Don’t like Sprint. Please don’t include it in Halo 6.
[deleted]
[deleted]
> 2533274879887605;13829:
> Sprint needs to stay, the game would be slow whitout it.
I’d like to say as I normally do, that I’m astounded people actually believe this, but after looking at your username, I’m not. SPRINT DOES NOT MAKE THE GAME FASTER it is an illusion mechanic to make you “feel” faster, but maps just need to be stretched out to accommodate it. When playing Halo 2 or 3, even on the MCC, matches are much faster than in Halo 5, because combat is more condensed and people don’t need to come out of an animation to start shooting. This Call of Duty mentality that we need sprint for fast gameplay is just plain wrong.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
I like sprint. It should stay I like the faster pace.
> 2535428931873471;13867:
> > 2533274879887605;13829:
> > Sprint needs to stay, the game would be slow whitout it.
>
> I’d like to say as I normally do, that I’m astounded people actually believe this, but after looking at your username, I’m not. SPRINT DOES NOT MAKE THE GAME FASTER it is an illusion mechanic to make you “feel” faster, but maps just need to be stretched out to accommodate it. When playing Halo 2 or 3, even on the MCC, matches are much faster than in Halo 5, because combat is more condensed and people don’t need to come out of an animation to start shooting. This Call of Duty mentality that we need sprint for fast gameplay is just plain wrong.
I feel your pain, so many of those posts…
> 2535456416152038;13871:
> I like sprint. It should stay I like the faster pace.
Oh look found another one.
Please read the above quote GOLD 4 stayfrosty has a very short explanation for you to get started on understanding sprint beyond the animation 
> 2533274887665513;13870:
> > 2594261035368257;13862:
> > > 2533274825830455;13853:
> > >
> >
> > This simple statement brings to light (more clearly at least and obviously IMO) why I dislike sprint. It’s addition has allowed and I think even promoted, on some level, a shift in gameplay to a more serious and competitive momentum and nearly disallowed much of the possibility of having a chaotic, fun and frantic option.
> >
> > Personally, I think that the addition of sprint is the single biggest mistake ever made for the Halo series.
> >
> > It’s not that I think sprint is “bad for game play” based on your statement because it clearly points out that dev(s) create the sandbox / environment to achieve the pace they’re seeking. It’s not that I think sprint improves gameplay, for the same reason. But it does change the feel of gameplay for each of us on an individual level and as this thread has lived long enough to indicate with little doubt, it’s a change that is either loved or hated [passionately FTMP] with not a lot of in between. It also has an impact on how the pace being sought is achieved through design, which is why so many people say it “doesn’t feel like Halo”.
> >
> > I personally think the “better” way to make Halo appeal to both new and older fans would be to find a decent BMS and give us a much wider variety of map sizes, designs. A decent number of large, medium and small maps, along with a more focused attention to the multitude of other details that help set the pace would allow for plenty of variety in games from serious and steady to frantic and chaotic and anywhere in between. From the sounds of a few previous posts, it would’ve been easier to achieve the desired pace in most situations with only 1 movement speed to consider anyway… but I’m not a map maker.
> >
> > Also, don’t think that I’m implying there isn’t enough variance in maps, sizes… I wouldn’t even know. It’s the large variety in map sizes and the combination of that with the attention to details that affect pace which, IMO, would negate the need for sprint. It would also, I think, allow for a much wider variety in gameplay experiences with anything from steady, serious tones to all out chaotic and frantic fun fests.
>
> One base movement speed would be amazing to design for! I think this is the problem, not many people here are map designers. You might know something feels off but if you have been designing maps for a while across the different Halo sandboxes, you REALLY know that sprint and clamber are the worst things to ever happen. As I pointed out at the top of p692, you might not want every sight line to be a pathway. Maps need defined pathing and controlled movement, some sort of restriction to player movement is necessary in order to have any strategic depth to a map. If anyone can get anywhere from everywhere, the map loses focus and engagements get messy as any sort of predictability to the map is lost. Thanks to sprint and clamber, I have to upscale both horizontally and vertically if I don’t want a player to be able to jump from one area to another. The problem with making maps larger has been explained pretty well these last few hundred pages so I will take a break. Vehicles, lifts and teleporters were far more interesting ways to get around a map, and it involved a lot more creativity on the design side as to how these could be implemented. And no teleporters are not too confusing for players in 2017! Don’t know about you people but I respect a game that respects my intelligence. Compare CE map design to Halo 5’s. Sure, most CE maps were a little odd, it was early days but there was easily more depth, interest and variety to those maps than you will find in Halo 5. Every Halo 5 map is a Pit/Midship style arena. I think it is much better to pour depth into the game through new maps, modes and weapons rather than just adding new movement mechanics.
