Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

The sprint discussion thread

OP Gandalfur

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 615
  4. 616
  5. 617
  6. 618
  7. 619
  8. ...
  9. 838
For all we know it could be incrediblyminiscule. And there is No proof that any of the added 'alienating' features have been the causeeither. There is no hard evidence that AA caused a huge decline, that loadouts did, that the DMR did, that the PS4 did, etc, etc, etc. Its simplestatistics. We cannot make a definitive statement in this regard because we don't know the stats.
Out of all of those... How would the DMR be alienating. Sprint is, AAs are, Loadouts are. That makes sense... But the DMR doesn't. I'd entirely argue you can say that sprint was a cause for it, but saying it's the entire cause is misguided.
Yes to alienation from sprint, aa and loadouts. Those don't work well, but I could see how dmr does as well, simply because of it's effective range in the arena setting. Also, no one ever said the dmr has to be placed on the map either. It goes both ways.Mainly sprint just needs to go away tho! ;)
For all we know it could be incrediblyminiscule. And there is No proof that any of the added 'alienating' features have been the causeeither. There is no hard evidence that AA caused a huge decline, that loadouts did, that the DMR did, that the PS4 did, etc, etc, etc. Its simplestatistics. We cannot make a definitive statement in this regard because we don't know the stats.
Out of all of those... How would the DMR be alienating. Sprint is, AAs are, Loadouts are. That makes sense... But the DMR doesn't. I'd entirely argue you can say that sprint was a cause for it, but saying it's the entire cause is misguided.
Hey you never know. And I legitimately had someone message me the other day saying they hated the DMR'sninclusion in Halo Reach.

You can argue I suppose that sprint was a cause. But that's about it. As there are some players we know of who have dropped Halo because of sprint. You can't know how significant that number is, or how major of a cause sprint it. Simply that it is a cause. I could say the same thing about the DMR. Or the exit of Bungie, not the performance of 343, just the exit of Bungie, the inclusion of radar, the removal of loadouts after Halo 4.... Etc
MCCesus wrote:
MCCesus wrote:
MCCesus wrote:
MCCesus wrote:
Sprint killed Halo. Absolutely killed it. Game cannot hold a population at all ever since sprint was introduced. It just doesn't fit and it fundamentally alters the game.
Game absolutely cannot hold a population since the elites changed design, since the DMR was introduced, since the magnum had a scope reintroduced, so are those reason's for Halo's fall as well?

Just saying sprint is the reason is pure speculation.
None of those things fundementally changed gameplay and map design.
Either way. Its still speculation. There's no hard evidence of sprint being the cause of Halo's decline
There's no evidence saying it isn't.
You're point? That doesn't make it the cause.

Either way. Its still speculation. There's no hard evidence of sprint being the cause of Halo's decline
It's not speculation as to if whether or not it was the cause. Just how much of a cause it was in comparison to all the other alienating features brought in on top of it.
For all we know it could be incrediblyminiscule. And there is proof that any if the features have been the causeeither. There is no hard evidence that AA caused a huge decline, that loadouts did, that the DMR did, that the PS4 did, etc, etc, etc. Its simplestatistics. We cannot make a definitive statement in this regard because we don't know the stats.
In my opinion it is a huge part of the issue. That's why we're here debating.
Thank you! You are more than welcome to have that as your opinion. I don't have a problem with that. But when you make definitive statements such as 'sprint is the cause For halos loss of popularity' rather than 'I think, I'm pretty sure, in my opinion, sprint is the cause for halos drop off'.
Soup7218 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show

Err you miss the point entirely. It changes the map design and whole feel of the game. Games work without it, halo did. It's not halo anymore. No more tight small maps with intricate skill jumps. No more hard punish if you get caught in the open, no more skill based shortcuts, like narrows where players found jumps to get from top mid to man cannon. Now we have huuuuuge maps with a million corridors and escape routes. Its all been changed to accommodate sprint, to the point where it only looks like halo, a cheap plastic one at that. In terms of feel its nothing like halo. All you will do is post a response that does'nt answer what I brought up, if you bother at all. There was no need to change the game it was FINE. 343 tried to make it like other games no one wanted that so we all quit. Now it has sprint and 30,000 players woohoo its down to 10 percent of the players who would be on regular in 3.
Uhh didn't all the older halo games have huge maps? Sidewinder, Blood Gulch etc. Consider this please. Now look the whole basis around this sprint argument is that it has influenced map design, ok i'm inclined to agree slightly. However the idea that the influence of sprint has caused maps to be larger than before is in my opinion untrue. Cause we have always had big maps and also small maps, now though we can just get to one side of the map faster than before.
In my original post to you I wasn't attempting to answer the issues you brought up because I don't see an issue I frankly could care less if we had sprint or didn't have sprint, bear in mind this, I knew someone who hadn't played halo before and we set up a LAN in college to play halo CE and the first thing he said when playing the game is that he wished he had sprint cause to him it felt way too slow, now that's a point worth noting I think.
And finally to address the issue you bring up at the end of your post. Look it isn't 2007 anymore, times have changed for better or for worse depends on your perspective, however the idea that the decrease in player population is a result of Sprint alone is not the case at all.
Those maps are big team maps bro smh. What I'm saying is even the 4v4 maps are now big. Its irreverent. If you want sprint play a different game, we have had our game taken. No it isn just sprint the whole game is nothing like halo. We want HALO it can never be halo with sprint it changes it far too much. The game is just bad now, hadly anyone likes it. We will never get what we want anyway, quake fans got a new classic quake. So maybe its best if halo dies for 10 years and comes back classic.
Well thats your opinion but i like halo 5, it still has 4v4,fair starts, skill jumps, good maps. Dont tell people to go play other games, not everyone sees that sprint ruins halo. Halo 5 needs a classic playlist were bms, weapon damage, grenade bounce need to be altered. Everyone on here is a halo fan.
MCCesus wrote:
Sprint killed Halo. Absolutely killed it. Game cannot hold a population at all ever since sprint was introduced. It just doesn't fit and it fundamentally alters the game.
Game absolutely cannot hold a population since the elites changed design, since the DMR was introduced, since the magnum had a scope reintroduced, so are those reason's for Halo's fall as well?

