Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

The return of classic movement mechanics?

OP A So So Sniper

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 124
  4. 125
  5. 126
  6. 127
  7. 128
  8. ...
  9. 155
You and your lame game design concept. This is why I don't like the meta arguments, you guys have no concept of exploration. I know Halo is a FPS therefore there should only be one type of game play killing. But you know what, in the game that is to be the Halo to end all halos, I'd say bring everything back, re-adjust them to fit in the game but bring it back. But that would be too much for you to comprehend!
So, No explanation on that software limitation which was asked about earlier.

As for the "Halo to end all Halos", what exactly would would the controll scheme look like?
Naqser wrote:
You and your lame game design concept. This is why I don't like the meta arguments, you guys have no concept of exploration. I know Halo is a FPS therefore there should only be one type of game play killing. But you know what, in the game that is to be the Halo to end all halos, I'd say bring everything back, re-adjust them to fit in the game but bring it back. But that would be too much for you to comprehend!
So, No explanation on that software limitation which was asked about earlier.

As for the "Halo to end all Halos", what exactly would would the controll scheme look like?
It would definitely be a modular one, the campaign will have its control scheme. As for multiplayer I think there should be one governed by the game type that is being played instead of a universal one size fits all. Back to the Reach/H4 for a metaphorical comparison in H4 you had players chose their loadouts, and of course the player is going to chose the one that gives them the most advantage. In reach there were loadouts but it was set by the gametype, if there was a specific loadout you don't think belong in the multiplayer environment, you can edit that loadout away from the game. Also if there was something you didn't like (ie the motion tracker) you could have it disabled just like a SWAT game. I am for options, but I want it to be a community choice, not studio, and not each player. There has to be some delegation of options, but I still want that option to be available, rather than outright removed. You can ban it from the tournament scenes (i don't see many scorpions in MLG), but let it go into the game as something that can be experimented with.
Naqser wrote:
You and your lame game design concept. This is why I don't like the meta arguments, you guys have no concept of exploration. I know Halo is a FPS therefore there should only be one type of game play killing. But you know what, in the game that is to be the Halo to end all halos, I'd say bring everything back, re-adjust them to fit in the game but bring it back. But that would be too much for you to comprehend!
So, No explanation on that software limitation which was asked about earlier.

As for the "Halo to end all Halos", what exactly would would the controll scheme look like?
It would definitely be a modular one, the campaign will have its control scheme. As for multiplayer I think there should be one governed by the game type that is being played instead of a universal one size fits all. Back to the Reach/H4 for a metaphorical comparison in H4 you had players chose their loadouts, and of course the player is going to chose the one that gives them the most advantage. In reach there were loadouts but it was set by the gametype, if there was a specific loadout you don't think belong in the multiplayer environment, you can edit that loadout away from the game. Also if there was something you didn't like (ie the motion tracker) you could have it disabled just like a SWAT game. I am for options, but I want it to be a community choice, not studio, and not each player. There has to be some delegation of options, but I still want that option to be available, rather than outright removed. You can ban it from the tournament scenes (i don't see many scorpions in MLG), but let it go into the game as something that can be experimented with.
So, No software limitation explanation?

Campaign would have its own? What features would it use? Spartan Abilities? Armor Abilities? Equipment? Dual Wielding? Would we be restricted to these old ones only and get nothing new? If not, what would that be and you'd smack that on top of an already crowded controller?

Then, each time you'd jump between single player and multiplayer you'd have to get used to a different scheme, not to talk about the supposed different schemes between game modes themselves. Even the options menu would be a forest of sub-menus and what not to accommodate all that.

But wait, there's more.
That'd be quite the definition of incoherent gameplay.
Jumping from mode to mode, having to re-adjust to a new scheme each time.
Let's also not forget the massive amounts of different combinations of enabled features they'd need to account for.

inb4: "custom game options".
Has there been a Halo game where base gameplay assets and asset specific animations have been regulated to being an option only, and not used as the default mode of game play?
CTF, assault and so forth does not count as base gameplay, as they are game type specific. I'm talking AAs, Dual Wielding and so forth.

If I recall correctly, i343 stated a long time ago, that Sprint is present in all of Halo 5's default gameplay, because they want the experience to be consistent.

As grand as your ideas are, they aren't feasible.
The most likely outcome you'll get is a convoluted game, with poor execution in all types of features it tries to juggle with all the different combinations, and an off-putting sensation jumping between modes.

And before you go on a "lame game design" parade again:
1: You don't know what I do for a living or my hobbies.
2: Have you read any of my suggestioner over the years?
3: Consider what your own career and hobbies are, then think about your wishes in this thread realistically.
Naqser wrote:
Naqser wrote:
You and your lame game design concept. This is why I don't like the meta arguments, you guys have no concept of exploration. I know Halo is a FPS therefore there should only be one type of game play killing. But you know what, in the game that is to be the Halo to end all halos, I'd say bring everything back, re-adjust them to fit in the game but bring it back. But that would be too much for you to comprehend!
So, No explanation on that software limitation which was asked about earlier.

