Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

The sprint discussion thread

OP Gandalfur

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 832
  4. 833
  5. 834
  6. 835
  7. 836
  8. ...
  9. 838
Delta5931 wrote:
Delta5931 wrote:
Naqser wrote:
Hey, I'm just coming up with solutions don't get mad at me. Also, I don't remember saying that the MCC wasn't a collection of games, don't know what you meant there. I mentioned Reach on the MCC because it seemed like something 343 would never do, but it is here. You said that 343 wouldn't make two different games(of course they wouldn't it is the same game) with different mechanics but, that sounds more realistic than Reach on MCC ever did.
So, is it a solution worth mentioning if you basically know it's a zero percent chance it's going to happen?

ODST got added rather quickly to the MCC, which increased Reach's odds for implementation somewhat.
While it sure required work, making two different games in one I'd argue is more work.
How does adding a game to a collection sound less realistic than, to my knowledge something that hasn't been done ever before.

Spikanor wrote:
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.
That doesnt change the mechanics of the game, however. Hitscan weapons are still tuned to hit players moving faster than their normal speed. Maps that exist are designed around having the full arsenal of abilities in them. There are jumps in Halo 5's regular maps you cannot make without clamber. You can argue "Well, they'll just design maps where that isn't the case!" But that's a lot of added effort to design new maps just for the classic gamemode.

If you then argue and say "Increase BMS and jump height," then we're back to the logical conclusion of doing that around the board and cutting out the middleman entirely.
Halo 5 did the same thing with Mythic, Halo CE throwback, and Halo 3 throwback. I doubt hitscan will be a problem. Yes, I was going to say increase BMS and jump height. It's just like Halo 5 customs you can do it easily.
Yeah... And it still uses Halo 5 mechanics for gunplay that weren't in Halo 3 or those other ones. You can call it "Throwback," but that isn't like playing Halo 3 or the others in anything except for the name. If we increase BMS and jump height, why waste time with another mode that does exactly the same things but under a different name? For the appeasement of the Sprint fans?
Also,
So, none of the maps or starting weapons are anywhere close? Not even weapon spawns and locations, ok.
Delta5931 wrote:
Delta5931 wrote:
Naqser wrote:
Hey, I'm just coming up with solutions don't get mad at me. Also, I don't remember saying that the MCC wasn't a collection of games, don't know what you meant there. I mentioned Reach on the MCC because it seemed like something 343 would never do, but it is here. You said that 343 wouldn't make two different games(of course they wouldn't it is the same game) with different mechanics but, that sounds more realistic than Reach on MCC ever did.
So, is it a solution worth mentioning if you basically know it's a zero percent chance it's going to happen?

ODST got added rather quickly to the MCC, which increased Reach's odds for implementation somewhat.
While it sure required work, making two different games in one I'd argue is more work.
How does adding a game to a collection sound less realistic than, to my knowledge something that hasn't been done ever before.

Spikanor wrote:
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.
Quote:
I doubt hitscan will be a problem
This would like a word with you. Yes, I know that Bullet Magnetism and hitscan aren't the same things, but the logic still applies. There are issues when you tune the game for players running at certain speeds and then take away those speeds.
I thought this was a sprint discussion. In Halo 3 throwback, the speeds aren't the same it is slower but, the bullet magnetism can't be changed. Yet, the throwback playlist has no problems. So, hitscan will not be a problem. Even if it did, it would just need minor tweaks.
Naqser wrote:
Really? You don't know where I get the two different game in one ideas from?
No, I don't. My example was CEA which was one game with two menus.
Spikanor wrote:
Spikanor wrote:
for me its easy.if the next halo game has no sprint then i not gone buy the game since i not gone buy a game i not like about and i not care about it also.
You're one of very few people that will base an entire purchasing decision off of one mechanic, while simultaneously misrepresenting the mechanic's purpose and not being open to any compromise about it.