Just saying sprint is the reason is pure speculation.
What a great post. I always told people that sprint can not be blamed alone...
I'm sure the bad story and microtransactions did a lot more to hurt populations. Btw are you pro-sprint? Just wondering.
No. A lot of people on here assume I am though, I quite enjoy both, and find that both have their benefits and disadvantages. I will defend both (which is why some see me as pro-sprint, because if you dare to oppose a single BMS with any point, you must be in love with sprint). My favorite Halo multiplayers are Halo 2A (no sprint) and Reach (only one AA has sprint). And campaigns are Halo 2 (No Sprint) and Halo 3 (Also No Sprint).

But anyways, yes, there are many more contributing factors to hurting the pop from Reach until now. Reach's overall percieved low quality map design, the general lackluster recieval of Halo 4's multiplayer, the problems with MCC, the fact that the gaming scene has changed drastically since '07, the fact that up till recently the PS4 outsold the Xbox One, etc, etc, etc.
This is probably the best post so far. Fair and reasonable, im the same i dont mind sprint and i like games with no sprint Halo CE Halo. 343i just needs to make a playlist that is just for the classic and use forge to do it.
MCCesus wrote:
MCCesus wrote:
MCCesus wrote:
Sprint killed Halo. Absolutely killed it. Game cannot hold a population at all ever since sprint was introduced. It just doesn't fit and it fundamentally alters the game.
Game absolutely cannot hold a population since the elites changed design, since the DMR was introduced, since the magnum had a scope reintroduced, so are those reason's for Halo's fall as well?

Just saying sprint is the reason is pure speculation.
None of those things fundementally changed gameplay and map design.
Either way. Its still speculation. There's no hard evidence of sprint being the cause of Halo's decline
There's no evidence saying it isn't.
If you look at the sales for halo reach they are the second highest in the franchise, and someone posted the stats for how long reachs population lasted which was the 2nd or 3rd longest in the series. Reach had sprint and i could argue that it was successful as a halo game. There are many reasons why halo is no longer selling 9 million plus copies one being that the FPS genre has shifted, the gaming market has changed by being more competitive, the xbox one not selling as many copies and sprint may play a factor in their sale numbers. Sprint is part of the sales problem but is not the main reason for low sales.
GED2208 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
THE ALL NEW SPACE MARINE SUPER SOLDIER. CAPABLE OF DESTROYING COVENANT FLEETS ALL BY THEMSELVES. AND ARE SMARTER FASTER AND STRONGER THEN ANY OTHER MARINE.

So ummm, whats his abilities....

Welp...he can maybe run...or maybe hit something with a charge I'm still deciding.
So you're going to use Halo Lore as the basis for why we should be able to sprint? I guess we should be able to grab missiles and toss them back since that was done in the books also.

I'm so tired of this over used argument... that and the old argument of "Well if you hate sprinting you should just not sprint".

Here JoelWelsh1998Hunterkiller040SORZUSZANEWatch this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iedeG7SVPCE
Don't you find it bizarre that this is the only community I know of that has a thread of over 2000+ comments that argue over a game mechanic that lets you run faster. Talk about pathetic, sprint is a tool that when used correctly is a benefit and when used incorrectly is a drawback. As for the youtube vid you linked *slow clap. I cant believe that this guy just wasted 10 minutes of oxygen -Yoinking!- like a little girl about a game mechanic that makes you run a little faster.
Err you miss the point entirely. It changes the map design and whole feel of the game. Games work without it, halo did. It's not halo anymore. No more tight small maps with intricate skill jumps. No more hard punish if you get caught in the open, no more skill based shortcuts, like narrows where players found jumps to get from top mid to man cannon. Now we have huuuuuge maps with a million corridors and escape routes. Its all been changed to accommodate sprint, to the point where it only looks like halo, a cheap plastic one at that. In terms of feel its nothing like halo. All you will do is post a response that does'nt answer what I brought up, if you bother at all. There was no need to change the game it was FINE. 343 tried to make it like other games no one wanted that so we all quit. Now it has sprint and 30,000 players woohoo its down to 10 percent of the players who would be on regular in 3.
Quote:
Uhh didn't all the older halo games have huge maps? Sidewinder, Blood Gulch etc. Consider this please. Now look the whole basis around this sprint argument is that it has influenced map design, ok i'm inclined to agree slightly. However the idea that the influence of sprint has caused maps to be larger than before is in my opinion untrue. Cause we have always had big maps and also small maps, now though we can just get to one side of the map faster than before.
In my original post to you I wasn't attempting to answer the issues you brought up because I don't see an issue I frankly could care less if we had sprint or didn't have sprint, bear in mind this, I knew someone who hadn't played halo before and we set up a LAN in college to play halo CE and the first thing he said when playing the game is that he wished he had sprint cause to him it felt way too slow, now that's a point worth noting I think.
And finally to address the issue you bring up at the end of your post. Look it isn't 2007 anymore, times have changed for better or for worse depends on your perspective, however the idea that the decrease in player population is a result of Sprint alone is not the case at all.
Those maps are big team maps bro smh. What I'm saying is even the 4v4 maps are now big. Its irreverent. If you want sprint play a different game, we have had our game taken. No it isn just sprint the whole game is nothing like halo. We want HALO it can never be halo with sprint it changes it far too much. The game is just bad now, hadly anyone likes it. We will never get what we want anyway, quake fans got a new classic quake. So maybe its best if halo dies for 10 years and comes back classic.
Well thats your opinion but i like halo 5, it still has 4v4,fair starts, skill jumps, good maps. Dont tell people to go play other games, not everyone sees that sprint ruins halo. Halo 5 needs a classic playlist were bms, weapon damage, grenade bounce need to be altered. Everyone on here is a halo fan.
Skill jumps aren't as there considering the addition of clamber which ultimately makes traversal of maps much easier. Many games have good maps, but ultimately it doesn't make it more Halo. The maps are still designed differently and stretched out.

