Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

[Locked] The sprint discussion thread

OP Gandalfur

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 493
  4. 494
  5. 495
  6. 496
  7. 497
  8. ...
  9. 840
Dinho239 wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Celestis wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Celestis wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
so then you prefer a pay to win Halo without sprint, you really care more about sprint than that Halo is almost becoming a pay to win???
I want both, sprint and Reqs/MTs, removed from future iterations.
But if somebody were to put a gun to my head and forced me to choose between the two of them, I'd rather have sprint gone and Reqs/MTs stay than the other way around.
Reqs/MTs don't affect me in campaign. Sprint does.
how does sprint affects in campaign??? is not like someone is forcing you to use it or anything.
Sprint affects level design, enemy AI and weapon balance. All of them are relevant in campaign. You can't avoid them just by not spriting.

Levels need to be more wide and stretched, so sprinting players don't get stuck on objects. That makes a lot of campaign levels dull, being either a long corridor or a vast and empty plane. AI needs to be programmed with a player's peak performance in mind, so they usually are just as fast as sprint speed, while still being able to shoot. It also doesn't help that 343 introduced teleporting enemies who can bum-rush you at a moments notice. Meanwhile, when on the offense, you have to decide whether to approach enemies at a slower speed while shooting, missing shots and losing ammo because of the distance (which the infinite-ammo-wielding enemies don't have to worry about) or sprint towards them so you get into range before growing a beard, while constantly getting bombarded by their barrage fire. All this while suffering from the reduced average TTK that was implemented because of sprint.

I actually don't really care what happens in multiplayer. 343 could reduce the multiplayer to one weapon, one map, have blue team stand on the ceiling and moonwalking be the only method of moving. But campaign is the last place I want to see sprint in.
not at all, Reach for me was one of the games with better level design in camaign and it also has the ability to sprint if you want to, also it had one of the best AI in my opinión, what really affects level design is the -Yoinking!- lack of creativity fron 343i, just look at the infinite armor variants in Halo 5, also that they're changing the level, AI design and almost everything else to atract new players from other games, which is a -Yoinking!- terrible idea, they focus on other fans than in keeping the fans they already had, which makes Halo turning into another generic random fps, Reach is a prove that a game can have sprint, and still feel like Halo in everything else. The problema isn't sprint, the problema is that 343i doesn't know how to implement anything the right way in the game.
Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. Just because you believe something or something is true in your experience does not mean that you can use that to disprove someone else. Unless you can provide evidence that can be agreed on and proven true then you can't try and disprove other people with your opinion.
then do you have evidence that people stop playing just for sprint or that dislike the whole game just for that, I know sprint made some changes to the franchise, but is not the -Yoinking!- end of the games, is just sprint, anyone can tolerate it, and if who doesn't at least tolerate it is just because is bad at playing with the new mechanics and because can't get use to it so tries to change the whole game at his convenience.
No, no one can prove that sprint changed anything until 343 makes another sprintless halo. And even then there are too many variables. But it would be ignorant to say that sprint didn't affect anything, or heavily add to the pile of reasons why people don't like the new games. Using git gud won't work here. We've all adapted to the new game, we play it, and find it much less enjoyable. Try out the halo 5 evolved settings if you think a no sprint halo wouldn't work.
what about MCC, more thanahlf of it's playlists were wihout sprint (Halo CE, 2, 2 anniversary and 3 playlists) and is maybe the least played game today, it has been ignored by almost everyone, and it wasn' for sprint, it was because the terrible rank system, bugs and glitches, and lack of polishing since day one etc, it was basically unplayable at it's launch, I'm not saying that sprint doesn't affect in anything, I know it affects in some areas like map design (also not at all since Halo online had Halo 3 maps that were perfectly playable with sprint) and makes the game more fast paced, but it makes changes, but that doesn't mean it makes damage to the game like other huge issues Halo 5 has.

