The sprint discussion thread

Games Halo 5: Guardians
15726

> 2533275001522797;15725:
> > 2533274795123910;15724:
> > > 2533275001522797;15723:
> > > I believe in not going back, for example. If 343 removed sprint from Infinite they might as well go back on everything thrust, weapon skins, armor choices, MULTIPLAYER! You see my point removing sprint is just as ridiculous as removing multiplayer whats done is done and should move forward in all future games. I do not know of many games that added something new then removed it the next game. But, this is all just my opinion.
> >
> > In other words, no matter what, all new features must stay no matter their impact on the gameplay.
> > Removing one feature means we need to remove an entire game mode section.
> > No, I don’t see your point in how removing sprint is like removing Multiplayer.
> >
> > -Health packs
> > -Bloom
> > -Custom loadouts
> > -Dual Wielding
> > -Armor Abilities
> > -Grenade Indicators
> > -Spartan Ops
> > -VISR
> >
> > Do you know what these are?
> > You don’t know of games which have had things removed in the next installment?
> > What did CoDWWII do to wall running and all that stuff?
> > Morrowind to Oblivion to Skyrim
> > Diablo 2 to Diablo 3
> > I heard Destiny 2 did some reverts on things the Destiny DLCs had done good to Destiny 1.
> > More?
>
> To me, everything included in the game that is an upgrade is equal like sprint and multiplayer. Things like spartan ops, bloom, and health packs were more like downgrades. Sprint is an upgrade so it stays. As for dual wielding that was removed because of 343 when I replied to this forum I meant Halo games made from 343 and it is my fault for not specifiying that fact.

How exactly is Sprint an upgrade? Give me one situation where a mechanic that forces you out of combat (excluding Spartan charge) and can only be used moving forward is more beneficial than being able to run at top speed in any direction while being able to shoot, melee and throw nades.

15727

> 2533274894112092;15726:
> > 2533275001522797;15725:
> > > 2533274795123910;15724:
> > > > 2533275001522797;15723:
> > > > I believe in not going back, for example. If 343 removed sprint from Infinite they might as well go back on everything thrust, weapon skins, armor choices, MULTIPLAYER! You see my point removing sprint is just as ridiculous as removing multiplayer whats done is done and should move forward in all future games. I do not know of many games that added something new then removed it the next game. But, this is all just my opinion.
> > >
> > > In other words, no matter what, all new features must stay no matter their impact on the gameplay.
> > > Removing one feature means we need to remove an entire game mode section.
> > > No, I don’t see your point in how removing sprint is like removing Multiplayer.
> > >
> > > -Health packs
> > > -Bloom
> > > -Custom loadouts
> > > -Dual Wielding
> > > -Armor Abilities
> > > -Grenade Indicators
> > > -Spartan Ops
> > > -VISR
> > >
> > > Do you know what these are?
> > > You don’t know of games which have had things removed in the next installment?
> > > What did CoDWWII do to wall running and all that stuff?
> > > Morrowind to Oblivion to Skyrim
> > > Diablo 2 to Diablo 3
> > > I heard Destiny 2 did some reverts on things the Destiny DLCs had done good to Destiny 1.
> > > More?
> >
> > To me, everything included in the game that is an upgrade is equal like sprint and multiplayer. Things like spartan ops, bloom, and health packs were more like downgrades. Sprint is an upgrade so it stays. As for dual wielding that was removed because of 343 when I replied to this forum I meant Halo games made from 343 and it is my fault for not specifiying that fact.
>
> How exactly is Sprint an upgrade? Give me one situation where a mechanic that forces you out of combat (excluding Spartan charge) and can only be used moving forward is more beneficial than being able to run at top speed in all direction so while being able to shoot, melee and throw nades.

How is sprint an upgrade? Imagine being born only able to walk and you can never run for the rest of your life. Is that enough?

15728

> 2533275001522797;15727:
> > 2533274894112092;15726:
> > > 2533275001522797;15725:
> > > > 2533274795123910;15724:
> > > > > 2533275001522797;15723:
> > > > > I believe in not going back, for example. If 343 removed sprint from Infinite they might as well go back on everything thrust, weapon skins, armor choices, MULTIPLAYER! You see my point removing sprint is just as ridiculous as removing multiplayer whats done is done and should move forward in all future games. I do not know of many games that added something new then removed it the next game. But, this is all just my opinion.
> > > >
> > > > In other words, no matter what, all new features must stay no matter their impact on the gameplay.
> > > > Removing one feature means we need to remove an entire game mode section.
> > > > No, I don’t see your point in how removing sprint is like removing Multiplayer.
> > > >
> > > > -Health packs
> > > > -Bloom
> > > > -Custom loadouts
> > > > -Dual Wielding
> > > > -Armor Abilities
> > > > -Grenade Indicators
> > > > -Spartan Ops
> > > > -VISR
> > > >
> > > > Do you know what these are?
> > > > You don’t know of games which have had things removed in the next installment?
> > > > What did CoDWWII do to wall running and all that stuff?
> > > > Morrowind to Oblivion to Skyrim
> > > > Diablo 2 to Diablo 3
> > > > I heard Destiny 2 did some reverts on things the Destiny DLCs had done good to Destiny 1.
> > > > More?
> > >
> > > To me, everything included in the game that is an upgrade is equal like sprint and multiplayer. Things like spartan ops, bloom, and health packs were more like downgrades. Sprint is an upgrade so it stays. As for dual wielding that was removed because of 343 when I replied to this forum I meant Halo games made from 343 and it is my fault for not specifiying that fact.
> >
> > How exactly is Sprint an upgrade? Give me one situation where a mechanic that forces you out of combat (excluding Spartan charge) and can only be used moving forward is more beneficial than being able to run at top speed in all direction so while being able to shoot, melee and throw nades.
>
> How is sprint an upgrade? Imagine being born only able to walk and you can never run for the rest of your life. Is that enough?

