Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

The return of classic movement mechanics?

OP A So So Sniper

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 258
  4. 259
  5. 260
  6. 261
  7. 262
  8. ...
  9. 288
Sprint is pretty much a guarantee, and honestly that's not so bad. I suspect Spartans will move a little quicker than they did in 1-3 as well, anyway.

I think the grappling hook, and other equipment in the game, will really add to the gameplay. The grappling hook alone really offers a lot of possibilities in terms of using the environment to attack opponents or drag people or objects towards you, possibly even pull yourself out of harm's way. I like the variety armor abilities added to the game in the past, as well as some of the more useful equipment in 3. I suspect some of those will return as equipment options.
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
"If you added sprint to a small map such as Lockout, the players would constantly run into walls because of the reduced turn radius."

this is the laughable level of reasoning 343 has to deal with. I dont even have to say anything. anti sprinters defeat themselves.
This ain't the best comment against sprint, point given. Bit out of context, but still. That said, we are on page 260 here. There are many, literally hundreds of post with actual valid and found reasonings for why sprint impacts negatively on the game. Why not choosing one of those and say something about those?
"If you added sprint to a small map such as Lockout, the players would constantly run into walls because of the reduced turn radius."

this is the laughable level of reasoning 343 has to deal with. I dont even have to say anything. anti sprinters defeat themselves.
This ain't the best comment against sprint, point given. Bit out of context, but still. That said, we are on page 260 here. There are many, literally hundreds of post with actual valid and found reasonings for why sprint impacts negatively on the game. Why not choosing one of those and say something about those?
i've pretty much covered every good point there is i believe. its all there in the last 20 pages or so. i dont know whats left to say. celestis just has a habit of saying the worse points. fine by me, since 343 will completely ignore his advice.
"If you added sprint to a small map such as Lockout, the players would constantly run into walls because of the reduced turn radius."

this is the laughable level of reasoning 343 has to deal with. I dont even have to say anything. anti sprinters defeat themselves.
This ain't the best comment against sprint, point given. Bit out of context, but still. That said, we are on page 260 here. There are many, literally hundreds of post with actual valid and found reasonings for why sprint impacts negatively on the game. Why not choosing one of those and say something about those?
i've pretty much covered every good point there is i believe. its all there in the last 20 pages or so. i dont know whats left to say. celestis just has a habit of saying the worse points. fine by me, since 343 will completely ignore his advice.
and 343 will ignore yours, especially since you have no prove for any claim you make and all you do is laugh when others actually bring up good points
"If you added sprint to a small map such as Lockout, the players would constantly run into walls because of the reduced turn radius."

this is the laughable level of reasoning 343 has to deal with. I dont even have to say anything. anti sprinters defeat themselves.
This ain't the best comment against sprint, point given. Bit out of context, but still. That said, we are on page 260 here. There are many, literally hundreds of post with actual valid and found reasonings for why sprint impacts negatively on the game. Why not choosing one of those and say something about those?
i've pretty much covered every good point there is i believe. its all there in the last 20 pages or so. i dont know whats left to say. celestis just has a habit of saying the worse points. fine by me, since 343 will completely ignore his advice.
and 343 will ignore yours, especially since you have no prove for any claim you make and all you do is laugh when others actually bring up good points
prove what? 343 will know who's statements line up with their own proven knowledge. At this point, 343 will know who is full of crap and who isnt regardless of proof stated here.
shooting people out of sprint would easily balance that. we already cant activate sprint in battle unlike thruster.
thruster allows you to thrust mid air and change direction onto different parts of a map which is not possible with sprint.
there is one way to make thruster work with classic halo maps. Only make thruster work on ground and only when not taking damage. However, if sprint is going to be in the game, the new instant slide will act like that thruster.
It makes the game tedious, Halo had fluid movement, now the compromise is to make the game feel like sludge? 1 charge of sprint likely covers 20-25x the distance of thruster, thruster has no real negative consequence in classic Halo maps in any way shape or form, the most major negative is that each engagement feels too samey as it's the backpocket mechanic for every encounter.

