[deleted]
I like the idea of a limited use armor ability… but I feel like sprint… if in game… should be open to all players… maybe also able to be toggled for playlists. For the bigger maps in particular… I think sprint can be used to move from location to location… but to balance… acceleration of sprint should be slow, while top speed should be fast… and should have a very slow recharge rate, but enough juice to get you across a map. Then it wouldn’t be used as an “escape” tool… but rather as a vehicle to get from a to b. Especially in cases where the vehicle is totaled, and you are in the middle of the map.
Your thoughts on the concept?
I think sprint ruins the strategy to big team battle. It takes away a little bit of decision making and risk/reward to map traversal. Rather than take a man cannon and being exposed to fire or driving a vehicle and giving away your position and becoming a bigger target, you can sprint at a lower speed than the previous 2 options and not have as much to worry about.
Of the many times I’ve posted in this thread, I’m thinking that my feelings are starting to go back to just a basic way of looking at things as opposed to being so analytical… not that I think there’s anything wrong with those long and very detail oriented posts for or against sprint and certainly not to dismiss the efforts and thought put into them. But just that I and (I believe it’s a no brainer to reasonably assume) pretty much all of us are playing Halo (any game for that matter) for fun and enjoyment. Fun and enjoyment are as simple and/or complex as you make them… and so are the explanations of why you find something more or less enjoyable.
It makes me think of a game I played a long time ago… can’t recall the name, or much about it… but I can recall it was a fps with a toggle sprint option. I recall that I found it a bit stupid to even have the option to toggle sprint. I mean, it was a shooter that was just like any shooter out there, on a basic concept aspect. You ran around the map shooting people. I had “always sprint” toggled on… anybody I knew/talked to who played the game had it toggled on and very few had any idea why they bothered to even put the toggle option there. I can’t recall if there was any “penalty” while sprinting, but I can recall that the average opinion was something like ‘why wouldn’t I want to move at top speed all the time? If I wanted to move slower, I’d not push the stick as far… but who wants bothered with pushing a button just to run?’
That’s how I’ve always felt. It’s up to the devs how fast I get into and out of the action, their maps and other design choices set “the pace”. The “pace is faster”, “There’s more action”, “I can get around faster” defenses make no sense when the devs’ design choices determine those aspects, simple as that (to me). It has to do with complexity, as has been mentioned in a recent post. But (not to go too far into the analytical realm that I’ve been happily freeing myself from) if you add complexity without depth, you’re adding it for nothing more than the sake of adding it. So now, 343 thinks that added complexity is the answer because “that’s what gamers want” and since sprint is everywhere, they decided to keep going with it.
But that’s where things get stupid IMO. You can’t just add a button push to make a Spartan move at top speed, because that accomplishes nothing but the act of pushing a button to go as fast as you could before, if you don’t change anything else. Now you have added complexity with no reason for it, so no depth. So now, change other things like the map sizes, or movement speed of sprinting, all kinds of “adjustments to sprint in order to properly balance it”. You know… all of those things that are bitterly argued over or cleverly debated back and forth throughout this thread.
So if you think about it in the most literal sense, a “sprint” mechanic could be added to even Halo 2 or 3 without changing the game play at all in the aspect of pushing a button to move at top speed. Simply capping BMS to a percentage of “top speed” with stick movement and requiring clicking a TS to achieve full BMS would be sprint… but who would’ve wanted that? It sounds completely stupid in that context, at least to me. Therefor, every single thing that has been done with sprint, all the crap they’ve adjusted to “balance” it, IMO, is nothing more than a (often enough) misguided attempt to justify pushing a button to do something that previously didn’t require you to push a button to do in Halo… well after it’s basic gameplay had been deployed and refined. So the way I see it, all the “balancing” aspects they’ve thrown at sprint in the hopes that something sticks aren’t balancing aspects in as much as they’re little more than “Let’s hope this set of attributes adds enough depth to make the added complexity of having to push a silly button just to achieve top speed seem worthwhile.” Just MPO, but… not really working well.
