Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

The return of classic movement mechanics?

OP A So So Sniper

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 79
  4. 80
  5. 81
  6. 82
  7. 83
  8. ...
  9. 148
As far as the campaign goes, no one knows what the mechanics will look like.

But playlists with both types of movement mechanics (sprint and no sprint) with different maps are very likely.
So, what are you basing this on again?? I haven't heard anything from 343I to indicate this. Did I miss something?

As of right now, unless I missed something, I think it's safe to ONLY say no one knows anything about the movement mechanics in single or multipleplayer or what playlists will be in Halo 6.
As someone who hasn't quite been here since OG Halo: CE, but has still played ALL of the games (save for Raven), I am absolutely fine with the new movement mechanics. The one thing that actually frustrated me about the older Halo's is the knowledge that most of the time we are a FULLY AUGMENTED SUPER SOLDIER. You know, those crazy space marines pumped full of chems and full of metal bits and bobs to make us super fast, super strong, and crazy smart with fast reaction times??? So, why is it Marines can literally out walk me again??? Spartans are said to be able to run at, what, 50-60 km/h? (With certain Spartans such as Kelly-087 being able to outperform even THAT speed.) The old jump height made sense, sure, but definitely NOT the snail crawl we had for walking.

Also, clambering makes SO much more sense. These Spartans should have literally no trouble hefting their own weight up and over a ledge. Their armor makes them weigh anywhere between 800-1,000 lbs, but their augmented strength INSIDE the suit should amplify their abilities to heft 5-6 times that (some Spartans might even be stronger than that.)

For the sake of the argument; I understand where you're coming from. You loved the old movement style because it made Halo feel like it's own thing. However, I feel like with how games as a whole have evolved, it just wouldn't work anymore. As an option? Maybe. As a standard? Not so much.
Lore doesn't matter when it comes to game play. Besides, why add sprint to fix a slow walk? Why not increase the BMS, that way you can still always have a weapon at the ready, while also moving quicker, which actually fits the lore.
Imo, it would be best if they just tried compromising with Reach controls, without lock up, etc. Just sprint and jetpack. That way, movement is still actually fast, but without absurd hulk smashes and the like. Take ads of the assault rifle probably, along with other full auto weapons.
Imo, it would be best if they just tried compromising with Reach controls, without lock up, etc. Just sprint and jetpack.
That still retains the problems that come with spartan abilities still being in the game.

The problem that arises from these being in the game is that all it does is increase map size to compensate for the faster movement speeds and ability to reach higher places. If a map designer wanted it to take you 5 seconds to run between point A and B, it will take you 5 seconds. Without sprint this distance is just shorter, allowing for closer quarters gameplay, increasing the usefulness of certain weapons and decreasing the prominence of others. With clamber/ a jetpack, if you're not wanted to be able to reach a certain area/make a certain jump, you won't be able to regardless. All that changes is the height of different sections to make it impossible to reach with those abilities.

If you say sprint is needed to make the player faster, why is it the only option? Increasing FOV gives the same effect and doesn't require a change in map design philosophy (larger vs smaller maps, prominence of vehicles and man cannons, etc.). (FOV is also the reason many say Halo 3 is very slow, despite having the same BMS as the previous games. The FOV is lower, and that's the only difference).

These abilities also change a major part of Halo's core gameplay: the fluidity of combat. With sprint you lower your weapon and speed up. During this time you can't fire, but you move faster. When you engage an enemy you'll slow down and raise your weapon, allowing combat. Clamber (I know you didn't talk about having clamber, I'm just pointing this out) does the same with stopping combat. As I've said before it doesn't allow you to reach newer areas, those areas are just higher up so you can't access them with clamber. Where before you'd just need to crouch jump, now you clamber. The difference being you can't shoot and look about while clambering. Whereas without this combat occurs on the move no matter where you are.

All these do is create a stop in combat. Whereas before you could fight while traversing larger areas, making interesting jumps, etc., now you have to stop combat for a little if you want to move a little faster to traverse an open area (that's designed to be more open to compensate for your increased speed) without making yourself a super easy, slow target.

Sprint just breaks the fluidity of the game. Clamber/Jetpacks just increase map verticality to compensate for the increased achievable heights for the player.

