[deleted]
<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not create alternate accounts to bypass forum bans. Alternate accounts will be permanently banned, and offending users will be subject to both temporary and permanent bans.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
I don’t understand stand why this forum exists we all know sprint is the best thing to happen to halo and 343 will keep it in halo is better off with sprint
> 2533274944752684;16032:
> 1. The BR is a pickup weapon that always dominated gunfights and had practically no counter aside from another BR or a full blown power weapon. Nade spam was a problem because of the exceptionally tight map design, so grenade splash damage was always accentuated in the often tight 4v4 maps. Grenades were practically an inescapable death sentence and discouraged longer range gunfights because again, you only got CQC weapons at spawn.
Although I freely admit that most niche weapons in Halo 3 were terribly useless, the BR was not the problem. All the other weapons in the sandbox were. Although it many people find it preferable to have a large viable weapon sandbox, I fail to see how this is not just a matter of preference. When it comes to grenade spam, I again fail to see the objective aspect of the issue. I can understand how both of these might be subjectively undesirable, but that’s it.
> 2533274944752684;16032:
> 2. I define freedom by the amount of choices you have, or we can even go by your definition here. Being restricted to only “walk, jump, crouch” is a pretty big restriction. 2 geared movement gives you that choice of one speed and another, which comes in handy on maps like Truth (or if you want, Midship) for pinches. EM gives us options. For example, Thrust lets us make big jumps and spice up our strafes. Slide lets us temporarily lower our profiles to catch enemies off guard. Clamber makes it easier to take higher routes (although it could be made unnecessary with map tweaks). Stabilize let’s us engage from angles we were never able to get before.
I can admit that other Spartan Abilities give the player more choices, and although I don’t believe many of these choices are very meaningful, I can understand the freedom aspect of it. However, when it comes to sprint, the freedom seems entirely illusory based on your description. After all, it’s not as if you couldn’t run at two different speeds in classic Halo games. You absolutely could. In fact, you could run at at least 256 different speeds (or however many bits of the precision of the analog stick the games used), but players rarely if ever made use of that freedom. However, it would be an understatement to say that players rarely took advantage of that freedom. For all practical purposes, Halo 5 doesn’t have any more movement modes than classic games did, all it does is prevent the player from shooting when moving at the highest speed. If you want to move slower than maximum speed in classic Halo, you can absolutely do it.
Again, I stress that I’m not talking about other Spartan Abilities here, only sprint.
> 2533274944752684;16032:
> 3. Strafes would be longer because BMS increase accounts for all directions. An increased speed is more distance in less time, so strafes would get longer and gunfights would likely be simplified. Messing with the aim assist alone is risky because then you can compromise the ranged capabilities of the weapon, and so may mess with balancing.
How would gunfights be simplified? If anything, strafing is currently far from being overly effective, so making it more effective by allowing players to strafe faster could only increase the importance of having a good strafe, making gunfights more complex.
When it comes to your aim assist concerns, they are not an issue, since the amount of aim assist can be based on distance. This would affect the behavior of
> 2533274944752684;16032:
> What I’m realizing classic guys simply don’t understand is doing everything in a single gear when you have so few options feels limiting to a lot of people. It’s like having an ice cream shop where you can mix any two of 100 flavors, but each flavor has a strong twinge of chocolate. Sure you have 495 possible combos, but if each tastes so much like chocolate, is that really freedom? Being limited to that one gear and only having 3 ways of moving is like having that ice cream I was talking about. Sure you have “everything”, but it still tastes like chocolate.
No, I don’t understand how being able to shoot while running at maximum speed feels more limiting than not being able to do it. As I see it, it’s just an artificial restriction to give the illusion of more options. I mean, you could remove the ability to jump while sprinting or moving at the BMS, and put it into a separate movement mode that has a speed comfortably between BMS and sprint. Putting aside the issues this would cause to gameplay, do you feel like this gives you more freedom? Does the current paradigm of being able jump whenever you want feel limiting?
> 2533274944752684;16032:
> 4. Well then what’ve you accomplished? All you have then is a slightly faster Halo 2/3, which doesn’t make a good compromise.
Well, this goes back to the question why did we have to limit what players can do at maximum speed in the first place?
> 2535473481267884;16042:
> > 2533274944752684;16026:
> > > 2533274830420921;16023:
> > > > 2535444702990491;16022:
> > > > > 2533274830420921;16018:
> > > > > When they reveil sprint or abilities in halo infinite in a couple of months.
> > > > > Everybody who is a classic fan are done , taking there briefcase and leaving halo.
> > > >
> > > > Yeah, yeah - anti sprinters said the same thing before Halo 5 and yet they still played it and they’re still here…
>
> I must say, that out all the attempts to justify the decline of Halo as a franchise, this is the most hilarious one.
>
> “H3 was in 2007. 8 years later (H5’s release) is a lot of time.” - Bob was born in 2003. It’s 2018 now. 15 years have passed. What has this to do with sprint debate? Nothing, exactly like your argument.“Population decline can’t solely be blamed on sprint and enhanced mobility.” - You’re right, but it plays a huge role in it. A reason to buy a videogame depands on the genre. Take sports game as an example. You usually buy the newest version for the updated squads, likely upgraded graphics and eventually a new gamemode. Then there are games like god of war, where you buy the games for another campaign experience. There are ton of things, but you get what I’m trying to say.So when it comes to the FPS Genre, you have certain expectations. Obviously the gameplay, new maps, gamemodes, campaign (depends on the franchise) etc. etc.
> But of all these things, the gameplay is the most important one. Because the gameplay influences every other aspect of the game. And you really can’t judge the whole campaign experience as a selling point, because you have only have access to the things you’ve been shown (Like the ad campaign) So I was hyped for H5’s campaign (because of the marketing) and I was disappointed, after the purchase.
>
> “The teenage audience would likely be in college or working jobs and would be busy, the adult audience would’ve probably grown out of Halo by now, and the child audience (read: squeakers) would’ve moved on with gaming fads.” - Ok, now this is what I was refering to in my first sentence. I mean what is this supposed to mean? I was in school 2007 and now I’m in University and I have a part time job, so what exactly should stop me to play Halo in particular?What about the other franchises? So, let’s say your statement is truth. I guess on this whole planet called earth only the Halo Fans are aging? Please explain the success of other franchises, which managed to grow within the same life cycle? (I’m not just talking about FPS Shooter)
>
> This modern gaming argument fascinates me everytime I see it. What is this supposed to mean? Sometimes I feel like people throw in some words and don’t even know what it means. Be specific? Is it fast gameplay, what you consider as modern gaming? Is it enhanched mobility? If you’re refering to this, your point makes even less sense, because the enhanched mobility trend is almost dead.
