > > > 2533274812413921;12559:
> > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12552:
> > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12357:
> > > > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12356:
> > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12355:
> > > > > > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12352:
> > > > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12342:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12336:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12328:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12326:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12315:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2533274913913392;12313:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12312:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2533274913913392;12273:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12240:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sprint killed Halo. Absolutely killed it. Game cannot hold a population at all ever since sprint was introduced. It just doesn’t fit and it fundamentally alters the game.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Game absolutely cannot hold a population since the elites changed design, since the DMR was introduced, since the magnum had a scope reintroduced, so are those reason’s for Halo’s fall as well?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just saying sprint is the reason is pure speculation.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > None of those things fundementally changed gameplay and map design.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Either way. Its still speculation. There’s no hard evidence of sprint being the cause of Halo’s decline
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There’s no evidence saying it isn’t.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you look at the sales for halo reach they are the second highest in the franchise, and someone posted the stats for how long reachs population lasted which was the 2nd or 3rd longest in the series. Reach had sprint and i could argue that it was successful as a halo game. There are many reasons why halo is no longer selling 9 million plus copies one being that the FPS genre has shifted, the gaming market has changed by being more competitive, the xbox one not selling as many copies and sprint may play a factor in their sale numbers. Sprint is part of the sales problem but is not the main reason for low sales.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reach dropped to 7th place on the xbl charts a couple months after release. It took a nose dive. Being 3rd means little when HCE had no online and h3/3 are miles ahead of everything else. Reach sold well off the coattails of h3.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Competition has hardly raised. The xb1 is outselling the 360. The xb1 does have RROD. The attach rate to xbl is higher than ever.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > You’re are factually incorrect on practically every point you made.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > So you made no reference to how your numbers affected sprint which was the premise of my point. Here are a couple of facts, reach’s population had 400,000 minimum playing until 2012. Thats two years after its release date. You mentioned that reach dropped to 7th place on xbl. I would argue that that doesnt mean much considering the population was still high and if you compare reach’s numbers to halo 3 numbers of june a year after their release the population was very similar. I would also add that 7th place on the xbl doesnt mean much because in 2011 COD modern warfare 3 released selling over 14 million copies. This is would explain that drop to 7th place.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that competition has hardly changed, this couldn’t be more wrong. Any COD game sold before 2006 sold less than 3 million copies, while after this period it sold upwards of 5 million and as high as 14 million. Coincidentally 2006 is the same time COD brought in regenerative health which they got from halo. Combine those sell numbers with battlefield with it’s last two game 3, 4 which sold over 7 million in 2011 before this time they only sold around 2 million. This increase in sales of other games could mean that population for other games dont last as long. So my point is that competition has certainly changed for halo, other games have become successful.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > And to say i was factually incorrect about reach being the 2nd best selling and 2nd best at holding the population was WRONG.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > My point in the previous thread was that some people are saying that sprint is the cause of sell numbers, while i dont disagree with this (because obviously people dont like sprint which is apparent in the thread) it cannot be said that sell numbers are entirely due to sprint.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Where is your proof of these claims? I know that they are pretty much all incorrect so you’re going to have to prove it.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Franchises that have existed just as long or longer than halo growing is not increased competition. That is just halo starting to lose vs the same competition.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > population.pdf - Google Drive
> > > > > > > > > > > and the game sales was from Vgcharts.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Did you even read it lol?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > It clearly states h2 had the best player retention, followed by 3.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Correct and i was never arguing that point. If i can paraphrase you from before “Sprint killed Halo. Absolutely killed it. Game cannot hold a population at all ever since sprint was introduced. It just doesn’t fit and it fundamentally alters the game”. Thats what you said, and that is what im replying to. I am arguing that sprint didnt kill halo and that there is a fundemental change in consumers for the console. And H2 did have the best player retention then H3 then reach thanks for making my point.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Look at my link provided above. Just before reach’s launch h3 was still holding million+ daily populations, 200,000 concurrent, and 2nd place on xbl charts. According to major Nelson h3 was xbl’s most played game in 07, 08 AND 09. This game faced off against MW2, BF, Fallout, etc, etc. All the same franchises reach did. Reach launched and within a matter of MONTHS halo’s population had halfed.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You’re going to sit here and tell me that’s because of a “market shift”? The entire market shifted in a matter of months even though no new franchises were introduced?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Riiiiiiiight
>
> Exaclty millions of people arent complaining about sprint, not even hundred of thousands not even thousands its less than 100 from what i can see on this thread, and you would be wrong in saying sprint killed halo because like my previous statement not that many people cared about sprint changing. There are many things that can affect gameplay to say that sprint is just a negative gameplay mechanic is absurd halo 3 brought in equipment while some were good they did have problems however i wouldnt say they killed gameplay.
>
> People want to move faster because it creates a quicker gameplay and yes you could make the maps smaller, but making maps smaller can have a diminishing return on gameplay. Speed in games is an illusion but how that illusion makes a person feel when playing the game is the most important part, so to say that people want sprint for no apparent reason is rediculus.