Yes exactly this.
Imagine the extra or entirely new game modes we could of got, if the time spent balancing sprint and other new mechanics, was spent on innovating game types, then even further, map design!!
[deleted]
> 2533274808578327;13860:
> Out of curiosity, how much have you viewed the debate outside Waypoint and also videos?
I don’t. I’m not that actively interested in people’s opinions about sprint.
I keep coming back to this thread because I keep remembering random bits of info.
I think it was a week or so ago that I read a comment on reddit about the abilities and how they affect map design, and one bit stuck out to me. I think it was from Kell_of_Scots.
Basically he pointed at a map like Narrows from Halo 3, and how it has the man-cannons that launch you from base to base. You really can’t have that kind of mechanic on a map like Halo 5, because you can just thrust out of the cannons default trajectory to land on the bridge in the middle. Which is a massive change to how that map would function and how it would play, and it’s probably a very deliberate choice on the part of the original map creator to not allow that sort of movement.
If you wanted to take that option out of Narrows in Halo 5, you’d have to use all sorts of convoluted methods to do so. You could add a wall that blocks the thrust, but then you block LOS to the bridge and the ability to throw grenades onto it. You could add a gravity volume that pushes the player away from it, but then you run into the problem of expectation vs. reality (i.e., if the player can’t see something blocking them, they’ll assume they can thrust across and will be frustrated when they can’t.) Same problem if you have an invisible teleporter.
This is pretty much the thing Slaphead was talking about:
> it’s where you can’t go that equally defines map flow.
And this is the most map-breaking thing about the abilities. If you don’t want a player to be able to jump from Snipe 2 to Blue 1 on Guardian, you’d have to make that gap monumentally large. If you don’t want them to climb from Shortcut to Blue Room using Clamber, you have to raise the height of Blue Room. Both of those changes would then affect how the map plays.
I can’t currently link things so here are where those Guardian call-outs refer to:
Snipe 2: http://www.haloforever.com/images/map%20callouts/call_outs_guardian_c.jpg
Blue 1: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_elDxHIauP8/hqdefault.jpg
Shortcut and Blue Room: http://www.haloforever.com/images/map%20callouts/call_outs_guardian_d.jpg
> 2533274913398097;13876:
> I keep coming back to this thread because I keep remembering random bits of info.
>
> I think it was a week or so ago that I read a comment on reddit about the abilities and how they affect map design, and one bit stuck out to me. I think it was from Kell_of_Scots.
>
> Basically he pointed at a map like Narrows from Halo 3, and how it has the man-cannons that launch you from base to base. You really can’t have that kind of mechanic on a map like Halo 5, because you can just thrust out of the cannons default trajectory to land on the bridge in the middle. Which is a massive change to how that map would function and how it would play, and it’s probably a very deliberate choice on the part of the original map creator to not allow that sort of movement.
>
>
>
>
> >
>
> And this is the most map-breaking thing about the abilities. If you don’t want a player to be able to jump from Snipe 2 to Blue 1 on Guardian, you’d have to make that gap monumentally large. If you don’t want them to climb from Shortcut to Blue Room using Clamber, you have to raise the height of Blue Room. Both of those changes would then affect how the map plays.
>
> I can’t currently link things so here are where those Guardian call-outs refer to:
> Snipe 2: http://www.haloforever.com/images/map%20callouts/call_outs_guardian_c.jpg
> Blue 1: https://i.ytimg.com/vi/_elDxHIauP8/hqdefault.jpg
> Shortcut and Blue Room: http://www.haloforever.com/images/map%20callouts/call_outs_guardian_d.jpg
1: Thrusters: One thing to “fix” it and potentially make some interesting things for map traverasal, is if the force vector for the thrusters were added to your current vector.
Meaning, if you went on a man cannon on Narrows and thrusted mid air, you’d continue forward and in the direction the thrusted because the force of the thrusters were added to your current momentum. You wouldn’t land mid bridge, you’d risk hitting a wall or landing close to one.
