[deleted]
> 2533274887665513;13944:
> There will be disagreements about what is true Halo since the original trilogy actually involved some pretty different games. CE plays pretty different to Halo 2/3 because of a big difference in kill time, spawn system and maps. Halo 2 had its controversial dual wielding and Halo 3’s equipment was cool but poorly balanced in some cases. At the core of all 3 original Halos, though, was the golden triangle of guns, grenades and melee. You can use all 3 of these attack methods at all times while moving. Everyone has a consistent base movement speed and fair starts. The pace of matches was decided by the map size/segmentation, the weapons/vehicles available and game modes.
>
> In Halo 5, the movement system complicates this formula and the design of the game suffers because of it. Simplicity is key. Instead of having a recharging thruster pack why not just have a good strafe? Being able to dodge while shooting was core to classic Halo yet in Halo 5, blast radius’ of grenades and certain weapons are optimized as if everyone is thruster packing all the time. Problem is, when your thrusters are not ready, grenades and so on become OP. It’s not “tactical” to decide when and when to not use this ability, it’s common sense. Briefly lowering my gun to shoot does nothing but make the experience more clunky.
>
> Designing around multiple movement speeds unnecessarily complicates map design. I have been making maps for years and every good forger I know agrees. Halo 5’s arena map designs sit at a pretty mediocre standard. Supporting the spartan abilities limits what you can do with a map.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274887665513;13821:
> > I think one of my biggest problems with the abilities is how they change map design. I have been forging for a long time and me and my friends agree that it isn’t just about where you can go, it’s where you can’t go that equally defines map flow. Again, I think predictability is incredibly important on maps. Having to make clear choices on which path to take depending on the situation makes maps interesting to me. Map design is all about making interesting choices for the player. Should I go here to control the power position or should I go down there to get a power weapon, or do I instead go around there to flank the enemy? As a map designer you want to present a clean cut reason as to why someone should travel somewhere and when. I think the more successful maps take this into account versus a map that is just an area to fight in with no clearly defined pathing, positions or sight lines.
> >
> > Because of the increased movement speed, strength of automatics, certain power weapons and spartan charge I can no longer create tight close quarters areas on maps without them playing incredibly badly. To me, classic maps were interesting because they had a range of close, mid and long range areas. In Halo 5 every area has to be fairly open to support the sandbox.
> >
> > Map flow is far harder to control now since players can make ridiculously long jumps. Flow is defined by how players move around a map along the set out paths. When you design a map, you might not want every sight line to be a path. You may want interaction between two spaces but not a connection. If you want one position to fire on another without the player being able to travel directly between the two, you can’t achieve that without making these two areas incredibly far apart. If you try and make a close quarters arena like Empire, everyone can get to anywhere from everywhere. The flow is incredibly uncontrolled. This is partly due to cluttered map design but the abilities are a huge influence on the problem. Restriction is just as important as freedom in a Halo map. When you have complete freedom of movement, there is little strategy in the movement or ability to predict where players will be.
>
> It’s also been explained how the spartan abilities, mainly sprint, have changed weapon balancing for the worse. One good example being how the sniper is optimized for players zipping around at high speeds however to shoot at the guy sniping you, you must slow down. Problem is it makes the sniper too easy to use in that situation. There is so much more but it has been covered to death.
>
> Movement, map design and weapons balancing all relate closely. Change one, you change them all. For example: Add sprint - maps get bigger - shotgun range increases. Maps have to be larger in a Halo with sprint otherwise they are a complete cluster ****. The problems with making maps larger have been explained over and over.
>
> What is Halo-esque will be slightly different between Halo fans but at the core of Halo 1-3 is simplicity and refinement. Halo 5’s complex movement system is incompatible with the original formula.
The original halo trilogy is simple, yet complicated af.
It’s simple to grasp and easy to pick up. You know its halo when you see it.
But it’s hard to master.
The movement is tied to the map design, play any of the original halo games and there would be a neat jump you could do around pretty much every single corner of the map.
Crouch jumping, ramp skipping (a move I used to get to places faster), and even button glitches.
Like it or not, button glitches have been in every halo game in the halo trilogy.
