The sprint discussion thread

Games Halo 5: Guardians
14906

> 2535460550943257;14901:
> I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.

From Reach you forgot Jet pack and Hologram, out of all AA’s sprint was used the most.
Fairly balanced? I remember quite well which weapons were used the most, DMR, BR and Lightrifle.

> 2535460550943257;14901:
> Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.

Fans complained because basically any change made from Halo Orignal series to 4 was in an effort to mimic CoD. Apart from Spartan Ops, any addition / change made could be found in CoD.
-Flinch
-Perks
-Spartan points for unlocking gameplay items as you leveled up.
And so forth.

Nice also referencing the first Halo game’s sub-title.
You do know that it was a requirement from Microsoft to have something more on the Case than just “Halo”?

Also, here’s the juicy thing, why would i343 only have removed mechanics?
The only reason you’re even going there is because at any one point someone does not want something in Halo, they don’t post their own Game Design Document in order to show what they want instead. It’s a waste of time, and it’d convolute the threads quite a lot if everyone coming in with an issue had their proper GDD only a Ctrl+V away.
Should we have a replacement mechanic at hand?
Funny thing about that as well, usually when things actually go that way, it goes largely ignored. I think I even posted what I’d like to test in Halo, quite a post as well, to someone who challenged me to it, how long did that post survive? Two pages.

So you can call “Combat (d)evolved” all you want when things get complained about, but you have no idea what they’ve suggested in the past.

> 2535460550943257;14901:
> For the most part, I think that sprint is just fine. In multiplayer, it should be finite, so you can only sprint for 7 or 8 seconds before returning to walk speed. People should realize that sprint is not really used in combat situations unless one uses Spartan Charge, which I already mentioned is a problem. In Halo 5, running away from a gunfight is much more difficult. To address the argument that two movement speeds are not necessary, I’ll just point out that you cannot shoot a gun, recharge shields, throw grenades, etc. Simply increasing the movement speed will still allow for these things.

That’s a bingo.

That is exactly the issue many find with sprint. You can’t do anything else than move forward slightly faster.
Having a high BMS does everything sprint does in terms of transportation, but will not prevent players from all other actions which sprint limits.

So the questions usually asked is.
-What does sprint do, which a high BMS can’t do, if speed was an issue in the first place?
-Seeing all the suggestions to nerf sprint more and more, lessening its viability, why should we keep it to begin with?

14907

> 2533274833081329;14905:
> > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
> >
> > Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
>
> This assumes there is only one way to “evolve”.
>
> We already went backwards from Halo 4 to Halo 5. We removed Loadouts, Jetpack, kill cams, Ordnance, re-purposed Armor abilities into Spartan Abilities, and went back to equal starts.
>
> So clearly going backwards isn’t always a bad idea.
>
> And it’s also funny that people want Halo to “evolve”, but when other people want to change Halo 5, suddenly they don’t want it to evolve anymore.

You just pulled that from another post earlier. I’m not going to bother arguing with you again. I already made my point 1-2 pages ago.

I do think that Halo 5 was a step backwards. But that is my opinion. The fact is, if the community wants removal of sprint, 343i should do it. 746 pages show that the community strongly cares about this.

14908

> 2535416616313329;14907:
> > 2533274833081329;14905:
> > > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > > I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
> > >
> > > Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
> >
> > This assumes there is only one way to “evolve”.
> >
> > We already went backwards from Halo 4 to Halo 5. We removed Loadouts, Jetpack, kill cams, Ordnance, re-purposed Armor abilities into Spartan Abilities, and went back to equal starts.
> >
> > So clearly going backwards isn’t always a bad idea.
> >
> > And it’s also funny that people want Halo to “evolve”, but when other people want to change Halo 5, suddenly they don’t want it to evolve anymore.
>
> You just pulled that from another post earlier. I’m not going to bother arguing with you again. I already made my point 1-2 pages ago.
>
> I do think that Halo 5 was a step backwards. But that is my opinion. The fact is, if the community wants removal of sprint, 343i should do it. 746 pages show that the community strongly cares about this.

Of course I did. They said the same thing last time I posted it. It’s still relevant and no one really countered it from an objective standpoint.

The comment wasn’t toward you to begin with, so I don’t know where you’re getting the argument idea from. You replied to me here, not vice versa. You made your point before, and so did I. Enough people have shown and agreed why Loadouts didn’t help, a lot of people left Halo 4 less than 2 weeks after launch, and then 343i decided to go back on everything just to stop the bleeding for Halo 5. This even happened in Halo 4 with the weapon tuning update and Legendary Gametypes.

14909

> 2533274833081329;14908:
> > 2535416616313329;14907:
> > > 2533274833081329;14905:
> > > > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > > > I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
> > > >
> > > > Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
> > >
> > > This assumes there is only one way to “evolve”.
> > >
> > > We already went backwards from Halo 4 to Halo 5. We removed Loadouts, Jetpack, kill cams, Ordnance, re-purposed Armor abilities into Spartan Abilities, and went back to equal starts.
> > >
> > > So clearly going backwards isn’t always a bad idea.
> > >
> > > And it’s also funny that people want Halo to “evolve”, but when other people want to change Halo 5, suddenly they don’t want it to evolve anymore.
> >
> > You just pulled that from another post earlier. I’m not going to bother arguing with you again. I already made my point 1-2 pages ago.
> >
> > I do think that Halo 5 was a step backwards. But that is my opinion. The fact is, if the community wants removal of sprint, 343i should do it. 746 pages show that the community strongly cares about this.
>
> Of course I did. They said the same thing last time I posted it. It’s still relevant and no one really countered it from an objective standpoint.
>
> The comment wasn’t toward you to begin with, so I don’t know where you’re getting the argument idea from. You replied to me here, not vice versa. You made your point before, and so did I. Enough people have shown and agreed why Loadouts didn’t help, a lot of people left Halo 4 less than 2 weeks after launch, and then 343i decided to go back on everything just to stop the bleeding for Halo 5. This even happened in Halo 4 with the weapon tuning update and Legendary Gametypes.

That’s not objective. The loss of population proves that the community doesn’t like loadouts. It doesn’t prove anything objectively. The debate comes down to what each one of us wants in a game and how to get it. I admit the community doesn’t want loadouts and sprint. That doesn’t make the community objectively right or wrong. 343i should do what the majority wants. That doesn’t mean that I am wrong for disagreeing with the community.

