Seems like a cheap way to design maps. Haven’t got to worry about size or vehicle placement if you can unlessly sprint, and how is that even possible doesn’t seem to have much in game logic to it.
Would prefer a return to the different abilities, I don’t know why they were hated so much.
> 2535426108243641;14926:
> Seems like a cheap way to design maps. Haven’t got to worry about size or vehicle placement if you can unlessly sprint, and how is that even possible doesn’t seem to have much in game logic to it.
>
> Would prefer a return to the different abilities, I don’t know why they were hated so much.
Agreed. I’m not sure why Bungie and 343i thought that AAs had to go hand in hand with loadouts. If people didn’t like loadouts, why not make AAs map pickups. Like equipment from Halo 3 but reusable. Halo Reach introduced AAs but only in loadouts. I used to lay more abilities out in forge. Bungie never took advantage of that though. Then 343i did the same thing along with scrapping loadouts and abilities at once.
> 2535409816624774;14925:
> This thread has some interesting arguments, but really boils down to “I like sprint” and “I don’t like sprint.”
Not really. It’s not sprint I don’t like. I love sprint in many games, and I don’t like it in others.
If it boils down to anything it would be “I prefer the simplicity, pacing and flow of the classic gameplay” vs “I like feeling like I’m doing more than I really am”
No sprint in the new Halo! Look at how good CSGO is, and look at how well COD did by returning their roots! Please, return to Halo 2 and 3s roots! Thank you!
Personally, I like sprint. I don’t think it’s as much of a burden others are making it out to be. The only issue I have with sprint is how maps are scaled to accommodate it. I’d much rather have maps be the size they were in Halo 3 and Reach, then just have sprint in addition.
> 2535416616313329;14872:
> > 2533274855740591;14844:
> > > 2535416616313329;14828:
> > > > 2547348539238747;14827:
> > > > > 2535416616313329;14824:
> > > > > > 2533274802441922;14821:
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > If the future Halos remove sprint but keep the multiplayer enjoyable like 4, I will be fine with that too.
> > > >
> > > > Halo 4 had the worst performing MP out of all the Halo games, and sprint wasn’t the worst thing about the title either.
> > > >
> > > > 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.
> > > >
> > > > You say you are 21 and didn’t get xbl until 2016, so is it reasonable to assume you haven’t experienced Halo 2 and Halo 3 online during their haydays?, where the Matchmaking system did a very admirable job of dividing different skilled players based on their skill. It created even and fun matches. So rather than evening out the skill levels through MM, today’s games even out the skill levels through game mechanics. Today’s MM systems do not do anywhere near good enough to divide people based on skill. That’s why you see 50’s and platinums up against 10s and bronze. The only way to experience that sort of onesided-ness before would be to exploit the system.
> > >
> > > I have the opposite opinion about Halo 4. I have the most fun in Halo 4, and sprint isn’t the BEST thing added.
> > >
> > > I actually despise Warzone in Halo 5 because of clans steamrolling randoms. My problem with older Halos is grenade jumping, crouch jumping, and button combos(aka, cheating). I never have used button combos and refuse to use BXR in Halo 2 because it is cheating. Halo 4 and Reach added abilities like jet packs. Halo 5 added clamber(which I approve of). These changes remove experienced players getting into camping spots that I can’t get to.
> > >
> > > I dont mind some randomness to account for low population but why is the population low? I think we already discussed this earlier in this forum, but why is there no multiplayer games with the same population as Halo 3 did in 2007? Is sprint really the reason? Do most players prefer ultra competitive games?
> > > Maybe there is too many class based shooters like COD, Battlefield, and Halo 4/Reach. Though I think Halo 4 is a very unique game. I can’t find a game like Halo 4 anywhere else.
> >
> > How are button combos cheating ? They are available for everyone in the game to use. It just takes time to learn them because they aren’t easy to do. Cheating is modding your Xbox to make your gun have unlimited ammo and endless clip. You want clamber because it lets you get to jumps easier ? Well that’s a skill in itself learning jumps with grenades and crouching. You say you can’t get to the camping spots in older halos, but how much have you really tried ?
>
> Do do you believe cheat codes are cheating? Anybody can look up cheat codes. Did Bungie intend for people to use button combos?
>
> I have litteraly spent half an hour, trying to pick up a scull in Halo 3. I read online that I needed to grenade jump. So I spent all that time trying to grenade jump without killing myself . Frag grenades bounce too much and plasma grenades have little AOE. I have attempted to crouch jump a few times. I didn’t even know about crouch jumping until I noticed Halo 2 players in places that they shouldn’t have gotten.
>
> It’s a different argument if more skill based game is good or bad. I prefer reduction in skill gap. I want to enjoy Halo but hate being destroyed by 50’s from Halo 2 and 3.
Cheat codes are a different thing totally because anybody can go look them up and use them regardless of skill. Button combos not everyone can do because they require practice to execute. Hard to say if Bungie put them in intentionally but it did make the competitive scene a lot more exciting
Halo has always had a large skill gap soo I don’t know why you want that to change. It’s extremely boring when all the kills are easy to get because there isn’t much difference in skill but that’s just my opinion.
