> 2533274829873463;14604:
> Rather sprint was replaced with just increased speed since just seems odd to have limited sprint. Feels like the only reason it exists is to make it look similar to modern games like Battlefield, etc…
Sprint in H5 is unlimited. Its balanced out a bit by making your shields not able to charge when sprinting while also making you more vulnerable and those situations harder to escape.
> 2533274816299345;14606:
> > 2533274829873463;14604:
> > Rather sprint was replaced with just increased speed since just seems odd to have limited sprint. Feels like the only reason it exists is to make it look similar to modern games like Battlefield, etc…
>
> Sprint in H5 is unlimited. Its balanced out a bit by making your shields not able to charge when sprinting while also making you more vulnerable and those situations harder to escape.
Not entirely true. Get shot at, your sprint systems becomes slower than the breaks on a train.
> 2533274816299345;14605:
> > 2533274795123910;14603:
> > > 2533274816299345;14602:
> > > I love how anti sprint people beg for sprint fans to give a reason for it to stay then when it happens they either ignore it or say its not a valid reason.
> > > “It makes the game faster”. Thats a valid reason that can actually be argued on both sides equally.
> > > The comeback: “you can have a fast game without sprint”.
> > > Well that doest say that it isnt a valid reason. Thats just stating obvious facts. A game can be fast with, or without sprint.
> > > Again, idc one way or another but the hypocrisy in this thread ON BOTH SIDES is hilarious. I only singled out anti sprinters because they provided the most recent example and they are also in the minority on the subject. And for funsies i guess lol
> > >
> > > Another fun fact. Everything in the universe is either a peanut or its not.
> >
> > Is there an argument made by an pro-sprinter recently that wasn’t covered at all by anyone?
> > I know I have to answer FallenKnight but I’ll have to sit down properly for that, not be at work and have the kids asleep.
> >
> > “It makes the game faster” is a claim about a fact. It should be provable, no?
> > If evidence does not prove that statement, can it be a valid reason?
> >
> > There was a time when it was believed the earth was flat by the majority as well.
>
> It can make the game faster. Boost H5 walking speed to default H2 speed and and sprint. Boom, faster game. On the flip side. Remove sprint from H5 and make the default speed slightly higher than the sprint speed. Boom, faster game. Its a valid argument for both sides.
A: Halo CE - 3 has the same movement speed.
B: Halo 5 supposedly have a faster BMS than Halo CE - 3, think Tsassi has to confirm this
C: Here’s someone who did some some research. Think someone did it earlier in this thread as well.
Time to explain what “faster game” means.
Sprint isn’t used in Combat which is a significant part of the game.
Traverse the maps faster? Has been covered before and apparently it is so that maps are made with sprint in mind:
Comparison.
Map designer Interview.
How exactly does Sprint make the game faster?
> 2533274795123910;14608:
> B: Halo 5 supposedly have a faster BMS than Halo CE - 3, think tsassi has to confirm this
About 2.59 units per second versus 2.25 units per second, in Bungie’s units. In other words, Halo 5 is a 15% bump from Halo CE, 2, and 3.
> 2533274795123910;14608:
> C: Here’s someone who did some some research. Think someone did it earlier in this thread as well.
Well, the same person did post it here, also.
> 2533274795123910;14608:
> > 2533274816299345;14605:
> > > 2533274795123910;14603:
> > > > 2533274816299345;14602:
> > > > I love how anti sprint people beg for sprint fans to give a reason for it to stay then when it happens they either ignore it or say its not a valid reason.
> > > > “It makes the game faster”. Thats a valid reason that can actually be argued on both sides equally.
> > > > The comeback: “you can have a fast game without sprint”.
> > > > Well that doest say that it isnt a valid reason. Thats just stating obvious facts. A game can be fast with, or without sprint.
> > > > Again, idc one way or another but the hypocrisy in this thread ON BOTH SIDES is hilarious. I only singled out anti sprinters because they provided the most recent example and they are also in the minority on the subject. And for funsies i guess lol
> > > >
> > > > Another fun fact. Everything in the universe is either a peanut or its not.
> > >
> > > Is there an argument made by an pro-sprinter recently that wasn’t covered at all by anyone?
> > > I know I have to answer FallenKnight but I’ll have to sit down properly for that, not be at work and have the kids asleep.
> > >
> > > “It makes the game faster” is a claim about a fact. It should be provable, no?
> > > If evidence does not prove that statement, can it be a valid reason?
> > >
> > > There was a time when it was believed the earth was flat by the majority as well.
> >
> > It can make the game faster. Boost H5 walking speed to default H2 speed and and sprint. Boom, faster game. On the flip side. Remove sprint from H5 and make the default speed slightly higher than the sprint speed. Boom, faster game. Its a valid argument for both sides.
>
> A: Halo CE - 3 has the same movement speed.