14910

> 2535416616313329;14909:
> > 2533274833081329;14908:
> > > 2535416616313329;14907:
> > > > 2533274833081329;14905:
> > > > > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > > > > I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
> > > > >
> > > > > Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
> > > >
> > > > This assumes there is only one way to “evolve”.
> > > >
> > > > We already went backwards from Halo 4 to Halo 5. We removed Loadouts, Jetpack, kill cams, Ordnance, re-purposed Armor abilities into Spartan Abilities, and went back to equal starts.
> > > >
> > > > So clearly going backwards isn’t always a bad idea.
> > > >
> > > > And it’s also funny that people want Halo to “evolve”, but when other people want to change Halo 5, suddenly they don’t want it to evolve anymore.
> > >
> > > You just pulled that from another post earlier. I’m not going to bother arguing with you again. I already made my point 1-2 pages ago.
> > >
> > > I do think that Halo 5 was a step backwards. But that is my opinion. The fact is, if the community wants removal of sprint, 343i should do it. 746 pages show that the community strongly cares about this.
> >
> > Of course I did. They said the same thing last time I posted it. It’s still relevant and no one really countered it from an objective standpoint.
> >
> > The comment wasn’t toward you to begin with, so I don’t know where you’re getting the argument idea from. You replied to me here, not vice versa. You made your point before, and so did I. Enough people have shown and agreed why Loadouts didn’t help, a lot of people left Halo 4 less than 2 weeks after launch, and then 343i decided to go back on everything just to stop the bleeding for Halo 5. This even happened in Halo 4 with the weapon tuning update and Legendary Gametypes.
>
> That’s not objective. The loss of population proves that the community doesn’t like loadouts. It doesn’t prove anything objectively. The debate comes down to what each one of us wants in a game and how to get it. I admit the community doesn’t want loadouts and sprint. That doesn’t make the community objectively right or wrong. 343i should do what the majority wants. That doesn’t mean that I am wrong for disagreeing with the community.

I didn’t say “you are objectively wrong for liking Loadouts/Sprint.” You keep taking my statement out of context and it’s getting dangerously close to a strawman argument.

You are entitled to like what you like, and no one can stop you. I can argue against your reasoning for why you think Loadouts are good, but I can’t say you are wrong for liking it.

It’s an objective statement that Halo 5 went backwards from Halo 4 to be closer to Halo CE-3. I didn’t say whether it’s a good thing or not is objective.

It’s an objective statement that a large enough section of the community didn’t like Loadouts enough to cause a change. Legendary gametypes in Halo 4 was a direct response to that voice, and Halo 5 is just a long-term response.

14911

> 2533274833081329;14905:
> > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
> >
> > Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
>
> This assumes there is only one way to “evolve”.
>
> We already went backwards from Halo 4 to Halo 5. We removed Loadouts, Jetpack, kill cams, Ordnance, re-purposed Armor abilities into Spartan Abilities, and went back to equal starts.
>
> So clearly going backwards isn’t always a bad idea.
>
> And it’s also funny that people want Halo to “evolve”, but when other people want to change Halo 5, suddenly they don’t want it to evolve anymore.

We are talking about the combat itself, so the removal of loadouts, kill cams, and such does not necessarily affect the combat itself. Jetpack was replaced with thrusters, and ordnance exists through weapon pads and REQ stations. The combat itself did evolve, because there are different factors like thrusting and lowered aim assist.

I do think that Halo 6 should evolve with a nerfed Spartan Charge, and for competitive multiplayer only limited sprint. Maybe we could get dual-wield capabilities back, and maybe a balanced Ground Pound hijack like the one in Halo Wars 2.

14912

> 2547348539238747;14900:
> > 2533274822883564;14897:
> > > 2547348539238747;14896:
> > > > 2533274801973487;14833:
> > > > > 2547348539238747;14827:
> > > > > Halo Reach, H4, and H5 have all embraced a larger element of randomness and personal empowerment over a highly controllable arena and teamwork. That’s what makes the games more fun for lower skill/new players. It’s also what killed those games for the highly skilled, highly organised players. It’s also why you see players losing it when full teams and clans steam roll people on arena and warzone.
> > > >
> > > > I’M afraid you have something mixed up here, new Halo games are putting a lot less focus onto personal empowerment.
> > > > personal empowerment is steadily decreasing since HCE. It starts with small things like team size (2v2 has a bigger emphasis on the singular player), and continues with stuff like sprint (it’s a lot easier to run away or rush to help a teammate despite bad positioning) and your starting weapon (a non-random utility weapon with a high delta between a slow average TTK and a fast perfect TTK let the individual shine rather then making “team-shooting” so overly effective) I’m not too sure about which order to put R-5 in but when you look at the OT, HCE has the biggest personal empowerment, followed by H2, followed by H3 and then it all goes down the drain…
>
> In contrast, assassinations in Halo reach (as cool as I thought they were) serve no purpose to the gameplay. A smash in the back was already fatal in classic Halo. Their inclusion in Reach was a superficial addition that did nothing but make you feel good for doing them.

I could of said it better my self, the assassination are as pointless as the characters given to us in halo 5.

14913

> 2535460550943257;14911:
> > 2533274833081329;14905:
> > > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > > I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
> > >
> > > Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
> >
> > This assumes there is only one way to “evolve”.
> >
> > We already went backwards from Halo 4 to Halo 5. We removed Loadouts, Jetpack, kill cams, Ordnance, re-purposed Armor abilities into Spartan Abilities, and went back to equal starts.
> >
> > So clearly going backwards isn’t always a bad idea.
> >
> > And it’s also funny that people want Halo to “evolve”, but when other people want to change Halo 5, suddenly they don’t want it to evolve anymore.
>
> We are talking about the combat itself, so the removal of loadouts, kill cams, and such does not necessarily affect the combat itself. Jetpack was replaced with thrusters, and ordnance exists through weapon pads and REQ stations. The combat itself did evolve, because there are different factors like thrusting and lowered aim assist.
>
> I do think that Halo 6 should evolve with a nerfed Spartan Charge, and for competitive multiplayer only limited sprint. Maybe we could get dual-wield capabilities back, and maybe a balanced Ground Pound hijack like the one in Halo Wars 2.

