The sprint discussion thread

Games Halo 5: Guardians
15366

I periodically check back in on this debate. It has become much more than a sprint debate. It’s become new halo vs old halo. (Has since about page 2 lol)

Halo CE 2 3 vs reach 4 5.

What i I find amusing in this is that the later 3 are very much different games from each other. Reach 4 and 5 all have tried many different things outside of the “halo” box. Some of them good. Some of them bad. Yet they get classed together because they don’t follow the constricting formula of the original trilogy aside from being very different games.

I love halo CE 2 and 5. But halo reach and 4 are my least favorite in the series. So I think the “classic” vs “modern” classification system is hugely flawed. There are many gamers who like reach but not 4 or 5. But one thing that remains the constant in this debate is that most those that really dislike any of the latest 3 halo games are opposed to these games because they stray to far away from their perception of what halo is.

That lies mainly in the movement mechanics of h1-3.

Ive stated in this thread before that I don’t think a major halo title can go back to h3 movement. I just don’t think it works in modern gaming. I mean losing thruster sprint clamber, everything added since 3. I don’t think it’s a good idea. Although halo without sprint probably is.

I think where halo needs to go is a a classic halo MP only release on top of the major release that is taking over three years between releases. Just MP only though, no campaign. All the classic playlists BTB infection arena and gamemodes. Not just rehashed maps. A whole new multiplayer halo game with a huge sandbox of new and old weapons but the old school movement mechanics. Preferably with a FOV like CE. Keep this a pure bungie classic halo game. Let 343 continue to make the main game in their vision.

This would mean having a new mp every year and a half to 2 years. And instead of trying to cater to 2 fan bases and failing miserably just make a new solid product for each one. I think halo games have to high of gap between releases. Having a new mp every couple of years would be a huge bonus. Also, the sales numbers would help dictate where the franchise goes. If the classic MP only side game is outselling and outlasting the major title then that would show where the franchise needs to go.

This could replace a spartan assault or halo wars.

Just my 2 cents. Again. But I don’t see how everyone is kept happy without some sort of franchise split. This is the least evasive way of doing so.

15367

> 2535473635314008;15366:
> Ive stated in this thread before that I don’t think a major halo title can go back to h3 movement. I just don’t think it works in modern gaming. I mean losing thruster sprint clamber, everything added since 3. I don’t think it’s a good idea. Although halo without sprint probably is.

I find this claim stranger the more I think about it. There just doesn’t seem to be a good case one can make for “players want more complex movement”. I mean, Brink tried it seven years ago, it failed. Titanfall tried it four years ago, it was a moderate success, but nothing stunning. Halo and CoD both received some backlash from the community for attempting it, and now CoD has gone back to its roots.

On the other hand, time and time again, it seems like games with fairly rudimentary movement mechanics face great success: CS:GO, PUBG, even Overwatch, really. It almost seems like players aren’t actually seeking more complex movement, but can appreciate anything as long as the gameplay is sufficiently engaging. It’s been years since developers got the capability animate the player models to perform these complicated maneuvers. They surely should’ve gotten the hang of it by now, yet the success of that style of movement remains fairly modest.

When I look at the landscape of games today, I just don’t see a reason why classic Halo movement couldn’t be successful. That’s not to say that it definitely would be successful, but as far as options go, I fail to see it as any worse than the path taken by Halo 5.

