The sprint discussion thread

> 2535430336598763;16304:
> Sprint may not ave been part of halo in h1 h2 h3 but in halo reach from there on sprint was a option of sorts and i like it however if sprint was part of the original trilogy this thread probably wouldn’t even exist. Almost all if not all games include these days include sprint or something like it. What really disappoints me is the lack of evidence to support the removal of sprint if their was reasonable proof or some evidence to show its not good for a series then i dont think removal of sprint needs to be on the table as i’ve read all 816 Pages of this and been up all night so im gonna go to bed but please provide evidence to the thread then 343i can look at it for future halo releases.

It causes the stretching of maps, damages the weapon sandbox, bullet magnetism, restricts movement options because it can only be used forwards, movement and combat are no longer simultaneous, maps are functional but hardly memorable, players retreat from fights, feeling faster can be achieved through a higher base movement speed/FoV etc. Those are some of my problems with Sprint, is that reasonable enough?

> 2533274894112092;16306:
> > 2535430336598763;16304:
> > Sprint may not ave been part of halo in h1 h2 h3 but in halo reach from there on sprint was a option of sorts and i like it however if sprint was part of the original trilogy this thread probably wouldn’t even exist. Almost all if not all games include these days include sprint or something like it. What really disappoints me is the lack of evidence to support the removal of sprint if their was reasonable proof or some evidence to show its not good for a series then i dont think removal of sprint needs to be on the table as i’ve read all 816 Pages of this and been up all night so im gonna go to bed but please provide evidence to the thread then 343i can look at it for future halo releases.
>
> - It causes the stretching of maps,This is barely noticeable with sprint; plus an increased BMS (which you are also arguing for) would cause this anyway. Larger maps are better anyways- next gen consoles can support a much higher player count; which leads to new and exciting gametypes. - damages the weapon sandbox,Pure speculation and personal opinion. - bullet magnetism,Nothing about this is “damaged,” granted higher skill is required to hit a sprinting target. - restricts movement options because it can only be used forwards,It makes sense to only use sprint while moving forward. It’s not “restrictive,” rather focused, controlled, and directed; putting it straight into the hands of the player to determine when sprint is necessary. - movement and combat are no longer simultaneous,This clearly isn’t necessary for Halo, as the past three AAA titles have included sprint. This may be your personal preference, but I’d argue that this is now part of an antiquated Halo experience. - maps are functional but hardly memorable,Theres no clear evidence that sprint is the culprit of this issue. 343’s shortfalls in map creativity and design innovation thus far would have been the same with or without sprint. They need to step their game up in this department but there is no direct evidence linking sprint to this particular issue. - players retreat from fights,All change isn’t bad. This creates unique combat encounters that wouldn’t be present without sprint. Proper map control can effectively neutralize this issue via anticipating, funneling, and teamshotting your opponents. - feeling faster can be achieved through a higher base movement speed/FoV etc.Faster travel doesn’t achieve the same level of control over player movement that sprint offers. Sprint provides the player with two permanent BMS’ so that the player can decide when and where to implement sprint dynamically based upon the situation at hand. - Those are some of my problems with Sprint, is that reasonable enough?Sure it’s “reasonable,” for you to feel that way… As with most gripes against sprint, these opinions nearly always boil down to personal preference of gameplay. To each their own but these are still heavily opinionated lines of reasoning.

> 2533274833081329;16305:
> What do you consider as “evidence” or “proof” then? You say you’ve read all 816 pages full of people who have made long posts back and forth about why Sprint needs to stay/go, but apparently that isn’t valid as evidence. What evidence should be provided to you that’s different from what was said in the past?

I saw nothing but “I say its not right” or “I dont like it” or even “It doesn’t feel like a halo with it” Kinda comments

I want to see proof with diagrams statistics heck even a you tube video describing and showing what is so wrong with it. 343I works for Microsoft which is a corporation if you were to go to court over something like “It isnt right” You would lose. Video, statistical even graphical would be better than hearsay. I saw no links that described why it was bad or ruins the sandbox just links with people ranting or put too little effort into describing it.

If sprint is so bad for halo then what about games like CoD, or the battlefield franchises why arent they getting scrutinized for this because they didn’t have sprint originally either. This thread to me just feels like a rant thread for 816 pages which is why it is so bad it doesn’t give me any proof that makes me want to side with the removal of sprint and i bet the forum team and 343I look at these threads more than i do and if you haven’t been acknowledged its because they haven’t been given proper evidence to make them need to remove it from a creators stand point your not gonna change something if people dont give proper evidence to prove it

The reason spiltscreen will return is because 343i said something along the lines of its too hard to get people into the same home or building but the youtube community made videos of themselves getting there friends over and the massive rants from the youtubers and fans alike. To me the people are angry but without that proof or justification the creators arent gonna change something.

The Act Man: The Return of Splitscreen
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6_Nj54gKABo