Quote:
Take ads of the assault rifle probably, along with other full auto weapons.
ADS is a whole other topic, but to summarise my opinions on it: Halo's gotten along just fine for 14 years before it was added. All it is is a gimmick to attract people from other FPS games to make them feel more comfortable with the controls.
Without wanting to seem malicious... it's probably just you then. The triangle creates a perfectly clear image of a game design philosophy as I perceive it. You can call it "my" perception of what it is if you like and that may be true to a degree, but it's my perception of a philosophy Bungie had. Abstract or not it exists, regardless of its name. Only so much of it can be open for interpretation.
Apparently, quite a bit of it can be open for interpretation since what we've been talking about—the idea that combat abilities should be available at all times—has nothing to do with what Lars Bakken was talking about. After all, the original context was SMG starts and dual wielding discouraging people from using melee and grenades. Anything more is ascribing meaning to it that wasn't there originally. I doubt whether Bungie would've even seen Halo the way we do, where combat abilities must be available at all times. I think we've veered quite far from Bungie's philosophy.

Two sides to this coin. Your side sees it as "criminal" to emphasize melee while "ignoring" movement. My side sees it as accepting the fact that movement itself goes without saying because you have no game without it.
One could say the same about weapons, because we'd have no shooter without it. Should it then be the golden line, perhaps—grenades and melee, since weapons and movement go without saying? It's not like the mere existence of things in the triangle is all that matters. (Or if it is, I've vastly underestimated its pointlessness.) I may not understand why people like it so important, but even I can tell that it's supposed to guide our thinking about gameplay design. What we emphasize in our design principles is what we emphasize in design. If we talk about weapons, grenades, and melee, we're guided to think how these three things interact and affect combat. Movement, on the other hand, just is there. There is nothing interesting about movement, as long as it works. It's not part of any design slogan, so we're not going to dedicate any time to thinking about its deeper role. (In fact, Bungie never really did much with movement beyond its obvious uses.)

Not IMO. I see no issues with extra abilities interfering with the triangle in its simplest interpretation. As long as you still have access to the 3 base traits at any point in time, regardless of what abilities are added. Silly ideas are born of a misunderstanding of that. Just like you said. All FPS have weapons, grenades, melee. I believe that it's a mistake to interpret the triangle as emphasizing specific combat actions. It refers to those three simply because they were the ones that were in the game... and the true emphasis is that you have access to any one of them at any point in time. FE: I'd have little issue with sprint if we still had access to weapons/nades/melee while "sprinting". But that would reduce sprint to little more than pushing a button to go 20% faster which would be redundant and silly.
No, the golden triangle definitely very much emphasizes the individual actions. After all, if you didn't want to emphasize the specific actions, you'd just be talking about "combat" or "combat abilities" or whatever, not about "weapons, grenades, and melee". In fact, this again goes back to the context where it was coined, which was the impact of dual wielding on use of grenades and melee. The whole term "the golden triangle" emphasizes the mutual balance of these three features. Your mind isn't immediately drawn to a radar chart type thing when seeing the phrase "golden triangle"? I can guarantee you that many people's are. In fact, this whole conversation began from someone relying on this sort of idea of balance, thinking melee combat should have a more prominent role.

If you really think the golden triangle doesn't emphasize its individual elements, see what other people have thought in the past. This post goes on to explain how the person thinks Reach breaks each corner of the golden triangle. One commenter interprets there to be a strict hierarchy: "Note They put weapon because its the most prominent, Nades second and Melee last." From more recent times: "that's what the golden triangle is, and guess what, how many of your kills in halo 3 averaged out in that order?" Another comment on the balance aspect: "Grenades have been horribly neglected due to being called overpowered. Melees have been made overpowered (but the lunge has finally been corrected). Guns have been made viable but are too easy or too frustrating to utilize.". Then there's of course just a huge amount of comments referring to rectangles.

If Bungie never prescribed a specific meaning to it, and if a large portion of people see the indivudal elements of the triangle as important, are they the ones mistaken, or are you just denying the common meaning of the term?