Sprint doesn't ruin Halo. It fundamentally changes Halo. If I want to play a game where sprint and enhanced movement belongs, I will play the other games that have so. But when I want to play Halo, I want to play a Halo game that offers it's a unique experience that it created when it first came out. I don't mind evolving, I don't mind slightly changing it, all I want is for 343i to take influence from 1-3 (not Reach) and try to go back to the franchise's fundamentals and improving and expanding upon it.

Classic playlists won't do what I just suggested. Nobody in the right mind will play a Halo 2.5 or a Halo 3.5 every single new Halo title is released. I mean, it might sound good in paper, but ultimately what we want is a new Halo game that doesn't negatively impact the fundamentals of the game.
GED2208 wrote:
MCCesus wrote:
MCCesus wrote:
MCCesus wrote:
Sprint killed Halo. Absolutely killed it. Game cannot hold a population at all ever since sprint was introduced. It just doesn't fit and it fundamentally alters the game.
Game absolutely cannot hold a population since the elites changed design, since the DMR was introduced, since the magnum had a scope reintroduced, so are those reason's for Halo's fall as well?

Just saying sprint is the reason is pure speculation.
None of those things fundementally changed gameplay and map design.
Either way. Its still speculation. There's no hard evidence of sprint being the cause of Halo's decline
There's no evidence saying it isn't.
If you look at the sales for halo reach they are the second highest in the franchise, and someone posted the stats for how long reachs population lasted which was the 2nd or 3rd longest in the series. Reach had sprint and i could argue that it was successful as a halo game. There are many reasons why halo is no longer selling 9 million plus copies one being that the FPS genre has shifted, the gaming market has changed by being more competitive, the xbox one not selling as many copies and sprint may play a factor in their sale numbers. Sprint is part of the sales problem but is not the main reason for low sales.
Reach dropped to 7th place on the xbl charts a couple months after release. It took a nose dive. Being 3rd means little when HCE had no online and h3/3 are miles ahead of everything else. Reach sold well off the coattails of h3.

Competition has hardly raised. The xb1 is outselling the 360. The xb1 does have RROD. The attach rate to xbl is higher than ever.

You're are factually incorrect on practically every point you made.
GED2208 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
THE ALL NEW SPACE MARINE SUPER SOLDIER. CAPABLE OF DESTROYING COVENANT FLEETS ALL BY THEMSELVES. AND ARE SMARTER FASTER AND STRONGER THEN ANY OTHER MARINE.

So ummm, whats his abilities....

Welp...he can maybe run...or maybe hit something with a charge I'm still deciding.
So you're going to use Halo Lore as the basis for why we should be able to sprint? I guess we should be able to grab missiles and toss them back since that was done in the books also.

I'm so tired of this over used argument... that and the old argument of "Well if you hate sprinting you should just not sprint".

Here JoelWelsh1998Hunterkiller040SORZUSZANEWatch this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iedeG7SVPCE
Don't you find it bizarre that this is the only community I know of that has a thread of over 2000+ comments that argue over a game mechanic that lets you run faster. Talk about pathetic, sprint is a tool that when used correctly is a benefit and when used incorrectly is a drawback. As for the youtube vid you linked *slow clap. I cant believe that this guy just wasted 10 minutes of oxygen -Yoinking!- like a little girl about a game mechanic that makes you run a little faster.
Err you miss the point entirely. It changes the map design and whole feel of the game. Games work without it, halo did. It's not halo anymore. No more tight small maps with intricate skill jumps. No more hard punish if you get caught in the open, no more skill based shortcuts, like narrows where players found jumps to get from top mid to man cannon. Now we have huuuuuge maps with a million corridors and escape routes. Its all been changed to accommodate sprint, to the point where it only looks like halo, a cheap plastic one at that. In terms of feel its nothing like halo. All you will do is post a response that does'nt answer what I brought up, if you bother at all. There was no need to change the game it was FINE. 343 tried to make it like other games no one wanted that so we all quit. Now it has sprint and 30,000 players woohoo its down to 10 percent of the players who would be on regular in 3.
Quote:
Uhh didn't all the older halo games have huge maps? Sidewinder, Blood Gulch etc. Consider this please. Now look the whole basis around this sprint argument is that it has influenced map design, ok i'm inclined to agree slightly. However the idea that the influence of sprint has caused maps to be larger than before is in my opinion untrue. Cause we have always had big maps and also small maps, now though we can just get to one side of the map faster than before.
In my original post to you I wasn't attempting to answer the issues you brought up because I don't see an issue I frankly could care less if we had sprint or didn't have sprint, bear in mind this, I knew someone who hadn't played halo before and we set up a LAN in college to play halo CE and the first thing he said when playing the game is that he wished he had sprint cause to him it felt way too slow, now that's a point worth noting I think.
And finally to address the issue you bring up at the end of your post. Look it isn't 2007 anymore, times have changed for better or for worse depends on your perspective, however the idea that the decrease in player population is a result of Sprint alone is not the case at all.
Those maps are big team maps bro smh. What I'm saying is even the 4v4 maps are now big. Its irreverent. If you want sprint play a different game, we have had our game taken. No it isn just sprint the whole game is nothing like halo. We want HALO it can never be halo with sprint it changes it far too much. The game is just bad now, hadly anyone likes it. We will never get what we want anyway, quake fans got a new classic quake. So maybe its best if halo dies for 10 years and comes back classic.
Well thats your opinion but i like halo 5, it still has 4v4,fair starts, skill jumps, good maps. Dont tell people to go play other games, not everyone sees that sprint ruins halo. Halo 5 needs a classic playlist were bms, weapon damage, grenade bounce need to be altered. Everyone on here is a halo fan.
Skill jumps aren't as there considering the addition of clamber which ultimately makes traversal of maps much easier. Many games have good maps, but ultimately it doesn't make it more Halo. The maps are still designed differently and stretched out.