15368

> 2535473635314008;15366:
> I periodically check back in on this debate. It has become much more than a sprint debate. It’s become new halo vs old halo. (Has since about page 2 lol)
>
> Halo CE 2 3 vs reach 4 5.
>
> What i I find amusing in this is that the later 3 are very much different games from each other. Reach 4 and 5 all have tried many different things outside of the “halo” box. Some of them good. Some of them bad. Yet they get classed together because they don’t follow the constricting formula of the original trilogy aside from being very different games.
>
> I love halo CE 2 and 5. But halo reach and 4 are my least favorite in the series. So I think the “classic” vs “modern” classification system is hugely flawed. There are many gamers who like reach but not 4 or 5. But one thing that remains the constant in this debate is that most those that really dislike any of the latest 3 halo games are opposed to these games because they stray to far away from their perception of what halo is.
>
> That lies mainly in the movement mechanics of h1-3.
>
> Ive stated in this thread before that I don’t think a major halo title can go back to h3 movement. I just don’t think it works in modern gaming. I mean losing thruster sprint clamber, everything added since 3. I don’t think it’s a good idea. Although halo without sprint probably is.
>
> I think where halo needs to go is a a classic halo MP only release on top of the major release that is taking over three years between releases. Just MP only though, no campaign. All the classic playlists BTB infection arena and gamemodes. Not just rehashed maps. A whole new multiplayer halo game with a huge sandbox of new and old weapons but the old school movement mechanics. Preferably with a FOV like CE. Keep this a pure bungie classic halo game. Let 343 continue to make the main game in their vision.
>
> This would mean having a new mp every year and a half to 2 years. And instead of trying to cater to 2 fan bases and failing miserably just make a new solid product for each one. I think halo games have to high of gap between releases. Having a new mp every couple of years would be a huge bonus. Also, the sales numbers would help dictate where the franchise goes. If the classic MP only side game is outselling and outlasting the major title then that would show where the franchise needs to go.
>
> This could replace a spartan assault or halo wars.
>
> Just my 2 cents. Again. But I don’t see how everyone is kept happy without some sort of franchise split. This is the least evasive way of doing so.

I can see why you’d say that it looks like an old vs new(er) argument, just wanted to say that I don’t find it that ‘cut-n-dried’ myself. Personally, I find things I like in all of the games… as well as things I don’t like. I do, however, find more things I don’t like in Halo 5 than any other title.

I don’t really think “going back to H3 movement” is the answer either, but I firmly believe a sprint free Halo is more than accomplishable with no loss of the “pace” that so many seem to cling to for its defense.

I’m a bit confused with your idea. You’re saying there should still be a main Halo game, SP campaign, done by 343 with “their vision” of Halo… and a separate title released at more frequent intervals with a more classic based game play concept? At least that’s what I’m getting from it.

If so, I can’t see that working. At least not for me. One of the main reasons that the Halo franchise reached such heights is that Bungie did something that was -Yoink!- hard to accomplish. They nailed it for both SP and MP game play.

Just me, but if the Halo franchise split into what [I think] you’re saying, I wouldn’t bother even keeping an eye on the next game release at all. As it is right now, the next Halo is a no go on release day for me. It’s a “watch and see” and then maybe buy a used disc if the campaign doesn’t suck, with full expectation of the MP to be nothing I’ll bother with for various reasons.

IF… you’re saying that 343 should go forward with what they’re doing now, regarding campaign, I think that’s just as big of a mistake for them as H5’s campaign was in the first place. To sell a MP only version at more frequent intervals doesn’t interest me at all. Even if it returns to a more classic based game play… actually, especially if it does, because that takes away any consistency between SP and MP game play. And of course you know if they did do something like that, they sure as hell wouldn’t charge less than full price for each version, which would only further irritate a lot of people because they’d feel like they’re being charged full price for half of what used to be a full game. All of that on the heels of H5… a game that already got tons of criticism for releasing with “bare bones” content, leaving many people to feel like they paid for the full game up front, but didn’t get what should’ve been there for many months afterward. Well, unless I misinterpreted.