It doesn't matter to me what anyone would've said in 2011. For me, the golden triangle... or... my interpretation of it, hasn't changed since I came to understand it for what it is and that's been a long time ago. It hasn't "shaped to fill" any need I have in order to justify my being upset about anything in particular, regardless of whether or not there is some presumed authority from Bungie.
Maybe you are a lucky pioneer, and were thinking about the interplay of movement and combat way ahead of everyone else. However, the reality is that that interpretation of it only became prominent after Halo 5. Before then it was all about how bloom breaks weapons, how lack of bleed through breaks melee, how armor abilities make it a rectangle, and so on. As an individual, you may not adapt it to your needs, but collectively, the community does.
tsassi wrote:
DaekLaw wrote:
I agree to most of your points, except this one sentence

"You almost never hear people defending sprint with "I like not being able to shoot while moving at maximum speed"The thing is - you do. I've seen a lot of times that this kind of restriction get's defended. People like to call it trade off, for "beeing faster"
But as you mentioned in your next sentence - it seperates movement & combat, which is contradictory to the defend of sprint.
But that's the thing, they see it as a trade-off for being faster. They fundamentally can't conceive sprint as a restriction to their maximum speed, and rather see it as an extra that needs to be restricted, or else it's too powerful (from their perspective, not mine). They don't like being unable to shoot while moving. They see it as a necessary restriction. The defense of the restriction is founded on a misunderstanding, not on any love of the restriction.
I got into this thread relatively late, but real quick, I just want to try defend the restriction on gun use (and shield regen) while sprinting (I think the latter is certainly a much more defensible restriction): although in some respects, the addition of sprint as a new movement mode is, by it's very nature, the removal of the capability to shoot while moving at maximum speed, and this could, in some respects, be conceived as a reduction in the (relative) speed of combat, the effect that sprint has on shield regen, in my mind, exonerates it from any damage it conceivably causes via it's relative slowing down of the combat: of the two restrictions placed on sprint, this is the much more significant one, as hampering shield regen, as a trade for a relative speed boost, provides a reasonably significant choice to the player (which is obviously beholden to the map design), as it may drastically increase the vulnerability of the player taking advantage of it. Thus, it's yet another risk-reward trade, along with the millions of other similar trades that must be worked to play the game.

I think the clarity of the risk could be improved by having sprinting reduce shields, rather than hamper regen. I think a similar change could be made to abilities like the thruster boost, to produce a more risk/reward based system, but I do recognise that this is probably an idea with very glaring faults.

I see (some) merit around the argument that the inclusion of sprint produces maps that are annoying to traverse without sprint, due to larger sizes, and more bland area between spaces, however, I honestly believe its presence is a positive that outweighs this negative.

In terms of the other changes that have been made, I can't see Armor abilities as something remotely good for the gameplay, except possibly in the context of the campaign. Same with equipment from 3; I think, competitively, the game works much better when everyone is on equal footing, and designing a sandbox that includes armor abilities, only to not include them in competitive multiplayer would probably feel worse than a design built without them in mind at all.

Finally onto the abilities in Halo 5:

I think Ground Pound, is a balanced ability with a good risk / reward, and view it as little more than just a contextually different melee.

I am not sure if Auto Stabilize should have a place in future Halo games - I like it but only as a technique to build upon the other Spartan Abilities (namely Clamber and Thrust); when used like this, it plays into the risk/reward thing I've been so stuck on. Very subjectively, I just enjoy chaining abilities together too, although I get that people may not enjoy that in the way I do.

I believe that Slide is possibly a necessary evil in any game with Sprint, and so I've got no issues with it out of the box.

I see Clamber as another ability that is pretty innocuous, however I do believe that it should maybe be replaced by some slightly buffed crouch jumping manoeuvre.

Finally, Thrust. This is a really tough one for me to be totally in favour of. It does heavily increase the options you have in combat, however I believe that, given this is the most clear combat-ready ability, its use should be less of a no brainer. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's overpowered, but I think the lack of consequences (except having a cool down) encourage a kind of mindless single sided decision. I think that, even if it doesn't go so far as to reduce shields, thrusting should provide a very short cool down on using weapons, and have its reuse cool down time lowered reasonably significantly; thus encouraging plays that are almost entirely defensive (such as dodging hydra missiles), but discouraging its use in even battles.
although in some respects, the addition of sprint as a new movement mode is, by it's very nature, the removal of the capability to shoot while moving at maximum speed, and this could, in some respects, be conceived as a reduction in the (relative) speed of combat, the effect that sprint has on shield regen, in my mind, exonerates it from any damage it conceivably causes via it's relative slowing down of the combat: of the two restrictions placed on sprint, this is the much more significant one, as hampering shield regen, as a trade for a relative speed boost, provides a reasonably significant choice to the player (which is obviously beholden to the map design), as it may drastically increase the vulnerability of the player taking advantage of it. Thus, it's yet another risk-reward trade, along with the millions of other similar trades that must be worked to play the game.
While I'm not against the shield restrictions on Sprint, it begs the question of "Does this choice need to exist in the first place?"

