Sprint had it’s opportunity in Halo 4 and 5 , and it’s obvious it’s not working. If you check the most played games list on xbox halo 5 isn’t in the top 10. Halo 3 held the top spot for more than a year after launch. “Evolving” halo doesn’t mean you rip it’s identity away and make it something completely different. You can’t say having sprint in halo will make it identical to the original trilogy , halo 2 was nothing like halo ce , and halo 3 was nothing like ce or 2, and none of them had sprint. People were obviously not getting sick of the classic formula,as you can tell from halo 3’s population after launch. Halo only started losing popularity at reach where it didn’t play like traditional halo , and it hasn’t got better from there. Sprint had it’s opportunity in halo and it obviously failed . You can’t expect to do the same thing and get different results. It’s abundantly clear that people don’t like sprint in halo , and if 343 wants halo 6 to succeed, it needs to remove sprint and spartan abilities.
> 2533274944267503;14079:
> This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making posts that do not contribute to the topic at hand.*Original post. Click at your own discretion. So 343 announced that Halo 6 will not be at E3 this year, and H3A isn’t happening according to them. Maybe we will get a spinoff before Halo 6? Or 343 could just say it’s not Halo 6 because they’re dropping the number altogether.
Since this was flagged, allow me to clarify what should have been obvious. I want to talk about the possibility of a no sprint spinoff title being announced. The financial risk, popularity of a title, and discussion how such a game could work, etc. are all relevant topics within a thread about sprint. I did see that someone said that Microsoft said they will not announce any FPS Halo games this year. Could you provide a source?
> 2533274944267503;14085:
> > 2533274944267503;14079:
> > This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making posts that do not contribute to the topic at hand.*Original post. Click at your own discretion. So 343 announced that Halo 6 will not be at E3 this year, and H3A isn’t happening according to them. Maybe we will get a spinoff before Halo 6? Or 343 could just say it’s not Halo 6 because they’re dropping the number altogether.
>
> Since this was flagged, allow me to clarify what should have been obvious. I want to talk about the possibility of a no sprint spinoff title being announced. The financial risk, popularity of a title, and discussion how such a game could work, etc. are all relevant topics within a thread about sprint. I did see that someone said that Microsoft said they will not announce any FPS Halo games this year. Could you provide a source?
Not to be that guy, but IMO it’s pointless discussing E3 and possible no sprint halos until E3 actually lands. I think it is a waste of time discussing things with very little evidence or going off a single quote, not to mention it gets us no-where. Now, if I were 343, what I would do is launch. Halo 5:ODST that sets the tone for Cortanas takeover. Obviously, the gameplay will be classic, with no sprint, thrusters etc. this would be a good way to test the market-because the excuse that “Spartans should be able to sprint and thrust” etc does not really apply for ODSTs. Even though that arguement make little to no sense in the first place, as pointed out numerous times, Spartans can sprint, shoot, etc at the same time “in the lore”. Lore should never dictate gameplay in a game like halo.
> 2533274944267503;14085:
> > 2533274944267503;14079:
> > This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making posts that do not contribute to the topic at hand.*Original post. Click at your own discretion. So 343 announced that Halo 6 will not be at E3 this year, and H3A isn’t happening according to them. Maybe we will get a spinoff before Halo 6? Or 343 could just say it’s not Halo 6 because they’re dropping the number altogether.
>
> Since this was flagged, allow me to clarify what should have been obvious. I want to talk about the possibility of a no sprint spinoff title being announced. The financial risk, popularity of a title, and discussion how such a game could work, etc. are all relevant topics within a thread about sprint. I did see that someone said that Microsoft said they will not announce any FPS Halo games this year. Could you provide a source?
As the post above me said, it probably isn’t best to talk about E3 in this thread anyway (especially since my post also got flagged for spam). All I can say is that I believe it was either a quote from Frankie on Neogaf, or a quote from Phil Spencer, but don’t quote me on that as I’m not sure my claim is 100% legit.