On top of that, you blatantly ignore questions for clarification of your wild claims when its presented to you.
at some point i gone ignore questions from some communety members since its no use to keep in discusion with then since there keep coming with the same thing always
Yeah that's a whole essay and I have no intention to commenting on every single piece.

You said Sprint is good because it tells a longer and better story. Someone asked you to clarify. You proceeded to not clarify.

You said you weren't going to buy the game solely because there is no Sprint in it. Then you backpedaled to "maybe there are other things I like about the game" which invalidates your whole previous post.

You asked for suggestions because you "never see them", someone provided some, and you gave reasons to why you don't like it. How is anyone supposed to provide a reasonable suggestion if you don't want a change in the first place?
No, I don't. My example was CEA which was one game with two menus.
Under the assumption that you actually know what's wanted, it'd require two games, not a full game and the half, quarter, whatever, is left after the full version is stripped of whatever is deemed "non-classic".

Your example is pretty much two different games in one package...
Naqser wrote:
No, I don't. My example was CEA which was one game with two menus.
Under the assumption that you actually know what's wanted, it'd require two games, not a full game and the half, quarter, whatever, is left after the full version is stripped of whatever is deemed "non-classic".

Your example is pretty much two different games in one package...
CEA was one game with two menus. One menu only had campaign with the 2001 graphics and remastered graphics. The second menu had forge, multiplayer, customs, theatre with graphics from 2010, different weapons and sounds. What I'm proposing is one game with two menus. One menu(as an example since idk what Infinite will have) has thrust, clamber, and sprint. The second menu is the exact same without those three, slightly higher jump height and slightly higher bms. So, how is that two different games? This can be done in Halo 5's customs.
Spikanor wrote:
do you really think i gone replay on questions where people ask me why doom or Counter Strike are doing great since there have no sprint on that type questions i not gone replay more since i not care about that type game's no.
If you've ever claimed Halo need sprint to do good, then you'd better be prepared to answer why other games with no sprint aren't doing bad, regardless of your own opinion of them.
Not explaining why CSGO and Doom are doing good, just means you can't explain wht Halo would do poorly without sprint.

Spikanor wrote:
then why you not come also with suggestions about how to deal with the sprint problem since i not seeing that from a lot off people on this thread that there only can tell its wrong and not come with better idea's how to fix it then.
There have been plenty of suggestions thrown out, but...

Spikanor wrote:
The only suggestions i keep seeing are still the same that there most remove sprint from the full game but we all know thats not gone fix the problem.
thats more choosing for you own side and not care about the other side.
That is a good example of how well some actually listen to those suggestions, not a lot.

Caring about the other side? I'd say the feeling's mutual, but I'm not really looking for that kind of "affection" from you.

Spikanor wrote:
at some point i gone ignore questions from some communety members since its no use to keep in discusion with then since there keep coming with the same thing always
Well, two possabilities, either you don't provide a good enough answer, or you youself bring up the same things again and again, think you've brought up JiP twice now, and from what I recall, both times went thw same way.
Though it seems you're changing strategy and choosing something else:

Spikanor wrote:
but you also not has answer my question i have ask on the same post.
that since most communety members see sprint in halo that its more becoming a cod game that what about the firefight mode we all like to have in the halo series that was also stolen from cod since halo 3 ODST and halo reach firefight system was copy from COD World At War zombie's mode.
thats what all the reviews are telling more about the halo 3 ODST and Halo reach Firefight system that it was copy from cod world at war Zombie's mode more.
and then is copying from cod is a good thing will sprint is copy from cod also most on this thread have told then is firefight also wrong then.
Sprint is a player mechanic altering the default gameplay. The gameplay we use to play the game, it is present oretty much across the whole game.
Firefight is a survival mode which provide, in amount, more gameplay to experience. It is a specific PvE mode in which players try to stay alive as long as possible, ot reach a specific goal.
One is a tool, and the other is pretty much a large asset.

