Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

[Locked] The sprint discussion thread

OP Gandalfur

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 646
  4. 647
  5. 648
  6. 649
  7. 650
  8. ...
  9. 840
TryHardFan wrote:
HiIAmMoot wrote:
tsassi wrote:
C0RRuPTT wrote:
GED2208 wrote:
Think I'd rather play a "new" classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don't like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren't new and we've played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
What was successful nine years ago wouldn't necessarily be as successful today.
And all people ask is to test that hypothesis. Go ahead and release a proper sequel to Halo 3. Redefine and rebalance the sandbox. Try to improve on what the complains in Halo 3 were, like a higher base movement speed and FoV. I honestly doubt it would sell worse than Halo 5 at this point so there isn't much to lose I think.
That's a bit unfair to say it's an untested hypothesis.
C0RRuPTT wrote:
We have not had a classic style Halo since 2007, which was the most successful Halo ever.
See above.
It's also unfair to gauge or draw any conclusions to the success of classic halo game play within a collection that 343 severely failed to care for within the first 4 months of its life span.
I have not made any conclusions. I have shown that 343i tried giving a VERY classic Halo experience.

As for misclaiming the game only got 4 months of support, while it certainly didn't get service past a year, many are making the parallel that Sprint = low populated Halos. Obviously, there's a lot more to it than "Sprint ruined Halo."

HCS ran H2A tournaments. H2A was/is there for custom games of an updated Halo on XB1 coding. That the overall Halo community isn't playing the games they loved still, while so many other "old" games are still being played, does not equate to Sprint being THE factor. That the competitive crowd didn't support H2A more, that's up to them.
MCC was a very poorly created Halo game, that never had a chance. Sure, if the game worked, it would have been amazing. But it didn't, and still has many issues to this day...
People who dislike sprint give definitive statements about why it should not be in Halo.
"Sprint is bad, because..."

People who defend sprint only give vague disagreements.
"You can't say that for sure"
"That doesn't necessarily mean..."

If you think sprint SHOULD be in Halo, please explain why. Other than "I like it"
and please be specific. Use evidence of why it is good for the game.

Here's my evidence of why it is NOT.
Maps are stretched out to accommodate sprint. (Yes, look at Truth opposed to Midship)
Sprint/Abilities do not work on classic Halo maps. (Lockout's flow would be shattered. You could jump from BR3 to Snipe3 without touching the ground.)
You put your weapon down to run into battle (This isn't fast gameplay, you actually slow gameplay down by stopping because you have to put your gun back up.)
Multiple movement speeds creates randomized player/team movement. (Uncertainty IS random)
Risk v.s. Reward doesn't make sense for sprint. (You are removing the ability to shoot / making a bad play, that could turn out good by escaping / obtaining power items.)
Slide/Spartan Charge/Thrust/Stabilize allow you to make inconceivable jumps you should not be allowed to make.
A "Modern game" does not NEED sprint. Why would it? (To be like other games? Halo should be setting itself apart from other titles, not trying to blend in.)

Now ask yourself, what makes sprint a GOOD mechanic? How does it improve gameplay?
Would you abandon the franchise if sprint was removed?

Seriously, explain why sprint is good somebody?
Great points! Midship's close quarters combat is top notch, and that magic is not captured near as well with sprint. Sprint serves to randomize the Halo experience, by not being able to aim while shooting, and over-complicates the gameplay. Not to mention spartan charge and ground pound randomizes it as well. While all three abilities allow players an escape from poor positioning and decision making.
tsassi wrote:
C0RRuPTT wrote:
GED2208 wrote:
Think I'd rather play a "new" classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don't like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren't new and we've played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
What kind of arguement is this?
Reach, H4 & H5 all have such low populations to begin with, right!?
H5 has low population because everyone wants to play the MCC games BUT not play the MCC games right?
343i doesn't listen to its fans but H5G is getting lots of support for its fans and population is reflecting this?