As for the "Halo to end all Halos", what exactly would would the controll scheme look like?
It would definitely be a modular one, the campaign will have its control scheme. As for multiplayer I think there should be one governed by the game type that is being played instead of a universal one size fits all. Back to the Reach/H4 for a metaphorical comparison in H4 you had players chose their loadouts, and of course the player is going to chose the one that gives them the most advantage. In reach there were loadouts but it was set by the gametype, if there was a specific loadout you don't think belong in the multiplayer environment, you can edit that loadout away from the game. Also if there was something you didn't like (ie the motion tracker) you could have it disabled just like a SWAT game. I am for options, but I want it to be a community choice, not studio, and not each player. There has to be some delegation of options, but I still want that option to be available, rather than outright removed. You can ban it from the tournament scenes (i don't see many scorpions in MLG), but let it go into the game as something that can be experimented with.
So, No software limitation explanation?

Campaign would have its own? What features would it use? Spartan Abilities? Armor Abilities? Equipment? Dual Wielding? Would we be restricted to these old ones only and get nothing new? If not, what would that be and you'd smack that on top of an already crowded controller?

Then, each time you'd jump between single player and multiplayer you'd have to get used to a different scheme, not to talk about the supposed different schemes between game modes themselves. Even the options menu would be a forest of sub-menus and what not to accommodate all that.

But wait, there's more.
That'd be quite the definition of incoherent gameplay.
Jumping from mode to mode, having to re-adjust to a new scheme each time.
Let's also not forget the massive amounts of different combinations of enabled features they'd need to account for.

inb4: "custom game options".
Has there been a Halo game where base gameplay assets and asset specific animations have been regulated to being an option only, and not used as the default mode of game play?
CTF, assault and so forth does not count as base gameplay, as they are game type specific. I'm talking AAs, Dual Wielding and so forth.

If I recall correctly, i343 stated a long time ago, that Sprint is present in all of Halo 5's default gameplay, because they want the experience to be consistent.

As grand as your ideas are, they aren't feasible.
The most likely outcome you'll get is a convoluted game, with poor execution in all types of features it tries to juggle with all the different combinations, and an off-putting sensation jumping between modes.

And before you go on a "lame game design" parade again:
1: You don't know what I do for a living or my hobbies.
2: Have you read any of my suggestioner over the years?
3: Consider what your own career and hobbies are, then think about your wishes in this thread realistically.
You sound just like someone from another forum, all get rid of this and this has ruined a great game. Thing is I heard all these arguments before, in table top games in other games. All you do is cry and demand the removal of something claiming no skill or bad design or dare I say the dreaded N.P.E. and when you guys get your way, it is not enough, further more the game still suffers. So I gave you my reason but like every single meta-complainer I have come across. You immediately hit the reply and show that you don't care for what others have to say. This is your game and you demand the experience you want. Sure that is reasonable, but then you demand that everyone else experiences it your way.

No I don't know you personally, but I have met your personality in other places, it is all the same. Your suggestions are better off if they are ignored.
You sound just like someone from another forum, all get rid of this and this has ruined a great game. Thing is I heard all these arguments before, in table top games in other games. All you do is cry and demand the removal of something claiming no skill or bad design or dare I say the dreaded N.P.E. and when you guys get your way, it is not enough, further more the game still suffers. So I gave you my reason but like every single meta-complainer I have come across. You immediately hit the reply and show that you don't care for what others have to say. This is your game and you demand the experience you want. Sure that is reasonable, but then you demand that everyone else experiences it your way.

No I don't know you personally, but I have met your personality in other places, it is all the same. Your suggestions are better off if they are ignored.
You need to calm down and decide whether you want to participate in this discussion or not. This thread isn't your personal soapbox. If you wish to represent your personal opinions, you should expect for them to be challenged, and you should be able to handle that without lashing out at whoever is challenging your opinions. If you have something relevant to say or explain, then do so, but all this complaining about people's attitudes, thinly veiled insults, and projection of your own caricatures of personalities onto others is entirely irrelevant to the topic at hand and needs to stop.
So I'll just leave you with THIS.
But instead you ignored my answer go with an argumentative equivalent of "I'm right and you're wrong" which tells me that while you preach superior design philosophy you have no design philosophy which is inferior to any other design philosophy (even bad ones), so your position is now lower than lore something you have declared to be at the very bottom. but go ahead and hit that quote button again, after all You are always right and I am always wrong because I don't hate the things you hate.
I'd be surprised by the hypocrisy, but I'm not surprised by the hypocrisy.
All you do is cry and demand the removal of something claiming no skill or bad design or dare I say the dreaded N.P.E. and when you guys get your way, it is not enough, further more the game still suffers.
Guess I'm going to have to forget about getting a software limitation elaboration.