Because it's not that Sprint was always overpowered and needed a restrictions, because we didn't always have Sprint.

It's not that regular movement was underpowered and needed Sprint, because there was more than one solution to that problem.

So why did we need to create a distinction between movement and shooting, and then place different punishments for making one choice over the other?
I would like classic but expect a half measure of sorts
although in some respects, the addition of sprint as a new movement mode is, by it's very nature, the removal of the capability to shoot while moving at maximum speed, and this could, in some respects, be conceived as a reduction in the (relative) speed of combat, the effect that sprint has on shield regen, in my mind, exonerates it from any damage it conceivably causes via it's relative slowing down of the combat: of the two restrictions placed on sprint, this is the much more significant one, as hampering shield regen, as a trade for a relative speed boost, provides a reasonably significant choice to the player (which is obviously beholden to the map design), as it may drastically increase the vulnerability of the player taking advantage of it. Thus, it's yet another risk-reward trade, along with the millions of other similar trades that must be worked to play the game.
While I'm not against the shield restrictions on Sprint, it begs the question of "Does this choice need to exist in the first place?"

Because it's not that Sprint was always overpowered and needed a restrictions, because we didn't always have Sprint.

It's not that regular movement was underpowered and needed Sprint, because there was more than one solution to that problem.

So why did we need to create a distinction between movement and shooting, and then place different punishments for making one choice over the other?
exactly why I prefer it without that distinction. the classic system gave all players full access to the sandbox at any time and an equal chance of reaching an objective, for me sprints biggest issue is how it fundamentally changes bot map design and how we interact with the sandbox and that is what separated MW and Halo 3 for me. COD4 was fun but Halo 3 was far more open to the player. but we are all different my only defense is we have countless sprint twitch shooters but only ID is doing old school well atm. and that mp is lacking. Maybe if sprint created increased recoil and lowered accuracy/removed reticles?
although in some respects, the addition of sprint as a new movement mode is, by it's very nature, the removal of the capability to shoot while moving at maximum speed, and this could, in some respects, be conceived as a reduction in the (relative) speed of combat, the effect that sprint has on shield regen, in my mind, exonerates it from any damage it conceivably causes via it's relative slowing down of the combat: of the two restrictions placed on sprint, this is the much more significant one, as hampering shield regen, as a trade for a relative speed boost, provides a reasonably significant choice to the player (which is obviously beholden to the map design), as it may drastically increase the vulnerability of the player taking advantage of it. Thus, it's yet another risk-reward trade, along with the millions of other similar trades that must be worked to play the game.
While I'm not against the shield restrictions on Sprint, it begs the question of "Does this choice need to exist in the first place?"

Because it's not that Sprint was always overpowered and needed a restrictions, because we didn't always have Sprint.

It's not that regular movement was underpowered and needed Sprint, because there was more than one solution to that problem.

So why did we need to create a distinction between movement and shooting, and then place different punishments for making one choice over the other?
I agree with you on the points - I know the reasons for adding sprint were not really based on a distinct reason for it. However, I think it can equally beg the question why include crouch? Crouch prevents you from showing up on motion trackers, and can be used in conjunction with jumping to get extra height, but does so at immense cost to player speed; that's the punishment for the benefit of not showing upon motion trackers. Without this punishment, there would be no reason to walk ever - why not stay a smaller target, and avoid radar detection? Obviously the punishment here is one that's not connected to combat, so some would argue that it's not directly comparable because the issue with sprint being included is not that it's unnecessary but that it creates a line between movement and combat that's viewed as unacceptable; there's not much I can say by way of argument against that point, except that we've obviously got different ideals for the gameplay.

As I argued in the quote, though, while I wouldn't say the addition was "necessary" for the sandbox, I do view it as nice to just have the option to go faster at the cost of being less combat-ready. And I think this view is just based on a different philosophy, and I think there's good arguments for each that I can see: complex vs simple sandbox. I think in the simple sandbox, there's probably a much larger skill gap, which probably isn't a bad thing, and map design that's more focussed and thus enjoyable. I just tend to think that the first option is the one I see more imminent fun in, just given how much I enjoy chaining abilities together even if there's only a few ways you can do that, and I'm okay with making the trade in map design philosophy (although I think there can still be really good maps in games with sprint, such as Haven from Halo 4, I think it's just a more difficult thing to pull off).
tsassi wrote:
About option 3 have you played halo 5 with out charge and thrusters it works and has a classic feel that is still new so remove thrusters and keep sprint would probably happen and maybe return things like equipment and armor abilities so that people have more options to make maps that can be from all of the halo games using things from each game and they could add duel wield but not break the weapons so kind of what h2a was doing with the suppressed smg so it is a bit better but not game breaking or the individual weapons are too week to use on there own.