>
> B: Halo 5 supposedly have a faster BMS than Halo CE - 3, think tsassi has to confirm this
>
> C: Here’s someone who did some some research. Think someone did it earlier in this thread as well.
>
> Time to explain what “faster game” means.
> Sprint isn’t used in Combat which is a significant part of the game.
> Traverse the maps faster? Has been covered before and apparently it is so that maps are made with sprint in mind:
> Comparison.
> Map designer Interview.
>
> How exactly does Sprint make the game faster?
Its literally like talking to a wall. Im done.
> 2533274816299345;14610:
> > 2533274795123910;14608:
> > > 2533274816299345;14605:
> > > > 2533274795123910;14603:
> > > > > 2533274816299345;14602:
> > > > > I love how anti sprint people beg for sprint fans to give a reason for it to stay then when it happens they either ignore it or say its not a valid reason.
> > > > > “It makes the game faster”. Thats a valid reason that can actually be argued on both sides equally.
> > > > > The comeback: “you can have a fast game without sprint”.
> > > > > Well that doest say that it isnt a valid reason. Thats just stating obvious facts. A game can be fast with, or without sprint.
> > > > > Again, idc one way or another but the hypocrisy in this thread ON BOTH SIDES is hilarious. I only singled out anti sprinters because they provided the most recent example and they are also in the minority on the subject. And for funsies i guess lol
> > > > >
> > > > > Another fun fact. Everything in the universe is either a peanut or its not.
> > > >
> > > > Is there an argument made by an pro-sprinter recently that wasn’t covered at all by anyone?
> > > > I know I have to answer FallenKnight but I’ll have to sit down properly for that, not be at work and have the kids asleep.
> > > >
> > > > “It makes the game faster” is a claim about a fact. It should be provable, no?
> > > > If evidence does not prove that statement, can it be a valid reason?
> > > >
> > > > There was a time when it was believed the earth was flat by the majority as well.
> > >
> > > It can make the game faster. Boost H5 walking speed to default H2 speed and and sprint. Boom, faster game. On the flip side. Remove sprint from H5 and make the default speed slightly higher than the sprint speed. Boom, faster game. Its a valid argument for both sides.
> >
> > A: Halo CE - 3 has the same movement speed.
> >
> > B: Halo 5 supposedly have a faster BMS than Halo CE - 3, think tsassi has to confirm this
> >
> > C: Here’s someone who did some some research. Think someone did it earlier in this thread as well.
> >
> > Time to explain what “faster game” means.
> > Sprint isn’t used in Combat which is a significant part of the game.
> > Traverse the maps faster? Has been covered before and apparently it is so that maps are made with sprint in mind:
> > Comparison.
> > Map designer Interview.
> >
> > How exactly does Sprint make the game faster?
>
> Its literally like talking to a wall. Im done.
That’s helpful…
I’m asking you to convince me.
I’m asking you to explain your claims and statements.
What? Had I said “Sprint slows down the game”, had you just accepted it as a truth and gone with it? Without any explanation?
> 2533274825830455;14609:
> > 2533274795123910;14608:
> > B: Halo 5 supposedly have a faster BMS than Halo CE - 3, think tsassi has to confirm this
>
> About 2.59 units per second versus 2.25 units per second, in Bungie’s units. In other words, Halo 5 is a 15% bump from Halo CE, 2, and 3.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274795123910;14608:
> > C: Here’s someone who did some some research. Think someone did it earlier in this thread as well.
>
> Well, the same person did post it here, also.
Thank you very much
> 2533274816299345;14610:
> Its literally like talking to a wall. Im done.
I don’t understand. You did say that “it makes the game faster” is a valid argument for sprint. Naqser came forward with some data that suggests that, at least with respect to a certain definition of “faster”, Halo 5 does not seem to be faster than Halo 3. If what this data suggests is true, this would indeed invalidate the above argument in favor of sprint.
If you’re not happy with that, you could at least try to clarify to all of us what you meant. Is the definition of “faster” the problem here? As an outsider to the discussion between you two, I think you were being unclear with what you mean, and when Naqser asked for clarification, you made this unhelpful response. I don’t understand where it’s coming from. What is it that you want to hear?
If there’s a communication issue, clearly refusing all further communication isn’t the right solution.
Nooga does have a point in that a player can traverse a map faster in H5 than in pretty much any other game, but this is not due to sprint itself. It’s actually the combination of sprint, thrust, and clamber that make traversing a map so fast, and even then, this does not necessarily mean that it speeds up the gameplay. Player speed is just one element in defining the pace of a Halo game. You also have to take into account spawn times, player downtime, kill times, map structure, etc. If a player is whipping around the map faster than ever before, but isn’t netting kills any faster than previous games (I’d like to link tsassi’s kill frequency post here, but I’m on mobile), then can one really say that the gameplay is indeed faster?