> Overwatch, which leans more towards Run’Gun, came out of nowhere and surpassed every other game. And correft me if I’m wrong, but the most characters can’t sprint, right? (I haven’t played it yet) I know that there are certain ways to move faster around the map, exactly like Halo back in the days. Battle Royale Games came and surpassed even Overwatch and both games are still the on the top. You can sprint in these games, but both of them play very slow. (That’s the point of this gamemode - this proves, that you don’t have to run across the map over and over again to have fun)
> Battlefield is currenlty more popular now and yup, you can sprint - the maps are huge, so sometimes you won’t find one single enemy to engage. Is this a bad thing? No, in fact I like battlefield for what it is. And there is no E.M. (Again, it can’t be anyway in a Worldwar game - this is not my point)
> Even COD tries to slow down the gameplay.
> All these games do offer a different experience. This is why they are currently on the top. Non of this games sold their own identity. Surely you can get inspired by certain things from other franchises, but sacrificing your own, unique gameplay experience is not an option. If you do this, you’ll turn into one of many, generic games on the market and become irrelevant.
> This is why I respect the decision to delay Infinite. It seems like 343 finally understands, that this can’t go on like this forever. I’d rather wait a few more years to have something new and unique, than just another ripoff.
That’s got to be the most condescending first sentence of a reply I’ve ever read. Way to make a first impression man.
Okay, let’s start with point numero uno: The reply has to do with the decline of Halo, and shines another theory on why it may be declining. 8 years is more than enough time for someone to leave a franchise and a universe because the world turns buddy, and we turn with it. People’s interests drift. People leave franchises. People grow up to have more responsibilities, raise families, get jobs, and a lot of these people don’t have time for or are no longer interested in games. And over 8 years? It’s a practically a given.
Other franchises grow when they consistently pull in new people, and Halo 5’s extremely hostile press atmosphere did not help at all. I mean, we’ve got guys like Act Man (who I am a fan of before you get any ideas) pumping out 5 videos just ragging on the campaign. He’s not particularly wrong in his videos, but if you’re just some random Joe considering buying H5, are you gonna buy it after seeing something like that? No!
If you’re not convinced, I can give you more than just the “Halo got stale” schtick:
- Halo 5’s, again, terrible press coverage - Halo 5’s terrible launch - Microtransactions - The XB1’s terrible sales - 343i’s tainted reputation after MCCJust some of of many reasons that H5 could’ve tanked.
Point #2 is pretty decent conjecture, but it projects your stricter expections of what a Halo game should be rather than the expectations of the average consumer. Not to mention you have no hard evidence.
- With changing number of age, our tastes, schedules, and motivation changes with it. A lot of students who’ve moved on to college could have a myriad of reasons to stop:
- Being too busy (I for one had a lot of all-nighters) - Just not caring about Halo anymore - Taking H5’s press coverage at face value and just not buying the game - Losing interest in multiplayerAmd I’m pretty sure there’s a lot I haven’t covered.
- But what makes you think Halo’s sold its identity? Halo’s identity is still after 17 years of this franchise a hotly debated topic. If we don’t even know what the identity is, how can we say Halo’s lost it? When I first played Halo, the only thing that jumped out at me was the long TTK and the Grav Hammer. That’s it. If you’re defining Halo’s identity by the big features that differentiate it from other franchises as it’s own unique game, the only thing that stands out is the shields system. If you’re saying sprint killed Halo’s identity with an animation, Halo must’ve had an embarrassingly fragile identity then and is a doomed franchise, because by that logic if an animation is too much then what isn’t?
<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not create alternate accounts to bypass forum bans. Alternate accounts will be permanently banned, and offending users will be subject to both temporary and permanent bans.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Halo 5 is the most competitive halo game. Ppl like halo reach that has sprint but not halo 5. I’d say non sprint believers need to adjust and stop complaining it’s not good for community sprint adds depth to game
> 2533274825830455;16048:
> I mean, you could remove the ability to jump while sprinting or moving at the BMS, and put it into a separate movement mode that has a speed comfortably between BMS and sprint. Putting aside the issues this would cause to gameplay, do you feel like this gives you more freedom? Does the current paradigm of being able jump whenever you want feel limiting?
We’re so massively limited.
More freedom for the players:
-Slug pace: Needed to be able to crouch, can’t shoot or throw grenades.
-Combat slug: For when you need to shoot and throw grenade while crouched, slightly larger profile than when crouching.
-Combat mode: When you need to shoot and throw grenades.
-Spring mode: When you need to jump, slightly faster than combat mode but can’t shoot or throw grenades
-Kangaroo mode: When jumping is needed in combat, slightly slower movement speed than Combat mode, and slightly lower jump height than spring mode, but you can shoot and throw grenades.
-Sprint: Like it is now, but no jumping
-Cheetah mode: Faster than sprint, decreased turn rate, can jump.
-Ludacris speed: Fastest forward movement speed available, no turn rate at all, no jumping.
Perhaps that’s too little freedom still, shooting and grenade throwing may need to be in their own respective movement modes?
Edit:
One thing which has been on my mind recently is the usage of a button for it.
A controller has limited buttons, and Halo 5’s layout feels really cluttered.
Do we need a function which doesn’t do much, take up room on the controller?
> 2533274795123910;16051:
> > 2533274825830455;16048:
> > I mean, you could remove the ability to jump while sprinting or moving at the BMS, and put it into a separate movement mode that has a speed comfortably between BMS and sprint. Putting aside the issues this would cause to gameplay, do you feel like this gives you more freedom? Does the current paradigm of being able jump whenever you want feel limiting?
>
> We’re so massively limited.
> More freedom for the players:
> -Slug pace: Needed to be able to crouch, can’t shoot or throw grenades.
> -Combat slug: For when you need to shoot and throw grenade while crouched, slightly larger profile than when crouching.
> -Combat mode: When you need to shoot and throw grenades.