To land mid you’d have to thrust at the right moment somewhere just when you’ve entered the man cannon. That in turn could be designed so that a right timed thrust is required to land mid, otherwise you land elsewhere or fall to your death.
2: Unfortunately too many players are under the impression that new movement mechanics allow things that wasn’t previously doable. When in reality it’s the map design which allow or not, certain traversals. Atleast that is my experience of a lot of players.
> 2533274913398097;13876:
> If you wanted to take that option out of Narrows in Halo 5, you’d have to use all sorts of convoluted methods to do so. You could add a wall that blocks the thrust, but then you block LOS to the bridge and the ability to throw grenades onto it. You could add a gravity volume that pushes the player away from it, but then you run into the problem of expectation vs. reality (i.e., if the player can’t see something blocking them, they’ll assume they can thrust across and will be frustrated when they can’t.) Same problem if you have an invisible teleporter.
I guess the simplest solution would just be to increase the gap between the man cannon and the bridge in such a way that you can’t reach the bridge with a thrust-stabilize-GP-thrust-clamber combo. But that means you’re making the map bigger, and leaves you with a large amount of empty space that serves no further purpose.
All this goes beyond the topic of sprint, though, and to the larger problem that is the amount of freedom of movement that Spartan Abillities give the player.
> 2533274795123910;13877:
> 2: Unfortunately too many players are under the impression that new movement mechanics allow things that wasn’t previously doable. When in reality it’s the map design which allow or not, certain traversals. Atleast that is my experience of a lot of players.
Yeah, that drives me crazy sometimes when somebody’s like, “I love clamber, it opens up so many options.” It doesn’t! The maps are just scaled so that you need clamber! If this were Halo 1-3 that jump would just be smaller! If anything, there are more things that clamber restricts or makes impossible than there are options that it opens up.
> 2533274913398097;13879:
> > 2533274795123910;13877:
> > 2: Unfortunately too many players are under the impression that new movement mechanics allow things that wasn’t previously doable. When in reality it’s the map design which allow or not, certain traversals. Atleast that is my experience of a lot of players.
>
> Yeah, that drives me crazy sometimes when somebody’s like, “I love clamber, it opens up so many options.” It doesn’t! The maps are just scaled so that you need clamber! If this were Halo 1-3 that jump would just be smaller! If anything, there are more things that clamber restricts or makes impossible than there are options that it opens up.
I have to disagree. Not with the fact that map design dictates how player can move, because that’s a given, but that Clamber restricts more than it opens up. One of the main problems with movement in Halo 5 is precisely that players can move too freely, which would be rectifiable with designing even larger maps, but 343i hasn’t, and there are far too many choices of paths. Movement in Halo 5 is more free than it has ever been, and you need stronger measures to restrict it than in previous games, but if you look at how 343i has designed the maps in Halo 5, they haven’t really restricted the movement that much. They have restricted it, but still left significantly more room than in previous games. Partly this may be because they probably didn’t expect some of the combinations of Spartan Abilities people found, but partly I believe it’s because they want to give players more freedom than in previous games.
The problem with the statement “I love clamber, it opens up so many options” is that these new options aren’t interesting. Movement paths can be interesting for two reasons: either they’re difficult enough that not everyone can execute them, giving the players who can an advantage, or they’re not very obvious, giving the more ingenious players (or the players who watch videos) an advantage. But Clamber does none of this, because it’s only function is to give players more freedom, and protection from failure, which inherently can only make jumps easier, and more obvious.
> 2533274825830455;13880:
> One of the main problems with movement in Halo 5 is precisely that players can move too freely
That’s really what I’m referring to, and what slaphead was talking about. Clamber makes some map design choices - which would be trivial to create in the classic games - a downright pain in the -Yoink-.
For example, let’s say you have a sniper rifle spawning on a map. Next to it is a wall low enough that a player can jump and see over it, but high enough that they can’t actually jump over it. Is that situation even possible in Halo 5? Any block you can see over, you can clamber over, so how do you stop a player from doing that? You would have to utilise the same ridiculous methods as the Narrows example.
And this isn’t some dumb map feature that nobody would actually use, it’s super prominent in The Pit for example.
There were a fair few things that I didn’t enjoy about the newer Halos, because change is uncomfortable. But Sprint was not one of these reasons.
Having a playlist without sprint would feel different like the old halos and that’s not necessarily bad. It would probably feel more strategic.