So what I see happening that makes the most sense for me is bringing back old mechanics but keeping new ones as well like sprint clamber ads and things that are of that nature because halo had to have things change to make it feel new but all I hear is that people want it to be like 3 but if halo stayed like 3 up tell now people would be bored of the game and it would face what cod did when ghost was released.

Look I know that a lot of people want it to be like 3 in gameplay but it isn't going to work and to quote the gravemind "There is much talk, and I have listened, through rock and metal and time." I have spent a lot of time in forums and all I can say is that sprint should stay and by removing thrusters and charge will get rid of what I have seen as the biggest problems in 5s multiplayer but without thrusters the tracking weapons needler suppressor and bolt shot will need to be reworked because in my own testing of no thrusters the needler will always get kills and the others become so powerful as well
As far as I'm concerned, purely in terms of the feel of the gameplay, Sprint and Clamber are the worst culprit of nonclassic feel since they prevent the player from performing combat abilities when used. And the intertwining of movement and combat is exactly what classic Halo is all about. In that respect, Thruster Pack is actually fine. It's the only Spartan Ability from Halo 5 I could immediately consider retaining with appropriate modifications.
https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/games/halo-5-guardians/xbox-one/game-variants?lastModifiedFilter=Everything&sortOrder=BookmarkCount&page=1&gamertag=Spartan%20S498#ugc_halo-5-guardians_xbox-one_gamevariant_Spartan%20S498_8e3065bf-12cc-4832-b517-0defdaf65a18

This is a mode I set up removing thrusters and charge I think you will understand why I say that sprint and clamber aren't the problem after playing this
https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/games/halo-5-guardians/xbox-one/game-variants?lastModifiedFilter=Everything&sortOrder=BookmarkCount&page=1&gamertag=Spartan%20S498#ugc_halo-5-guardians_xbox-one_gamevariant_Spartan%20S498_8e3065bf-12cc-4832-b517-0defdaf65a18

A mode that I think a lot of people should at least try and see how sprint and clamber aren't the problem in 5 and that by removing thrusters and shoulder charge can change the game but keep the fast pace and feel nice to play
tsassi wrote:
About option 3 have you played halo 5 with out charge and thrusters it works and has a classic feel that is still new so remove thrusters and keep sprint would probably happen and maybe return things like equipment and armor abilities so that people have more options to make maps that can be from all of the halo games using things from each game and they could add duel wield but not break the weapons so kind of what h2a was doing with the suppressed smg so it is a bit better but not game breaking or the individual weapons are too week to use on there own.

So what I see happening that makes the most sense for me is bringing back old mechanics but keeping new ones as well like sprint clamber ads and things that are of that nature because halo had to have things change to make it feel new but all I hear is that people want it to be like 3 but if halo stayed like 3 up tell now people would be bored of the game and it would face what cod did when ghost was released.

Look I know that a lot of people want it to be like 3 in gameplay but it isn't going to work and to quote the gravemind "There is much talk, and I have listened, through rock and metal and time." I have spent a lot of time in forums and all I can say is that sprint should stay and by removing thrusters and charge will get rid of what I have seen as the biggest problems in 5s multiplayer but without thrusters the tracking weapons needler suppressor and bolt shot will need to be reworked because in my own testing of no thrusters the needler will always get kills and the others become so powerful as well
As far as I'm concerned, purely in terms of the feel of the gameplay, Sprint and Clamber are the worst culprit of nonclassic feel since they prevent the player from performing combat abilities when used. And the intertwining of movement and combat is exactly what classic Halo is all about. In that respect, Thruster Pack is actually fine. It's the only Spartan Ability from Halo 5 I could immediately consider retaining with appropriate modifications.
https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/games/halo-5-guardians/xbox-one/game-variants?lastModifiedFilter=Everything&sortOrder=BookmarkCount&page=1&gamertag=Spartan%20S498#ugc_halo-5-guardians_xbox-one_gamevariant_Spartan%20S498_8e3065bf-12cc-4832-b517-0defdaf65a18