It is rather laughable to insinuate that thruster is where the line needs to be drawn (in relation to what we have had to deal with for 5 years with H5) when clamber breaks the power struggle for vertical map placement, a mechanic designed with the intent of breaking one of the staple characteristics of Halo. Ground pound and spartan charge, when players thought double pummel was loathesome to cqb gameplay, and sprint, a mechanic which places 50% of time played in an animation and is mostly used to escape gameplay, which is the opposite of how it is used in most other games as 1 life or instant kill create the danger that Halo lacks.

You suggest a way to create danger, by essentially killing anyone using sprint in Halo, as it's a getaway mechanic by nature, so now most players who get shot will be in compromised positions with the slower base movement and all eyes on them. Why not, like upwards of 100,000 posts since Reach came out, raise the base movement speed and add other movement mechanics in weapons or map design and stop fitting a useless mechanic into the game any means necessary.
"now most players who get shot will be in compromised positions with the slower base movement and all eyes on them"

thats the point, sprint should be risk vs reward. the most important thing is it has risk. in instant kill games like cod they dont need to disable sprint when shot because theyre dead. all halo sprint needs is that risk of being shot out of sprint and forced into a battle. Also lots of players use sprint offensively, im not sure why you only think its mostly used for running away especially since once in battle you cant activate sprint in 5.

increasing bms would be horrible for halo's classic gameplay. halo is not quake or doom. it plays like a tactical shooter and needs slow movement in battles.

thruster can only work in the way i described to support classic halo.
That isn't risk vs reward, you are just punishing the player for using the base mechanic as it should, not punishing bad play specifically. You won't be forced into a battle at that point, those that are shooting are up on you, you mostly lose that encounter. They'll likely get another shot if you aren't facing them as turning around 90 degrees on the common used sens 3-6 still takes time. What do you mean you can't activate sprint in 5? isn't it only until shield begins recharging that you can sprint again? that really only nerfs sprint for the cqb range.

Depends on what you mean by offensive, if simply moving forwards to a new position instead of running away is offensive then sure, though i would say that is just neutral movement. flanking people aggressively in a fight i would say is offensive use, but because of knocking players out of sprint who aren't at full speed i would say finding that is as limited as running away at cqb range. maybe less so as the other mechanics offered in 5 specifically (thruster, clamber, ground pound, stabilise) allowed players to get the running boost while the shield delay finished.

All in all it doesn't really take away what i said, that sprint takes up a large chunk of game time and that making it very conditional in a game centered around fluid movement and positioning will make the game play very stop / start, clunky and tedious.

Did I mention quake or doom? they make great examples of shooters that don't have sprint, but at no point is that the goal. Having movement omnidirectionally that doesn't force the player to decide whether they want to move OR shoot is key. In H5 120% movement 120% jump height is more ideal than sprint. Halo is an arena shooter at its base, in CE it is nearly 1:1, it just lacked a means to accelerate like quake. The main thing that changed was removing health, and more emphasis on team play with longer kill times and less vertical maps.

What exactly is a tactical shooter? At least in relation to Halo, i can think possibly CSGO and R6..Halo has aspects, but is further from those games than to quake in regards to a design blueprint. Slower movement in battles doesn't really make sense as there hasn't been a point where that's not been the case so far, or in the anti-sprint suggestions.

Thruster works perfectly fine, i would prefer it to be a pick-up like evade in Reach but beyond that it's less game breaking than sprint. Halo has a lot of value in positional advantage, not just vertically but also in controlling areas of the map. It's more unique in that regard as true arena shooters are usually 1v1, low kill and brief exchanges around the map and instakill shooters lack the lifetime to give it enough value. Whether its original inclusion or the nerfed version, sprint does more to break the strategic value of Halos map design and general game flow than thruster ever could. In conjunction with clamber and thruster like in 5 it became a complete mess. Thruster is at its worst as a start-up or added push to sprint, it's individual use really is not severely impactful to the game.