> -Spring mode: When you need to jump, slightly faster than combat mode but can’t shoot or throw grenades
> -Kangaroo mode: When jumping is needed in combat, slightly slower movement speed than Combat mode, and slightly lower jump height than spring mode, but you can shoot and throw grenades.
> -Sprint: Like it is now, but no jumping
> -Cheetah mode: Faster than sprint, decreased turn rate, can jump.
> -Ludacris speed: Fastest forward movement speed available, no turn rate at all, no jumping.
>
> Perhaps that’s too little freedom still, shooting and grenade throwing may need to be in their own respective movement modes?
The strawman is strong with this one.
> 2533274944752684;16049:
> > 2535473481267884;16042:
> > > 2533274944752684;16026:
> > > > 2533274830420921;16023:
> > > > > 2535444702990491;16022:
> > > > > > 2533274830420921;16018:
> > > > > > When they reveil sprint or abilities in halo infinite in a couple of months.
> > > > > > Everybody who is a classic fan are done , taking there briefcase and leaving halo.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yeah, yeah - anti sprinters said the same thing before Halo 5 and yet they still played it and they’re still here…
> >
> > I must say, that out all the attempts to justify the decline of Halo as a franchise, this is the most hilarious one.
> >
> > “H3 was in 2007. 8 years later (H5’s release) is a lot of time.” - Bob was born in 2003. It’s 2018 now. 15 years have passed. What has this to do with sprint debate? Nothing, exactly like your argument.“Population decline can’t solely be blamed on sprint and enhanced mobility.” - You’re right, but it plays a huge role in it. A reason to buy a videogame depands on the genre. Take sports game as an example. You usually buy the newest version for the updated squads, likely upgraded graphics and eventually a new gamemode. Then there are games like god of war, where you buy the games for another campaign experience. There are ton of things, but you get what I’m trying to say.So when it comes to the FPS Genre, you have certain expectations. Obviously the gameplay, new maps, gamemodes, campaign (depends on the franchise) etc. etc.
> > But of all these things, the gameplay is the most important one. Because the gameplay influences every other aspect of the game. And you really can’t judge the whole campaign experience as a selling point, because you have only have access to the things you’ve been shown (Like the ad campaign) So I was hyped for H5’s campaign (because of the marketing) and I was disappointed, after the purchase.
> >
> > “The teenage audience would likely be in college or working jobs and would be busy, the adult audience would’ve probably grown out of Halo by now, and the child audience (read: squeakers) would’ve moved on with gaming fads.” - Ok, now this is what I was refering to in my first sentence. I mean what is this supposed to mean? I was in school 2007 and now I’m in University and I have a part time job, so what exactly should stop me to play Halo in particular?What about the other franchises? So, let’s say your statement is truth. I guess on this whole planet called earth only the Halo Fans are aging? Please explain the success of other franchises, which managed to grow within the same life cycle? (I’m not just talking about FPS Shooter)
> >
> > This modern gaming argument fascinates me everytime I see it. What is this supposed to mean? Sometimes I feel like people throw in some words and don’t even know what it means. Be specific? Is it fast gameplay, what you consider as modern gaming? Is it enhanched mobility? If you’re refering to this, your point makes even less sense, because the enhanched mobility trend is almost dead.
> > Overwatch, which leans more towards Run’Gun, came out of nowhere and surpassed every other game. And correft me if I’m wrong, but the most characters can’t sprint, right? (I haven’t played it yet) I know that there are certain ways to move faster around the map, exactly like Halo back in the days. Battle Royale Games came and surpassed even Overwatch and both games are still the on the top. You can sprint in these games, but both of them play very slow. (That’s the point of this gamemode - this proves, that you don’t have to run across the map over and over again to have fun)
> > Battlefield is currenlty more popular now and yup, you can sprint - the maps are huge, so sometimes you won’t find one single enemy to engage. Is this a bad thing? No, in fact I like battlefield for what it is. And there is no E.M. (Again, it can’t be anyway in a Worldwar game - this is not my point)
> > Even COD tries to slow down the gameplay.
> > All these games do offer a different experience. This is why they are currently on the top. Non of this games sold their own identity. Surely you can get inspired by certain things from other franchises, but sacrificing your own, unique gameplay experience is not an option. If you do this, you’ll turn into one of many, generic games on the market and become irrelevant.
> > This is why I respect the decision to delay Infinite. It seems like 343 finally understands, that this can’t go on like this forever. I’d rather wait a few more years to have something new and unique, than just another ripoff.
>
> That’s got to be the most condescending first sentence of a reply I’ve ever read. Way to make a first impression man.
>
> Okay, let’s start with point numero uno: The reply has to do with the decline of Halo, and shines another theory on why it may be declining. 8 years is more than enough time for someone to leave a franchise and a universe because the world turns buddy, and we turn with it. People’s interests drift. People leave franchises. People grow up to have more responsibilities, raise families, get jobs, and a lot of these people don’t have time for or are no longer interested in games. And over 8 years? It’s a practically a given.
>
> Other franchises grow when they consistently pull in new people, and Halo 5’s extremely hostile press atmosphere did not help at all. I mean, we’ve got guys like Act Man (who I am a fan of before you get any ideas) pumping out 5 videos just ragging on the campaign. He’s not particularly wrong in his videos, but if you’re just some random Joe considering buying H5, are you gonna buy it after seeing something like that? No!
>
> If you’re not convinced, I can give you more than just the “Halo got stale” schtick:
>
>
> - Halo 5’s, again, terrible press coverage - Halo 5’s terrible launch - Microtransactions - The XB1’s terrible sales - 343i’s tainted reputation after MCCJust some of of many reasons that H5 could’ve tanked.
>
> Point #2 is pretty decent conjecture, but it projects your stricter expections of what a Halo game should be rather than the expectations of the average consumer. Not to mention you have no hard evidence.
>
> 3. With changing number of age, our tastes, schedules, and motivation changes with it. A lot of students who’ve moved on to college could have a myriad of reasons to stop:
>
>
> - Being too busy (I for one had a lot of all-nighters) - Just not caring about Halo anymore - Taking H5’s press coverage at face value and just not buying the game - Losing interest in multiplayerAmd I’m pretty sure there’s a lot I haven’t covered.