15369

> 2533274825830455;15367:
> > 2535473635314008;15366:
> > Ive stated in this thread before that I don’t think a major halo title can go back to h3 movement. I just don’t think it works in modern gaming. I mean losing thruster sprint clamber, everything added since 3. I don’t think it’s a good idea. Although halo without sprint probably is.
>
> I find this claim stranger the more I think about it. There just doesn’t seem to be a good case one can make for “players want more complex movement”. I mean, Brink tried it seven years ago, it failed. Titanfall tried it four years ago, it was a moderate success, but nothing stunning. Halo and CoD both received some backlash from the community for attempting it, and now CoD has gone back to its roots.
>
> On the other hand, time and time again, it seems like games with fairly rudimentary movement mechanics face great success: CS:GO, PUBG, even Overwatch, really. It almost seems like players aren’t actually seeking more complex movement, but can appreciate anything as long as the gameplay is sufficiently engaging. It’s been years since developers got the capability animate the player models to perform these complicated maneuvers. They surely should’ve gotten the hang of it by now, yet the success of that style of movement remains fairly modest.
>
> When I look at the landscape of games today, I just don’t see a reason why classic Halo movement couldn’t be successful. That’s not to say that it definitely would be successful, but as far as options go, I fail to see it as any worse than the path taken by Halo 5.

I don’t think that h3 movement is comparable really to any of those games you listed. Overwatch while it may not have sprint has a very fast strafe, crouch and speed boosting in some characters. You traverse the maps at a much higher speed than h3. Whether that’s map size FOV bms I don’t know enough of overwatch to say. I don’t consider it very rudimentary in any case. Pubg has sprint, the crux of this long standing debate.

Im not saying that simplified movement wouldn’t be a good thing for halo. I’m saying that the movement pacing of h3 wouldn’t work. That isn’t to say a FOV like that in CE and a higher bms wouldn’t be enough. I do like a evade mechanic in the thruster and I see it as a positive. But that’s just my opinion.

15370

> 2594261035368257;15368:
> > 2535473635314008;15366:
> > **I periodically check back in on this debate. It has become much more than a sprint debate. It’s become new halo vs old halo. (Has since about page 2 lol)**Halo CE 2 3 vs reach 4 5.
> >
> > What i I find amusing in this is that the later 3 are very much different games from each other. Reach 4 and 5 all have tried many different things outside of the “halo” box. Some of them good. Some of them bad. Yet they get classed together because they don’t follow the constricting formula of the original trilogy aside from being very different games.
> >
> > I love halo CE 2 and 5. But halo reach and 4 are my least favorite in the series. So I think the “classic” vs “modern” classification system is hugely flawed. There are many gamers who like reach but not 4 or 5. But one thing that remains the constant in this debate is that most those that really dislike any of the latest 3 halo games are opposed to these games because they stray to far away from their perception of what halo is.
> >
> > That lies mainly in the movement mechanics of h1-3.
> >
> > **Ive stated in this thread before that I don’t think a major halo title can go back to h3 movement. I just don’t think it works in modern gaming. I mean losing thruster sprint clamber, everything added since 3. I don’t think it’s a good idea. Although halo without sprint probably is.**I think where halo needs to go is a a classic halo MP only release on top of the major release that is taking over three years between releases. Just MP only though, no campaign. All the classic playlists BTB infection arena and gamemodes. Not just rehashed maps. A whole new multiplayer halo game with a huge sandbox of new and old weapons but the old school movement mechanics. Preferably with a FOV like CE. Keep this a pure bungie classic halo game. Let 343 continue to make the main game in their vision.
> >
> > This would mean having a new mp every year and a half to 2 years. And instead of trying to cater to 2 fan bases and failing miserably just make a new solid product for each one. I think halo games have to high of gap between releases. Having a new mp every couple of years would be a huge bonus. Also, the sales numbers would help dictate where the franchise goes. If the classic MP only side game is outselling and outlasting the major title then that would show where the franchise needs to go.
> >
> > This could replace a spartan assault or halo wars.
> >
> > Just my 2 cents. Again. But I don’t see how everyone is kept happy without some sort of franchise split. This is the least evasive way of doing so.
>
> I can see why you’d say that it looks like an old vs new(er) argument, just wanted to say that I don’t find it that ‘cut-n-dried’ myself. Personally, I find things I like in all of the games… as well as things I don’t like. I do, however, find more things I don’t like in Halo 5 than any other title.
>
> I don’t really think “going back to H3 movement” is the answer either, but I firmly believe a sprint free Halo is more than accomplishable with no loss of the “pace” that so many seem to cling to for its defense.
>
> I’m a bit confused with your idea. You’re saying there should still be a main Halo game, SP campaign, done by 343 with “their vision” of Halo… and a separate title released at more frequent intervals with a more classic based game play concept? At least that’s what I’m getting from it.
>
> If so, I can’t see that working. At least not for me. One of the main reasons that the Halo franchise reached such heights is that Bungie did something that was -Yoink!- hard to accomplish. They nailed it for both SP and MP game play.
>
> Just me, but if the Halo franchise split into what [I think] you’re saying, I wouldn’t bother even keeping an eye on the next game release at all. As it is right now, the next Halo is a no go on release day for me. It’s a “watch and see” and then maybe buy a used disc if the campaign doesn’t suck, with full expectation of the MP to be nothing I’ll bother with for various reasons.
>
> IF… you’re saying that 343 should go forward with what they’re doing now, regarding campaign, I think that’s just as big of a mistake for them as H5’s campaign was in the first place. To sell a MP only version at more frequent intervals doesn’t interest me at all. Even if it returns to a more classic based game play… actually, especially if it does, because that takes away any consistency between SP and MP game play. And of course you know if they did do something like that, they sure as hell wouldn’t charge less than full price for each version, which would only further irritate a lot of people because they’d feel like they’re being charged full price for half of what used to be a full game. All of that on the heels of H5… a game that already got tons of criticism for releasing with “bare bones” content, leaving many people to feel like they paid for the full game up front, but didn’t get what should’ve been there for many months afterward. Well, unless I misinterpreted.

