Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

[Locked] The sprint discussion thread

OP Gandalfur

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 444
  4. 445
  5. 446
  6. 447
  7. 448
  8. ...
  9. 840
R4d1c47Ed wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Literally everyone here complains about change. It cant be Halo CE forever.
For a game series that started with "Combat Evolved" it doesn't do the second word in that very well.
Then when it does try and change, it is hated. As expected.
So if I become paralyzed from the neck down, I should embrace it because it's a change?
If you equate the change in the series currently, that I and many many others consider to be better, as being paralysed, then I don't know what to tell you.
Reach, 3 and 5 have the best MPs in the entire series in my opinion. If you want the game to keep being another game, then just play that game instead of contributing to the people holding the series back.
What about Halo 4 and 5's sales, combined, being less than Halo 3's sales don't you understand? Sprint is holding Halo back.
You're honestly saying that sprint is the reason that Halo is declining sales-wise?
Well, I know that at least me and quite a few of my friends didn't buy H5G specifically because of sprint, ADS and the lack of splitscreen. (And if splitscreen had been there, I still wouldn't have bought the game because of its mechanics.)
Will use the same guidelines when evaluating a purchase of Halo 6, or any Halo from here on out. (Which is why I'll probably still buy Halo Wars 2, provided it's not as broken as the MCC.)
In that case, about 70% of the weapons in the games are unnecessary.
They are. And a lot of people actually complain about weapon redundancy and suggest the return to a smaller but more specialized and diverse weapon sandbox, à la Halo CE.

Halo 5 plays like Halo, and makes me feel like a Spartan super soldier. I think both of those are highly important.
Good for you. Just be aware that other people have different opinions. It does not play like Halo to me, and makes me feel less like a Spartan than ever before, since I can't run'n'gun anymore and am forced to aim down sights instead of using the superior smart-link technology from the previous games.
The old halo games were great, but there isn't enough demand for them to make it, altough it is a good idea, halo might die because of that.
Celestis wrote:
Again: He was running at the same 7m/s BMS that he has during gameplay. You assumption is wrong. There was no difference in speed in both instances and as far as we know it isn't his top speed either.
Well here it is then. You've shown that Spartans are capable of both gun up and gun down running at a speed of 15 m/s. If the sprint speed shown in Halo CE/2 cutscenes make it that the Spartan is only going 7 m/s, then clearly he should be able to sprint faster than that, with his gun down no less.
The argument isn't wrong. Master Chief supposedly once ran at ~ 29 m/s. Clearly they aren't sprinting as fast as possible in the games. So let's not call it sprint. In fact, since it's seemingly indefinite, it can only be defined as running faster than when the gun is up. Why has that been done? Perhaps 343 felt the marginal speed difference was nicely offset by the loss of gun usage. But it's been pretty clearly defined that A) Spartans can run with their guns down and B) They can run at speeds of past 15m/s, something never seen in game. Lore wise, this incarnation of a faster movement speed, as seen in Halo 5, fits perfectly into the lore. Call it sprint, call it running fast, hell call it an augmented movement boost, it still fits into the lore.

Just for the other point of view, The Package posits that Spartans can simultaneously aim and fire in two directions, Spartan Laser blasts can melt Covenant walls, and that Master Chief and Co are capable of acrobatic flips and leaps. Since none of those are in the actual games, I'm gonna assume they took some artistic liberties with the universe, or they made everything hyper exaggerated. Neither seems like an adequate fit for a comparison to a video game. The cutscene can simply be explained by the fact that it was originally done in the same graphical style and settings of the game itself, so the Spartan appears to sprint but actually moves at the gameplay speed. They likely recorded that using the engine. Blur simply remastered the cutscenes.

. . . .
Why isn't removing sprint and increasing BMS the logical conclusion?

Fred's arms weren't really swinging, but he was keeping up with the other members of Blue Team. Isn't Kelly supposed to be the fastest Spartan, or something?

Dual-wielding with independent aim could actually be pretty interesting, but how would the controls for that work?