Anyway, back on topic, I agree that an FPS Halo spinoff with no sprint gameplay and classic style multiplayer would be the best means of testing the waters for classic Halo in the modern shooter market, since 343 obviously aren’t going to try it in Halo 6 or whatever they end up calling it. The point of my post that got flagged was that if 343 aren’t going to announce the release of a Halo FPS in 2017 at E3, then the likeliest possibility of us getting a classic Halo FPS would be around or (most likely) after the release of Halo 6 in the upcoming years. All we have to do is let 343 know that there is in fact a market for such a game and that if Halo 6 doesn’t deliver on that then they should at least try to make a classic Halo spin off. A classic playlist or two in Halo 6 won’t cut it, we need a game built from the ground up with the old trilogy’s principles in mind.
Microsoft sees Halo 5’s multiplayer as ‘‘the best in the series’’ and will therefore (sadly) continue to build upon Halo 5’s foundation. The reality of that however is that this thread has confirmed that Sprint is utterly useless as there have been 0 good arguments in favor of Sprint out of nearly 15000 posts. So I’m more curious than anything to see if 343 will continue to hit nails in Halo’s coffin with Halo 6, or if they will finally overcome their monstrous ego and listen to proper feedback.
I know that I’m biased since I’m a PC guy, but I would love if Microsoft released Halo 5 on Steam and allowed modders to do a classic playlist. With the kind of people we have working on Halo Online and the people that would inevitably be drawn to a Halo PC release, I have no doubt we could have an insanely awesome classic playlist with incredible looking maps (Don’t get me wrong, Forge is great for what it is, but people can do some really crazy stuff with proper tools) and gameplay that felt just like old Halo games. This would be a super low risk way to actually test the waters for Halo on PC and classic Halo gameplay. Maybe I just have to much wishful thinking about Halo on PC though…
> 2535428931873471;14089:
> I know that I’m biased since I’m a PC guy, but I would love if Microsoft released Halo 5 on Steam and allowed modders to do a classic playlist. With the kind of people we have working on Halo Online and the people that would inevitably be drawn to a Halo PC release, I have no doubt we could have an insanely awesome classic playlist with incredible looking maps (Don’t get me wrong, Forge is great for what it is, but people can do some really crazy stuff with proper tools) and gameplay that felt just like old Halo games. This would be a super low risk way to actually test the waters for Halo on PC and classic Halo gameplay. Maybe I just have to much wishful thinking about Halo on PC though…
Evolved settings.
> 2535449545792902;14090:
> > 2535428931873471;14089:
> > I know that I’m biased since I’m a PC guy, but I would love if Microsoft released Halo 5 on Steam and allowed modders to do a classic playlist. With the kind of people we have working on Halo Online and the people that would inevitably be drawn to a Halo PC release, I have no doubt we could have an insanely awesome classic playlist with incredible looking maps (Don’t get me wrong, Forge is great for what it is, but people can do some really crazy stuff with proper tools) and gameplay that felt just like old Halo games. This would be a super low risk way to actually test the waters for Halo on PC and classic Halo gameplay. Maybe I just have to much wishful thinking about Halo on PC though…
>
> Evolved settings.
That’s completely actually pretty different than what I’m talking about. I’m talking more about a playlist that would be what a AAA classic style Halo release would look like, except with a mix of old remade maps and maps designed for no sprint settings that could be used to test different settings, rather than a playlist that just sort of imitates the classic feeling like an evolved one does. Now, is it realistic to expect that 1) Microsoft would be for this, and 2) That people would want to do all of this? No, of course not, but I really would be interested in seeing how it would go if it did happen.
> 2533274968894951;14088:
> Microsoft sees Halo 5’s multiplayer as ‘‘the best in the series’’ and will therefore (sadly) continue to build upon Halo 5’s foundation. The reality of that however is that this thread has confirmed that Sprint is utterly useless as there have been 0 good arguments in favor of Sprint out of nearly 15000 posts. So I’m more curious than anything to see if 343 will continue to hit nails in Halo’s coffin with Halo 6, or if they will finally overcome their monstrous ego and listen to proper feedback.