Yea grenade jumps are hard to pull off but like anything they take practice
> 2535416616313329;14872:
> It’s a different argument if more skill based game is good or bad. I prefer reduction in skill gap. I want to enjoy Halo but hate being destroyed by 50’s from Halo 2 and 3.
If a game was properly ranked, you wouldn’t have matched 50s unless you were near a 50 yourself. Somehow I doubt you really faced enough 50s from Halo 2 or Halo 3 to be this against it. If the game was ranked (ie. not Reach or 4), you would have faced people who were of similar skill level to you.
They are 50s for a reason. They are more experienced and better than you. If they were 50s you wouldn’t have been able to beat them unless you were near their skill level. They deserve to win with their higher levels of skill.
You basically want to bring everyone down to your level instead of everyone fighting people their own levels.
Sprint should be kept, as it allows for more traversal of the battlefield, though I would be open to some modes without sprint.
> 2535439074829653;14933:
> Sprint should be kept, as it allows for more traversal of the battlefield, though I would be open to some modes without sprint.
Isn’t that what vehicles are for? Or man cannons?
Or just walking very fast like Speed Boost?
> 2533274833081329;14932:
> > 2535416616313329;14872:
> > It’s a different argument if more skill based game is good or bad. I prefer reduction in skill gap. I want to enjoy Halo but hate being destroyed by 50’s from Halo 2 and 3.
>
> If a game was properly ranked, you wouldn’t have matched 50s unless you were near a 50 yourself. Somehow I doubt you really faced enough 50s from Halo 2 or Halo 3 to be this against it. If the game was ranked (ie. not Reach or 4), you would have faced people who were of similar skill level to you.
>
> They are 50s for a reason. They are more experienced and better than you. If they were 50s you wouldn’t have been able to beat them unless you were near their skill level. They deserve to win with their higher levels of skill.
>
> You basically want to bring everyone down to your level instead of everyone fighting people their own levels.
I actually have been giving Halo 3 another chance. The multiplayer can be fun when properly matched. Having said that, I do get matched against high level players players too often. I probably get matched against 30’s or above at least every five games. Sometimes a level 5 will beat me, which shows how inaccurate the matchmaking system is. I am(as of right now) a level “15”, yet get killed by lower level players. What I hate is when the entire other team is 40-50s and our team is 10-20s. So, yeah I have had a quite a few matches with very bad scores. (For Example: 16 kills/50kills)
If I shouldn’t be able to beat higher level players, how does anybody improve rank? But yeah I get what your saying. In fact, that is my problem. Getting matched against people that are too far above my level of skill.
That sounds awfully like a “strawman” argument to me. I never said that I wanted to “bring everyone down”. I only want to lower the skill floor, while making it less than 1% chance of being matched against 40s or 50s.
> 2535416616313329;14935:
> > 2533274833081329;14932:
> > > 2535416616313329;14872:
> > > It’s a different argument if more skill based game is good or bad. I prefer reduction in skill gap. I want to enjoy Halo but hate being destroyed by 50’s from Halo 2 and 3.
> >
> > If a game was properly ranked, you wouldn’t have matched 50s unless you were near a 50 yourself. Somehow I doubt you really faced enough 50s from Halo 2 or Halo 3 to be this against it. If the game was ranked (ie. not Reach or 4), you would have faced people who were of similar skill level to you.
> >
> > They are 50s for a reason. They are more experienced and better than you. If they were 50s you wouldn’t have been able to beat them unless you were near their skill level. They deserve to win with their higher levels of skill.
> >
> > You basically want to bring everyone down to your level instead of everyone fighting people their own levels.
>
> I actually have been giving Halo 3 another chance. The multiplayer can be fun when properly matched. Having said that, I do get matched against high level players players too often. I probably get matched against 30’s or above at least every five games. Sometimes a level 5 will beat me, which shows how inaccurate the matchmaking system is. I am(as of right now) a level “15”, yet get killed by lower level players. What I hate is when the entire other team is 40-50s and our team is 10-20s. So, yeah I have had a quite a few matches with very bad scores. (For Example: 16 kills/50kills)
>
> If I shouldn’t be able to beat higher level players, how does anybody improve rank? But yeah I get what your saying. In fact, that is my problem. Getting matched against people that are too far above my level of skill.
>
> That sounds awfully like a “strawman” argument to me. I never said that I wanted to “bring everyone down”. I only want to lower the skill floor, while making it less than 1% chance of being matched against 40s or 50s.
Probably because the population of Halo 3 is too low after literally 10 years to provide enough players to provide much in the way of fair ranks for everyone at all times. Most people who play Halo 3 at this point are either really good (AKA 50s) or just starting out (1-10). Not many in between.
You improve rank by slowly beating people who are just slightly above your level. Rank 10s try to beat Rank 13-15 until they become 15 themselves, and then fight Rank 20 until they become 20, and so on. You don’t jump from 20-50.
Wasn’t really much of a strawman, just a conclusion I came to. You don’t want to be killed by 40s and 50s and are a fan of more random gameplay elements that allow you to kill said 40s and 50s. You don’t like how the more experienced players get all the power weapons so you want to spawn them for yourself.