“Less than 100 people are complaining about sprint”
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

It doesn’t matter to me what you think, because you’re wrong.
I’ve used nothing but evidence and examples, and you just disagree so ignorantly. It’s hopeless. This isn’t my opinion, this is fact.
It’s like asking a 3 year old to try a type of food.
“try this it’s good.”
“I don’t like it”
“You didn’t even try it yet…”
“Cause I don’t like it!”

Not to sound harsh, but I’m done wasting my time trying to explain to you. You won’t get it. Even the pros have collectively spoken out against sprint/radar/abilities.

Take a trip over to “BeyondEntertainment.com” and ask them about sprint. Maybe then it will stick. But I’m done.

Maps are stretched out to accommodate sprint. (Yes, look at Truth opposed to Midship)
Sprint/Abilities do not work on classic Halo maps. (Lockout’s flow would be shattered. You could jump from BR3 to Snipe3 without touching the ground.)
You put your weapon down to run into battle (This isn’t fast gameplay, you actually slow gameplay down by stopping because you have to put your gun back up.)
Multiple movement speeds creates randomized player/team movement. (Uncertainty IS random)
Risk v.s. Reward doesn’t make sense for sprint. (You are removing the ability to shoot / making a bad play, that could turn out good by escaping / obtaining power items.)
Slide/Spartan Charge/Thrust/Stabilize allow you to make inconceivable jumps you should not be allowed to make.
A “Modern game” does not NEED sprint. Why would it? (To be like other games? Halo should be setting itself apart from other titles, not trying to blend in.)

tsassi · December 3, 2016, 6:24am

> 2535455477282651;12907:
> > 2603643534597848;12905:
> > > 2535455477282651;12904:
> > > Why did they change the gameplay when Halo was at it’s highest population with Halo 3?
> > > We don’t want change.
> > > The reason people don’t play old Halo’s is because their successors came out. If Halo 5 stuck to the original formula it would probably have a much healthy population.
> >
> > H3’s mechanics were not very well received by, at least some of the very best, in competitive/MLG Halo. As such, Halo3 wasn’t as popular as you think it was
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2603643534597848;119:
> > > Please understand, Halo3, as popular as it was, was not a standalone juggernaut once CoD4 released. CoD rivaled Halo on the Xbox as an individual platform and released multiplatform.
> > > CoD’s success is its own and does not diminish Halo’s.
> > > http://majornelson.com/2007/11/17/live-activity-for-week-of-11-12/Halo3, COD4, GoW
> > > http://majornelson.com/2008/01/22/live-activity-for-week-of-1-14/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > > http://majornelson.com/2008/02/13/live-activity-for-week-of-2-4/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > > http://majornelson.com/2008/02/19/live-activity-for-week-of-2-11/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > > http://majornelson.com/2008/02/26/live-activity-for-week-of-2-18/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > > http://majornelson.com/2008/04/23/live-activity-for-week-of-4-14/COD4, Halo3, GoW
> > > http://majornelson.com/2008/05/06/live-activity-for-week-of-4-28-gta-is-1/
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Though, H3 was still popular.
> >
> > If Reach & Sprint were so bad (and Armour Lock, shivers) to Halo, Halo3 could’ve quickly repopulated in the same manner that CoD can have BOIII ahead of Infinite Warfare in the top 5 XBL played.
> >
> > Battlefield isn’t #1 played right now because it’s WWII themed specifically, and it sure isn’t using classic loadout or sandbox settings beyond archetype titles (you don’t know classic BF gameplay if you’re not jumping into aerial prone position from a sprint to counter-snipe).
> > And I really hope you don’t think BF became popular with Bad Company.
> >
> > If there are things are detrimental to Halo’s population, it’s far from Sprint being the issue for the top 1-10%.
>
> As soon as they added Sprint the population decreased. 343 have never given no sprint Halo a chance.

You could say the same about Bloom, all other armor abilities, Invasion, Loadouts, DMR, and a bunch of other stuff added in Reach. To be honest, I find it quite hilarious that someone genuinely believes sprint is the thing that makes a difference between popular and unpopular Halo. The decrease in popularity is most likely a cause of many things—some of which are internal, and some of which are external—occurring over the years, some of which would trace back to the time before the release of Halo 3. It’s highly likely that sprint was one of those things, but it is extremely unlikely that it had a significant effect by itself.