Loadouts definitely affected the combat itself. Don’t know where you got the idea it didn’t. Every weapon had to be balanced roughly around each other, and it still didn’t work because some weapons ended up inherently better.

Ordnance isn’t the same as weapon pads. Weapon pads are just an announcement of power weapons that we’ve always had in previous games. Ordanance removed the power weapons on the maps in most cases and brought them down in front of the player through Scorestreaks. REQ stations are only in Warzone and people still complained about that.

Jetpack wasn’t replaced with Thrusters. Thruster pack was replaced with Thrusters. It went from an optional AA in Halo 4 (Halo Reach technically, with Evade), to being universal in Halo 5.

Lowered aim assist is to an extent negated by the higher bullet magnetism, which took like 2 patches to try to fix but still didn’t fully get there.

Is removing Sprint while increasing Base Movement Speed “devolving” Halo despite giving you more options?

14914

> 2533274795123910;14906:
> > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
>
> From Reach you forgot Jet pack and Hologram, out of all AA’s sprint was used the most.
> Fairly balanced? I remember quite well which weapons were used the most, DMR, BR and Lightrifle.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
>
> Fans complained because basically any change made from Halo Orignal series to 4 was in an effort to mimic CoD. Apart from Spartan Ops, any addition / change made could be found in CoD.
> -Flinch
> -Perks
> -Spartan points for unlocking gameplay items as you leveled up.
> And so forth.
>
> Nice also referencing the first Halo game’s sub-title.
> You do know that it was a requirement from Microsoft to have something more on the Case than just “Halo”?
>
> Also, here’s the juicy thing, why would i343 only have removed mechanics?
> The only reason you’re even going there is because at any one point someone does not want something in Halo, they don’t post their own Game Design Document in order to show what they want instead. It’s a waste of time, and it’d convolute the threads quite a lot if everyone coming in with an issue had their proper GDD only a Ctrl+V away.
> Should we have a replacement mechanic at hand?
> Funny thing about that as well, usually when things actually go that way, it goes largely ignored. I think I even posted what I’d like to test in Halo, quite a post as well, to someone who challenged me to it, how long did that post survive? Two pages.
>
> So you can call “Combat (d)evolved” all you want when things get complained about, but you have no idea what they’ve suggested in the past.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > For the most part, I think that sprint is just fine. In multiplayer, it should be finite, so you can only sprint for 7 or 8 seconds before returning to walk speed. People should realize that sprint is not really used in combat situations unless one uses Spartan Charge, which I already mentioned is a problem. In Halo 5, running away from a gunfight is much more difficult. To address the argument that two movement speeds are not necessary, I’ll just point out that you cannot shoot a gun, recharge shields, throw grenades, etc. Simply increasing the movement speed will still allow for these things.
>
> That’s a bingo.
>
> That is exactly the issue many find with sprint. You can’t do anything else than move forward slightly faster.
> Having a high BMS does everything sprint does in terms of transportation, but will not prevent players from all other actions which sprint limits.
>
> So the questions usually asked is.
> -What does sprint do, which a high BMS can’t do, if speed was an issue in the first place?
> -Seeing all the suggestions to nerf sprint more and more, lessening its viability, why should we keep it to begin with?

It’s funny, because Jetpack and Hologram are my favorite AA’s period. I cannot explain why I forgot them. As for Halo 4’s loadouts being balanced, most players had access to these weapons fairly quickly. I do believe that all weapons should have been unlocked at the beginning of the game, but you could still be effective with automatics and the Carbine. I still remember going around with camo and a Storm Rifle.

I never said that Halo didn’t take elements that were in CoD. I do have a problem with people comparing Halo to CoD only. At this point, nearly every game with controllable characters could sprint, and most shooters allowed for personalized loadouts. You can say that Halo was trying to catch up to CoD, but let’s be real, Halo was just trying to appeal to a larger audience. 343 Industries apparently didn’t realize CoD and Battlefield fans won’t switch to Halo because Halo took a few ideas.

By saying Halo 5: Combat Devolved, I meant that simply removing abilities does not make sense if games are supposed to evolve. Halo: Reach and Halo 4 already brought sprint to the table, so by removing sprint, that would just be devolving the combat.

> -What does sprint do, which a high BMS can’t do, if speed was an issue in the first place?

Sprint does not let you throw grenades, shoot guns, and recharge shields, all of which you can do by simply not sprinting. Therefore, players are discouraged from sprinting unless you are getting around the map. I already mentioned Spartan Charge needs a major nerf, and unless you plan to shoulder-bash your opponent people generally don’t sprint during combat. Unless the goal is to be able to do these things while moving quickly.

> -Seeing all the suggestions to nerf sprint more and more, lessening its viability, why should we keep it to begin with?

This is an excellent question which I would be unable to find an answer for if I really wanted to crush sprint’s viability. I just think that limited sprint in a competitive scenario makes a lot of sense, because that further discourages people from using up their precious sprint. Other than that, I think sprint should stay just the way it is.

14915

> 2533274833081329;14913:
> > 2535460550943257;14911:
> > > 2533274833081329;14905:
> > > > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > > > I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
> > > >
> > > > Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
> > >
> > > This assumes there is only one way to “evolve”.
> > >
> > > We already went backwards from Halo 4 to Halo 5. We removed Loadouts, Jetpack, kill cams, Ordnance, re-purposed Armor abilities into Spartan Abilities, and went back to equal starts.
> > >
> > > So clearly going backwards isn’t always a bad idea.
> > >
> > > And it’s also funny that people want Halo to “evolve”, but when other people want to change Halo 5, suddenly they don’t want it to evolve anymore.
> >
> > We are talking about the combat itself, so the removal of loadouts, kill cams, and such does not necessarily affect the combat itself. Jetpack was replaced with thrusters, and ordnance exists through weapon pads and REQ stations. The combat itself did evolve, because there are different factors like thrusting and lowered aim assist.
> >
> > I do think that Halo 6 should evolve with a nerfed Spartan Charge, and for competitive multiplayer only limited sprint. Maybe we could get dual-wield capabilities back, and maybe a balanced Ground Pound hijack like the one in Halo Wars 2.
>
> Loadouts definitely affected the combat itself. Don’t know where you got the idea it didn’t. Every weapon had to be balanced roughly around each other, and it still didn’t work because some weapons ended up inherently better.
>
> Ordnance isn’t the same as weapon pads. Weapon pads are just an announcement of power weapons that we’ve always had in previous games. Ordanance removed the power weapons on the maps in most cases and brought them down in front of the player through Scorestreaks. REQ stations are only in Warzone and people still complained about that.
>
> Jetpack wasn’t replaced with Thrusters. Thruster pack was replaced with Thrusters. It went from an optional AA in Halo 4 (Halo Reach technically, with Evade), to being universal in Halo 5.
>
> Lowered aim assist is to an extent negated by the higher bullet magnetism, which took like 2 patches to try to fix but still didn’t fully get there.
>
> Is removing Sprint while increasing Base Movement Speed “devolving” Halo despite giving you more options?

