Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

The return of classic movement mechanics?

OP A So So Sniper

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 132
  4. 133
  5. 134
  6. 135
  7. 136
  8. ...
  9. 156
In my opinion, anything with the jet boosted should be dumped. It was a good mechanic but not for a Halo game. Sprint is fine to me as much as the Original Trilogy purists hate it.
Greynex wrote:
I'm Og halo player and when it they added Sprint to reach I thought it was good but I hated the cool down especially in campaign so when they made Sprint official I thought it was good.
Everyone likes the feeling of sprinting. The only issue I have with that is that it causes the map to become longer in places (just enough so that in the same map you'd still get to the end faster if you were playing Halo 3. See the youtube videos), so it's not actually doing anything.

And also it causes you to put your gun down and take that disadvantage to get to point B faster.

Quote:
silverwolf098: Sprint is fine to me as much as the Original Trilogy purists hate it.
It doesn't make you an "Original Trilogy purist" to dislike what in your opinion is bad game design. the term "purist" assumes that I won't play any game that isn't in the original trilogy just because it's not in the original three games or has sprint.

That's like if I called someone who liked Halo 5's sprint CoD players because I, in my genius intellect, know that nobody who likes Halo 5 has or will play the previous games.

It doesn't make any sense.

This post has been hidden.

0
Unknown wrote:
Halo 5 is the slowest Halo.
Not to say that people can't like Halo 5. It's fun, but what the eagle says is the truth.

The idea that Sprint in Halo makes you faster is nothing more than illusion.
What if Halo Infinite has it's multiplayer split in half like Halo 5? Arena would have classic movement, with maps that are built from the ground up to support that. The "Warzone" (whatever it's going to be) mode will feature advanced movement similair to Halo 5.

This possibility has me worried. If 343 considers their Halo 5 approach to multiplayer succesfull, then there might be a chance that they'll implement it in Infinite. Personally I feel that Sprint should dissapear forever from Halo, so the game as a whole will be a unified experience, but something tells me 343 is too afraid to do it.

Then again, the increased demand for classic Halo, the growing controversy around sprint and the success of DOOM 2016 must've had at least some sort of effect on 343 and their developement on Halo Infinite. I mean, there are still active Halo 3 tournaments ffs!

This post has been hidden.

0
CrazeTurk wrote:
What if Halo Infinite has it's multiplayer split in half like Halo 5? Arena would have classic movement, with maps that are built from the ground up to support that. The "Warzone" (whatever it's going to be) mode will feature advanced movement similair to Halo 5.
I am afraid of a scenario like this because it would make a further separation between casual players and more competitive ones. A difference in gameplay between playlists/modes would further discourage a player from either group to play the other one because they would feel not at ease. I hope they just take a decision and make it work for everyone.
Unknown wrote:
In my opinion, anything with the jet boosted should be dumped. It was a good mechanic but not for a Halo game. Sprint is fine to me as much as the Original Trilogy purists hate it.
Halo 5 is the slowest Halo.
Prove it.
Unknown wrote:
In my opinion, anything with the jet boosted should be dumped. It was a good mechanic but not for a Halo game. Sprint is fine to me as much as the Original Trilogy purists hate it.
Halo 5 is the slowest Halo.
It does not feel like the slowest Halo. What are you basing that on ? I thought the speed in Halo 5 was very good, I've always said that, if you boot up Halo 3 after playing Halo 5 you'll find Halo 5 feels a lot faster in comparison imo.
NAG4SE wrote:
CrazeTurk wrote:
What if Halo Infinite has it's multiplayer split in half like Halo 5? Arena would have classic movement, with maps that are built from the ground up to support that. The "Warzone" (whatever it's going to be) mode will feature advanced movement similair to Halo 5.
I am afraid of a scenario like this because it would make a further separation between casual players and more competitive ones. A difference in gameplay between playlists/modes would further discourage a player from either group to play the other one because they would feel not at ease. I hope they just take a decision and make it work for everyone.
But I think it's a good idea, and the reason is very simple: the competitive is not for everyone. never has been. Each halo had competitive playlists with different rules and settings from the rest of the game. The H5 mistake was trying to make players who do not like competitive to play it.