Celoin · December 3, 2016, 7:41am

> 2533274825830455;12909:
> > 2535455477282651;12907:
> > > 2603643534597848;12905:
> > > > 2535455477282651;12904:
> > > > Why did they change the gameplay when Halo was at it’s highest population with Halo 3?
> > > > We don’t want change.
> > > > The reason people don’t play old Halo’s is because their successors came out. If Halo 5 stuck to the original formula it would probably have a much healthy population.
> > >
> > > H3’s mechanics were not very well received by, at least some of the very best, in competitive/MLG Halo. As such, Halo3 wasn’t as popular as you think it was
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 2603643534597848;119:
> > > > Please understand, Halo3, as popular as it was, was not a standalone juggernaut once CoD4 released. CoD rivaled Halo on the Xbox as an individual platform and released multiplatform.
> > > > CoD’s success is its own and does not diminish Halo’s.
> > > > http://majornelson.com/2007/11/17/live-activity-for-week-of-11-12/Halo3, COD4, GoW
> > > > http://majornelson.com/2008/01/22/live-activity-for-week-of-1-14/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > > > http://majornelson.com/2008/02/13/live-activity-for-week-of-2-4/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > > > http://majornelson.com/2008/02/19/live-activity-for-week-of-2-11/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > > > http://majornelson.com/2008/02/26/live-activity-for-week-of-2-18/COD4, Halo3, GH3
> > > > http://majornelson.com/2008/04/23/live-activity-for-week-of-4-14/COD4, Halo3, GoW
> > > > http://majornelson.com/2008/05/06/live-activity-for-week-of-4-28-gta-is-1/
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Though, H3 was still popular.
> > >
> > > If Reach & Sprint were so bad (and Armour Lock, shivers) to Halo, Halo3 could’ve quickly repopulated in the same manner that CoD can have BOIII ahead of Infinite Warfare in the top 5 XBL played.
> > >
> > > Battlefield isn’t #1 played right now because it’s WWII themed specifically, and it sure isn’t using classic loadout or sandbox settings beyond archetype titles (you don’t know classic BF gameplay if you’re not jumping into aerial prone position from a sprint to counter-snipe).
> > > And I really hope you don’t think BF became popular with Bad Company.
> > >
> > > If there are things are detrimental to Halo’s population, it’s far from Sprint being the issue for the top 1-10%.
> >
> > As soon as they added Sprint the population decreased. 343 have never given no sprint Halo a chance.
>
> You could say the same about Bloom, all other armor abilities, Invasion, Loadouts, DMR, and a bunch of other stuff added in Reach. To be honest, I find it quite hilarious that someone genuinely believes sprint is the thing that makes a difference between popular and unpopular Halo. The decrease in popularity is most likely a cause of many things—some of which are internal, and some of which are external—occurring over the years, some of which would trace back to the time before the release of Halo 3. It’s highly likely that sprint was one of those things, but it is extremely unlikely that it had a significant effect by itself.

I never said sprint was the only issue. What I’m saying is that a Halo game without it could be better than people think and it’ll be unique since there are no shooter like it.
Reach had terrible gameplay but everything outside of the gameplay is great and has good replay ability. Halo 5 is the opposite.