There's so many ways this PoV flops to ensure it's always throwing salt.
343i can't win because you want a classic game but won't play those classic games with equally lack of support, population and other "made up" reasons.''
Let me show you explicitly;
Quote:
Not to mention those games aren't new and we've played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
You don't want to play the old stale games... But you want to play the old stale games.
We have not had a classic style Halo since 2007, which was the most successful Halo ever.
What was successful nine years ago wouldn't necessarily be as successful today.
That gameplay never had a chance to get old. Reach came, and changed things drastically.
HiIAmMoot wrote:
tsassi wrote:
C0RRuPTT wrote:
GED2208 wrote:
Think I'd rather play a "new" classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don't like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren't new and we've played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
What was successful nine years ago wouldn't necessarily be as successful today.
And all people ask is to test that hypothesis. Go ahead and release a proper sequel to Halo 3. Redefine and rebalance the sandbox. Try to improve on what the complains in Halo 3 were, like a higher base movement speed and FoV. I honestly doubt it would sell worse than Halo 5 at this point so there isn't much to lose I think.
Great idea, I believe this would be very successful. Create a game that that is full of quality content from release like Halo 3, to include ranks, oddball, KoTH, functioning theater, solid social playlists, solid-Chief focused campaign, small (Warlock sized) maps to accompany large Blood Gulch style maps, working file share, splitscreen, playable elites and most importantly gameplay with "no" sprint. All features Halo 3 had day ONE! Also, include dedicated servers. They're awesome in H5!
C0RRuPTT wrote:
HiIAmMoot wrote:
tsassi wrote:
C0RRuPTT wrote:
GED2208 wrote:
Think I'd rather play a "new" classic game over the 360 versions that have no support to them and pretty much no population to them (besides reach but don't like reach) and a still broken mcc that too has no support. How many people do you think want to play/tolerate barren games that have no support to them? Not to mention those games aren't new and we've played them many times over, hence why people want a new classic game.
Great idea, I believe this would be very successful. Create a game that that is full of quality content from release like Halo 3, to include ranks, oddball, KoTH, functioning theater, solid social playlists, solid-Chief focused campaign, small (Warlock sized) maps to accompany large Blood Gulch style maps, working file share, splitscreen, playable elites and most importantly gameplay with "no" sprint. All features Halo 3 had day ONE! Also, include dedicated servers. They're awesome in H5!
While your opinion of Warlock sized maps being in H3 from the beginning is wrong, and MLG did have a bit of a request to use Foundry to make maps more to their liking.As a note, Snowbound is considered medium-large..
And as you may note, for dev made maps, they had to up BMS by 10%.

It's not the first time it's been mentioned but I hope these links will finally convince that the past is looked at much more completely than the presents' "parts".
I'd just like to chip in with the point of how sprint affects map design, artificially stretching them out in order to allow for TTK's etc....

Compare the scale, style, design and overall quality of Halo CE, 2, 3 maps...then look at the quality of Halo 4 and 5 maps....

Look at Valhalla (Halo 3) and compare it to Ragnarok (Halo 4) for example.
pajama dad wrote:
People who dislike sprint give definitive statements about why it should not be in Halo.
"Sprint is bad, because..."

People who defend sprint only give vague disagreements.
"You can't say that for sure"
"That doesn't necessarily mean..."

If you think sprint SHOULD be in Halo, please explain why. Other than "I like it"
and please be specific. Use evidence of why it is good for the game.

Here's my evidence of why it is NOT.
Maps are stretched out to accommodate sprint. (Yes, look at Truth opposed to Midship)
Sprint/Abilities do not work on classic Halo maps. (Lockout's flow would be shattered. You could jump from BR3 to Snipe3 without touching the ground.)
You put your weapon down to run into battle (This isn't fast gameplay, you actually slow gameplay down by stopping because you have to put your gun back up.)
Multiple movement speeds creates randomized player/team movement. (Uncertainty IS random)
Risk v.s. Reward doesn't make sense for sprint. (You are removing the ability to shoot / making a bad play, that could turn out good by escaping / obtaining power items.)
Slide/Spartan Charge/Thrust/Stabilize allow you to make inconceivable jumps you should not be allowed to make.
A "Modern game" does not NEED sprint. Why would it? (To be like other games? Halo should be setting itself apart from other titles, not trying to blend in.)

Now ask yourself, what makes sprint a GOOD mechanic? How does it improve gameplay?
Would you abandon the franchise if sprint was removed?

Seriously, explain why sprint is good somebody?
you spend a lot of time presenting evidence that boils down to opinion. How is that any better than simply saying "I dont like sprint"?

all of this, on both sides, has been laid out in detail, like, years ago.
Exactly. His reasons for why sprint should not be in the game are the almost exact same reasons why they should be in the game(excluding his comment about lockout. ). I enjoy the gameplay reasons he listed. to be specific. Those gameplay things he listed benefit me. I do well when those are n the game. Obviously he does not or at least doesn't want to. I have said a few times n this thread and have yet to see much of anything else. People no matter what they are arguing for on this thread or this site or any other gaming site, argue for something because it helps their play. What THEY like. and people argue against game mechanics(guns, maps whatever) because it hurts them. That is what it boils down to. Whats good and bad is strictly opinion and I have not seen anything in this thread that has proven otherwise.
I'd just like to chip in with the point of how sprint affects map design, artificially stretching them out in order to allow for TTK's etc....
Compare the scale, style, design and overall quality of Halo CE, 2, 3 maps...then look at the quality of Halo 4 and 5 maps....
Look at Valhalla (Halo 3) and compare it to Ragnarok (Halo 4) for example.
What do you mean specifically? Without comparing the no-flinch+loadout+DMR/LR gameplay of Halo4, and knowing it takes 38s to run, not sprint, from base to base in both games (same vanilla BMS), again, what specifically?