This is obviously not a universal truth of Halo’s pace, but it’s my own working definition. With this definition, I can easily say that Halo CE is the fastest paced Halo game by a large margin, and many would likely agree by watching a high level CE match. However, if Nooga’s definition of game pace is simply the time it takes getting from point A to point B, then he’d be (half) right, because like I said, it’s sprint, thrust, and clamber that all work in unison to create the largest movement delta in Halo to date.
> 2533274825830455;14612:
> > 2533274816299345;14610:
> > Its literally like talking to a wall. Im done.
>
> I don’t understand. You did say that “it makes the game faster” is a valid argument for sprint. Naqser came forward with some data that suggests that, at least with respect to a certain definition of “faster”, Halo 5 does not seem to be faster than Halo 3. If what this data suggests is true, this would indeed invalidate the above argument in favor of sprint.
>
> If you’re not happy with that, you could at least try to clarify to all of us what you meant. Is the definition of “faster” the problem here? As an outsider to the discussion between you two, I think you were being unclear with what you mean, and when Naqser asked for clarification, you made this unhelpful response. I don’t understand where it’s coming from. What is it that you want to hear?
>
> If there’s a communication issue, clearly refusing all further communication isn’t the right solution.
I said both sides can use making the game faster as an argument.
Prosprint for being able to literally go faster, in at least one direction anyway, making it take less time to get to the action if maps are bigger. It can however slow down a game allowing people to get away easier from situations they may not have otherwise.
Antisprint for gameplay. Map dsign typically allows for smaller maps to keep players in the action. It can however slow down a game. Larger maps in Halo 3 are just the worst if you dont have a vehicle. Last resort, avalanche, sand trap, etc. They just seem slow to me anyways, might be a little more subjective.
> 2533274815533909;14580:
> > 2535409816624774;14571:
> > > 2533274815533909;14568:
> > > > 2535409816624774;14537:
> > > > > 2533274815533909;14530:
> > > > > > 2535409816624774;14524:
> > > > > > > 2533274825830455;14522:
> > > > > > > > 2533274863544717;14521:
> > > > > > > > I don’t believe that videos like this are subjective. Yes, there are some subjective arguments, but the speed comparison of Halo 3 vs. Halo 5 isn’t one of them.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think it would do us all a favor to distinguish what exactly is and what isn’t subjective.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sure enough, the observation that map sizes have increased to counteract the speed increase brought by sprint is not subjective. Anyone can replicate the experiment in that video, and arrive at the same conclusion. However, what is subjective is whether this is, or isn’t a bad thing.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We can discuss the effects of sprint on gameplay in an objective way. That’s productive, and important, and it helps us understand the mechanic, but it’s just cataloging facts and conjectures about sprint. Ultimately, we have to face the question: what does that all mean for the player experience? And this question has no right answer. It depends on what any one of us wants from the game.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > It is interesting that sprint slows down gameplay, but I guess you are in a non-combative state for the most part. This is also conjecture, but I think that sprint has become so common in shooters, that it could hurt a game to not include it.
> > > >
> > > > I wouldn’t say that overwatch is a fair comparison, or the DOOM was successful at all. I couldn’t find games within the first two weeks. Obviously, we can’t say this is based on movement systems, but it still didn’t prove that an old schoolish arena game is clearly superior over games with sprint. I don’t think there is anything I can add that I haven’t said already on this thread, but I believe that sprint was a good idea to implement based on market trends and the relative popularity of Halo compared to other games. There are many factors at play when predicting a game’s success.
> > >
> > > Why isn’t Overwatch a good comparison?? Your reasons?Overwatch might not be a pure Arena FPS, I acknowledge that but it definitely has elements of one… And I’m not even talking about if it’s a arena type, loadouts type or character type anyways, that wasn’t the point. The point was, You stated that modern FPS without a sprint animation might hurt it’s sales, popularity etc. I gave an example of a new, modern FPS (Overwatch) that has done extremely well in both sales and in popularity and it has no sprint animation (save 1 character) So unless you can gave me a reason that I haven’t thought of as too why it’s not a good comparison, Overwatch has proved your statement otherwise.
> > >
> > > DOOM wasn’t successful at all??? Your kidding right?? Please tell me your kidding… It was nominated for 4 video game awards Source Including game of the year I might add, no small feat. It won 2 awards for best action game and best soundtrack. Just as a side note, in the other two categories that it lost in, game of the year and best game Direction, it lost to Overwatch. DOOM did extremely well in sales and was hailed by the majority of old Doom fans, non Doom fans and reviewers alike. It didn’t sustain popularity as well, this is true, as the multiplayer had a lot of flaws when it first launched which hurt a lot. They have now corrected that and it is a lot better but the damage was done. In this day and age if a game doesn’t launch right odds are it’s going to hurt the population big time as we all are aware (looking at you TMCC) Even if the multiplayer didn’t have flaws at lunch, I do think it wouldn’t have been crazy popular as the multiplayer portion of the game definitely had some flaws and lacked some polish I think, but it would have done a heck of a lot better than what it did if it was right from the get-go though.