Wouldn't destructible environments be an absolutely amazing direction to take Halo in?

What would acrobatic flips add to the gameplay?
R4d1c47Ed wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Literally everyone here complains about change. It cant be Halo CE forever.
For a game series that started with "Combat Evolved" it doesn't do the second word in that very well.
Then when it does try and change, it is hated. As expected.
So if I become paralyzed from the neck down, I should embrace it because it's a change?
If you equate the change in the series currently, that I and many many others consider to be better, as being paralysed, then I don't know what to tell you.
Reach, 3 and 5 have the best MPs in the entire series in my opinion. If you want the game to keep being another game, then just play that game instead of contributing to the people holding the series back.
What about Halo 4 and 5's sales, combined, being less than Halo 3's sales don't you understand? Sprint is holding Halo back.
You're honestly saying that sprint is the reason that Halo is declining sales-wise?
It's not the only reason, but it's a big one. Obviously.
no se :v
I'd rather keep sprint, it's part of my playstyle. Maybe you could do a playlist without sprint for the people who do want it gone.
A good solution for this problem is to lower the speed of sprinting. Not too much of a drastic change, but something that slows down the pace of the game a bit.

-xCarmineRulesxX AKA Luke the Duke
A good solution for this problem is to lower the speed of sprinting. Not too much of a drastic change, but something that slows down the pace of the game a bit.

-xCarmineRulesxX AKA Luke the Duke
Mkkk

1. Then what's the point of BMS being lower than sprint? May as well use BMS if sprint is going to get lowered.
2. Sprints speed isn't the issue
3.sprints current issue is it slows the pace down, so what's the point in lowering sprint speed to fix this? May as well stick to a BMS.
4.it still wouldn't fix weapon readiness being lowered.
5. I don't think it'd even discourage runners but could lower the occurances, but again, may as well use just a simple BMS.

One thing I foresee as an issue "if" they were to ever do this, is why have a button for sprint if you'll lower its speed? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe sprint is only 5% faster than the regular BMS, lowering sprint speed really would serve no purpose when you may as well just use the BMS and free up a button.
I'd rather keep sprint, it's part of my playstyle. Maybe you could do a playlist without sprint for the people who do want it gone.
If its so essential to yout playstyle, why not to have your own sprint playlist on Halo 6 without messing the maps with sprint & abilities ?
I'd rather keep sprint, it's part of my playstyle. Maybe you could do a playlist without sprint for the people who do want it gone.
Why couldn't they just make a playlist with sprint for the people who want it to stay?
Almost 9,000 posts and still no 343 presence on this thread? I guess it has to hit 10,000 before they consider taking a look. I'm surprised this hasn't been locked yet.
Celestis wrote:
In that case, about 70% of the weapons in the games are unnecessary.
They are. And a lot of people actually complain about weapon redundancy and suggest the return to a smaller but more specialized and diverse weapon sandbox, à la Halo CE.

Halo 5 plays like Halo, and makes me feel like a Spartan super soldier. I think both of those are highly important.
Good for you. Just be aware that other people have different opinions. It does not play like Halo to me, and makes me feel less like a Spartan than ever before, since I can't run'n'gun anymore and am forced to aim down sights instead of using the superior smart-link technology from the previous games.
100% agree (bold) I absolutely HATE how halo 5 added ADS style animation for zoom...and anyways who says it is the same needs to get there eyes and head checked. It's not by a country mile! Old style zoom was better in every way and they should of just made it look better. Wouldn't of been hard to do. Instead halo now looks like all the other FPS... Joy... One of the reason why I always like Halo was because I liked how the zoom looked. Nothing blocking my view aka my target....now for weapons like the BR, over half my target is blocked because of it... absolutely one of the worst decisions they did.
Sprint is just a small portion of an overall larger problem, which is that Halo is quickly becoming just another generic shooter, while at the same time loosing the community based features that helped make the franchise as popular as it was.