And, are you really saying Fathom, Riptide, Coliseum... Pretty much all of the Arena maps except for Torque & Stasis, are large and stretched out like most Halo4 maps? Especially considering I just linked above the noted dislike of not-so-small maps in competitive H3, without sprint, until Foundry?
I'd just like to chip in with the point of how sprint affects map design, artificially stretching them out in order to allow for TTK's etc....
Compare the scale, style, design and overall quality of Halo CE, 2, 3 maps...then look at the quality of Halo 4 and 5 maps....
Look at Valhalla (Halo 3) and compare it to Ragnarok (Halo 4) for example.
What do you mean specifically? Without comparing the no-flinch+loadout+DMR/LR gameplay of Halo4, and knowing it takes 38s to run, not sprint, from base to base in both games (same vanilla BMS), again, what specifically?

And, are you really saying Fathom, Riptide, Coliseum... Pretty much all of the Arena maps except for Torque & Stasis, are large and stretched out like most Halo4 maps? Especially considering I just linked above the noted dislike of not-so-small maps in competitive H3, without sprint, until Foundry?
I mean that the inclusion of sprint necessitates larger open areas, in order for people to be "in the open" for the necessary TTK. I do agree that the loadouts of Halo 4 made this problem worse. In my opinion it puts several restrictions on map design...in short.
What do you mean specifically? Without comparing the no-flinch+loadout+DMR/LR gameplay of Halo4, and knowing it takes 38s to run, not sprint, from base to base in both games (same vanilla BMS), again, what specifically?

And, are you really saying Fathom, Riptide, Coliseum... Pretty much all of the Arena maps except for Torque & Stasis, are large and stretched out like most Halo4 maps? Especially considering I just linked above the noted dislike of not-so-small maps in competitive H3, without sprint, until Foundry?
I mean that the inclusion of sprint necessitates larger open areas, in order for people to be "in the open" for the necessary TTK. I do agree that the loadouts of Halo 4 made this problem worse. In my opinion it puts several restrictions on map design...in short.
So, in short, Warlock is a non-open map but Riptide is very open?
The Halo 5 arena maps are terrible sources to reference. There is a reason Overgrowth, Riptide, Molten, and more are not played in HCS at all. They're even worse maps than the original ones.

Try crossing Truth's bottom level diagonally compared to midship. Truth is a super stretched flat wasteland, that is never smart to enter. Why do you think the weapons aren't the same? They added fuel rod and hydra because nobody wants to go towards the middle of the map. It isn't smart. HCS ignores hydra bottom middle completely. That was not the case in H2 for shotgun.

pajama dad wrote:
Exactly. His reasons for why sprint should not be in the game are the almost exact same reasons why they should be in the game(excluding his comment about lockout. ). I enjoy the gameplay reasons he listed. to be specific. Those gameplay things he listed benefit me. I do well when those are n the game. Obviously he does not or at least doesn't want to. I have said a few times n this thread and have yet to see much of anything else. People no matter what they are arguing for on this thread or this site or any other gaming site, argue for something because it helps their play. What THEY like. and people argue against game mechanics(guns, maps whatever) because it hurts them. That is what it boils down to. Whats good and bad is strictly opinion and I have not seen anything in this thread that has proven otherwise.
I provided evidence of how gameplay is negatively impacted by sprint, I didn't mention opinions.
You're logic here is saying, you like sprint for the complications I described...
That doesn't mean it should be in the game. For me to be wrong, you have to prove me wrong,
and that isn't possible with the argument "I like it" which you have just thrown down.
Soup7218 wrote:
pajama dad wrote:
People who dislike sprint give definitive statements about why it should not be in Halo.
"Sprint is bad, because..."

People who defend sprint only give vague disagreements.
"You can't say that for sure"
"That doesn't necessarily mean..."

If you think sprint SHOULD be in Halo, please explain why. Other than "I like it"
and please be specific. Use evidence of why it is good for the game.

Here's my evidence of why it is NOT.
Maps are stretched out to accommodate sprint. (Yes, look at Truth opposed to Midship)
Sprint/Abilities do not work on classic Halo maps. (Lockout's flow would be shattered. You could jump from BR3 to Snipe3 without touching the ground.)
You put your weapon down to run into battle (This isn't fast gameplay, you actually slow gameplay down by stopping because you have to put your gun back up.)
Multiple movement speeds creates randomized player/team movement. (Uncertainty IS random)
Risk v.s. Reward doesn't make sense for sprint. (You are removing the ability to shoot / making a bad play, that could turn out good by escaping / obtaining power items.)
Slide/Spartan Charge/Thrust/Stabilize allow you to make inconceivable jumps you should not be allowed to make.
A "Modern game" does not NEED sprint. Why would it? (To be like other games? Halo should be setting itself apart from other titles, not trying to blend in.)