BLB in halo CE
BXB in Halo 2
And in halo 3, this was less of a glitch and more of a skill move but it’s done through
BYB
Sprint, dumbs down the gameplay in many ways. Gun play fluidity is lost.
You lose your ability to have your gun up at top speed
You start creating random moments such as spartan charging into another player.
Bumping into enemies etc etc.
It’s like the original halo formula is a deep hidden gem in gaming, only waiting to be re-discovered.
It’s a matter of time
#I01_Game
[deleted]
> 2533274887665513;13946:
> I would be really great to hear some input on this discussion from at least one of the designers at 343. We are almost at 700 pages! Sprint/Enhanced mobility is clearly the most controversial design choice made to Halo. I just want to hear some reasoning. Do people think these additions seriously improve Halo? No I didn’t want a Halo 3 remake by the way, just an improved Halo that respected its foundation, direction and fan base instead of changing it. Halo only lost its audience when its direction changed.
>
> What does sprint actually add to the game? Is it really worth all the hassle having to rethink the way we design and scale maps as well as balance weapons just because you felt like adding a mechanic to please inpatient people? This time could have been spent adding more modes, maps and other features instead of trying to redesign Halo for a new movement system.
>
> Asides from “other games have sprint therefore players expect it so Halo needs it” what justifies the inclusion of sprint in Halo? I really disagree with the whole “players these days expect this” mentality. It’s such a huge generalization that makes people sound so incredibly narrow minded. Who the hell is actually dropping a game because it doesn’t have one mechanic they saw in another game? I hope people are not this ignorant to other styles of game play. People don’t want every game to play the same do they? This mentality comes from a corporate standpoint and not a creative one. I imagine publishers are terrified of stand out original games because they don’t know if they will sell well. The exception here is that Halo has already proved itself in the past. I don’t understand what is to be lost here. There is still a lot of money to be made out of a classic based Halo game.
Isnt that just speculation?
> 2533274848599184;13947:
> > 2533274887665513;13946:
> > I would be really great to hear some input on this discussion from at least one of the designers at 343. We are almost at 700 pages! Sprint/Enhanced mobility is clearly the most controversial design choice made to Halo. I just want to hear some reasoning. Do people think these additions seriously improve Halo? No I didn’t want a Halo 3 remake by the way, just an improved Halo that respected its foundation, direction and fan base instead of changing it. Halo only lost its audience when its direction changed.
> >
> > What does sprint actually add to the game? Is it really worth all the hassle having to rethink the way we design and scale maps as well as balance weapons just because you felt like adding a mechanic to please inpatient people? This time could have been spent adding more modes, maps and other features instead of trying to redesign Halo for a new movement system.
> >
> > Asides from “other games have sprint therefore players expect it so Halo needs it” what justifies the inclusion of sprint in Halo? I really disagree with the whole “players these days expect this” mentality. It’s such a huge generalization that makes people sound so incredibly narrow minded. Who the hell is actually dropping a game because it doesn’t have one mechanic they saw in another game? I hope people are not this ignorant to other styles of game play. People don’t want every game to play the same do they? This mentality comes from a corporate standpoint and not a creative one. I imagine publishers are terrified of stand out original games because they don’t know if they will sell well. The exception here is that Halo has already proved itself in the past. I don’t understand what is to be lost here. There is still a lot of money to be made out of a classic based Halo game.
>
> Isnt that just speculation?
bringing a product to the market is usually based on speculations…
343 speculated people will love perks, loadouts and all that junk, and some do, some didn’t
343 speculated people will love SA’s, map remasters and H5’s campaign, and some do , some didn’t
and it’s the same with a sprint-less Halo , some will love it, some will dislike it
> 2535428931873471;13943:
> I would say it entails a limited set of movement abilities, slightly airy movement, and a high TTK. That’s just gameplay-wise, but I’d also say that a semi gloomy art style is necessary too.
The problem here is that I am someone who loves CE. That game had multiple movement abilities, such as the CE spawn system, negating fall damage, grenade jumps, rocket jumps, teleports, ladders, the three base movement speeds(crouch, run forwards and strafe(12% slower than running forwards)) and regular jumps. CE also had a very low TTK.
So I will argue that movement isn’t bad for Halo, it’s how easy and meaningless movement is in H5G.