So true, its obvious the majority of players don’t like sprint . Any business with some common sense would have seen by now that halo with sprint isn’t working.It really doesn’t take someone with a business degree to figure that out.
> 2535428931873471;14077:
> The way I see it, in the original trilogy, we were always sprinting, but we were still able to shoot. If you look at it that way then adding “running style sprint” was just stupid and made spartans less like super soldiers.
Good luck explaining that to folks who buy into the illusion of swaying arms and panting noises.
> 2533274808578327;14093:
> > 2535428931873471;14077:
> > The way I see it, in the original trilogy, we were always sprinting, but we were still able to shoot. If you look at it that way then adding “running style sprint” was just stupid and made spartans less like super soldiers.
>
> Good luck explaining that to folks who buy into the illusion of swaying arms and panting noises.
Its funny but also sadly true. No matter how much of a speed boost sprint gives it always feels super clunky to me and I can’t understand why people like it in any games. Games with fast base movement feel so much faster even if the actual speed is slower than a game with sprint.
> 2535437497517606;14092:
> > 2533274968894951;14088:
> > Microsoft sees Halo 5’s multiplayer as ‘‘the best in the series’’ and will therefore (sadly) continue to build upon Halo 5’s foundation. The reality of that however is that this thread has confirmed that Sprint is utterly useless as there have been 0 good arguments in favor of Sprint out of nearly 15000 posts. So I’m more curious than anything to see if 343 will continue to hit nails in Halo’s coffin with Halo 6, or if they will finally overcome their monstrous ego and listen to proper feedback.
>
> So true, its obvious the majority of players don’t like sprint . Any business with some common sense would have seen by now that halo with sprint isn’t working.It really doesn’t take someone with a business degree to figure that out.
Majority? Where does this data come from?
> 2535428931873471;14094:
> > 2533274808578327;14093:
> > > 2535428931873471;14077:
> > > The way I see it, in the original trilogy, we were always sprinting, but we were still able to shoot. If you look at it that way then adding “running style sprint” was just stupid and made spartans less like super soldiers.
> >
> > Good luck explaining that to folks who buy into the illusion of swaying arms and panting noises.
>
> Its funny but also sadly true. No matter how much of a speed boost sprint gives it always feels super clunky to me and I can’t understand why people like it in any games. Games with fast base movement feel so much faster even if the actual speed is slower than a game with sprint.
It is clunky. To me it is like playing a game with a smooth 30fps vs a game that could vary between 30 and 60 fps. The locked 30fps is going to be a better experience because it is smoother. The problem with sprint is the judder. The constant state of being between two forms. It’s horrid. In certain games sprint doesn’t matter, or doesn’t create this judder. In tactical games or military games you’ll spend considerable down time, either for sneaking or traversing. In an Arena game you want to fill as much time as possible with combat. So where as the former you can switch between the two states for a considerable length of time, in Halo you spend seconds in each form before you have to swap back again. This switching from combat and traversal/maximum speed is what slows Halo 4 and 5 down compared to previous Halos, and offers this inconsistent gameplay.
It bothers me that a big Development company like 343i and Publisher like MS don’t seem to get simple gameplay designs. How each genre has different strengths. Either that or they don’t care, which is worse.
> 2533274943854776;14095:
> > 2535437497517606;14092:
> > > 2533274968894951;14088:
> > > Microsoft sees Halo 5’s multiplayer as ‘‘the best in the series’’ and will therefore (sadly) continue to build upon Halo 5’s foundation. The reality of that however is that this thread has confirmed that Sprint is utterly useless as there have been 0 good arguments in favor of Sprint out of nearly 15000 posts. So I’m more curious than anything to see if 343 will continue to hit nails in Halo’s coffin with Halo 6, or if they will finally overcome their monstrous ego and listen to proper feedback.