I did not explain myself well enough. I believe every player should have had all of the weapons available to them from the start, and for my purposes I’ll go ahead and assume 343 did that. It really does depend on somebody’s play-style. Every loadout weapon worked well in its own right. Most players prefer precision weapons like the Battle Rifle and the DMR, but using myself as an example, I played decently with Assault Rifles and Storm Rifles. So, when it comes down to combat situations, automatics work well for practiced users in their optimal ranges, and the same is true for precision weapons. In other words, somebody who favors automatics and grenades can construct a loadout around that and do just as well as the guy who favors Battle Rifles and Ordinance.

I do understand what you’re saying with the Ordinance. Personal Ordinance has been removed in Halo 5 except for Warzone, where the REQ stations are essentially another version of them. I do think that Personal Ordinance should have been limited to BTB, though.

I used jetpack because you mentioned it, but the Spartan Abilities as a whole (including thrusters) replaced the Armor Abilities as a whole (including jetpack).

The high bullet magnetism is definitely a problem; I’m with you there. I do still feel the effects of the lowered aim assist though, so it accomplished something.

Sprint didn’t exist in the first four Halo FPS titles, and they appeared in the three most recent ones. On the mechanics standpoint, abandoning this mechanic now is equivalent to devolving Halo. It also would not make sense from a canonical standpoint, because supersoldiers who were once able to sprint would only able to jog. That does not make sense.

14916

> 2535460550943257;14914:
> I never said that Halo didn’t take elements that were in CoD. I do have a problem with people comparing Halo to CoD only. At this point, nearly every game with controllable characters could sprint, and most shooters allowed for personalized loadouts. You can say that Halo was trying to catch up to CoD, but let’s be real, Halo was just trying to appeal to a larger audience. 343 Industries apparently didn’t realize CoD and Battlefield fans won’t switch to Halo because Halo took a few ideas.

Frankly, I do not care what any other shooter has that made it into Halo 4 that CoD also has.

At that time i343 / Microsoft were chasing the CoD audience, because that was at that time the most similar shooter, and biggest, to Halo.

It’s quite astounding that gamers realise that fans of other shooters will not migrate to a second mimicing shooter, when they got the original, instead of the people sitting on the data, and those who pretty much run the gaming industry.
Few ideas? No, there were quite a significant amount of them, as well as gameplay changing ones.

> 2535460550943257;14914:
> By saying Halo 5: Combat Devolved, I meant that simply removing abilities does not make sense if games are supposed to evolve. Halo: Reach and Halo 4 already brought sprint to the table, so by removing sprint, that would just be devolving the combat.

> The only reason you’re even going there is because at any one point someone does not want something in Halo, they don’t post their own Game Design Document in order to show what they want instead.

“Evolve” is a buzzword, and going with “devolve” is just a wordplay to denote a negative notion to a certain action, or removal, without actually addressing the action itself.

> 2535460550943257;14914:
> Sprint does not let you throw grenades, shoot guns, and recharge shields, all of which you can do by simply not sprinting. Therefore, players are discouraged from sprinting unless you are getting around the map. I already mentioned Spartan Charge needs a major nerf, and unless you plan to shoulder-bash your opponent people generally don’t sprint during combat. Unless the goal is to be able to do these things while moving quickly.

Yeah, and the question was, if speed was ever an issue, what does sprint help in that case if BMS can just be bumped.
Spartan Charge is not part of sprint.
What benefit is there to the gameplay with having sprint if you remove those player abilities when they want to navigate the map at their best capacity in terms of speed?

> 2535460550943257;14914:
> This is an excellent question which I would be unable to find an answer for if I really wanted to crush sprint’s viability. I just think that limited sprint in a competitive scenario makes a lot of sense, because that further discourages people from using up their precious sprint. Other than that, I think sprint should stay just the way it is.

You do realise that since Halo 4, sprint has seen 2, if not 3 nerfs already, if you want to count the radar one.
Halo 4 -> Halo 5 Beta: Shield recharge reset
Halo 5 Beta -> Halo 5: Increased BMS, delta between max BMS and Sprint decreased.
Halo 5 Radar update: Sprinting alerts enemies of your presence on the motion tracker.

Making it limited would even further decrease it’s value and usability, especially for Competitive play.
I don’t see its use now even.

They tried to remove the issue of being able to flee encounters too easily. Removing one of Sprint’s usabilities, but they didn’t really succeed because it isn’t entirely removed.
So basically, it’s use as a mechanic is for transport, but BMS can do that, map entities can do that, clever map design can do that. All while not introducing the limitations sprint puts on a player wanting to navigate the map at full movement speed capacity.

Sprint’s only “redeeming” qualities has been, faster speed and being able to more easily escape.
However, escaping more easily decreases the depth of the game, and sprint adds slightly more complexity, so it’s seen as undesirable, evident by the shield nerf, and possibly the smaller Delta difference.
What’s left? Faster speed.
In a game which has built on movement and combat, it’s become separated into movement or combat, considering all the limitations put on the player to perform basic actions, and have their Health even, tied to sprint usage.

Unless you actually want to impose restrictions on players for moving around a map ( in a game series which has been about moving efficiently around the map and in combat without restrictions ), then sprint is an entirely useless mechanic which additionally takes up keypad space and development resources.