DOOM 2016 didn’t need sprint to be a good game
> 2594261035368257;14769:
> Of the many times I’ve posted in this thread, I’m thinking that my feelings are starting to go back to just a basic way of looking at things as opposed to being so analytical… not that I think there’s anything wrong with those long and very detail oriented posts for or against sprint and certainly not to dismiss the efforts and thought put into them. But just that I and (I believe it’s a no brainer to reasonably assume) pretty much all of us are playing Halo (any game for that matter) for fun and enjoyment. Fun and enjoyment are as simple and/or complex as you make them… and so are the explanations of why you find something more or less enjoyable.
>
> It makes me think of a game I played a long time ago… can’t recall the name, or much about it… but I can recall it was a fps with a toggle sprint option. I recall that I found it a bit stupid to even have the option to toggle sprint. I mean, it was a shooter that was just like any shooter out there, on a basic concept aspect. You ran around the map shooting people. I had “always sprint” toggled on… anybody I knew/talked to who played the game had it toggled on and very few had any idea why they bothered to even put the toggle option there. I can’t recall if there was any “penalty” while sprinting, but I can recall that the average opinion was something like ‘why wouldn’t I want to move at top speed all the time? If I wanted to move slower, I’d not push the stick as far… but who wants bothered with pushing a button just to run?’
>
> That’s how I’ve always felt. It’s up to the devs how fast I get into and out of the action, their maps and other design choices set “the pace”. The “pace is faster”, “There’s more action”, “I can get around faster” defenses make no sense when the devs’ design choices determine those aspects, simple as that (to me). It has to do with complexity, as has been mentioned in a recent post. But (not to go too far into the analytical realm that I’ve been happily freeing myself from) if you add complexity without depth, you’re adding it for nothing more than the sake of adding it. So now, 343 thinks that added complexity is the answer because “that’s what gamers want” and since sprint is everywhere, they decided to keep going with it.
>
> But that’s where things get stupid IMO. You can’t just add a button push to make a Spartan move at top speed, because that accomplishes nothing but the act of pushing a button to go as fast as you could before, if you don’t change anything else. Now you have added complexity with no reason for it, so no depth. So now, change other things like the map sizes, or movement speed of sprinting, all kinds of “adjustments to sprint in order to properly balance it”. You know… all of those things that are bitterly argued over or cleverly debated back and forth throughout this thread.
>
> So if you think about it in the most literal sense, a “sprint” mechanic could be added to even Halo 2 or 3 without changing the game play at all in the aspect of pushing a button to move at top speed. Simply capping BMS to a percentage of “top speed” with stick movement and requiring clicking a TS to achieve full BMS would be sprint… but who would’ve wanted that? It sounds completely stupid in that context, at least to me. Therefor, every single thing that has been done with sprint, all the crap they’ve adjusted to “balance” it, IMO, is nothing more than a (often enough) misguided attempt to justify pushing a button to do something that previously didn’t require you to push a button to do in Halo… well after it’s basic gameplay had been deployed and refined. So the way I see it, all the “balancing” aspects they’ve thrown at sprint in the hopes that something sticks aren’t balancing aspects in as much as they’re little more than “Let’s hope this set of attributes adds enough depth to make the added complexity of having to push a silly button just to achieve top speed seem worthwhile.” Just MPO, but… not really working well.
Ah, I like this idea. Wanna move faster? Keep the thumb stick in that direction until you reach max speed. I guess my argument will then become increase movement speed… but only for long distance travel… and add momentum mechanics so that it’s take a bit to change direction at high speeds.
> 2594261035368257;14769:
> So if you think about it in the most literal sense, a “sprint” mechanic could be added to even Halo 2 or 3 without changing the game play at all in the aspect of pushing a button to move at top speed. Simply capping BMS to a percentage of “top speed” with stick movement and requiring clicking a TS to achieve full BMS would be sprint… but who would’ve wanted that? It sounds completely stupid in that context, at least to me. Therefor, every single thing that has been done with sprint, all the crap they’ve adjusted to “balance” it, IMO, is nothing more than a (often enough) misguided attempt to justify pushing a button to do something that previously didn’t require you to push a button to do in Halo… well after it’s basic gameplay had been deployed and refined. So the way I see it, all the “balancing” aspects they’ve thrown at sprint in the hopes that something sticks aren’t balancing aspects in as much as they’re little more than “Let’s hope this set of attributes adds enough depth to make the added complexity of having to push a silly button just to achieve top speed seem worthwhile.” Just MPO, but… not really working well.