Do you remember Halo Reach? the MLG playlist was a totally different game, but: for fun players (most of them) had fun in the slayer team with abilities, while competitive players had fun in their playlist.

I believe that halo should have the right to evolve again, adapting to all other fps or even something more, so:

- Different characters joinable in multiplayer
- Weapons with different values of rateo, impact, range etc.
- Armors with different values of strenght, agility, revocery
- Abilities and Powers
- Building of your character and progresion career

but, i would like also a little old style area, similar to H2/H3 gameplay. Not occasional playlist as H3 Throwback or Anniversary Slayer. I mean a permanent, ranked area with:

- No abilities
- Classic movements
- H2 BR as primary weapon
- Classic weapons balancing (no automatic weapons OP)
- The best maps from HCE to H3 (forge maps obviously) especially those used in MLG Tournaments.
LuKr4SH wrote:
But I think it's a good idea, and the reason is very simple: the competitive is not for everyone. never has been. Each halo had competitive playlists with different rules and settings from the rest of the game. The H5 mistake was trying to make players who do not like competitive to play it.

Do you remember Halo Reach? the MLG playlist was a totally different game, but: for fun players (most of them) had fun in the slayer team with abilities, while competitive players had fun in their playlist.

I believe that halo should have the right to evolve again, adapting to all other fps or even something more, so:

- Different characters joinable in multiplayer
- Weapons with different values of rateo, impact, range etc.
- Armors with different values of strenght, agility, revocery
- Abilities and Powers
- Building of your character and progresion career

but, i would like also a little old style area, similar to H2/H3 gameplay. Not occasional playlist as H3 Throwback or Anniversary Slayer. I mean a permanent, ranked area with:

- No abilities
- Classic movements
- H2 BR as primary weapon
- Classic weapons balancing (no automatic weapons OP)
- The best maps from HCE to H3 (forge maps obviously) especially those used in MLG Tournaments.
The question that lies here is: does social/casual playlists need to be filled with all those stuff to appeal that part of players? Shouldn't base gameplay and game modes in themselves be enough to make players of any demographic enjoy the game?

I feel like they have to find an answer to that before making any decisions about gameplay (which at this point in development they already did most likely), because again, I'm not sure that having so many differences between social and ranked modes is a great idea. People can use social games to practice, for some quick games, if they could get interrupted during a ranked because they have to do something, anything really. And then there are players who only play casually, yes, but just like those who only play ranked they are going to be a minority. Most people would probably just play both modes at will, depending on a lot of things (time, feeling, etc.) and you have to take that into account. I'd be fine with a few game modes where rules are different and to be fair we always had some (zombie, griffball, warzone), but not separate the multiplayer entirely.
LuKr4SH wrote:
But I think it's a good idea, and the reason is very simple: the competitive is not for everyone. never has been. Each halo had competitive playlists with different rules and settings from the rest of the game. The H5 mistake was trying to make players who do not like competitive to play it.
A: Competitive / casual is more of a mindset than anything.

Not everyone who's competitive likes what's bunched together as "competitive", and not everyone who's casual like what's bunched together as "social/casual".

B: No, not really. Halo 2 and Halo 3's Ranked vs Unranked playlists were almost identical, save a few minute details, but you would always play with the same ruleset.

Enter Reach, however and they started experimenting. One Ranked playlists which changed over the course of the game's lifespan, even in that, most playlists at the start could easily have been made ranked.
Though, it was at that time a "Rift" started regarding "competitive / social" game rules.

C: Or perhaps the problem isn't Halo 5 offering unranked versions of the ranked playlists, but that a lot of players think "social" means "minimal effort to win".

LuKr4SH wrote:
Do you remember Halo Reach? the MLG playlist was a totally different game, but: for fun players (most of them) had fun in the slayer team with abilities, while competitive players had fun in their playlist.
MLG was nothing more than an additional different playlists like that of SWAT, Action Sack and Grifball.

I'm fairly certain there were plenty of competitive players who played normal Team Slayer in Reach.

LuKr4SH wrote:
I believe that halo should have the right to evolve again, adapting to all other fps
Who ever revoked the "evolution rights" from Halo?
And what does "adapting to all other FPS" even mean? Seems to me it's do what other popular / mainstream titles are doing.