> 2535460550943257;14915:
> Sprint didn’t exist in the first four Halo FPS titles, and they appeared in the three most recent ones. On the mechanics standpoint, abandoning this mechanic now is equivalent to devolving Halo. It also would not make sense from a canonical standpoint, because supersoldiers who were once able to sprint would only able to jog. That does not make sense.

You seriously want to go there?

i343 controlls canon, they can make it happen in the lore.
A: Jog? You’ll find someone will probably post evidence of their speeds when they were capable of utilising their weaponry perfectly fine, at higher speeds than the current sprint speeds.
B: Want a small fan-fic reasion? New armors with active counter weights allowing the Spartans to move at their full speed, safely, while also being able to maintain full gun usage and full accuracy.

14917

> 2535460550943257;14915:
> > 2533274833081329;14913:
> > > 2535460550943257;14911:
> > > > 2533274833081329;14905:
> > > > > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > > > > I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
> > > > >
> > > > > Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
> > > >
> > > > This assumes there is only one way to “evolve”.
> > > >
> > > > We already went backwards from Halo 4 to Halo 5. We removed Loadouts, Jetpack, kill cams, Ordnance, re-purposed Armor abilities into Spartan Abilities, and went back to equal starts.
> > > >
> > > > So clearly going backwards isn’t always a bad idea.
> > > >
> > > > And it’s also funny that people want Halo to “evolve”, but when other people want to change Halo 5, suddenly they don’t want it to evolve anymore.
> > >
> > > We are talking about the combat itself, so the removal of loadouts, kill cams, and such does not necessarily affect the combat itself. Jetpack was replaced with thrusters, and ordnance exists through weapon pads and REQ stations. The combat itself did evolve, because there are different factors like thrusting and lowered aim assist.
> > >
> > > I do think that Halo 6 should evolve with a nerfed Spartan Charge, and for competitive multiplayer only limited sprint. Maybe we could get dual-wield capabilities back, and maybe a balanced Ground Pound hijack like the one in Halo Wars 2.
> >
> > Loadouts definitely affected the combat itself. Don’t know where you got the idea it didn’t. Every weapon had to be balanced roughly around each other, and it still didn’t work because some weapons ended up inherently better.
> >
> > Ordnance isn’t the same as weapon pads. Weapon pads are just an announcement of power weapons that we’ve always had in previous games. Ordanance removed the power weapons on the maps in most cases and brought them down in front of the player through Scorestreaks. REQ stations are only in Warzone and people still complained about that.
> >
> > Jetpack wasn’t replaced with Thrusters. Thruster pack was replaced with Thrusters. It went from an optional AA in Halo 4 (Halo Reach technically, with Evade), to being universal in Halo 5.
> >
> > Lowered aim assist is to an extent negated by the higher bullet magnetism, which took like 2 patches to try to fix but still didn’t fully get there.
> >
> > Is removing Sprint while increasing Base Movement Speed “devolving” Halo despite giving you more options?
>
> I did not explain myself well enough. I believe every player should have had all of the weapons available to them from the start, and for my purposes I’ll go ahead and assume 343 did that. It really does depend on somebody’s play-style. Every loadout weapon worked well in its own right. Most players prefer precision weapons like the Battle Rifle and the DMR, but using myself as an example, I played decently with Assault Rifles and Storm Rifles. So, when it comes down to combat situations, automatics work well for practiced users in their optimal ranges, and the same is true for precision weapons. In other words, somebody who favors automatics and grenades can construct a loadout around that and do just as well as the guy who favors Battle Rifles and Ordinance.
>
> I do understand what you’re saying with the Ordinance. Personal Ordinance has been removed in Halo 5 except for Warzone, where the REQ stations are essentially another version of them. I do think that Personal Ordinance should have been limited to BTB, though.
>
> I used jetpack because you mentioned it, but the Spartan Abilities as a whole (including thrusters) replaced the Armor Abilities as a whole (including jetpack).
>
> The high bullet magnetism is definitely a problem; I’m with you there. I do still feel the effects of the lowered aim assist though, so it accomplished something.

The BR and DMR were constantly at odds with each other trying to be the best weapon. And then at the end the BR became a 4 shot weapon and was just all around better except from the most extreme ranges. Even then, the Boltshot was a pocket Shotgun that made close range a chore and almost replaced the actual Shotgun.

That’s why I believe Loadouts shouldn’t be in an arena game like Halo. It brings each and every encounter down to chance. Instead of being about who is better, it is “who had the better Loadout”, and that’s something you can’t predict because it’s all handled outside of spawn. Someone has the inherent advantage depending on which Loadout you created.

Even if you preferred precision or automatic, you always started with one precision and one automatic anyway.

> 2535460550943257;14915:
> Sprint didn’t exist in the first four Halo FPS titles, and they appeared in the three most recent ones. On the mechanics standpoint, abandoning this mechanic now is equivalent to devolving Halo.

But adding that mechanic ended up worse than what you already started with. You went from being able to move and shoot at the same time, to only having a choice of moving or shooting. From that perspective, adding Sprint already “devolved” Halo. You’re looking at the quantity of mechanics, not the quality of each mechanic.

You wanted Dual Wielding back, when it was removed for a reason. It didn’t exist in the last 3 Halo games, wouldn’t putting Dual Wielding back “devolve” Halo, or was Reach already devolving Halo by getting rid of it? That isn’t even about getting into the quality of Dual Wielding in the first place.

> 2535460550943257;14915:
> It also would not make sense from a canonical standpoint, because supersoldiers who were once able to sprint would only able to jog. That does not make sense.

You’re going to have to do a lot better than “canon” reasons. That idea was dropped a long time ago.

You’d have to explain why supersoldiers are suddenly unable to run and shoot at the same time.

You’d have to explain why supersoldiers can’t aim a Pistol, or any weapon correctly and succumb to recoil.

You’d have to explain why supersoldiers drown the moment they go underwater.

You’d have to explain why sometimes there’s fall damage and sometimes there’s not.

Even the lore itself contradicts what happens in the gameplay.