I don’t think sprint is really that detrimental to campaign gameplay. In the first 3 halos to be perfectly honest there are many times I wish I could sprint on some of the campaign levels.

I think sprint just makes map design a little more difficult in mp. Maps make mp great. And making great maps in mp with sprint has proven to be difficult for devs. IMO the biggest mark against h5 is maps. The only 2 maps I consider memorable are plaza and coliseum. I enjoy the gameplay in h5 but making great maps has been a problem. I’m not sure if this is a sprint/mechanic problem or just a map designer problem.

If h5 had maps of the same quality as h2 this debate I don’t think would be happening. The question is can consistent high quality maps be put in an enhanced mobility game. I think they can. But it’s easier to do without. And it is a fact that devs have struggled to do so.

The problem with halo 5 campaign wasn’t mechanics. It was an absolutely terrible story first and foremost. Weird levels that could have been told on a cut scene and repetitive warden fights.

Part of me worries that the biggest problem with modern halo is being ignored. That is map design. There is no reason why halo 2 still has the best maps in any halo and it’s over a decade old.

We can get rid of all enhanced mobility across the board. If halo continues to be released with more maps the quality of h5 the franchise will continue to regress regardless.

15371

I’ll quote someone from another forum.

> Halo CE came out in 2001. Halo 3 came out in 2007. Thats 6 years.
>
> Halo 3 came out 11 years ago. We have now been waiting for a new classic Halo game for over half of Halo’s existence. What the flying -Yoink-.

Crazy to think about and I’m not including MCC. I think it’s time for a new direction than it’s currently going. If they took the best things from the original trilogy and implemented that into their new game I think it could be amazing.

15372

I swear every time classic movement comes up in these conversations… everyone points to Halo 3 (the slowest of the trilogy). Every. Single. Time. “I can’t go back to H3 movement.” Well good… I don’t think anyone wants to. Why not point to CE/H2 when trying to argue if classic movement will work in today’s market?