>
> 4. But what makes you think Halo’s sold its identity? Halo’s identity is still after 17 years of this franchise a hotly debated topic. If we don’t even know what the identity is, how can we say Halo’s lost it? When I first played Halo, the only thing that jumped out at me was the long TTK and the Grav Hammer. That’s it. If you’re defining Halo’s identity by the big features that differentiate it from other franchises as it’s own unique game, the only thing that stands out is the shields system. If you’re saying sprint killed Halo’s identity with an animation, Halo must’ve had an embarrassingly fragile identity then and is a doomed franchise, because by that logic if an animation is too much then what isn’t?
You’ve just posted the exact same post with the same, baseless statements again. In fact, you added even more of them ;D I mean, that’s what I expected anyway. I could literally just bump my last post as a respond - but yeah, whatever.
> 2533274944752684;16032:
> 4. Well then what’ve you accomplished? All you have then is a slightly faster Halo 2/3, which doesn’t make a good compromise.
Isn’t that exactly what people wanted in the first place? To move faster than Halo 2 & Halo 3 because they felt so slow? That’s basically the main complaint (both satirical and legitimate) in this thread about those two.
Like there’s the solution, it solved the problem that everyone was having. The game is not (as) slow anymore, and there’s no Sprint animation anymore. What’s the problem here?
The weapons sucked? That’s a sandbox problem. Maps are too large? That’s a map design problem. Sprint never made any of them better (more people argue it made them worse).
> 2535473481267884;16053:
> > 2533274944752684;16049:
> > > 2535473481267884;16042:
> > > > 2533274944752684;16026:
> > > > > 2533274830420921;16023:
> > > > > > 2535444702990491;16022:
> > > > > > > 2533274830420921;16018:
> > > > > > > When they reveil sprint or abilities in halo infinite in a couple of months.
> > > > > > > Everybody who is a classic fan are done , taking there briefcase and leaving halo.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yeah, yeah - anti sprinters said the same thing before Halo 5 and yet they still played it and they’re still here…
> > >
> > > I must say, that out all the attempts to justify the decline of Halo as a franchise, this is the most hilarious one.
> > >
> > > “H3 was in 2007. 8 years later (H5’s release) is a lot of time.” - Bob was born in 2003. It’s 2018 now. 15 years have passed. What has this to do with sprint debate? Nothing, exactly like your argument.“Population decline can’t solely be blamed on sprint and enhanced mobility.” - You’re right, but it plays a huge role in it. A reason to buy a videogame depands on the genre. Take sports game as an example. You usually buy the newest version for the updated squads, likely upgraded graphics and eventually a new gamemode. Then there are games like god of war, where you buy the games for another campaign experience. There are ton of things, but you get what I’m trying to say.So when it comes to the FPS Genre, you have certain expectations. Obviously the gameplay, new maps, gamemodes, campaign (depends on the franchise) etc. etc.
> > > But of all these things, the gameplay is the most important one. Because the gameplay influences every other aspect of the game. And you really can’t judge the whole campaign experience as a selling point, because you have only have access to the things you’ve been shown (Like the ad campaign) So I was hyped for H5’s campaign (because of the marketing) and I was disappointed, after the purchase.
> > >
> > > “The teenage audience would likely be in college or working jobs and would be busy, the adult audience would’ve probably grown out of Halo by now, and the child audience (read: squeakers) would’ve moved on with gaming fads.” - Ok, now this is what I was refering to in my first sentence. I mean what is this supposed to mean? I was in school 2007 and now I’m in University and I have a part time job, so what exactly should stop me to play Halo in particular?What about the other franchises? So, let’s say your statement is truth. I guess on this whole planet called earth only the Halo Fans are aging? Please explain the success of other franchises, which managed to grow within the same life cycle? (I’m not just talking about FPS Shooter)
> > >
> > > This modern gaming argument fascinates me everytime I see it. What is this supposed to mean? Sometimes I feel like people throw in some words and don’t even know what it means. Be specific? Is it fast gameplay, what you consider as modern gaming? Is it enhanched mobility? If you’re refering to this, your point makes even less sense, because the enhanched mobility trend is almost dead.
> > > Overwatch, which leans more towards Run’Gun, came out of nowhere and surpassed every other game. And correft me if I’m wrong, but the most characters can’t sprint, right? (I haven’t played it yet) I know that there are certain ways to move faster around the map, exactly like Halo back in the days. Battle Royale Games came and surpassed even Overwatch and both games are still the on the top. You can sprint in these games, but both of them play very slow. (That’s the point of this gamemode - this proves, that you don’t have to run across the map over and over again to have fun)
> > > Battlefield is currenlty more popular now and yup, you can sprint - the maps are huge, so sometimes you won’t find one single enemy to engage. Is this a bad thing? No, in fact I like battlefield for what it is. And there is no E.M. (Again, it can’t be anyway in a Worldwar game - this is not my point)
> > > Even COD tries to slow down the gameplay.
> > > All these games do offer a different experience. This is why they are currently on the top. Non of this games sold their own identity. Surely you can get inspired by certain things from other franchises, but sacrificing your own, unique gameplay experience is not an option. If you do this, you’ll turn into one of many, generic games on the market and become irrelevant.
> > > This is why I respect the decision to delay Infinite. It seems like 343 finally understands, that this can’t go on like this forever. I’d rather wait a few more years to have something new and unique, than just another ripoff.
> >
> > That’s got to be the most condescending first sentence of a reply I’ve ever read. Way to make a first impression man.
> >
> > Okay, let’s start with point numero uno: The reply has to do with the decline of Halo, and shines another theory on why it may be declining. 8 years is more than enough time for someone to leave a franchise and a universe because the world turns buddy, and we turn with it. People’s interests drift. People leave franchises. People grow up to have more responsibilities, raise families, get jobs, and a lot of these people don’t have time for or are no longer interested in games. And over 8 years? It’s a practically a given.
> >
> > Other franchises grow when they consistently pull in new people, and Halo 5’s extremely hostile press atmosphere did not help at all. I mean, we’ve got guys like Act Man (who I am a fan of before you get any ideas) pumping out 5 videos just ragging on the campaign. He’s not particularly wrong in his videos, but if you’re just some random Joe considering buying H5, are you gonna buy it after seeing something like that? No!