It's quite sad that this has to be repeated so many times.
People who do not like current Halo, are not fond of the newer mechanics introduced, but are not opposed to other changes.

Here's a thoughtcookie for you:
Why is it that whenever someone doesn't like something and want it gone, those defending act as if the developers have no ideas/imagination of what to implement if that something was gone, and were completely unable to include other mechanics, if that something was not present. Yet, when those defending that something go on being the spokesperson of change, changing "evolution, adapting and change", then the developers have all the resources, imagination and time in the world to make the new big grand franchise revitalizing miracle. So, what are these new franchise evolving, competitive adaption, revitalizing ideas?
Well, doing what the developer has been doing for their last titles of course, look what other popular titles have going on, and do that. No secret some people want Battle Royal in Infinite. More?

LuKr4SH wrote:
- Different characters joinable in multiplayer
- Weapons with different values of rateo, impact, range etc.
- Armors with different values of strenght, agility, revocery
- Abilities and Powers
- Building of your character and progresion career
1: Overwatch, Team Fortress, Titanfall, CoD, Battlefield, Destiny.
2: Destiny, Anthem, Borderlands.
3: Destiny (You remember how people were afraid armors would start to affect gameplay in Halo 4 when armor upgrades were revealed? Throwing player customization out the window for the most effective armor build? Yeah that didn't sit well then, think it'd changed?)
4: Same as 1.
5: Destiny, Borderlands, Anthem.

LuKr4SH wrote:
but, i would like also a little old style area, similar to H2/H3 gameplay.
But when would that part ever be its own thing with its own "evolutions, changes and adaptations" if all it's ever going to be is a watered down version of the "full experience" in an attempt to remake an experience which most have played a lot of and want a new twist on, an experience which quite frankly isn't up to par.

LuKr4SH wrote:
- No abilities
- Classic movements
- H2 BR as primary weapon
- Classic weapons balancing (no automatic weapons OP)
- The best maps from HCE to H3 (forge maps obviously) especially those used in MLG Tournaments.
See? This is just a watered down version of the previous changes, not trying into the main game at all which features character progression and seemingly randomly generated weaponry, in order to attempt a "classic" experience.

It doesn't take the old games and add new ideas, which aren't on the current Path. It doesn't take old mechanics and perfect them.

CnC4 is a perfect example of a game "evolving", recieving major backlash from the community.
DNF is a perfect example of a game "getting with the times of modern shooters" and failing miserably, even if the physics and graphics had been better made.
I'd say it's safe to add Quake Champions to the list of games "getting with the times", peeping at Overwatch, that game fell off the gamer radar quickly despite it being a household name for many gamers.

But, what game was a surprise reveal, re-enetered the household of many, was critically acclaimed (not including MP), did its own thing while keeping things fresh? Also featuring a back story of being called "Call of *insert title*" by the developers themselves? Doom 2016 of course.

You can't herd competitive and social players into separate playlists based on some sort of checklist, because it is not binary.
Not to mention, making gameplay between different modes very differently from each other makes it difficult to easily jump between modes without it being confusing/jarring.
LuKr4SH wrote:
NAG4SE wrote:
CrazeTurk wrote:
What if Halo Infinite has it's multiplayer split in half like Halo 5? Arena would have classic movement, with maps that are built from the ground up to support that. The "Warzone" (whatever it's going to be) mode will feature advanced movement similair to Halo 5.
I am afraid of a scenario like this because it would make a further separation between casual players and more competitive ones. A difference in gameplay between playlists/modes would further discourage a player from either group to play the other one because they would feel not at ease. I hope they just take a decision and make it work for everyone.
But I think it's a good idea, and the reason is very simple: the competitive is not for everyone. never has been. Each halo had competitive playlists with different rules and settings from the rest of the game. The H5 mistake was trying to make players who do not like competitive to play it.

Do you remember Halo Reach? the MLG playlist was a totally different game, but: for fun players (most of them) had fun in the slayer team with abilities, while competitive players had fun in their playlist.