(this has bugged me for a while)

15373

> 2533274794648158;15372:
> I swear every time classic movement comes up in these conversations… everyone points to Halo 3 (the slowest of the trilogy). Every. Single. Time. “I can’t go back to H3 movement.” Well good… I don’t think anyone wants to. Why not point to CE/H2 when trying to argue if classic movement will work in today’s market?
>
> (this has bugged me for a while)

The movement is actually the same in halo 1-3. (Bms anyway)

CE has a much faster feel due to FOW, spawns, maps, and spawning with what is considered the best starting weapon in any halo game.

IMO a FOV similar to CE and a bms similar to h5 would be worth discussion. Halo doesn’t have to play as fast as doom or UT. I just can’t think it can take off right where h3 left it and I think that’s why everyone brings up h3 as a reference.

Aside from visuals h3 has not aged well IMO. The art style is well ahead of its time. But the gameplay isn’t. CE doubles is still incredible to play 17 years later. I think that’s where the reference to classic halo should be put.

15374

> 2727626560040591;15371:
> I’ll quote someone from another forum.
>
>
> > Halo CE came out in 2001. Halo 3 came out in 2007. Thats 6 years.
> > Halo 3 came out 11 years ago. We have now been waiting for a new classic Halo game for over half of Halo’s existence. What the flying -Yoink-.
>
> Crazy to think about and I’m not including MCC. I think it’s time for a new direction than it’s currently going. If they took the best things from the original trilogy and implemented that into their new game I think it could be amazing.

Here’s another one.

Halo CEA came out in 2011, Halo 4 came out in 2012.

We are now closer to a hypothetical Halo 4 Anniversary than we were to Halo CEA.

We are one year away from being at the midpoint between a hypothetical Halo 4 Anniversary and Halo 2A (MCC)

15375

> 2535473635314008;15369:
> Im not saying that simplified movement wouldn’t be a good thing for halo. I’m saying that the movement pacing of h3 wouldn’t work. That isn’t to say a FOV like that in CE and a higher bms wouldn’t be enough. I do like a evade mechanic in the thruster and I see it as a positive. But that’s just my opinion.

But I don’t think anybody has been asking for exactly Halo 3 movement. People know that Halo 3 feels the slowest out of the original trilogy. When you say “Halo 3 movement”, most probably translate that to “movement without extra abilities”, rather than taking it literally. But if you think an increase in FoV and BMS would suffice, then we don’t disagree.

15376

> 2535473635314008;15370:
> > 2594261035368257;15368:
> > > 2535473635314008;15366:
> > >
>
> I don’t think sprint is really that detrimental to campaign gameplay. In the first 3 halos to be perfectly honest there are many times I wish I could sprint on some of the campaign levels.
>
> **I think sprint just makes map design a little more difficult in mp. Maps make mp great. And making great maps in mp with sprint has proven to be difficult for devs. IMO the biggest mark against h5 is maps. The only 2 maps I consider memorable are plaza and coliseum. I enjoy the gameplay in h5 but making great maps has been a problem. I’m not sure if this is a sprint/mechanic problem or just a map designer problem.**If h5 had maps of the same quality as h2 this debate I don’t think would be happening. The question is can consistent high quality maps be put in an enhanced mobility game. I think they can. But it’s easier to do without. And it is a fact that devs have struggled to do so.
>
> The problem with halo 5 campaign wasn’t mechanics. It was an absolutely terrible story first and foremost. Weird levels that could have been told on a cut scene and repetitive warden fights.
>
> Part of me worries that the biggest problem with modern halo is being ignored. That is map design. There is no reason why halo 2 still has the best maps in any halo and it’s over a decade old.
>
> We can get rid of all enhanced mobility across the board. If halo continues to be released with more maps the quality of h5 the franchise will continue to regress regardless.

I can recall several people on this thread (although I couldn’t even begin to guess which/how many of the 700+ pages contain said posts) who have designed maps for H5 and have plainly stated that designing them with sprint in mind basically makes them want to pull out their hair. I honestly believe it is a sprint/mechanic problem and just can’t see how the benefit of keeping sprint outweighs the cost of having good quality maps.