> >
> > If you’re not convinced, I can give you more than just the “Halo got stale” schtick:
> >
> >
> > - Halo 5’s, again, terrible press coverage - Halo 5’s terrible launch - Microtransactions - The XB1’s terrible sales - 343i’s tainted reputation after MCCJust some of of many reasons that H5 could’ve tanked.
> >
> > Point #2 is pretty decent conjecture, but it projects your stricter expections of what a Halo game should be rather than the expectations of the average consumer. Not to mention you have no hard evidence.
> >
> > 3. With changing number of age, our tastes, schedules, and motivation changes with it. A lot of students who’ve moved on to college could have a myriad of reasons to stop:
> >
> >
> > - Being too busy (I for one had a lot of all-nighters) - Just not caring about Halo anymore - Taking H5’s press coverage at face value and just not buying the game - Losing interest in multiplayerAmd I’m pretty sure there’s a lot I haven’t covered.
> >
> > 4. But what makes you think Halo’s sold its identity? Halo’s identity is still after 17 years of this franchise a hotly debated topic. If we don’t even know what the identity is, how can we say Halo’s lost it? When I first played Halo, the only thing that jumped out at me was the long TTK and the Grav Hammer. That’s it. If you’re defining Halo’s identity by the big features that differentiate it from other franchises as it’s own unique game, the only thing that stands out is the shields system. If you’re saying sprint killed Halo’s identity with an animation, Halo must’ve had an embarrassingly fragile identity then and is a doomed franchise, because by that logic if an animation is too much then what isn’t?
>
> You’ve just posted the exact same post with the same, baseless statements again. In fact, you added even more of them ;D I mean, that’s what I expected anyway. I could literally just bump my last post as a respond - but yeah, whatever.
Your reply makes me feel a lot less like I’m cornered and makes me feel a lot more like you’re copping out.
I mean honestly, all you’ve presented in this thread is conjecture, your own biases, and condescension. Get off your high horse.
> 2533274944752684;16055:
> > 2535473481267884;16053:
> > > 2533274944752684;16049:
> > > > 2535473481267884;16042:
> > > > > 2533274944752684;16026:
> > > > > > 2533274830420921;16023:
> > > > > > > 2535444702990491;16022:
> > > > > > > > 2533274830420921;16018:
> > > > > > > > When they reveil sprint or abilities in halo infinite in a couple of months.
> > > > > > > > Everybody who is a classic fan are done , taking there briefcase and leaving halo.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yeah, yeah - anti sprinters said the same thing before Halo 5 and yet they still played it and they’re still here…
> > > >
> > > > I must say, that out all the attempts to justify the decline of Halo as a franchise, this is the most hilarious one.
> > > >
> > > > “H3 was in 2007. 8 years later (H5’s release) is a lot of time.” - Bob was born in 2003. It’s 2018 now. 15 years have passed. What has this to do with sprint debate? Nothing, exactly like your argument.“Population decline can’t solely be blamed on sprint and enhanced mobility.” - You’re right, but it plays a huge role in it. A reason to buy a videogame depands on the genre. Take sports game as an example. You usually buy the newest version for the updated squads, likely upgraded graphics and eventually a new gamemode. Then there are games like god of war, where you buy the games for another campaign experience. There are ton of things, but you get what I’m trying to say.So when it comes to the FPS Genre, you have certain expectations. Obviously the gameplay, new maps, gamemodes, campaign (depends on the franchise) etc. etc.
> > > > But of all these things, the gameplay is the most important one. Because the gameplay influences every other aspect of the game. And you really can’t judge the whole campaign experience as a selling point, because you have only have access to the things you’ve been shown (Like the ad campaign) So I was hyped for H5’s campaign (because of the marketing) and I was disappointed, after the purchase.
> > > >
> > > > “The teenage audience would likely be in college or working jobs and would be busy, the adult audience would’ve probably grown out of Halo by now, and the child audience (read: squeakers) would’ve moved on with gaming fads.” - Ok, now this is what I was refering to in my first sentence. I mean what is this supposed to mean? I was in school 2007 and now I’m in University and I have a part time job, so what exactly should stop me to play Halo in particular?What about the other franchises? So, let’s say your statement is truth. I guess on this whole planet called earth only the Halo Fans are aging? Please explain the success of other franchises, which managed to grow within the same life cycle? (I’m not just talking about FPS Shooter)
> > > >
> > > > This modern gaming argument fascinates me everytime I see it. What is this supposed to mean? Sometimes I feel like people throw in some words and don’t even know what it means. Be specific? Is it fast gameplay, what you consider as modern gaming? Is it enhanched mobility? If you’re refering to this, your point makes even less sense, because the enhanched mobility trend is almost dead.
> > > > Overwatch, which leans more towards Run’Gun, came out of nowhere and surpassed every other game. And correft me if I’m wrong, but the most characters can’t sprint, right? (I haven’t played it yet) I know that there are certain ways to move faster around the map, exactly like Halo back in the days. Battle Royale Games came and surpassed even Overwatch and both games are still the on the top. You can sprint in these games, but both of them play very slow. (That’s the point of this gamemode - this proves, that you don’t have to run across the map over and over again to have fun)
> > > > Battlefield is currenlty more popular now and yup, you can sprint - the maps are huge, so sometimes you won’t find one single enemy to engage. Is this a bad thing? No, in fact I like battlefield for what it is. And there is no E.M. (Again, it can’t be anyway in a Worldwar game - this is not my point)
> > > > Even COD tries to slow down the gameplay.
> > > > All these games do offer a different experience. This is why they are currently on the top. Non of this games sold their own identity. Surely you can get inspired by certain things from other franchises, but sacrificing your own, unique gameplay experience is not an option. If you do this, you’ll turn into one of many, generic games on the market and become irrelevant.
> > > > This is why I respect the decision to delay Infinite. It seems like 343 finally understands, that this can’t go on like this forever. I’d rather wait a few more years to have something new and unique, than just another ripoff.
> > >
> > > …Other franchises grow when they consistently pull in new people, and Halo 5’s extremely hostile press atmosphere did not help at all. I mean, we’ve got guys like Act Man (who I am a fan of before you get any ideas) pumping out 5 videos just ragging on the campaign. He’s not particularly wrong in his videos, but if you’re just some random Joe considering buying H5, are you gonna buy it after seeing something like that? No!