> >
> > Sorry I had to quote the whole thing because I couldn’t partition it for some reason. Overwatch is an unfair comparison because it has numerous characters that have specific acceleration/traversal mechanics that are designed to give characters advantages in specific situations. It’s designed for certain characters to take less skill to use as well, narrowing that skill gap very much with asymmetrical abilities. That is why I think it’s an unfair comparison. I explained why DOOM failed already. A game can get great reviews, but people still have to play it and buy it. Multiplayer was dead within a month, so that is what I am mainly referring to. That being said, I did like the single player.
>
> No worries man.
>
> Well, that’s interesting on Overwatch, I don’t think I knew/realized that about the characters but I still don’t see how any of that is relevant too what we’re talking about. You originally said (not a direct quote here) that you’re glad Halo was following the market trend of adding a sprint animation because if it didn’t you don’t think it would be successful or as successful as a game that didn’t have a sprint animation. We’re only talking about the sprint animation here… Overwatch, is a new, modem game that decided not to use a sprint animation. It doesn’t matter that it’s character base, arena-based or anything like that. It’s a FPS that didn’t follow the market trend because it didn’t have a Sprint animation. I’m sorry, but I don’t see how you can’t compare the two. By your previous statement, it falls into exactly what you were saying.
>
> Doom wasn’t successful?? Well, as if July 2017, it’s been confirmed that it has sold over 2 million copies on PC alone! Source It has also sold over a million copies AT LEAST on Xbox One and PS4 (don’t have the source at the moment, can’t find it but saw it earlier, but I’ll get it if ya want) I don’t know about you, but that sounds like a pretty successful game to me.
>
> Yes, multiplayer wasn’t as good as I acknowledged earlier or as polished as it should have been and they have corrected a lot of that since now but the damage was done. I would be surprised if Bethesda doesn’t change or fix a lot of the multiplayer in the next Doom game as it sounds like they have heard people’s complaints about it… Regardless, that’s irrelevant in this conversation. The facts are DOOM as a whole, was received well by the majority of Doom fans, non fans and reviewers alike and has sold very well. So I ask again, how was DOOM not successful?
>
> So, as I stated in my original post you said, you thought Halo should follow the market trend and have a sprint animation as games that don’t have it wouldn’t be anywhere nearly as successful, if at all. Doom and Overwatch are two new FPS that didn’t follow the market trend with having a sprint animation and have been very successful as a whole.
DOOM was not successful because it has little to no player base.
> 2535409816624774;14615:
> DOOM was not successful because it has little to no player base.
I find this logic silly because I can just point to H4’s population numbers and your “sprint makes Halo more successful” argument falls apart. It’s fine if you prefer sprint but there’s no need to make such claims. Player retention can fluctuate for an infinite number of reasons.
> 2533274816299345;14602:
> I love how anti sprint people beg for sprint fans to give a reason for it to stay then when it happens they either ignore it or say its not a valid reason.
> “It makes the game faster”. Thats a valid reason that can actually be argued on both sides equally.
> The comeback: “you can have a fast game without sprint”.
> Well that doest say that it isnt a valid reason. Thats just stating obvious facts. A game can be fast with, or without sprint.
> “Spartans should be able to sprint” another valid reason for lore fans.
> The comeback: “lore shouldnt be part of gameplay for balancing” you can balance a game with lore features. Halo 5 proves that imo. Arena seems balanced enough to me.
> Again, idc one way or another but the hypocrisy in this thread ON BOTH SIDES is hilarious. I only singled out anti sprinters because they provided the most recent example and they are also in the minority on the subject. And for funsies i guess lol
>
> Another fun fact. Everything in the universe is either a peanut or its not.
If a game can be fast with or without Sprint, why do we need to design a whole mechanic to do something that can be changed with a simple number? There’s no point in taking the long road with Sprint if taking the short road provides the same benefit with zero consequences.
This is the question that “pro-Sprints” never seems to be capable of properly answering without throwing in their own opinion which means nothing to me.
"you can balance a game with lore features." You can’t balance a game entirely around lore, especially this franchise. It just doesn’t work. The only reason people use this argument is because it fits their narrative to justify Sprint in the first place. Suddenly these “lore” based super soldiers lost the ability to run and shoot at the same time?
Notice how none of those people have anything to say about ADS and how it brings a gun to your face for aiming, despite the fact that it’s already established that their visor does the zooming for them so they don’t have to manually aim the gun? It just doesn’t make sense.
You try to paint yourself as above others in this thread for discussing this so much but every time you get questioned, you default back to either “I don’t care” or “In my opinion”, neither of these being good for discussion because all you care about the act of Sprinting, not how it works.