This is a mode I set up removing thrusters and charge I think you will understand why I say that sprint and clamber aren't the problem after playing this
I don't need to play your gametype to know what the problem is. An important part of classic gameplay for me is the fact that I can use my weapons no matter how I move. In Halo 5, Sprint and Clamber are the two most used abilities that prevent me from using my weapons. Therefore they are the biggest problem.
tsassi wrote:
tsassi wrote:
About option 3 have you played halo 5 with out charge and thrusters it works and has a classic feel that is still new so remove thrusters and keep sprint would probably happen and maybe return things like equipment and armor abilities so that people have more options to make maps that can be from all of the halo games using things from each game and they could add duel wield but not break the weapons so kind of what h2a was doing with the suppressed smg so it is a bit better but not game breaking or the individual weapons are too week to use on there own.

So what I see happening that makes the most sense for me is bringing back old mechanics but keeping new ones as well like sprint clamber ads and things that are of that nature because halo had to have things change to make it feel new but all I hear is that people want it to be like 3 but if halo stayed like 3 up tell now people would be bored of the game and it would face what cod did when ghost was released.

Look I know that a lot of people want it to be like 3 in gameplay but it isn't going to work and to quote the gravemind "There is much talk, and I have listened, through rock and metal and time." I have spent a lot of time in forums and all I can say is that sprint should stay and by removing thrusters and charge will get rid of what I have seen as the biggest problems in 5s multiplayer but without thrusters the tracking weapons needler suppressor and bolt shot will need to be reworked because in my own testing of no thrusters the needler will always get kills and the others become so powerful as well
As far as I'm concerned, purely in terms of the feel of the gameplay, Sprint and Clamber are the worst culprit of nonclassic feel since they prevent the player from performing combat abilities when used. And the intertwining of movement and combat is exactly what classic Halo is all about. In that respect, Thruster Pack is actually fine. It's the only Spartan Ability from Halo 5 I could immediately consider retaining with appropriate modifications.
https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/games/halo-5-guardians/xbox-one/game-variants?lastModifiedFilter=Everything&sortOrder=BookmarkCount&page=1&gamertag=Spartan%20S498#ugc_halo-5-guardians_xbox-one_gamevariant_Spartan%20S498_8e3065bf-12cc-4832-b517-0defdaf65a18

This is a mode I set up removing thrusters and charge I think you will understand why I say that sprint and clamber aren't the problem after playing this
I don't need to play your gametype to know what the problem is. An important part of classic gameplay for me is the fact that I can use my weapons no matter how I move. In Halo 5, Sprint and Clamber are the two most used abilities that prevent me from using my weapons. Therefore they are the biggest problem.
All I ask is try a gamemode that removes thrusters and shoulder charge and see if you like it that way
tsassi wrote:
tsassi wrote:
About option 3 have you played halo 5 with out charge and thrusters it works and has a classic feel that is still new so remove thrusters and keep sprint would probably happen and maybe return things like equipment and armor abilities so that people have more options to make maps that can be from all of the halo games using things from each game and they could add duel wield but not break the weapons so kind of what h2a was doing with the suppressed smg so it is a bit better but not game breaking or the individual weapons are too week to use on there own.

So what I see happening that makes the most sense for me is bringing back old mechanics but keeping new ones as well like sprint clamber ads and things that are of that nature because halo had to have things change to make it feel new but all I hear is that people want it to be like 3 but if halo stayed like 3 up tell now people would be bored of the game and it would face what cod did when ghost was released.

Look I know that a lot of people want it to be like 3 in gameplay but it isn't going to work and to quote the gravemind "There is much talk, and I have listened, through rock and metal and time." I have spent a lot of time in forums and all I can say is that sprint should stay and by removing thrusters and charge will get rid of what I have seen as the biggest problems in 5s multiplayer but without thrusters the tracking weapons needler suppressor and bolt shot will need to be reworked because in my own testing of no thrusters the needler will always get kills and the others become so powerful as well
As far as I'm concerned, purely in terms of the feel of the gameplay, Sprint and Clamber are the worst culprit of nonclassic feel since they prevent the player from performing combat abilities when used. And the intertwining of movement and combat is exactly what classic Halo is all about. In that respect, Thruster Pack is actually fine. It's the only Spartan Ability from Halo 5 I could immediately consider retaining with appropriate modifications.
https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/games/halo-5-guardians/xbox-one/game-variants?lastModifiedFilter=Everything&sortOrder=BookmarkCount&page=1&gamertag=Spartan%20S498#ugc_halo-5-guardians_xbox-one_gamevariant_Spartan%20S498_8e3065bf-12cc-4832-b517-0defdaf65a18