Now ask yourself, what makes sprint a GOOD mechanic? How does it improve gameplay?
Would you abandon the franchise if sprint was removed?

Seriously, explain why sprint is good somebody?
you spend a lot of time presenting evidence that boils down to opinion. How is that any better than simply saying "I dont like sprint"?

all of this, on both sides, has been laid out in detail, like, years ago.
What.
Nothing I said is opinionated...
All the points I just made, how is that just my opinion? It's logic, not opinion.
You did exactly what I was just referring to btw, you try to diminish my logic without actually presenting your own.
In any argument, there is a right and wrong, based on logical evidence.
Unless you can counter my logic, and disprove me, I'm right. That's how arguments works.

Tell me why sprint is good for the game.
If your last statement is vaguely: "That's just your opinion." You have lost the argument.
Sprint is good because it allows the player to exercise the "flight" response when under pressure--even if it's the illusion of it. So when the adrenaline spikes and fighting has been eliminated as a course of action, turning tail and retreating is the only other recourse (I guess you can "surrender" too as a tertiary option). So you see, psychologically speaking, implementing sprint translates the player's natural, healthy reaction response to his/her digital avatar. I'm the kind of person that has to sit close to the exit and skirt the fringe of a crowd. Running is definitely a valid response to anxiety and dangers...even in a simulation. This is of course an opinion, but I think it is a coherent and compelling argument for the controversial gameplay mechanic we call "sprint".
It's not emulating real life, it's a game with rules those rules have been shattered and the game sucks now.
Not saying that.
TryHardFan wrote:
pajama dad wrote:
People who dislike sprint give definitive statements about why it should not be in Halo.
"Sprint is bad, because..."

People who defend sprint only give vague disagreements.
"You can't say that for sure"
"That doesn't necessarily mean..."

If you think sprint SHOULD be in Halo, please explain why. Other than "I like it"
and please be specific. Use evidence of why it is good for the game.

Here's my evidence of why it is NOT.
Maps are stretched out to accommodate sprint. (Yes, look at Truth opposed to Midship)
Sprint/Abilities do not work on classic Halo maps. (Lockout's flow would be shattered. You could jump from BR3 to Snipe3 without touching the ground.)
You put your weapon down to run into battle (This isn't fast gameplay, you actually slow gameplay down by stopping because you have to put your gun back up.)
Multiple movement speeds creates randomized player/team movement. (Uncertainty IS random)
Risk v.s. Reward doesn't make sense for sprint. (You are removing the ability to shoot / making a bad play, that could turn out good by escaping / obtaining power items.)
Slide/Spartan Charge/Thrust/Stabilize allow you to make inconceivable jumps you should not be allowed to make.
A "Modern game" does not NEED sprint. Why would it? (To be like other games? Halo should be setting itself apart from other titles, not trying to blend in.)

Now ask yourself, what makes sprint a GOOD mechanic? How does it improve gameplay?
Would you abandon the franchise if sprint was removed?

Seriously, explain why sprint is good somebody?
you spend a lot of time presenting evidence that boils down to opinion. How is that any better than simply saying "I dont like sprint"?

all of this, on both sides, has been laid out in detail, like, years ago.
What.
Nothing I said is opinionated...
All the points I just made, how is that just my opinion? It's logic, not opinion.
You did exactly what I was just referring to btw, you try to diminish my logic without actually presenting your own.
In any argument, there is a right and wrong, based on logical evidence.
Unless you can counter my logic, and disprove me, I'm right. That's how arguments works.

Tell me why sprint is good for the game.
If your last statement is vaguely: "That's just your opinion." You have lost the argument.
Sprint is good because it allows the player to exercise the "flight" response when under pressure--even if it's the illusion of it. So when the adrenaline spikes and fighting has been eliminated as a course of action, turning tail and retreating is the only other recourse (I guess you can "surrender" too as a tertiary option). So you see, psychologically speaking, implementing sprint translates the player's natural, healthy reaction response to his/her digital avatar. I'm the kind of person that has to sit close to the exit and skirt the fringe of a crowd. Running is definitely a valid response to anxiety and dangers...even in a simulation. This is of course an opinion, but I think it is a coherent and compelling argument for the controversial gameplay mechanic we call "sprint".
So what is it about the sprint mechanic that activates the flight response which can't be replicated among an equally fast BMS? You theoretically should be achieving the same level of intensity regardless, especially given that your opponent is still just as capable in chasing you, which can potentially add to the experience.
Well there's the fact that you actually feel like you are running. It can make a difference in time sensitive or score based playlists like CTF. Also, if teammates need your help you can zip to them at a good clip. You can move at the classic slowness when pieing a corner or watching for hidden/camouflaged enemies. Sprint does not benefit all scenarios, but it does have its place. If you just want BMS increased, 343 needs to scale it up by 300-400% to achieve a satisfying "running" speed. Regardless, the mechanic is implemented. If you like it, use it--if you don't, don't.
lI Mr X Il wrote:
pajama dad wrote:
People who dislike sprint give definitive statements about why it should not be in Halo.
"Sprint is bad, because..."