I believe that halo should have the right to evolve again, adapting to all other fps or even something more, so:

- Different characters joinable in multiplayer
- Weapons with different values of rateo, impact, range etc.
- Armors with different values of strenght, agility, revocery
- Abilities and Powers
- Building of your character and progresion career

but, i would like also a little old style area, similar to H2/H3 gameplay. Not occasional playlist as H3 Throwback or Anniversary Slayer. I mean a permanent, ranked area with:

- No abilities
- Classic movements
- H2 BR as primary weapon
- Classic weapons balancing (no automatic weapons OP)
- The best maps from HCE to H3 (forge maps obviously) especially those used in MLG Tournaments.
I have to massively disagree. To me it sounds like your turning Halo into some kind of Overwatch/Destiny style game with RPG elements and such. Halo needs to be Halo! This is what has gotten Halo in trouble in the first place by changing what it is. Halo 5 mistake (well, one of lol) was that it only had ranked and didn't have social playlists at all until months later. The people that played social didn't want it to play differently than the ranked they just wanted to be able to play games and not have to worry about rank just like in pass games. That is what was Halo 5 mistake in that area was.

If they want to make a game that has character classes and all the stuff you mentioned, fine, but make it an entirely separate different game. Trying this whole making two games in one is a bad idea from the get go for many obvious reasons. Halo 5 pretty much did this and it wasn't a good idea.

Ranked and Social should play the same in the sense of mechanics and whatnot. The exception being there MLG/HCS playlist or playlists if there is more then one. That playlist should have its own "rules" and things, like it always has in the past. Now ideally, it wouldn't but if they want things a little different in those playlists, that's fine. Halo 3 did this to perfection. Social and Ranked played the same. Players could go from one to the other and know exactly how to play, what to expect etc. The exception being the MLG playlist in ranked but that was only one playlist and that playlist didn't require mass changes to things like game mechanics aka having no sprint or something like this. This is what 343I should be striving for in Infinite.

I don't want social to play differently then ranked and vice versa (again with the exception of the HCS/MLG) to me that was one of the problems in Halo 5 with warzone. You have an entire mode that is completely different than the rest that used MASSIVE resources and time and things suffered because of it. One example being BTB.

I think I'll stop there as I feel Naqser sums things up really well in the post above me. Nice job man 👍
Naqser wrote:
LuKr4SH wrote:
But I think it's a good idea, and the reason is very simple: the competitive is not for everyone. never has been. Each halo had competitive playlists with different rules and settings from the rest of the game. The H5 mistake was trying to make players who do not like competitive to play it.
No, not really. Halo 2 and Halo 3's Ranked vs Unranked playlists were almost identical, save a few minute details, but you would always play with the same ruleset.

MLG was nothing more than an additional different playlists like that of SWAT, Action Sack and Grifball.
So, playing SMG or BR start is just a matter of small details? Halo Reach was even more extreme, removing the abilities except for only one pick-up on the map.

If you don't see significant differences in this, I certainly can't show it to you.
LuKr4SH wrote:
Naqser wrote:
LuKr4SH wrote:
But I think it's a good idea, and the reason is very simple: the competitive is not for everyone. never has been. Each halo had competitive playlists with different rules and settings from the rest of the game. The H5 mistake was trying to make players who do not like competitive to play it.
No, not really. Halo 2 and Halo 3's Ranked vs Unranked playlists were almost identical, save a few minute details, but you would always play with the same ruleset.

MLG was nothing more than an additional different playlists like that of SWAT, Action Sack and Grifball.
So, playing SMG or BR start is just a matter of small details? Halo Reach was even more extreme, removing the abilities except for only one pick-up on the map.

If you don't see significant differences in this, I certainly can't show it to you.
BR vs SMG is quite the minute detail when you'd compare it to enabling / disabling player traits such as sprint, clamber and so forth. You do realise I did say that the bigger and bigger differentiations between social and competitive playlists really kicked it off with Reach? Also completely disregarding the even bigger differences between your suggested game modes.

As also mentioned in the quote, I do not regard MLG to be of any significance as it's more of a niche playlist made by the community, like SWAT, Action Sack and Grifball.

Or do you think SWAT should be a relevant playlist to take into account when discussing mainlinr competitive/social playlists regarding how Shields should be handled?