14918

> 2535460550943257;14901:
> I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
>
> Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
>
> For the most part, I think that sprint is just fine. In multiplayer, it should be finite, so you can only sprint for 7 or 8 seconds before returning to walk speed. People should realize that sprint is not really used in combat situations unless one uses Spartan Charge, which I already mentioned is a problem. In Halo 5, running away from a gunfight is much more difficult. To address the argument that two movement speeds are not necessary, I’ll just point out that you cannot shoot a gun, recharge shields, throw grenades, etc. Simply increasing the movement speed will still allow for these things.

I don’t think the need for games franchises to ‘evolve’ should give any and all changes implemented an automatic free pass. I would argue custom loadouts represent a parallel sub genre shift within the remit of FPS, not an evolution. There isn’t just one ‘logical next step’, games can ‘evolve’ in any infinite number of directions.

14919

> 2533274797849057;14918:
> > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
> >
> > Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
> >
> > For the most part, I think that sprint is just fine. In multiplayer, it should be finite, so you can only sprint for 7 or 8 seconds before returning to walk speed. People should realize that sprint is not really used in combat situations unless one uses Spartan Charge, which I already mentioned is a problem. In Halo 5, running away from a gunfight is much more difficult. To address the argument that two movement speeds are not necessary, I’ll just point out that you cannot shoot a gun, recharge shields, throw grenades, etc. Simply increasing the movement speed will still allow for these things.
>
> I don’t think the need for games franchises to ‘evolve’ should give any and all changes implemented an automatic free pass. I would argue custom loadouts represent a parallel sub genre shift within the remit of FPS, not an evolution. There isn’t just one ‘logical next step’, games can ‘evolve’ in any infinite number of directions.

I would think of it like a road. There are plenty of other roads that link up, and there are many possible turns. In my analogy, the “logical next step” is just following the road you have already been traveling. I think that the sprint mechanic is an example. Reach implemented it as an armor ability, and 343 made the “logical next step” in making it a basic game mechanic. The analogy isn’t perfect, I’ll admit.

14920

> 2533274833081329;14917:
> > 2535460550943257;14915:
> > > 2533274833081329;14913:
> > > > 2535460550943257;14911:
> > > > > 2533274833081329;14905:
> > > > > > 2535460550943257;14901:
> > > > > > I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
> > > > >
> > > > > This assumes there is only one way to “evolve”.
> > > > >
> > > > > We already went backwards from Halo 4 to Halo 5. We removed Loadouts, Jetpack, kill cams, Ordnance, re-purposed Armor abilities into Spartan Abilities, and went back to equal starts.
> > > > >
> > > > > So clearly going backwards isn’t always a bad idea.
> > > > >
> > > > > And it’s also funny that people want Halo to “evolve”, but when other people want to change Halo 5, suddenly they don’t want it to evolve anymore.
> > > >
> > > > We are talking about the combat itself, so the removal of loadouts, kill cams, and such does not necessarily affect the combat itself. Jetpack was replaced with thrusters, and ordnance exists through weapon pads and REQ stations. The combat itself did evolve, because there are different factors like thrusting and lowered aim assist.
> > > >
> > > > I do think that Halo 6 should evolve with a nerfed Spartan Charge, and for competitive multiplayer only limited sprint. Maybe we could get dual-wield capabilities back, and maybe a balanced Ground Pound hijack like the one in Halo Wars 2.
>
> The BR and DMR were constantly at odds with each other trying to be the best weapon. And then at the end the BR became a 4 shot weapon and was just all around better except from the most extreme ranges. Even then, the Boltshot was a pocket Shotgun that made close range a chore and almost replaced the actual Shotgun.
>
> That’s why I believe Loadouts shouldn’t be in an arena game like Halo. It brings each and every encounter down to chance. Instead of being about who is better, it is “who had the better Loadout”, and that’s something you can’t predict because it’s all handled outside of spawn. Someone has the inherent advantage depending on which Loadout you created.
>
> Even if you preferred precision or automatic, you always started with one precision and one automatic anyway.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535460550943257;14915:
> > Sprint didn’t exist in the first four Halo FPS titles, and they appeared in the three most recent ones. On the mechanics standpoint, abandoning this mechanic now is equivalent to devolving Halo.
>
> But adding that mechanic ended up worse than what you already started with. You went from being able to move and shoot at the same time, to only having a choice of moving or shooting. From that perspective, adding Sprint already “devolved” Halo. You’re looking at the quantity of mechanics, not the quality of each mechanic.
>
> You wanted Dual Wielding back, when it was removed for a reason. It didn’t exist in the last 3 Halo games, wouldn’t putting Dual Wielding back “devolve” Halo, or was Reach already devolving Halo by getting rid of it? That isn’t even about getting into the quality of Dual Wielding in the first place.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535460550943257;14915:
> > It also would not make sense from a canonical standpoint, because supersoldiers who were once able to sprint would only able to jog. That does not make sense.
>
> You’re going to have to do a lot better than “canon” reasons. That idea was dropped a long time ago.
>
> You’d have to explain why supersoldiers are suddenly unable to run and shoot at the same time.
>
> You’d have to explain why supersoldiers can’t aim a Pistol, or any weapon correctly and succumb to recoil.
>
> You’d have to explain why supersoldiers drown the moment they go underwater.
>
> You’d have to explain why sometimes there’s fall damage and sometimes there’s not.
>
> Even the lore itself contradicts what happens in the gameplay.

If the BR were a 5-shot weapon, the DMR would be way superior. 343 implemented personal loadouts as the next step from Bungie’s predetermined loadouts, and they did a phenomenal job organizing everything. The Boltshot was definitely powerful, but I don’t remember getting killed by that thing near as much as I get killed by Spartan Charge in Halo 5. Having used every weapon in Halo 4 frequently, I can honestly say that every weapon performs well under its designed ranges. It was very rare for me to die to a precision weapon when I was up close with an automatic.

I actually do prefer equal starts. While I enjoyed the loadouts and appreciate them for what they were, equal stars work better for a game like Halo.

I always did spawn with a precision and an automatic. Usually I would choose my Tactical Package, Armor Ability, and my Support Upgrade to support only one weapon, but I would have the other type in my Secondary slot just in case.

You can still move and shoot, although you do not walk as fast. Sprinting removed a higher base movement speed, but replaced it with an overall higher movement speed which is discouraged by eliminating your ability to throw grenades and fire a gun. That actually addresses the quality of the mechanic as well; it serves that particular purpose, and it works. The pros in Halo 4 and 5 don’t sprint all over the map; they tend to walk.