People who defend sprint only give vague disagreements.
"You can't say that for sure"
"That doesn't necessarily mean..."

If you think sprint SHOULD be in Halo, please explain why. Other than "I like it"
and please be specific. Use evidence of why it is good for the game.

Here's my evidence of why it is NOT.
Maps are stretched out to accommodate sprint. (Yes, look at Truth opposed to Midship)
Sprint/Abilities do not work on classic Halo maps. (Lockout's flow would be shattered. You could jump from BR3 to Snipe3 without touching the ground.)
You put your weapon down to run into battle (This isn't fast gameplay, you actually slow gameplay down by stopping because you have to put your gun back up.)
Multiple movement speeds creates randomized player/team movement. (Uncertainty IS random)
Risk v.s. Reward doesn't make sense for sprint. (You are removing the ability to shoot / making a bad play, that could turn out good by escaping / obtaining power items.)
Slide/Spartan Charge/Thrust/Stabilize allow you to make inconceivable jumps you should not be allowed to make.
A "Modern game" does not NEED sprint. Why would it? (To be like other games? Halo should be setting itself apart from other titles, not trying to blend in.)

Now ask yourself, what makes sprint a GOOD mechanic? How does it improve gameplay?
Would you abandon the franchise if sprint was removed?

Seriously, explain why sprint is good somebody?
you spend a lot of time presenting evidence that boils down to opinion. How is that any better than simply saying "I dont like sprint"?

all of this, on both sides, has been laid out in detail, like, years ago.
What.
Nothing I said is opinionated...
All the points I just made, how is that just my opinion? It's logic, not opinion.
You did exactly what I was just referring to btw, you try to diminish my logic without actually presenting your own.
In any argument, there is a right and wrong, based on logical evidence.
Unless you can counter my logic, and disprove me, I'm right. That's how arguments works.

Tell me why sprint is good for the game.
If your last statement is vaguely: "That's just your opinion." You have lost the argument.
Sprint is good because it allows the player to exercise the "flight" response when under pressure--even if it's the illusion of it. So when the adrenaline spikes and fighting has been eliminated as a course of action, turning tail and retreating is the only other recourse (I guess you can "surrender" too as a tertiary option). So you see, psychologically speaking, implementing sprint translates the player's natural, healthy reaction response to his/her digital avatar. I'm the kind of person that has to sit close to the exit and skirt the fringe of a crowd. Running is definitely a valid response to anxiety and dangers...even in a simulation. This is of course an opinion, but I think it is a coherent and compelling argument for the controversial gameplay mechanic we call "sprint".
That's exactly what fans of the older halos don't like about sprint. It rewards the flight response over the fight reponse. It rewards a defensive style of play and allows more room for error in movement, aim, and positioning. High level CE doubles is like a game of chess. You have to think two moves ahead of your opponent because if you don't properly predict where your opponent is and you make the wrong move you are going to get annihilated. If you get caught in a bad spot you can't run away. You are forced to battle your way out and rely on your strafe and your shot to get you out of that spot. You are punished for your bad positioning and rewarded for placing good shots under pressure. Likewise, you are rewarded heavily for having good positioning because opponents who are caught in a bad spot can't run away. Sprint is first and foremost and defensive tactic (since you can't even shoot while doing it) and shrinks the skill gap between good players and great players.
Another valid point. Well said.
Soup7218 wrote:
Well there's the fact that you actually feel like you are running. It can make a difference in time sensitive or score based playlists like CTF. Also, if teammates need your help you can zip to them at a good clip. You can move at the classic slowness when pieing a corner or watching for hidden/camouflaged enemies. Sprint does not benefit all scenarios, but it does have its place. If you just want BMS increased, 343 needs to scale it up by 300-400% to achieve a satisfying "running" speed. Regardless, the mechanic is implemented. If you like it, use it--if you don't, don't.
A "feeling" has NOTHING to do with gameplay. You understand the movement speeds more when there is one one to worry about, because it is all you know.
It doesn't relate to time sensitive things like CTF, because if the other team challenged you, won, got the flag, why should you get to go faster just to catch up to them and stop the capture? Your team should have stopped them in the first place. In this scenario, you get punished for making mistakes, and the other team gets rewarded for making the correct plays. That is what should be promoted. Not a false sense of entitlement.
Soup7218 wrote:
Well there's the fact that you actually feel like you are running. It can make a difference in time sensitive or score based playlists like CTF. Also, if teammates need your help you can zip to them at a good clip. You can move at the classic slowness when pieing a corner or watching for hidden/camouflaged enemies. Sprint does not benefit all scenarios, but it does have its place. If you just want BMS increased, 343 needs to scale it up by 300-400% to achieve a satisfying "running" speed. Regardless, the mechanic is implemented. If you like it, use it--if you don't, don't.
A "feeling" has NOTHING to do with gameplay. You understand the movement speeds more when there is one one to worry about, because it is all you know.
It doesn't relate to time sensitive things like CTF, because if the other team challenged you, won, got the flag, why should you get to go faster just to catch up to them and stop the capture? Your team should have stopped them in the first place. In this scenario, you get punished for making mistakes, and the other team gets rewarded for making the correct plays. That is what should be promoted. Not a false sense of entitlement.
Maybe all YOU know. Are you some kind of jellyfish? Some of us have more complex nervous systems. Oh, and a feeling has nothing to do with gameplay? Tell me more about how you keep your cool when you're getting slapped by a company of n00bz. Entitlement? I'm not talking about adolescent suburban kids or Affirmative Action (although you may fall into the former category). That has nothing to do with this. Your credibility is crumbling along with your reasoning.
Soup7218 wrote:
pajama dad wrote:
People who dislike sprint give definitive statements about why it should not be in Halo.
"Sprint is bad, because..."