> 2533274887665513;13944:
> There will be disagreements about what is true Halo since the original trilogy actually involved some pretty different games. CE plays pretty different to Halo 2/3 because of a big difference in kill time, spawn system and maps. Halo 2 had its controversial dual wielding and Halo 3’s equipment was cool but poorly balanced in some cases. At the core of all 3 original Halos, though, was the golden triangle of guns, grenades and melee. You can use all 3 of these attack methods at all times while moving. Everyone has a consistent base movement speed and fair starts.
Dual wielding wasn’t Halo 2’s only controversial feature. Remember things like dynamic timers, the new melee system, noob combo, hit scan, sword lunge and host? The removal of things like the CE spawn system, projectiles, fall damage and grenading weapons and power ups was also very controversial. That’s not mentioning the maps and the TTK.
The point is that CE is not “pretty different” to H2 and H3, it’s a fundamentally different game. Not every game that has the golden triangle is “Halo-esque”.
CE also didn’t have a consistent base movement speed…
> 2533274887665513;13944:
> What is Halo-esque will be slightly different between Halo fans but at the core of Halo 1-3 is simplicity and refinement. Halo 5’s complex movement system is incompatible with the original formula.
I actually explained how CE wasn’t really a simple game above, please read it.
> 2533274801973487;13948:
> > 2533274848599184;13947:
> > > 2533274887665513;13946:
> > > I would be really great to hear some input on this discussion from at least one of the designers at 343. We are almost at 700 pages! Sprint/Enhanced mobility is clearly the most controversial design choice made to Halo. I just want to hear some reasoning. Do people think these additions seriously improve Halo? No I didn’t want a Halo 3 remake by the way, just an improved Halo that respected its foundation, direction and fan base instead of changing it. Halo only lost its audience when its direction changed.
> > >
> > > What does sprint actually add to the game? Is it really worth all the hassle having to rethink the way we design and scale maps as well as balance weapons just because you felt like adding a mechanic to please inpatient people? This time could have been spent adding more modes, maps and other features instead of trying to redesign Halo for a new movement system.
> > >
> > > Asides from “other games have sprint therefore players expect it so Halo needs it” what justifies the inclusion of sprint in Halo? I really disagree with the whole “players these days expect this” mentality. It’s such a huge generalization that makes people sound so incredibly narrow minded. Who the hell is actually dropping a game because it doesn’t have one mechanic they saw in another game? I hope people are not this ignorant to other styles of game play. People don’t want every game to play the same do they? This mentality comes from a corporate standpoint and not a creative one. I imagine publishers are terrified of stand out original games because they don’t know if they will sell well. The exception here is that Halo has already proved itself in the past. I don’t understand what is to be lost here. There is still a lot of money to be made out of a classic based Halo game.
> >
> > Isnt that just speculation?
>
> bringing a product to the market is usually based on speculations…
> 343 speculated people will love perks, loadouts and all that junk, and some do, some didn’t
> 343 speculated people will love SA’s, map remasters and H5’s campaign, and some do , some didn’t
> and it’s the same with a sprint-less Halo , some will love it, some will dislike it
Sure but are we really saying our speculation, from sitting inside our houses and conversing with like minded individuals, is actually equal to the speculation that comes from Microsoft and 343?
> 2533274943854776;13949:
> > 2535428931873471;13943:
> > I would say it entails a limited set of movement abilities, slightly airy movement, and a high TTK. That’s just gameplay-wise, but I’d also say that a semi gloomy art style is necessary too.
>
> The problem here is that I am someone who loves CE. That game had multiple movement abilities, such as the CE spawn system, negating fall damage, grenade jumps, rocket jumps, teleports, ladders, the three base movement speeds(crouch, run forwards and strafe(12% slower than running forwards)) and regular jumps. CE also had a very low TTK.
>
> So I will argue that movement isn’t bad for Halo, it’s how easy and meaningless movement is in H5G.
I’m not arguing movement is bad either, in fact I think that a classic style Halo game with thrusters would be even better than Halo 2 (which is my personal favorite Halo game in relation to mechanics) I think we can agree that there’s a little bit of a difference between crouching and slower strafe speed than the garbage that is sprint.