> 2535409816624774;14615:
> > 2533274815533909;14580:
> > > 2535409816624774;14571:
> > > > 2533274815533909;14568:
> > > > > 2535409816624774;14537:
> > > > > > 2533274815533909;14530:
> > > > > > > 2535409816624774;14524:
> > > > > > > > 2533274825830455;14522:
> > > > > > > > > 2533274863544717;14521:
> > > > > > > > > I don’t believe that videos like this are subjective. Yes, there are some subjective arguments, but the speed comparison of Halo 3 vs. Halo 5 isn’t one of them.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think it would do us all a favor to distinguish what exactly is and what isn’t subjective.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sure enough, the observation that map sizes have increased to counteract the speed increase brought by sprint is not subjective. Anyone can replicate the experiment in that video, and arrive at the same conclusion. However, what is subjective is whether this is, or isn’t a bad thing.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We can discuss the effects of sprint on gameplay in an objective way. That’s productive, and important, and it helps us understand the mechanic, but it’s just cataloging facts and conjectures about sprint. Ultimately, we have to face the question: what does that all mean for the player experience? And this question has no right answer. It depends on what any one of us wants from the game.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is interesting that sprint slows down gameplay, but I guess you are in a non-combative state for the most part. This is also conjecture, but I think that sprint has become so common in shooters, that it could hurt a game to not include it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I wouldn’t say that overwatch is a fair comparison, or the DOOM was successful at all. I couldn’t find games within the first two weeks. Obviously, we can’t say this is based on movement systems, but it still didn’t prove that an old schoolish arena game is clearly superior over games with sprint. I don’t think there is anything I can add that I haven’t said already on this thread, but I believe that sprint was a good idea to implement based on market trends and the relative popularity of Halo compared to other games. There are many factors at play when predicting a game’s success.
> > > >
> > > > Why isn’t Overwatch a good comparison?? Your reasons?Overwatch might not be a pure Arena FPS, I acknowledge that but it definitely has elements of one… And I’m not even talking about if it’s a arena type, loadouts type or character type anyways, that wasn’t the point. The point was, You stated that modern FPS without a sprint animation might hurt it’s sales, popularity etc. I gave an example of a new, modern FPS (Overwatch) that has done extremely well in both sales and in popularity and it has no sprint animation (save 1 character) So unless you can gave me a reason that I haven’t thought of as too why it’s not a good comparison, Overwatch has proved your statement otherwise.
> > > >
> > > > DOOM wasn’t successful at all??? Your kidding right?? Please tell me your kidding… It was nominated for 4 video game awards Source Including game of the year I might add, no small feat. It won 2 awards for best action game and best soundtrack. Just as a side note, in the other two categories that it lost in, game of the year and best game Direction, it lost to Overwatch. DOOM did extremely well in sales and was hailed by the majority of old Doom fans, non Doom fans and reviewers alike. It didn’t sustain popularity as well, this is true, as the multiplayer had a lot of flaws when it first launched which hurt a lot. They have now corrected that and it is a lot better but the damage was done. In this day and age if a game doesn’t launch right odds are it’s going to hurt the population big time as we all are aware (looking at you TMCC) Even if the multiplayer didn’t have flaws at lunch, I do think it wouldn’t have been crazy popular as the multiplayer portion of the game definitely had some flaws and lacked some polish I think, but it would have done a heck of a lot better than what it did if it was right from the get-go though.
> > >
> > > Sorry I had to quote the whole thing because I couldn’t partition it for some reason. Overwatch is an unfair comparison because it has numerous characters that have specific acceleration/traversal mechanics that are designed to give characters advantages in specific situations. It’s designed for certain characters to take less skill to use as well, narrowing that skill gap very much with asymmetrical abilities. That is why I think it’s an unfair comparison. I explained why DOOM failed already. A game can get great reviews, but people still have to play it and buy it. Multiplayer was dead within a month, so that is what I am mainly referring to. That being said, I did like the single player.
> >
> > No worries man.
> >
> > Well, that’s interesting on Overwatch, I don’t think I knew/realized that about the characters but I still don’t see how any of that is relevant too what we’re talking about. You originally said (not a direct quote here) that you’re glad Halo was following the market trend of adding a sprint animation because if it didn’t you don’t think it would be successful or as successful as a game that didn’t have a sprint animation. We’re only talking about the sprint animation here… Overwatch, is a new, modem game that decided not to use a sprint animation. It doesn’t matter that it’s character base, arena-based or anything like that. It’s a FPS that didn’t follow the market trend because it didn’t have a Sprint animation. I’m sorry, but I don’t see how you can’t compare the two. By your previous statement, it falls into exactly what you were saying.