and if people doesn't like the newer games is for reasons: they don't like it for the other reasons I said before, can't get used to the new mechanics and are bad at playing with them so they want to change it at their convenience, or they're just Bungie fanboys.
so valid reasons you "accept" for not liking newer Halos are:
- game is broken as -Yoink-
- you suck at it
- you're a fanboy

have you ever considered that by the addition of sprint, Halos gameplay has changed in a way that people don't enjoy playing it anymore?
so then how doesn the addition of sprint broke or at least damage the game, I know that the gameplay has changed, but if people doesn't enjoy it is because they don't get used to the new gameplay, if they don't like it they can move to other games instead of trying to change it to their convenience, things always change, and Halo isn't the exception, if Halo had never changed it's gameplay it would have been kept something of the past and maybe it wouldn't be still alive today since everyone would be bored of it to be exactly as every other past game, then it wouldn't be nessesary to buy the newer games if the only thing that changes is the campaign, and it doesn't have any different and new content on it's MP, just try to see it in the perspective of the producers of the game, they need to keep the things fresh and new so people doesn't get bored of it, and if someone doesn't like a franchise just because the gameplay is more fast paced then it's not a true fan, it it doesn't neither improve or damage the game then there's no reason to complain.
Then please explain why Halo has been doing poorly since there was a major gameplay change. If people were getting tired of the same thing as you put it, why is it that when Bunge tried something new, it didn't do so well?
Wow, this thing is about to get 10,000 replies.
I think that sprint is fine, just get used to it. 343 isn't getting rid of it anytime soon.
Dinho239 wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Celestis wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Celestis wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
so then you prefer a pay to win Halo without sprint, you really care more about sprint than that Halo is almost becoming a pay to win???
I want both, sprint and Reqs/MTs, removed from future iterations.
But if somebody were to put a gun to my head and forced me to choose between the two of them, I'd rather have sprint gone and Reqs/MTs stay than the other way around.
Reqs/MTs don't affect me in campaign. Sprint does.
how does sprint affects in campaign??? is not like someone is forcing you to use it or anything.
Sprint affects level design, enemy AI and weapon balance. All of them are relevant in campaign. You can't avoid them just by not spriting.

Levels need to be more wide and stretched, so sprinting players don't get stuck on objects. That makes a lot of campaign levels dull, being either a long corridor or a vast and empty plane. AI needs to be programmed with a player's peak performance in mind, so they usually are just as fast as sprint speed, while still being able to shoot. It also doesn't help that 343 introduced teleporting enemies who can bum-rush you at a moments notice. Meanwhile, when on the offense, you have to decide whether to approach enemies at a slower speed while shooting, missing shots and losing ammo because of the distance (which the infinite-ammo-wielding enemies don't have to worry about) or sprint towards them so you get into range before growing a beard, while constantly getting bombarded by their barrage fire. All this while suffering from the reduced average TTK that was implemented because of sprint.

I actually don't really care what happens in multiplayer. 343 could reduce the multiplayer to one weapon, one map, have blue team stand on the ceiling and moonwalking be the only method of moving. But campaign is the last place I want to see sprint in.
not at all, Reach for me was one of the games with better level design in camaign and it also has the ability to sprint if you want to, also it had one of the best AI in my opinión, what really affects level design is the -Yoinking!- lack of creativity fron 343i, just look at the infinite armor variants in Halo 5, also that they're changing the level, AI design and almost everything else to atract new players from other games, which is a -Yoinking!- terrible idea, they focus on other fans than in keeping the fans they already had, which makes Halo turning into another generic random fps, Reach is a prove that a game can have sprint, and still feel like Halo in everything else. The problema isn't sprint, the problema is that 343i doesn't know how to implement anything the right way in the game.
Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. Just because you believe something or something is true in your experience does not mean that you can use that to disprove someone else. Unless you can provide evidence that can be agreed on and proven true then you can't try and disprove other people with your opinion.
then do you have evidence that people stop playing just for sprint or that dislike the whole game just for that, I know sprint made some changes to the franchise, but is not the -Yoinking!- end of the games, is just sprint, anyone can tolerate it, and if who doesn't at least tolerate it is just because is bad at playing with the new mechanics and because can't get use to it so tries to change the whole game at his convenience.
No, no one can prove that sprint changed anything until 343 makes another sprintless halo. And even then there are too many variables. But it would be ignorant to say that sprint didn't affect anything, or heavily add to the pile of reasons why people don't like the new games. Using git gud won't work here. We've all adapted to the new game, we play it, and find it much less enjoyable. Try out the halo 5 evolved settings if you think a no sprint halo wouldn't work.