Sprint doesn't ruin Halo. It fundamentally changes Halo. If I want to play a game where sprint and enhanced movement belongs, I will play the other games that have so. But when I want to play Halo, I want to play a Halo game that offers it's a unique experience that it created when it first came out. I don't mind evolving, I don't mind slightly changing it, all I want is for 343i to take influence from 1-3 (not Reach) and try to go back to the franchise's fundamentals and improving and expanding upon it.

Classic playlists won't do what I just suggested. Nobody in the right mind will play a Halo 2.5 or a Halo 3.5 every single new Halo title is released. I mean, it might sound good in paper, but ultimately what we want is a new Halo game that doesn't negatively impact the fundamentals of the game.
That's fine, unfortunately i don't think halo will go back to the classic style any time soon. Halo 3 bms was to slow if they increased the bms that would be good or increased the fov that would be fine. Im not against the classic halos just more for a faster halo.
For all we know it could be incrediblyminiscule. And there is No proof that any of the added 'alienating' features have been the causeeither. There is no hard evidence that AA caused a huge decline, that loadouts did, that the DMR did, that the PS4 did, etc, etc, etc. Its simplestatistics. We cannot make a definitive statement in this regard because we don't know the stats.
Out of all of those... How would the DMR be alienating. Sprint is, AAs are, Loadouts are. That makes sense... But the DMR doesn't. I'd entirely argue you can say that sprint was a cause for it, but saying it's the entire cause is misguided.
Any change is potentially alienating, just because you like somethings dosn't mean evreyone does. Not that I dislike the DMR but it did change the sandbox in a way that could be viewed as negative.
GED2208 wrote:
GED2208 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
THE ALL NEW SPACE MARINE SUPER SOLDIER. CAPABLE OF DESTROYING COVENANT FLEETS ALL BY THEMSELVES. AND ARE SMARTER FASTER AND STRONGER THEN ANY OTHER MARINE.

So ummm, whats his abilities....

Welp...he can maybe run...or maybe hit something with a charge I'm still deciding.
So you're going to use Halo Lore as the basis for why we should be able to sprint? I guess we should be able to grab missiles and toss them back since that was done in the books also.

I'm so tired of this over used argument... that and the old argument of "Well if you hate sprinting you should just not sprint".

Here JoelWelsh1998Hunterkiller040SORZUSZANEWatch this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iedeG7SVPCE
Don't you find it bizarre that this is the only community I know of that has a thread of over 2000+ comments that argue over a game mechanic that lets you run faster. Talk about pathetic, sprint is a tool that when used correctly is a benefit and when used incorrectly is a drawback. As for the youtube vid you linked *slow clap. I cant believe that this guy just wasted 10 minutes of oxygen -Yoinking!- like a little girl about a game mechanic that makes you run a little faster.
Err you miss the point entirely. It changes the map design and whole feel of the game. Games work without it, halo did. It's not halo anymore. No more tight small maps with intricate skill jumps. No more hard punish if you get caught in the open, no more skill based shortcuts, like narrows where players found jumps to get from top mid to man cannon. Now we have huuuuuge maps with a million corridors and escape routes. Its all been changed to accommodate sprint, to the point where it only looks like halo, a cheap plastic one at that. In terms of feel its nothing like halo. All you will do is post a response that does'nt answer what I brought up, if you bother at all. There was no need to change the game it was FINE. 343 tried to make it like other games no one wanted that so we all quit. Now it has sprint and 30,000 players woohoo its down to 10 percent of the players who would be on regular in 3.
Quote:
Uhh didn't all the older halo games have huge maps? Sidewinder, Blood Gulch etc. Consider this please. Now look the whole basis around this sprint argument is that it has influenced map design, ok i'm inclined to agree slightly. However the idea that the influence of sprint has caused maps to be larger than before is in my opinion untrue. Cause we have always had big maps and also small maps, now though we can just get to one side of the map faster than before.
In my original post to you I wasn't attempting to answer the issues you brought up because I don't see an issue I frankly could care less if we had sprint or didn't have sprint, bear in mind this, I knew someone who hadn't played halo before and we set up a LAN in college to play halo CE and the first thing he said when playing the game is that he wished he had sprint cause to him it felt way too slow, now that's a point worth noting I think.
And finally to address the issue you bring up at the end of your post. Look it isn't 2007 anymore, times have changed for better or for worse depends on your perspective, however the idea that the decrease in player population is a result of Sprint alone is not the case at all.
Those maps are big team maps bro smh. What I'm saying is even the 4v4 maps are now big. Its irreverent. If you want sprint play a different game, we have had our game taken. No it isn just sprint the whole game is nothing like halo. We want HALO it can never be halo with sprint it changes it far too much. The game is just bad now, hadly anyone likes it. We will never get what we want anyway, quake fans got a new classic quake. So maybe its best if halo dies for 10 years and comes back classic.
Well thats your opinion but i like halo 5, it still has 4v4,fair starts, skill jumps, good maps. Dont tell people to go play other games, not everyone sees that sprint ruins halo. Halo 5 needs a classic playlist were bms, weapon damage, grenade bounce need to be altered. Everyone on here is a halo fan.
Skill jumps aren't as there considering the addition of clamber which ultimately makes traversal of maps much easier. Many games have good maps, but ultimately it doesn't make it more Halo. The maps are still designed differently and stretched out.

