The sprint discussion thread

Games Halo 5: Guardians
14986

> 2547348539238747;14985:
> > 2533274816788253;14978:
> > > 2533274801973487;14975:
> > > > 2533274816788253;14974:
> > > > > 2533274815533909;14973:
> > > > > > 2533275031935123;14965:
> > > > > > > 2533274816788253;14964:
> > > > > > > > 2533274825830455;14963:
> > > > > > > > > 2533274816788253;14962:
> > > > > > > > > I didn’t say as many kills, I said they didn’t get a kill when some one made it cover because of sprint. Also I didn’t down play others point of view.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > But this is a very demeaning thing to say, because it’s clearly meant to give the reader the impression that the people who complain about sprint only do so because they are newbies who can’t get a kill. Trying to offer it as an “explanation” for why people dislike sprint is at best misleading and disparaging, and at worst plain false.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > The reality is obviously highly nuanced. Some people in the community were skeptical of sprint even before the release of Reach, and the issue that it could make running away easier was surely understood before people played the beta. Then the verdict that this was indeed a problem was as much from being the one who ran away, as it was from someone else running away. In fact, personally being the one who ran away is probably ultimately the greater influence on the opinions of many, because any sensible person understands that you can’t evaluate the difficulty of something by the ease with which someone else does it. To convince yourself, you have to ensure that you can do it when you shouldn’t be able to.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 2533274816788253;14962:
> > > > > > > > > Just said they way over analyze sprint to try and back up their opinion.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Excuse us for trying to articulate our opinions clearly. Why anyone would expect anything but detailed analysis in a thread titled “The sprint discussion thread”, I don’t understand.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > You have a history of coming into this thread with dismissive posts that border being nonconstructive. If you don’t care to discuss sprint in the depth we do, then that’s fine. But mocking us for doing so is not.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > You see this kinda shows that the “anti sprinters” over analyze stuff. Never did I call any one a newbie or any of the sorts. I said they didn’t get a particular kill because of the mechanic of sprint…that is it. Halo plays just fine with and even without sprint and there are ways to play both. As for the future of Halo removing sprint at this point will more likely do more harm that good.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There is such a thing as “implying”, without expressly “stating”
> > > > > > As for doing more harm than good… How? You cant make a statement like that without backing it up with some sort of information or data.
> > > > >
> > > > > (Bold) ya I kind of have to agree here with Delta5931. Why do you think it would do more harm then good LethalQ? What’s your reasoning behind thinking that?? I’m genuinely curious.
> > > > >
> > > > > The way I see things is, the people who think Halo 1-3 are slow or clunky, that can be fixed by an increased base speed… Pretty simple really and I think then most of those people would be ok with sprint not being in then.
> > > > >
> > > > > Then you have a pile of people who don’t care if sprint is in or not, so they’ll play/buy the new Halo game no matter what so you don’t have to worry about them… But, you have a bunch of people who absolutely hate how Halo has sprint in and how it’s changed how the game feels/plays and won’t buy a Halo game with it in. Those are the players who you hope to attract.
> > > > >
> > > > > I haven’t heard of anyone saying that won’t buy a Halo game if sprint isn’t in it. Now, I’m sure they’re out there for sure but if I had to wager, I’d say they’re many more people who won’t play a Halo with sprint, then without.
> > > > >
> > > > > Also, sales figures of pass games show us that Halo without sprint sells well and with the success of games like OverWatch and Doom (especially Overwatch) shows us that people are more then willing and ok with, playing a game that doesn’t have a sprint animation.
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally, I just don’t feel sprint is needed in Halo. I don’t hate it, but it does change a lot of things in the game with it being in. If it was me, my new Halo game would have a Halo 1-3 style game gameplay, with Clamber, Interactive environment like H2A had, and equipment that are map pick up, one time use items like Halo 3 did. The possibilities of equipment are nearly endless!!! Honestly!!!
> > > > > Just think about all the things you could do, my god!
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyways, that’s moreless my thought s :wink: lol
> >
> > At least H5 is on the most played list and doom never has been for a long time.
>
> I know Doom has been brought up, but originally when we brought up Doom it was used as a counter to “Classic Halo is too slow without sprint”, and Doom perfectly demonstrates how games without sprint can feel fast.
>
> It’s also worth noting that Doom is not Halo. Doom does not have a reputation on consoles for being a strong MP game. Even on a design level, Doom (2016) and Halo, despite both being Arena shooters, do not play the same. Halo is focused more on map control while Doom is focused more on constantly moving around the map. This shows in the mechanics of each game. How picks up, health, weapons etc all work around the core design of each game.
>
> So comparing the two is not going to work. The different brands have different perceptions on each platform. The different gameplay styles have different audiences too. MCC did very well on the top list, even with the massive issues the game had, and continues to have.
>
> Also also, outside of NA Halo 5 is pretty much dead. Europe all bought PS4s and even with those that are left, Halo 5 is very low on the top played list.
>
>
> > 2533274816788253;14979:
> > > 2533274833081329;14977:
> > > > 2533274816788253;14974:
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 2533274816788253;14974:
> > > >
> >
> > If there is a ton of people who don’t want sprint in Halo where are they? Why isn’t there way more games in customs being played with classic settings?
>
> They bought Halo 4, and was disappointed.
>
> They bought MCC, and was disappointed.
>
> Why would they buy Halo 5 only to have to fix the game themselves to even enjoy it?