GED2208 · December 3, 2016, 1:47pm

> 2533274812413921;12908:
> > 2533274866652866;12626:
> > > 2533274812413921;12612:
> > > > 2533274866652866;12588:
> > > > > 2533274812413921;12587:
> > > > > > 2533274866652866;12560:
> > > > > > > 2533274812413921;12559:
> > > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12552:
> > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12357:
> > > > > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12356:
> > > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12355:
> > > > > > > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12352:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12342:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12336:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12328:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12326:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12315:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2533274913913392;12313:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12312:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2533274913913392;12273:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 2535429794399531;12240:
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sprint killed Halo. Absolutely killed it. Game cannot hold a population at all ever since sprint was introduced. It just doesn’t fit and it fundamentally alters the game.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Game absolutely cannot hold a population since the elites changed design, since the DMR was introduced, since the magnum had a scope reintroduced, so are those reason’s for Halo’s fall as well?
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Just saying sprint is the reason is pure speculation.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > None of those things fundementally changed gameplay and map design.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Either way. Its still speculation. There’s no hard evidence of sprint being the cause of Halo’s decline
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There’s no evidence saying it isn’t.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If you look at the sales for halo reach they are the second highest in the franchise, and someone posted the stats for how long reachs population lasted which was the 2nd or 3rd longest in the series. Reach had sprint and i could argue that it was successful as a halo game. There are many reasons why halo is no longer selling 9 million plus copies one being that the FPS genre has shifted, the gaming market has changed by being more competitive, the xbox one not selling as many copies and sprint may play a factor in their sale numbers. Sprint is part of the sales problem but is not the main reason for low sales.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Reach dropped to 7th place on the xbl charts a couple months after release. It took a nose dive. Being 3rd means little when HCE had no online and h3/3 are miles ahead of everything else. Reach sold well off the coattails of h3.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Competition has hardly raised. The xb1 is outselling the 360. The xb1 does have RROD. The attach rate to xbl is higher than ever.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You’re are factually incorrect on practically every point you made.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > So you made no reference to how your numbers affected sprint which was the premise of my point. Here are a couple of facts, reach’s population had 400,000 minimum playing until 2012. Thats two years after its release date. You mentioned that reach dropped to 7th place on xbl. I would argue that that doesnt mean much considering the population was still high and if you compare reach’s numbers to halo 3 numbers of june a year after their release the population was very similar. I would also add that 7th place on the xbl doesnt mean much because in 2011 COD modern warfare 3 released selling over 14 million copies. This is would explain that drop to 7th place.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > You said that competition has hardly changed, this couldn’t be more wrong. Any COD game sold before 2006 sold less than 3 million copies, while after this period it sold upwards of 5 million and as high as 14 million. Coincidentally 2006 is the same time COD brought in regenerative health which they got from halo. Combine those sell numbers with battlefield with it’s last two game 3, 4 which sold over 7 million in 2011 before this time they only sold around 2 million. This increase in sales of other games could mean that population for other games dont last as long. So my point is that competition has certainly changed for halo, other games have become successful.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > And to say i was factually incorrect about reach being the 2nd best selling and 2nd best at holding the population was WRONG.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > My point in the previous thread was that some people are saying that sprint is the cause of sell numbers, while i dont disagree with this (because obviously people dont like sprint which is apparent in the thread) it cannot be said that sell numbers are entirely due to sprint.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Where is your proof of these claims? I know that they are pretty much all incorrect so you’re going to have to prove it.
> > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Franchises that have existed just as long or longer than halo growing is not increased competition. That is just halo starting to lose vs the same competition.
> > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > population.pdf - Google Drive
> > > > > > > > > > > > and the game sales was from Vgcharts.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Did you even read it lol?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > It clearly states h2 had the best player retention, followed by 3.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Correct and i was never arguing that point. If i can paraphrase you from before “Sprint killed Halo. Absolutely killed it. Game cannot hold a population at all ever since sprint was introduced. It just doesn’t fit and it fundamentally alters the game”. Thats what you said, and that is what im replying to. I am arguing that sprint didnt kill halo and that there is a fundemental change in consumers for the console. And H2 did have the best player retention then H3 then reach thanks for making my point.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Look at my link provided above. Just before reach’s launch h3 was still holding million+ daily populations, 200,000 concurrent, and 2nd place on xbl charts. According to major Nelson h3 was xbl’s most played game in 07, 08 AND 09. This game faced off against MW2, BF, Fallout, etc, etc. All the same franchises reach did. Reach launched and within a matter of MONTHS halo’s population had halfed.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > You’re going to sit here and tell me that’s because of a “market shift”? The entire market shifted in a matter of months even though no new franchises were introduced?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Riiiiiiiight
>
> “Less than 100 people are complaining about sprint”
> BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
>
> It doesn’t matter to me what you think, because you’re wrong.
> I’ve used nothing but evidence and examples, and you just disagree so ignorantly. It’s hopeless. This isn’t my opinion, this is fact.
> It’s like asking a 3 year old to try a type of food.
> “try this it’s good.”
> “I don’t like it”
> “You didn’t even try it yet…”
> “Cause I don’t like it!”
>
> Not to sound harsh, but I’m done wasting my time trying to explain to you. You won’t get it. Even the pros have collectively spoken out against sprint/radar/abilities.
>
> Take a trip over to “BeyondEntertainment.com” and ask them about sprint. Maybe then it will stick. But I’m done.

Sorry i should of been more specific less than 100 people are on non sprint in this forum.

Your done trying to explain to me, from my recollection you havent explained why sprint is bad and what a single BMS would do for halo. Except you have used things like game sells to prove your point, population numbers without even understanding the different variables that go into selling games or retaining a population all ive done is presented you with other reasons why people might not be buying halo or playing halo for as long as halo 3. Instead you bring everything down to a single reason for low sell number that is the most absurd thing. It shows how closed minded you are to other factors in the gaming industry.

The biggest mistake that people make is they over emphasise how sprint alone has destroyed halo.

Look at some of my other posts some people have suggested increasing BMS and FOV and ive agreed with them, instead of just dumbing the conversation down to sprint is lame explain what could be substituted instead of using sprint. Dont use data that has many interpretations. And im not sure you understand what a fact is, its something that is proved to be true. As ive said the things youve used are information which is open for interpretation only with more information will it be known to be true or fact.