Though you still cling on to CoD, and you're pretty much the only in a long time to mention CoD.

Lastly, survival modes have existed long before CoD: WaW's zombie mode.
If I'm not mistaken, there were even ways to have endless enemies spawn in some places in Halo CE, where you could simulate some sort of survival.

Naqser wrote:
No, I don't. My example was CEA which was one game with two menus.
Under the assumption that you actually know what's wanted, it'd require two games, not a full game and the half, quarter, whatever, is left after the full version is stripped of whatever is deemed "non-classic".

Your example is pretty much two different games in one package...
CEA was one game with two menus. One menu only had campaign with the 2001 graphics and remastered graphics. The second menu had forge, multiplayer, customs, theatre with graphics from 2010, different weapons and sounds. What I'm proposing is one game with two menus. One menu(as an example since idk what Infinite will have) has thrust, clamber, and sprint. The second menu is the exact same without those three, slightly higher jump height and slightly higher bms. So, how is that two different games? This can be done in Halo 5's customs.
No, Halo CEA was two games.
Halo CE remastered campaign, and a button leading to a sectioned Reach Multiplayer.

Also, watered down, a short dead end path tied to "modern", assets tuned to missing mechanics.
Naqser wrote:
Spikanor wrote:
Naqser wrote:
No, I don't. My example was CEA which was one game with two menus.
Under the assumption that you actually know what's wanted, it'd require two games, not a full game and the half, quarter, whatever, is left after the full version is stripped of whatever is deemed "non-classic".

Your example is pretty much two different games in one package...
CEA was one game with two menus. One menu only had campaign with the 2001 graphics and remastered graphics. The second menu had forge, multiplayer, customs, theatre with graphics from 2010, different weapons and sounds. What I'm proposing is one game with two menus. One menu(as an example since idk what Infinite will have) has thrust, clamber, and sprint. The second menu is the exact same without those three, slightly higher jump height and slightly higher bms. So, how is that two different games? This can be done in Halo 5's customs.
No, Halo CEA was two games.
Halo CE remastered campaign, and a button leading to a sectioned Reach Multiplayer.

Also, watered down, a short dead end path tied to "modern", assets tuned to missing mechanics.
Ok, lets say it's two games. Infinite doesn't need to games to do what I said. Halo 5 could do it without making a completely different game. There was standard, mythic, HCS, and throwback variants. Tell me, when they removed certain movement options and other features did they have to create a completely different game to do that?
Spikanor wrote:
Spikanor wrote:
for me its easy.if the next halo game has no sprint then i not gone buy the game since i not gone buy a game i not like about and i not care about it also.
You're one of very few people that will base an entire purchasing decision off of one mechanic, while simultaneously misrepresenting the mechanic's purpose and not being open to any compromise about it.

On top of that, you blatantly ignore questions for clarification of your wild claims when its presented to you.
at some point i gone ignore questions from some communety members since its no use to keep in discusion with then since there keep coming with the same thing always
Yeah that's a whole essay and I have no intention to commenting on every single piece.

You said Sprint is good because it tells a longer and better story. Someone asked you to clarify. You proceeded to not clarify.

You said you weren't going to buy the game solely because there is no Sprint in it. Then you backpedaled to "maybe there are other things I like about the game" which invalidates your whole previous post.

You asked for suggestions because you "never see them", someone provided some, and you gave reasons to why you don't like it. How is anyone supposed to provide a reasonable suggestion if you don't want a change in the first place?
then here is a question for you then:
what you gone tell then to the people on this forum that have told all that there not gone buy the game so long there is sprint in the game you gone tell then the same thing then?

its with all game's that you have people that only buy a game for some reason.
2 years ago a lot off people have told all there not gone buy the new cod game since it got no campaign in the game since there have replace the campaign mode with a battle royal mode and lot off players are not happy about that.
its with all game's that release a new version one year later.