> 2535444702990491;16307:
> > 2533274894112092;16306:
> > > 2535430336598763;16304:
> > > Sprint may not ave been part of halo in h1 h2 h3 but in halo reach from there on sprint was a option of sorts and i like it however if sprint was part of the original trilogy this thread probably wouldn’t even exist. Almost all if not all games include these days include sprint or something like it. What really disappoints me is the lack of evidence to support the removal of sprint if their was reasonable proof or some evidence to show its not good for a series then i dont think removal of sprint needs to be on the table as i’ve read all 816 Pages of this and been up all night so im gonna go to bed but please provide evidence to the thread then 343i can look at it for future halo releases.
> >
> > - It causes the stretching of maps,This is barely noticeable with sprint; plus an increased BMS (which you are also arguing for) would cause this anyway. Larger maps are better anyways- next gen consoles can support a much higher player count; which leads to new and exciting gametypes. - damages the weapon sandbox,Pure speculation and personal opinion. - bullet magnetism,Nothing about this is “damaged,” granted higher skill is required to hit a sprinting target. - restricts movement options because it can only be used forwards,It makes sense to only use sprint while moving forward. It’s not “restrictive,” rather focused, controlled, and directed; putting it straight into the hands of the player to determine when sprint is necessary. - movement and combat are no longer simultaneous,This clearly isn’t necessary for Halo, as the past three AAA titles have included sprint. This may be your personal preference, but I’d argue that this is now part of an antiquated Halo experience. - maps are functional but hardly memorable,Theres no clear evidence that sprint is the culprit of this issue. 343’s shortfalls in map creativity and design innovation thus far would have been the same with or without sprint. They need to step their game up in this department but there is no direct evidence linking sprint to this particular issue. - players retreat from fights,All change isn’t bad. This creates unique combat encounters that wouldn’t be present without sprint. Proper map control can effectively neutralize this issue via anticipating, funneling, and teamshotting your opponents. - feeling faster can be achieved through a higher base movement speed/FoV etc.Faster travel doesn’t achieve the same level of control over player movement that sprint offers. Sprint provides the player with two permanent BMS’ so that the player can decide when and where to implement sprint dynamically based upon the situation at hand. - Those are some of my problems with Sprint, is that reasonable enough?Sure it’s “reasonable,” for you to feel that way… As with most gripes against sprint, these opinions nearly always boil down to personal preference of gameplay. To each their own but these are still heavily opinionated lines of reasoning.

Sorry about the layout in advance.

The maps would be stretched, but not nearly as much as they are with sprint. Especially because I believe we only need a slight nudge in bms if the FoV is good.

You’re right this is mainly personal preference, but I find the hitscan weapons either too powerful or too unreliable. I also believe that Halo 5 lacks in niche weapons.

I think sprint takes away from movement options because we’ve always been able to move at top speed in all directions with our weapon at the ready. It’s more focused forwards, but I prefer it focused in ALL directions.

I won’t blame the maps solely on sprint, but if the game had simpler mechanics, they’d have less barriers to design around. Though, 343 could use some work entirely in that area.

I simply don’t believe sprint will work well in Halo unless the TTK is shortened, which we know isn’t gonna happen. Players retreating isn’t really unique to me, just frustrating.

Just so we’re on the same page, your obviously aware that fast gameplay can be achieved without sprint but you prefer the freedom of having two movement speeds?

> 2535430336598763;16308:
> > 2533274833081329;16305:
> > What do you consider as “evidence” or “proof” then? You say you’ve read all 816 pages full of people who have made long posts back and forth about why Sprint needs to stay/go, but apparently that isn’t valid as evidence. What evidence should be provided to you that’s different from what was said in the past?
>
> I saw nothing but “I say its not right” or “I dont like it” or even “It doesn’t feel like a halo with it” Kinda comments
>
> I want to see proof with diagrams statistics heck even a you tube video describing and showing what is so wrong with it. 343I works for Microsoft which is a corporation if you were to go to court over something like “It isnt right” You would lose. Video, statistical even graphical would be better than hearsay. I saw no links that described why it was bad or ruins the sandbox just links with people ranting or put too little effort into describing it.
>
> If sprint is so bad for halo then what about games like CoD, or the battlefield franchises why arent they getting scrutinized for this because they didn’t have sprint originally either. This thread to me just feels like a rant thread for 816 pages which is why it is so bad it doesn’t give me any proof that makes me want to side with the removal of sprint and i bet the forum team and 343I look at these threads more than i do and if you haven’t been acknowledged its because they haven’t been given proper evidence to make them need to remove it from a creators stand point your not gonna change something if people dont give proper evidence to prove it
>
> The reason spiltscreen will return is because 343i said something along the lines of its too hard to get people into the same social space but the act man made a video of people getting there friends over and massive rant from the you-tubers and fans alike The act man put together a video down below and many others out together videos asking why it matters. The people are angry but without that proof or justification the creators arent gonna change something.
>
> The Act Man: The Return of Splitscreen
> The Return of Splitscreen - YouTube

Going just through the last few pages you can find descriptions and statistics of various speeds. On just page 815 there’s a possible compromise, a comment of someone detailing their problems and list of changes, another comment showing examples, and a video (that I didn’t watch so I can’t judge the content of).

I’m sensing either a bit of selective bias or complete fabrication of what you saw. Even our resident moderator here made a point that just going “I like/don’t like it” doesn’t hold a lot of value without any substance to back it up.

"If sprint is so bad for halo then what about games like CoD, or the battlefield franchises why arent they getting scrutinized for this because they didn’t have sprint originally either." - Because Halo =/= CoD and Halo =/= Battlefield. Those games are designed differently, and they play differently. I thought people hated comparing Halo to Call of Duty because “they are nothing alike” whenever someone compares Halo 4-5 to that franchise?

Why isn’t DOOM and CS:GO under scrutiny for not having Sprint right now, the former currently getting a sequel?

"The reason spiltscreen will return is because 343i said something along the lines of its too hard to get people into the same social space but the act man made a video of people getting there friends over and massive rant from the you-tubers and fans alike The act man put together a video down below and many others out together videos asking why it matters. The people are angry but without that proof or justification the creators arent gonna change something."
And the difference here is that 343i said Sprint is in Halo 5 because it’s marketable, not for the benefit of gameplay. It was actually heavily contested within the studio whether it would even be included or not.

Even the video you gave me is just 9 minutes of different people going “They like Splitscreen, they expect Splitscreen, therefore they want Splitscreen.” The only time they say why it mattered is because Bungie’s games had it and they were really good, but no one in those rants said how they helped gameplay. Yet that outcry was enough to get Splitscreen back.

If a video and a massive “rant” (which Waypoint also has a dedicated thread for Split-screen) was enough to bring that back, why isn’t it enough for Sprint?