15377

> 2535473635314008;15366:
> Halo CE 2 3 vs reach 4 5.
>
> What i I find amusing in this is that the later 3 are very much different games from each other. Reach 4 and 5 all have tried many different things outside of the “halo” box. Some of them good. Some of them bad. Yet they get classed together because they don’t follow the constricting formula of the original trilogy aside from being very different games.

Just so we’re clear: The initial three games do not play identical either, just because they form a (narrative) trilogy. CE is about as much different from 2 as 4 is from 5. Arguably even more because the latter didn’t change the shield and health system, switch from projectile to hitscan, etc. The only two games in the series that play very close to one another are 2 and 3, and even those have sufficient differences to feel distinct.

The reason these games are “lumped together” how they are is because they form two distinct groups in a category that is tangentially related to sprint and hence gets brought up repeatedly: Advanced movement. The former three actively opposed it while the latter three openly embraced it. More importantly, the entire movement of 1 through 5 is dictated by the inclusion or omission of the one mechanic this thread is named after: Sprint. (Reach is probably the only odd one out here as with sprint being optional it had to be accounted for the player both having and not having it available. To varying degrees of success.)

With regards to gameplay, these two groups stand on opposing sides of a huge chasm, the only difference is how close they stand next to one another on their respective side…

15378

I don’t don’t mind sprint at all

15379

I don’t see what benefit Sprint brings to Halo that couldn’t simply be solved by increasing the FoV and base movement speed.

15380

> 2533274894112092;15379:
> I don’t see what benefit Sprint brings to Halo that couldn’t simply be solved by increasing the FoV and base movement speed.

Sprint brings a bit of a tactical aspect to speed. Sprinting forces you to put down your weapon, so you have to contemplate your needs and whether or not Sprint will accomplish those needs effectively. Increasing walk speed would make the game go faster, but that’s it. Sprint just adds that little bit of thinking and know-how to speeding across the map.

15381

> 2533274944752684;15380:
> > 2533274894112092;15379:
> > I don’t see what benefit Sprint brings to Halo that couldn’t simply be solved by increasing the FoV and base movement speed.
>
> Sprint brings a bit of a tactical aspect to speed. Sprinting forces you to put down your weapon, so you have to contemplate your needs and whether or not Sprint will accomplish those needs effectively. Increasing walk speed would make the game go faster, but that’s it. Sprint just adds that little bit of thinking and know-how to speeding across the map.

But the benefit of that decision to gameplay is minimal. Once you have the necessary information to make the decision, the decision itself is rather trivial: you sprint when there’s a low probability of running into an opponent, and you don’t sprint when the you’re likely to run into an opponent. There’s not much to the decision itself, all the work and skill is actually in acquiring the necessary information, and you use that same information to make a bunch of other decisions, some of which are more complex than the decision whether to sprint or not. So, sprint doesn’t even make this information a more crucial part of the game. The positive impact that sprint has on the tactical depth of the game is therefore negligible.

15382

> 2533274825830455;15381:
> > 2533274944752684;15380:
> > > 2533274894112092;15379:
> > > I don’t see what benefit Sprint brings to Halo that couldn’t simply be solved by increasing the FoV and base movement speed.
> >
> > Sprint brings a bit of a tactical aspect to speed. Sprinting forces you to put down your weapon, so you have to contemplate your needs and whether or not Sprint will accomplish those needs effectively. Increasing walk speed would make the game go faster, but that’s it. Sprint just adds that little bit of thinking and know-how to speeding across the map.
>
> But the benefit of that decision to gameplay is minimal. Once you have the necessary information to make the decision, the decision itself is rather trivial: you sprint when there’s a low probability of running into an opponent, and you don’t sprint when the you’re likely to run into an opponent. There’s not much to the decision itself, all the work and skill is actually in acquiring the necessary information, and you use that same information to make a bunch of other decisions, some of which are more complex than the decision whether to sprint or not. So, sprint doesn’t even make this information a more crucial part of the game. The positive impact that sprint has on the tactical depth of the game is therefore negligible.