> > >
> > > If you’re not convinced, I can give you more than just the “Halo got stale” schtick:
> > >
> > >
> > > - Halo 5’s, again, terrible press coverage - Halo 5’s terrible launch - Microtransactions - The XB1’s terrible sales - 343i’s tainted reputation after MCCJust some of of many reasons that H5 could’ve tanked.
> > >
> > > Point #2 is pretty decent conjecture, but it projects your stricter expections of what a Halo game should be rather than the expectations of the average consumer. Not to mention you have no hard evidence.
> > >
> > > 3. With changing number of age, our tastes, schedules, and motivation changes with it. A lot of students who’ve moved on to college could have a myriad of reasons to stop:
> > >
> > >
> > > - Being too busy (I for one had a lot of all-nighters) - Just not caring about Halo anymore - Taking H5’s press coverage at face value and just not buying the game - Losing interest in multiplayerAmd I’m pretty sure there’s a lot I haven’t covered.
> > >
> > > 4. But what makes you think Halo’s sold its identity? Halo’s identity is still after 17 years of this franchise a hotly debated topic. If we don’t even know what the identity is, how can we say Halo’s lost it? When I first played Halo, the only thing that jumped out at me was the long TTK and the Grav Hammer. That’s it. If you’re defining Halo’s identity by the big features that differentiate it from other franchises as it’s own unique game, the only thing that stands out is the shields system. If you’re saying sprint killed Halo’s identity with an animation, Halo must’ve had an embarrassingly fragile identity then and is a doomed franchise, because by that logic if an animation is too much then what isn’t?
> >
> > You’ve just posted the exact same post with the same, baseless statements again. In fact, you added even more of them ;D I mean, that’s what I expected anyway. I could literally just bump my last post as a respond - but yeah, whatever.
>
> Your reply makes me feel a lot less like I’m cornered and makes me feel a lot more like you’re copping out.
>
> I mean honestly, all you’ve presented in this thread is conjecture, your own biases, and condescension. Get off your high horse.
Thank you- I completely agree which is why I’m leaning away from engaging with this person. I understand they do not prefer sprint in Halo but the notion that there aren’t “good reasons,” for keeping sprint is false; as you’ve quite clearly demonstrated. It serves anti sprinters more benefit to debate this with us intelligently then to try to be so condescending and short sighted over the issue.
> 2533274833081329;16054:
> > 2533274944752684;16032:
> > 4. Well then what’ve you accomplished? All you have then is a slightly faster Halo 2/3, which doesn’t make a good compromise.
>
> Isn’t that exactly what people wanted in the first place? To move faster than Halo 2 & Halo 3 because they felt so slow? That’s basically the main complaint (both satirical and legitimate) in this thread about those two.
>
> Like there’s the solution, it solved the problem that everyone was having. The game is not (as) slow anymore, and there’s no Sprint animation anymore. What’s the problem here?
>
> The weapons sucked? That’s a sandbox problem. Maps are too large? That’s a map design problem. Sprint never made any of them better (more people argue it made them worse).
That’s the main complaint for a lot of people, but my main complaint is in that H1-3 felt restricted. A slow game can be serviced by map design, but a feeling of restriction boils down to the fundamental classic movement system itself. That’s why I’d rather keep sprint. Illusion or not, it definitely feels more free than the one geared system. I also prefer it because 2 geared caters to my flanking playstyle a lot more than a universal max speed.
Also, remark No.4 was a lot more about the increase proposed rather than the idea of increase in BMS itself. If I’m going to tolerate a classic movement system, I’d expect bigger maps to lessen nade spamming and a bigger bump than 15%. My big problems with classic movement were the terrible nade spam and the limiting feeling.
> 2533274795123910;16051:
> > 2533274825830455;16048:
> > I mean, you could remove the ability to jump while sprinting or moving at the BMS, and put it into a separate movement mode that has a speed comfortably between BMS and sprint. Putting aside the issues this would cause to gameplay, do you feel like this gives you more freedom? Does the current paradigm of being able jump whenever you want feel limiting?
>
> We’re so massively limited.
> More freedom for the players:
> -Slug pace: Needed to be able to crouch, can’t shoot or throw grenades.
> -Combat slug: For when you need to shoot and throw grenade while crouched, slightly larger profile than when crouching.
> -Combat mode: When you need to shoot and throw grenades.
> -Spring mode: When you need to jump, slightly faster than combat mode but can’t shoot or throw grenades
> -Kangaroo mode: When jumping is needed in combat, slightly slower movement speed than Combat mode, and slightly lower jump height than spring mode, but you can shoot and throw grenades.
> -Sprint: Like it is now, but no jumping
> -Cheetah mode: Faster than sprint, decreased turn rate, can jump.
> -Ludacris speed: Fastest forward movement speed available, no turn rate at all, no jumping.
>
> Perhaps that’s too little freedom still, shooting and grenade throwing may need to be in their own respective movement modes?
I see it now, the limitless possibilities. I can move any way I want, however I want, as long as I don’t want to do two things simultaneously. It’s glorious.
> 2533274944752684;16052:
> The strawman is strong with this one.
It can’t be a strawman if it’s not an argument, and I’m sure this one’s completely in jest. No one has claimed that this is what you’re asking for. Mind you, I am genuinely curious whether you think any of these ideas would give the player more freedom (or why you think none of them would), since it is the exact idea behind sprint taken to its logical extreme: forcing the player to give up other actions to perform one action better.
> 2533274944752684;16057:
> > 2533274833081329;16054:
> > > 2533274944752684;16032:
> > > 4. Well then what’ve you accomplished? All you have then is a slightly faster Halo 2/3, which doesn’t make a good compromise.
> >
> > Isn’t that exactly what people wanted in the first place? To move faster than Halo 2 & Halo 3 because they felt so slow? That’s basically the main complaint (both satirical and legitimate) in this thread about those two.
> >
> > Like there’s the solution, it solved the problem that everyone was having. The game is not (as) slow anymore, and there’s no Sprint animation anymore. What’s the problem here?
> >
> > The weapons sucked? That’s a sandbox problem. Maps are too large? That’s a map design problem. Sprint never made any of them better (more people argue it made them worse).
>
> That’s the main complaint for a lot of people, but my main complaint is in that H1-3 felt restricted. A slow game can be serviced by map design, but a feeling of restriction boils down to the fundamental classic movement system itself. That’s why I’d rather keep sprint. Illusion or not, it definitely feels more free than the one geared system. I also prefer it because 2 geared caters to my flanking playstyle a lot more than a universal max speed.