I don’t see your point, even in Halo 3 which is widely considered the slowest game in the series due to it’s FoV, you could still traverse the map fairly quickly. And you didn’t answer my question, what does Sprint bring to Halo that a faster base movement speed wouldn’t?

15729

> 2533274894112092;15728:
> > 2533275001522797;15727:
> > > 2533274894112092;15726:
> > > > 2533275001522797;15725:
> > > > > 2533274795123910;15724:
> > > > > > 2533275001522797;15723:
> > > > > > I believe in not going back, for example. If 343 removed sprint from Infinite they might as well go back on everything thrust, weapon skins, armor choices, MULTIPLAYER! You see my point removing sprint is just as ridiculous as removing multiplayer whats done is done and should move forward in all future games. I do not know of many games that added something new then removed it the next game. But, this is all just my opinion.
> > > > >
> > > > > In other words, no matter what, all new features must stay no matter their impact on the gameplay.
> > > > > Removing one feature means we need to remove an entire game mode section.
> > > > > No, I don’t see your point in how removing sprint is like removing Multiplayer.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Health packs
> > > > > -Bloom
> > > > > -Custom loadouts
> > > > > -Dual Wielding
> > > > > -Armor Abilities
> > > > > -Grenade Indicators
> > > > > -Spartan Ops
> > > > > -VISR
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you know what these are?
> > > > > You don’t know of games which have had things removed in the next installment?
> > > > > What did CoDWWII do to wall running and all that stuff?
> > > > > Morrowind to Oblivion to Skyrim
> > > > > Diablo 2 to Diablo 3
> > > > > I heard Destiny 2 did some reverts on things the Destiny DLCs had done good to Destiny 1.
> > > > > More?
> > > >
> > > > To me, everything included in the game that is an upgrade is equal like sprint and multiplayer. Things like spartan ops, bloom, and health packs were more like downgrades. Sprint is an upgrade so it stays. As for dual wielding that was removed because of 343 when I replied to this forum I meant Halo games made from 343 and it is my fault for not specifiying that fact.
> > >
> > > How exactly is Sprint an upgrade? Give me one situation where a mechanic that forces you out of combat (excluding Spartan charge) and can only be used moving forward is more beneficial than being able to run at top speed in all direction so while being able to shoot, melee and throw nades.
> >
> > How is sprint an upgrade? Imagine being born only able to walk and you can never run for the rest of your life. Is that enough?
>
> I don’t see your point, even in Halo 3 which is widely considered the slowest game in the series, you could still traverse the map fairly quickly. And you didn’t answer my question, what does Sprint bring to Halo that a faster base movement speed wouldn’t?

Better map control, a more fast-paced game, and it helped with map design. Halo 3 was more time consuming with big maps and slow movements compared to Halo 5 with smaller maps and advanced movement. This advanced movement also created more of a skill gap. And again I’m talking about Halo titles made from 343.

15730

> 2533275001522797;15729:
> Better map control, a more fast-paced game, and it helped with map design.

You’d have to elaborate on what you mean by “better map control” and “helped with map design”, otherwise you’re just using these as meaningless buzzwords. I’d also like you to specify, what metric are you using to judge the pace of the game? And do you have evidence that Halo 5 is faster? As of now, you’re just making a vague conjecture and expecting us to believe it.

> 2533275001522797;15729:
> Halo 3 was more time consuming with big maps and slow movements compared to Halo 5 with smaller maps and advanced movement.

This is not true. Maps in Halo 5 are typically larger than in Halo 3 to account for the faster movement speed that Halo 5 has. For example, running from one end of Truth to the other end takes about the same time as running from one end of Heretic to the other.

> 2533275001522797;15729:
> This advanced movement also created more of a skill gap.

Again, buzzwords. If you’re going to claim that advanced movement increases the skill gap, you also need to explain how it accomplishes that. Otherwise your claim is completely irrelevant.

15731

> 2533275001522797;15723:
> I believe in not going back, for example. If 343 removed sprint from Infinite they might as well go back on everything thrust, weapon skins, armor choices, MULTIPLAYER! You see my point removing sprint is just as ridiculous as removing multiplayer whats done is done and should move forward in all future games. I do not know of many games that added something new then removed it the next game. But, this is all just my opinion.

I mean, removing enhanced mobility would be the dream. And going so far to say you might as well remove armor choices and especially multiplayer is just ridiculous. COD had wall running and jet packs, but they removed them due to fan outcry and sluggish sales for one example. I suggest going a couple pages back and reading many of the arguements against sprint, along with other enhanced mobility, because they just don’t fit with the kind of play Halo was praised for.

15732

> 2533274825830455;15730:
> > 2533275001522797;15729:
> > Better map control, a more fast-paced game, and it helped with map design.
>
> You’d have to elaborate on what you mean by “better map control” and “helped with map design”, otherwise you’re just using these as meaningless buzzwords. I’d also like you to specify, what metric are you using to judge the pace of the game? And do you have evidence that Halo 5 is faster? As of now, you’re just making a vague conjecture and expecting us to believe it.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533275001522797;15729:
> > Halo 3 was more time consuming with big maps and slow movements compared to Halo 5 with smaller maps and advanced movement.
>
> This is not true. Maps in Halo 5 are typically larger than in Halo 3 to account for the faster movement speed that Halo 5 has. For example, running from one end of Truth to the other end takes about the same time as running from one end of Heretic to the other.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533275001522797;15729:
> > This advanced movement also created more of a skill gap.
>
> Again, buzzwords. If you’re going to claim that advanced movement increases the skill gap, you also need to explain how it accomplishes that. Otherwise your claim is completely irrelevant.