It may of been a pick-up but we used evade in ZBNS Reach and it played great, it had 2 charges, pretty quick cooldown and covered a lot of distance, fit right in with Halo. As someone who is against sprint my main hang-up is more adding all the power to the player off-spawn and not on map. Things like quickfall or a spring jump, stabilise or a short thrust are micro-movements that give a little more flavour / flair to movement. You try to convince others of how to deal with sprint by offering chopped together frankenstein examples yet can't seem to budge on thinking of how a thrust mechanic could be modified to better enhance gameplay, i thought we were supposed to be the single minded backwards thinking stick in the mud types. Your suggestion isn't the only way of balancing thrust, too dramatic, just decrease distance.

Upon 343s entry with 4 we had to deal with many things that removed classic halo gameplay by giving power to players on spawn rather than on map. loadouts, perks, ordnance. Then with 5s advanced movement. A quick and fluid game like H2 but a nudge faster, with those flairs to movement as well as map additions like teleporters, speed gates, jump pads etc, with powerups, and weapons or items that affect movement makes for a game that plays much more like Halo (as nearly all existed but not further developed on in the classic games) than H4, H5 or the weird arguments to bend all gameplay around the core of sprint ever could.
While they are professionals and have many talented people within the company, as a unit and in regards to their final product 343 don't have a great eye for quality. In a franchise that previously held 90+ ratings for all main titles they have released a remake of CE where the actual content (remade graphics and new maps) sucked. Two mild rated stinkers in 4 and 5. One of the greatest launch failures of all time with MCC that taken 5 years to truly fix. A new title that was mocked by everyone for looking like xbox 360 graphics and roasted so poorly that despite advertising lining up to be a launch title (console box art) it had to be delayed a year. As well as two phone games no-one cared for and an arcade game that while looking the part played underwhelmingly. Their greatest success is Halo wars 2, a game mostly developed by Creative Assembly that at most is still an 8/10 game. Real pedigree.
"If you added sprint to a small map such as Lockout, the players would constantly run into walls because of the reduced turn radius."

this is the laughable level of reasoning 343 has to deal with. I dont even have to say anything. anti sprinters defeat themselves.
Way to generalize every single argument against sprint based off of the weakest argument from a post which made 8 different arguments, that definitely doesn't make you look extremely disingenuous and petty.
While they are professionals and have many talented people within the company, as a unit and in regards to their final product 343 don't have a great eye for quality. In a franchise that previously held 90+ ratings for all main titles they have released a remake of CE where the actual content (remade graphics and new maps) sucked. Two mild rated stinkers in 4 and 5. One of the greatest launch failures of all time with MCC that taken 5 years to truly fix. A new title that was mocked by everyone for looking like xbox 360 graphics and roasted so poorly that despite advertising lining up to be a launch title (console box art) it had to be delayed a year. As well as two phone games no-one cared for and an arcade game that while looking the part played underwhelmingly. Their greatest success is Halo wars 2, a game mostly developed by Creative Assembly that at most is still an 8/10 game. Real pedigree.
People seem to give 343 more credit that they really deserve, they haven't put out a single game that hasn't been either decisive or just bad. And even then their best game ( HW2 ) suffers from horrible balance issues and stale maps combined with zero support from the developers past 2018.
shooting people out of sprint would easily balance that. we already cant activate sprint in battle unlike thruster.
thruster allows you to thrust mid air and change direction onto different parts of a map which is not possible with sprint.
there is one way to make thruster work with classic halo maps. Only make thruster work on ground and only when not taking damage. However, if sprint is going to be in the game, the new instant slide will act like that thruster.
"That isn't risk vs reward, you are just punishing the player for using the base mechanic as it should, not punishing bad play specifically. You won't be forced into a battle at that point, those that are shooting are up on you, you mostly lose that encounter. They'll likely get another shot if you aren't facing them as turning around 90 degrees on the common used sens 3-6 still takes time. "

That is the risk. Every mechanic base or not has a level of risk vs reward. sprint rewards you with getting to an objective faster, but it has risks which youve explained. It still needs more risks though in order to play like classic halo. sprint should be used sparingly at the right moments as it should come with big risks like getting shot in the back and being forced into a potentially losing battle when sprint gets disabled. people would use sprint much more cautiously, tactically. there will be a constant question of do you risk it where as when you can sprint in halo 5 you can sprint through damage(when full sprint) and thrust to safety. halo 5 sprint needs way more risk than that.