Those that did buy Halo 5 likely just quit playing when they realized how far removed the mechanics were from older Halos.

14987

Can’t quote every one so… In regards to Doom it maybe a good game but never making the most played list shows just because a FPS doesn’t have sprint and a fast base movement doesn’t mean its going to have a strong population. I feel most place to much blame on a mechanic for Halo’s lack of population when it’s more so based on 343 inability to make a fully functional game on Xbox one in general. The major botch of MCC and H5 is pretty unstable unless you have excellent connections. I feel for the players who don’t like sprint but odds are it’s here to stay. 343 seems to like lore injected into everything in Halo so removing it won’t make much sense lore wise. 343 said before H4 launched that Spartans are super soldiers in super suits and that is how the game should play (something to that effect anyways). I can some what agree with that. Now l love Halo either way. I still think H2A was the best Halo ever made it’s just to bad it was apart of that major botch MCC and didn’t get it’s proper respect by being a stand alone game with more remastered content. However H5 could have been an awesome game as well but to many missteps, bugs, and bad servers has practically done it in.

14988

I always thought it was dumb without it. These are elite super soldiers but the lost the ability to run a little faster. Especially since maps are getting bigger I think sprint will always be necessary. It would be cool if they disabled it in a classic mode.

14989

> 2533274835668951;14988:
> I always thought it was dumb without it. These are elite super soldiers but the lost the ability to run a little faster. Especially since maps are getting bigger I think sprint will always be necessary. It would be cool if they disabled it in a classic mode.

Simple solution is to make the maps smaller, thus making Sprint redundant.
As for the “Muh super sold1er!”, there’s a post a few pages back that deal with that issue. I always thought that running would compromise a Spartan’s ability to fight, as we see several times in this game, as players round corners and get shredded by a camper.
Anyway, find that post. Deals with the “Muh super sold1er!” arguement.

As for complexity, this is certainly an issue. We’re hitting the System Shock 2 issue now. Too many inputs, not enough buttons.

14990

> 2533274816788253;14987:
> Can’t quote every one so… In regards to Doom it maybe a good game but never making the most played list shows just because a FPS doesn’t have sprint and a fast base movement doesn’t mean its going to have a strong population. I feel most place to much blame on a mechanic for Halo’s lack of population when it’s more so based on 343 inability to make a fully functional game on Xbox one in general. The major botch of MCC and H5 is pretty unstable unless you have excellent connections. I feel for the players who don’t like sprint but odds are it’s here to stay. 343 seems to like lore injected into everything in Halo so removing it won’t make much sense lore wise. 343 said before H4 launched that Spartans are super soldiers in super suits and that is how the game should play (something to that effect anyways). I can some what agree with that. Now l love Halo either way. I still think H2A was the best Halo ever made it’s just to bad it was apart of that major botch MCC and didn’t get it’s proper respect by being a stand alone game with more remastered content. However H5 could have been an awesome game as well but to many missteps, bugs, and bad servers has practically done it in.

The biggest argument that DOOM supplies is that just because a game doesn’t have Sprint, doesn’t mean it’s not fast.

So if another mechanic can do what Sprint can but better, why are we still using Sprint?

Which rolls around to the million dollar question: What can Sprint do that simply moving faster can’t do?
“343 seems to like lore injected into everything in Halo so removing it won’t make much sense lore wise. 343 said before H4 launched that Spartans are super soldiers in super suits and that is how the game should play (something to that effect anyways). I can some what agree with that.”
Again, all of that falls apart when you realize that Spartans can run and shoot at the same time. Clearly that’s a disconnect from the lore and the gameplay. If you want evidence, just watch the first cutscene of Halo 5. Team Osiris can run, slide down a mountain, and shoot all at the same time, but apparently for us we can’t do any of that.

The only reason people use this argument is because it fits their narrative to justify Sprint in the first place. Suddenly these “lore” based super soldiers lost the ability to run and shoot at the same time?

Notice how none of those people have anything to say about ADS and how it brings a gun to your face for aiming, despite the fact that it’s already established that their visor does the zooming for them so they don’t have to manually aim the gun? It just doesn’t make sense.

14991

> 2533274825830455;14976:
> > 2533274801973487;14975:
> > You’re funny
> > 1) bringing up the most played list list as a H5 fan…
>
> I don’t really get what’s funny about this. Considering the context was Doom being given as an example of a game that “shows us that people are more then willing and ok with, playing a game that doesn’t have a sprint animation”, it’s completely appropriate to point out that it didn’t do any better than Halo 5, the popularity of which people in turn consider a failure.Therefore it can’t both be true at the same time that Halo 5 is an unsuccesful game, and that Doom is an example of a successful game without sprint.
>
> After seeing you criticize LethalQ for mocking others, I sure thought you wouldn’t resort to doing the same thing. I don’t see the point of asking someone to take you seriously when you’re not even willing to return the favor.