so valid reasons you "accept" for not liking newer Halos are:
- game is broken as -Yoink-
- you suck at it
- you're a fanboy

have you ever considered that by the addition of sprint, Halos gameplay has changed in a way that people don't enjoy playing it anymore?
so then how doesn the addition of sprint broke or at least damage the game, I know that the gameplay has changed, but if people doesn't enjoy it is because they don't get used to the new gameplay, if they don't like it they can move to other games instead of trying to change it to their convenience, things always change, and Halo isn't the exception, if Halo had never changed it's gameplay it would have been kept something of the past and maybe it wouldn't be still alive today since everyone would be bored of it to be exactly as every other past game, then it wouldn't be nessesary to buy the newer games if the only thing that changes is the campaign, and it doesn't have any different and new content on it's MP, just try to see it in the perspective of the producers of the game, they need to keep the things fresh and new so people doesn't get bored of it, and if someone doesn't like a franchise just because the gameplay is more fast paced then it's not a true fan, it it doesn't neither improve or damage the game then there's no reason to complain.
Oh boy...
so if you don't like a game, you just have to get used to it? Tell me, why do developers even go through all those hard times to create a game if it would be perfectly fine if there was just one FPS that everybody should just get used to it?
Have you ever considered that Halos gameplay was quite unique? A true fan cannot simply move on to another game because there is nothing like it and 343 is trying their best to create a game that is far away from traditional Halo either...
I'm starting to feel like a brain dead parrot, repeating those phrases over and over again but apperently, most people simply don't read -Yoink- so here I go again:
Every Halofan wants Halo to move foreward, the difference is that some people want Halo to stay true to it's core priciples rather then blindly following what other FPS games are doing just because it's the „modern“ thing to do..you know what's the problem about modern trends? At some point, they are not modern any more and other stuff is modern which you then have to follow to not be outdated. If you discard you identity to follow trends your game will become a shallow shell.
Look at CS, did it change it's gameplay to follow modern trends? Is it dead?

You fail to understand that there are more and better ways to create a fast paced game (fast BMS, high FOV, TTK, map design) adding sprint doesn't create a fast paced game, it creates a game that delivers the illusion of beeing fast because even if there is nothing happening on the screen, the player is getting the impression something is going on because you're pressing bottoms, your characters arms are moving and other audio-visual cues indicate that something is happening around you..

improve or damage are a matter of someones point of view, if something changes the way a game is beeing played, then there is a potentially valid reason to complain because it might didn't objectivly improve/damage the game but maybe it changed what a person liked about the game in the first place...