> >
> > So true, its obvious the majority of players don’t like sprint . Any business with some common sense would have seen by now that halo with sprint isn’t working.It really doesn’t take someone with a business degree to figure that out.
>
> Majority? Where does this data come from?
There’s no pure data for that.
Though the games that have included sprint have performed worse than the non sprint Halos. The decline in the series started with the inclusion of the mechanic and has really only gotten worse. Early polls done while the previous community was about showed a dislike for the mechanic (and only since 343i pushed the old community out did the polls swing in favour of sprint).
You could argue that the inclusion of sprint clearly hasn’t been the saving grace it’s constantly touted as. Halo 4 and 5 had default sprint, where as Halo Reach had it as an option. Out of the 3 Halo Reach competed against its peers with a better success rate. It wasn’t first but it was in the top ten. Halo 5 struggles with the top 30s.
There’s also the logical dissonance. Sprint is meant to make Halo more accessible and appeal to a wider audience, but it’s an extra mechanic, an extra layer on top on the game that a player must learn and master. We know that to attract the widest possible audience you have to use the lowest common denominator. This is true for all products. In short it means the more simple your design is, the bigger the audience that could potentially enjoy it. Halo had a huge following of very casual players. I’m talking players who had never played an FPS game before. The simple controls made it very easy for these players to learn and get in to the game, All the extra layers of Halo Reach - H5 are off putting to these players. We know for a fact that the casual audience is the biggest (i.e. majority) of every major game.
It’s all conjecture, but I’ve been arguing this case since prior to Halo 4’s release, and every release only seems to confirm this theory.
> 2533274943854776;14095:
> > 2535437497517606;14092:
> > > 2533274968894951;14088:
> > > Microsoft sees Halo 5’s multiplayer as ‘‘the best in the series’’ and will therefore (sadly) continue to build upon Halo 5’s foundation. The reality of that however is that this thread has confirmed that Sprint is utterly useless as there have been 0 good arguments in favor of Sprint out of nearly 15000 posts. So I’m more curious than anything to see if 343 will continue to hit nails in Halo’s coffin with Halo 6, or if they will finally overcome their monstrous ego and listen to proper feedback.
> >
> > So true, its obvious the majority of players don’t like sprint . Any business with some common sense would have seen by now that halo with sprint isn’t working.It really doesn’t take someone with a business degree to figure that out.
>
> Majority? Where does this data come from?
Almost every other website besides Waypoint really, and even that has changed somewhat.
While also bearing in mind these voices aren’t as fully collected as it could be due to disinterest in the series.
> 2547348539238747;14096:
> > 2533274943854776;14095:
> > > 2535437497517606;14092:
> > >
> >
> > Majority? Where does this data come from?
>
> There’s no pure data for that.
This is really all I needed, but because I liked your reply, I will comment on the other stuff as well.
> 2547348539238747;14096:
> Though the games that have included sprint have performed worse than the non sprint Halos. The decline in the series started with the inclusion of the mechanic and has really only gotten worse. Early polls done while the previous community was about showed a dislike for the mechanic (and only since 343i pushed the old community out did the polls swing in favour of sprint).
> You could argue that the inclusion of sprint clearly hasn’t been the saving grace it’s constantly touted as. Halo 4 and 5 had default sprint, where as Halo Reach had it as an option. Out of the 3 Halo Reach competed against its peers with a better success rate. It wasn’t first but it was in the top ten. Halo 5 struggles with the top 30s.
There is no reason to think that the drop in popularity was caused by sprint. Maybe it was the DMR, but if I had to guess, I’d say that it was caused by multiple factors. I’m saying that nothing here tells us that the majority does not like sprint.