  1. Doom was recieved well for it’s SP part, not it’s MP, which usually is what keeps those games up in those lists (with RPGs beeing the exection of course). The MP suffers from similar issues like modern Halo, so I think you can make the point of saying that people can enjoy playing a game even if it doesn’t have sprint even if Dooms MP didn’t succed in the long run, if people didn’t like sprint-less gameplay, they would tear the SP apart as well.
  2. I might be mixing stuff up here but isn’t the regular counter argument for people saying “halo 5 is failure, just look how low it is on that list” something like “well those lists don’t mean -Yoink-”, so why does this list mean nothing when it is beeing used against Halo, but it’s perfectly fine to use it against other games?

As for hte last part, guilty as charged and nothing to whitewash there… Guess I’m tired of trying to argue with people that show no interst in understanding the other side and probably shouldn’t have done it, I still did but I guess I survive even if I won’t be able to have a proper conversation with him :wink:

Anyway, I have some huge respect for everyone still argueing for this cause, I however have not much hope left 343 will do something for people like “us”. In some ways, I guess LethalQ is right; 343 will try to cater to thier current userbase rather then their old fanbase and double down on their vision of Halo…
I hope I’m wrong…

14992

> 2533274816788253;14987:
> Can’t quote every one so… In regards to **(**1) Doom it maybe a good game but never making the most played list shows just because a FPS doesn’t have sprint and a fast base movement doesn’t mean its going to have a strong population. (2) I feel most place to much blame on a mechanic for Halo’s lack of population when it’s more so based on 343 inability to make a fully functional game on Xbox one in general. The major botch of MCC and H5 is pretty unstable unless you have excellent connections. I feel for the players who don’t like sprint but odds are it’s here to stay. (3) 343 seems to like lore injected into everything in Halo so removing it won’t make much sense lore wise. 343 said before H4 launched that Spartans are super soldiers in super suits and that is how the game should play (something to that effect anyways). I can some what agree with that. Now l love Halo either way. (4) I still think H2A was the best Halo ever made it’s just to bad it was apart of that major botch MCC and didn’t get it’s proper respect by being a stand alone game with more remastered content. However H5 could have been an awesome game as well but to many missteps, bugs, and bad servers has practically done it in.

  1. Again, that’s misrepresenting the argument. The argument isn’t “no sprint would have a stronger population”, the argument is “you can have a fast game without sprint”, which Doom shows.

  2. I obviously can’t talk for everyone, but for me, sprint isn’t the sole cause of the problems (both gameplay-wise and community-wise) with Halo 5. Sprint is a symptom and one that has knock on effects of its own. 343i are trying to blend Halo with other mechanics and gameplay designs of other games. To do that they need to add in extra abilities and features that clash with classic Halo. So sprint is a symptom of 343i’s misguided design, and then sprint also affects the gameplay at a core level, having its own effects such as map design, weapon/grenade damage/functions, aiming issues etc.

We fought this misguided design by demanding that loadouts, ordnance, perks, sprint etc be taken out. They took out everything except sprint. So now we continue to fight to have that removed too.

  1. It’s been shown, all in media that Spartans can run and gun at the same time. So the lore excuse, is just that, an excuse. It makes more sense from a lore point of view to not have sprint for Spartans

  2. Again, Halo 2A was a victim of 343i, but still. By recognising that Halo 2A is a fantastic game, you have to recognise that classic gameplay works. Which then leads you to ask why sprint is included in the first place, which leads you to conclude that sprint is a pointless mechanic, show-horned in to carter to players who wouldn’t and mostly don’t play Halo anyway. Game design isn’t about throwing in everything you possibly can before you ship your game. It’s about having a clear vision for the gameplay and making that fun. If a mechanic doesn’t work you just don’t include it. It’s a huge balancing act, one that has been thrown off in recent years by Devs trying to cram in as much MTX and lootboxes as possible, and making sure they tick those checklists of features. It’s bad game design.

As gamers, we have a duty to call this stuff out. When we don’t, Publishers like EA will keep pushing it until they do a Battlefront 2. Push gamers to their limits. We should have called out lootboxes years ago, I have been, but because players gave them passes, it continued. The same goes for Halo, and any other franchise you love. You can’t just give them a pass. If you can see that Halo 2A is a better experience than Halo 5, then you should be voicing that opinion first. That should be the most prominent point when discussing these games. It will let 343i and MS know which experience the community prefers.

14993

> 2533274801973487;14991:
> 1) Doom was recieved well for it’s SP part, not it’s MP, which usually is what keeps those games up in those lists (with RPGs beeing the exection of course). The MP suffers from similar issues like modern Halo, so I think you can make the point of saying that people can enjoy playing a game even if it doesn’t have sprint even if Dooms MP didn’t succed in the long run, if people didn’t like sprint-less gameplay, they would tear the SP apart as well.