A player back a decade ago, could play Halo and CoD, enjoy both games equally for their very specific / different styles of play, and what the games offered the community in terms of tools. Now that Halo has modernized, the game plays far more similar to CoD, BF, Titanfall, and other games that have these "advanced" dynamic movement systems that separate movement from combat. A player that liked both for the differences, now has no reason to play Halo, if CoD is offering a better gameplay experience ( which it has, regardless if you like CoD as a franchise or not, the game launched with what the community expected ). Halo isn't alone in this. We saw this same issue with Titanfall's gameplay that was generic in terms of what was out at the time, and the lack of content, drove people away to other games with similar features, that offered more content.
Celestis wrote:
R4d1c47Ed wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Literally everyone here complains about change. It cant be Halo CE forever.
For a game series that started with "Combat Evolved" it doesn't do the second word in that very well.
Then when it does try and change, it is hated. As expected.
So if I become paralyzed from the neck down, I should embrace it because it's a change?
If you equate the change in the series currently, that I and many many others consider to be better, as being paralysed, then I don't know what to tell you.
Reach, 3 and 5 have the best MPs in the entire series in my opinion. If you want the game to keep being another game, then just play that game instead of contributing to the people holding the series back.
What about Halo 4 and 5's sales, combined, being less than Halo 3's sales don't you understand? Sprint is holding Halo back.
You're honestly saying that sprint is the reason that Halo is declining sales-wise?
Well, I know that at least me and quite a few of my friends didn't buy H5G specifically because of sprint, ADS and the lack of splitscreen. (And if splitscreen had been there, I still wouldn't have bought the game because of its mechanics.)
Will use the same guidelines when evaluating a purchase of Halo 6, or any Halo from here on out. (Which is why I'll probably still buy Halo Wars 2, provided it's not as broken as the MCC.)
I personally know 15-20+ people who refuse to play modern Halo's due to the vast change in player mechanics. I only got it because of the name, and didn't even enjoy the game that well. I don't like ADS, Sprint, Clamber, Thruster, Ground Pound, SPARTAN CHARGE, and the lack of game modes. I can handle a bad campaign, but not campaign and multiplayer. I have pre-ordered every Halo game sense H2, and I have been in the series sense a month after CE's launch when I first laid my hands on Halo. Now, I have decided to never return unless 343 is removed from the equation. I will not be wasting my HARD earned money on something that is not satisfying.
Eggnaug wrote:
Almost 9,000 posts and still no 343 presence on this thread? I guess it has to hit 10,000 before they consider taking a look. I'm surprised this hasn't been locked yet.
Have they not had any presence? This is a huge issue and would be a lot of fun to debate with the devs. Isn't it disrespectful to the community? Is there someone I can tweet at to tell them to come to this thread and communicate?
Eggnaug wrote:
Almost 9,000 posts and still no 343 presence on this thread? I guess it has to hit 10,000 before they consider taking a look. I'm surprised this hasn't been locked yet.
Have they not had any presence? This is a huge issue and would be a lot of fun to debate with the devs. Isn't it disrespectful to the community? Is there someone I can tweet at to tell them to come to this thread and communicate?
There's no point. They know about this thread just like they know about the Elite thread and the split screen thread. They know about all these complaints, they're just choosing not to discuss them. Their reason for sprints inclusion largely comes down to immersion. There's no debating that explanation because it's in complete disregard for sprints place in the gameplay and it's effect on the gameplay.
The old halo games were great, but there isn't enough demand for them to make it, altough it is a good idea, halo might die because of that.
Not to sound like a jerk here, but where is your proof that there isn't enough demand for that style?? Last I checked Halo 3 is still the highest selling Halo game and other games of that style are or have done very well selling and in popularity.
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.
The old halo games were great, but there isn't enough demand for them to make it, altough it is a good idea, halo might die because of that.
This, this, this, a million times this.
Stop being fear of change, people.
Sprint should stay.
What kind of supersoldier is unable to sprint anyway?
That's like Altair in AC not being able to swim! -oh wait.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 444
  4. 445
  5. 446
  6. 447
  7. 448
  8. ...
  9. 840