There are aspects of Sprint that you’re leaving out here: forward-facing movement only and weapons disabled. Without those restrictions, I wouldn’t call it Sprint so much as an inverse of crouching (without height change, obviously).
> 2533274830294676;14770:
> DOOM 2016 didn’t need sprint to be a good game
Any games you can think of that really benefit from Sprint? Only thing I can think of is the mechanic’s merits in a survival-horror (not being able to look at whatever deranged character is chasing you if you hope to get away).
> 2533274814945686;14771:
> > 2594261035368257;14769:
> > Of the many times I’ve posted in this thread, I’m thinking that my feelings are starting to go back to just a basic way of looking at things as opposed to being so analytical… not that I think there’s anything wrong with those long and very detail oriented posts for or against sprint and certainly not to dismiss the efforts and thought put into them. But just that I and (I believe it’s a no brainer to reasonably assume) pretty much all of us are playing Halo (any game for that matter) for fun and enjoyment. Fun and enjoyment are as simple and/or complex as you make them… and so are the explanations of why you find something more or less enjoyable.
> >
> > It makes me think of a game I played a long time ago… can’t recall the name, or much about it… but I can recall it was a fps with a toggle sprint option. I recall that I found it a bit stupid to even have the option to toggle sprint. I mean, it was a shooter that was just like any shooter out there, on a basic concept aspect. You ran around the map shooting people. I had “always sprint” toggled on… anybody I knew/talked to who played the game had it toggled on and very few had any idea why they bothered to even put the toggle option there. I can’t recall if there was any “penalty” while sprinting, but I can recall that the average opinion was something like ‘why wouldn’t I want to move at top speed all the time? If I wanted to move slower, I’d not push the stick as far… but who wants bothered with pushing a button just to run?’
> >
> > That’s how I’ve always felt. It’s up to the devs how fast I get into and out of the action, their maps and other design choices set “the pace”. The “pace is faster”, “There’s more action”, “I can get around faster” defenses make no sense when the devs’ design choices determine those aspects, simple as that (to me). It has to do with complexity, as has been mentioned in a recent post. But (not to go too far into the analytical realm that I’ve been happily freeing myself from) if you add complexity without depth, you’re adding it for nothing more than the sake of adding it. So now, 343 thinks that added complexity is the answer because “that’s what gamers want” and since sprint is everywhere, they decided to keep going with it.
> >
> > But that’s where things get stupid IMO. You can’t just add a button push to make a Spartan move at top speed, because that accomplishes nothing but the act of pushing a button to go as fast as you could before, if you don’t change anything else. Now you have added complexity with no reason for it, so no depth. So now, change other things like the map sizes, or movement speed of sprinting, all kinds of “adjustments to sprint in order to properly balance it”. You know… all of those things that are bitterly argued over or cleverly debated back and forth throughout this thread.
> >
> > So if you think about it in the most literal sense, a “sprint” mechanic could be added to even Halo 2 or 3 without changing the game play at all in the aspect of pushing a button to move at top speed. Simply capping BMS to a percentage of “top speed” with stick movement and requiring clicking a TS to achieve full BMS would be sprint… but who would’ve wanted that? It sounds completely stupid in that context, at least to me. Therefor, every single thing that has been done with sprint, all the crap they’ve adjusted to “balance” it, IMO, is nothing more than a (often enough) misguided attempt to justify pushing a button to do something that previously didn’t require you to push a button to do in Halo… well after it’s basic gameplay had been deployed and refined. So the way I see it, all the “balancing” aspects they’ve thrown at sprint in the hopes that something sticks aren’t balancing aspects in as much as they’re little more than “Let’s hope this set of attributes adds enough depth to make the added complexity of having to push a silly button just to achieve top speed seem worthwhile.” Just MPO, but… not really working well.
>
> Ah, I like this idea. Wanna move faster? Keep the thumb stick in that direction until you reach max speed. I guess my argument will then become increase movement speed… but only for long distance travel… and add momentum mechanics so that it’s take a bit to change direction at high speeds.