Favyn · December 3, 2016, 10:13pm

> 2535455681930574;12690:
> > 2533274810305245;12689:
> > > 2535455681930574;12688:
> > > > 2533274943854776;12687:
> > > > > 2535455681930574;12686:
> > > > > > 2533274943854776;12685:
> > > > > > > 2535455681930574;12684:
> > > > > > > > 2533274795123910;12679:
> > > > > > > > > 2535455681930574;12678:
> > > > > > > > > > 2535434037793365;12677:
> > > > > > > > > > > 2535455681930574;12672:
> > > > > > > > > > > Hey, everyone! Arc Trooper is back with another proposal that will most likely get shot down because many can’t compromise lol.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > What if (drumroll please), sprint was removed from certain arena playlists, but it stayed in BTB, Warzone, and one sprint arena playlist? Yes, things like thrust and stabilizers will still be active, but this is a thread for removing sprint, not Spartan abilities. Also, once you hold the energy sword or gravity hammer, sprint would turn on for you. For games like grifball, action sack, and infection, sprint doesn’t really matter (and I actually like it better when sprint is in those playlists), but for things like team arena, team slayer, FFA, swat, etc. there would be no sprint. So what do you think?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Or why not just increase the FOV or the BMS? Want the illusion of speed that sprint gives off? An increase in FOV would do just that. Want to actually get around faster? Increase the BMS while retaining the average original map size. Also, we can call vehicles in Warzone and there are a ton of vehicles usually in BTB.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Sprint is unnecessary, just increase the BMS.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Looks like we have found one of the many who can’t compromise. Unless you actually discuss what would work and possible solutions (besides removing it), then I will not continue the conversation.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But a compromise like that makes gameplay inconsostent over the playlists.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Why would we need sprint for specific playlists when we could increase BMS and/or FoV? While on top of that introduce more means of faster map traversal for players on foot like Portals, Teleporters, Man cannons, conveyor belts and then some?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Why do you want sprint? We can’t discuss a compromise if we do not have atleast two points to go from.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It doesn’t. Just look at Halo online or whatever it’s called. It only has sprint in BTB, and everything works fine. You guys aren’t just gonna say "oh just increase the BMS and then everyone will be happy. No, that’s not what we want. Look at the other side instead of coming up with compromises that only help you.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wait! Why do you like sprint? Why do you want it in the game? Oh, and I’d personally be fine with sprint in BTB by the way.
> > > > >
> > > > > You’ve never known that I like sprint? Anyways, it adds more variety by having multiple movement speeds, it adds some realism that I like in my games, it helps me get to my places faster than my opponents so I can surprise them, and pretty much just stuff like that. Just adds another twist you have to think about that I like.
> > > > >
> > > > > So you like my compromise?
> > > >
> > > > Now, I wanted to address some of your pro-sprint points. Sprint does not give the player more options. You’re saying that in classic Halos you were only able to walk and now in H5 you’re able to walk and run. But a person with a different perspective might allege that in classic Halos you were able to go full speed with your gun up, while in H5 you have to put your gun down to go full speed. You might argue that this is only a matter of perspective, but realistically: You would get across Midship on H2 just as fast as you’d get across Truth on H5, while holding your gun up in H2. You say you like the realism aspect of it, but I will argue that it is subjective and people like Celestis have argued that Spartans should be able to run with their gun up.
> > > >
> > > > You like that it gets you from point A to point B faster than by walking, but wouldn’t a better solution in that case be smaller maps or a high BMS?
> > > > BTB maps have to be designed around vehicles a lot of the time, so sprint doesn’t bother me in BTB as long as the vehicles are still a little faster than the player(excluding tanks).
>
> What the actual -Yoink-!!! In the back of my mind, I knew you were going to find me. Sorry if this response isn’t that long. I had just finished a lengthy response to you, then my iPad thought it would be a good time to reload the page and delete everything I had written. I’m salty now.
>
> Anyways, I’ll write it again. So I thought maybe Halo 6 could do what that one PC Halo game did (Halo online I think it’s called), where sprint is activated in only BTB. For Halo 6, sprint would be activated for BTB, Warzone, an “Evolved Arena” playlist, and certain social playlists (like action sack and grifball, but those playlists can work with or without sprint). The playlists like Slayer, team arena, FFA, swat, snipers, etc. would all be sprintless. The evolved arena playlist would basically just have sprint in it and contain a variety of modes like slayer, ctf, strongholds, oddball, assault, etc. Also, when holding the energy sword and gravity hammer, sprint would be activated (I’m not sure if this would make the energy sword and gravity hammer OP though). Just note that some Spartan abilities like thrusters and stabilizers would be active in all playlists.
>
> Alright here are some pros:
> 1. Only one sandbox needs to be designed. IMO, BTB, warzone, and to a lesser extent, evolved arena, would work with the sprintless sandbox. I think evolved arena would be fine honestly.
>
> 2. The maps wouldn’t need to be designed around sprint. It’s no secret that the sprintless maps are more favored than the sprint-designed ones. Evolved arena, once again, may or may not work. If it doesn’t, forge/remixes maps can be made to accommodate.
>
> 3. BTB and warzone wouldn’t be ruined. Most can agree that it sucked a lot when BTB didn’t have sprint. Yes, some will still complain, but they will most likely be in the minority.
>
> 4. Everyone would be happy. The guys who can absolutely not live with sprint would have all their old gamemodes back, the guys who NEED sprint will have their evolved arena playlist, warzone, BTB, and some action-sacky playlists, and the most of us who can handle both will have everything.
>
> I think this is better than your idea of having two separate games because the community wouldn’t be split, you wouldn’t have to wait longer for the game that has your prefered style of gameplay, and the playlists that sprint is in only benefits the gameplay in that playlist. Believe it or not, my original reply was longer than that lol. So what do you think?