People who defend sprint only give vague disagreements.
"You can't say that for sure"
"That doesn't necessarily mean..."

If you think sprint SHOULD be in Halo, please explain why. Other than "I like it"
and please be specific. Use evidence of why it is good for the game.

Here's my evidence of why it is NOT.
Maps are stretched out to accommodate sprint. (Yes, look at Truth opposed to Midship)
Sprint/Abilities do not work on classic Halo maps. (Lockout's flow would be shattered. You could jump from BR3 to Snipe3 without touching the ground.)
You put your weapon down to run into battle (This isn't fast gameplay, you actually slow gameplay down by stopping because you have to put your gun back up.)
Multiple movement speeds creates randomized player/team movement. (Uncertainty IS random)
Risk v.s. Reward doesn't make sense for sprint. (You are removing the ability to shoot / making a bad play, that could turn out good by escaping / obtaining power items.)
Slide/Spartan Charge/Thrust/Stabilize allow you to make inconceivable jumps you should not be allowed to make.
A "Modern game" does not NEED sprint. Why would it? (To be like other games? Halo should be setting itself apart from other titles, not trying to blend in.)

Now ask yourself, what makes sprint a GOOD mechanic? How does it improve gameplay?
Would you abandon the franchise if sprint was removed?

Seriously, explain why sprint is good somebody?
you spend a lot of time presenting evidence that boils down to opinion. How is that any better than simply saying "I dont like sprint"?

all of this, on both sides, has been laid out in detail, like, years ago.
What.
Nothing I said is opinionated...
All the points I just made, how is that just my opinion? It's logic, not opinion.
You did exactly what I was just referring to btw, you try to diminish my logic without actually presenting your own.
In any argument, there is a right and wrong, based on logical evidence.
Unless you can counter my logic, and disprove me, I'm right. That's how arguments works.

Tell me why sprint is good for the game.
If your last statement is vaguely: "That's just your opinion." You have lost the argument.
TryHardFan wrote:
pajama dad wrote:
People who dislike sprint give definitive statements about why it should not be in Halo.
"Sprint is bad, because..."

People who defend sprint only give vague disagreements.
"You can't say that for sure"
"That doesn't necessarily mean..."

If you think sprint SHOULD be in Halo, please explain why. Other than "I like it"
and please be specific. Use evidence of why it is good for the game.

Here's my evidence of why it is NOT.
Maps are stretched out to accommodate sprint. (Yes, look at Truth opposed to Midship)
Sprint/Abilities do not work on classic Halo maps. (Lockout's flow would be shattered. You could jump from BR3 to Snipe3 without touching the ground.)
You put your weapon down to run into battle (This isn't fast gameplay, you actually slow gameplay down by stopping because you have to put your gun back up.)
Multiple movement speeds creates randomized player/team movement. (Uncertainty IS random)
Risk v.s. Reward doesn't make sense for sprint. (You are removing the ability to shoot / making a bad play, that could turn out good by escaping / obtaining power items.)
Slide/Spartan Charge/Thrust/Stabilize allow you to make inconceivable jumps you should not be allowed to make.
A "Modern game" does not NEED sprint. Why would it? (To be like other games? Halo should be setting itself apart from other titles, not trying to blend in.)