The reason I don’t explain is that I don’t have enough time, unfortunately. I will briefly explain what I mean though I might link a video of my opinion.

Better map control:
With sprint, one can move around the map quicker so that they are able to reach the opponents spawns fast enough to kill them.

Map design:
Has anyone noticed when the map Valhalla from Halo 3 was remade in Halo 5 the advanced movement screwed with the gameplay a lot. The lifts were not even needed anymore and matches ended way quicker than they did in Halo 3. In Halo 5 because of the advanced movement maps were made smaller so games go quicker.

Quicker games:
Look at my service record an average slayer game for me is between 8-12 minutes. Halo 3 averaged 15 minutes I want to say. I doubt every game was so close the time limit almost ended every time. With the bigger maps and no sprint it seems that the games would last longer.

Skill gap:
This is obvious I hear it everywhere. This falls more into advanced movement overall and not just sprint. Spring jumping, thrust. This is movement added to Halo 3’s formula. Thrust, sprint, and more were added and the people who use the best are the people at the top. The people at the bottom are those who don’t know how to sprint and don’t thrust properly as well as never use some of the Halo 3 formulas like strafing.

I will link a video for this later and once again. I AM TALKING ABOUT HALO TITLES MADE BY 343i.

15733

> 2533274829213703;15731:
> > 2533275001522797;15723:
> > I believe in not going back, for example. If 343 removed sprint from Infinite they might as well go back on everything thrust, weapon skins, armor choices, MULTIPLAYER! You see my point removing sprint is just as ridiculous as removing multiplayer whats done is done and should move forward in all future games. I do not know of many games that added something new then removed it the next game. But, this is all just my opinion.
>
> I mean, removing enhanced mobility would be the dream. And going so far to say you might as well remove armor choices and especially multiplayer is just ridiculous. COD had wall running and jet packs, but they removed them due to fan outcry and sluggish sales for one example. I suggest going a couple pages back and reading many of the arguements against sprint, along with other enhanced mobility, because they just don’t fit with the kind of play Halo was praised for.

Sorry to be crashing the party here again (practically public enemy no. 1 here by now) but I have something to chime in with.

Halo was praised for it’s simplistic yet effective style. Everywhere online, there is a perceptible majority of people who want the classic style back.

However, a rule of thumb is that the people complaining are a vocal minority, and everyone else is too busy enjoying the game to praise it. With that in mind, how many people is going to classic bringing back? Sure, you might bring back a few, but here’s the thing:

  • Halo likely just got stale for a lot of people. A lot of modern gaming culture functions in fads, not many stay loyal to a franchise. Going to classic isn’t going to bring these guys back. - The online Halo community at this point cranks out such a ridiculous amount of negative press on 343i and modern Halo that we may need to consider irreversible damage. We need to consider the people who flatly don’t trust 343i and have boycotted them. While I don’t think these guys are a large group (and a lot of them will likely return if Halo goes classic, but again I doubt that’s much), a subsection of them won’t return and will do some population damage. - People who just don’t remember Halo or just moved on to other genres are likely not going to come back. - Going Classic will definitely tick off the community that likes the flexibility of advanced movement. A lot will probably leave, especially with the removal of Sprint.With that said, I seriously doubt the claims that going Classic is the magical panacea for Halo’s population and community that many make it seem. Sorry to say it guys, but it’s nigh on impossible to MHGA. If we do go Classic, I fear a Titanfall 2 style demise…
15734

> 2533275001522797;15727:
> > 2533274894112092;15726:
> > > 2533275001522797;15725:
> > > > 2533274795123910;15724:
> > > > > 2533275001522797;15723:
> > > > > I believe in not going back, for example. If 343 removed sprint from Infinite they might as well go back on everything thrust, weapon skins, armor choices, MULTIPLAYER! You see my point removing sprint is just as ridiculous as removing multiplayer whats done is done and should move forward in all future games. I do not know of many games that added something new then removed it the next game. But, this is all just my opinion.
> > > >
> > > > In other words, no matter what, all new features must stay no matter their impact on the gameplay.
> > > > Removing one feature means we need to remove an entire game mode section.
> > > > No, I don’t see your point in how removing sprint is like removing Multiplayer.
> > > >
> > > > -Health packs
> > > > -Bloom
> > > > -Custom loadouts
> > > > -Dual Wielding
> > > > -Armor Abilities
> > > > -Grenade Indicators
> > > > -Spartan Ops
> > > > -VISR
> > > >
> > > > Do you know what these are?
> > > > You don’t know of games which have had things removed in the next installment?
> > > > What did CoDWWII do to wall running and all that stuff?
> > > > Morrowind to Oblivion to Skyrim
> > > > Diablo 2 to Diablo 3
> > > > I heard Destiny 2 did some reverts on things the Destiny DLCs had done good to Destiny 1.
> > > > More?
> > >
> > > To me, everything included in the game that is an upgrade is equal like sprint and multiplayer. Things like spartan ops, bloom, and health packs were more like downgrades. Sprint is an upgrade so it stays. As for dual wielding that was removed because of 343 when I replied to this forum I meant Halo games made from 343 and it is my fault for not specifiying that fact.
> >
> > How exactly is Sprint an upgrade? Give me one situation where a mechanic that forces you out of combat (excluding Spartan charge) and can only be used moving forward is more beneficial than being able to run at top speed in all direction so while being able to shoot, melee and throw nades.
>
> How is sprint an upgrade? Imagine being born only able to walk and you can never run for the rest of your life. Is that enough?