> >
> > Doom wasn’t successful?? Well, as if July 2017, it’s been confirmed that it has sold over 2 million copies on PC alone! Source It has also sold over a million copies AT LEAST on Xbox One and PS4 (don’t have the source at the moment, can’t find it but saw it earlier, but I’ll get it if ya want) I don’t know about you, but that sounds like a pretty successful game to me.
> >
> > Yes, multiplayer wasn’t as good as I acknowledged earlier or as polished as it should have been and they have corrected a lot of that since now but the damage was done. I would be surprised if Bethesda doesn’t change or fix a lot of the multiplayer in the next Doom game as it sounds like they have heard people’s complaints about it… Regardless, that’s irrelevant in this conversation. The facts are DOOM as a whole, was received well by the majority of Doom fans, non fans and reviewers alike and has sold very well. So I ask again, how was DOOM not successful?
> >
> > So, as I stated in my original post you said, you thought Halo should follow the market trend and have a sprint animation as games that don’t have it wouldn’t be anywhere nearly as successful, if at all. Doom and Overwatch are two new FPS that didn’t follow the market trend with having a sprint animation and have been very successful as a whole.
>
> DOOM was not successful because it has little to no player base.
It has sold over 2 million copies on PC ALONE. How is it not successful??? So your logic is, what…if a game isn’t in the top 20 in currently being played it’s not successful??? Or if people aren’t playing the multiple player part like it’s going out of style that means it’s not successful??? What do you deem a successful game then??? Don’t get me wrong here, I’m not trying to say DOOM is the be all end all game, but as a whole its certainly is successful in my mind, in Bethesda’s mind and many others players mind. Not to mention financially it has been too. I’m sorry bro, but your logic here makes no sense to me at all…but…ok man.
Also strange why Bethesda would bother releasing an unsuccessful game on Nintendo Switch as well…
Getting back to your original post, I guess i proved my point that new FPS games don’t need to have a sprint animation to be successful and/or popular. Good talk man
> 2533274833081329;14617:
> > 2533274816299345;14602:
> > I love how anti sprint people beg for sprint fans to give a reason for it to stay then when it happens they either ignore it or say its not a valid reason.
> > “It makes the game faster”. Thats a valid reason that can actually be argued on both sides equally.
> > The comeback: “you can have a fast game without sprint”.
> > Well that doest say that it isnt a valid reason. Thats just stating obvious facts. A game can be fast with, or without sprint.
> > “Spartans should be able to sprint” another valid reason for lore fans.
> > The comeback: “lore shouldnt be part of gameplay for balancing” you can balance a game with lore features. Halo 5 proves that imo. Arena seems balanced enough to me.
> > Again, idc one way or another but the hypocrisy in this thread ON BOTH SIDES is hilarious. I only singled out anti sprinters because they provided the most recent example and they are also in the minority on the subject. And for funsies i guess lol
> >
> > Another fun fact. Everything in the universe is either a peanut or its not.
>
> If a game can be fast with or without Sprint, why do we need to design a whole mechanic to do something that can be changed with a simple number? There’s no point in taking the long road with Sprint if taking the short road provides the same benefit with zero consequences.
>
> This is the question that “pro-Sprints” never seems to be capable of properly answering without throwing in their own opinion which means nothing to me.
>
> "you can balance a game with lore features." You can’t balance a game entirely around lore, especially this franchise. It just doesn’t work. The only reason people use this argument is because it fits their narrative to justify Sprint in the first place. Suddenly these “lore” based super soldiers lost the ability to run and shoot at the same time?
>
> **Notice how none of those people have anything to say about ADS and how it brings a gun to your face for aiming, despite the fact that it’s already established that their visor does the zooming for them so they don’t have to manually aim the gun? It just doesn’t make sense.**You try to paint yourself as above others in this thread for discussing this so much but every time you get questioned, you default back to either “I don’t care” or “In my opinion”, neither of these being good for discussion because all you care about the act of Sprinting, not how it works.
Well said man, I especially like and agree with the bold part. People use lore for sprint but those same people ignore lore when it comes to the ADS in Halo.
> 2533274794648158;14616:
> > 2535409816624774;14615:
> > DOOM was not successful because it has little to no player base.
>
> I find this logic silly because I can just point to H4’s population numbers and your “sprint makes Halo more successful” argument falls apart. It’s fine if you prefer sprint but there’s no need to make such claims. Player retention can fluctuate for an infinite number of reasons.