>
> Also, remark No.4 was a lot more about the increase proposed rather than the idea of increase in BMS itself. If I’m going to tolerate a classic movement system, I’d expect bigger maps to lessen nade spamming and a bigger bump than 15%. My big problems with classic movement were the terrible nade spam and the limiting feeling.
That’s a lot of use of the word feel.
> 2533274825830455;16058:
> > 2533274795123910;16051:
> > > 2533274825830455;16048:
> > > I mean, you could remove the ability to jump while sprinting or moving at the BMS, and put it into a separate movement mode that has a speed comfortably between BMS and sprint. Putting aside the issues this would cause to gameplay, do you feel like this gives you more freedom? Does the current paradigm of being able jump whenever you want feel limiting?
> >
> > We’re so massively limited.
> > More freedom for the players:
> > -Slug pace: Needed to be able to crouch, can’t shoot or throw grenades.
> > -Combat slug: For when you need to shoot and throw grenade while crouched, slightly larger profile than when crouching.
> > -Combat mode: When you need to shoot and throw grenades.
> > -Spring mode: When you need to jump, slightly faster than combat mode but can’t shoot or throw grenades
> > -Kangaroo mode: When jumping is needed in combat, slightly slower movement speed than Combat mode, and slightly lower jump height than spring mode, but you can shoot and throw grenades.
> > -Sprint: Like it is now, but no jumping
> > -Cheetah mode: Faster than sprint, decreased turn rate, can jump.
> > -Ludacris speed: Fastest forward movement speed available, no turn rate at all, no jumping.
> >
> > Perhaps that’s too little freedom still, shooting and grenade throwing may need to be in their own respective movement modes?
>
> I see it now, the limitless possibilities. I can move any way I want, however I want, as long as I don’t want to do two things simultaneously. It’s glorious.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274944752684;16052:
> > The strawman is strong with this one.
>
> It can’t be a strawman if it’s not an argument, and I’m sure this one’s completely in jest. No one has claimed that this is what you’re asking for. Mind you, I am genuinely curious whether you think any of these ideas would give the player more freedom (or why you think none of them would), since it is the exact idea behind sprint taken to its logical extreme: forcing the player to give up other actions to perform one action better.
If we’re going off of my perception of “freedom”, these ostensibly would because there are more choices, but it doesn’t mean I don’t find them redundant and unnecessary. I only need 2 gears to achieve my desired inequality of speeds, not… wait… 1… 2… ok, 9 gears.
If Naqser’s reply was a joke, I’m genuinely sorry for being so defensive. I’m vary wary of jokes ever since… that incident.
> 2533274944752684;16057:
> > 2533274833081329;16054:
> > > 2533274944752684;16032:
> > > 4. Well then what’ve you accomplished? All you have then is a slightly faster Halo 2/3, which doesn’t make a good compromise.
> >
> > Isn’t that exactly what people wanted in the first place? To move faster than Halo 2 & Halo 3 because they felt so slow? That’s basically the main complaint (both satirical and legitimate) in this thread about those two.
> >
> > Like there’s the solution, it solved the problem that everyone was having. The game is not (as) slow anymore, and there’s no Sprint animation anymore. What’s the problem here?
> >
> > The weapons sucked? That’s a sandbox problem. Maps are too large? That’s a map design problem. Sprint never made any of them better (more people argue it made them worse).
>
> That’s the main complaint for a lot of people, but my main complaint is in that H1-3 felt restricted. A slow game can be serviced by map design, but a feeling of restriction boils down to the fundamental classic movement system itself. That’s why I’d rather keep sprint. Illusion or not, it definitely feels more free than the one geared system. I also prefer it because 2 geared caters to my flanking playstyle a lot more than a universal max speed.
>
> Also, remark No.4 was a lot more about the increase proposed rather than the idea of increase in BMS itself. If I’m going to tolerate a classic movement system, I’d expect bigger maps to lessen nade spamming and a bigger bump than 15%. My big problems with classic movement were the terrible nade spam and the limiting feeling.
But a feeling can be recreated. Feelings can be fooled and even biased. Sometimes they’re subjective, sometimes they’re entirely false information.
People thought Halo 3 moves the slowest, but Halo Reach moves marginally slower than the entire trilogy, probably the entire series. So if you’re using any Armor Ability other than Sprint, you are objectively moving slower than ever even though people didn’t feel that way because there is the eventual option of Sprint even though they’re using Hologram.
I still can’t wrap my head around how it’s more “free” than one movement system that lets you do the abilities of both movement systems. I understand that it suits your playstyle, but that’s also more of a map design issue, creating areas and paths where it’s optimal to flank with. Halo CE was pretty heavily about flanking. Like tsassi said, is jumping in both systems limiting and should we create a separate system for vertical travel? We even have Clamber to compliment it.
Nade spamming really won’t go away simply because it’s the nature/design of grenades to be used to weaken someone or trap someone, and there’s no reason not to throw grenades, especially when there is a chance to pick up grenades from the person you defeated, replenishing your supply to continue spamming grenades. Sprint didn’t really decrease that because it still happens very frequently in Halo 5. If anything, it only made it worse considering the update that made grenades take half your shields away at minimum no matter how far you are from the center of the blast radius.
> 2533274829213703;16059:
> > 2533274944752684;16057:
> > > 2533274833081329;16054:
> > > > 2533274944752684;16032:
> > > > 4. Well then what’ve you accomplished? All you have then is a slightly faster Halo 2/3, which doesn’t make a good compromise.
> > >
> > > Isn’t that exactly what people wanted in the first place? To move faster than Halo 2 & Halo 3 because they felt so slow? That’s basically the main complaint (both satirical and legitimate) in this thread about those two.
> > >
> > > Like there’s the solution, it solved the problem that everyone was having. The game is not (as) slow anymore, and there’s no Sprint animation anymore. What’s the problem here?
> > >
> > > The weapons sucked? That’s a sandbox problem. Maps are too large? That’s a map design problem. Sprint never made any of them better (more people argue it made them worse).