Sprint doesn't ruin Halo. It fundamentally changes Halo. If I want to play a game where sprint and enhanced movement belongs, I will play the other games that have so. But when I want to play Halo, I want to play a Halo game that offers it's a unique experience that it created when it first came out. I don't mind evolving, I don't mind slightly changing it, all I want is for 343i to take influence from 1-3 (not Reach) and try to go back to the franchise's fundamentals and improving and expanding upon it.

Classic playlists won't do what I just suggested. Nobody in the right mind will play a Halo 2.5 or a Halo 3.5 every single new Halo title is released. I mean, it might sound good in paper, but ultimately what we want is a new Halo game that doesn't negatively impact the fundamentals of the game.
That's fine, unfortunately i don't think halo will go back to the classic style any time soon. Halo 3 bms was to slow if they increased the bms that would be good or increased the fov that would be fine. Im not against the classic halos just more for a faster halo.
That's what we want. An increased BMS. Have you tried out the halo 5 evolved settings? It would be a lot like that.
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
C0RRuPTT wrote:
C0RRuPTT wrote:
Debating about the polls is silly. No matter the result of them, they don't matter. This is a creative medium.

Success in creative mediums is often attained by subverting expectations and giving people something they didn't expect to love but end up loving.

"Anti sprinters" are convinced replacing sprint with high BMS will do this and no data exists that can disprove this theory.
Equally along those lines no data exists that can prove such a theory... This being the creative medium that it is, all we can do is discuss the issue with fellow fans that are not all like-minded regarding sprint. Personally, I think I've heard and seen many points supporting why one high BMS will definitely not replace sprint and would make Halo worse... Anti sprinters would tell you different, but I do agree insofar that no one should be here with the intention to "disprove," "dismantle," and/or "destroy," opinions from our fellow fans about this.
I got three reasons for you.
1. Halo: CE
2. Halo 2
3. Halo 3
I've got three reasons for you.
1) Reach
2) Halo 4
3) Halo 5
Reach, 4 & 5 are the three most controversial Halo titles.
That doesn't really mean much, just because it's controversial, doesn't mean it should change. Most of the abilities and mechanics that were put into Reach were meant to be put into the series earlier, some even in Halo 2. Bungie didn't put those mechanics in because they didn't have time and didn't have the best set up to do it then, but if they had, then Halo 2 and 3 would have been super controversial.
Incorrect, they played with sprint early on and removed it due to pacing issues. Set up? Sprint has been in fps gaming since the 90's.
It's not incorrect, that's what I was referring to, they were trying to use it in Halo 2 but they couldn't balance it right before they had to finish the game.
Pretty sure there's no evidence of that whatsoever.
There's no evidence to the contrary. With how much of Halo 2 was cut or reworked due to time constraints, i.e. entire campaign levels, weapons, enemies, etc, we have no idea where sprint came into play.
In what world is something legitimate just because there's no proof otherwise? Your own fantasy world I'm sure. Have fun in it, but I'm in the real world. I care not for your nonesense.
Wow, calm yourself, haha. Don't get so worked up that you have demean everyone that you talk to.
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
C0RRuPTT wrote:
C0RRuPTT wrote:
Debating about the polls is silly. No matter the result of them, they don't matter. This is a creative medium.

Success in creative mediums is often attained by subverting expectations and giving people something they didn't expect to love but end up loving.

"Anti sprinters" are convinced replacing sprint with high BMS will do this and no data exists that can disprove this theory.
Equally along those lines no data exists that can prove such a theory... This being the creative medium that it is, all we can do is discuss the issue with fellow fans that are not all like-minded regarding sprint. Personally, I think I've heard and seen many points supporting why one high BMS will definitely not replace sprint and would make Halo worse... Anti sprinters would tell you different, but I do agree insofar that no one should be here with the intention to "disprove," "dismantle," and/or "destroy," opinions from our fellow fans about this.
I got three reasons for you.
1. Halo: CE
2. Halo 2
3. Halo 3
I've got three reasons for you.
1) Reach
2) Halo 4
3) Halo 5
Reach, 4 & 5 are the three most controversial Halo titles.
That doesn't really mean much, just because it's controversial, doesn't mean it should change. Most of the abilities and mechanics that were put into Reach were meant to be put into the series earlier, some even in Halo 2. Bungie didn't put those mechanics in because they didn't have time and didn't have the best set up to do it then, but if they had, then Halo 2 and 3 would have been super controversial.
Incorrect, they played with sprint early on and removed it due to pacing issues. Set up? Sprint has been in fps gaming since the 90's.
It's not incorrect, that's what I was referring to, they were trying to use it in Halo 2 but they couldn't balance it right before they had to finish the game.
Again, it wasnt about time or them being rushed, this was early in development.
People seem to forget that movement options aren't thrown in at the last second.
Yeah, they developed it for a while, but it just didn't turn out like they wanted it to.
Exactly, because it caused problems with the pacing and gameplay. What exactly are you arguing because it sounds like you agreed with me...
All I'm basically saying is that they waited to put it in until Halo Reach, because they didn't get it worked out well until then. In Reach, sprint was really well balanced with everything else.
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
Zr0Fear v2 wrote:
C0RRuPTT wrote:
C0RRuPTT wrote:
Debating about the polls is silly. No matter the result of them, they don't matter. This is a creative medium.