> 2533274894112092;16309:
> > 2535444702990491;16307:
> > > 2533274894112092;16306:
> > > > 2535430336598763;16304:
> > > > Sprint may not ave been part of halo in h1 h2 h3 but in halo reach from there on sprint was a option of sorts and i like it however if sprint was part of the original trilogy this thread probably wouldn’t even exist. Almost all if not all games include these days include sprint or something like it. What really disappoints me is the lack of evidence to support the removal of sprint if their was reasonable proof or some evidence to show its not good for a series then i dont think removal of sprint needs to be on the table as i’ve read all 816 Pages of this and been up all night so im gonna go to bed but please provide evidence to the thread then 343i can look at it for future halo releases.
> > >
> > > - It causes the stretching of maps,This is barely noticeable with sprint; plus an increased BMS (which you are also arguing for) would cause this anyway. Larger maps are better anyways- next gen consoles can support a much higher player count; which leads to new and exciting gametypes. - damages the weapon sandbox,Pure speculation and personal opinion. - bullet magnetism,Nothing about this is “damaged,” granted higher skill is required to hit a sprinting target. - restricts movement options because it can only be used forwards,It makes sense to only use sprint while moving forward. It’s not “restrictive,” rather focused, controlled, and directed; putting it straight into the hands of the player to determine when sprint is necessary. - movement and combat are no longer simultaneous,This clearly isn’t necessary for Halo, as the past three AAA titles have included sprint. This may be your personal preference, but I’d argue that this is now part of an antiquated Halo experience. - maps are functional but hardly memorable,Theres no clear evidence that sprint is the culprit of this issue. 343’s shortfalls in map creativity and design innovation thus far would have been the same with or without sprint. They need to step their game up in this department but there is no direct evidence linking sprint to this particular issue. - players retreat from fights,All change isn’t bad. This creates unique combat encounters that wouldn’t be present without sprint. Proper map control can effectively neutralize this issue via anticipating, funneling, and teamshotting your opponents. - feeling faster can be achieved through a higher base movement speed/FoV etc.Faster travel doesn’t achieve the same level of control over player movement that sprint offers. Sprint provides the player with two permanent BMS’ so that the player can decide when and where to implement sprint dynamically based upon the situation at hand. - Those are some of my problems with Sprint, is that reasonable enough?Sure it’s “reasonable,” for you to feel that way… As with most gripes against sprint, these opinions nearly always boil down to personal preference of gameplay. To each their own but these are still heavily opinionated lines of reasoning.
>
> - You’re right this is mainly personal preference, but I find the hitscan weapons either too powerful or too unreliable. I also believe that Halo 5 lacks in niche weapons.I understand how you feel that way. I still don’t see how sprint is the culprit behind niche weapons, though… You’ve just got to have faster reflexes and (usually) better skill to hit a sprinting Spartan in the head, but it definitely can be done. - I think sprint takes away from movement options because we’ve always been able to move at top speed in all directions with our weapon at the ready. It’s more focused forwards, but I prefer it focused in ALL directions.Of all the points you’ve just laid out, this one I get the most. Wanting to move at max speed in all directions is indeed an understandable criticism when it comes to your gaming preference. I’d argue that 1) it’s definitely not something that we’ve “always been able [to do in Halo],• because Reach, 4, and now 5 prove otherwise. Sure it’s something from the older formula of Halo, which I get your nostalgic approach here but it’s certianly not something that’s always been there in Halo. And 2) It’s simply not needed… Even The Act Man (who prefers and wants classic movement) forthrightly admitted that the gameplay is “just so smooth and fluid,” in Halo 5, largely due to its advanced movement system. Sprint is the critical element driving modern Halo’s smoother and more fluid controls over classic Halo which is mainly why it’s my preference. I also like being able to utilize sprint to close the distance faster with my opponents and the realism sprint brings to Halo (At the risk of offending anti sprinters - it just makes me feel more immersed and like I’m able to move like a real spartan should; with agility and rapid bursts of movement as he situation dictates). And 3) Just increasing one BMS would reimplement the same old monotony with the classic movement, while taking away the control, stability, and dynamic range that two permanent BMS’ have to offer. - I won’t blame the maps solely on sprint, but if the game had simpler mechanics, they’d have less barriers to design around. Though, 343 could use some work entirely in that area.I get your frustration and understand where you’re coming from on this point. To me the maps in 4 and 5 indeed lack creativity and innovation. The maps need to generate more unique combat encounters, have better scenery and depth, and be more immersive- but sprint just isn’t in the culprit in my mind… Sure, movement mechanics impact map design in terms of raw space- maps need to be slightly larger to accommodate increased movement speed, maps have to offer vertical spaces for ground pound, maps have to offer clamber opportunities for clamber… But these things are minute, raw design elements to maps which are still otherwise lacking in creativity, innovation, and unique combat encounters. With or without sprint the maps in the last two Halos would’ve been just as bad- and 343i needs to step up their game in this particular department moving forward (regardless of movement mechanics). - I simply don’t believe sprint will work well in Halo unless the TTK is shortened, which we know isn’t gonna happen. Players retreating isn’t really unique to me, just frustrating.I don’t want to argue against how you feel on this point. While I like regular game types, I’ve always personally preferred the playlists with shorter TTK like Swat and Snipers… One shot kill weapons feel more visceral and gritty to me which (to me) is particularly appealing when present in FPS titles. - Just so we’re on the same page, your obviously aware that fast gameplay can be achieved without sprint but you prefer the freedom of having two movement speeds?Sure moving faster “can be achieved,” that way but which is better? For the reasons mentioned above, sprint is such a better alternative IMO. It’s just getting what you want in this hypothetical scenario- but moving faster all the time is less controllable, stable, and precise versus sprint whereas the player gets to move at regular, stable speeds most of the time… But the player can, at any time they deem necessary, choose to implement temporary and very much controlled boosts to their speed as the situation dictates.