> 2547348539238747;14096:
> There’s also the logical dissonance. Sprint is meant to make Halo more accessible and appeal to a wider audience, but it’s an extra mechanic, an extra layer on top on the game that a player must learn and master. We know that to attract the widest possible audience you have to use the lowest common denominator. This is true for all products. In short it means the more simple your design is, the bigger the audience that could potentially enjoy it. Halo had a huge following of very casual players. I’m talking players who had never played an FPS game before. The simple controls made it very easy for these players to learn and get in to the game, All the extra layers of Halo Reach - H5 are off putting to these players. We know for a fact that the casual audience is the biggest (i.e. majority) of every major game.
I disagree. Sprint is not something that must be learned, because there’s nothing difficult about it. It adds complexity, but if isn’t difficult, and sprint isn’t it doesn’t add “an extra layer on top on the game that a player must learn and master”.
> 2533274943854776;14098:
> > 2547348539238747;14096:
> > > 2533274943854776;14095:
> > > > 2535437497517606;14092:
> > > >
> > >
> > > Majority? Where does this data come from?
> >
> > There’s no pure data for that.
>
> This is really all I needed, but because I liked your reply, I will comment on the other stuff as well.
>
>
> > 2547348539238747;14096:
> > Though the games that have included sprint have performed worse than the non sprint Halos. The decline in the series started with the inclusion of the mechanic and has really only gotten worse. Early polls done while the previous community was about showed a dislike for the mechanic (and only since 343i pushed the old community out did the polls swing in favour of sprint).
> > You could argue that the inclusion of sprint clearly hasn’t been the saving grace it’s constantly touted as. Halo 4 and 5 had default sprint, where as Halo Reach had it as an option. Out of the 3 Halo Reach competed against its peers with a better success rate. It wasn’t first but it was in the top ten. Halo 5 struggles with the top 30s.
>
> There is no reason to think that the drop in popularity was caused by sprint. Maybe it was the DMR, but if I had to guess, I’d say that it was caused by multiple factors. I’m saying that nothing here tells us that the majority does not like sprint.
>
>
> > 2547348539238747;14096:
> > There’s also the logical dissonance. Sprint is meant to make Halo more accessible and appeal to a wider audience, but it’s an extra mechanic, an extra layer on top on the game that a player must learn and master. We know that to attract the widest possible audience you have to use the lowest common denominator. This is true for all products. In short it means the more simple your design is, the bigger the audience that could potentially enjoy it. Halo had a huge following of very casual players. I’m talking players who had never played an FPS game before. The simple controls made it very easy for these players to learn and get in to the game, All the extra layers of Halo Reach - H5 are off putting to these players. We know for a fact that the casual audience is the biggest (i.e. majority) of every major game.
>
> I disagree. Sprint is not something that must be learned, because there’s nothing difficult about it. It adds complexity, but if isn’t difficult, and sprint isn’t it doesn’t add “an extra layer on top on the game that a player must learn and master”.
It’s a common thread that has still continued to stick with the series. A point of discussion that has raged on since it’s inclusion in Reach. What more signs need to point at it? Sprint changes more things than just an illusionary speed boost.
And sprint adding complexity is simply not true either. There was more depth when everyone is truly on the same playing field, moving at the same fastest and always with the ability to shoot.
> 2533274943854776;14098:
> > 2547348539238747;14096:
> > > 2533274943854776;14095:
> > > > 2535437497517606;14092:
> > > >
> > >
> > > Majority? Where does this data come from?
> >
> > There’s no pure data for that.
>
> This is really all I needed, but because I liked your reply, I will comment on the other stuff as well.
>
>
> > 2547348539238747;14096:
> > Though the games that have included sprint have performed worse than the non sprint Halos. The decline in the series started with the inclusion of the mechanic and has really only gotten worse. Early polls done while the previous community was about showed a dislike for the mechanic (and only since 343i pushed the old community out did the polls swing in favour of sprint).
> > You could argue that the inclusion of sprint clearly hasn’t been the saving grace it’s constantly touted as. Halo 4 and 5 had default sprint, where as Halo Reach had it as an option. Out of the 3 Halo Reach competed against its peers with a better success rate. It wasn’t first but it was in the top ten. Halo 5 struggles with the top 30s.