This is a mode I set up removing thrusters and charge I think you will understand why I say that sprint and clamber aren't the problem after playing this
I don't need to play your gametype to know what the problem is. An important part of classic gameplay for me is the fact that I can use my weapons no matter how I move. In Halo 5, Sprint and Clamber are the two most used abilities that prevent me from using my weapons. Therefore they are the biggest problem.
All I ask is try a gamemode that removes thrusters and shoulder charge and see if you like it that way
I can tell you that even Reach's sprint makes Halo far less enjoyable to me. Having your weapons up and available no matter what you're doing is one of the main reasons I love Halo's gameplay, and its also one of its biggest defining features that needs to return.
tsassi wrote:
I don't need to play your gametype to know what the problem is. An important part of classic gameplay for me is the fact that I can use my weapons no matter how I move. In Halo 5, Sprint and Clamber are the two most used abilities that prevent me from using my weapons. Therefore they are the biggest problem.
All I ask is try a gamemode that removes thrusters and shoulder charge and see if you like it that way
I genuinely don't need to, because I know I don't like Sprint, and I know I don't like Clamber, and i know why I don't like these two mechanics, so I already know that I won't like anything involving them. Testing your gametype really would not give me any new insight.
A mode that I think a lot of people should at least try and see how sprint and clamber aren't the problem in 5 and that by removing thrusters and shoulder charge can change the game but keep the fast pace and feel nice to play
All you're doing is lessening a couple problems in the game which helps, but it doesn't solve the issues that people have with those remaining abilities which a couple are arguably worse for map design and gameplay.
As someone who hasn't quite been here since OG Halo: CE, but has still played ALL of the games (save for Raven), I am absolutely fine with the new movement mechanics. The one thing that actually frustrated me about the older Halo's is the knowledge that most of the time we are a FULLY AUGMENTED SUPER SOLDIER. You know, those crazy space marines pumped full of chems and full of metal bits and bobs to make us super fast, super strong, and crazy smart with fast reaction times??? So, why is it Marines can literally out walk me again??? Spartans are said to be able to run at, what, 50-60 km/h? (With certain Spartans such as Kelly-087 being able to outperform even THAT speed.) The old jump height made sense, sure, but definitely NOT the snail crawl we had for walking.

Also, clambering makes SO much more sense. These Spartans should have literally no trouble hefting their own weight up and over a ledge. Their armor makes them weigh anywhere between 800-1,000 lbs, but their augmented strength INSIDE the suit should amplify their abilities to heft 5-6 times that (some Spartans might even be stronger than that.)

For the sake of the argument; I understand where you're coming from. You loved the old movement style because it made Halo feel like it's own thing. However, I feel like with how games as a whole have evolved, it just wouldn't work anymore. As an option? Maybe. As a standard? Not so much.
Lore doesn't matter when it comes to game play. Besides, why add sprint to fix a slow walk? Why not increase the BMS, that way you can still always have a weapon at the ready, while also moving quicker, which actually fits the lore.
I'm not defending sprint in anyway here, but the thing is 343I have said lore DOES matter. Even know there are lots of cases where people who know lore WAY better then I do say they break it (like with them adding ADS style zooming for example) I'm not hating on 343I in anyway here but, In my opinion 343I uses the whole lore argument when it suits them. They put things in or justify some of there design choices by saying it's lore. I'll admit, I don't know lore that well, but I do like it. This said, lore should NEVER be used to justify doing or putting something in your game in my opinion. Unfortunately, I think the sprint animation will stay because 343I will just say it's lore so it has too.... not to mention, they will continue to say dumb ADS style zooming is now lore (even know MANY people have proven to them it's not) as well and I'm betting it'll be in Halo 6 too :(

although in some respects, the addition of sprint as a new movement mode is, by it's very nature, the removal of the capability to shoot while moving at maximum speed, and this could, in some respects, be conceived as a reduction in the (relative) speed of combat, the effect that sprint has on shield regen, in my mind, exonerates it from any damage it conceivably causes via it's relative slowing down of the combat: of the two restrictions placed on sprint, this is the much more significant one, as hampering shield regen, as a trade for a relative speed boost, provides a reasonably significant choice to the player (which is obviously beholden to the map design), as it may drastically increase the vulnerability of the player taking advantage of it. Thus, it's yet another risk-reward trade, along with the millions of other similar trades that must be worked to play the game.
While I'm not against the shield restrictions on Sprint, it begs the question of "Does this choice need to exist in the first place?"

