Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

[Locked] "Classic" gameplay is excruciatingly slow

OP Spidah Handz406

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. 6
  6. 7
  7. ...
  8. 8
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Have you ever considered that if you find Halo's original gameplay too slow, that maybe Halo just isn't the franchise for you any more? Why should the newer games bend and twist themselves into something totally different to cater to someone who no longer enjoys what the franchise was built on?
Telling someone that they should move away from a game they like is not a good way to approach this situation
How many times have classic Halo fans been told to move on or go back to the old games?
To be honest not as often as you would think. The Halo community is way too divisive and everybody is at each other’s throats. How many of the common core mechanics from CE have been carried over throughout Halo as a whole, the answer is all of them
Not as often as I think? I'm told that constantly!
Well how often do you criticize their opinions?
I don't. I speak out in support of classic gameplay. But, I don't put down anybody for their opinions or preferences.
Willko wrote:
Have you ever considered that if you find Halo's original gameplay too slow, that maybe Halo just isn't the franchise for you any more? Why should the newer games bend and twist themselves into something totally different to cater to someone who no longer enjoys what the franchise was built on?
It's been 19 years. Games change.
Willko wrote:
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Have you ever considered that if you find Halo's original gameplay too slow, that maybe Halo just isn't the franchise for you any more? Why should the newer games bend and twist themselves into something totally different to cater to someone who no longer enjoys what the franchise was built on?
Telling someone that they should move away from a game they like is not a good way to approach this situation
How many times have classic Halo fans been told to move on or go back to the old games?
To be honest not as often as you would think. The Halo community is way too divisive and everybody is at each other’s throats. How many of the common core mechanics from CE have been carried over throughout Halo as a whole, the answer is all of them
Not as often as I think? I'm told that constantly!
Well how often do you criticize their opinions?
I don't. I speak out in support of classic gameplay. But, I don't put down anybody for their opinions or preferences.
Well that is respectable, everyone is still entitled to their opinions whether you think they are wrong or not. Personally I like Halo 5s advanced movement mechanics and it creates a vast skill gap between players, but I also really like playing the old Halos and they worked well for the time but you can’t keep recycling the same ideas without innovation.
Willko wrote:
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Xomet wrote:
Willko wrote:
Have you ever considered that if you find Halo's original gameplay too slow, that maybe Halo just isn't the franchise for you any more? Why should the newer games bend and twist themselves into something totally different to cater to someone who no longer enjoys what the franchise was built on?
Telling someone that they should move away from a game they like is not a good way to approach this situation
How many times have classic Halo fans been told to move on or go back to the old games?
To be honest not as often as you would think. The Halo community is way too divisive and everybody is at each other’s throats. How many of the common core mechanics from CE have been carried over throughout Halo as a whole, the answer is all of them
Not as often as I think? I'm told that constantly!
Well how often do you criticize their opinions?
I don't. I speak out in support of classic gameplay. But, I don't put down anybody for their opinions or preferences.
I'm a classic halo fan and I will accept changes to halo, but long we least have some classic like I don't mind if it just armor, gameplay or any really, but mostly armor, and some stuff in game mixed with new and old, halo spv3 did that and it turned out well.
Riahisama wrote:
Imagine posting this unironically and actually think sprint makes the game faster... I seriously can't lose more brain cells this week. Have you ever played CSGO, Doom, Valorant, overwatch, R6 and more? All very successful games with either no sprint at their core or extremely slow by nature. Sprint is an old trend and so unnecessary for the gameplay. If you cant stand playing the MCC or CSGO you seriously need to check if you have some hyper activity issues.
They are not successful because of no sprint mate, that is such a broad statement.
correct me if I’m wrong these games excel on pc not console.
The demographics of console v pc is a whole new debate.
To make a claim that someone has hyper activity issue because they can’t stand mcc or csgo is preposterous.
Csgo may be considered successful but a huge number of gamers hate that game and quite vocally too, do they all have hyper activity issues? Lol what a joke.
Needless to say the other games are sub par as well as they’re run by companies using money gouging tactics is that what your considering successful based on their profit margins?
God Rohan wrote:
Riahisama wrote:
Imagine posting this unironically and actually think sprint makes the game faster... I seriously can't lose more brain cells this week. Have you ever played CSGO, Doom, Valorant, overwatch, R6 and more? All very successful games with either no sprint at their core or extremely slow by nature. Sprint is an old trend and so unnecessary for the gameplay. If you cant stand playing the MCC or CSGO you seriously need to check if you have some hyper activity issues.
They are not successful because of no sprint mate, that is such a broad statement.
correct me if I’m wrong these games excel on pc not console.
The demographics of console v pc is a whole new debate.
To make a claim that someone has hyper activity issue because they can’t stand mcc or csgo is preposterous.
Csgo may be considered successful but a huge number of gamers hate that game and quite vocally too, do they all have hyper activity issues? Lol what a joke.
Needless to say the other games are sub par as well as they’re run by companies using money gouging tactics is that what your considering successful based on their profit margins?
That wasn't my point though... I said they are successful even without sprint because they are their own games, which proves sprint is such an unnecessary feature in Halo, the Halo formula has no need for sprint whatsoever
God Rohan wrote:
God Rohan wrote:
God Rohan wrote:
God Rohan wrote:
Willko wrote:
Have you ever considered that if you find Halo's original gameplay too slow, that maybe Halo just isn't the franchise for you any more? Why should the newer games bend and twist themselves into something totally different to cater to someone who no longer enjoys what the franchise was built on?
This statement is ludicrous. How can you say this? If the game doesn’t move forward and evolve it’ll stagnate and fail. I enjoy having sprint and climb. But I still also enjoy old school halo. To say that halo isn’t the franchise for you anymore to anyone because they enjoy the new features is rubbish. If anything it could be said that the franchise is not for you anymore because you’re stuck in the past.
Why does a game need to evolve to be successful? Halo 5 bombed.
That bombed not because of evolution but because of a rushed abysmal -Yoink- show that was. But in all fairness the multiplayer was its only saving glory. If you don’t want progress why don’t you just scream for a halo 3 remaster?
Your straw manning me, I never said that I didn’t want halo to progress. The game should progress with new sandbox tools like vehicles and guns not chasing trends. Also 343 would absolutely mess up a remaster which is why people don’t ask for it
No I’m not lol. I don’t think they’d ruin that, the halo 1 and 2 remasters are fine in my opinion. What trend would they be chasing? They’d stagnate simply be another cod but without loadouts same gameplay only addition is guns and vehicles. That might work but for how long? The og games were ground breaking for their time which is why they’re beloved but if we stay in the past without innovation and progress the halo franchise will end up failing worse then it currently is. They only way I see this looped debate/argument over sprint being concluded is by catering to both with both modes new and old designed ground up separately.
Cod is nothing like classic halo the modern halo games are far more like it. Halo 4 was chasing cod loadouts and 5 was chasing the mobility of game like advanced warfare and titan fall. Ironically cod modern warfare went back to its roots and it sold much better than the advanced mobility games. Remember classic halo has always been successful modern halo failed twice. You innovate the franchise by adding new sandbox tools like the grappling hook, not by changing the fundamental way the game is played.
Cod did not go back to its roots lol? The grappling hook does change the fundamentals. We not gonna mention reach? that was also an attempt at copying cod with loadouts and perks look how well that did. Pretty sure that changed the “fundamental ways” halo is played.
Yes you clearly know nothing about cod because the newer games had stuff like wall running which was removed in the newest game. The grappling hook is a power up in multiplayer so it’s like the grav lift. Halo reach isn’t classic halo and the playerbase wasn’t as high although not as bad as 4 and 5
Yeah but removing that and claiming they went back to their roots is incorrect. If you compare the most recent cod to the first they are vastly different.
before you make a claim the fundamentals are the same they’re not. Any one difference changes the dynamics and fundamentals of the game.
4 and 5s player base failing isn’t just because of multiplayer 50% of the game is campaign as well, not too mention a huge majority of Xbox players left for Sony. There are way too many variables at play to pin it on sprint and old v new mechanics.
Funny thing is that if you were to play H:CE for a couple of hours then play H5 you will instantly see that H5 is slower than H:CE. Like what you like by all means but your opinion is incorrect.
Funny thing is that if you were to play H:CE for a couple of hours then play H5 you will instantly see that H5 is slower than H:CE. Like what you like by all means but your opinion is incorrect.
Yeah no you immediately think wtf why can’t i run I see this is slow af compared to H5. I digress though by all means feel how you feel but your opinion is incorrect.
Tresor564 wrote:
BTB Bill wrote:
Sprint slows down gameplay by not allowing you to shoot your gun and move at the same time, as well as streching maps. Congrats on being coned into thinking you move fast.
It lets u get out of bad situations a lot faster and if u take 3 steps on the wrong direction u won’t die so I mean 🤷🏽‍♂️
Not sure if you're saying that's a good thing or not, but it isn't.
you cant understand the good old days. the enhanced movement screws -Yoink- up for the flow of halo. maps need to be made bigger to accommodate sprint and advanced movement and it makes the gameplay faster but it was never intended to be faster.
Cyro XVX wrote:
Willko wrote:
Have you ever considered that if you find Halo's original gameplay too slow, that maybe Halo just isn't the franchise for you any more? Why should the newer games bend and twist themselves into something totally different to cater to someone who no longer enjoys what the franchise was built on?
It's been 19 years. Games change.
only when they're failing except for reach. reach changed so much from halo 3 because bungie didnt know how to make a better game than halo 3 and also really wanted to make destiny.