Success in creative mediums is often attained by subverting expectations and giving people something they didn't expect to love but end up loving.

"Anti sprinters" are convinced replacing sprint with high BMS will do this and no data exists that can disprove this theory.
Equally along those lines no data exists that can prove such a theory... This being the creative medium that it is, all we can do is discuss the issue with fellow fans that are not all like-minded regarding sprint. Personally, I think I've heard and seen many points supporting why one high BMS will definitely not replace sprint and would make Halo worse... Anti sprinters would tell you different, but I do agree insofar that no one should be here with the intention to "disprove," "dismantle," and/or "destroy," opinions from our fellow fans about this.
I got three reasons for you.
1. Halo: CE
2. Halo 2
3. Halo 3
I've got three reasons for you.
1) Reach
2) Halo 4
3) Halo 5
Reach, 4 & 5 are the three most controversial Halo titles.
That doesn't really mean much, just because it's controversial, doesn't mean it should change. Most of the abilities and mechanics that were put into Reach were meant to be put into the series earlier, some even in Halo 2. Bungie didn't put those mechanics in because they didn't have time and didn't have the best set up to do it then, but if they had, then Halo 2 and 3 would have been super controversial.
Incorrect, they played with sprint early on and removed it due to pacing issues. Set up? Sprint has been in fps gaming since the 90's.
It's not incorrect, that's what I was referring to, they were trying to use it in Halo 2 but they couldn't balance it right before they had to finish the game.
Again, it wasnt about time or them being rushed, this was early in development.
People seem to forget that movement options aren't thrown in at the last second.
Yeah, they developed it for a while, but it just didn't turn out like they wanted it to.
Exactly, because it caused problems with the pacing and gameplay. What exactly are you arguing because it sounds like you agreed with me...
All I'm basically saying is that they waited to put it in until Halo Reach, because they didn't get it worked out well until then. In Reach, sprint was really well balanced with everything else.
They didn't put it in because of the problems it caused with gameplay. The same problems that it caused when they finally did put it in Reach.
GED2208 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show

Err you miss the point entirely. It changes the map design and whole feel of the game. Games work without it, halo did. It's not halo anymore. No more tight small maps with intricate skill jumps. No more hard punish if you get caught in the open, no more skill based shortcuts, like narrows where players found jumps to get from top mid to man cannon. Now we have huuuuuge maps with a million corridors and escape routes. Its all been changed to accommodate sprint, to the point where it only looks like halo, a cheap plastic one at that. In terms of feel its nothing like halo. All you will do is post a response that does'nt answer what I brought up, if you bother at all. There was no need to change the game it was FINE. 343 tried to make it like other games no one wanted that so we all quit. Now it has sprint and 30,000 players woohoo its down to 10 percent of the players who would be on regular in 3.
Uhh didn't all the older halo games have huge maps? Sidewinder, Blood Gulch etc. Consider this please. Now look the whole basis around this sprint argument is that it has influenced map design, ok i'm inclined to agree slightly. However the idea that the influence of sprint has caused maps to be larger than before is in my opinion untrue. Cause we have always had big maps and also small maps, now though we can just get to one side of the map faster than before.
In my original post to you I wasn't attempting to answer the issues you brought up because I don't see an issue I frankly could care less if we had sprint or didn't have sprint, bear in mind this, I knew someone who hadn't played halo before and we set up a LAN in college to play halo CE and the first thing he said when playing the game is that he wished he had sprint cause to him it felt way too slow, now that's a point worth noting I think.
And finally to address the issue you bring up at the end of your post. Look it isn't 2007 anymore, times have changed for better or for worse depends on your perspective, however the idea that the decrease in player population is a result of Sprint alone is not the case at all.
Those maps are big team maps bro smh. What I'm saying is even the 4v4 maps are now big. Its irreverent. If you want sprint play a different game, we have had our game taken. No it isn just sprint the whole game is nothing like halo. We want HALO it can never be halo with sprint it changes it far too much. The game is just bad now, hadly anyone likes it. We will never get what we want anyway, quake fans got a new classic quake. So maybe its best if halo dies for 10 years and comes back classic.
Well thats your opinion but i like halo 5, it still has 4v4,fair starts, skill jumps, good maps. Dont tell people to go play other games, not everyone sees that sprint ruins halo. Halo 5 needs a classic playlist were bms, weapon damage, grenade bounce need to be altered. Everyone on here is a halo fan.
How bout the other way round all classic modes and and play list with sprint, then we will see how many actually play that playlist.
MCCesus wrote:
GED2208 wrote:
MCCesus wrote:
MCCesus wrote:
MCCesus wrote:
Sprint killed Halo. Absolutely killed it. Game cannot hold a population at all ever since sprint was introduced. It just doesn't fit and it fundamentally alters the game.
Game absolutely cannot hold a population since the elites changed design, since the DMR was introduced, since the magnum had a scope reintroduced, so are those reason's for Halo's fall as well?

Just saying sprint is the reason is pure speculation.
None of those things fundementally changed gameplay and map design.
Either way. Its still speculation. There's no hard evidence of sprint being the cause of Halo's decline
There's no evidence saying it isn't.
If you look at the sales for halo reach they are the second highest in the franchise, and someone posted the stats for how long reachs population lasted which was the 2nd or 3rd longest in the series. Reach had sprint and i could argue that it was successful as a halo game. There are many reasons why halo is no longer selling 9 million plus copies one being that the FPS genre has shifted, the gaming market has changed by being more competitive, the xbox one not selling as many copies and sprint may play a factor in their sale numbers. Sprint is part of the sales problem but is not the main reason for low sales.
Reach dropped to 7th place on the xbl charts a couple months after release. It took a nose dive. Being 3rd means little when HCE had no online and h3/3 are miles ahead of everything else. Reach sold well off the coattails of h3.