I’m not trying to argue that Doom isn’t a great example of how movement in a modern game can work without sprint. I’m only saying that if someone says “the success of games like OverWatch and Doom (especially Overwatch) shows us that people are more then willing and ok with, playing a game that doesn’t have a sprint animation”, then it’s appropriate to point out that—if another metric of success hasn’t been defined—Doom did worse in terms of popularity than Halo 5.

> 2533274801973487;14991:
> 2) I might be mixing stuff up here but isn’t the regular counter argument for people saying “halo 5 is failure, just look how low it is on that list” something like “well those lists don’t mean -Yoink-”, so why does this list mean nothing when it is beeing used against Halo, but it’s perfectly fine to use it against other games?

That line of reasoning would work only if you could show that LethalQ had used that particular argument. As far as I’m aware, LethalQ has at no point said or implied that the list means nothing when it comes to Halo.

14994

> 2533274835668951;14988:
> I always thought it was dumb without it. These are elite super soldiers but the lost the ability to run a little faster. Especially since maps are getting bigger I think sprint will always be necessary. It would be cool if they disabled it in a classic mode.

Halo 1, 2 and 3 were the most successful Halo games. All made without sprint. EVERY Halo since has been less successful and more divisive. It’s time for a true return to form, classic no-sprint Halo game to be made.

14995

I would like to say this: Many of the Halo 5 maps are clones from prior games (before sprint was introduced) so I do not believe those were actually stretched to compensate. Not by much anyway, if they were stretched at all.

14996

> 2533274806739045;14995:
> I would like to say this: Many of the Halo 5 maps are clones from prior games (before sprint was introduced) so I do not believe those were actually stretched to compensate. Not by much anyway, if they were stretched at all.

Many? Such as? Truth is a Midship remake (and we know based on measurements that it has been stretched), and Mercy is a remake of Haven which is a Halo 4 map, but that’s already from the sprint era. That’s about all I can come up with.

14997

> 2533274825830455;14996:
> > 2533274806739045;14995:
> > I would like to say this: Many of the Halo 5 maps are clones from prior games (before sprint was introduced) so I do not believe those were actually stretched to compensate. Not by much anyway, if they were stretched at all.
>
> Many? Such as? Truth is a Midship remake (and we know based on measurements that it has been stretched), and Mercy is a remake of Haven which is a Halo 4 map, but that’s already from the sprint era. That’s about all I can come up with.

Great points. These maps are stretched out to compensate for sprint. This concept actually takes away from how good these maps could be.

14998

I have been seeing the same arguments on this forum for a long time.

On one side, there seems to be a few permanent members on the anti-sprint side that explain the negative impacts of sprint. They say that the maps have to be stretched, it adds an extra unnecessary button, and a game can be fast-paced without sprint.

On the other side, there is the people that says that Spartans should be able to sprint because of lore. Or because they want to feel like a super soldier.

No side is wrong. I don’t have a strong attachment to sprint but I don’t mind it. I actually like it because it allows a more realistic feeling to the game. If a Halo game could play in a modern way without sprint, then I would have no issue with sprint being removed. I just want more control in a game than “I can move forward, backwards, left, or right”. Therefore, I like sprint, clamber, high jacking, duel wielding, and Armour Abilities(Halo 4). I would be in favor of adding prone to Halo too.

The argument of lore seems to based off of no logic. Who says Spartans can’t run and shoot at the same time? Now the argument that people want to feel like super soldiers is actually partially how I feel. I never felt like a super soldier, playing in Halo CE. Halo 2 and 3 were better at immersion into being a Spartan. We got high jacking and duel welding. In Halo Reach, 4, and 5, we get all kind of abilities including sprint.

For the argument that sprint doesn’t add anything, it does add a feeling of awsomeness mixed with realism. AKA immersion. As for the argument that sprint adds an extra button, it allows more precision between moving slow and full out running. If running was all on the analog stick, we would have less precise control over walking slow. The argument that sprint allows for less skilled play is not objective because it assumes we all want Halo to be competitive.

I know that I sound like someone in favor of sprint but the truth is that I just want to have fun regardless of sprint. I want a balance between realism and fun gameplay.

14999

> 2535416616313329;14998:
> I have been seeing the same arguments on this forum for a long time.
>
> On one side, there seems to be a few permanent members on the anti-sprint side that explain the negative impacts of sprint. They say that the maps have to be stretched, it adds an extra unnecessary button, and a game can be fast-paced without sprint.
>
> On the other side, there is the people that says that Spartans should be able to sprint because of lore. Or because they want to feel like a super soldier.
>
> No side is wrong. I don’t have a strong attachment to sprint but I don’t mind it. I actually like it because it allows a more realistic feeling to the game. If a Halo game could play in a modern way without sprint, then I would have no issue with sprint being removed. I just want more control in a game than “I can move forward, backwards, left, or right”. Therefore, I like sprint, clamber, high jacking, duel wielding, and Armour Abilities(Halo 4). I would be in favor of adding prone to Halo too.
>
> The argument of lore seems to based off of no logic. Who says Spartans can’t run and shoot at the same time? Now the argument that people want to feel like super soldiers is actually partially how I feel. I never felt like a super soldier, playing in Halo CE. Halo 2 and 3 were better at immersion into being a Spartan. We got high jacking and duel welding. In Halo Reach, 4, and 5, we get all kind of abilities including sprint.
>
> For the argument that sprint doesn’t add anything, it does add a feeling of awsomeness mixed with realism. AKA immersion. As for the argument that sprint adds an extra button, it allows more precision between moving slow and full out running. If running was all on the analog stick, we would have less precise control over walking slow. The argument that sprint allows for less skilled play is not objective because it assumes we all want Halo to be competitive.
>
> I know that I sound like someone in favor of sprint but the truth is that I just want to have fun regardless of sprint. I want a balance between realism and fun gameplay.

