So you are saying not to do it because it is too much work? Wow, and they say what I suggest is lazy.
Quote:And sure, some custom game will "suffer", but in the end, custom gametypes is not a justification to keep assets that require modeling, animation, extensive programming and so forth. Which could also be regarded as an integral part of the game.
Well yes, I am, but you do not understand the reason for it, clearly.
It's not what's lazy or not, it's what kind of resources are spent, what kind of game mechanics they are and the impact they have on the gameplay. AA's are of such an "important" nature to the gameplay, that first developing them and dumping them into Customs could make the game feel lacking.
Customs is not a dumping ground for cut content.
Why aren't we asking for Prone, ADS, Brawling, and so on for Customs only then?
Well, first of all, instead of asking people to please read what you write, atleast try to properly structure your sentances and divide your post into paragraphs. Use punctuation as well, I found one dot in that single post. Now that I've cleaned it up and made it more enjoyable to read, let's dive into it.
Quote:To debunk some things said about sprint,( plz read all). With sprint players traverse distances between each other faster, while the maps are made bigger, and you do have the illusion you are moving from point A to point B faster.
The distance between you and an enemy player near you is where sprint speeds up the gameplay, with it you have more options, you can sprint and jump over the player, assassinate them, shoot them, or double melee them. Without sprint, you two keep your distance as you out shoot an grenade each other. Without sprint you only have shoot and grenade, the rest of the options are less likely to be used.
With sprint you have shoot, grenade, melee, assassinate, jump over, and flank, a range of combat options.
In the second paragraph that I created, you say that sprint enables a lot more different actions than without sprint. And that sprint speeds up gameplay when players are closer to each other. None of which is true. Sprint doesn't speed up gameplay, it speeds your travel speed up, there's a difference. It doesn't either enable more options to perform. All of the options you numbered could be made in previous games without sprint.
Quote:Without sprint power positions are OP, and makes holding them too easy, along with making sniping easy. With sprint holding a power position is more difficult and more intense, making the power position more important, along with making sniping more difficult. This separates the good players from the GREAT players.
If power positions are overpowered, it's a map design issue, not an issue that always will be regardless of how the map is designed. Either way, seeing as they're called power positions, why shouldn't they be advantageous for those controlling it? Pulling down the usefullness of a power position just makes it less of a power position which damages the flow and map movement. If there are no real points of interests on the map, there's no interest to actually move.
Quote:Saying sprint is a COD element is kinda wrong, as COD has sprint. It isn’t the first to have it, and because Halo has something COD has, doesn’t mean its bad or that it is added due to COD influence. You may argue sprint works in COD due to lower health, well, with health like health in halo, sprint makes positioning all the more important. In COD there is the I see you first, I shoot first, I get the kill. In Halo without sprint, like it or not, this was the same thing, let me explain in a scenario with no sprint.
I'd say you have to ignore anyone referencing CoD when talking about what to have in Halo or not. Instead concentrate on the posts which look at sprint in a pure game mechanical way.
Could you elaborate on how positioning becomes more important in Halo with sprint involved? Because you give an example of how someone in a bad position makes an escape with sprint and gets away with being in a bad position.
Let's move to the scenario then.
Quote:2 equal players, both aware of the threat made by the next, both with equal starts, since both know and can see each other, the game is fair and balanced. The better player wins, lets say one player is aware of the other player, but the other no aware of them. This player has the element of surprise, a higher advantage, they are no longer on even footing. The game is no unbalanced, without sprint the element of surprise aids in giving the player an easy kill.
I think you mean "The game is now
I'm going with that because that's kind of the angle you're shooting for here.
So, one player outplays the other, gets better positioning and has the element of surprise on the other. That's well played compared to the other right? Well now you go in and say that the game is unbalanced, and the reason being that the first player played better. That is the whole point of playing a multiplayer game in order to win, play better and create your own unbalance. Player created unbalance is how a game is won. Even then, sprint doesn't eliminate surprise elements, it's still there. Constant waypoints over players eliminate surprises.
Quote:With sprint, the element of surprise is broken by giving the unaware player a chance to get a short distance away, turn around and think of how to defeat their attacker and create a flanking strategy. Returning both players on even footing, the player who got the first shots has his prey with some shields down. But his prey is now aware of the situation and is behind a cover, the player pursues, if his prey nades him and drop shots him, then he is the lesser player, if he follows and get the kill, then he is the better player.
In other words, a player with a positioning advantage should be denied the advantage because it's unbalanced, and sprint is the way to deny advantageous players their advantage.
So all in all, what I can draw from that scenario is that sprint lessens the skillgap as players who get advantages are denied it. Players at a bad positions gets away with bad decisions and even gets the upper hand.
I don't know if it's any indication of anything, would need far more samples, but I have far less melee kills in Halo 4 per game than I have in Halo 3. So melee kills are far less frequent for me atleast. I melee whenever the opportunity presents itself, but it rarely does. Just recently got to the last stage on the melee commendation, and I'm over 1000 games completed.