*comment*
If this is how you want to look at it I will not be able to educate you from the other side of the planet...
Warden657 wrote:
Wow, this thing is about to get 10,000 replies.
I think that sprint is fine, just get used to it. 343 isn't getting rid of it anytime soon.
"Don't like it? Don't play it." or "Just adapt to the new system." These kinds of comments tell me that those people are thinking they are correct and everyone else is wrong, immature mentality. Furthermore, those people never explained how and why sprint is fine/good in/for Halo, and expect us to agree with them.
Justima wrote:
Warden657 wrote:
Wow, this thing is about to get 10,000 replies.
I think that sprint is fine, just get used to it. 343 isn't getting rid of it anytime soon.
"Don't like it? Don't play it." or "Just adapt to the new system." These kinds of comments tell me that those people are thinking they are correct and everyone else is wrong, immature mentality. Furthermore, those people never explained how and why sprint is fine/good in/for Halo, and expect us to agree with them.
You're mistaken- people do not have to explain to you how and why sprint is good... They can if they want do but if they choose not to explain than that doesn't diminish their opinion like you're inferring.
Justima wrote:
Justima wrote:
Why are pro-sprinters talking like every single gamer wants fast paced game? Also, like many times, game can be fast without sprint.
Like Over watch, Doom and few others I don't remember.
Doom is ridiculously fast... I like Overwatch's pace.
Doom is really fast, I was just suggestions.
Justima wrote:
Warden657 wrote:
Wow, this thing is about to get 10,000 replies.
I think that sprint is fine, just get used to it. 343 isn't getting rid of it anytime soon.
"Don't like it? Don't play it." or "Just adapt to the new system." These kinds of comments tell me that those people are thinking they are correct and everyone else is wrong, immature mentality. Furthermore, those people never explained how and why sprint is fine/good in/for Halo, and expect us to agree with them.
You're mistaken- people do not have to explain to you how and why sprint is good... They can if they want do but if they choose not to explain than that doesn't diminish their opinion like you're inferring.
That just means everything they say after their initial "it's fine" is of no importance whatsoever. Though, if they want to be taken seriously as far as this discussion goes, an explanation is required for that.
There really is only one logical and what would be epicness but will never happen is this.... 343 make a proper ground up 100% remaster of Halo 3. In this remastered edition maybe throw in a few new maps and maybe even a firefight/Spartan ops mode. Then fans of the classic halo can play there. Then of course keep the "modern" mechanics for H6..... Then the few players, like myself, who love Halo either way will have the best of both worlds.
LethalQ wrote:
There really is only one logical and what would be epicness but will never happen is this.... 343 make a proper ground up 100% remaster of Halo 3. In this remastered edition maybe throw in a few new maps and maybe even a firefight/Spartan ops mode. Then fans of the classic halo can play there. Then of course keep the "modern" mechanics for H6..... Then the few players, like myself, who love Halo either way will have the best of both worlds.
Or they can make the next game for classic fans and a spin off for fans of the current style (like they should've done in the first place).
LethalQ wrote:
There really is only one logical and what would be epicness but will never happen is this.... 343 make a proper ground up 100% remaster of Halo 3. In this remastered edition maybe throw in a few new maps and maybe even a firefight/Spartan ops mode. Then fans of the classic halo can play there. Then of course keep the "modern" mechanics for H6..... Then the few players, like myself, who love Halo either way will have the best of both worlds.
why do people want to force H3A on classic halo fans? H3 has many issues and wouldn't satisfy old school fans at all..
Why can't people just push for a stand-alone and unique calssic spin-off game based up on HCE? (true utility weapon, faster BMS, higher FOV, no equipment/SA's/SS's, classic art design, set on Halo ring, maybe brutes and/or flood returning as enemies)
LethalQ wrote:
There really is only one logical and what would be epicness but will never happen is this.... 343 make a proper ground up 100% remaster of Halo 3. In this remastered edition maybe throw in a few new maps and maybe even a firefight/Spartan ops mode. Then fans of the classic halo can play there. Then of course keep the "modern" mechanics for H6..... Then the few players, like myself, who love Halo either way will have the best of both worlds.
why do people want to force H3A on classic halo fans? H3 has many issues and wouldn't satisfy old school fans at all..
Why can't people just push for a stand-alone and unique calssic spin-off game based up on HCE? (true utility weapon, faster BMS, higher FOV, no equipment/SA's/SS's, classic art design, set on Halo ring, maybe brutes and/or flood returning as enemies)
Why does any one wanna force what they feel Halo should be on every one else?
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
There really is only one logical and what would be epicness but will never happen is this.... 343 make a proper ground up 100% remaster of Halo 3. In this remastered edition maybe throw in a few new maps and maybe even a firefight/Spartan ops mode. Then fans of the classic halo can play there. Then of course keep the "modern" mechanics for H6..... Then the few players, like myself, who love Halo either way will have the best of both worlds.
Or they can make the next game for classic fans and a spin off for fans of the current style (like they should've done in the first place).
I just don't think there are swams of classic fans out there like some seem to think. I am willing to bet the majority who play Halo now started with the "modern" mechanics. Then depending on which game has a higher player base can dictate the direction for H7.
Justima wrote:
Warden657 wrote:
Wow, this thing is about to get 10,000 replies.
I think that sprint is fine, just get used to it. 343 isn't getting rid of it anytime soon.
"Don't like it? Don't play it." or "Just adapt to the new system." These kinds of comments tell me that those people are thinking they are correct and everyone else is wrong, immature mentality. Furthermore, those people never explained how and why sprint is fine/good in/for Halo, and expect us to agree with them.
I don't expect you to agree. I just think it is ok to me. How many replies has this thread gotten about how people don't like sprint? And has 343 removed sprint yet? No. So they probably won't, the best chance at it not being in game is Halo 6, which would be ok to me, because I play Halo 3 from time to time, and Halo 3 ODST. So I don't care too much for sprint.
EDIT: I was just expressing my opinion, like you are.
l Jinxed I wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Celestis wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
Celestis wrote:
Dinho239 wrote:
so then you prefer a pay to win Halo without sprint, you really care more about sprint than that Halo is almost becoming a pay to win???
I want both, sprint and Reqs/MTs, removed from future iterations.
But if somebody were to put a gun to my head and forced me to choose between the two of them, I'd rather have sprint gone and Reqs/MTs stay than the other way around.
Reqs/MTs don't affect me in campaign. Sprint does.
how does sprint affects in campaign??? is not like someone is forcing you to use it or anything.
Sprint affects level design, enemy AI and weapon balance. All of them are relevant in campaign. You can't avoid them just by not spriting.