That depends on what you expect out of “realism” in this game. Do you want the game to be realistic in what you can do, or to what they can do. Those are two different answers, because you aren’t a super soldier.

If you want it to be more realistic to what you can do, which involves Sprint and its mechanics, then you’re actively breaking the lore, because Spartans don’t move like that.

If you want to be more realistic to what they can do, then you don’t have anything that resembles a balanced game, because these people can crush concrete, literally dodge a couple bullets, fire extremely accurately, and a bunch of other stuff.

It made perfect sense to be moving in one constant speed back then, because you were always assumed to be “running”, you can just run and shoot at the same time because you’re a super solider.

Having prone would make perfect sense in the lore because people actively do it. It would be a terrible game mechanic because it doesn’t add anything to gameplay in a game that’s based around moving.

I do find the “lore” argument people bring up wrong, because it never made sense in the first place. Having the ability to choose weapons before entering a battle made me feel more like a Spartan, but it doesn’t mean I didn’t want Loadouts removed. Lore should never dictate game mechanics, because you aren’t playing a book.

15000

> 2533274833081329;14999:
> > 2535416616313329;14998:
> > I have been seeing the same arguments on this forum for a long time.
> >
> > On one side, there seems to be a few permanent members on the anti-sprint side that explain the negative impacts of sprint. They say that the maps have to be stretched, it adds an extra unnecessary button, and a game can be fast-paced without sprint.
> >
> > On the other side, there is the people that says that Spartans should be able to sprint because of lore. Or because they want to feel like a super soldier.
> >
> > No side is wrong. I don’t have a strong attachment to sprint but I don’t mind it. I actually like it because it allows a more realistic feeling to the game. If a Halo game could play in a modern way without sprint, then I would have no issue with sprint being removed. I just want more control in a game than “I can move forward, backwards, left, or right”. Therefore, I like sprint, clamber, high jacking, duel wielding, and Armour Abilities(Halo 4). I would be in favor of adding prone to Halo too.
> >
> > The argument of lore seems to based off of no logic. Who says Spartans can’t run and shoot at the same time? Now the argument that people want to feel like super soldiers is actually partially how I feel. I never felt like a super soldier, playing in Halo CE. Halo 2 and 3 were better at immersion into being a Spartan. We got high jacking and duel welding. In Halo Reach, 4, and 5, we get all kind of abilities including sprint.
> >
> > For the argument that sprint doesn’t add anything, it does add a feeling of awsomeness mixed with realism. AKA immersion. As for the argument that sprint adds an extra button, it allows more precision between moving slow and full out running. If running was all on the analog stick, we would have less precise control over walking slow. The argument that sprint allows for less skilled play is not objective because it assumes we all want Halo to be competitive.
> >
> > I know that I sound like someone in favor of sprint but the truth is that I just want to have fun regardless of sprint. I want a balance between realism and fun gameplay.
>
> That depends on what you expect out of “realism” in this game. Do you want the game to be realistic in what you can do, or to what they can do. Those are two different answers, because you aren’t a super soldier.
>
> If you want it to be more realistic to what you can do, which involves Sprint and its mechanics, then you’re actively breaking the lore, because Spartans don’t move like that.
>
> If you want to be more realistic to what they can do, then you don’t have anything that resembles a balanced game, because these people can crush concrete, literally dodge a couple bullets, fire extremely accurately, and a bunch of other stuff.
>
> It made perfect sense to be moving in one constant speed back then, because you were always assumed to be “running”, you can just run and shoot at the same time because you’re a super solider.
>
> Having prone would make perfect sense in the lore because people actively do it. It would be a terrible game mechanic because it doesn’t add anything to gameplay in a game that’s based around moving.
>
> I do find the “lore” argument people bring up wrong, because it never made sense in the first place. Having the ability to choose weapons before entering a battle made me feel more like a Spartan, but it doesn’t mean I didn’t want Loadouts removed. Lore should never dictate game mechanics, because you aren’t playing a book.

“That depends on what you expect out of “realism” in this game. Do you want the game to be realistic in what you can do, or to what they can do. Those are two different answers, because you aren’t a super soldier.”
Actually after thinking about what I like about games, I have come to the conclusion that what I like in games is a combination between my real self and character. Halo has always been good at this. When I play Halo, I’m not Master Chief but not an ordinary human. I am a version of myself but as a Spartan. This is not an either/or argument, it’s both.