So I gave you my reason but like every single meta-complainer I have come across. You immediately hit the reply and show that you don't care for what others have to say.
If I didn't care, I would not have replied.
I asked how your vision would be realised, and presented the numerous obstacles which I think likely would be there which would detract from the experience, drawn both from own experiences as well as having heard and read from different reviewers.

This is your game and you demand the experience you want. Sure that is reasonable, but then you demand that everyone else experiences it your way.
It's Microsoft's game, and i343 do as they see fit.
I offer feedback and suggestion on what I think would make the game more enjoyable for me, I have zero obligations to think about anyone else in that regard.
I also do not demand anyone else to experience it the way I like it, because no one is forced to play anything they dislike to the extent that they do not wish to play it.

No I don't know you personally, but I have met your personality in other places, it is all the same. Your suggestions are better off if they are ignored.
Oh so you do have read my many suggestions over the years?
It's quite unfortunate that you think an overhaul of the global ordnance system from Halo 4 making it more competitive and fair is better off ignored, same for multi-directional gravitation coupled with zero-G Combat, combining medkits with regenerating health, multifunction weapons across the board, additions to existing vehicles, new vehicles and weapons, wall jumping, new types of map traversal entities, more map hazards, upgrades in theatre, AI usage and learning, improved Firefight and whatever else I might have forgotten.

You realised you conveniently skipped the second point, as you have with the aformentioned software limitation? And I never said anything about my personality, only what I do for a living and my hobbies.
What about faster movement speed and no spartan abilities?
I feel like a lot of people that say Classic Halo is slower haven't played it since 5 released because the opposite is easily true. If you need an animation to make you feel like you're going fast for it to be playable even though you're going at the same speed I don't really know what to say. I hope all Spartan Abilities are gone in Infinite, I hate gimmicks and animations that slow down gameplay getting in the way of Halo's "easy to understand, hard to master" arena gameplay. I don't enjoy Halo 5 nearly as much as Halo 2 or Online so at the risk of sounding stubborn I'm just going to say that I'm not going to be interested if Infinite uses 5's gameplay. Games, for me, are supposed to be fun and I just don't think Halo 5 is a fun game and it certainly doesn't feel like what I expect from a Halo game just as Reach's default settings and 4 didn't.
Halo Infinite with classic gameplay = chance to bring back so much player and revive the community halo used to had back in the days
Halo Infinite with H5 gameplay = will be forgotten within the next few months after release.
Just that simple.
sX ApeX wrote:
Halo Infinite with classic gameplay = chance to bring back so much player and revive the community halo used to had back in the days
Halo Infinite with H5 gameplay = will be forgotten within the next few months after release.
Just that simple.
thank you! this is the reality of the situation.if they try and cling to the halo 5 gameplay the game will quickly fade.
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making posts that do not contribute to the topic at hand.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
What I think is rather hilarious that some fans in the community that favour the new advanced movement say that it's too slow etc. Well if you actually look into it it's your perception is what dictates what is slow or fast paced in a halo game. You genuinely move faster in halo 3 without Sprint, only 343 tonning down base movement n adding Sprint gives you the perspective that your running faster
Could you elaborate on this?
"Moving fast" has gotten so many definitions now it's difficult to accurately interpret what people mean anymore.

In terms of velocity, Halo 5's BMS is higher than Halo 3's BMS, and no default sprint in Halo have had its default velocity equal to any of the original titles' BMS, all of which are identical to each other by the way.
Naqser wrote:
What I think is rather hilarious that some fans in the community that favour the new advanced movement say that it's too slow etc. Well if you actually look into it it's your perception is what dictates what is slow or fast paced in a halo game. You genuinely move faster in halo 3 without Sprint, only 343 tonning down base movement n adding Sprint gives you the perspective that your running faster
Could you elaborate on this?
"Moving fast" has gotten so many definitions now it's difficult to accurately interpret what people mean anymore.

In terms of velocity, Halo 5's BMS is higher than Halo 3's BMS, and no default sprint in Halo have had its default velocity equal to any of the original titles' BMS, all of which are identical to each other by the way.
Watched a YouTube video
Naqser wrote:
What I think is rather hilarious that some fans in the community that favour the new advanced movement say that it's too slow etc. Well if you actually look into it it's your perception is what dictates what is slow or fast paced in a halo game. You genuinely move faster in halo 3 without Sprint, only 343 tonning down base movement n adding Sprint gives you the perspective that your running faster
Could you elaborate on this?
"Moving fast" has gotten so many definitions now it's difficult to accurately interpret what people mean anymore.