Finally getting around to responding to this.

The issue is that you say the community would be split with 2 separate games, but you’re suggestion is still just splitting the community within one game. The only difference is that its using resources of a singular product and therefore neither style will be built around sufficiently.

Secondly this idea commits a cardinal sin when it comes to game design and thats because it breaks the cohesion of the product and lacks consistency across its modes. From one mode to the next youll have completely different controller layouts, balancing, etc and thats really bad and causes a disconnect with players.

The evolved arena playlist would be a joke and horribly optomized and while sprint in btb wouldnt be the worst thing ever, it still runs in to the problem I mentioned earlier and is honestly lazy game design.

The speed and feel of the game is determined by your map design, not a “go faster” button. If BTB maps feel too big and clunky then the solution is not to add sprint, but rather to find innovative and interesting ways to move players within the map itself.

Arc_Trooper_48 · December 4, 2016, 1:24am

> 2533274810305245;12912:
> > 2535455681930574;12690:
> > > 2533274810305245;12689:
> > > HaloM team arena, FFA, swat, snipers, etc. would all be sprintless. The evolved arena playlist would basically just have sprint in it and contain a variety of modes like slayer, ctf, strongholds, oddball, assault, etc. Also, when holding the energy sword and gravity hammer, sprint would be activated (I’m not sure if this would make the energy sword and gravity hammer OP though). Just note that some Spartan abilities like thrusters and stabilizers would be active in all playlists.
> > >
> > > Alright here are some pros:
> >
> > 1. Only one sandbox needs to be designed. IMO, BTB, warzone, and to a lesser extent, evolved arena, would work with the sprintless sandbox. I think evolved arena would be fine honestly.
> >
> > 2. The maps wouldn’t need to be designed around sprint. It’s no secret that the sprintless maps are more favored than the sprint-designed ones. Evolved arena, once again, may or may not work. If it doesn’t, forge/remixes maps can be made to accommodate.
> >
> > 3. BTB and warzone wouldn’t be ruined. Most can agree that it sucked a lot when BTB didn’t have sprint. Yes, some will still complain, but they will most likely be in the minority.
> >
> > 4. Everyone would be happy. The guys who can absolutely not live with sprint would have all their old gamemodes back, the guys who NEED sprint will have their evolved arena playlist, warzone, BTB, and some action-sacky playlists, and the most of us who can handle both will have everything.
> >
> > I think this is better than your idea of having two separate games because the community wouldn’t be split, you wouldn’t have to wait longer for the game that has your prefered style of gameplay, and the playlists that sprint is in only benefits the gameplay in that playlist. Believe it or not, my original reply was longer than that lol. So what do you think?
>
> Finally getting around to responding to this.
>
> The issue is that you say the community would be split with 2 separate games, but you’re suggestion is still just splitting the community within one game. The only difference is that its using resources of a singular product and therefore neither style will be built around sufficiently.
>
> Secondly this idea commits a cardinal sin when it comes to game design and thats because it breaks the cohesion of the product and lacks consistency across its modes. From one mode to the next youll have completely different controller layouts, balancing, etc and thats really bad and causes a disconnect with players.
>
> The evolved arena playlist would be a joke and horribly optomized and while sprint in btb wouldnt be the worst thing ever, it still runs in to the problem I mentioned earlier and is honestly lazy game design.
>
> The speed and feel of the game is determined by your map design, not a “go faster” button. If BTB maps feel too big and clunky then the solution is not to add sprint, but rather to find innovative and interesting ways to move players within the map itself.

I don’t think it would be split into sprint and no sprint. Most are fine with sprint in BTB and most don’t require sprint in arena.

Halo 5 lacks consistency, and people are fine with that. In the mp, your shields can’t recharge while sprinting, but in grifball and the campaign. When you’re infected, you can’t sprint. Sure they may be minor, but the point is that no one really cares about a mechanic changing throughout gamemodes.

The evolved playlist may not work well, but I think it would function how it’s supposed to. Halo 4’s weapon range was a lot closer to halo 3 than to 5, and it still worked well with sprint. I can’t necessarily prove you wrong (and vice-versa), but I think halo 4 is a good example.

I think sprint is actually a solution for BTB. Sure you have teleporters and all that, but you can’t use them frequently and whenever you need to. IMO, the pros of my compromise far outweigh the cons.

xRedGhostx86 · December 4, 2016, 1:53am

I love sprint, but it sucks now that your shields can’t recharge while sprinting. 343 said its to balance the gameplay, but it would actually be more challenging for the shields to recharge.