Levels need to be more wide and stretched, so sprinting players don't get stuck on objects. That makes a lot of campaign levels dull, being either a long corridor or a vast and empty plane. AI needs to be programmed with a player's peak performance in mind, so they usually are just as fast as sprint speed, while still being able to shoot. It also doesn't help that 343 introduced teleporting enemies who can bum-rush you at a moments notice. Meanwhile, when on the offense, you have to decide whether to approach enemies at a slower speed while shooting, missing shots and losing ammo because of the distance (which the infinite-ammo-wielding enemies don't have to worry about) or sprint towards them so you get into range before growing a beard, while constantly getting bombarded by their barrage fire. All this while suffering from the reduced average TTK that was implemented because of sprint.

I actually don't really care what happens in multiplayer. 343 could reduce the multiplayer to one weapon, one map, have blue team stand on the ceiling and moonwalking be the only method of moving. But campaign is the last place I want to see sprint in.
not at all, Reach for me was one of the games with better level design in camaign and it also has the ability to sprint if you want to, also it had one of the best AI in my opinión, what really affects level design is the -Yoinking!- lack of creativity fron 343i, just look at the infinite armor variants in Halo 5, also that they're changing the level, AI design and almost everything else to atract new players from other games, which is a -Yoinking!- terrible idea, they focus on other fans than in keeping the fans they already had, which makes Halo turning into another generic random fps, Reach is a prove that a game can have sprint, and still feel like Halo in everything else. The problema isn't sprint, the problema is that 343i doesn't know how to implement anything the right way in the game.
Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal. Just because you believe something or something is true in your experience does not mean that you can use that to disprove someone else. Unless you can provide evidence that can be agreed on and proven true then you can't try and disprove other people with your opinion.
then do you have evidence that people stop playing just for sprint or that dislike the whole game just for that, I know sprint made some changes to the franchise, but is not the -Yoinking!- end of the games, is just sprint, anyone can tolerate it, and if who doesn't at least tolerate it is just because is bad at playing with the new mechanics and because can't get use to it so tries to change the whole game at his convenience.
No, no one can prove that sprint changed anything until 343 makes another sprintless halo. And even then there are too many variables. But it would be ignorant to say that sprint didn't affect anything, or heavily add to the pile of reasons why people don't like the new games. Using git gud won't work here. We've all adapted to the new game, we play it, and find it much less enjoyable. Try out the halo 5 evolved settings if you think a no sprint halo wouldn't work.
what about MCC, more thanahlf of it's playlists were wihout sprint (Halo CE, 2, 2 anniversary and 3 playlists) and is maybe the least played game today, it has been ignored by almost everyone, and it wasn' for sprint, it was because the terrible rank system, bugs and glitches, and lack of polishing since day one etc, it was basically unplayable at it's launch, I'm not saying that sprint doesn't affect in anything, I know it affects in some areas like map design (also not at all since Halo online had Halo 3 maps that were perfectly playable with sprint) and makes the game more fast paced, but it makes changes, but that doesn't mean it makes damage to the game like other huge issues Halo 5 has.

and if people doesn't like the newer games is for reasons: they don't like it for the other reasons I said before, can't get used to the new mechanics and are bad at playing with them so they want to change it at their convenience, or they're just Bungie fanboys.
so valid reasons you "accept" for not liking newer Halos are:
- game is broken as -Yoink-
- you suck at it
- you're a fanboy