> 2535430336598763;16308:
> I want to see proof with diagrams statistics heck even a you tube video describing and showing what is so wrong with it.

You should’ve asked that question like 3 or 4 years ago, lol. Most of the good discussions that I know of where that kind of stuff was discussed is now dead and buried. If I did a good search I could probably find stuff, but I’m not really up for it. I do like these two videos though (which were easy to find from memory) although they don’t provide hard stats or anything like you want and the second one is about sprint and abilities.

Link. The video that he’s talking about is called ‘sprint is an illusion’. It’s more rant based, but still has good points.
Link.

> 2727626560040591;16312:
> > 2535430336598763;16308:
> > I want to see proof with diagrams statistics heck even a you tube video describing and showing what is so wrong with it.
>
> You should’ve asked that question like 3 or 4 years ago, lol. Most of the good discussions that I know of where that kind of stuff was discussed is now dead and buried. If I did a good search I could probably find stuff, but I’m not really up for it. I do like these two videos though (which were easy to find from memory) although they don’t provide hard stats or anything like you want and the second one is more general.
> Link.
> Link.

Thanks for the links i like the points made in these videos but now im on the fence about sprint… crap

> 2535430336598763;16313:
> > 2727626560040591;16312:
> > > 2535430336598763;16308:
> > > I want to see proof with diagrams statistics heck even a you tube video describing and showing what is so wrong with it.
> >
> > You should’ve asked that question like 3 or 4 years ago, lol. Most of the good discussions that I know of where that kind of stuff was discussed is now dead and buried. If I did a good search I could probably find stuff, but I’m not really up for it. I do like these two videos though (which were easy to find from memory) although they don’t provide hard stats or anything like you want and the second one is more general.
> > Link.
> > Link.
>
> Thanks for the links i like the points made in these videos but now im on the fence about sprint… crap

Why crap? The fact that you can take in this information and possibly change your opinion is a good thing. It’s the driving force behind debate.

> 2533274831961512;16314:
> > 2535430336598763;16313:
> > > 2727626560040591;16312:
> > > > 2535430336598763;16308:
> > > > I want to see proof with diagrams statistics heck even a you tube video describing and showing what is so wrong with it.
> > >
> > > You should’ve asked that question like 3 or 4 years ago, lol. Most of the good discussions that I know of where that kind of stuff was discussed is now dead and buried. If I did a good search I could probably find stuff, but I’m not really up for it. I do like these two videos though (which were easy to find from memory) although they don’t provide hard stats or anything like you want and the second one is more general.
> > > Link.
> > > Link.
> >
> > Thanks for the links i like the points made in these videos but now im on the fence about sprint… crap
>
> Why crap? The fact that you can take in this information and possibly change your opinion is a good thing. It’s the driving force behind debate.

The person is clearly conflicted; probably because they like using sprint. Having a talking head on YouTube gripe about why they don’t like sprint doesn’t legitimize their claims either. I’ve seen many of those clips and while many raise interesting points about why they feel that they don’t want sprint, I’ve yet to see anything substantial enough to change my position on the matter.

> 2535444702990491;16315:
> > 2533274831961512;16314:
> > > 2535430336598763;16313:
> > > > 2727626560040591;16312:
> > > > > 2535430336598763;16308:
> > > > > I want to see proof with diagrams statistics heck even a you tube video describing and showing what is so wrong with it.
> > > >
> > > > You should’ve asked that question like 3 or 4 years ago, lol. Most of the good discussions that I know of where that kind of stuff was discussed is now dead and buried. If I did a good search I could probably find stuff, but I’m not really up for it. I do like these two videos though (which were easy to find from memory) although they don’t provide hard stats or anything like you want and the second one is more general.
> > > > Link.
> > > > Link.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the links i like the points made in these videos but now im on the fence about sprint… crap
> >
> > Why crap? The fact that you can take in this information and possibly change your opinion is a good thing. It’s the driving force behind debate.
>
> The person is clearly conflicted; probably because they like using sprint. Having a talking head on YouTube gripe about why they don’t like sprint doesn’t legitimize their claims either. I’ve seen many of those clips and while many raise interesting points about why they feel that they don’t want sprint, I’ve yet to see anything substantial enough to change my position on the matter.

If the 816 pages of “back and forth” and antisprintism aren’t enough, I’m pretty sure Favyn and other YouTubers regurgitating the same talking points we’re all familiar with isn’t going to convince anyone either.

> 2535444702990491;16307:
> - restricts movement options because it can only be used forwards,It makes sense to only use sprint while moving forward. It’s not “restrictive,” rather focused, controlled, and directed; putting it straight into the hands of the player to determine when sprint is necessary.

If I can move at maximum speed in any direction, any jump I can make forwards, I can also make strafing and backwards. If my maximum speed depends on direction, I cannot do so. Likewise, if I can’t use my weapons and move at maximum speed at the same time, I can’t make every jump while in combat that I would be able to make while out of combat.

You can describe sprint with whatever meaningless buzzwords you can come up with. However, if you can only move forward at maximum speed, and you can’t use weapons while doing so, you can unambiguously do less things than if you didn’t have those two restrictions. This is just a fundamental property of those restrictions that holds regardless of whether you accept it or not.

> 2535444702990491;16307:
> - feeling faster can be achieved through a higher base movement speed/FoV etc.Faster travel doesn’t achieve the same level of control over player movement that sprint offers. Sprint provides the player with two permanent BMS’ so that the player can decide when and where to implement sprint dynamically based upon the situation at hand.

We’ve been through this before: there are more than two states to the analog stick. The player can move at practically any speed between zero and the base movement speed. The control you’re talking about is entirely superficial. While you may find some strange satisfaction in it, the reality is that it’s just a forced action, not something players would do voluntarily if they didn’t have to.