That’s an incredibly facetious argument. Gameplay trumps immersion.

As for what Tennyson said (mobile is a pain to edit), making Halo homogenous with everything else is never the way to go. At that point, it joins the roster of bland military space shooters and loses the unique identity it once had. Halo 5 experienced a massive die off after release, and is in very dire straits now. I frequently get matched with the same people, game after game. Heck, I got matched with the same people in SWAT a day after I played them.
You’re bringing up Titanfall 2, but the entire reason that game died was because EA very foolishly thought that putting it up against Battlefield 1, a hotly anticipated title, was a good idea. Titanfall 2 has more in common in terms of movement style with Halo 5 than it does with Halo 1-3.

Sprint does massive damage to Halo. The fact that after 700+ pages of arguement, where the best defense Sprint has is “Immersion” should be pretty telling that the system has to go.

15735

> 2533275001522797;15732:
> Better map control:
> With sprint, one can move around the map quicker so that they are able to reach the opponents spawns fast enough to kill them.

This is inherently dependent on map design, and is not determined by player movement speed. As I already stated, map sizes in Halo 5 are generally larger than they were in the original trilogy to compensate for the increased movement speed of players. In fact, this increase in map size is partially to counter what you’re trying to sell me as a good thing: players getting from one part of the map to another too fast. You see, players getting from their own spawn to the opponent’s spawn faster isn’t necessarily a good thing. Players returning to battle too quickly after death means that a player’s death punishes the team less. This means that teams will have easier time holding their ground, which in turn makes establishing map control more difficult. As for many things, there’s a delicate balance for the speed at which players get back to combat after death. Too fast and the game will devolve to a stalemate where it’s difficult for either team to make progress towards map control, too slow and the state of map control becomes too sensitive to deaths of individual players.

> 2533275001522797;15732:
> Map design:
> Has anyone noticed when the map Valhalla from Halo 3 was remade in Halo 5 the advanced movement screwed with the gameplay a lot. The lifts were not even needed anymore and matches ended way quicker than they did in Halo 3. In Halo 5 because of the advanced movement maps were made smaller so games go quicker.

Again, maps in Halo 5 are larger than in Halo 3, larger not smaller.

> 2533275001522797;15732:
> Quicker games:
> Look at my service record an average slayer game for me is between 8-12 minutes. Halo 3 averaged 15 minutes I want to say. I doubt every game was so close the time limit almost ended every time. With the bigger maps and no sprint it seems that the games would last longer.

’
I’ve actually looked into this before in terms of how fast kills happen in a match (i.e., how many kills occur in a given amount of time on average), and found that Halo 3 is about the same, if not faster than Halo 5. Others have also studied this question of pace and have found results in conflict with your claim. Mind you, here one needs to account for the 110% movement speed in Halo 3 MLG, but this still leaves us with Halo 5 having at most a pace equal to default Halo 3. In any case, the evidence seems to be in favor of Halo 5 not being faster than Halo 3.

> 2533275001522797;15732:
> Skill gap:
> This is obvious I hear it everywhere. This falls more into advanced movement overall and not just sprint. Spring jumping, thrust. This is movement added to Halo 3’s formula. Thrust, sprint, and more were added and the people who use the best are the people at the top. The people at the bottom are those who don’t know how to sprint and don’t thrust properly as well as never use some of the Halo 3 formulas like strafing.

What you fail to take into account, however, are the negative effects of advanced movement. For example, once a player learns the basics of using sprint and Thruster Pack, they will have easier time escaping encounters than they would in prior games. One also has to consider how much there is to learn in Spartan Abilities, which isn’t very much. For instance, learning to use sprint properly is more about awareness of the state of the game than anything, but that was already an important skill without the introduction of sprint, so sprint itself doesn’t introduce anything significant to the skill pool. On the other hand, if we consider the use of Thruster Pack as part of strafing, it relies on the same basic skill set. The particular problem of how to time a trust in particular isn’t a very deep addition on top of how to time a strafe in general.

15736

> 2533275001522797;15725:
> > 2533274795123910;15724:
> > > 2533275001522797;15723:
> > > I believe in not going back, for example. If 343 removed sprint from Infinite they might as well go back on everything thrust, weapon skins, armor choices, MULTIPLAYER! You see my point removing sprint is just as ridiculous as removing multiplayer whats done is done and should move forward in all future games. I do not know of many games that added something new then removed it the next game. But, this is all just my opinion.
> >
> > In other words, no matter what, all new features must stay no matter their impact on the gameplay.
> > Removing one feature means we need to remove an entire game mode section.
> > No, I don’t see your point in how removing sprint is like removing Multiplayer.
> >
> > -Health packs
> > -Bloom
> > -Custom loadouts
> > -Dual Wielding
> > -Armor Abilities
> > -Grenade Indicators
> > -Spartan Ops
> > -VISR
> >
> > Do you know what these are?
> > You don’t know of games which have had things removed in the next installment?
> > What did CoDWWII do to wall running and all that stuff?
> > Morrowind to Oblivion to Skyrim
> > Diablo 2 to Diablo 3
> > I heard Destiny 2 did some reverts on things the Destiny DLCs had done good to Destiny 1.
> > More?
>
> To me, everything included in the game that is an upgrade is equal like sprint and multiplayer. Things like spartan ops, bloom, and health packs were more like downgrades. Sprint is an upgrade so it stays. As for dual wielding that was removed because of 343 when I replied to this forum I meant Halo games made from 343 and it is my fault for not specifiying that fact.