> 2533274848599184;13950:
> Sure but are we really saying our speculation, from sitting inside our houses and conversing with like minded individuals, is actually equal to the speculation that comes from Microsoft and 343?
While you make a decent point, keep in mind taht Microsoft and 343 are the same companies that are continually ignoring most of what the community says in favor of what they think will work, which rarely does.
> 2535428931873471;13951:
> > 2533274943854776;13949:
> > > 2535428931873471;13943:
> > >
>
>
>
> > 2533274848599184;13950:
> > Sure but are we really saying our speculation, from sitting inside our houses and conversing with like minded individuals, is actually equal to the speculation that comes from Microsoft and 343?
>
> While you make a decent point, keep in mind taht Microsoft and 343 are the same companies that are continually ignoring most of what the community says in favor of what they think will work, which rarely does.
Isnt this point of view born from two equally speculative premises.
One being, that somehow, the **outspoken members on Waypoint and YouTube represent the majority of the community.**And two being, twofold, in that if the way Halo is now is “not working”, then the alternative you suggest is guaranteed to work, else why bother to change it unless for personal preference.
> 2533274848599184;13952:
> > 2535428931873471;13951:
> > > 2533274943854776;13949:
> > > > 2535428931873471;13943:
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533274848599184;13950:
> > > Sure but are we really saying our speculation, from sitting inside our houses and conversing with like minded individuals, is actually equal to the speculation that comes from Microsoft and 343?
> >
> > While you make a decent point, keep in mind taht Microsoft and 343 are the same companies that are continually ignoring most of what the community says in favor of what they think will work, which rarely does.
>
> Isnt this point of view born from two equally speculative premises.
> One being, that somehow, the **outspoken members on Waypoint and YouTube represent the majority of the community.**And two being, twofold, in that if the way Halo is now is “not working”, then the alternative you suggest is guaranteed to work, else why bother to change it unless for personal preference.
While I would not say that we represent the majority of the community any more, there certainly is a large community desire for this gameplay, otherwise faanmade games like I01 wouldn’t be getting so much attention. Furthermore, I believe that it is fair to say that Halo in the current state is not working. Halo 5 sold about 5 million units and MCC sold less. Sure the Xbox One didn’t start off too well, but by this point we have a 26 million units being sold. That means Halo 5 has about a 19.2% adoption rate. Halo 3 (which I compare to because Halo 5 is oft compared to it) had 8.1 million units sold by January 2008, and at the same time the xbox 360 sold 17.7 million units. This means Halo 3 had an adoption rate of about 45.7%. If you look at total adoption rate for 360s, being 84 million, Halo 3 still had an adoption rate of just under 15%, and that’s ignoring for people buying multiple units per household for one reason or another. Ignoring adoption rate, just raw sales numbers show that the popularity of Halo is going down. While we cannot definitely tie this to to sprint in game, Halo Reach marked the beginning of the downturn of sales for Halo (the first to include sprint), which slowly went down until the steep plummet that is Halo 5. There are many issues with Halo, but I believe it is the denial of reality should we not consider the possibility that the decline of Halo’s success is in any way related to sprint and modern movement mechanics within the series.
> 2533274944267503;13953:
> There are many issues with Halo, but I believe it is the denial of reality should we not consider the possibility that the decline of Halo’s success is in any way related to sprint and modern movement mechanics within the series.
I think the problem is that there’s still a big leap from believing this to believing that removing sprint would make Halo significantly more popular. Yet this is a leap that many people are ready to make without much critical judgement.
> 2533274848599184;13952:
> > 2535428931873471;13951:
> > > 2533274943854776;13949:
> > > > 2535428931873471;13943:
> > > >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533274848599184;13950:
> > > Sure but are we really saying our speculation, from sitting inside our houses and conversing with like minded individuals, is actually equal to the speculation that comes from Microsoft and 343?
> >
> > While you make a decent point, keep in mind taht Microsoft and 343 are the same companies that are continually ignoring most of what the community says in favor of what they think will work, which rarely does.
>
> Isnt this point of view born from two equally speculative premises.
> One being, that somehow, the **outspoken members on Waypoint and YouTube represent the majority of the community.**And two being, twofold, in that if the way Halo is now is “not working”, then the alternative you suggest is guaranteed to work, else why bother to change it unless for personal preference.