"What do you mean you can't activate sprint in 5? isn't it only until shield begins recharging that you can sprint again? that really only nerfs sprint for the cqb range"

if you are in bms or in the first seconds of sprint, any damage will stop you using sprint. its risk, but not enough. The sprint shield delay is a horrible mechanic. i created my own thread about that. its just another poor example of trying to design halo around sprint instead of just balancing sprint itself.

"Thruster works perfectly fine"

thruster how it works now doesnt work with classic halo . halo was all about meaningful careful movement. risk vs reward. thruster has too much reward and too little risk worse than 5's sprint. It rewards sweaty teamplay by ruining cqb ttk. i played halo for cqb. h5's Thruster ruined it more than anything else now that cqb is wildly inconsistent and not worth the risk. h5 is mainly just boring medium and long ranged combat with little risk of someone getting a "quick" cqb kill on you like classic halo BECAUSE of thruster. it would be fine as a pick up or balanced like the new halo infinite instant slide. as long as we get shot out of sprint, slide will act like a perfectly balanced thruster.

"Did I mention quake or doom?"

in a previous post you did i think. ever wonder why no one cares about doom or quake multiplayer? it was cool for its time but players now desire something less chaotic with more meaningful combat. classic halo was successful because of long ttk at long range, short ttk at close range. the slow movement made it a perfect balance between both. h5's sprint and thruster ruins short ttk and makes it a boring teamshooter because of lack of quick cqb risk, unless you properly balance them by giving players the ability to suppress enemies fast movement. that is all modern halo needs to finally feel like classic halo. none of this fast arena bullcrap. ive said this like 10 times now. did you know halo 1 was inspired by counterstrike?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OheqVrMGPv0 the qoute is in there somewhere.
Nuss902928 wrote:
"If you added sprint to a small map such as Lockout, the players would constantly run into walls because of the reduced turn radius."