> >
> > That’s the main complaint for a lot of people, but my main complaint is in that H1-3 felt restricted. A slow game can be serviced by map design, but a feeling of restriction boils down to the fundamental classic movement system itself. That’s why I’d rather keep sprint. Illusion or not, it definitely feels more free than the one geared system. I also prefer it because 2 geared caters to my flanking playstyle a lot more than a universal max speed.
> >
> > Also, remark No.4 was a lot more about the increase proposed rather than the idea of increase in BMS itself. If I’m going to tolerate a classic movement system, I’d expect bigger maps to lessen nade spamming and a bigger bump than 15%. My big problems with classic movement were the terrible nade spam and the limiting feeling.
>
> That’s a lot of use of the word feel.
Yeah, it is. To me, gameplay is half about how it feels, so that’s why I have gripes with classic. It just feels like I’m on a collar midmatch, so my concentration is constantly breaking.
> 2533274944752684;16060:
> If we’re going off of my perception of “freedom”, these ostensibly would because there are more choices, but it doesn’t mean I don’t find them redundant and unnecessary. I only need 2 gears to achieve my desired inequality of speeds, not… wait… 1… 2… ok, 9 gears.
>
> If Naqser’s reply was a joke, I’m genuinely sorry for being so defensive. I’m vary wary of jokes ever since… that incident.
Fair enough. I can value your consistency of opinion regarding the meaning of freedom, even if I disagree with it. Mind you, I still don’t understand why this of all places is where you choose draw the line, but I’ve come to the limit of my ability to ask useful questions.
[deleted]
> 2533274944752684;16055:
> > 2535473481267884;16053:
> > > 2533274944752684;16049:
> > > > 2535473481267884;16042:
> > > > > 2533274944752684;16026:
> > > > > > 2533274830420921;16023:
> > > > > > > 2535444702990491;16022:
> > > > > > > > 2533274830420921;16018:
> > > > > > > > When they reveil sprint or abilities in halo infinite in a couple of months.
> > > > > > > > Everybody who is a classic fan are done , taking there briefcase and leaving halo.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yeah, yeah - anti sprinters said the same thing before Halo 5 and yet they still played it and they’re still here…
> > > >
> > > > I must say, that out all the attempts to justify the decline of Halo as a franchise, this is the most hilarious one.
> > > >
> > > > “H3 was in 2007. 8 years later (H5’s release) is a lot of time.” - Bob was born in 2003. It’s 2018 now. 15 years have passed. What has this to do with sprint debate? Nothing, exactly like your argument.“Population decline can’t solely be blamed on sprint and enhanced mobility.” - You’re right, but it plays a huge role in it. A reason to buy a videogame depands on the genre. Take sports game as an example. You usually buy the newest version for the updated squads, likely upgraded graphics and eventually a new gamemode. Then there are games like god of war, where you buy the games for another campaign experience. There are ton of things, but you get what I’m trying to say.So when it comes to the FPS Genre, you have certain expectations. Obviously the gameplay, new maps, gamemodes, campaign (depends on the franchise) etc. etc.
> > > > But of all these things, the gameplay is the most important one. Because the gameplay influences every other aspect of the game. And you really can’t judge the whole campaign experience as a selling point, because you have only have access to the things you’ve been shown (Like the ad campaign) So I was hyped for H5’s campaign (because of the marketing) and I was disappointed, after the purchase.
> > > >
> > > > “The teenage audience would likely be in college or working jobs and would be busy, the adult audience would’ve probably grown out of Halo by now, and the child audience (read: squeakers) would’ve moved on with gaming fads.” - Ok, now this is what I was refering to in my first sentence. I mean what is this supposed to mean? I was in school 2007 and now I’m in University and I have a part time job, so what exactly should stop me to play Halo in particular?What about the other franchises? So, let’s say your statement is truth. I guess on this whole planet called earth only the Halo Fans are aging? Please explain the success of other franchises, which managed to grow within the same life cycle? (I’m not just talking about FPS Shooter)
> > > >
> > > > This modern gaming argument fascinates me everytime I see it. What is this supposed to mean? Sometimes I feel like people throw in some words and don’t even know what it means. Be specific? Is it fast gameplay, what you consider as modern gaming? Is it enhanched mobility? If you’re refering to this, your point makes even less sense, because the enhanched mobility trend is almost dead.
> > > > Overwatch, which leans more towards Run’Gun, came out of nowhere and surpassed every other game. And correft me if I’m wrong, but the most characters can’t sprint, right? (I haven’t played it yet) I know that there are certain ways to move faster around the map, exactly like Halo back in the days. Battle Royale Games came and surpassed even Overwatch and both games are still the on the top. You can sprint in these games, but both of them play very slow. (That’s the point of this gamemode - this proves, that you don’t have to run across the map over and over again to have fun)
> > > > Battlefield is currenlty more popular now and yup, you can sprint - the maps are huge, so sometimes you won’t find one single enemy to engage. Is this a bad thing? No, in fact I like battlefield for what it is. And there is no E.M. (Again, it can’t be anyway in a Worldwar game - this is not my point)
> > > > Even COD tries to slow down the gameplay.
> > > > All these games do offer a different experience. This is why they are currently on the top. Non of this games sold their own identity. Surely you can get inspired by certain things from other franchises, but sacrificing your own, unique gameplay experience is not an option. If you do this, you’ll turn into one of many, generic games on the market and become irrelevant.
> > > > This is why I respect the decision to delay Infinite. It seems like 343 finally understands, that this can’t go on like this forever. I’d rather wait a few more years to have something new and unique, than just another ripoff.
>
> Your reply makes me feel a lot less like I’m cornered and makes me feel a lot more like you’re copping out.
>
> I mean honestly, all you’ve presented in this thread is conjecture, your own biases, and condescension. Get off your high horse.
I really couldn’t care less what you think of me.
The problem is not in me beeing arrogant, the problem is that you refuse to read arguments from the other side. While I’m trying to respond to every single one of your points, you’re just ignoring all of mine. This is disrispectful, not my attitude.
I mean, you even complain about the act man. Sometimes you have to critisize the thing you like for the greater good. Feedback is the most important thing and if you give constructive feedback, it will benefit the franchise. As you see, they’ve started to listen.
We’re not here for the sake of hating, we’re here to give our feedback. There are other aspects I like about H5 (forge, custom game browser) but why should I mention them in this particular thread?
As I see, now you start to give gameplay reasons and I have nothing against them, but this is how this discussion should’ve been right from the start.