but 4 5 and infinite keep changing because they keep failing in certain aspects
God Rohan wrote:
Funny thing is that if you were to play H:CE for a couple of hours then play H5 you will instantly see that H5 is slower than H:CE. Like what you like by all means but your opinion is incorrect.
Yeah no you immediately think wtf why can’t i run I see this is slow af compared to H5. I digress though by all means feel how you feel but your opinion is incorrect.
Yeah well you're not "incorrect".
Pray tell, if I were to take Halo 2 or Halo 3, bump the speed to 300%, it's faster, right? Yeah it is.
Make it a 4v4 Slayer on an enclosed small map.
How quickly would the match end, 300% faster? Would you be netting kills 300% faster?
How about a 4v4 on a large massive map to acommodate the increase in movement speed?
Still end 300% faster?
Because I'm assuming that you will only hold the game speed, to your capability of moving around, and nothing else at all.
God Rohan wrote:
Funny thing is that if you were to play H:CE for a couple of hours then play H5 you will instantly see that H5 is slower than H:CE. Like what you like by all means but your opinion is incorrect.
Yeah no you immediately think wtf why can’t i run I see this is slow af compared to H5. I digress though by all means feel how you feel but your opinion is incorrect.
Incorrect, friend.
Ok, so Halo 5 was said to have sold 5 million copies 3 months after launch and nothing seems to give numbers after that except 5 mill+ (which isn't really helpful). That is indeed lower than say Halo 2 or 3, about half. The issue is we have nothing for after that 5 mil number. The number definitely went up ( I mean it ain't going down) and with regards to the population, you seem to forget games pass, used copies, etc which has probably added at least a small chunk of players to the base. I am not saying its Halo 3 levels of success, but saying its the worst performing Halo is definitely not true. Like I said before, its probably comparable to Reach.
Problem is, we know for a fact that this "5 Million figure" was blown up, because Microsoft referred to the shipped units (sold in to stores) instead of the sold units (sold through to the end consumer).
We also have no idea about the digital sales, since Microsoft doesn't release any information about that kinda stuff. However, EA did, and roughly 1/5th to 1/6th of EA's sales at that time were digital. So assuming that the gaming landscape is homogeneous and Microsoft has the same sales ration between physical/digital, add about 20% to the VGChartz numbers, which only count physical releases, and there you have your sales figures.