have you ever considered that by the addition of sprint, Halos gameplay has changed in a way that people don't enjoy playing it anymore?
so then how doesn the addition of sprint broke or at least damage the game, I know that the gameplay has changed, but if people doesn't enjoy it is because they don't get used to the new gameplay, if they don't like it they can move to other games instead of trying to change it to their convenience, things always change, and Halo isn't the exception, if Halo had never changed it's gameplay it would have been kept something of the past and maybe it wouldn't be still alive today since everyone would be bored of it to be exactly as every other past game, then it wouldn't be nessesary to buy the newer games if the only thing that changes is the campaign, and it doesn't have any different and new content on it's MP, just try to see it in the perspective of the producers of the game, they need to keep the things fresh and new so people doesn't get bored of it, and if someone doesn't like a franchise just because the gameplay is more fast paced then it's not a true fan, it it doesn't neither improve or damage the game then there's no reason to complain.
Then please explain why Halo has been doing poorly since there was a major gameplay change. If people were getting tired of the same thing as you put it, why is it that when Bunge tried something new, it didn't do so well?
well then they weren't core Halo fans, they just liked the game for it's gameplay, or have you seen a pro gamer or someone immportant like many bloggers or youtubers complaining or even caring about sprint??? as I said perviously, if something doesn't damage there's no reason to complain, so in this case people that doesn't like it is just because they suck with the new mechanics and get mad for that and blame the game and it's mechanics.
LethalQ wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
There really is only one logical and what would be epicness but will never happen is this.... 343 make a proper ground up 100% remaster of Halo 3. In this remastered edition maybe throw in a few new maps and maybe even a firefight/Spartan ops mode. Then fans of the classic halo can play there. Then of course keep the "modern" mechanics for H6..... Then the few players, like myself, who love Halo either way will have the best of both worlds.
Or they can make the next game for classic fans and a spin off for fans of the current style (like they should've done in the first place).
I just don't think there are swams of classic fans out there like some seem to think. I am willing to bet the majority who play Halo now started with the "modern" mechanics. Then depending on which game has a higher player base can dictate the direction for H7.
If they care about making the player base bigger, doing the same thing they've been doing won't accomplish that, so it doesn't matter how many of the current players enjoy either style.

Or maybe they could just ignore all that and make the game based on what's best for it and not based on what they think people expect.
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Justima wrote:
Warden657 wrote:
Wow, this thing is about to get 10,000 replies.
I think that sprint is fine, just get used to it. 343 isn't getting rid of it anytime soon.
"Don't like it? Don't play it." or "Just adapt to the new system." These kinds of comments tell me that those people are thinking they are correct and everyone else is wrong, immature mentality. Furthermore, those people never explained how and why sprint is fine/good in/for Halo, and expect us to agree with them.
You're mistaken- people do not have to explain to you how and why sprint is good... They can if they want do but if they choose not to explain than that doesn't diminish their opinion like you're inferring.
That just means everything they say after their initial "it's fine" is of no importance whatsoever. Though, if they want to be taken seriously as far as this discussion goes, an explanation is required for that.
Not at all... Just like those polls you anti sprint guys like to bring up- those just boil down to opinions anyway. When people share your opinion it's fine but for you all they just have to get into a debate with you to be "taken seriously," huh? Why for, you're not going to agree with anything pro sprinters tell you anyway. Bottom line is that "Keep sprint," or "Don't keep sprint" is an opinionated question... One doesn't need to respond to such a poll with an explanation of why they want to keep sprint in order to be taken seriously- though anti sprinters don't want to cite all the polls where "keep sprint," wins anyway... Just easier for you guys to minimize and under value opinions when they don't line up with yours, right??
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Justima wrote:
Warden657 wrote:
Wow, this thing is about to get 10,000 replies.
I think that sprint is fine, just get used to it. 343 isn't getting rid of it anytime soon.
"Don't like it? Don't play it." or "Just adapt to the new system." These kinds of comments tell me that those people are thinking they are correct and everyone else is wrong, immature mentality. Furthermore, those people never explained how and why sprint is fine/good in/for Halo, and expect us to agree with them.
You're mistaken- people do not have to explain to you how and why sprint is good... They can if they want do but if they choose not to explain than that doesn't diminish their opinion like you're inferring.
That just means everything they say after their initial "it's fine" is of no importance whatsoever. Though, if they want to be taken seriously as far as this discussion goes, an explanation is required for that.
Not at all... Just like those polls you anti sprint guys like to bring up- those just boil down to opinions anyway. When people share your opinion it's fine but for you guys they just have to get into a debate with you to be "taken seriously," huh? Why for, you're not going to agree with anything pro sprinters tell you anyway. Bottom line is that "Keep sprint," or "Don't keep sprint" is an opinionated question... One doesn't need to respond to such a poll with an explanation of why they want to keep sprint in order to be taken seriously- though anti sprinters don't want to cite all the polls where "keep sprint," wins anyway... Just easier for you guys to minimize and under value opinions when they don't line up with yours, right??
I didn't ask about your denial. There was no reason to bring it up.