this is the laughable level of reasoning 343 has to deal with. I dont even have to say anything. anti sprinters defeat themselves.
Way to generalize every single argument against sprint based off of the weakest argument from a post which made 8 different arguments, that definitely doesn't make you look extremely disingenuous and petty.
celestis shouldnt act like he represents the anti sprinters then. All his points are generally weak and not worth my time replying to anymore.
I dont want another Call of Halo. If you all want that go play Call of Duty. I want the sprint to be staggered even if you get you shouldn't slow. I want the shield to always charge regardless if you sprint or not. I dont want thrusters to save you in the last second because you were too careless take them out. Halo 5 was made for those kinds of mechanics, I've left many kills on the tables and some I only got assists because the thruster got the guy out just in time for me not to kill him. The books and classic Halo should really be considered. In the books Chiefs visor eliminated all lens flare regardless if he looks at the sun. Halo 5 was horrible when trying to aim because of it. I also found myself over correcting my shots. I want two settings for aiming. You can have your "improved" aim while I want my aim to have more friction so I'm not over correcting when my reticle goes to far in front of you call it "Classic" and let it be... It's not aim assist but it's not so twitchy that likens me to call Halo 5 "Call of Halo". Lastly, stop putting ghosts and banshees in every damn map. Doing this has caused games to feel like being in a blender and I dont get any chance to breathe. You can hardly destroy them unless your entire team is dedicated to taking it out but no worries.. 1-2 minutes later you'll have to do it again because the weapons used to take them out are highly sought after and you are more likely to be mugged trying to fire them at the ghost or banshee. Too much verticality with enemies spawning behind you. Stop the Call of Duty spawning as well. Its garbage. Again follow what made Halo great. Dont try to be relevant and follow others. We carved this path we are relevant.
Atamus wrote:
I dont want another Call of Halo. If you all want that go play Call of Duty. I want the sprint to be staggered even if you get you shouldn't slow. I want the shield to always charge regardless if you sprint or not. I dont want thrusters to save you in the last second because you were too careless take them out. Halo 5 was made for those kinds of mechanics, I've left many kills on the tables and some I only got assists because the thruster got the guy out just in time for me not to kill him. The books and classic Halo should really be considered. In the books Chiefs visor eliminated all lens flare regardless if he looks at the sun. Halo 5 was horrible when trying to aim because of it. I also found myself over correcting my shots. I want two settings for aiming. You can have your "improved" aim while I want my aim to have more friction so I'm not over correcting when my reticle goes to far in front of you call it "Classic" and let it be... It's not aim assist but it's not so twitchy that likens me to call Halo 5 "Call of Halo". Lastly, stop putting ghosts and banshees in every damn map. Doing this has caused games to feel like being in a blender and I dont get any chance to breathe. You can hardly destroy them unless your entire team is dedicated to taking it out but no worries.. 1-2 minutes later you'll have to do it again because the weapons used to take them out are highly sought after and you are more likely to be mugged trying to fire them at the ghost or banshee. Too much verticality with enemies spawning behind you. Stop the Call of Duty spawning as well. Its garbage. Again follow what made Halo great. Dont try to be relevant and follow others. We carved this path we are relevant.
" I want the sprint to be staggered even if you get you shouldn't slow"
what did you mean to say here?
Nuss902928 wrote:
"If you added sprint to a small map such as Lockout, the players would constantly run into walls because of the reduced turn radius."

this is the laughable level of reasoning 343 has to deal with. I dont even have to say anything. anti sprinters defeat themselves.
Way to generalize every single argument against sprint based off of the weakest argument from a post which made 8 different arguments, that definitely doesn't make you look extremely disingenuous and petty.
celestis shouldnt act like he represents the anti sprinters then. All his points are generally weak and not worth my time replying to anymore.
Citation needed please, I don't recall Celestis ever making such a claim, and even if he did that doesn't make it so.

Also you can't claim that he isn't worth your time responding to when you continue to snipe at him with your petty mini responses after already claiming beforehand that you were no longer going to respond to him.

And lastly his points are mostly strong, the fact that you only even tried (and failed) to counter one of his last eight points is evidence of that.
Nuss902928 wrote:
Nuss902928 wrote:
"If you added sprint to a small map such as Lockout, the players would constantly run into walls because of the reduced turn radius."

this is the laughable level of reasoning 343 has to deal with. I dont even have to say anything. anti sprinters defeat themselves.
Way to generalize every single argument against sprint based off of the weakest argument from a post which made 8 different arguments, that definitely doesn't make you look extremely disingenuous and petty.
celestis shouldnt act like he represents the anti sprinters then. All his points are generally weak and not worth my time replying to anymore.
Citation needed please, I don't recall Celestis ever making such a claim, and even if he did that doesn't make it so.

Also you can't claim that he isn't worth your time responding to when you continue to snipe at him with your petty mini responses after already claiming beforehand that you were no longer going to respond to him.

And lastly his points are mostly strong, the fact that you only even tried (and failed) to counter one of his last eight points is evidence of that.
"Citation needed please, I don't recall Celestis ever making such a claim, and even if he did that doesn't make it so. "

the classic give me proof and even if there is proof its not relevent line. lol. its my opinion.