Dual wielding was removed because of its effect on armor abilities. Imagine players in Reach crouching around with camo while dual wielding plasma rifles. That would be too powerful. I did not play Halo 3 in its prime, but I can almost guarantee some players did this. However, nobody could spawn with camo in Halo 3; in Reach, you could. Halo 5 already removed the armor abilities, and I do think that dual wielding can be balanced.

I’d like to believe the war games simulators are not real Spartans shooting each other. In fact, this is certainly not the case (except for Breakout, possibly, where you could use stun rounds) because of the respawn system. I can respawn and look at my dead body, and that is certainly not realistic. You have probably heard of the equipment which lets you run and turn in-game by running and turning in real life. There could probably be something similar on the Infinity, where Spartans enter a booth, which takes them into a sort of imperfect alternate reality where they compete and respawn. When they sprint, they are automatically disabled from shooting guns and throwing grenades. If these simulators added sprint and the limitations that come with it, then imperfections such as not being able to run and shoot, recoil from guns, fall damage, difficulties in the aiming system, drowning when they go underwater (i.e. leaving the battlefield), etc.

I will admit, Infinity could remove sprint and remain canonically consistent if my theory is true. Honestly, I think they would decide to keep sprint. You probably disagree, and truly there is no way to enter the minds of the division of the Infinity crew responsible for these simulators.

The alternate-reality theory would explain all of the game glitches, because you could blame the faulty simulator system.

14921

> 2535460550943257;14901:
> I don’t think I have appeared on this thread yet (maybe I did a long time ago), but Halo is supposed to evolve with each title. In Halo: Reach, Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough. Halo 4 was supposed to evolve as well, and the next logical step from Reach was incorporating sprint as a game mechanic. In Reach, several gamemodes let you choose predetermined loadouts, so the next logical step was incorporating loadouts that the players could customize. People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.
>
> Fans still complained, so 343 did revert back to equal starts, but Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint. So, they replaced them with Spartan Abilities, which I think are just fine except for Spartan Charge.
>
> For the most part, I think that sprint is just fine. In multiplayer, it should be finite, so you can only sprint for 7 or 8 seconds before returning to walk speed. People should realize that sprint is not really used in combat situations unless one uses Spartan Charge, which I already mentioned is a problem. In Halo 5, running away from a gunfight is much more difficult. To address the argument that two movement speeds are not necessary, I’ll just point out that you cannot shoot a gun, recharge shields, throw grenades, etc. Simply increasing the movement speed will still allow for these things.

Simply adding things doesn’t equate to “evolving”, especially when those additions are met with such resistance.

"Bungie added sprint as an armor ability which could be swapped for a drop shield, active camo, and armor lock. That was balanced enough."Balanced how? Jet packs destroyed map control, a focus point for the pvp. How do you chase a jet pack with only sprint if he’s going under and over the maps? (Good god you even brought up armor lock) armor lock was nerfed and was still arguably the #1 hated ability even with the nerf. It slowed the game down by prolonging engagements, it even added a get out of jail free card if you could use it long enough for a team mate to back you up. It was an ability that can instant destroy vehicles and it was even a pickup ability, you spawned with it right off the bat. It’s as bad as halo 4 giving you a picket shotgun with the bolt right from the get go. Sprint itself in both games was used to run away from engagements, in H4s case it was even worse when paired with the ordnance drop as many players would get chased, head around a corner and pop that ordnance to get just what they need to kill the pursuing player.

the thing about adding things is it has to mesh with the game, simply adding it doesn’t mean your “evolving”.

“Halo 5: Guardians would have to be called Halo 5: Combat Devolved if 343 simply removed armor abilities and sprint.” it’s not really devolving if it’s beneficial to the game. You can find franchises reberting back to previous mechanics and making it work better than they could incorporating new ones based of the trends of the Industry. BF1 went WW1 and did great, it even printed CoD to try WW2 which has already done better than infinite warfare. Those two games dumped a lot of futuristic BS and went to an older style that some consider “outdated”. The thing is they did better dumping much of the newer things people considered as “evolving”. I’ve said it for a while now, since halos numbers gave only been declining, what dies it hurt to try an older style iteration on a new game. That would then put the “halo needs to go back to its roots” to rest if it succeeds or fails.

“People say it is like CoD, but unlike other FPS games the loadouts were fairly balanced. No one loadout was significantly better than the next one.” I’ve already argued the abilities being an issue for loadouts (for halo) but I’m definitely curious how other games do loadouts in an unbalanced manner, especially twitch shooters when they are the ones that accel with it.

14922

> 2547348539238747;14896:
> > 2533274801973487;14833:
> > > 2547348539238747;14827:
> > > Halo Reach, H4, and H5 have all embraced a larger element of randomness and personal empowerment over a highly controllable arena and teamwork. That’s what makes the games more fun for lower skill/new players. It’s also what killed those games for the highly skilled, highly organised players. It’s also why you see players losing it when full teams and clans steam roll people on arena and warzone.
> >
> > I’M afraid you have something mixed up here, new Halo games are putting a lot less focus onto personal empowerment.
> > personal empowerment is steadily decreasing since HCE. It starts with small things like team size (2v2 has a bigger emphasis on the singular player), and continues with stuff like sprint (it’s a lot easier to run away or rush to help a teammate despite bad positioning) and your starting weapon (a non-random utility weapon with a high delta between a slow average TTK and a fast perfect TTK let the individual shine rather then making “team-shooting” so overly effective) I’m not too sure about which order to put R-5 in but when you look at the OT, HCE has the biggest personal empowerment, followed by H2, followed by H3 and then it all goes down the drain…
>
> No, that’s the skill gap that’s decreasing.
>
> By personal empowerment I’m talking about focusing on K/D, personal unlock, personal loadouts, perks, drops, adding extras to the base player abilities rather than the map etc. All the changes that 343i added (and Bungie during Reach) was done to enhance the player’s perception of their character’s abilities. Rather than enhancing gameplay mechanics. That’s why you get so many banging on about “feeling like a Spartan”, instead of the benefits of the mechanics.
>
> Granted, Halo CE had a huge skill gap and single players could dominate. The difference is between actually being effective, and the perception of such. Low skill players will never feel powerful in Halo CE, but that is why so many don’t like it. Where as from Reach, H4, H5 Destiny, and all games of the last decade or so has put more importance on making the player ‘feel’ strong, and the solo experience.