C0RRuPTT · December 4, 2016, 7:42am

> 2603643534597848;12899:
> > 2533274923562209;12898:
> > > 2603643534597848;12897:
> > > > 2533274866652866;12890:
> > > >
> >
> > Think I’d rather play a “new” classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don’t like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
>
> What kind of arguement is this?
> Reach, H4 & H5 all have such low populations to begin with, right!?
> H5 has low population because everyone wants to play the MCC games BUT not play the MCC games right?
> 343i doesn’t listen to its fans but H5G is getting lots of support for its fans and population is reflecting this?
>
> There’s so many ways this PoV flops to ensure it’s always throwing salt.
> 343i can’t win because you want a classic game but won’t play those classic games with equally lack of support, population and other “made up” reasons.’’
> Let me show you explicitly;
>
>
> > Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
>
> You don’t want to play the old stale games… But you want to play the old stale games.

We have not had a classic style Halo since 2007, which was the most successful Halo ever.

tsassi · December 4, 2016, 9:52am

> 2533274866906624;12915:
> > 2603643534597848;12899:
> > > 2533274923562209;12898:
> > > > 2603643534597848;12897:
> > > > > 2533274866652866;12890:
> > > > >
> > >
> > > Think I’d rather play a “new” classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don’t like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
> >
> > What kind of arguement is this?
> > Reach, H4 & H5 all have such low populations to begin with, right!?
> > H5 has low population because everyone wants to play the MCC games BUT not play the MCC games right?
> > 343i doesn’t listen to its fans but H5G is getting lots of support for its fans and population is reflecting this?
> >
> > There’s so many ways this PoV flops to ensure it’s always throwing salt.
> > 343i can’t win because you want a classic game but won’t play those classic games with equally lack of support, population and other “made up” reasons.’’
> > Let me show you explicitly;
> >
> >
> > > Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
> >
> > You don’t want to play the old stale games… But you want to play the old stale games.
>
> We have not had a classic style Halo since 2007, which was the most successful Halo ever.

What was successful nine years ago wouldn’t necessarily be as successful today.

Cuxp · December 4, 2016, 10:22am

Sprint has no place in Halo.

HiIAmMoot · December 4, 2016, 10:45am

> 2533274825830455;12916:
> > 2533274866906624;12915:
> > > 2603643534597848;12899:
> > > > 2533274923562209;12898:
> > > > > 2603643534597848;12897:
> > > > > > 2533274866652866;12890:
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Think I’d rather play a “new” classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don’t like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
>
> What was successful nine years ago wouldn’t necessarily be as successful today.

And all people ask is to test that hypothesis. Go ahead and release a proper sequel to Halo 3. Redefine and rebalance the sandbox. Try to improve on what the complains in Halo 3 were, like a higher base movement speed and FoV. I honestly doubt it would sell worse than Halo 5 at this point so there isn’t much to lose I think.

thy_ReaperMC · December 4, 2016, 12:48pm

> 2533274891802271;12918:
> > 2533274825830455;12916:
> > > 2533274866906624;12915:
> > > > 2603643534597848;12899:
> > > > > 2533274923562209;12898:
> > > > > > 2603643534597848;12897:
> > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12890:
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Think I’d rather play a “new” classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don’t like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
> >
> > What was successful nine years ago wouldn’t necessarily be as successful today.
>
> And all people ask is to test that hypothesis. Go ahead and release a proper sequel to Halo 3. Redefine and rebalance the sandbox. Try to improve on what the complains in Halo 3 were, like a higher base movement speed and FoV. I honestly doubt it would sell worse than Halo 5 at this point so there isn’t much to lose I think.

That’s a bit unfair to say it’s an untested hypothesis.

> 2533274866906624;12915:
> We have not had a classic style Halo since 2007, which was the most successful Halo ever.

See above.

TryHardFan · December 4, 2016, 2:14pm

> 2603643534597848;12919:
> > 2533274891802271;12918:
> > > 2533274825830455;12916:
> > > > 2533274866906624;12915:
> > > > > 2603643534597848;12899:
> > > > > > 2533274923562209;12898:
> > > > > > > 2603643534597848;12897:
> > > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12890:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Think I’d rather play a “new” classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don’t like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
> > >
> > > What was successful nine years ago wouldn’t necessarily be as successful today.
> >
> > And all people ask is to test that hypothesis. Go ahead and release a proper sequel to Halo 3. Redefine and rebalance the sandbox. Try to improve on what the complains in Halo 3 were, like a higher base movement speed and FoV. I honestly doubt it would sell worse than Halo 5 at this point so there isn’t much to lose I think.
>
> That’s a bit unfair to say it’s an untested hypothesis.
>
>
> > 2533274866906624;12915:
> > We have not had a classic style Halo since 2007, which was the most successful Halo ever.
>
> See above.