Now, we can discuss the benefits and issues with forced choices in video games in general, and of the restrictions of sprint in particular. However, trying to sell them as increased control or freedom seems disingenuous.

> 2535444702990491;16315:
> The person is clearly conflicted; probably because they like using sprint. Having a talking head on YouTube gripe about why they don’t like sprint doesn’t legitimize their claims either. I’ve seen many of those clips and while many raise interesting points about why they feel that they don’t want sprint, I’ve yet to see anything substantial enough to change my position on the matter.

To be honest, of all the people defending sprint I’ve ran into, you seem the most dogmatic. In all these years I haven’t met anyone who’s as passionate and as persistent about spreading the sprint gospel as you are.

> 2533274825830455;16317:
> > 2535444702990491;16307:
> > -
>
>
>
> > 2535444702990491;16315:
> > The person is clearly conflicted; probably because they like using sprint. Having a talking head on YouTube gripe about why they don’t like sprint doesn’t legitimize their claims either. I’ve seen many of those clips and while many raise interesting points about why they feel that they don’t want sprint, I’ve yet to see anything substantial enough to change my position on the matter.
>
> To be honest, of all the people defending sprint I’ve ran into, you seem the most dogmatic. In all these years I haven’t met anyone who’s as passionate and as persistent about spreading the sprint gospel as you are.

A lot of this post I’ve quoted has a bunch of obvious flaws (pushing the thumb stick halfway is definitely no substitute for a defined two gear system) and frankly my coughing fits have me too exhausted to write the obligatory mini-essay. But this quip here I’ve quoted: it stands out. Of all the people to be calling Balanced a zealot, you are definitely not all that qualified considering just how much time you’ve spent here and the average length of your posts. It can easily be argued that you’re just as much of, if not more of, a zealot than Balanced. I feel like this remark of yours up there is just unnecessary and it feels like a subtle jab at your interlocutor.

> 2533274825830455;16317:
> > 2535444702990491;16307:
> > - restricts movement options because it can only be used forwards,It makes sense to only use sprint while moving forward. It’s not “restrictive,” rather focused, controlled, and directed; putting it straight into the hands of the player to determine when sprint is necessary.
>
> - If I can move at maximum speed in any direction, any jump I can make forwards, I can also make strafing and backwards. If my maximum speed depends on direction, I cannot do so. Likewise, if I can’t use my weapons and move at maximum speed at the same time, I can’t make every jump while in combat that I would be able to make while out of combat.I’ve already conceded that this is an understandable concern based upon gaming preference. For the reasons mentioned in that post, I personally prefer sprint on it’s current two-gear system (even if that means sacrificing max speed when moving horizontal and backwards). If you rather prefer to be able to move in this manner then I do understand your concern here. - You can describe sprint with whatever meaningless buzzwords you can come up with.Ouch, I guess? If nothing else I’d like to think that the words in my posts have meaning, even if you disagree with them. - However, if you can only move forward at maximum speed, and you can’t use weapons while doing so, you can unambiguously do less things than if you didn’t have those two restrictions. This is just a fundamental property of those restrictions that holds regardless of whether you accept it or not.I can understand why you feel that way about sprinting. But to me, I consider lowering my weapon to sprint as a choice that I get to make whenever I feel the need to do so. Sure if I choose to sprint I’m not shooting anybody until I also choose to come back out of sprint, but I guess I just don’t view that process as restrictive. Also I feel that I can face whatever direction that I need to (relatively quickly) before, during, and after sprinting which negates my desire to move at max speed in all directions.
>
> > 2535444702990491;16307:
> > - feeling faster can be achieved through a higher base movement speed/FoV etc.Faster travel doesn’t achieve the same level of control over player movement that sprint offers. Sprint provides the player with two permanent BMS’ so that the player can decide when and where to implement sprint dynamically based upon the situation at hand.
>
> - We’ve been through this before: there are more than two states to the analog stick. The player can move at practically any speed between zero and the base movement speed. The control you’re talking about is entirely superficial. While you may find some strange satisfaction in it, the reality is that it’s just a forced action, not something players would do voluntarily if they didn’t have to.I understand and have read your proposition for an alternative movement system. I’m not suggesting that your proposed movement system couldn’t function, rather it wouldn’t be my preference. Halo has always offered relatively fixed movement systems. You either walk at a fixed pace or in modern Halo you can also sprint at a fixed pace. All I’m suggesting is that trying to increase the range of movement into one thumb stick like disrupts this control over movement that Halo’s always offered to players. Sprinting is deliberate; it’s a choice that players make when they determine it’s necessary to move faster. Are you suggesting it’s better to take away this consistency and make walking equate to, let’s say 75% of a depressed joystick? How can a player achieve any consistent pace for walking when they always have to overthink such movement controls? The only movement consistency would come in the form of max speed (100% of a depressed joystick), which quite closely resembles classic movement but still doesn’t offer the control and precision of movement that we have right now in Halo. - Now, we can discuss the benefits and issues with forced choices in video games in general, and of the restrictions of sprint in particular. However, trying to sell them as increased control or freedom seems disingenuous.I understand you disagree but (as an OG) to me classic movement is what’s restrictive.
>
> > 2535444702990491;16315:
> > The person is clearly conflicted; probably because they like using sprint. Having a talking head on YouTube gripe about why they don’t like sprint doesn’t legitimize their claims either. I’ve seen many of those clips and while many raise interesting points about why they feel that they don’t want sprint, I’ve yet to see anything substantial enough to change my position on the matter.
>
> - To be honest, of all the people defending sprint I’ve ran into, you seem the most dogmatic. In all these years I haven’t met anyone who’s as passionate and as persistent about spreading the sprint gospel as you are.Really though? I don’t want to elaborate (as surely this line of reasoning wouldn’t lead to anything positive) but I’ll just say I don’t agree with or appreciate this assessment based upon my participation in this debate. I’m simply just trying to discuss sprint in the sprint discussion thread.