in the end, it’s just semantics and I think we both want the same thing. I get your point but I think you’re making it sound too easy. What you’re describing, I’d much rather call “power fantasy”, similar to how sprint is a illusion of speed, having pokemon attacks and perks will create a illusion of power rather then actual empowerment. These power fantasys can go hand in hand with a decreased skill gap, infact, all those factors can influence one another.
I’d argue that H3 did have rather high skill gap but a rather low’ish amount of actual “personal empowerment” and a low’ish level of “power fantasy” due to fancy stuff like dual wielding or equipment, add assassinations and you could increase power fantasies without influencing the skill gap.
splitting these up might seem narrow-minded but in the end, I believe we need to be as precise as possible when expressing you concerns so 343 can’t read anything wrong into it.
My perfect Halo would come with a high level of personal empowerment (read: I can do good on my own and don’t have to rely on my team mate) high skill gap (read: my skill translates into my gameplay) and a low level of “power fantasy” (read: enough stuff for kids to feel cool, but nothing that would -Yoink- with either skill gap or empowerment)
Making sure people don’t feel totally powerless should be the job of the Matchmaking, good players match good players, bad ones match other bad ones.

14923

> 2535460550943257;14920:
> If the BR were a 5-shot weapon, the DMR would be way superior.

It was a 5-shot weapon, and the DMR was superior for a while. Then the BR became a 4-shot weapon, and then it became superior.

> 2535460550943257;14920:
> The Boltshot was definitely powerful, but I don’t remember getting killed by that thing near as much as I get killed by Spartan Charge in Halo 5. Having used every weapon in Halo 4 frequently, I can honestly say that every weapon performs well under its designed ranges.

That’s because the Boltshot had to be hit by like 2 separate nerfs in updates just to try and limit it, and it was still comparable to the Shotgun. Clearly not every weapon performed perfectly well if they had to create an entire system of backend tuning and then changed a section of the sandbox.

> 2535460550943257;14920:
> You can still move and shoot, although you do not walk as fast. Sprinting removed a higher base movement speed, but replaced it with an overall higher movement speed which is discouraged by eliminating your ability to throw grenades and fire a gun. That actually addresses the quality of the mechanic as well; it serves that particular purpose, and it works. The pros in Halo 4 and 5 don’t sprint all over the map; they tend to walk.

In other words, I have to choose between moving at my maximum speed and shooting and inflicting damage. Why was the higher base movement speed “removed”? There wasn’t and there still isn’t any need for that. The very few benefits gained by Sprint is overshadowed by the many negatives that come with it.

If Sprint is such a detriment to use, then why does it exist in the game? Why does a movement mechanic exist in the game to be avoided? To make it simple, what can Sprint do that simply walking faster couldn’t do?

I know you’re going to tell me “it adds a layer of strategy! To know when to Sprint and when not to Sprint!” But it’s a layer of strategy that only fully exists because we took away choices for the player.

In previous games you can get almost anywhere and everywhere in the map’s design, and you can fight anywhere while doing it. You can fight your way to a better position by just out-strafing whoever is after you.

What’s the point of creating a mechanic with its own drawbacks when you can make a slightly different mechanic with all of the benefits and none of the drawbacks?

> 2535460550943257;14920:
> Dual wielding was removed because of its effect on armor abilities. Imagine players in Reach crouching around with camo while dual wielding plasma rifles. That would be too powerful. I did not play Halo 3 in its prime, but I can almost guarantee some players did this. However, nobody could spawn with camo in Halo 3; in Reach, you could. Halo 5 already removed the armor abilities, and I do think that dual wielding can be balanced.

No it wasn’t, because it was decreased in Halo 3 compared to how it was in Halo 2. The SMG lost its status as a starting weapon in favor of the returned (non-dual wielding) AR, the Needler can’t be Dual Wielded anymore and replaced with the Spiker, the Mauler was a shotgun that could only one shot kill when Dual Wielded.

Dual Wielding is simply a sandbox nightmare. Either you have weapons be okay on it’s own, and blatantly OP when Dual Wielded, or a weapon becomes useless unless it’s dual wielded. Each “Dual-Wieldable” weapon had to be balanced in a way where it’s okay on it’s own, but somehow still okay when you double the damage, which in turn halves the time to kill. An SMG that’s Dual Wielded would have a TTK of half a second. That’s faster than the CE Pistol in Halo CE.

> 2535460550943257;14920:
> I’d like to believe the war games simulators are not real Spartans shooting each other. In fact, this is certainly not the case (except for Breakout, possibly, where you could use stun rounds) because of the respawn system. I can respawn and look at my dead body, and that is certainly not realistic. You have probably heard of the equipment which lets you run and turn in-game by running and turning in real life. There could probably be something similar on the Infinity, where Spartans enter a booth, which takes them into a sort of imperfect alternate reality where they compete and respawn. When they sprint, they are automatically disabled from shooting guns and throwing grenades. If these simulators added sprint and the limitations that come with it, then imperfections such as not being able to run and shoot, recoil from guns, fall damage, difficulties in the aiming system, drowning when they go underwater (i.e. leaving the battlefield), etc.

Then you’d have to explain how that happens in older games, when there was no Infinity or simulators. No one said Halo CE-3 all happened in a simulator, and if they were, why the Sprint “limitation” being implemented in Halo 4-5?

Halo 5 has already proven they have some sort of control of weapons and their statistics within simulators, so why wouldn’t they try to make it as close to “realistic” as possible in comparisons to Spartans? Why would they need to make a vastly different experience? And if they are disabled from shooting guns and throwing grenades, why? Spartans have already been seen doing both at the same time.

Also, the Campaign. Not in a simulator, yet these limitations still happen. A game cannot be fully balanced around lore. Otherwise one Flood Infection Form would kill you, not 100.

14924

[deleted]

14925

This thread has some interesting arguments, but really boils down to “I like sprint” and “I don’t like sprint.”