- at this poitn, I do think so both speculation are are rather equal…
Sure 343/MS have the money to do some focus group testing, create surveys and have other tools to analyse markets but those tools are either not beeing used at all, they are not beeing used properly (maybe 343 is trying to confirm their own bias rather then looking for the “truth”) or those tools are simply not capable of predicting the video game market/the Halo community at all…
Just look at 343 track record…
2)Listinig to the community is a double-edged sword, you need to do it to improve your game but I think a big problem is that gamers, for the most part, don’t really know what they actually want themself…most people simply lack the imagination to think of something other then what they know (at least it is my experience…just look at all the peolpe coming here and saying stuff like “well you just want H3 2.0 if you don’t like sprint” because they fail to realize that change can happen, even without fundamatally changeing the core of gameplay), so if 343 does a fancy survey and asks “do you want to keep sprint”, lots of people will probably look at H5, remember CoD,BF and whatsoever and come to the conclusion “well every game has sprint therefore: a game without sprint = not possible/not fun” but that doesn’t mean those people wouldn’t enjoy an modern, well made sprint-less Halo.
I guess you could make the case that it’s the same with “anti-sprinter” but 8 years of fighting the current status of the game kinda shows that it is more then just not beeing able to think of something different then want is beeing fed to them…
The thing is, at this point, all we know is that the classic Halo gameplay DID work, it made this series grow and become a huge cultural phenomenon, climaxing with H3, and falling apart with Reach onward. Will a return to it’s old gameplay equal a return to it’s former glory? No, most likely not! the market has changed, 343 has worked hard to get a rather bad reputation and so on BUT the constant resistance shows that there is a core of players, who do not want to give up on “their” Halo and a lot of people will most likely buy and defend whatever is the latest game anyway so I don’t see a classic game (full scale release, not some half–Yoinked!- Remaster or something like that) doing worse then whatever 343 is doing at the moment.
And, giving classic Halo another shot is the only way to see how the community thinks about it. Maybe it does just as average as H5, maybe it does better, but I don’t think we will ever find out because MS doesn’t have the balls to order an experiment like that and 343 is too stubborn to not hold on to their vision for “Halo”
> 2533274944267503;13953:
> > 2533274848599184;13952:
> > > 2535428931873471;13951:
> > > > 2533274943854776;13949:
> > > > > 2535428931873471;13943:
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 2533274848599184;13950:
> > > > Sure but are we really saying our speculation, from sitting inside our houses and conversing with like minded individuals, is actually equal to the speculation that comes from Microsoft and 343?
> > >
> > > While you make a decent point, keep in mind taht Microsoft and 343 are the same companies that are continually ignoring most of what the community says in favor of what they think will work, which rarely does.
> >
> > Isnt this point of view born from two equally speculative premises.
> > One being, that somehow, the **outspoken members on Waypoint and YouTube represent the majority of the community.**And two being, twofold, in that if the way Halo is now is “not working”, then the alternative you suggest is guaranteed to work, else why bother to change it unless for personal preference.
>
> While I would not say that we represent the majority of the community any more, there certainly is a large community desire for this gameplay, otherwise faanmade games like I01 wouldn’t be getting so much attention. Furthermore, I believe that it is fair to say that Halo in the current state is not working. Halo 5 sold about 5 million units and MCC sold less. Sure the Xbox One didn’t start off too well, but by this point we have a 26 million units being sold. That means Halo 5 has about a 19.2% adoption rate. Halo 3 (which I compare to because Halo 5 is oft compared to it) had 8.1 million units sold by January 2008, and at the same time the xbox 360 sold 17.7 million units. This means Halo 3 had an adoption rate of about 45.7%. If you look at total adoption rate for 360s, being 84 million, Halo 3 still had an adoption rate of just under 15%, and that’s ignoring for people buying multiple units per household for one reason or another. Ignoring adoption rate, just raw sales numbers show that the popularity of Halo is going down. While we cannot definitely tie this to to sprint in game, Halo Reach marked the beginning of the downturn of sales for Halo (the first to include sprint), which slowly went down until the steep plummet that is Halo 5. There are many issues with Halo, but I believe it is the denial of reality should we not consider the possibility that the decline of Halo’s success is in any way related to sprint and modern movement mechanics within the series.