you know also that a lot off the suggestions that have been done a lot off people not like.
a loadout system that you have 2 diffrend loadouts one 1 with sprint and other with basicmovement speed is some type off suggestion you also need to explane to the players that hate any type loadout system in the halo series since there are lot off players that hate any type off loadout system in the halo game.
its with all the suggestions that have been done on this thread and other threads that there is always something that people not like.
then is at some point no use more to keep this disscusion alive since its always the same thing.
Naqser wrote:
If you've ever claimed Halo need sprint to do good, then you'd better be prepared to answer why other games with no sprint aren't doing bad, regardless of your own opinion of them.
Not explaining why CSGO and Doom are doing good, just means you can't explain wht Halo would do poorly without sprint.
nobody can tell if a game is doing good or not that are risks you have as a game company and developer.
you have game's that are doing sometime's and later when there release a new game there doing what bad thats normal.
do you really think that 343 is thinking from we most make halo great again like it was back then things have chance hard there are a lot off other new game's that have release a new game.
there are titels like fortnite or desteny or apex that are also lot off fun for a lot off players.
and there not care more about cod or halo game any more since there have found a new game that is more fun to play then the game's there have play before.

Naqser wrote:
That is a good example of how well some actually listen to those suggestions, not a lot.Caring about the other side? I'd say the feeling's mutual, but I'm not really looking for that kind of "affection" from you.
a seperate playlist that has not sprint option is what halo 5 is doing now and why not make it standart like rakend and social playlist.
that from 2 standart playlist's you have now 3 standart playlist to choose out from in the halo series's.
Ok, lets say it's two games. Infinite doesn't need to games to do what I said. Halo 5 could do it without making a completely different game. There was standard, mythic, HCS, and throwback variants. Tell me, when they removed certain movement options and other features did they have to create a completely different game to do that?
No they didn't but, here's the kicker, have any of the mechanics which are unavailable to player tampering been changed?
Is that going to be applicable over the entire game? AI, vehicles, weapons, map assets, difficulty balancing, controller schemes, to name a few things.

Then there's of course the post-release support, resource allocation to each version, balance updates, things generally done after a game has been released.

That then ties in with the classic gameplay not getting to progress on its own, without being second hand / tethered to another version which chugs along its own track.

Spikanor wrote:
nobody can tell if a game is doing good or not that are risks you have as a game company and developer.
you have game's that are doing sometime's and later when there release a new game there doing what bad thats normal.
No one can tell if CSGO is doing good or not?
If someone's asked you why a specific game is doing as it is doing, I find it highly likely you've made a claim which in some way goes against what those games are going through.
What you're now talking about is something completely different to what you initially started with.

Spikanor wrote:
do you really think that 343 is thinking from we most make halo great again like it was back then things have chance hard there are a lot off other new game's that have release a new game.
Do you really think that if someone wants sprint removed, they want a Halo OG game carbon copy, exactly as it was on release day?
So, how has this new found change Halo's gone through treated the franchise in this supposed "new age of gaming"?
Is Halo 5 up there as a household name along with the other big titles?

Spikanor wrote:
there are titels like fortnite or desteny or apex that are also lot off fun for a lot off players.
and there not care more about cod or halo game any more since there have found a new game that is more fun to play then the game's there have play before.
Yes, if a lot of players chose one game over another, then it is somewhat logical to assume that the more played game is more fun for the larger crowd.
So what's the best course of action you think? Chase more trends?

Spikanor wrote:
a seperate playlist that has not sprint option is what halo 5 is doing now and why not make it standart like rakend and social playlist.
that from 2 standart playlist's you have now 3 standart playlist to choose out from in the halo series's.
Sure, I mean, your initial post was about how you don't think "us anti-sprinters" offer any "solutions" to the "sprint-problem", and my post about there being suggestions on how to proceed from the "anti-sprint" crowd, which take into account what pro-sprinters like about sprint, with some explanations regarding some of those aspects.
Then here we are with a totally unrelated response.