Or perhaps you actually do not have a good answer to defend the notion of further drivning a wedge between what you've labled competitive and social?
Or the rest of the post for that matter.
Naqser wrote:
LuKr4SH wrote:
Naqser wrote:
LuKr4SH wrote:
But I think it's a good idea, and the reason is very simple: the competitive is not for everyone. never has been. Each halo had competitive playlists with different rules and settings from the rest of the game. The H5 mistake was trying to make players who do not like competitive to play it.
No, not really. Halo 2 and Halo 3's Ranked vs Unranked playlists were almost identical, save a few minute details, but you would always play with the same ruleset.

MLG was nothing more than an additional different playlists like that of SWAT, Action Sack and Grifball.
So, playing SMG or BR start is just a matter of small details? Halo Reach was even more extreme, removing the abilities except for only one pick-up on the map.

If you don't see significant differences in this, I certainly can't show it to you.
BR vs SMG is quite the minute detail when you'd compare it to enabling / disabling player traits such as sprint, clamber and so forth. You do realise I did say that the bigger and bigger differentiations between social and competitive playlists really kicked it off with Reach? Also completely disregarding the even bigger differences between your suggested game modes.

As also mentioned in the quote, I do not regard MLG to be of any significance as it's more of a niche playlist made by the community, like SWAT, Action Sack and Grifball.

Or do you think SWAT should be a relevant playlist to take into account when discussing mainlinr competitive/social playlists regarding how Shields should be handled?

Or perhaps you actually do not have a good answer to defend the notion of further drivning a wedge between what you've labled competitive and social?
Or the rest of the post for that matter.
I just said my opinion bro, don't get angry :)
Its seems we are once again at the "why not do both" stage of the discussion and people still need reminding that that idea is completely unrealistic. What you are asking is that 343 make effectively two games on the same time and budget needed to develop one.

All that is going to happen is that either nuHalo or classic Halo is going to get shafted in terms of actual content or both of them will. There are some disagreements that can't be fixed via compromise as their needs are too different to effectively reconcile. I understand the impulse to try and make everyone happy, but in this case all it is going to do is leave folks of all kinds disappointed.

As much as I want a classic Halo uncompromised by sprint and other movement mechanics, I also don't want to see fans of sprint be stuck with a compromised version of sprint. The delayed shield recharge in Halo 5 is one of the most unintuitive "balancing" mechanics I've ever had the displeasure of dealing with and it exists solely to try and placate fans like me. The problem is that I and other like me have a fundamental issue with the inclusion of sprint that can't simply be "balanced" away.

Half measures are not good for anyone in this case. I would still rather see nuHalo fans get everything they could ever want at the cost of classic Halo rather than have some compromised mess of a game that doesn't really please anyone(in the broad sense).

343 just needs to bite the bullet and pick one direction or the other and commit fully to that vision, or at the very least commit to something entirely new ala the new God of War.
tsassi wrote:
Unknown wrote:
In my opinion, anything with the jet boosted should be dumped. It was a good mechanic but not for a Halo game. Sprint is fine to me as much as the Original Trilogy purists hate it.
Halo 5 is the slowest Halo.
Prove it.
If you want to be exactly 100% factual, Halo 5 and older (say Halo 2) are exactly the same speed at full sprint (more or less depending on the fact that I did not do pixel measurements but you get to the same place at the same time). In Halo 2 you can shoot, and do whatever you want without breaking top speed. in Halo 5, doing anything makes you slower.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6YdPRyW0DAThis is a good visual aide.
Personally, I like the gameplay mechanics of Halo 4 and 5. A little quicker and more flexible. But I wouldn't mind it being closer to the older titles.
Ken Static wrote:
Personally, I like the gameplay mechanics of Halo 4 and 5. A little quicker and more flexible. But I wouldn't mind it being closer to the older titles.
I don't understand why though. Running really fast is good, but I think what would be more fun is running really fast, being able to turn 360 degrees, shoot while running and perform virtually any in-game action short of say, lunging to melee a target and pausing the game.

I wouldn't riot though if sprint was in the game. I'd just prefer it isn't and base movement speed was increased.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 132
  4. 133
  5. 134
  6. 135
  7. 136
  8. ...
  9. 156