Competition has hardly raised. The xb1 is outselling the 360. The xb1 does have RROD. The attach rate to xbl is higher than ever.

You're are factually incorrect on practically every point you made.
So you made no reference to how your numbers affected sprint which was the premise of my point. Here are a couple of facts, reach's population had 400,000 minimum playing until 2012. Thats two years after its release date. You mentioned that reach dropped to 7th place on xbl. I would argue that that doesnt mean much considering the population was still high and if you compare reach's numbers to halo 3 numbers of june a year after their release the population was very similar. I would also add that 7th place on the xbl doesnt mean much because in 2011 COD modern warfare 3 released selling over 14 million copies. This is would explain that drop to 7th place.

You said that competition has hardly changed, this couldn't be more wrong. Any COD game sold before 2006 sold less than 3 million copies, while after this period it sold upwards of 5 million and as high as 14 million. Coincidentally 2006 is the same time COD brought in regenerative health which they got from halo. Combine those sell numbers with battlefield with it's last two game 3, 4 which sold over 7 million in 2011 before this time they only sold around 2 million. This increase in sales of other games could mean that population for other games dont last as long. So my point is that competition has certainly changed for halo, other games have become successful.

And to say i was factually incorrect about reach being the 2nd best selling and 2nd best at holding the population was WRONG.

My point in the previous thread was that some people are saying that sprint is the cause of sell numbers, while i dont disagree with this (because obviously people dont like sprint which is apparent in the thread) it cannot be said that sell numbers are entirely due to sprint.
GED2208 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
THE ALL NEW SPACE MARINE SUPER SOLDIER. CAPABLE OF DESTROYING COVENANT FLEETS ALL BY THEMSELVES. AND ARE SMARTER FASTER AND STRONGER THEN ANY OTHER MARINE.

So ummm, whats his abilities....

Welp...he can maybe run...or maybe hit something with a charge I'm still deciding.
So you're going to use Halo Lore as the basis for why we should be able to sprint? I guess we should be able to grab missiles and toss them back since that was done in the books also.

I'm so tired of this over used argument... that and the old argument of "Well if you hate sprinting you should just not sprint".

Here JoelWelsh1998Hunterkiller040SORZUSZANEWatch this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iedeG7SVPCE
Don't you find it bizarre that this is the only community I know of that has a thread of over 2000+ comments that argue over a game mechanic that lets you run faster. Talk about pathetic, sprint is a tool that when used correctly is a benefit and when used incorrectly is a drawback. As for the youtube vid you linked *slow clap. I cant believe that this guy just wasted 10 minutes of oxygen -Yoinking!- like a little girl about a game mechanic that makes you run a little faster.
Err you miss the point entirely. It changes the map design and whole feel of the game. Games work without it, halo did. It's not halo anymore. No more tight small maps with intricate skill jumps. No more hard punish if you get caught in the open, no more skill based shortcuts, like narrows where players found jumps to get from top mid to man cannon. Now we have huuuuuge maps with a million corridors and escape routes. Its all been changed to accommodate sprint, to the point where it only looks like halo, a cheap plastic one at that. In terms of feel its nothing like halo. All you will do is post a response that does'nt answer what I brought up, if you bother at all. There was no need to change the game it was FINE. 343 tried to make it like other games no one wanted that so we all quit. Now it has sprint and 30,000 players woohoo its down to 10 percent of the players who would be on regular in 3.
Quote:
Uhh didn't all the older halo games have huge maps? Sidewinder, Blood Gulch etc. Consider this please. Now look the whole basis around this sprint argument is that it has influenced map design, ok i'm inclined to agree slightly. However the idea that the influence of sprint has caused maps to be larger than before is in my opinion untrue. Cause we have always had big maps and also small maps, now though we can just get to one side of the map faster than before.
In my original post to you I wasn't attempting to answer the issues you brought up because I don't see an issue I frankly could care less if we had sprint or didn't have sprint, bear in mind this, I knew someone who hadn't played halo before and we set up a LAN in college to play halo CE and the first thing he said when playing the game is that he wished he had sprint cause to him it felt way too slow, now that's a point worth noting I think.
And finally to address the issue you bring up at the end of your post. Look it isn't 2007 anymore, times have changed for better or for worse depends on your perspective, however the idea that the decrease in player population is a result of Sprint alone is not the case at all.
Those maps are big team maps bro smh. What I'm saying is even the 4v4 maps are now big. Its irreverent. If you want sprint play a different game, we have had our game taken. No it isn just sprint the whole game is nothing like halo. We want HALO it can never be halo with sprint it changes it far too much. The game is just bad now, hadly anyone likes it. We will never get what we want anyway, quake fans got a new classic quake. So maybe its best if halo dies for 10 years and comes back classic.
Well thats your opinion but i like halo 5, it still has 4v4,fair starts, skill jumps, good maps. Dont tell people to go play other games, not everyone sees that sprint ruins halo. Halo 5 needs a classic playlist were bms, weapon damage, grenade bounce need to be altered. Everyone on here is a halo fan.
Skill jumps aren't as there considering the addition of clamber which ultimately makes traversal of maps much easier. Many games have good maps, but ultimately it doesn't make it more Halo. The maps are still designed differently and stretched out.

Sprint doesn't ruin Halo. It fundamentally changes Halo. If I want to play a game where sprint and enhanced movement belongs, I will play the other games that have so. But when I want to play Halo, I want to play a Halo game that offers it's a unique experience that it created when it first came out. I don't mind evolving, I don't mind slightly changing it, all I want is for 343i to take influence from 1-3 (not Reach) and try to go back to the franchise's fundamentals and improving and expanding upon it.