Because it's not that Sprint was always overpowered and needed a restrictions, because we didn't always have Sprint.

It's not that regular movement was underpowered and needed Sprint, because there was more than one solution to that problem.

So why did we need to create a distinction between movement and shooting, and then place different punishments for making one choice over the other?
Bang on Vegeto30294!! I couldn't of said it better.

I think people really need to think about what you said here really, REALLY hard!! Seriously ask yourself these questions and see what answers you come up. I would love to hear what people come up with..... Maybe I'll actually hear something different other then "your a super solider, you should be able to sprint" or "It just makes sense" or "people expect to be able to sprint in video games today" ....though I highly doubt it.

Again, great post bud :)
Halo will never be truly great again when built around armor/spartan abilities. It's just not possible. Sprint/clamber/etc... any form of ability is counterproductive to the most basic flow of moment to moment gameplay. It destroys the fluidity of gameplay and gets rid of the rewards which precise positioning provided in the older games. They also negatively affect map design. AND they add nothing to the actual game except an illusion of maneuverability. The game doesn't actually get faster. Players don't gain real movement options around the map that weren't there before. It just adds an illusion of those things at a heavy cost to gameplay and map design.
Halo: MCC is much more fun to play, now that it's fixed, than Halo 5, and the fact that Halo 5 is designed from the ground up around spartan abilities is almost exclusively to blame for Halo 5 being inferior.
M killshot wrote:
Imo, it would be best if they just tried compromising with Reach controls, without lock up, etc. Just sprint and jetpack.
That still retains the problems that come with spartan abilities still being in the game.

The problem that arises from these being in the game is that all it does is increase map size to compensate for the faster movement speeds and ability to reach higher places. If a map designer wanted it to take you 5 seconds to run between point A and B, it will take you 5 seconds. Without sprint this distance is just shorter, allowing for closer quarters gameplay, increasing the usefulness of certain weapons and decreasing the prominence of others. With clamber/ a jetpack, if you're not wanted to be able to reach a certain area/make a certain jump, you won't be able to regardless. All that changes is the height of different sections to make it impossible to reach with those abilities.

If you say sprint is needed to make the player faster, why is it the only option? Increasing FOV gives the same effect and doesn't require a change in map design philosophy (larger vs smaller maps, prominence of vehicles and man cannons, etc.). (FOV is also the reason many say Halo 3 is very slow, despite having the same BMS as the previous games. The FOV is lower, and that's the only difference).

These abilities also change a major part of Halo's core gameplay: the fluidity of combat. With sprint you lower your weapon and speed up. During this time you can't fire, but you move faster. When you engage an enemy you'll slow down and raise your weapon, allowing combat. Clamber (I know you didn't talk about having clamber, I'm just pointing this out) does the same with stopping combat. As I've said before it doesn't allow you to reach newer areas, those areas are just higher up so you can't access them with clamber. Where before you'd just need to crouch jump, now you clamber. The difference being you can't shoot and look about while clambering. Whereas without this combat occurs on the move no matter where you are.

All these do is create a stop in combat. Whereas before you could fight while traversing larger areas, making interesting jumps, etc., now you have to stop combat for a little if you want to move a little faster to traverse an open area (that's designed to be more open to compensate for your increased speed) without making yourself a super easy, slow target.

Sprint just breaks the fluidity of the game. Clamber/Jetpacks just increase map verticality to compensate for the increased achievable heights for the player.

Quote:
Take ads of the assault rifle probably, along with other full auto weapons.
ADS is a whole other topic, but to summarise my opinions on it: Halo's gotten along just fine for 14 years before it was added. All it is is a gimmick to attract people from other FPS games to make them feel more comfortable with the controls.
Honestly, while I haven't had significant experience with classic halo mp as others, I don't see much of an issue with sprint. However, I guess there are those that know better than I, and am completely willing to admit that. I just don't want the same halo over and over again, controls included.

I certainly don't think sprint is the only option.

On another note, jetpack is a fun way to mix things up. It should certainly not be on everything.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 79
  4. 80
  5. 81
  6. 82
  7. 83
  8. ...
  9. 148