So, now it’s just not features, it’s “upgrades”, which I’ll ask you to define. What is an “upgrade”? How was the things you listed “downgrades”?
I’m pretty sure Bungie removed Dual Wielding with Halo Reach.
But considering you moved from “not knowing many games adding something and having it removed”, to games made by i343 ( when shown examples of games removing things ), I guess Reach does not count and you just shrunk the pool of games down to a list which can be counted on two hands, all in favour for you, no?
Why does other games and their developers not count?

15737

> 2533274944752684;15733:
> > 2533274829213703;15731:
> > > 2533275001522797;15723:
> > > I believe in not going back, for example. If 343 removed sprint from Infinite they might as well go back on everything thrust, weapon skins, armor choices, MULTIPLAYER! You see my point removing sprint is just as ridiculous as removing multiplayer whats done is done and should move forward in all future games. I do not know of many games that added something new then removed it the next game. But, this is all just my opinion.
> >
> > I mean, removing enhanced mobility would be the dream. And going so far to say you might as well remove armor choices and especially multiplayer is just ridiculous. COD had wall running and jet packs, but they removed them due to fan outcry and sluggish sales for one example. I suggest going a couple pages back and reading many of the arguements against sprint, along with other enhanced mobility, because they just don’t fit with the kind of play Halo was praised for.
>
> Sorry to be crashing the party here again (practically public enemy no. 1 here by now) but I have something to chime in with.
>
> Halo was praised for it’s simplistic yet effective style. Everywhere online, there is a perceptible majority of people who want the classic style back.
>
> However, a rule of thumb is that the people complaining are a vocal minority, and everyone else is too busy enjoying the game to praise it. With that in mind, how many people is going to classic bringing back? Sure, you might bring back a few, but here’s the thing:
>
>
> - Halo likely just got stale for a lot of people. A lot of modern gaming culture functions in fads, not many stay loyal to a franchise. Going to classic isn’t going to bring these guys back. - The online Halo community at this point cranks out such a ridiculous amount of negative press on 343i and modern Halo that we may need to consider irreversible damage. We need to consider the people who flatly don’t trust 343i and have boycotted them. While I don’t think these guys are a large group (and a lot of them will likely return if Halo goes classic, but again I doubt that’s much), a subsection of them won’t return and will do some population damage. - People who just don’t remember Halo or just moved on to other genres are likely not going to come back. - Going Classic will definitely tick off the community that likes the flexibility of advanced movement. A lot will probably leave, especially with the removal of Sprint.With that said, I seriously doubt the claims that going Classic is the magical panacea for Halo’s population and community that many make it seem. Sorry to say it guys, but it’s nigh on impossible to MHGA. If we do go Classic, I fear a Titanfall 2 style demise…

Most of what you say isn’t backed up with anything but your word. Especially point number one.
#1 You say that Halo got stale, but Halo has been having big changes ever since Reach. While I can’t make any concrete conclusions, one could easily get the idea in their head that changing the formula at its core has caused a decrease in players.
#2 Have you seen how happy just seeing some classic art of Halo has made people that are the biggest and most notable critics. People like Act Man and LNG have huge followings and many of the people following them are excited about just the glimpse of a return to classic Halo.
#3 If they left and won’t ever come back, even Halo 3.2 wouldn’t make them come back so that doesn’t matter. It isn’t about bringing them back.
#4 Did you ever consider that the addition of enhanced mobility ticked off fans and they left?

Just because you say it’s impossible doesn’t mean anything. I could say it’ll fix everything and you could say it’ll fix nothing, but at the end of the day, Halo is not doing too hot nowadays and there are many arguements from a design standpoint that sprint (enhanced mobility overall) hurts the overall sandbox of Halo. Whether it is the now uselessness of vehicles, heavily having to modify maps so it takes the same time to traverse, guns, aim assist,… The list goes on. Halo wasn’t stale when they decided to add in changes to the core gameplay, and all the changes have done are push people away from Halo. Sprint isn’t the only problem with modern Halos, but it definitely is a problem.