> 2533274944752684;16318:
> A lot of this post I’ve quoted has a bunch of obvious flaws (pushing the thumb stick halfway is definitely no substitute for a defined two gear system) and frankly my coughing fits have me too exhausted to write the obligatory mini-essay. But this quip here I’ve quoted: it stands out. Of all the people to be calling Balanced a zealot, you are definitely not all that qualified considering just how much time you’ve spent here and the average length of your posts. It can easily be argued that you’re just as much of, if not more of, a zealot than Balanced. I feel like this remark of yours up there is just unnecessary and it feels like a subtle jab at your interlocutor.

Well, calling me a zealot is probably reasonably accurate. It’s not a description I can deny.

I think it’s important to recognize that most people out there really don’t care about sprint, one way or the other, nearly as much as any of us does. We, every one of us here who come to this thread daily, are the zealots. However, unlike there are numerous people who really dislike sprint, there really aren’t that many people who are really into it. And based on everything I’ve seen, xBalancedForcex is really into sprint, much more than anyone I’ve met before. I mean, usually people who like sprint a lot might just drop by here to say a few words in defense of sprint and leave it at that. But xBalancedForcex has most of those people beat by sheer post count alone. On top of that, however, he’s the only sprint fan whom I’ve actively, regularly seen bring sprint up as a really important feature in other threads not directly about sprint. As I said, I’ve not seen anyone as passionate about their love for sprint, and that would obviously make their opinion more difficult to sway than the opinion of the average person. I would expect some of the anti-sprint arguments to sway people’s opinions who don’t care much about sprint one way or the other, but I wouldn’t expect those same arguments to sway someone who very deeply believes in sprint.

Also, on a on a tangential note related to my post length: it’s not because I’m a zealot. If I only cared about spreading the anti-sprint gospel, I wouldn’t write like that. I’d write short, meaningless posts void of any substance regurgitating common claims about how sprint “destroys Halo” without any justification or critical thought paid to them. The length is me trying to scrutinize my own views. I don’t claim I’m great at it, I don’t claim my arguments are perfect, but it’s all me trying to be honest with myself.

> 2535444702990491;16319:
> - You can describe sprint with whatever meaningless buzzwords you can come up with.Ouch, I guess? If nothing else I’d like to think that the words in my posts have meaning, even if you disagree with them.

But, you see, “focused”, “controlled”, and “directed” aren’t meaningful descriptions of the restrictions of sprint to anyone who doesn’t already believe that sprint is just absolutely great. Considering those words were used in a comment addressed to someone who obviously doesn’t like those restrictions, those words don’t serve any purpose in explaining your views to that person. They just serve to pad your own belief rather than explaining it. The issue is of course further compounded by the fact that you denied that these restrictions are restrictions at all.

It’s a pet peeve of mine. People in these discussions choose certain words and phrases, not because they have any explanatory power, but because they think those sound good.

> 2535444702990491;16319:
> I understand and have read your proposition for an alternative movement system. I’m not suggesting that your proposed movement system couldn’t function, rather it wouldn’t be my preference. Halo has always offered relatively fixed movement systems. You either walk at a fixed pace or in modern Halo you can also sprint at a fixed pace. All I’m suggesting is that trying to increase the range of movement into one thumb stick like disrupts this control over movement that Halo’s always offered to players. Sprinting is deliberate; it’s a choice that players make when they determine it’s necessary to move faster. Are you suggesting it’s better to take away this consistency and make walking equate to, let’s say 75% of a depressed joystick? How can a player achieve any consistent pace for waking when they always have to overthink these movement controls? The only movement consistency would come in the form of max speed (100% of a depressed joystick), which doesn’t offer the control and presicison of movement that we have right now in Halo.

You’re overthinking it. The system I’m suggesting is the system we’ve had all the way since movement with analog sticks became a thing in the 90’s. We’ve had it in all Halo games. And the thing is: people never cared. Because it turns out that once players can do everything while moving at maximum speed, they will do everything while moving at maximum speed. The movement control absolutely is there for all those who want to use it, but nobody wants to use it.

No, you have to force people to move at those lower speeds by making certain actions impossible at high speeds. Then all players are using at least part of the movement range have. Not because they like it, not because they think moving at lower than maximum speed is fun (obviously, if they did, they would’ve done it long before sprint), but because they have to in order to be able to play the game properly. If you have to force people to do a thing in order to get them to do the thing, it becomes kind of disingenious to call it control, unless you’re talking about yourself.

> 2535444702990491;16319:
> I understand you disagree but (as an OG) to me classic movement is what’s restrictive.

Which is completely bizzare, because it allows you to do everything sprint does, and more. I can’t even say more than that, because there’s literrally nothing you can do with sprint that you couldn’t do without it.

> 2535444702990491;16319:
> Really though? I don’t want to elaborate (as surely this line of reasoning wouldn’t lead to anything positive) but I’ll just say I don’t agree with or appreciate this. I’m just trying to discuss sprint in the sprint discussion thread.

Really, I could’ve worded it differently, fleshed it out more, and I should’ve scrapped it when I ran out of time. I’m sorry. However, I maintain that 1) you’re the most passionate sprint fan I’ve ever met, and 2) therefore your opinion is much less likely to sway than the opinion of most people.