You make the decision sound far easier than it is. Don’t you notice that pretty much every new player sprints like a madman? It’s trivial, yes. But it does nonetheless exist as something to be learned, and it connects to other skills like spawn prediction and flow. The decision itself doesn’t take much, but it takes a good amount of info and rhythm to intitiate it.

Also, sprint connects to other movements like Slide. That in and of itself makes it meritorious in my opinion, as it does add in that controller skill as well.

15383

> 2533274944752684;15382:
> You make the decision sound far easier than it is. Don’t you notice that pretty much every new player sprints like a madman? It’s trivial, yes. But it does nonetheless exist as something to be learned, and it connects to other skills like spawn prediction and flow. The decision itself doesn’t take much, but it takes a good amount of info and rhythm to intitiate it.

I don’t think the actions of new or unskilled players can be considered indicative of what is and isn’t good for gameplay. Those players sprint everywhere, not because they’re under the impression that it’s the best choice, but because they haven’t bothered to spare a single thought to tactics. They’re not trying to be good at the game.

Another thing to consider is that as a new player, you don’t have any context for the game. You’re just dropped on a map, and you don’t yet know things like where players usually are. You don’t have any information, and under those circumstances sprinting everywhere isn’t actually any worse choice than sprinting selectively. But again, this is about the skill needed to acquire the information necessary to make the decision, not the skill needed to make the decision itself. And since that same information is used for all kinds of decisions, whether sprint is one of those decisions is not particularly relevant.

The point is that just because a mechanic induces a decision, it’s not necessarily a worthwile mechanic. It needs to introduce something more complex than a single yes-or-no decision. And that’s without taking into account the negative effects the mechanic may have on the game.

> 2533274944752684;15382:
> Also, sprint connects to other movements like Slide. That in and of itself makes it meritorious in my opinion, as it does add in that controller skill as well.

This isn’t unique to sprint, however. Even if sprint was removed, all other Spartan Abilities could be retained with minor modifications. For example, Slide could just as well be activated by crouching and using the Thruster Pack at the same time. Sprint really isn’t necessary in any of this.

15384

> 2533274825830455;15383:
> > 2533274944752684;15382:
> > You make the decision sound far easier than it is. Don’t you notice that pretty much every new player sprints like a madman? It’s trivial, yes. But it does nonetheless exist as something to be learned, and it connects to other skills like spawn prediction and flow. The decision itself doesn’t take much, but it takes a good amount of info and rhythm to intitiate it.
>
> I don’t think the actions of new or unskilled players can be considered indicative of what is and isn’t good for gameplay. Those players sprint everywhere, not because they’re under the impression that it’s the best choice, but because they haven’t bothered to spare a single thought to tactics. They’re not trying to be good at the game.
>
> Another thing to consider is that as a new player, you don’t have any context for the game. You’re just dropped on a map, and you don’t yet know things like where players usually are. You don’t have any information, and under those circumstances sprinting everywhere isn’t actually any worse choice than sprinting selectively. But again, this is about the skill needed to acquire the information necessary to make the decision, not the skill needed to make the decision itself. And since that same information is used for all kinds of decisions, whether sprint is one of those decisions is not particularly relevant.
>
> The point is that just because a mechanic induces a decision, it’s not necessarily a worthwile mechanic. It needs to introduce something more complex than a single yes-or-no decision. And that’s without taking into account the negative effects the mechanic may have on the game.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274944752684;15382:
> > Also, sprint connects to other movements like Slide. That in and of itself makes it meritorious in my opinion, as it does add in that controller skill as well.
>
> This isn’t unique to sprint, however. Even if sprint was removed, all other Spartan Abilities could be retained with minor modifications. For example, Slide could just as well be activated by crouching and using the Thruster Pack at the same time. Sprint really isn’t necessary in any of this.