15738

> 2533275031935123;15734:
> > 2533275001522797;15727:
> > > 2533274894112092;15726:
> > > > 2533275001522797;15725:
> > > > > 2533274795123910;15724:
> > > > > > 2533275001522797;15723:
> > > > > > I believe in not going back, for example. If 343 removed sprint from Infinite they might as well go back on everything thrust, weapon skins, armor choices, MULTIPLAYER! You see my point removing sprint is just as ridiculous as removing multiplayer whats done is done and should move forward in all future games. I do not know of many games that added something new then removed it the next game. But, this is all just my opinion.
> > > > >
> > > > > In other words, no matter what, all new features must stay no matter their impact on the gameplay.
> > > > > Removing one feature means we need to remove an entire game mode section.
> > > > > No, I don’t see your point in how removing sprint is like removing Multiplayer.
> > > > >
> > > > > -Health packs
> > > > > -Bloom
> > > > > -Custom loadouts
> > > > > -Dual Wielding
> > > > > -Armor Abilities
> > > > > -Grenade Indicators
> > > > > -Spartan Ops
> > > > > -VISR
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you know what these are?
> > > > > You don’t know of games which have had things removed in the next installment?
> > > > > What did CoDWWII do to wall running and all that stuff?
> > > > > Morrowind to Oblivion to Skyrim
> > > > > Diablo 2 to Diablo 3
> > > > > I heard Destiny 2 did some reverts on things the Destiny DLCs had done good to Destiny 1.
> > > > > More?
> > > >
> > > > To me, everything included in the game that is an upgrade is equal like sprint and multiplayer. Things like spartan ops, bloom, and health packs were more like downgrades. Sprint is an upgrade so it stays. As for dual wielding that was removed because of 343 when I replied to this forum I meant Halo games made from 343 and it is my fault for not specifiying that fact.
> > >
> > > How exactly is Sprint an upgrade? Give me one situation where a mechanic that forces you out of combat (excluding Spartan charge) and can only be used moving forward is more beneficial than being able to run at top speed in all direction so while being able to shoot, melee and throw nades.
> >
> > How is sprint an upgrade? Imagine being born only able to walk and you can never run for the rest of your life. Is that enough?
>
> That’s an incredibly facetious argument. Gameplay trumps immersion.
>
> As for what Tennyson said (mobile is a pain to edit), making Halo homogenous with everything else is never the way to go. At that point, it joins the roster of bland military space shooters and loses the unique identity it once had. Halo 5 experienced a massive die off after release, and is in very dire straits now. I frequently get matched with the same people, game after game. Heck, I got matched with the same people in SWAT a day after I played them.
> You’re bringing up Titanfall 2, but the entire reason that game died was because EA very foolishly thought that putting it up against Battlefield 1, a hotly anticipated title, was a good idea. Titanfall 2 has more in common in terms of movement style with Halo 5 than it does with Halo 1-3.
>
> Sprint does massive damage to Halo. The fact that after 700+ pages of arguement, where the best defense Sprint has is “Immersion” should be pretty telling that the system has to go.

Halo should never be homogenous, of course. But like I said, there needs to be some damage control measures here. Going full Classic is going to anger a majority of the people who like H5’s flexibility. Going full Modern is going to make the Classic guys even angrier than before. We need a perfect mixture, not one that angers the fan base as a whole, but one that forces compromise. It’s my opinion that if we achieve such a mixture, we can’t take sprint out. Sprint is just too fundamental of a facet of gameplay at this point. We’ve had it since Reach. It would be quite jarring to many who enjoyed Reach and after to just all of a sudden play on HCE-style movement.

Sprint and its removal is one of those high-risk things. If we take it out, we could lose a large chunk of the community. But how much would we lose if we kept it in? Sure, make your argument for the gameplay benefits, but I don’t think the losses would be as high player-wise. I’m no fortune teller, but I have a hunch nonetheless.

Lastly on the Titanfall 2 remarks, I’d say it’s far more probable that Titanfall 2 got killed because it was tied to a bad name. Titanfall 1 felt incomplete at it’s absolute best and was an Xbox exclusive. There was no real campaign, the multiplayer was ridiculously erratic with the sheer amount of customizability, and it was niche in general. Titanfall 2, despite being a very good game, can’t really shake that tarnish that the first game had.

With that in mind, is Halo not by now a tarnished name? I mean, we have Act Man pumping out 5+ videos ragging on H5. While I do agree with him and I’m not jabbing at him in any way, that does not shine well on the Halo name. With all the severely negative press that the 343 games got, can we say that H6, no matter how much they listened to the online community, will recover? I severely doubt it, and I also doubt removing Sprint is going to help keep the game afloat.

Thoughts?

15739

> 2533274944752684;15733:
> However, a rule of thumb is that the people complaining are a vocal minority, and everyone else is too busy enjoying the game to praise it.

In what sense is this a rule of thumb? I might accept that in general, the portion of people who raise public complaints about any issue are a minority. However, the claim that everyone who does not complain publicly must be absolutely fine with the situation is ridiculous. Rather, most people are too apathetic to do anything, regardless of whether they like the situation or not. The threshold for going from “eh, this kinda sucks” to “I need to voice my concerns” is high for most people, and they won’t actively seek out a place to voice their complaints.

15740

> 2533274944752684;15738:
> > 2533275031935123;15734:
> > > 2533275001522797;15727:
> > > How is sprint an upgrade? Imagine being born only able to walk and you can never run for the rest of your life. Is that enough?
> >
> > That’s an incredibly facetious argument. Gameplay trumps immersion.
> >
> > As for what Tennyson said (mobile is a pain to edit), making Halo homogenous with everything else is never the way to go. At that point, it joins the roster of bland military space shooters and loses the unique identity it once had. Halo 5 experienced a massive die off after release, and is in very dire straits now. I frequently get matched with the same people, game after game. Heck, I got matched with the same people in SWAT a day after I played them.
> > You’re bringing up Titanfall 2, but the entire reason that game died was because EA very foolishly thought that putting it up against Battlefield 1, a hotly anticipated title, was a good idea. Titanfall 2 has more in common in terms of movement style with Halo 5 than it does with Halo 1-3.
> >
> > Sprint does massive damage to Halo. The fact that after 700+ pages of arguement, where the best defense Sprint has is “Immersion” should be pretty telling that the system has to go.
>
> Halo should never be homogenous, of course. But like I said, there needs to be some damage control measures here. Going full Classic is going to anger a majority of the people who like H5’s flexibility. Going full Modern is going to make the Classic guys even angrier than before. We need a perfect mixture, not one that angers the fan base as a whole, but one that forces compromise. It’s my opinion that if we achieve such a mixture, we can’t take sprint out. Sprint is just too fundamental of a facet of gameplay at this point. We’ve had it since Reach. It would be quite jarring to many who enjoyed Reach and after to just all of a sudden play on HCE-style movement.
>
> Sprint and its removal is one of those high-risk things. If we take it out, we could lose a large chunk of the community. But how much would we lose if we kept it in? Sure, make your argument for the gameplay benefits, but I don’t think the losses would be as high player-wise. I’m no fortune teller, but I have a hunch nonetheless.
>
> Lastly on the Titanfall 2 remarks, I’d say it’s far more probable that Titanfall 2 got killed because it was tied to a bad name. Titanfall 1 felt incomplete at it’s absolute best and was an Xbox exclusive. There was no real campaign, the multiplayer was ridiculously erratic with the sheer amount of customizability, and it was niche in general. Titanfall 2, despite being a very good game, can’t really shake that tarnish that the first game had.
>
> With that in mind, is Halo not by now a tarnished name? I mean, we have Act Man pumping out 5+ videos ragging on H5. While I do agree with him and I’m not jabbing at him in any way, that does not shine well on the Halo name. With all the severely negative press that the 343 games got, can we say that H6, no matter how much they listened to the online community, will recover? I severely doubt it, and I also doubt removing Sprint is going to help keep the game afloat.
>
> Thoughts?