> 2533274833081329;14936:
> > 2535416616313329;14935:
> > > 2533274833081329;14932:
> > > > 2535416616313329;14872:
> > > > It’s a different argument if more skill based game is good or bad. I prefer reduction in skill gap. I want to enjoy Halo but hate being destroyed by 50’s from Halo 2 and 3.
> > >
> > > If a game was properly ranked, you wouldn’t have matched 50s unless you were near a 50 yourself. Somehow I doubt you really faced enough 50s from Halo 2 or Halo 3 to be this against it. If the game was ranked (ie. not Reach or 4), you would have faced people who were of similar skill level to you.
> > >
> > > They are 50s for a reason. They are more experienced and better than you. If they were 50s you wouldn’t have been able to beat them unless you were near their skill level. They deserve to win with their higher levels of skill.
> > >
> > > You basically want to bring everyone down to your level instead of everyone fighting people their own levels.
> >
> > I actually have been giving Halo 3 another chance. The multiplayer can be fun when properly matched. Having said that, I do get matched against high level players players too often. I probably get matched against 30’s or above at least every five games. Sometimes a level 5 will beat me, which shows how inaccurate the matchmaking system is. I am(as of right now) a level “15”, yet get killed by lower level players. What I hate is when the entire other team is 40-50s and our team is 10-20s. So, yeah I have had a quite a few matches with very bad scores. (For Example: 16 kills/50kills)
> >
> > If I shouldn’t be able to beat higher level players, how does anybody improve rank? But yeah I get what your saying. In fact, that is my problem. Getting matched against people that are too far above my level of skill.
> >
> > That sounds awfully like a “strawman” argument to me. I never said that I wanted to “bring everyone down”. I only want to lower the skill floor, while making it less than 1% chance of being matched against 40s or 50s.
>
> Probably because the population of Halo 3 is too low after literally 10 years to provide enough players to provide much in the way of fair ranks for everyone at all times. Most people who play Halo 3 at this point are either really good (AKA 50s) or just starting out (1-10). Not many in between.
>
> You improve rank by slowly beating people who are just slightly above your level. Rank 10s try to beat Rank 13-15 until they become 15 themselves, and then fight Rank 20 until they become 20, and so on. You don’t jump from 20-50.
>
> Wasn’t really much of a strawman, just a conclusion I came to. You don’t want to be killed by 40s and 50s and are a fan of more random gameplay elements that allow you to kill said 40s and 50s. You don’t like how the more experienced players get all the power weapons so you want to spawn them for yourself.
BTW, I don’t know if I mentioned it, but I am playing Halo 3 as part of TMCC. Don’t know if the types of players are different on the original(x360) Halo 3. I was literally just playing Halo 2 classic. Two matches in a row were unbalanced, full of 49s, 50s, etc. My team had a 20 as the highest player.
[deleted]
> 2535416616313329;14935:
> That sounds awfully like a “strawman” argument to me. I never said that I wanted to “bring everyone down”. I only want to lower the skill floor, while making it less than 1% chance of being matched against 40s or 50s.
The issue is with how you phrased. When you say “I prefer a reduction in skill gap”, most people interpret “skill gap” as the gap between what a novice can accomplish in the game, and what the best player can accomplish in the game. To them “reduction in skill gap” is the same thing as “bringing everyone down”. You can’t really call it a strawman when it’s precisely what your statement means to them, regardless of how you wanted it to be interpreted.
I think everyone can get behind the idea of lowering the skill floor to make it easier for new players to get into the game, as long as it also doesn’t come with lowering the skill ceiling. But the problems you’re describing with matching players above your skill level have nothing to do with the skill floor, but the fact that you have faced players better than you. That issue cannot be addressed by gameplay design without lowering the skill ceiling. It’s in the domain of matchmaking, and outside the scope of this thread.
> 2535439074829653;14933:
> Sprint should be kept, as it allows for more traversal of the battlefield, though I would be open to some modes without sprint.
Excuse me, but what does “more traversal of the battlefield” mean?
I like sprint, it should be kept in Halo 6.
Can someone please explain why the hate for sprint?
> 2802686553820689;14942:
> Can someone please explain why the hate for sprint?
Here is a post I wrote a whole 33 pages back # dam this thread is huge. I hope it helps you understand the other side of the argument.
> 2802686553820689;14942:
> Can someone please explain why the hate for sprint?
In short:
I feel it’s an ability which makes the game more shallow at it’s worst and at it’s best it’s an unecessary ability which takes up space on the controller to accomplish something a simple change of a number could do as well.
I don’t feel it brings anything worthwhile to the game, and it seems like one of the only reasons it was shoeh… put into Halo was to appeal to an audience which weren’t interested in Halo to begin with.
> 2802686553820689;14942:
> Can someone please explain why the hate for sprint?
Because it’s an unnecessary complication for the game. Halo was most accessible when you had grenades, shoot, jump, and scope buttons. Another option would be just increasing base movement speed to be fast.
I personally am neutral with sprint, it could be removed and I’d be fine with it, as long as base speed was bumped up to halo 1 and 2’s levels.