I’d say that my take on all this is that Sprint is more of a mechanic that acts for information, not a mechanic that information collects for. Change your paradigm for a second. Instead of looking at it through the idea that spawn prediction and flow go into Sprint, think of it as Sprint going into spawn prediction and flow. What sets Sprint apart from increased movement speed is that it creates a voluntarily asymmetrical movement flow. When the teams patrol a map, increased movement speed would make it so only a change in velocity could intercept the other team. Sprint however can allow you to only need speed to intercept, meaning that a head on clash isn’t necessary for a gunfight to ensue.

In short, the voluntary asymmetry that Sprint creates because not everyone is sprinting at the same time affects rythm and the direction of the team. If everyone got a universal speed buff, velocity change would be the only way to catch a team or player that isn’t camping. However, because everyone sprinting at the same time is near impossible probability wise, the asymmetry of speed and flow that Sprint creates allows for numerous techniques of interception that are otherwise not possible without it. Clamber and Stabilize would allow you take shortcuts to get the asymmetry of distance, but those are nonetheless situational and not as versatile as Sprint

Now on the last remark, making Slide a combo of Thrust and Crouch would mean changing the default setup, unless you happen to have grown two right thumbs. Not to mention that all that would do is get rid of a Thrust, so it’s really more of an inconvenience than anything when we already have a more convenient and effective mechanic for Slide.

15385

> 2533274944752684;15384:
> I’d say that my take on all this is that Sprint is more of a mechanic that acts for information, not a mechanic that information collects for. Change your paradigm for a second. Instead of looking at it through the idea that spawn prediction and flow go into Sprint, think of it as Sprint going into spawn prediction and flow. What sets Sprint apart from increased movement speed is that it creates a voluntarily asymmetrical movement flow. When the teams patrol a map, increased movement speed would make it so only a change in velocity could intercept the other team. Sprint however can allow you to only need speed to intercept, meaning that a head on clash isn’t necessary for a gunfight to ensue.
>
> In short, the voluntary asymmetry that Sprint creates because not everyone is sprinting at the same time affects rythm and the direction of the team. If everyone got a universal speed buff, velocity change would be the only way to catch a team or player that isn’t camping. However, because everyone sprinting at the same time is near impossible probability wise, the asymmetry of speed and flow that Sprint creates allows for numerous techniques of interception that are otherwise not possible without it. Clamber and Stabilize would allow you take shortcuts to get the asymmetry of distance, but those are nonetheless situational and not as versatile as Sprint

I’m not sure how relevant this actually is for how encounters occur. After all, players start and stop often, turn around, and in general don’t run directly forward. This already seems to introduce plenty of what you call asymmetry into flow. It’s not like head-on encounters are the only way players run into each other in classic Halo. There are plenty of times one players encounters another from the side or from behind.

> 2533274944752684;15384:
> Now on the last remark, making Slide a combo of Thrust and Crouch would mean changing the default setup, unless you happen to have grown two right thumbs. Not to mention that all that would do is get rid of a Thrust, so it’s really more of an inconvenience than anything when we already have a more convenient and effective mechanic for Slide.

To be honest, I didn’t even remember that the Halo 5 doesn’t have crouch on the left stick by default, because I don’t use the default control scheme, and the left stick is where crouch has traditionally been. But obviously, doing any changes to the mechanics means rethinking the button layouts.

I don’t see how this would get rid of Thrust. After all, when you press the Thruster Pack button alone, you still thrust normally, but when you also press crouch, you slide. In fact, Slide as a separate mechanic is redundant and awkward anyway. The essential functions of both Slide and Thruster Pack could be combined into a mechanic that performs an Evade-style roll when the player is on the ground, and a thrust when the player is in the air.

It’s not very progressive to think that the Spartan Abilities implemented exactly as they are in Halo 5 is the best movement system Halo could possibly have.