As the old saying goes, a game for everyone is a game for no one. Compromising would just annoy both sides.
Sprint was not a staple in Reach, it was only an option.

The question is more of how many have we lost with having it in?

Without any definite proof, one could say Titanfall failed because of it’s enhanced mobility. Heck, games that previously featured it are now reverting to their own classic styles like Call of Duty, or flat out dying like Titanfall.

Act Man has also had a very positive video regarding the returning art style and possibilities of classic movement returning.

Halo Infinite will probably have an iffy launch due to the history, but if it is actually good, people will flock to it. Just like when Halo CE launched in 2001, they have to prove themselves.

15741

> 2533274944752684;15738:
> Halo should never be homogenous, of course. But like I said, there needs to be some damage control measures here. Going full Classic is going to anger a majority of the people who like H5’s flexibility. Going full Modern is going to make the Classic guys even angrier than before. We need a perfect mixture, not one that angers the fan base as a whole, but one that forces compromise.

That’s how we ended up with Halo 5, yet people aren’t happy with the result. The old phrase pleasing everyone yet pleasing no one stuff comes up.

I mean look at how Halo 5 handled the competitive community and the casual community, especially in the beginning. Textbook definition.

Forcing compromise doesn’t mean everyone gets to play the stuff they want, it just means that both sides are now forced to deal with features they don’t like.

> 2533274944752684;15738:
> Sprint and its removal is one of those high-risk things. If we take it out, we could lose a large chunk of the community. But how much would we lose if we kept it in? Sure, make your argument for the gameplay benefits, but I don’t think the losses would be as high player-wise. I’m no fortune teller, but I have a hunch nonetheless.

I mean you already seem convinced that removing Sprint loses a large chunk of the community. Exactly how much would we lose if we got rid of it? There’s no more evidence of that than removing Sprint, but in my experience, I have rarely seen a (rational) player say they would leave the game if it didn’t have Sprint, only if the game played slow as a result, which isn’t the same thing.

15742

> 2533275001522797;15723:
> I believe in not going back, for example. If 343 removed sprint from Infinite they might as well go back on everything thrust, weapon skins, armor choices, MULTIPLAYER! You see my point removing sprint is just as ridiculous as removing multiplayer whats done is done and should move forward in all future games. I do not know of many games that added something new then removed it the next game. But, this is all just my opinion.

So where were you when we removed:

  • Jetpack - Promethean Vision - Loadouts - Ordnance - Killcams - Armor LockAnd just to be sure, those were 343i removals.
15743

> 2533275001522797;15732:
> > 2533274825830455;15730:
> > > 2533275001522797;15729:
> > > Better map control, a more fast-paced game, and it helped with map design.
> >
> > You’d have to elaborate on what you mean by “better map control” and “helped with map design”, otherwise you’re just using these as meaningless buzzwords. I’d also like you to specify, what metric are you using to judge the pace of the game? And do you have evidence that Halo 5 is faster? As of now, you’re just making a vague conjecture and expecting us to believe it.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533275001522797;15729:
> > > Halo 3 was more time consuming with big maps and slow movements compared to Halo 5 with smaller maps and advanced movement.
> >
> > This is not true. Maps in Halo 5 are typically larger than in Halo 3 to account for the faster movement speed that Halo 5 has. For example, running from one end of Truth to the other end takes about the same time as running from one end of Heretic to the other.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533275001522797;15729:
> > > This advanced movement also created more of a skill gap.
> >
> > Again, buzzwords. If you’re going to claim that advanced movement increases the skill gap, you also need to explain how it accomplishes that. Otherwise your claim is completely irrelevant.
>
> The reason I don’t explain is that I don’t have enough time, unfortunately. I will briefly explain what I mean though I might link a video of my opinion.
>
> Better map control:
> With sprint, one can move around the map quicker so that they are able to reach the opponents spawns fast enough to kill them.
>
> Map design:
> Has anyone noticed when the map Valhalla from Halo 3 was remade in Halo 5 the advanced movement screwed with the gameplay a lot. The lifts were not even needed anymore and matches ended way quicker than they did in Halo 3. In Halo 5 because of the advanced movement maps were made smaller so games go quicker.
>
> Quicker games:
> Look at my service record an average slayer game for me is between 8-12 minutes. Halo 3 averaged 15 minutes I want to say. I doubt every game was so close the time limit almost ended every time. With the bigger maps and no sprint it seems that the games would last longer.
>
> Skill gap:
> This is obvious I hear it everywhere. This falls more into advanced movement overall and not just sprint. Spring jumping, thrust. This is movement added to Halo 3’s formula. Thrust, sprint, and more were added and the people who use the best are the people at the top. The people at the bottom are those who don’t know how to sprint and don’t thrust properly as well as never use some of the Halo 3 formulas like strafing.
>
> I will link a video for this later and once again. I AM TALKING ABOUT HALO TITLES MADE BY 343i.

