I don't care much for classic Halo strategies. Having grown up playing Ghost Recon and Rainbow Six, the idea of trying to constantly spawn kill people or trap them in a certain area is best left to campaign and AI.
You didn't think that Assault on Zanzibar was fun? I could play that forever. I loved sniffing out the bombguy using my knowledge of the map and various calculations. As for spawnkilling, that was only a real problem for me when I was matched up with modders who fired plasma grenades out of plasma pistols. Turf wasn't very forgiving if there was a large skill gap, that's true, but its design was totally sound. That said, spawns have been a problem in pretty much every Halo title. In Halo 5, SWAT on Fathom is nothing short of infuriating. Spawn killed, again and again. Super Fiesta, on most maps, can become a complete spawnkillfest. I mean, look at killfarming in Warzone: I've been trapped inside of my team's Home Base, unable to leave, stuck at REQ level 2, because I can't even kill a single member of an entire team armed with REQs--
especially when my teammates start quitting out. It takes a lot of skill to do that, though, so it's fairly uncommon.
Quote:
You say sprint is fine in Warzone, and use SWAT as an example of how is it unnecessary. Is it fair for me to say that since melee is less common in Warzone than in Arena Team Slayer, is it unnecessary? You essentially accepted that it serves a purpose, and then said that unless it served a purpose at all times, it's unnecessary. In that case, about 70% of the weapons in the games are unnecessary.
Warzone maps aren't designed for Arena gameplay. Non-sequitur. Regardless, yes, melee is a necessary mechanic in Team Slayer. It's also a necessary mechanic in Warzone. Would you kindly explain how sprint is a necessary mechanic for Arena? Fascinating, you seem to know more about my position than even I do. As for 70% of the weapons being unnecessary, that's more-or-less true. The DMR is unnecessary. The SMG is unnecessary. There, that's 40% of the loadout weapons gone.
Quote:
Halo 5 plays like Halo, and makes me feel like a Spartan super soldier. I think both of those are highly important.
Huh, I've been playing Halo for 15 years, and Halo 5 doesn't feel like Halo to me. There are elements of it that are recognizable, but overall, it's a complete change--one that defines classic Halo. Sprinting doesn't help me to feel immersed. Blood and military themes, in a futuristic military sci-fi, did a lot more for me than considering the implications of a thrust and stabilizer system that can maneuver a 500 pound Spartan in the ways that it does in Halo 5. Can I get a physicist up in here? Anyway, for the sake of immersion, why don't I flinch when I thrust into a wall? I can't ready my weapon immediately after sprinting, but slamming into a wall doesn't shake my aim? What's up with that? You know what made me feel like a super soldier? Single-handedly fighting through hordes of enemies. Running, jumping, falling, and never missing a shot. Those are the marks of a super soldier, are they not?
Quote:
I specifically state that they may be moving at the same speed, but 343 chose to make run speed guns down slightly faster to compensate for loss of gun use. There's no need to prove speculation, and the different speeds exist in the games themselves.
No, 343i chose to do that in an attempt to balance sprint. This penalty discourages people from sprinting everywhere.
You are claiming that Spartans are moving faster when they are swinging their arms. It's a logical inference to make, sure, but can you support your position with evidence? If not, then the most logical thing to do is adopt a position of uncertainty, rather than doubling down on why sprint "makes sense". Like I said: the burden of proof is upon the person who is making the positive claim. "When Spartans swing their arms, they run faster." Running faster than the BMS would be a positive claim, would it not? If I claimed that Halo Reach had a slower BMS than Halo 3 did, then the person who disagreed would have to prove his claim. This is basic logic and skepticism. I can speculate that there's an incorporeal dragon sitting right next to me, sure, but does that actually mean anything if I can't prove that that's really the case?
Quote:
Halo is unique for bringing FPS to console, and that's about it. Most everything else was done before, and ignoring things like Half Life, Quake, Doom, and assuming Halo is responsible for the FPS genre is like saying that everyone before Einstein was irrelevant because only he put it all together.
Huh, I thought that was Goldeneye. Where did I claim that Half Life, Quake, and Doom were irrelevant? Are the Theories of General and Special Relativity unique?
Quote:
Equipment is a minor change on map powerups, and all it did was take class based abilities and perks and make it into on map pickups. Forge is indeed wonderful, and highly influenced by the customization available on PC. And Firefight was at least a year after Gears of War made Horde mode, itself probably copied from something else.
Well, sprint just--do I honestly need to bother? Like, why are you here? Why are you posting? Equipment was more innovative than sprint, and that's a fact. It increased the depth of classic Halo gameplay, and sprint has done the exact opposite of that.
Firefight was inspired by Halo CE. What about vehicles? Like, I don't even...
Quote:
Yes there was CoD influence in Halo 4. The same way there was a Quake and Doom influence on Halo CE. Nothing wrong with inspiration. They just picked the wrong market. And changed their mistakes. However, the class system was already in Halo Reach, so the "copying" started with the original creators themselves. None of the games were highly innovative, they were just a lot of fun. If you lost that fun along the way, then I'm sorry for you.
Except there has to be something wrong if you suddenly lose millions of fans when you radically change the core gameplay. Halo had its own thing going, I mean, Warzone just re-applied Invasion and added several game mechanics. Halo also already had an audience, a larger audience than it has now, so you tell me whether or not something is wrong here. Changed their mistakes? Sure, they corrected some missteps, but they've made plenty more.
Halo Reach was a spin-off, and came along a year after CoD:MW2 was released. Did MW3 have jetpacks or armor lock? (Or, maybe, vehicles?) No, but you couldn't pick up ammo or grenades without a perk, either. Anyway, sprint was one of five Armor Abilities, not a core gameplay mechanic. I didn't lose the fun along the way, I lost the Halo experience. Solid gameplay has been sacrificed in order to diminish the skill gap and appeal to casual gamers.