Well said
> 2535409816624774;14615:
> > 2533274815533909;14580:
> > > 2535409816624774;14571:
> > > > 2533274815533909;14568:
> > > > > 2535409816624774;14537:
> > > > > > 2533274815533909;14530:
> > > > > > > 2535409816624774;14524:
> > > > > > > > 2533274825830455;14522:
> > > > > > > > > 2533274863544717;14521:
> > > > > > > > > I don’t believe that videos like this are subjective. Yes, there are some subjective arguments, but the speed comparison of Halo 3 vs. Halo 5 isn’t one of them.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think it would do us all a favor to distinguish what exactly is and what isn’t subjective.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sure enough, the observation that map sizes have increased to counteract the speed increase brought by sprint is not subjective. Anyone can replicate the experiment in that video, and arrive at the same conclusion. However, what is subjective is whether this is, or isn’t a bad thing.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We can discuss the effects of sprint on gameplay in an objective way. That’s productive, and important, and it helps us understand the mechanic, but it’s just cataloging facts and conjectures about sprint. Ultimately, we have to face the question: what does that all mean for the player experience? And this question has no right answer. It depends on what any one of us wants from the game.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is interesting that sprint slows down gameplay, but I guess you are in a non-combative state for the most part. This is also conjecture, but I think that sprint has become so common in shooters, that it could hurt a game to not include it.
> > > > >
> > > > > I wouldn’t say that overwatch is a fair comparison, or the DOOM was successful at all. I couldn’t find games within the first two weeks. Obviously, we can’t say this is based on movement systems, but it still didn’t prove that an old schoolish arena game is clearly superior over games with sprint. I don’t think there is anything I can add that I haven’t said already on this thread, but I believe that sprint was a good idea to implement based on market trends and the relative popularity of Halo compared to other games. There are many factors at play when predicting a game’s success.
> > > >
> > > > Why isn’t Overwatch a good comparison?? Your reasons?Overwatch might not be a pure Arena FPS, I acknowledge that but it definitely has elements of one… And I’m not even talking about if it’s a arena type, loadouts type or character type anyways, that wasn’t the point. The point was, You stated that modern FPS without a sprint animation might hurt it’s sales, popularity etc. I gave an example of a new, modern FPS (Overwatch) that has done extremely well in both sales and in popularity and it has no sprint animation (save 1 character) So unless you can gave me a reason that I haven’t thought of as too why it’s not a good comparison, Overwatch has proved your statement otherwise.
> > > >
> > > > DOOM wasn’t successful at all??? Your kidding right?? Please tell me your kidding… It was nominated for 4 video game awards Source Including game of the year I might add, no small feat. It won 2 awards for best action game and best soundtrack. Just as a side note, in the other two categories that it lost in, game of the year and best game Direction, it lost to Overwatch. DOOM did extremely well in sales and was hailed by the majority of old Doom fans, non Doom fans and reviewers alike. It didn’t sustain popularity as well, this is true, as the multiplayer had a lot of flaws when it first launched which hurt a lot. They have now corrected that and it is a lot better but the damage was done. In this day and age if a game doesn’t launch right odds are it’s going to hurt the population big time as we all are aware (looking at you TMCC) Even if the multiplayer didn’t have flaws at lunch, I do think it wouldn’t have been crazy popular as the multiplayer portion of the game definitely had some flaws and lacked some polish I think, but it would have done a heck of a lot better than what it did if it was right from the get-go though.
>
> DOOM was not successful because it has little to no player base.
http://m.ign.com/articles/2017/02/25/dice-2017-hugo-martin-marty-stratton-on-potential-for-doom-sequelso now I have my answer when I asked how you determine “successful” from DOOM and Overwatch days ago. It’s funny how something that isn’t “successful” has the devs excited and open to future content and feeling the potential is there for a sequel. Furthermore is this player base in reference to the multiplayer? The thing that’s always been 3rd fiddle for DOOM after the campaigns and arcade modes? Dooms multiplayer was never expected to be a hit, ID only needed to nail the campaign which it did and that’s why it’s successful. It’s so successful that people DO want more from DOOM.
Just to end it here, If DOOM really wasn’t “successful”, it wasn’t cause of the lack of sprint or it’s movement, it’s actually the thing various people enjoy. It’s quick paced, full of action and smashing in a demons skull into oblivion with a pretty decent story to it. Exactly how DOOM should be.
https://steamcommunity.com/app/379720/discussions/0/133259956015829759/ The 2nd link dies the work for me as the people argued, gave their conclusions and linked their own data. Pc alone had nearly 2 million, I’d count on both PS4 and XB1 getting around 1-1.5 total and that’s a combined 3-4million being just the educated guess as there is no definitive 100% thing on it. 4 million isn’t bad for a franchise that’s been non existent for nearly a decade and for a game that was rebooted. So where is this non existent player base?
> 2533274815533909;14620:
> > 2533274794648158;14616:
> > > 2535409816624774;14615:
> > > DOOM was not successful because it has little to no player base.
> >
> > I find this logic silly because I can just point to H4’s population numbers and your “sprint makes Halo more successful” argument falls apart. It’s fine if you prefer sprint but there’s no need to make such claims. Player retention can fluctuate for an infinite number of reasons.