This was something Goldeneye had back in 1997 - wow, it still surprises me that the game turned 20 this year, back in August. Being able to move faster diagonally is something Halo’s Strafe could benefit from, too.
> 2535440283237581;14773:
> > 2533274830294676;14770:
> > DOOM 2016 didn’t need sprint to be a good game
>
> Any games you can think of that really benefit from Sprint? Only thing I can think of is the mechanic’s merits in a survival-horror (not being able to look at whatever deranged character is chasing you if you hope to get away).
Well, really, you could say any kind of game that puts you in the shoes of a normal human and tries to make that experience feel more real benefits from sprint. It would be misguided to think sprint as a pointless mechanic that almost no game benefits from. There are many games where it’s entirely appropriate. It’s just that there are also many games that do not depict normal humans, or where accurate depiction of humans isn’t relevant to the experience.
I’d say keep it.
But slow it down a little.
And remove the unlimited sprint time
> 2535440283237581;14772:
> > 2594261035368257;14769:
> > So if you think about it in the most literal sense, a “sprint” mechanic could be added to even Halo 2 or 3 without changing the game play at all in the aspect of pushing a button to move at top speed. Simply capping BMS to a percentage of “top speed” with stick movement and requiring clicking a TS to achieve full BMS would be sprint… but who would’ve wanted that? It sounds completely stupid in that context, at least to me. Therefor, every single thing that has been done with sprint, all the crap they’ve adjusted to “balance” it, IMO, is nothing more than a (often enough) misguided attempt to justify pushing a button to do something that previously didn’t require you to push a button to do in Halo… well after it’s basic gameplay had been deployed and refined. So the way I see it, all the “balancing” aspects they’ve thrown at sprint in the hopes that something sticks aren’t balancing aspects in as much as they’re little more than “Let’s hope this set of attributes adds enough depth to make the added complexity of having to push a silly button just to achieve top speed seem worthwhile.” Just MPO, but… not really working well.
>
> There are aspects of Sprint that you’re leaving out here: forward-facing movement only and weapons disabled. Without those restrictions, I wouldn’t call it Sprint so much as an inverse of crouching (without height change, obviously).
While I can see a point about forward-facing movement only (and IMO an arguable one in some aspects), you’re missing my point about thinking in the most literal sense and that is having sprint be nothing more than a button push to move at top speed. You’re applying weapons disabled… which is not a necessity in order to push a button and move faster, it’s a balancing measure applied in an after the fact fashion. Whether or not you’d call it sprint without those restrictions is your opinion.
But the point remains that (in the most literal sense) it wouldn’t make much sense and would be seen as adding a completely unnecessary button push in the OG Halo series, if you added a bare bones sprint mechanic with no “restrictions”. Which is exactly my point. If they’re restrictions, they’re exactly what I called them… balancing measures… after the fact additions, to make the idea that you have to do an additional button push just to achieve the predetermined top speed seem to have enough depth to counter the additional (and unnecessary) complexity.
> 2594261035368257;14777:
> > 2535440283237581;14772:
> > > 2594261035368257;14769:
> > > So if you think about it in the most literal sense, a “sprint” mechanic could be added to even Halo 2 or 3 without changing the game play at all in the aspect of pushing a button to move at top speed. Simply capping BMS to a percentage of “top speed” with stick movement and requiring clicking a TS to achieve full BMS would be sprint… but who would’ve wanted that? It sounds completely stupid in that context, at least to me. Therefor, every single thing that has been done with sprint, all the crap they’ve adjusted to “balance” it, IMO, is nothing more than a (often enough) misguided attempt to justify pushing a button to do something that previously didn’t require you to push a button to do in Halo… well after it’s basic gameplay had been deployed and refined. So the way I see it, all the “balancing” aspects they’ve thrown at sprint in the hopes that something sticks aren’t balancing aspects in as much as they’re little more than “Let’s hope this set of attributes adds enough depth to make the added complexity of having to push a silly button just to achieve top speed seem worthwhile.” Just MPO, but… not really working well.
> >
> > There are aspects of Sprint that you’re leaving out here: forward-facing movement only and weapons disabled. Without those restrictions, I wouldn’t call it Sprint so much as an inverse of crouching (without height change, obviously).