As for population, we once again turn to EA, as they actually provided population numbers for all of their games (Battlefield and Battlefront). At the time of H5G's release, these games had less population than Halo 4 did when it launched and from Xbox's Most Played list, we know H5G was below them.

I have no idea how gamepass (and the repeated content drops) helped the game in the long-term, but within the first 6 months after release, H5G was the worst-performing title of the franchise, in terms of both sales and playerbase, save maybe ODST, which was a standalone-DLC without proper multiplayer.
Celestis wrote:
Problem is, we know for a fact that this "5 Million figure" was blown up, because Microsoft referred to the shipped units (sold in to stores) instead of the sold units (sold through to the end consumer).
Do we? The only source for that number I know of is Frankie on NeoGAF, and he didn't elaborate any further. Would be great if you could give a source for this.
Don't hate you for liking something different than I like.

How you feel about slow halo is how some of us feel about fast halo. Now imagine if infinite actually featured slow halo over fast halo like you prefer, feels awful doesn't it? You'd have people on the forums telling you to go back to halo 5, go find another game, adapt (even if you're better at slow halo theoretically instead of fast halo), no one cares about your opinion, yada yada yada. Now imagine the vast majority of the other fps on the market are similar to slow halo instead of fast halo so you basically have no where to go, again feels awful doesn't it?

But you can always go back to your old game right? Well now imagine that you actually like some quality of life improvements that new games have compared to the old ones or that you aren't blinded by nostalgia enough to look past each of the games flaws (every one of them are flawed in some way, hate to break it to each of you who think the past halo's are perfect). So you could go back to the old game you like, and give up any modern quality of life improvements that more recent games have gotten.
very well said.
BTB Bill wrote:
Sprint slows down gameplay by not allowing you to shoot your gun and move at the same time, as well as streching maps. Congrats on being coned into thinking you move fast.
That's my boy!
Tresor564 wrote:
BTB Bill wrote:
Sprint slows down gameplay by not allowing you to shoot your gun and move at the same time, as well as streching maps. Congrats on being coned into thinking you move fast.
It lets u get out of bad situations a lot faster and if u take 3 steps on the wrong direction u won’t die so I mean 🤷🏽‍♂️
Yes, that's the point. Good Halo punished you for bad map awareness and you would grow as a player. Now in bad Halo you have a get out of jail card and with one press of the button you escape and you learn nothing.
Classic gameplay is inherently faster than Halo's "enhanced mobility" gameplay. It's about "running and gunning", not "running, stopping, then gunning, then maybe running again but this time away to stall for your life".

Go play Titan Fall if you want to see advanced movement mechanics implemented well in an FPS designed for it from the ground up.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. 6
  6. 7
  7. ...
  8. 8