We cant use numbers when the original statement is flawed. No one knows the sales of Halo 5. All we can guarantee is that it sold more than 1 million units, and that 5 million units were either shipped or sold within the first 3 months. If that figure is the shipped numbers, it does not include digital sales, but we are unaware of how many of those shipped copies have been sold through. If that figure is sales numbers, then you have to account for another 16 months of sales for Halo 5.
Id also like to address the whole “Microsoft doesnt give sales numbers because it knows Halo is failing”. MS doesnt give sales numbers for all of its major franchises, at least as far as I can tell. This means Forza, Gears of War, Halo, etc. Id argue this has more to do with their strategy against Sony than any assumption that their whole exclusives lineup is failing. Of anything, at least Forza continues dominance in its genre. The sales figure of that series are updated whenever it hits 1 million sales, or a major franchise milestone is hit. Halo is reported the exact same way. The NPD say that Forza is the leading racing franchise, for this generation, and yet its sales are reported the same way as Halo’s, or Gears of War’s.
Cant compare adoption rates when we dont know any hardcore sales facts. Even for Halo 3, you have to consider the amount of consoles Halo 3 sold, people who bought more than one edition (like me, the legendary edition had the helmet, but only the limited edition had a physical beastiarium), and various other cases. Unless someone is willing to sit down and figure out the total number of Xbox consoles sold for the Halo 3 launch, the adoption rate over time, and then do the same for Halo 5, its really not a fair comparison.
*“There are many issues with Halo, but I believe it is the denial of reality should we not consider the possibility that the decline of Halo’s success is in any way related to sprint and modern movement mechanics within the series.”*I agree that we should not ignore that changes in the series correlate to a decline in sales and popularity. But I also ask if thats where Halo was headed already, and whether there is anything that could have been done to keep the series at Halo 3 levels of popularity. The fact is that a majority of individuals on this site argue as if not changing Halo would have maintained its throne as the king of shooters, and while that is possible, its equally possible the series could have plummeted even further.
> 2533274801973487;13955:
> > 2533274848599184;13952:
> > > 2535428931873471;13951:
> > > > 2533274943854776;13949:
> > > > > 2535428931873471;13943:
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 2533274848599184;13950:
> > > > Sure but are we really saying our speculation, from sitting inside our houses and conversing with like minded individuals, is actually equal to the speculation that comes from Microsoft and 343?
> > >
> > > While you make a decent point, keep in mind taht Microsoft and 343 are the same companies that are continually ignoring most of what the community says in favor of what they think will work, which rarely does.
> >
> > Isnt this point of view born from two equally speculative premises.
> > One being, that somehow, the **outspoken members on Waypoint and YouTube represent the majority of the community.**And two being, twofold, in that if the way Halo is now is “not working”, then the alternative you suggest is guaranteed to work, else why bother to change it unless for personal preference.
>
> 1) at this poitn, I do think so both speculation are are rather equal…
> Sure 343/MS have the money to do some focus group testing, create surveys and have other tools to analyse markets but those tools are either not beeing used at all, they are not beeing used properly (maybe 343 is trying to confirm their own bias rather then looking for the “truth”) or those tools are simply not capable of predicting the video game market/the Halo community at all…
> Just look at 343 track record…
>
> 2)Listinig to the community is a double-edged sword, you need to do it to improve your game but I think a big problem is that gamers, for the most part, don’t really know what they actually want themself…most people simply lack the imagination to think of something other then what they know (at least it is my experience…just look at all the peolpe coming here and saying stuff like “well you just want H3 2.0 if you don’t like sprint” because they fail to realize that change can happen, even without fundamatally changeing the core of gameplay), so if 343 does a fancy survey and asks “do you want to keep sprint”, lots of people will probably look at H5, remember CoD,BF and whatsoever and come to the conclusion “well every game has sprint therefore: a game without sprint = not possible/not fun” but that doesn’t mean those people wouldn’t enjoy an modern, well made sprint-less Halo.