In terms of velocity, Halo 5's BMS is higher than Halo 3's BMS, and no default sprint in Halo have had its default velocity equal to any of the original titles' BMS, all of which are identical to each other by the way.
From my own research on the base movement speed from both games my conclusion is that halo 3 without Sprint runs at 7.43 and with halo 5 litter higher than 8. Now my point was everyone is so against the Classic style of halo without actually looking into it and seeing that there isny much of a difference in the bms. But with the ADVANCED moving mechinancs of halo 5 yes you are faster because of clamber, slide etc etc. So therefore without including clambering etc it's your own perception that dictates how 'slow' the game is because there is in no way shape or form a vast difference in BMS in bungie halo and 343s halo. Now from my own experience playing halo from 2002 up until now the Classic gameplay of halo is what makes halo, it adds another layer of skill that I would loved to see implemented in a more innovative way to please both fans of the halo universe.
I don't get much out of those numbers, seeing as I don't know how your experiments were conducted, let alone the lack of what those numbers represent, m/s??
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post change the content of a moderated post.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not bump.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
Naqser wrote:
Naqser wrote:
What I think is rather hilarious that some fans in the community that favour the new advanced movement say that it's too slow etc. Well if you actually look into it it's your perception is what dictates what is slow or fast paced in a halo game. You genuinely move faster in halo 3 without Sprint, only 343 tonning down base movement n adding Sprint gives you the perspective that your running faster
Could you elaborate on this?
"Moving fast" has gotten so many definitions now it's difficult to accurately interpret what people mean anymore.

In terms of velocity, Halo 5's BMS is higher than Halo 3's BMS, and no default sprint in Halo have had its default velocity equal to any of the original titles' BMS, all of which are identical to each other by the way.
From my own research on the base movement speed from both games my conclusion is that halo 3 without Sprint runs at 7.43 and with halo 5 litter higher than 8. Now my point was everyone is so against the Classic style of halo without actually looking into it and seeing that there isny much of a difference in the bms. But with the ADVANCED moving mechinancs of halo 5 yes you are faster because of clamber, slide etc etc. So therefore without including clambering etc it's your own perception that dictates how 'slow' the game is because there is in no way shape or form a vast difference in BMS in bungie halo and 343s halo. Now from my own experience playing halo from 2002 up until now the Classic gameplay of halo is what makes halo, it adds another layer of skill that I would loved to see implemented in a more innovative way to please both fans of the halo universe.
I don't get much out of those numbers, seeing as I don't know how your experiments were conducted, let alone the lack of what those numbers represent, m/s??
So,
You took Truth and Midship (because it's always those), or not those, then ran across the chosen maps, timed those runs and from that concluded that Halo 3 BMS is as fast in terms of velocity as Halo 5 sprint?
Naqser wrote:
Naqser wrote:
What I think is rather hilarious that some fans in the community that favour the new advanced movement say that it's too slow etc. Well if you actually look into it it's your perception is what dictates what is slow or fast paced in a halo game. You genuinely move faster in halo 3 without Sprint, only 343 tonning down base movement n adding Sprint gives you the perspective that your running faster
Could you elaborate on this?
"Moving fast" has gotten so many definitions now it's difficult to accurately interpret what people mean anymore.

In terms of velocity, Halo 5's BMS is higher than Halo 3's BMS, and no default sprint in Halo have had its default velocity equal to any of the original titles' BMS, all of which are identical to each other by the way.
From my own research on the base movement speed from both games my conclusion is that halo 3 without Sprint runs at 7.43 and with halo 5 litter higher than 8. Now my point was everyone is so against the Classic style of halo without actually looking into it and seeing that there isny much of a difference in the bms. But with the ADVANCED moving mechinancs of halo 5 yes you are faster because of clamber, slide etc etc. So therefore without including clambering etc it's your own perception that dictates how 'slow' the game is because there is in no way shape or form a vast difference in BMS in bungie halo and 343s halo. Now from my own experience playing halo from 2002 up until now the Classic gameplay of halo is what makes halo, it adds another layer of skill that I would loved to see implemented in a more innovative way to please both fans of the halo universe.
I don't get much out of those numbers, seeing as I don't know how your experiments were conducted, let alone the lack of what those numbers represent, m/s??
Yikes, straight to the insults.

I hope you realize that "seconds" is not a measurement of speed. Not many cars go "40 seconds" fast.

What happened to "I'd like to start a constructive discussion"?
At the very least I want ground pound, spartan charge, and clamber gone in Halo Infinite. Halo 5 gets kind of old and boring. I’m in support of increasing the BM speed and getting rid of sprint. I would actually like to see loadouts return for BTB while keeping 4vs4 similar to Halos 1-3. In my opinion, Halo 4 had the best BTB and Halo CE remains the most competitive. Let’s combine the best of both.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 124
  4. 125
  5. 126
  6. 127
  7. 128
  8. ...
  9. 155