> 2533274825830455;16320:
> > 2533274944752684;16318:
> > A lot of this post I’ve quoted has a bunch of obvious flaws (pushing the thumb stick halfway is definitely no substitute for a defined two gear system) and frankly my coughing fits have me too exhausted to write the obligatory mini-essay. But this quip here I’ve quoted: it stands out. Of all the people to be calling Balanced a zealot, you are definitely not all that qualified considering just how much time you’ve spent here and the average length of your posts. It can easily be argued that you’re just as much of, if not more of, a zealot than Balanced. I feel like this remark of yours up there is just unnecessary and it feels like a subtle jab at your interlocutor.
>
> Well, calling me a zealot is probably reasonably accurate. It’s not a description I can deny.
>
> I think it’s important to recognize that most people out there really don’t care about sprint, one way or the other, nearly as much as any of us does. We, every one of us here who come to this thread daily, are the zealots. However, unlike there are numerous people who really dislike sprint, there really aren’t that many people who are really into it. And based on everything I’ve seen, xBalancedForcex is really into sprint, much more than anyone I’ve met before. I mean, usually people who like sprint a lot might just drop by here to say a few words in defense of sprint and leave it at that. But xBalancedForcex has most of those people beat by sheer post count alone. On top of that, however, he’s the only sprint fan whom I’ve actively, regularly seen bring sprint up as a really important feature in other threads not directly about sprint. As I said, I’ve not seen anyone as passionate about their love for sprint, and that would obviously make their opinion more difficult to sway than the opinion of the average person. I would expect some of the anti-sprint arguments to sway people’s opinions who don’t care much about sprint one way or the other, but I wouldn’t expect those same arguments to sway someone who very deeply believes in sprint.
>
> Also, on a on a tangential note related to my post length: it’s not because I’m a zealot. If I only cared about spreading the anti-sprint gospel, I wouldn’t write like that. I’d write short, meaningless posts void of any substance regurgitating common claims about how sprint “destroys Halo” without any justification or critical thought paid to them. The length is me trying to scrutinize my own views. I don’t claim I’m great at it, I don’t claim my arguments are perfect, but it’s all me trying to be honest with myself.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535444702990491;16319:
> > - You can describe sprint with whatever meaningless buzzwords you can come up with.Ouch, I guess? If nothing else I’d like to think that the words in my posts have meaning, even if you disagree with them.
>
> But, you see, “focused”, “controlled”, and “directed” aren’t meaningful descriptions of the restrictions of sprint to anyone who doesn’t already believe that sprint is just absolutely great. Considering those words were used in a comment addressed to someone who obviously doesn’t like those restrictions, those words don’t serve any purpose in explaining your views to that person. They just serve to pad your own belief rather than explaining it. The issue is of course further compounded by the fact that you denied that these restrictions are restrictions at all.
>
> It’s a pet peeve of mine. People in these discussions choose certain words and phrases, not because they have any explanatory power, but because they think those sound good.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535444702990491;16319:
> > I understand and have read your proposition for an alternative movement system. I’m not suggesting that your proposed movement system couldn’t function, rather it wouldn’t be my preference. Halo has always offered relatively fixed movement systems. You either walk at a fixed pace or in modern Halo you can also sprint at a fixed pace. All I’m suggesting is that trying to increase the range of movement into one thumb stick like disrupts this control over movement that Halo’s always offered to players. Sprinting is deliberate; it’s a choice that players make when they determine it’s necessary to move faster. Are you suggesting it’s better to take away this consistency and make walking equate to, let’s say 75% of a depressed joystick? How can a player achieve any consistent pace for waking when they always have to overthink these movement controls? The only movement consistency would come in the form of max speed (100% of a depressed joystick), which doesn’t offer the control and presicison of movement that we have right now in Halo.
>
> You’re overthinking it. The system I’m suggesting is the system we’ve had all the way since movement with analog sticks became a thing in the 90’s. We’ve had it in all Halo games. And the thing is: people never cared. Because it turns out that once players can do everything while moving at maximum speed, they will do everything while moving at maximum speed. The movement control absolutely is there for all those who want to use it, but nobody wants to use it.
>
> No, you have to force people to move at those lower speeds by making certain actions impossible at high speeds. Then all players are using at least part of the movement range have. Not because they like it, not because they think moving at lower than maximum speed is fun (obviously, if they did, they would’ve done it long before sprint), but because they have to in order to be able to play the game properly. If you have to force people to do a thing in order to get them to do the thing, it becomes kind of disingenious to call it control, unless you’re talking about yourself.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535444702990491;16319:
> > I understand you disagree but (as an OG) to me classic movement is what’s restrictive.
>
> Which is completely bizzare, because it allows you to do everything sprint does, and more. I can’t even say more than that, because there’s literrally nothing you can do with sprint that you couldn’t do without it.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535444702990491;16319:
> > Really though? I don’t want to elaborate (as surely this line of reasoning wouldn’t lead to anything positive) but I’ll just say I don’t agree with or appreciate this. I’m just trying to discuss sprint in the sprint discussion thread.
>
> Really, I could’ve worded it differently, fleshed it out more, and I should’ve scrapped it when I ran out of time. I’m sorry. However, I maintain that 1) you’re the most passionate sprint fan I’ve ever met, and 2) therefore your opinion is much less likely to sway than the opinion of most people.

It doesn’t make sense why you would include that. No matter how you slice it or how much of a zealot Balanced actually is, it very outwardly reeks of a lightly disguised smear on your interlocutor to even include that kind of remark.

> 2535430336598763;16304:
> Sprint may not ave been part of halo in h1 h2 h3 but in halo reach from there on sprint was a option of sorts and i like it however if sprint was part of the original trilogy this thread probably wouldn’t even exist. Almost all if not all games include these days include sprint or something like it. What really disappoints me is the lack of evidence to support the removal of sprint if their was reasonable proof or some evidence to show its not good for a series then i dont think removal of sprint needs to be on the table as i’ve read all 816 Pages of this and been up all night so im gonna go to bed but please provide evidence to the thread then 343i can look at it for future halo releases.