> I guess you could make the case that it’s the same with “anti-sprinter” but 8 years of fighting the current status of the game kinda shows that it is more then just not beeing able to think of something different then want is beeing fed to them…
>
> The thing is, at this point, all we know is that the classic Halo gameplay DID work, it made this series grow and become a huge cultural phenomenon, climaxing with H3, and falling apart with Reach onward. Will a return to it’s old gameplay equal a return to it’s former glory? No, most likely not! the market has changed, 343 has worked hard to get a rather bad reputation and so on BUT the constant resistance shows that there is a core of players, who do not want to give up on “their” Halo and a lot of people will most likely buy and defend whatever is the latest game anyway so I don’t see a classic game (full scale release, not some half–Yoinked!- Remaster or something like that) doing worse then whatever 343 is doing at the moment.
> And, giving classic Halo another shot is the only way to see how the community thinks about it. Maybe it does just as average as H5, maybe it does better, but I don’t think we will ever find out because MS doesn’t have the balls to order an experiment like that and 343 is too stubborn to not hold on to their vision for “Halo”
- You’re using speculation to fight speculation. Again, nobody knows how 343 did their survey, or what the full results are. Its possible that they twisted the survey to suit their needs, or its possible that there is a silent majority of the population who like sprint. Also, this track record comment is again born of speculation. Like i mentioned in another reply, all of these arguments come from a position that Halo would be doing much better under a classical style of gameplay, which is speculation.
“Look at 343’s track record.” If Halo had stayed classic in style, and sales had declined, would we not be saying the same thing about a modernized Halo, and 343’s “track record”? Their track record, at least to Microsoft, is two decently reviewed games that made Microsoft nice profits, and lots of merchandise to sell. The metacritic differences are a fair way to say that 343’s track record is not as great as Bungie’s, and yet these games are being reviewed by fans, like you and I, who happen to have to same biases and interests that the Halo community has. Any time there is change, there will be pushback.
- Im not a firm believer in telling people what they want. I think someone on Xbox One is perfectly capable of playing Master Chief Collection, and then Halo 5, and judging for themselves if they like sprint or not. Bad arguments made by people doesn’t suddenly make their feelings equally bad. Ill tell you what, i’d enjoy a classic Halo. I did, and I still do, almost once a month I go back to MCC or play split-screen with some buddies on 360 Halo 3. But I like Halo 5 the best. Its the most fun, for me personally. Im fairly certain I know how I feel much better than you or anyone sitting behind a computer reading this.
Yes, the classic Halo did work. Did being the operative word. Like I said before, I’m sure there is a reason Microsoft doesnt experiment with a classic style Halo, something to do with industry trends they studied and surveys they conduct. You cant expected a profit, public based company like Microsoft to do something on a whim if they have evidence to the contrary. Maybe all these return to era games will cause them to look back. I agree that the only way to see for sure is to make a classic style Halo game for the masses. What I cant understand is why people want to assume that Microsoft is not looking at this in the most profit oriented way. If they saw that a lot of sales would come from a classic style Halo game, then they would make one. Unless 343 also doesn’t care about profits, and only their own vision for Halo, and they hide and manipulate data they find and give to Microsoft, and then we get a little too much tin foil hat-esque for my tastes.
This idea of constant resistance is fair, but you make it seem so much larger than it is. Want to see true resistance? Infinite Warfare’s reveal trailer, and the subsequent multiplayer reveal trailer. Thats how fans of a series show their displeasure with a game. You want to get Halo to change, thats how you do it.
> 2533274887665513;13946:
> I would be really great to hear some input on this discussion from at least one of the designers at 343. We are almost at 700 pages! Sprint/Enhanced mobility is clearly the most controversial design choice made to Halo. I just want to hear some reasoning. Do people think these additions seriously improve Halo? No I didn’t want a Halo 3 remake by the way, just an improved Halo that respected its foundation, direction and fan base instead of changing it. Halo only lost its audience when its direction changed.
>
> What does sprint actually add to the game? Is it really worth all the hassle having to rethink the way we design and scale maps as well as balance weapons just because you felt like adding a mechanic to please inpatient people? This time could have been spent adding more modes, maps and other features instead of trying to redesign Halo for a new movement system.