It’s also unfair to gauge or draw any conclusions to the success of classic halo game play within a collection that 343 severely failed to care for within the first 4 months of its life span.

thy_ReaperMC · December 4, 2016, 2:29pm

> 2533274968707582;12920:
> > 2603643534597848;12919:
> > > 2533274891802271;12918:
> > > > 2533274825830455;12916:
> > > > > 2533274866906624;12915:
> > > > > > 2603643534597848;12899:
> > > > > > > 2533274923562209;12898:
> > > > > > > > 2603643534597848;12897:
> > > > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12890:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Think I’d rather play a “new” classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don’t like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
> > > >
> > > > What was successful nine years ago wouldn’t necessarily be as successful today.
> > >
> > > And all people ask is to test that hypothesis. Go ahead and release a proper sequel to Halo 3. Redefine and rebalance the sandbox. Try to improve on what the complains in Halo 3 were, like a higher base movement speed and FoV. I honestly doubt it would sell worse than Halo 5 at this point so there isn’t much to lose I think.
> >
> > That’s a bit unfair to say it’s an untested hypothesis.
> >
> >
> > > 2533274866906624;12915:
> > > We have not had a classic style Halo since 2007, which was the most successful Halo ever.
> >
> > See above.
>
> It’s also unfair to gauge or draw any conclusions to the success of classic halo game play within a collection that 343 severely failed to care for within the first 4 months of its life span.

I have not made any conclusions. I have shown that 343i tried giving a VERY classic Halo experience.

As for misclaiming the game only got 4 months of support, while it certainly didn’t get service past a year, many are making the parallel that Sprint = low populated Halos. Obviously, there’s a lot more to it than “Sprint ruined Halo.”

HCS ran H2A tournaments. H2A was/is there for custom games of an updated Halo on XB1 coding. That the overall Halo community isn’t playing the games they loved still, while so many other “old” games are still being played, does not equate to Sprint being THE factor. That the competitive crowd didn’t support H2A more, that’s up to them.

Celoin · December 4, 2016, 4:17pm

> 2533274825830455;12916:
> > 2533274866906624;12915:
> > > 2603643534597848;12899:
> > > > 2533274923562209;12898:
> > > > > 2603643534597848;12897:
> > > > > > 2533274866652866;12890:
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Think I’d rather play a “new” classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don’t like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
> > >
> > > What kind of arguement is this?
> > > Reach, H4 & H5 all have such low populations to begin with, right!?
> > > H5 has low population because everyone wants to play the MCC games BUT not play the MCC games right?
> > > 343i doesn’t listen to its fans but H5G is getting lots of support for its fans and population is reflecting this?
> > >
> > > There’s so many ways this PoV flops to ensure it’s always throwing salt.
> > > 343i can’t win because you want a classic game but won’t play those classic games with equally lack of support, population and other “made up” reasons.’’
> > > Let me show you explicitly;
> > >
> > >
> > > > Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
> > >
> > > You don’t want to play the old stale games… But you want to play the old stale games.
> >
> > We have not had a classic style Halo since 2007, which was the most successful Halo ever.
>
> What was successful nine years ago wouldn’t necessarily be as successful today.

I agree bro old Halo is slow and boring the population was also terrible from Halo 1-3. Halo needs wall running and should be a ww1 game look at BF1 and CoD/Titanfall most popular games rn so 343 should just look at what’s popular if they want this franchise to succeed it needs to be like everything else or it won’t sell because you know 343 did make a Halo game with the original formula and it didn’t work so obviously it won’t be a success.
Halo needs to evolve to stay relevant be like everything else or the game will only have 4 million sales and 20k population.

Lach4609 · December 4, 2016, 4:26pm

> 2535455477282651;12922:
> > 2533274825830455;12916:
> > > 2533274866906624;12915:
> > > > 2603643534597848;12899:
> > > > > 2533274923562209;12898:
> > > > > > 2603643534597848;12897:
> > > > > > > 2533274866652866;12890:
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Think I’d rather play a “new” classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don’t like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
> > > >
> > > > What kind of arguement is this?
> > > > Reach, H4 & H5 all have such low populations to begin with, right!?
> > > > H5 has low population because everyone wants to play the MCC games BUT not play the MCC games right?
> > > > 343i doesn’t listen to its fans but H5G is getting lots of support for its fans and population is reflecting this?
> > > >
> > > > There’s so many ways this PoV flops to ensure it’s always throwing salt.
> > > > 343i can’t win because you want a classic game but won’t play those classic games with equally lack of support, population and other “made up” reasons.’’
> > > > Let me show you explicitly;
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Not to mention those games aren’t new and we’ve played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
> > > >
> > > > You don’t want to play the old stale games… But you want to play the old stale games.
> > >
> > > We have not had a classic style Halo since 2007, which was the most successful Halo ever.
> >
> > What was successful nine years ago wouldn’t necessarily be as successful today.
>
> I agree bro old Halo is slow and boring the population was also terrible from Halo 1-3. Halo needs wall running and should be a ww1 game look at BF1 and CoD/Titanfall most popular games rn so 343 should just look at what’s popular if they want this franchise to succeed it needs to be like everything else or it won’t sell because you know 343 did make a Halo game with the original formula and it didn’t work so obviously it won’t be a success.
> Halo needs to evolve to stay relevant be like everything else or the game will only have 4 million sales and 20k population.

What an insightful response.