Spikanor wrote:
you know also that a lot off the suggestions that have been done a lot off people not like.
a loadout system that you have 2 diffrend loadouts one 1 with sprint and other with basicmovement speed is some type off suggestion you also need to explane to the players that hate any type loadout system in the halo series since there are lot off players that hate any type off loadout system in the halo game.
its with all the suggestions that have been done on this thread and other threads that there is always something that people not like.
then is at some point no use more to keep this disscusion alive since its always the same thing.
You actually take up my sarcastic suggestion, as a real example of what has been suggested, totally miss the point and take another swimg with the "loadout complaint", which I already adressed and explained to you?
Spikanor wrote:
Spikanor wrote:
Spikanor wrote:
for me its easy.if the next halo game has no sprint then i not gone buy the game since i not gone buy a game i not like about and i not care about it also.
You're one of very few people that will base an entire purchasing decision off of one mechanic, while simultaneously misrepresenting the mechanic's purpose and not being open to any compromise about it.

On top of that, you blatantly ignore questions for clarification of your wild claims when its presented to you.
at some point i gone ignore questions from some communety members since its no use to keep in discusion with then since there keep coming with the same thing always
Yeah that's a whole essay and I have no intention to commenting on every single piece.

You said Sprint is good because it tells a longer and better story. Someone asked you to clarify. You proceeded to not clarify.

You said you weren't going to buy the game solely because there is no Sprint in it. Then you backpedaled to "maybe there are other things I like about the game" which invalidates your whole previous post.

You asked for suggestions because you "never see them", someone provided some, and you gave reasons to why you don't like it. How is anyone supposed to provide a reasonable suggestion if you don't want a change in the first place?
then here is a question for you then:
what you gone tell then to the people on this forum that have told all that there not gone buy the game so long there is sprint in the game you gone tell then the same thing then?

its with all game's that you have people that only buy a game for some reason.
2 years ago a lot off people have told all there not gone buy the new cod game since it got no campaign in the game since there have replace the campaign mode with a battle royal mode and lot off players are not happy about that.
its with all game's that release a new version one year later.

you know also that a lot off the suggestions that have been done a lot off people not like.
a loadout system that you have 2 diffrend loadouts one 1 with sprint and other with basicmovement speed is some type off suggestion you also need to explane to the players that hate any type loadout system in the halo series since there are lot off players that hate any type off loadout system in the halo game.
its with all the suggestions that have been done on this thread and other threads that there is always something that people not like.
then is at some point no use more to keep this disscusion alive since its always the same thing.
Yeah I'm not falling for the whole deflection tactic and watch this whole thing go off on a tangent.

You said Sprint is good because it tells a longer and better story. Someone asked you to clarify. You proceeded to not clarify. You're purposely continuing to not clarify.

I'm not getting into any other discussion here. No suggestion is going to work for you since you already claimed that you wouldn't buy the game without Sprint. No suggestion is going to work for you because you refuse to clarify exactly what you want out of Sprint in the first place.
I'll say sprint is a good mechanic for gametypes with huge maps, which the most competitive/ranked game types typically are not held on. Small team ranked matches usually happen on the maps with 1-2 core rooms and a small amount of side alleys and flank chambers. Sprint in such small spaced maps is pointless and not necessary from the outset.

Playing firefight where you get spawned (or the next wave spawns) on the opposite side of a half kilometer long map demands a greater degree of movement, usually far above and beyond that required for close quarter ranked battle maps.

So - sprint off for any map with a ranked feature and sprint on for any firefight or generic "have fun" big battle maps
Custom/forged maps should be toggle-able so the map maker has that freedom in their design space
Naqser wrote:
Ok, lets say it's two games. Infinite doesn't need to games to do what I said. Halo 5 could do it without making a completely different game. There was standard, mythic, HCS, and throwback variants. Tell me, when they removed certain movement options and other features did they have to create a completely different game to do that?
No they didn't but, here's the kicker, have any of the mechanics which are unavailable to player tampering been changed?
Is that going to be applicable over the entire game? AI, vehicles, weapons, map assets, difficulty balancing, controller schemes, to name a few things.