>
> Asides from “other games have sprint therefore players expect it so Halo needs it” what justifies the inclusion of sprint in Halo? I really disagree with the whole “players these days expect this” mentality. It’s such a huge generalization that makes people sound so incredibly narrow minded. Who the hell is actually dropping a game because it doesn’t have one mechanic they saw in another game? I hope people are not this ignorant to other styles of game play. People don’t want every game to play the same do they? This mentality comes from a corporate standpoint and not a creative one. I imagine publishers are terrified of stand out original games because they don’t know if they will sell well. The exception here is that Halo has already proved itself in the past. I don’t understand what is to be lost here. There is still a lot of money to be made out of a classic based Halo game.
When salient 1 explained why they added sprint to halo immersion was how you could sum up at least two of his reasons.The other was that it added “depth” of whether or not you could sprint.With spartan abilities there is a little bit of strategy but it’s not deep at all.
Sprinting is a great mechanic, if you don’t like it then don’t use it
> 2535442437112713;13959:
> Sprinting is a great mechanic, if you don’t like it then don’t use it
Why handicap yourself doing that? It’s not as simple as “don’t use it”, the game is BUILT around the mechanic.
> 2533274923562209;13960:
> > 2535442437112713;13959:
> > Sprinting is a great mechanic, if you don’t like it then don’t use it
>
> Why handicap yourself doing that? It’s not as simple as “don’t use it”, the game is BUILT around the mechanic.
Agreed… for the how many(eth) time… wasn’t this “if you don’t like it don’t use it” petty dismissal attempt completely destroyed a few hundred pages ago?
> 2533274848599184;13957:
>
And you responce to my speculation are even more speculation?
silent majority that likes sprint -> specualtion
people wanting Halo to change if it had stayed true to it’s roots -> specualtion
believing people make rational dicisions based on research and thinking -> specualtion
CoD-Halo comparison -> specualtion
As I said, your comparison is just as good as anyone elses because as long as 343 doesn’t dare to take a shot at a modern classic Halo, no one will ever know.
And just to be clear, I never said that noone is capable of actually thinking and coming to the conclusion that they like sprint due to XY reason, I just doubt many people do, they either don’t care or repeat whatever 343’s PR-team has fed them (“makes the game faster” “industrie standards” “Immersion, makes you feel like a spartan”)
neither did I assume MS wasn’t looking at “the most profit oriented way”. But market developments aren’t some crystal clear science, you have to take risks some time… HCE was a huge bet against common market trends and it became HUGE and revolutionized console FPS gaming, you cannot expect this to happen over and over again but their philosophy of “adopting modern trends → attracting more players → even more money” didn’t work out…Halo is in decline ever since Reach, this is not solely to blame on Sprint but losing it’s identity for many people (as said, not just sprint but other aspects as well) might have a bigger influence then you want it to be, and I doubt this is something 343/MS planned all along , maybe the almighty MS might not be able to foretell sales and trends all that good after all.
> 2533274848599184;13952:
> > 2535428931873471;13951:
> > While you make a decent point, keep in mind taht Microsoft and 343 are the same companies that are continually ignoring most of what the community says in favor of what they think will work, which rarely does.
>
> Isnt this point of view born from two equally speculative premises.
> One being, that somehow, the **outspoken members on Waypoint and YouTube represent the majority of the community.**And two being, twofold, in that if the way Halo is now is “not working”, then the alternative you suggest is guaranteed to work, else why bother to change it unless for personal preference.
In response to your first point, while it may be valid, the people that are speaking on Waypoint, reddit, and YouTube do represent the community. If the majority of those people want something, it’s the majority of the people who’s opinions matter. Why would I say such a seemingly callous thing? I say it because the people that aren’t posting about Halo don’t care, or at least don’t care enough to talk about it. The people that do talk about the game and want it to be better are the ones 343 and Microsoft need to appeal to, not the ones who might buy Halo if it’s on sale and play it for a few weeks. In response to your second point, actually yes, that’s pretty much right. You can’t argue that Halo’s downfall occurred when bungie and 343 began changing major things in the games. The more change that there’s been, the worse the games have done. This obviously shows that people don’t want Halo to change. It was never necessary, at least to the extent that it occurred. A game’s formula never should be deviated from in such an extreme manner. It rarely works well or is well received.