>
> Well said
Except it isn’t. Halo 4 flopped, but Halo 5 did not implementing the only mechanic that matters in this conversation. That is a nice fancy straw man,though. Almost fooled me for a second.
> 2533274816299345;14614:
> > 2533274825830455;14612:
> > > 2533274816299345;14610:
> > > Its literally like talking to a wall. Im done.
> >
> > I don’t understand. You did say that “it makes the game faster” is a valid argument for sprint. Naqser came forward with some data that suggests that, at least with respect to a certain definition of “faster”, Halo 5 does not seem to be faster than Halo 3. If what this data suggests is true, this would indeed invalidate the above argument in favor of sprint.
> >
> > If you’re not happy with that, you could at least try to clarify to all of us what you meant. Is the definition of “faster” the problem here? As an outsider to the discussion between you two, I think you were being unclear with what you mean, and when Naqser asked for clarification, you made this unhelpful response. I don’t understand where it’s coming from. What is it that you want to hear?
> >
> > If there’s a communication issue, clearly refusing all further communication isn’t the right solution.
>
> I said both sides can use making the game faster as an argument.
> Prosprint for being able to literally go faster, in at least one direction anyway, making it take less time to get to the action if maps are bigger. It can however slow down a game allowing people to get away easier from situations they may not have otherwise.
> Antisprint for gameplay. Map dsign typically allows for smaller maps to keep players in the action. It can however slow down a game. Larger maps in Halo 3 are just the worst if you dont have a vehicle. Last resort, avalanche, sand trap, etc. They just seem slow to me anyways, might be a little more subjective.
To me, sprint making you literally go faster forward isn’t the same as making the game itself faster.
I accept you travel at a higher velocity with Sprint, covering longer distances in a shorter time than not sprinting. However, the time to get somewhere from some place is up to the designer. Now if the time to get somewhere is important, the speed will decide the distance you need to travel. Furthermore, as long as map designers also keep map timea consitent to some degree between game titles, Halo 3 - Halo 4 - Halo 5, we can compare the times between the maps, and hopefully draw a conclusion. Haven vs Guardian was tested and Midship Vs Truth as well. Seeing those times, especially the latter comparison as I also linked to it, the shortest travel times are relatively close.
Meaning, Sprint gets you places faster in its own environment where it has been taken into account.
Either way, then we go on to “slowing down the game”.
This argument can’t be made with the same “game speed” definition as the one used for “makes the game faster”.
I can agree that you can look at certain aspects of the game and say that those are sped up, while others are slowed down. However that’s taking just one part of an issue / equation / object and extrapolating it, especially with how phrasing it has been on the matter earlier.
At that point you need to look at the total sum, the whole result. Does sprint speed up more than it slows down? If we agree that it speeds up some parts and slows down other parts. Or does it slow down more than it speeds up?
Moving on to map design.
Bad map design is bad map design, you can’t circumvent that by adding mechanics to sidestep something regarded as an issue with specific maps. Neither does new mechanics prevent bad map design.
Avalance may be one of the biggest maps in Halo 3, but unlike Longbow in Halo 4, it had a multitude of man cannons and teleporters allowing players to quickly move about to certain vantage points or points of interests. And that is ignoring the importance of vehicles in those maps. Sure, it sucks not having a vehicle, but that either falls under Bad Map Design or not being good enough to not have your vehicles taken from you.
> 2535409816624774;14622:
> Except it isn’t. Halo 4 flopped, but Halo 5 did not implementing the only mechanic that matters in this conversation. That is a nice fancy straw man,though. Almost fooled me for a second.
My point was H4 had sprint.
And we don’t know how well H5 did population wise. All we have to go off of is the XBL Most Played list, which is incredibly vague.
> 2533274863544717;14518:
> > 2533274816299345;14517:
> > > 2533275023008055;14516:
> > > I like for Sprint to remain how it is now.
> >
> > This. I like this post. I agree.
>
> This doesn’t really add to the discussion. Okay, you like it. But why do you like it when there is so much evidence pointing out how negative it is for Halo?
>
> I just don’t get how, after all the information out there even with the proof that it doesn’t actually make the game faster, or you move faster compared to other Halo games without it, that players still want it in.
>
> My main reason for hoping that it doesn’t return in Halo 6 is the fact that 343 put it in simply because every other modern FPS has it. I like and play Halo because it is not like other shooters. I don’t want to play a game that has Destiny mechanics or CODlike loadouts. I don’t want Sprint for the sake of Sprint. I don’t need the illusion of fast gameplay. I need the reality of a well balanced Halo.
100% agreed, I don’t know how anyone can defend sprint when the FACTS ARE THERE. Its also not apart of halo’s gameplay, and never has been except in 3 titles. 2 of which (halo 4 and 5) have been the worst games in terms of population, which is saying something how how poor and (negatively) different the games are to the VERY SUCCESSFUL bungie trilogy. You have it the nail on the head with this post.