"Also you can't claim that he isn't worth your time responding to when you continue to snipe at him with your petty mini responses after already claiming beforehand that you were no longer going to respond to him."

i didnt respond to him. i used him as an example to the rest of the the forum users

"And lastly his points are mostly strong"

in your opinion

"the fact that you only even tried (and failed) to counter one of his last eight points is evidence of that."

the evidence is, ive stated i'm not responding to him. i didnt even try to counter anything. i pointed out a stupid quote of his for the rest of the forum users, to which one anti sprinter agreed with me.

your arguments are petty.
Nuss902928 wrote:
Nuss902928 wrote:
"If you added sprint to a small map such as Lockout, the players would constantly run into walls because of the reduced turn radius."

this is the laughable level of reasoning 343 has to deal with. I dont even have to say anything. anti sprinters defeat themselves.
Way to generalize every single argument against sprint based off of the weakest argument from a post which made 8 different arguments, that definitely doesn't make you look extremely disingenuous and petty.
celestis shouldnt act like he represents the anti sprinters then. All his points are generally weak and not worth my time replying to anymore.
Citation needed please, I don't recall Celestis ever making such a claim, and even if he did that doesn't make it so.

Also you can't claim that he isn't worth your time responding to when you continue to snipe at him with your petty mini responses after already claiming beforehand that you were no longer going to respond to him.

And lastly his points are mostly strong, the fact that you only even tried (and failed) to counter one of his last eight points is evidence of that.
"Citation needed please, I don't recall Celestis ever making such a claim, and even if he did that doesn't make it so. "

the classic give me proof and even if there is proof its not relevent line. lol. its my opinion.

"Also you can't claim that he isn't worth your time responding to when you continue to snipe at him with your petty mini responses after already claiming beforehand that you were no longer going to respond to him."

i didnt respond to him. i used him as an example to the rest of the the forum users

"And lastly his points are mostly strong"

in your opinion

"the fact that you only even tried (and failed) to counter one of his last eight points is evidence of that."

the evidence is, ive stated i'm not responding to him. i didnt even try to counter anything. i pointed out a stupid quote of his for the rest of the forum users, to which one anti sprinter agreed with.

your arguments are petty.
"the classic give me proof and even if there is proof its not relevent line. lol. its my opinion."

You made a specific claim about Celestis's supposed representation of anti sprinters, you provided nothing to back this up, and the reason why any direct quote that you brought me would not matter is because Celestis has no authority over anybody else's arguments. Even if he said that he was king of the anti sprinters, that wouldn't mean anything because just calling yourself the king doesn't make you the king.

"i didnt respond to him. i used him as an example to the rest of the the forum users"

Oh so you're openly admitting that you're the one who decided that he represents all anti sprinters.

"in your opinion"

Well if it's just my opinion then you should have little trouble breaking down why it's wrong.

"the evidence is, ive stated i'm not responding to him. i didnt even try to counter anything. i pointed out a stupid quote of his for the rest of the forum users, to which one anti sprinter agreed with"

So you don't want to counter or even have a meaningful discussion with his arguments, instead you just want to cherry pick and laugh at what you think are his weakest points in order to mock all arguments against sprint. Wow, what a wonderful contribution to what has been at many points a very interting thread with lots of in depth discussion.

"your arguments are petty."

If my unwillingness to allow you to drag the opinions and arguments of all anti sprinters through the mud with one cherry picked quote from a man who you can't even be bothered to talk to is petty, then I guess I am petty.

This is the second time now (the first time was with Tassi) that you've tried to personally write somebody off as unworthy of your attention because you didn't like a few things that they said and followed up by making up lies about them, so forgive me if I'm being a bit hostile with you.
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not flame or attack other members. This includes stat-flaming.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
Nuss902928 wrote:
Nuss902928 wrote:
Nuss902928 wrote:
"If you added sprint to a small map such as Lockout, the players would constantly run into walls because of the reduced turn radius."

this is the laughable level of reasoning 343 has to deal with. I dont even have to say anything. anti sprinters defeat themselves.
Way to generalize every single argument against sprint based off of the weakest argument from a post which made 8 different arguments, that definitely doesn't make you look extremely disingenuous and petty.
celestis shouldnt act like he represents the anti sprinters then. All his points are generally weak and not worth my time replying to anymore.
Citation needed please, I don't recall Celestis ever making such a claim, and even if he did that doesn't make it so.