>
> While I can see a point about forward-facing movement only (and IMO an arguable one in some aspects), you’re missing my point about thinking in the most literal sense and that is to have sprint be nothing more than a button push to move faster. You’re applying weapons disabled… which is not a necessity in order to push a button and move faster. Therefor it isn’t an aspect in the most literal sense of having the ability to sprint, it’s a balancing measure applied in an after the fact fashion.
Don’t get me wrong, I see what you’re saying. The thing is without those restrictions I mentioned, I wouldn’t consider it “Sprint” so much as “turbo” or “speed boost”.
As far as I can tell, those aspects are as integral to Sprint as crouching is to… well, crouching. You can talk about crouching being a “press button to move slower”, but that doesn’t detail the mechanic in its entirety. I know that’s not a perfect comparison, but I hope you get my point.
> 2533274825830455;14775:
> > 2535440283237581;14773:
> > > 2533274830294676;14770:
> > > DOOM 2016 didn’t need sprint to be a good game
> >
> > Any games you can think of that really benefit from Sprint? Only thing I can think of is the mechanic’s merits in a survival-horror (not being able to look at whatever deranged character is chasing you if you hope to get away).
>
> Well, really, you could say any kind of game that puts you in the shoes of a normal human and tries to make that experience feel more real benefits from sprint. It would be misguided to think sprint as a pointless mechanic that almost no game benefits from. There are many games where it’s entirely appropriate. It’s just that there are also many games that do not depict normal humans, or where accurate depiction of humans isn’t relevant to the experience.
Games attempting to closely simulate real-life, sure. I just think mechanics can be appropriate to a game’s setting without benefiting gameplay and don’t particularly think implementing mechanics under those circumstances is a good way to design games.
Can you describe or point me to a game where Sprint benefits the gameplay in ways a faster BMS couldn’t?
> 2535440283237581;14779:
> > 2533274825830455;14775:
> > > 2535440283237581;14773:
> > > > 2533274830294676;14770:
> > > > DOOM 2016 didn’t need sprint to be a good game
> > >
> > > Any games you can think of that really benefit from Sprint? Only thing I can think of is the mechanic’s merits in a survival-horror (not being able to look at whatever deranged character is chasing you if you hope to get away).
> >
> > Well, really, you could say any kind of game that puts you in the shoes of a normal human and tries to make that experience feel more real benefits from sprint. It would be misguided to think sprint as a pointless mechanic that almost no game benefits from. There are many games where it’s entirely appropriate. It’s just that there are also many games that do not depict normal humans, or where accurate depiction of humans isn’t relevant to the experience.
>
> Games attempting to closely simulate real-life, sure. I just think mechanics can be appropriate to a game’s setting without benefiting gameplay and don’t particularly think implementing mechanics under those circumstances is a good way to design games.
>
> Can you describe or point me to a game where Sprint benefits the gameplay in ways a faster BMS couldn’t?
At that point you’d have to specify what sorts of benefits to gameplay you’re looking for. People often talk about gameplay as if it existed in a vacuum. LIke “does it benefit gameplay?” Well, I can tell you as soon as you enlighten me on what it is that you want from your gameplay. Gameplay always has some purpose, and realism isn’t fundamentally a worse purpose than any other.
Now, if you were to ask me whether there’s any situation where sprint is the only choice for adding some tactical depth to movement, I would have to say no. There is no such situation that I can think, for all the important features of sprint can be replaced by other mechanics. For instance, one could argue that in some slow-paced, tactical shooter with short kill times sprint could be the way for transporting the player between cover fast while also preventing them from shooting while on move, since allowing them to shoot while moving would ruin the concept of the gameplay. However, I know well that the concept of accuracy that changes depending on the player’s movement speed was invented precisely to address such issues, and that it can be made so that shooting while running is as good as useless.
But I would claim that what we’re forgetting is that in scenarios like these, sprint isn’t necessarily any worse than the alternative. In fact, I would claim that in most games with short kill times, sprint isn’t any more harmful way of achieving the goal of fast movement than a high base movement speed. At which point, from the point of view of tactical depth, it is not any worse as an option. However, it can be, and often is, that it is the more thematically fitting option, which tips the scales in its favor.