I agree with you that the lore argument isn’t the best. Usually people(myself included) use the lore argument to support their viewpoint without actually caring for what the lore actually says. Therefore, I have stopped saying that I like advanced mobility because of “lore” and now prefer to say I like it because of “immersion”. I want to feel like myself as a Spartan, not a Spartan in lore or myself without armor. If I was going to make up a “lore” reason for sprint, I would say that Spartans can run and shoot at the same time but when moving at maximum speed, accuracy is diminished. Even Spartans have to remain balanced when moving at incredible speeds. My point is that anybody can make whatever reason they want logically fit into the lore. This is why I have stopped using lore as support for sprint. I just like the feel of running around in Halo not walking slowly and calling it running. I run faster in real life than Halo CE-3 Master Chief!

“It made perfect sense to be moving in one constant speed back then, because you were always assumed to be “running”, you can just run and shoot at the same time because you’re a super solider.”
I have already pointed out that I wouldn’t have a problem with a Halo without sprint but a faster BMS. The problem with the classic Halos is the “running” speed. If the BMS was as fast as Halo 4’s sprint, I wouldn’t have an issue.

I only used prone as an example of an ability that wouldn’t bother me. I probably wouldn’t use prone very much even if it was in the game. How is Halo based around movement more than Call of Duty though? They pretty much are the same except longer TTKs and vehicles. I just support as many abilities as possible to be featured in a game. More choices the better. Just because Call of Duty invented something doesn’t make it a bad idea. Why should Halo reject anything that it didn’t create. Whenever Halo does anything slightly like CoD, fans get mad. Whenever CoD does anything like Halo, fans get mad. Why the hate for games sharing good ideas and changing?

I think what is appealing about sprint, assassinations, Spartan charge, etc.; is the feeling of empowerment. Halo CE is so boring if you are bad at using the Magnum. The newer games offer more ways to avoid dying, new ways to get kills, and awesome abilities. You could be a horrible player but get the drop on an enemy and get the assassination or ground pound. Then you would feel like a Halo god. On the other hand, in Halo CE, if you’re bad, you’re just going to die…a lot! This is where people complain that the skill gap has diminished. Maybe it has and maybe it’s because not everyone has time to become a master(not to mention a Master Chief) at Halo but they still want to feel cool.

15001

> 2535416616313329;15000:
> I only used prone as an example of an ability that wouldn’t bother me. I probably wouldn’t use prone very much even if it was in the game. How is Halo based around movement more than Call of Duty though? They pretty much are the same except longer TTKs and vehicles. I just support as many abilities as possible to be featured in a game. More choices the better. Just because Call of Duty invented something doesn’t make it a bad idea. Why should Halo reject anything that it didn’t create. Whenever Halo does anything slightly like CoD, fans get mad. Whenever CoD does anything like Halo, fans get mad. Why the hate for games sharing good ideas and changing?

Because Call of Duty and Halo are two fundamentally different games.

Call of Duty has a very low time to kill because Players have such a low amount of health, and using cover is their way to avoid bullets. The TTK for just about every weapon in Black Ops 3 for example, is under 0.3 seconds. Movement isn’t (always) meant to be used while shooting, which is why they slow down or face a huge accuracy penalty when they shoot. Therefore Sprint comes in the picture so they can move from cover to cover quicker, because taking 2 bullets can spell a death sentence. Prone comes in because you can easily get the drop on someone without having to move, and you have the greatest accuracy at that point.

Halo follows the exact opposite of this rule. Our TTK is much higher, taking over a full second of accurate aiming to kill someone in most cases. We have much higher health and shields to boot. A person can take two, probably three bullets and still win the encounter. We don’t have movement penalties, we’re encouraged to shoot while moving because it gets the other person to miss. We have to keep moving because we gotta get to the power weapons so we can shoot better while moving.

Not every gameplay change is bad, it’s when they change for the sake of change or to appeal to an entirely different audience to make it work. Or worse, when you have to compromise other gameplay elements to make the new one work in the first place. An extreme example is like adding a game of Rock Paper Scissors to every melee battle.

Halo fans would love to have the same built-in broadcasting that Call of Duty has, because the one we barely came up with is not all that special and not all that functional.

> 2535416616313329;15000:
> I think what is appealing about sprint, assassinations, Spartan charge, etc.; is the feeling of empowerment. Halo CE is so boring if you are bad at using the Magnum. The newer games offer more ways to avoid dying, new ways to get kills, and awesome abilities. You could be a horrible player but get the drop on an enemy and get the assassination or ground pound. Then you would feel like a Halo god. On the other hand, in Halo CE, if you’re bad, you’re just going to die…a lot! This is where people complain that the skill gap has diminished. Maybe it has and maybe it’s because not everyone has time to become a master(not to mention a Master Chief) at Halo but they still want to feel cool.

That’s not what the skill gap means or how it affects us. In Halo CE you can get a kill from behind the same way you can get an assassination from Reach and beyond. It’s…the same method, just a flashy animation. If you’re bad at using the Magnum, the AR is the easier weapon to use and even has its own role that not even the Magnum can reliably accomplish. Yes in CE you’re going to die if you’re a bad player facing a much better player, because the much better player put in the work to get better. Assuming perfect matchmaking, you wouldn’t have faced him anyway.

