I believe this solution is the best out there. Once again, no one said it was a zero percent chance, in fact I do believe I said it had a higher chance than Reach on MCC. " that sounds more realistic than Reach on MCC ever did." In fact I quoted it in this post just in case you miss it again. Adding Reach(a game not specifically about the Chief) to the MASTER CHIEF COLLECTION(put that in bold just in case you missed it) didn't seem realistic. Yes, ODST was added but it had no multiplayer which made it easier and people really liked it. Reach is completely different than ODST. The modern and classic playstyles aren't hard to separate in one game, I don't know where you are getting these two different game in one ideas from. If you have played Halo 5 customs, you know you can simply turn off sprint, thrusters, etc.. So, 343 makes the game, then turns off whatever the community wants and makes two different menus.
I'm perfectly aware what MCC stands for. Any choice not to include a game post-launch is made, aside from cost, as an ideological one.
But apparently it's ok for some instances, but not others, as long as it in this case support your narrative.
Really? You don't know where I get the two different game in one ideas from?
Classic vs Modern settings does not work because it implies no new stuff is added outside of non-player assets, to the Classic settings.
Just because I dislike sprint doesn't mean I autmatically dislike thrusters. Just because I'm not fond of Clamber doesn't mean I'm against the idea of wall-jumping.
So no, it would not "keep all sides happy".
And that's ignoring split development resources ( modern is going to suffer from this as well), disproportionate support post-launch, the most-likely feeling of "watered down", and the population issues which highly likely comes along.
"Classic" Halo isn't going to progress on its own path if all it's ever going to be, is a dead-end short side-track along the Modern path. I.e, it's not going to be its own game designed around its own mechanics made to complement / perfect the classic gameplay, if all that's ever done with it is take the Modern version and remove some mechanics from that. That Classic can grow on its own, without being tethered to Modern.
If flicking a few switches and creating two separate game instances in a single game was as easy as you make it out to be, we would have seen it already elsewhere.
Your "best solution", is you getting what you want, and no-sprinters getting what you think they/we want.
who tells there need to become boring when there are long.
sure the halo CE second mission is boring thats something we all agree on.
but that has chance in the halo 4 campaing missions that there are also long but not boring thats something diffrend.
i not tell it most be the same as halo CE second mission then the campaigns are more boring then.
Let me make it simple:
You say second mission of Halo CE is boring, it needs sprint.
I say you'd still say the second mission of Halo CE is boring if it had sprint and the areas were bigger.
There's even a big chance you'd find the second mission boring even if Halo CE had sprint, and the areas were the same size.
I can't fathom how you thought anyone has implied anything needs to be boring.
Sprint does not change anything. If you're going to be running for 30 seconds, you're not doing anything different if you have sprint in the game or not. You're watching walls go by, nothing else.
from halo CE i not know if there are maps that are good to be use for sprint since since i never have play multiplayer that time and since there are not on the mcc i cant tell anything about it.
halo 2 the same thing as for halo CE but there are only Halo 2 anniversary maps in the mcc and from that point.
there are some maps in the halo 2 Anniversary that sprint is good to use for.
the halo 3 maps where i have start playing more the game from are more the large maps like: Sandtrap,Last Resort, Valhalla,Rat's Nest,Standoff,Avalanche,Orbital,Sandbox and longshore are more the maps i see where sprint are good for to have.
that are more the 4-12 and the 6-16 maps where sprint good for is.
for the 2-6 maps and the 2-8 maps is sprint not a good thing since its a small map and there for is sprint more useless.
for small maps that are for 8 max off players more is sprint not a good thing to have.
but for the 12 and the 16 max off players maps is sprint good to have since its a large map and sprint is good there.
For default gameplay you generally do not change aorund the basic gameplay based on how many players are present.
Halo CE - 3 functioned perfectly well with 2-16 players using default gameplay.
Starting to change up default gameplay between playlists based on player count just start segregation and risk player confusion.
Large maps function perfectly fine without sprint.
is true but that are more game modes that are more playable in the Team Slayer playlist where its more 4 vs 4 then is not having sprint better.
the best way to find a good solution for it all is easy on that type game mode's where sprint is no use for are more the 4 vs 4 game type's like you see more in the Team Slayer playlist.
same go's for playlist's like SWAT where sprint is no usefull are better without sprint.
and how to fix it that game type's and playlist's like that have no sprint and that other game type's like grifball,infection and BTB not infulse have from it is that game type's like Team Slayer and Swat join in 1 playlist like the Ranked playlist that all game type's and playlist in the Ranked playlist have no sprint and that the social playlist like BTB infection and Griffbal have the sprint option.
Mixing this much will just either make players feel confused and start sticking to specific playlists, or they'll just jump ship altogether.
for the campaign i still think sprint is good for that you can make a longer campaign story that you can tell the story more in 1 parts then you have in halo 3.
No, seriously, sprint does not make a longer story to tell.
that you can tell a good story more and better one also.
Sprint makes a better story? The argument behind these two Story aspects of sprint, I need to hear them. Please elaborate.
same go's for WARZONE in halo 5 and also for WARZONE FIREFIGHT in halo 5 where sprint is good for since you play on large maps and sprint a good thing there for is.
Design Warzone to not "need sprint", and everything is fine and dandy.
Sprint not needed at all.
and in halo reach firefight nobody took the sprint option since it was useless more there since the best way to get more points is with jetpeck there and in some case's you need notting for it since the map was small for any off the mechanice's you can choose out.
same go's for halo 5 matchmaking maps as for the halo 3 halo 4 and halo reach maps.
Sounds like we don't need sprint at all then.