Also you can't claim that he isn't worth your time responding to when you continue to snipe at him with your petty mini responses after already claiming beforehand that you were no longer going to respond to him.

And lastly his points are mostly strong, the fact that you only even tried (and failed) to counter one of his last eight points is evidence of that.
"Citation needed please, I don't recall Celestis ever making such a claim, and even if he did that doesn't make it so. "

the classic give me proof and even if there is proof its not relevent line. lol. its my opinion.

"Also you can't claim that he isn't worth your time responding to when you continue to snipe at him with your petty mini responses after already claiming beforehand that you were no longer going to respond to him."

i didnt respond to him. i used him as an example to the rest of the the forum users

"And lastly his points are mostly strong"

in your opinion

"the fact that you only even tried (and failed) to counter one of his last eight points is evidence of that."

the evidence is, ive stated i'm not responding to him. i didnt even try to counter anything. i pointed out a stupid quote of his for the rest of the forum users, to which one anti sprinter agreed with.

your arguments are petty.
"the classic give me proof and even if there is proof its not relevent line. lol. its my opinion."

You made a specific claim about Celestis's supposed representation of anti sprinters, you provided nothing to back this up, and the reason why any direct quote that you brought me would not matter is because Celestis has no authority over anybody else's arguments. Even if he said that he was king of the anti sprinters, that wouldn't mean anything because just calling yourself the king doesn't make you the king.

"i didnt respond to him. i used him as an example to the rest of the the forum users"

Oh so you're openly admitting that you're the one who decided that he represents all anti sprinters.

"in your opinion"

Well if it's just my opinion then you should have little trouble breaking down why it's wrong.

"the evidence is, ive stated i'm not responding to him. i didnt even try to counter anything. i pointed out a stupid quote of his for the rest of the forum users, to which one anti sprinter agreed with"

So you don't want to counter or even have a meaningful discussion with his arguments, instead you just want to cherry pick and laugh at what you think are his weakest points in order to mock all arguments against sprint. Wow, what a wonderful contribution to what has been at many points a very interting thread with lots of in depth discussion.

"your arguments are petty."

If my unwillingness to allow you to drag the opinions and arguments of all anti sprinters through the mud with one cherry picked quote from a man who you can't even be bothered to talk to is petty, then I guess I am petty.

This is the second time now (the first time was with Tassi) that you've tried to personally write somebody off as unworthy of your attention because you didn't like a few things that they said and followed up by making up lies about them, so forgive me if I'm being a bit hostile with you.
didnt read any of that. your account has no halo 5 play time. youve only replied to this thread in the last 3 months. You are celestis second account arent you? you even talk petty like him. arent there forum rules about having multiple accounts. ;)
"didnt read any of that."

Thanks for openly admitting right away that you're engaging in bad faith.

"your account has no halo 5 play time"

That's right, because I didn't waste my money on it after playing my brother's copy and at Halo Outpost discovery in Chicago and seeing how awful it was.

"youve only replied to this thread in the last 3 months"

This is yet another lie from you, head on over to page 122 and you'll see the oldest post of mine on this thread, it's 11 posts down and it was posted on 4/24/2019, which is well over 3 months ago.

"You are celestis second account arent you? you even talk petty like him. arent there forum rules about having multiple accounts."

I assure you I am not Celestis, although you're cowardly attempt to completely sidestep all my criticisms with such an absurd accusation is not unexpected. Do you also think that I'm Tassi because I've defended him from you as well?
For the love of god, stop falling for that guys -Yoink-. At this point it should be clear that he has no intention in having a decent, open minded conversation. You cannot win, he is like any populist -Yoink- poisining the discurse, trying to derail it, slowly dragging it down to his level. No matter what you write, on matter what the facts are, he will just sit back and tell you that it doesn‘t matter since he believes he is right.
So please don‘t let guy trash this thread even further...
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 258
  4. 259
  5. 260
  6. 261
  7. 262
  8. ...
  9. 288