Now ask yourself, what makes sprint a GOOD mechanic? How does it improve gameplay?
Would you abandon the franchise if sprint was removed?

Seriously, explain why sprint is good somebody?
you spend a lot of time presenting evidence that boils down to opinion. How is that any better than simply saying "I dont like sprint"?

all of this, on both sides, has been laid out in detail, like, years ago.
What.
Nothing I said is opinionated...
All the points I just made, how is that just my opinion? It's logic, not opinion.
You did exactly what I was just referring to btw, you try to diminish my logic without actually presenting your own.
In any argument, there is a right and wrong, based on logical evidence.
Unless you can counter my logic, and disprove me, I'm right. That's how arguments works.

Tell me why sprint is good for the game.
If your last statement is vaguely: "That's just your opinion." You have lost the argument.
So what is it about the sprint mechanic that activates the flight response which can't be replicated among an equally fast BMS? You theoretically should be achieving the same level of intensity regardless, especially given that your opponent is still just as capable in chasing you, which can potentially add to the experience.
Well there's the fact that you actually feel like you are running. It can make a difference in time sensitive or score based playlists like CTF. Also, if teammates need your help you can zip to them at a good clip. You can move at the classic slowness when pieing a corner or watching for hidden/camouflaged enemies. Sprint does not benefit all scenarios, but it does have its place. If you just want BMS increased, 343 needs to scale it up by 300-400% to achieve a satisfying "running" speed. Regardless, the mechanic is implemented. If you like it, use it--if you don't, don't.
Again, why can't the "running" speed just be tuned to match the current sprint speed in halo 5? I don't even think you realize how fast the game itself would actually be if the BMS was tuned to 300% of normal movement.

The refusal to use sprint doesn't make any of its consequences go away in my game play. I will have to consistently contend against enemies with power weapons because they'll always reach them faster, especially since all the maps will have kept the mechanic in mind. I can tell you to not use Spartan charge if you hate it so much, but that solves none of the issues pertaining to its damage output and ease of use.
I don't think sprint should be removed, but the maps have to be designed around the feature. Arena maps in this game are way too small, combined with the reduced motion tracker range and poor spawn placement, and often times I'll spawn only to have 3 people from the enemy team run in and mow me down before I can even get situated.
Soup7218 wrote:
Maybe all YOU know. Are you some kind of jellyfish? Some of us have more complex nervous systems. Oh, and a feeling has nothing to do with gameplay? Tell me more about how you keep your cool when you're getting slapped by a company of n00bz. Entitlement? I'm not talking about adolescent suburban kids or Affirmative Action (although you may fall into the former category). That has nothing to do with this. Your credibility is crumbling along with your reasoning.
What in the world is this supposed to mean?
Entitlement = I should be able to contest flag last second, even though we lost, and they earned the flag run.
My credibility is crumbling? You just barfed out a paragraph that can be summed up with calling me a jellyfish...?
lI Mr X Il wrote:
pajama dad wrote:
People who dislike sprint give definitive statements about why it should not be in Halo.
"Sprint is bad, because..."

People who defend sprint only give vague disagreements.
"You can't say that for sure"
"That doesn't necessarily mean..."

If you think sprint SHOULD be in Halo, please explain why. Other than "I like it"
and please be specific. Use evidence of why it is good for the game.

Here's my evidence of why it is NOT.
Maps are stretched out to accommodate sprint. (Yes, look at Truth opposed to Midship)
Sprint/Abilities do not work on classic Halo maps. (Lockout's flow would be shattered. You could jump from BR3 to Snipe3 without touching the ground.)
You put your weapon down to run into battle (This isn't fast gameplay, you actually slow gameplay down by stopping because you have to put your gun back up.)
Multiple movement speeds creates randomized player/team movement. (Uncertainty IS random)
Risk v.s. Reward doesn't make sense for sprint. (You are removing the ability to shoot / making a bad play, that could turn out good by escaping / obtaining power items.)
Slide/Spartan Charge/Thrust/Stabilize allow you to make inconceivable jumps you should not be allowed to make.
A "Modern game" does not NEED sprint. Why would it? (To be like other games? Halo should be setting itself apart from other titles, not trying to blend in.)

Now ask yourself, what makes sprint a GOOD mechanic? How does it improve gameplay?
Would you abandon the franchise if sprint was removed?

Seriously, explain why sprint is good somebody?
you spend a lot of time presenting evidence that boils down to opinion. How is that any better than simply saying "I dont like sprint"?

all of this, on both sides, has been laid out in detail, like, years ago.
What.
Nothing I said is opinionated...
All the points I just made, how is that just my opinion? It's logic, not opinion.
You did exactly what I was just referring to btw, you try to diminish my logic without actually presenting your own.
In any argument, there is a right and wrong, based on logical evidence.
Unless you can counter my logic, and disprove me, I'm right. That's how arguments works.