If someone wants to take part in this discussion, explanations are required. That's what discussions are for. End of story.
Get rid of armor abilities, Req Packs, Well, since the market is changing just make them less a requirement, and bring back dual wielding. And kill off or separate from chief, you're beating a broken horse to death and nobody will stand for it. Just stop.
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Justima wrote:
Warden657 wrote:
Wow, this thing is about to get 10,000 replies.
I think that sprint is fine, just get used to it. 343 isn't getting rid of it anytime soon.
"Don't like it? Don't play it." or "Just adapt to the new system." These kinds of comments tell me that those people are thinking they are correct and everyone else is wrong, immature mentality. Furthermore, those people never explained how and why sprint is fine/good in/for Halo, and expect us to agree with them.
You're mistaken- people do not have to explain to you how and why sprint is good... They can if they want do but if they choose not to explain than that doesn't diminish their opinion like you're inferring.
That just means everything they say after their initial "it's fine" is of no importance whatsoever. Though, if they want to be taken seriously as far as this discussion goes, an explanation is required for that.
Not at all... Just like those polls you anti sprint guys like to bring up- those just boil down to opinions anyway. When people share your opinion it's fine but for you guys they just have to get into a debate with you to be "taken seriously," huh? Why for, you're not going to agree with anything pro sprinters tell you anyway. Bottom line is that "Keep sprint," or "Don't keep sprint" is an opinionated question... One doesn't need to respond to such a poll with an explanation of why they want to keep sprint in order to be taken seriously- though anti sprinters don't want to cite all the polls where "keep sprint," wins anyway... Just easier for you guys to minimize and under value opinions when they don't line up with yours, right??
I didn't ask about your denial. There was no reason to bring it up.

If someone wants to take part in this discussion, explanations are required. That's what discussions are for. End of story.
What denial??? You're literally the one trying to deny people from contributing if they don't agree with you. I don't care what you asked me for either- if people want to say "Keep sprint because I like it," then their opinion still matters and is completely valid despite your desperate and bias attempts to undervalue those opinions.... You trying to bully people out of the thread or something?? People don't have to listen to you, I definitely won't let you dictate where I can pr cannot post. I like sprint and want it to stay- deal with that.
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Justima wrote:
Warden657 wrote:
Wow, this thing is about to get 10,000 replies.
I think that sprint is fine, just get used to it. 343 isn't getting rid of it anytime soon.
"Don't like it? Don't play it." or "Just adapt to the new system." These kinds of comments tell me that those people are thinking they are correct and everyone else is wrong, immature mentality. Furthermore, those people never explained how and why sprint is fine/good in/for Halo, and expect us to agree with them.
You're mistaken- people do not have to explain to you how and why sprint is good... They can if they want do but if they choose not to explain than that doesn't diminish their opinion like you're inferring.
That just means everything they say after their initial "it's fine" is of no importance whatsoever. Though, if they want to be taken seriously as far as this discussion goes, an explanation is required for that.
Not at all... Just like those polls you anti sprint guys like to bring up- those just boil down to opinions anyway. When people share your opinion it's fine but for you guys they just have to get into a debate with you to be "taken seriously," huh? Why for, you're not going to agree with anything pro sprinters tell you anyway. Bottom line is that "Keep sprint," or "Don't keep sprint" is an opinionated question... One doesn't need to respond to such a poll with an explanation of why they want to keep sprint in order to be taken seriously- though anti sprinters don't want to cite all the polls where "keep sprint," wins anyway... Just easier for you guys to minimize and under value opinions when they don't line up with yours, right??
I didn't ask about your denial. There was no reason to bring it up.

If someone wants to take part in this discussion, explanations are required. That's what discussions are for. End of story.
What denial??? You're literally the one trying to deny people from contributing if they don't agree with you. I don't care what you asked me for either- if people want to say "Keep sprint because I like it," then their opinion still matters and is completely valid despite your desperate and bias attempts to undervalue those opinions....
You should read my posts again, you don't seem to understand them.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 493
  4. 494
  5. 495
  6. 496
  7. 497
  8. ...
  9. 840