Classic playlists won't do what I just suggested. Nobody in the right mind will play a Halo 2.5 or a Halo 3.5 every single new Halo title is released. I mean, it might sound good in paper, but ultimately what we want is a new Halo game that doesn't negatively impact the fundamentals of the game.
Thats fine, and i respect that so how would you make a halo 6 game that is similar to halo 3 but not just a cut and copy? If this question sounds aggressive its not meant to be i just want to know.
I like sprint. Let's keep it but make it faster. Get rid of Spartan charge though. Using it inadvertently has resulted in my death more times than I can count. I don't know that I've ever actually intentionally used SC to kill someone.

This post has been hidden.

1
GED2208 wrote:
GED2208 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
Soup7218 wrote:
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
THE ALL NEW SPACE MARINE SUPER SOLDIER. CAPABLE OF DESTROYING COVENANT FLEETS ALL BY THEMSELVES. AND ARE SMARTER FASTER AND STRONGER THEN ANY OTHER MARINE.

So ummm, whats his abilities....

Welp...he can maybe run...or maybe hit something with a charge I'm still deciding.
So you're going to use Halo Lore as the basis for why we should be able to sprint? I guess we should be able to grab missiles and toss them back since that was done in the books also.

I'm so tired of this over used argument... that and the old argument of "Well if you hate sprinting you should just not sprint".

Here JoelWelsh1998Hunterkiller040SORZUSZANEWatch this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iedeG7SVPCE
Don't you find it bizarre that this is the only community I know of that has a thread of over 2000+ comments that argue over a game mechanic that lets you run faster. Talk about pathetic, sprint is a tool that when used correctly is a benefit and when used incorrectly is a drawback. As for the youtube vid you linked *slow clap. I cant believe that this guy just wasted 10 minutes of oxygen -Yoinking!- like a little girl about a game mechanic that makes you run a little faster.
Err you miss the point entirely. It changes the map design and whole feel of the game. Games work without it, halo did. It's not halo anymore. No more tight small maps with intricate skill jumps. No more hard punish if you get caught in the open, no more skill based shortcuts, like narrows where players found jumps to get from top mid to man cannon. Now we have huuuuuge maps with a million corridors and escape routes. Its all been changed to accommodate sprint, to the point where it only looks like halo, a cheap plastic one at that. In terms of feel its nothing like halo. All you will do is post a response that does'nt answer what I brought up, if you bother at all. There was no need to change the game it was FINE. 343 tried to make it like other games no one wanted that so we all quit. Now it has sprint and 30,000 players woohoo its down to 10 percent of the players who would be on regular in 3.
Quote:
Uhh didn't all the older halo games have huge maps? Sidewinder, Blood Gulch etc. Consider this please. Now look the whole basis around this sprint argument is that it has influenced map design, ok i'm inclined to agree slightly. However the idea that the influence of sprint has caused maps to be larger than before is in my opinion untrue. Cause we have always had big maps and also small maps, now though we can just get to one side of the map faster than before.
In my original post to you I wasn't attempting to answer the issues you brought up because I don't see an issue I frankly could care less if we had sprint or didn't have sprint, bear in mind this, I knew someone who hadn't played halo before and we set up a LAN in college to play halo CE and the first thing he said when playing the game is that he wished he had sprint cause to him it felt way too slow, now that's a point worth noting I think.
And finally to address the issue you bring up at the end of your post. Look it isn't 2007 anymore, times have changed for better or for worse depends on your perspective, however the idea that the decrease in player population is a result of Sprint alone is not the case at all.
Those maps are big team maps bro smh. What I'm saying is even the 4v4 maps are now big. Its irreverent. If you want sprint play a different game, we have had our game taken. No it isn just sprint the whole game is nothing like halo. We want HALO it can never be halo with sprint it changes it far too much. The game is just bad now, hadly anyone likes it. We will never get what we want anyway, quake fans got a new classic quake. So maybe its best if halo dies for 10 years and comes back classic.
Well thats your opinion but i like halo 5, it still has 4v4,fair starts, skill jumps, good maps. Dont tell people to go play other games, not everyone sees that sprint ruins halo. Halo 5 needs a classic playlist were bms, weapon damage, grenade bounce need to be altered. Everyone on here is a halo fan.
Skill jumps aren't as there considering the addition of clamber which ultimately makes traversal of maps much easier. Many games have good maps, but ultimately it doesn't make it more Halo. The maps are still designed differently and stretched out.

Sprint doesn't ruin Halo. It fundamentally changes Halo. If I want to play a game where sprint and enhanced movement belongs, I will play the other games that have so. But when I want to play Halo, I want to play a Halo game that offers it's a unique experience that it created when it first came out. I don't mind evolving, I don't mind slightly changing it, all I want is for 343i to take influence from 1-3 (not Reach) and try to go back to the franchise's fundamentals and improving and expanding upon it.

Classic playlists won't do what I just suggested. Nobody in the right mind will play a Halo 2.5 or a Halo 3.5 every single new Halo title is released. I mean, it might sound good in paper, but ultimately what we want is a new Halo game that doesn't negatively impact the fundamentals of the game.
Thats fine, and i respect that so how would you make a halo 6 game that is similar to halo 3 but not just a cut and copy? If this question sounds aggressive its not meant to be i just want to know.
I'm planning on making a post on how I'd design Halo 6's gameplay. Things I will say include: How to make the traversal of maps faster without sprint, SA's to remove and keep, things from previous games that should come back etc. It might sound like a crappy wishlist but I'll try my best.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 615
  4. 616
  5. 617
  6. 618
  7. 619
  8. ...
  9. 838