On the other hand, if you’re a good player in Halo 5, you can still lose to a bad player from Spartan Charge, Ground Pound, high aim assist, etc. (of course, a bit hyperbolic) making you feel like there is no reason to put in work to get better because you’re already close to the skill ceiling, and the skill floor isn’t that far away.

Taking from MultiLockOn’s thread, Look at Smash Brothers. Is it a simple button masher, or can it be played really intensively involving prediction and counters, wave dashing and sweet spots? The skill floor is too high so lower tier players find it too competitive, and the skill ceiling is too low so they don’t find it competitive enough and made for casuals.
Instead of looking like this, Halo 5 looks more like this.

15002

> 2533274833081329;15001:
> > 2535416616313329;15000:
> >
>
> Because Call of Duty and Halo are two fundamentally different games.
>
> Call of Duty has a very low time to kill because Players have such a low amount of health, and using cover is their way to avoid bullets. The TTK for just about every weapon in Black Ops 3 for example, is under 0.3 seconds. Movement isn’t (always) meant to be used while shooting, which is why they slow down or face a huge accuracy penalty when they shoot. Therefore Sprint comes in the picture so they can move from cover to cover quicker, because taking 2 bullets can spell a death sentence. Prone comes in because you can easily get the drop on someone without having to move, and you have the greatest accuracy at that point.
>
> Halo follows the exact opposite of this rule. Our TTK is much higher, taking over a full second of accurate aiming to kill someone in most cases. We have much higher health and shields to boot. A person can take two, probably three bullets and still win the encounter. We don’t have movement penalties, we’re encouraged to shoot while moving because it gets the other person to miss. We have to keep moving because we gotta get to the power weapons so we can shoot better while moving.
>
> Not every gameplay change is bad, it’s when they change for the sake of change or to appeal to an entirely different audience to make it work. Or worse, when you have to compromise other gameplay elements to make the new one work in the first place. An extreme example is like adding a game of Rock Paper Scissors to every melee battle.
>
> Halo fans would love to have the same built-in broadcasting that Call of Duty has, because the one we barely came up with is not all that special and not all that functional.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535416616313329;15000:
> >
>
> That’s not what the skill gap means or how it affects us. In Halo CE you can get a kill from behind the same way you can get an assassination from Reach and beyond. It’s…the same method, just a flashy animation. If you’re bad at using the Magnum, the AR is the easier weapon to use and even has its own role that not even the Magnum can reliably accomplish. Yes in CE you’re going to die if you’re a bad player facing a much better player, because the much better player put in the work to get better. Assuming perfect matchmaking, you wouldn’t have faced him anyway.
>
> On the other hand, if you’re a good player in Halo 5, you can still lose to a bad player from Spartan Charge, Ground Pound, high aim assist, etc. (of course, a bit hyperbolic) making you feel like there is no reason to put in work to get better because you’re already close to the skill ceiling, and the skill floor isn’t that far away.
>
> Taking from MultiLockOn’s thread, Look at Smash Brothers. Is it a simple button masher, or can it be played really intensively involving prediction and counters, wave dashing and sweet spots? The skill floor is too high so lower tier players find it too competitive, and the skill ceiling is too low so they don’t find it competitive enough and made for casuals.
> Instead of looking like this, Halo 5 looks more like this.

I wonder if the difference between CoD and Halo could be why I am terrible at CoD. I play CoD like Halo, strafing while shooting. Of course, I play Halo a little like CoD. I usually forget to pick up power weapons and just start camping.

In Halo CE you can melee people in the back sure, but no animation showing how awsome your Spartan is. Everything I mention is “flashy” abilities, making people feel like good players. Ground pound and Shoulder bash. Now with a perfect matchmaking system, we wouldn’t need anything to make bad players feel better, but how often do we get perfect matchmaking systems? If a player is really bad at Halo, realistically how often you think that player is going to feel good? They are probably not going to be matched against other bad players all day.

The argument that a good player should always beat a lower skilled player is also flawed. Again, it is based of the assumption that we all want a competitive game. I think that experience should definitely make a difference in a fight but not 100% of the time. I am decent at Halo 4 BTB and I win more than half the time but occasionally have really horrible matches because of luck. I don’t get mad at the game for allowing me to be beaten by a lower level player I just say, “I’ll win the next one”(after yelling at my tv). I always put more work into Halo 4. I’m trying to increase my CSR. I maybe good but I want to be better. On the other hand, in TMCC, I’m so bad it seems pointless to try to get when compared to easier to master games. I struggle to even go positive in Halo TMCC vs Halo 4 where I just got 35k/0d yesterday!

I never found Halo 5 to be that hard to learn. Clamber seems to simplify reaching locations. It’s not like normal jumping has been removed. The thrusters take a little time to master but seem straightforward. It did take me a while to learn what Ground Pound even was. Halo 5 hasn’t removed any abilities, only added some. How does more abilities equal lower skill ceiling?