>
> There is no reason to think that the drop in popularity was caused by sprint. Maybe it was the DMR, but if I had to guess, I’d say that it was caused by multiple factors. I’m saying that nothing here tells us that the majority does not like sprint.
>
>
> > 2547348539238747;14096:
> > There’s also the logical dissonance. Sprint is meant to make Halo more accessible and appeal to a wider audience, but it’s an extra mechanic, an extra layer on top on the game that a player must learn and master. We know that to attract the widest possible audience you have to use the lowest common denominator. This is true for all products. In short it means the more simple your design is, the bigger the audience that could potentially enjoy it. Halo had a huge following of very casual players. I’m talking players who had never played an FPS game before. The simple controls made it very easy for these players to learn and get in to the game, All the extra layers of Halo Reach - H5 are off putting to these players. We know for a fact that the casual audience is the biggest (i.e. majority) of every major game.
>
> I disagree. Sprint is not something that must be learned, because there’s nothing difficult about it. It adds complexity, but if isn’t difficult, and sprint isn’t it doesn’t add “an extra layer on top on the game that a player must learn and master”.
I disagree. Knowing when to Sprint is vital to map pathing and exposing oneself to fire since you’re completely vulnerable and require time to ready return fire. That said, it’s annoying since the maps are stretched so that you’re encouraged to Sprint or be in the open for way longer than most are comfortable with. Your shield recharge resets as well so it’s a calculation of risk vs. Reward. Again, all this said, the incorporation of sprint is handled poorly because the feedback from the game is once you start sprinting you can easily end up sprinting longer than you’d want to which kinda shafts you sometimes.
Overall it’s just a messy mechanic that wasn’t needed, was forced in, and poorly implemented at that and any complexity added is tedious if anything.
> 2533274808578327;14099:
> And sprint adding complexity is simply not true either. There was more depth when everyone is truly on the same playing field, moving at the same fastest and always with the ability to shoot.
FYI, complexity and depth are not the same thing. Any mechanic adds complexity, but not every mechanic adds depth.
> 2533274831961512;14100:
> > 2533274943854776;14098:
> > I disagree. Sprint is not something that must be learned, because there’s nothing difficult about it. It adds complexity, but if isn’t difficult, and sprint isn’t it doesn’t add “an extra layer on top on the game that a player must learn and master”.
>
> I disagree. Knowing when to Sprint is vital to map pathing and exposing oneself to fire since you’re completely vulnerable and require time to ready return fire.
>
> Your shield recharge resets as well so it’s a calculation of risk vs. Reward.
Knowing when to move is vital to map pathing. Why is sprinting more dangerous than walking? “Because you don’t have your weapon ready?” You can ready your weapon before you encounter an enemy. “Didn’t expect to encounter one?” Well how is walking going to save you? -It’s not. Do you understand? It doesn’t matter whether you walk into an ambush or sprint into an ambush, the outcome is the same!
What is “a calculation of risk vs. Reward?” Knowing when to sprint away instead of running away? This already existed in CE, because in that game strafing and backpedalling are both 12% slower than walking straight forwards. Were you looking at your chaser or were you not?
> 2533274831961512;14100:
> Overall it’s just a messy mechanic that wasn’t needed, was forced in, and poorly implemented at that
I agree.
> 2533274831961512;14100:
> and any complexity added is tedious if anything.
I disagree. Deep complexity makes the game meaningful.
> 2533274825830455;14101:
> > 2533274808578327;14099:
> > And sprint adding complexity is simply not true either. There was more depth when everyone is truly on the same playing field, moving at the same fastest and always with the ability to shoot.
>
> FYI, complexity and depth are not the same thing. Any mechanic adds complexity, but not every mechanic adds depth.
Thank you.
[Extra Credits’ explanation.
](Depth vs Complexity - Why More Features Don't Make a Better Game - Extra Credits - YouTube)When talking game design it’s important we all understand complicated issues like this.