Tell me why sprint is good for the game.
If your last statement is vaguely: "That's just your opinion." You have lost the argument.
Sprint is good because it allows the player to exercise the "flight" response when under pressure--even if it's the illusion of it. So when the adrenaline spikes and fighting has been eliminated as a course of action, turning tail and retreating is the only other recourse (I guess you can "surrender" too as a tertiary option). So you see, psychologically speaking, implementing sprint translates the player's natural, healthy reaction response to his/her digital avatar. I'm the kind of person that has to sit close to the exit and skirt the fringe of a crowd. Running is definitely a valid response to anxiety and dangers...even in a simulation. This is of course an opinion, but I think it is a coherent and compelling argument for the controversial gameplay mechanic we call "sprint".
That's exactly what fans of the older halos don't like about sprint. It rewards the flight response over the fight reponse. It rewards a defensive style of play and allows more room for error in movement, aim, and positioning. High level CE doubles is like a game of chess. You have to think two moves ahead of your opponent because if you don't properly predict where your opponent is and you make the wrong move you are going to get annihilated. If you get caught in a bad spot you can't run away. You are forced to battle your way out and rely on your strafe and your shot to get you out of that spot. You are punished for your bad positioning and rewarded for placing good shots under pressure. Likewise, you are rewarded heavily for having good positioning because opponents who are caught in a bad spot can't run away. Sprint is first and foremost and defensive tactic (since you can't even shoot while doing it) and shrinks the skill gap between good players and great players.
You can't sprint when being shot, unless you were already at full speed. In my opinion, sprint adds a new factor into the game. It offers increased mobility for no defense, much like Soldier 76 from Overwatch. Increased BMS would be like having no sprint at all if everybody moves at the same speed.
It adds a factor into the game alright. A factor that does nothing to benefit the gameplay. A factor that no one asked for and one that isn't needed. Halo is not a tactical shooter. I don't care for the risk vs reward factor of lowering your weapon for speed or sacrificing speed to keep it raised. Halo is an arena fps. Separating movement from shooting is a big no go. Anything I can do I should be able to do while keeping my aim on my opponent and shooting. When sprint is built into the game the maps are designed with that in mind. There will be gaps that require you to run and jump to clear. This means that in order to make the jump you would have to disengage from combat, look forward, and run and jump over the gap. In a halo without sprint any gap that is designed to be cleared can be cleared while moving at base speed. This means you could strafe and jump the gap facing sideways while sniping your opponent midair over the gap. Off topic, but clamber does the same thing. In order to hop on a ledge I have to disengage from combat, look forward at the ledge, and clamber up on it. In a Halo without clamber if a ledge was meant to be gotten on top of you could do it by crouch jumping while facing backwards and putting shots on the guy in front of you. People think sprint as a game mechanic isn't that big of a deal but it fundamentally changes the way the game plays. It completely takes away from Halo's arena fps roots in much the same way loadouts do. Halo with sprint and Halo without sprint might as well be two different games.
Soup7218 wrote:
Well there's the fact that you actually feel like you are running. It can make a difference in time sensitive or score based playlists like CTF. Also, if teammates need your help you can zip to them at a good clip. You can move at the classic slowness when pieing a corner or watching for hidden/camouflaged enemies. Sprint does not benefit all scenarios, but it does have its place. If you just want BMS increased, 343 needs to scale it up by 300-400% to achieve a satisfying "running" speed. Regardless, the mechanic is implemented. If you like it, use it--if you don't, don't.
A "feeling" has NOTHING to do with gameplay. You understand the movement speeds more when there is one one to worry about, because it is all you know.
It doesn't relate to time sensitive things like CTF, because if the other team challenged you, won, got the flag, why should you get to go faster just to catch up to them and stop the capture? Your team should have stopped them in the first place. In this scenario, you get punished for making mistakes, and the other team gets rewarded for making the correct plays. That is what should be promoted. Not a false sense of entitlement.
Maybe all YOU know. Are you some kind of jellyfish? Some of us have more complex nervous systems. Oh, and a feeling has nothing to do with gameplay? Tell me more about how you keep your cool when you're getting slapped by a company of n00bz. Entitlement? I'm not talking about adolescent suburban kids or Affirmative Action (although you may fall into the former category). That has nothing to do with this. Your credibility is crumbling along with your reasoning.
What the -Yoink- is going on in here, I'm gone for a cupple days and the discussion has moved from a discussion that was at least loosely based on scientific papers to people trying to make a point by calling others jellyfish and claiming they have a superior nervous systems?
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 646
  4. 647
  5. 648
  6. 649
  7. 650
  8. ...
  9. 840