We can all have our own opinions on what sort of design philosophy Halo should follow. However, I think it’s useful to appreciate that by no means should we try to apply the same philsosophy to all games. We should celebrate the variety of games that we have, that could only have come out of people embracing different design philosophies.
> 2535440283237581;14779:
> > 2533274825830455;14775:
> > > 2535440283237581;14773:
> > > > 2533274830294676;14770:
> > > > DOOM 2016 didn’t need sprint to be a good game
> > >
> > > Any games you can think of that really benefit from Sprint? Only thing I can think of is the mechanic’s merits in a survival-horror (not being able to look at whatever deranged character is chasing you if you hope to get away).
> >
> > Well, really, you could say any kind of game that puts you in the shoes of a normal human and tries to make that experience feel more real benefits from sprint. It would be misguided to think sprint as a pointless mechanic that almost no game benefits from. There are many games where it’s entirely appropriate. It’s just that there are also many games that do not depict normal humans, or where accurate depiction of humans isn’t relevant to the experience.
>
> Games attempting to closely simulate real-life, sure. I just think mechanics can be appropriate to a game’s setting without benefiting gameplay and don’t particularly think implementing mechanics under those circumstances is a good way to design games.
>
> Can you describe or point me to a game where Sprint benefits the gameplay in ways a faster BMS couldn’t?
To be fair, I’ve always thought that sprint is a perfect way of having a player feel weak in the context of his surroundings.
One of my favorite implementations of sprint is in Alan Wake. It’s not neccessarily a horror game, you can stand your ground in it if you want, but you are severly outnumbered and ammunition is scarce. More often than not, you’re on the run. For such a situation, it makes perfect sense to have sprint; You’re a normal human being, not even a good athlete, let a lone a soldier… you can either run or shoot. You can’t have it both ways. Do I try and finish off the last taken or do I try to sprint (which is very limited in this game) to the next safe haven? It’s a split second decision which keeps you on your toes and fits perfectly in the context of the genre. However, in a game whose premise is “Kill everyone else”, it just doesn’t.
That’s one of the reasons I’ve always found it baffling that people argue “I want to feel like a super soldier, so let me sprint”, when sprint does the exact opposite.
EDIT: Oh sh…oot. I just realized that this was your initial statement (survival horror). I should really learn to pay more attention reading. Well, then consider me agreeing with your opinion.
> 2533274801176260;14781:
> > 2535440283237581;14779:
> > > 2533274825830455;14775:
> > > > 2535440283237581;14773:
> > > > > 2533274830294676;14770:
> > > > > DOOM 2016 didn’t need sprint to be a good game
> > > >
> > > > Any games you can think of that really benefit from Sprint? Only thing I can think of is the mechanic’s merits in a survival-horror (not being able to look at whatever deranged character is chasing you if you hope to get away).
>
> To be fair, I’ve always thought that sprint is a perfect way of having a player feel weak in the context of his surroundings. {snip} That’s one of the reasons I’ve always found it baffling that people argue “I want to feel like a super soldier, so let me sprint”, when sprint does the exact opposite.
>
> EDIT: Oh sh…oot. I just realized that this was your initial statement (survival horror). I should really learn to pay more attention reading. Well, then consider me agreeing with your opinion.
Haha, no worries. Glad you had more elaboration to that point than what I gave. Don’t really play “horror” games myself, but can appreciate the way they invoke tension through relative helplessness.
What are your thoughts on BMS varying depending on direction (ex. moving forward faster than side-to-side, or moving diagonally faster) for a game like Halo?
I think if there is this much controversy around a new mechanic, it should get the boot, it’s obviously not the way halo is meant to be, and this is shown by the vast community reaction.
Sprint must go!
Sprints fine.
> papacoco01: Sprints fine.
In the context of Halo, I’d have to disagree. Halo’s design philosophy used to be about movement and combat working together, but with mechanics like Sprint it leads to players needing to choose between one or the other.
Why do you prefer to need to put your weapon down in order to move at your max speed? Why do you prefer being required to move forward to reach your max speed?
We’ve established that simply increasing the base movement speed could allow you to move as fast as you can while sprinting (and do so in any direction). Why would you prefer the limitations of Sprint over this alternative?