The evidence isn’t achieveable without 343s data, even then I doubt they’ve got data to show for it, it’s not like they asked everyone individually on the matter on their preference. So if you’re wanting evidence on sprint being bad, you’re not going to find it, the best thing you can get to that is to simply have a new Halo without sprint and compare sales to one (specifically the newest one) with it, that’s also assuming you don’t change anything else that can turn people away. So while evidence lacks on if sprint is bad, it also lacks on if it’s good.

That said even without evidence there’s plenty of valid arguments, and the issue isn’t that sprint is bad, it’s that it’s bad for Halo because it’s gameplay doesn’t support it which this thread has given plenty of examples of. Games can’t all feature the same things because their designs vary on how the features can co-exist with everything else. A short TTK game is going to have to do things differently than a longer TTK game, a twitch shooter will do things differently than an arena game, etc etc. I noticed in a later post you asked why sprint is bad for Halo but not CoD or Battlefield, this is why. They all function entirely different and as a result their mechanics and features will all act differently from one another. So X game having X feature doesn’t mean another can just because the other does, at that point you’re tossing good design out the window and slapping things in for the sake of it. Ive said it before, the only unique thing about halos sprint is it punishes you, does CoD? Battlefield? This in turn also irks those who do like the feature as why are you punishing people for using something so simple and is a necessity even when it hinders you? Want to hit that power up first? Better sprint, but make sure you’re fully charged on shields and no one’s around to knock you out of the animation. Need to run across the map to help an alley? Better hope you’re not intercepted on the way there as you’re weapon is lowered, you give a free shot up and you’re then having to ignore your alley to help yourself. That’s how asanine sprint is in Halo and I haven’t gotten into the real domino effect it has on the gameplay (no need to though if you’ve real the 800+ pages on here).

You wouldn’t be wrong when saying sprint wouldn’t be an issue if it were there from the start, there’s a difference in acceptance when something is there from the start compared to putting it in x years later. One has a group used to what the change would be, the other doesn’t, it’s why you’re not meant to implement anything drastic unless you like controversy and that’s what sprint has done in halos case. You can’t just put something in ten years later and expect people to not be mixed on it.

> 2533274944752684;16321:
> It doesn’t make sense why you would include that. No matter how you slice it or how much of a zealot Balanced actually is, it very outwardly reeks of a lightly disguised smear on your interlocutor to even include that kind of remark.

Maybe because he’s human? As far as we know anyway. He might’ve had a little too much coffee or maybe he let his guard down a little and had an overwhelming thought which needed to come out when he saw Balanced’s post about never being wavered yet. Who knows really, but we can’t be perfect a hundred percent of the time.

> 2533274944752684;16321:
> It doesn’t make sense why you would include that. No matter how you slice it or how much of a zealot Balanced actually is, it very outwardly reeks of a lightly disguised smear on your interlocutor to even include that kind of remark.

Considering he said he didn’t like it, continuing this line of discussion further would be impolite. I can only say that I’m sorry. Not that he needs to accept my apology, but that’s all I can offer.

> 2535430336598763;16304:
> Sprint may not ave been part of halo in h1 h2 h3 but in halo reach from there on sprint was a option of sorts and i like it (1) however if sprint was part of the original trilogy this thread probably wouldn’t even exist. (2) Almost all if not all games include these days include sprint or something like it. What really disappoints me is the lack of evidence to support the removal of sprint if their was reasonable proof or some evidence to show its not good for a series then i dont think removal of sprint needs to be on the table as i’ve read all 816 Pages of this and been up all night so im gonna go to bed but please provide evidence to the thread then 343i can look at it for future halo releases.

  1. Well no, of course it wouldn’t. As I’ve brought up before, it’s about expectations.

COD works with what it has because the series is known for the gameplay and modes it provides. BF works for the gameplay and the same goes for GTA, FIFA, etc etc. The reason these games build up their communities is through these safe designs. People like safety. It’s built in to our psychology. It’s why we build cities, buy the same products, and shy away from things we don’t generally understand. As much as the COD community has kicked up fuss about later entries, the gunplay and moment to moment gameplay has not really changed since 2007. It’s this consistency that makes consumers learn towards buying a familiar product over a new one. Big companies know all of this. Which is why they release yearly games of the same franchise and shy away from new IPs. Acti are the biggest proof of this as they’ve moved from releasing over a dozen new games each year to nearly exclusively focusing on COD, Destiny and Skylanders.

Even 343i indirectly confirmed this. The mechanic isn’t included in to Halo because it was really well suited to the gameplay, it was added because “people expected it”. What they were really saying was that because most other shooters had sprint, that if they wanted players of those games to play Halo, they needed to add sprint or when those players tried Halo they’d be instantly put off because there’d be an instantly noticeable difference. This difference would be new, and therefor, scary. 343i were afraid to make a Halo game without sprint.

What I don’t think 343i realised was that just because you copy popular mechanics doesn’t automatically mean you infuse that popularity with your game. So there were consumers buying Halo Reach and 4 for the expectation that they’d bring the familiarity of Halo 3 back, but neither did, and you can see that in the gradually larger population drops for each game.

But what 343i and pro-sprinters are arguing essentially is that sprint and familiar mechanics will bring in more players than they’ll drive away, but there isn’t any evidence for that either. As we saw with the population drops and Halo 5’s current 35ish position on the most played list. Players who want those mechanics are still playing COD, BF etc.

  1. Almost all games had a MP mode too at one point. It was, again, another push by big publishers to attract COD level of sales. But that didn’t automatically make those games play or sell better. And this year and next we will see every game under the sun have a Battle Royal mode. Again, that doesn’t mean that the BR modes automatically make every game play or sell better. This kind of logic is very bad for games in general.

The best way to stand out from the crowd of games is to do something new, or do something different from your competitors so that you can carve out a niche, a community, that enjoys your game for what it offers that others don’t, rather than for the things you offer that others do. 343i aren’t doing that and the franchise is struggling as a result.