…What?

“Better Map control”

You’re not supposed to run across the map over and over again, this is not COD. Yup, I take COD asan example again, because COD is one of these games, where you do that. Halo was never supposed to be played like that. You have multiple options. You fight in the area you spawn, you can grab a vehicle, take a man cannon / teleporter and you’re good to go. This is the way the real formular works.
I don’t care if people hate me for calling this the real formular. But it boggles my mind when people come with arguments like “modern” way. I mean what the hell is this supposed to mean?

“Map design”

Basicially confirms my first point and what the majority of the sprint supporters want from a Halo game. You’ve said it yourself. “The lifts were not needed anymore” - Same goes for the vehicles.
So tell me now, what’s the point of Halo at this point? Halos Complexity didn’t come from people flying around like Power rangers. Your movement was “simple” but every interaction within the map has made Halo such a unique Game. (Vehicles, Equipment, Teleporters, Man Cannons, Power Ups, weapons) And the most important thing: You had to earn Powerpositions. You had to fight your way through. Now I can Thrustjumpstabilizesprint like a futuristic Tarzan in Form of a Spartan.

Quicker Games:

0 evidence, you’ve just a thrown a number out there. I can say the exact same thing and just twist the numbers.

Skill Gap:

Again, nothing has gotten more complicated, just the movement. This is not the real formular. Halo has lost nearly every unique element, because of this. The movement and the part where you shoot is completly seperated now. In the first triology you had the oppurtunity to shoot & run at the sime time. Before you come with something like “lol, you can do this now too, just don’t sprint” - umm, I don’t want the enemy to sprint either. The game forces me to sprint, to clamber, to thrust in a lot of situations. It’s not an option, it’s not an addition, its’ a restriction.
The weapons are way easier to use, than in H3. The TTK for every weapon has decreased, the bullet magnetism has increased.

15744

> 2533274825830455;15739:
> > 2533274944752684;15733:
> > However, a rule of thumb is that the people complaining are a vocal minority, and everyone else is too busy enjoying the game to praise it.
>
> In what sense is this a rule of thumb? I might accept that in general, the portion of people who raise public complaints about any issue are a minority. However, the claim that everyone who does not complain publicly must be absolutely fine with the situation is ridiculous. Rather, most people are too apathetic to do anything, regardless of whether they like the situation or not. The threshold for going from “eh, this kinda sucks” to “I need to voice my concerns” is high for most people, and they won’t actively seek out a place to voice their complaints.

There are people who obviously are apathetic yet still have issues. That’s not something you really need to clarify. What I am saying is that the majority of people who don’t complain online are fine with what they got. People who don’t actively participate in communities generally don’t care as much about just how perfect the game is and aren’t as invested in the franchise. We at community forums have immensely high standards, especially we at the Halo community. And that’s good. But others don’t have those intensely high standards, and they in general have fun playing the game. Like the majority of gamers, the non vocal are mostly casuals and don’t really care about nuances like the effect of sprint on map scaling. As long as it’s fun, it’s fine with most.

Besides, it’s more of a faulty adage than a rule of thumb. It’s generally correct though.

15745

> 2533274833081329;15741:
> > 2533274944752684;15738:
> > Halo should never be homogenous, of course. But like I said, there needs to be some damage control measures here. Going full Classic is going to anger a majority of the people who like H5’s flexibility. Going full Modern is going to make the Classic guys even angrier than before. We need a perfect mixture, not one that angers the fan base as a whole, but one that forces compromise.
>
> That’s how we ended up with Halo 5, yet people aren’t happy with the result. The old phrase pleasing everyone yet pleasing no one stuff comes up.
>
> I mean look at how Halo 5 handled the competitive community and the casual community, especially in the beginning. Textbook definition.
>
> Forcing compromise doesn’t mean everyone gets to play the stuff they want, it just means that both sides are now forced to deal with features they don’t like.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274944752684;15738:
> > Sprint and its removal is one of those high-risk things. If we take it out, we could lose a large chunk of the community. But how much would we lose if we kept it in? Sure, make your argument for the gameplay benefits, but I don’t think the losses would be as high player-wise. I’m no fortune teller, but I have a hunch nonetheless.
>
> I mean you already seem convinced that removing Sprint loses a large chunk of the community. Exactly how much would we lose if we got rid of it? There’s no more evidence of that than removing Sprint, but in my experience, I have rarely seen a (rational) player say they would leave the game if itdidn’t have Sprint, only if the game played slow as a result, which isn’t the same thing.

Compromise is never perfect, but it can be adjusted. We can make Halo tip a little more classic, but it’s my opinion that we shouldn’t go as far as removing sprint. Besides, two mildly irritated sides with a good compromise (which I’m not saying H5 is) is a lot better than being worshipped by one and having another hate your guts.

For the second half, my reasoning is this:

  • The people still playing Halo 5 are the ones still with the franchise. That means that they may favor sprint at the absolute least. - Removing sprint may alienate some of those players still with us. - Removing sprint is only going to bring back the few classic guys who still are considering Halo. If we lost so many people, I doubt most of them care about the franchise anymore. - Thus, it’s better to keep sprint and to make a compromise that tips more towards the classic style than how it is currently.People still consider Reach to be a great game from what I see, and that had sprint. I doubt sprint was the big boogeyman for Halo 5’s death, as it had a terrible launch, microtransactions, and overall just a terrible press atmosphere that could’ve contributed to its demise.