15003

> 2535416616313329;15002:
> I wonder if the difference between CoD and Halo could be why I am terrible at CoD. I play CoD like Halo, strafing while shooting. Of course, I play Halo a little like CoD. I usually forget to pick up power weapons and just start camping.
>
> In Halo CE you can melee people in the back sure, but no animation showing how awsome your Spartan is. Everything I mention is “flashy” abilities, making people feel like good players. Ground pound and Shoulder bash. Now with a perfect matchmaking system, we wouldn’t need anything to make bad players feel better, but how often do we get perfect matchmaking systems? If a player is really bad at Halo, realistically how often you think that player is going to feel good? They are probably not going to be matched against other bad players all day.

Even if they were good at Halo, they would get the same thing, either the flashy animations in the later games or the straightforward body hitting the floor in the previous games. How good a person feels is in relation to how well they’re doing in a match or in that moment of time. They’ll feel good when they take out that sniper, they’ll feel good when they stick someone. They’ll feel good just by killing a lot of people in succession. “Flashy” animations doesn’t solely contribute to that.

We have matchmaking systems that are pretty close to “perfect”, the problem (Especially in Halo 5) is that the population is too small to maintain it. To a point, people would rather have an unbalanced game than no game, but people would definitely want a balanced game over an unbalanced game. If there were enough people to manage all skill levels, then the bad players wouldn’t notice they’re facing other bad players, and realistically they wouldn’t care because they’re having fun, not being stomped by someone better than them.

> 2535416616313329;15002:
> The argument that a good player should always beat a lower skilled player is also flawed. Again, it is based of the assumption that we all want a competitive game. I think that experience should definitely make a difference in a fight but not 100% of the time. I am decent at Halo 4 BTB and I win more than half the time but occasionally have really horrible matches because of luck. I don’t get mad at the game for allowing me to be beaten by a lower level player I just say, “I’ll win the next one”(after yelling at my tv). I always put more work into Halo 4. I’m trying to increase my CSR. I maybe good but I want to be better. On the other hand, in TMCC, I’m so bad it seems pointless to try to get when compared to easier to master games. I struggle to even go positive in Halo TMCC vs Halo 4 where I just got 35k/0d yesterday!

No, I’m going under the assumption that we all want a balanced game. Even the most social of games have some level of competitiveness. Each multiplayer match has a winner and a loser after all. There’s a reason why we removed the luck-based aspects of the game after Halo 4.

> 2535416616313329;15002:
> I never found Halo 5 to be that hard to learn. Clamber seems to simplify reaching locations. It’s not like normal jumping has been removed. The thrusters take a little time to master but seem straightforward. It did take me a while to learn what Ground Pound even was. Halo 5 hasn’t removed any abilities, only added some. How does more abilities equal lower skill ceiling?

Because you’re not at the skill floor, that’s why you don’t find it hard to learn.

Going off that thread again:

> In Halo 5 it literally takes 5 BUTTONS TO MOVE AROUND THE MAP (thumbstick > sprint > thrust > slide > jump ). Hell every button on the controller has two actions based on whether you hold it, press it twice, whether you’re sprinting, zoomed in, hovering, who knows. It’s ridiculous and if you were ever wondering why exactly Halo 5 sits anywhere from #20 - #35 on the Xbox Most Played List, there’s your answer. The game is EXTRAORINDARILY difficult to get into for the average player.

At the bold, normal jumping has been reduced in effectiveness. There are jumps that you cannot reach without Clamber. Walls are taller so you have to use it, otherwise you’d already jump over it and there would be no reason for Clamber to exist. That means walls are made even taller if you were not supposed to be able to get over them at all.

And because of Clamer (funny enough, just like Sprint), you can only make those jumps in one direction: forwards. You can’t do the same things going sideways or backwards, which pretty much limits you in movement.

15004

> 2535416616313329;15002:
> How does more abilities equal lower skill ceiling?

It can, if the abilities allow the player to do too much for too little effort. For example, with Clamber the issue is that it strictly makes jumping easier, and there’s no skill involved in using it. Anyone who can hold the A button down will learn everything there is to learn about the ability. So, all it does is make the game easier to master. On the other hand, something like Thruster Pack might appear to have something skillful to add, since a well-timed dodge takes skill, right? But then the issue is that it makes it easier for players to escape from bad situations, and there’s ultimately probably more skill involved in not getting to a bad situation in the first place than in the strafe maneuvers.

As a rule of thumb, strategy and planning outweigh timing button presses when it comes to difficulty of learning. The overarching argument is that Spartan Abilities give so much freedom to the platyer that the strategic content of skill is reduced significantly. To an extent, restrictions foster creative play, so it’s important to not give the player too much freedom.

15005

> 2535416616313329;15000:
> I just like the feel of running around in Halo not walking slowly and calling it running. I run faster in real life than Halo CE-3 Master Chief!

Now I legitimately want to see a video of you running at that speed, because Chief’s 7m/s is more than 2/3rds of Usain Bolts current sprint world record.