Then there's of course the post-release support, resource allocation to each version, balance updates, things generally done after a game has been released.

That then ties in with the classic gameplay not getting to progress on its own, without being second hand / tethered to another version which chugs along its own track.

"have any of the mechanics which are unavailable to player tampering been changed?" I don't understand this, I must be tired. Though they were not applicable over the entire game(Halo 5) they could be(Halo Infinite). I don't see why AI, vehicles, etc..(except controller schemes) need to be changed. For example 'classic' is 'modern' without sprint and clamber. To make up for this 'classic' has a higher jump height and faster movement speed to match sprint. The only thing that changes on the controller is sprint which is just clicking the stick forward(for most controller layouts). Since you don't like this two different menu suggestion for some reason, I have come up with a new one. In Halo 5's FFA there are two modes HCS and standard. HCS had no blip on radar unless, thrusting, sprinting, or shooting. Also, there was no SC or GP. Infinite could do this for all playlists. Standard and 'classic'. Lets use the map Lockout for example. There would be Lockout slayer. Then a few matches later Lockout 'classic' slayer. Basically a different mode lie Oddball and CTF. Have both modes mixed into every playlist.
You said Sprint is good because it tells a longer and better story. Someone asked you to clarify. You proceeded to not clarify. You're purposely continuing to not clarify
sure look at halo 4 campaign mode since there have done it all.

Naqser wrote:
Yes, if a lot of players chose one game over another, then it is somewhat logical to assume that the more played game is more fun for the larger crowd.
So what's the best course of action you think? Chase more trends?
more that its free to play and that with each new big update you play on new maps same go's for apex.
what company's like 343 are need to do more is keep updating the story line with adding new missions in there game's and stop with releasing each year a new game.
you get at some point that players not wane buy each new year a new version off the game that there current game gets more big update by adding for exemple more update's to one game by adding also new story missions in the story line on the same game.
Spikanor wrote:
You said Sprint is good because it tells a longer and better story. Someone asked you to clarify. You proceeded to not clarify. You're purposely continuing to not clarify
sure look at halo 4 campaign mode since there have done it all.
This is where I ask again: Clarify what you mean by that statement.

Either be direct and just properly answer the request with examples and sound reasoning, or just say you don't know what you're talking about and spare us the trouble.
Spikanor wrote:
You said Sprint is good because it tells a longer and better story. Someone asked you to clarify. You proceeded to not clarify. You're purposely continuing to not clarify
sure look at halo 4 campaign mode since there have done it all.
This is where I ask again: Clarify what you mean by that statement.

Either be direct and just properly answer the request with examples and sound reasoning, or just say you don't know what you're talking about and spare us the trouble.
easy in halo 4 mission 2 Requiem you start all with no Warthog for some time since there are in the other place before you can pick then then is sprint to reach that place a good way and is it not long like it was in halo 3 ODST where it take's long time before you can pick up a mongoose to move here and there easyer.
same go's for mission 3 Forerunner.
at some point if you run fast you can steal a banshee from a elite before he take's it then is sprint also good for since and same go's mission 2 and 3 are also long.
same as for halo reach how long some off the missions are with sprint.
will you see that some off the missions from halo 3 are shorter then from halo reach and halo 4.

and now this also.
why can a Elite with energy sword, a Brute with gravity hammer and a grunt that is using 2 plasma grenade's to kill his own life and you with it also.
why can all the 3 enemey's in halo since halo CE,halo 2 ,halo 3 and halo 3 ODST why can then all run and the spartans there cant run?
same go's why a elite easy can evade a grenate that you trow but you cant evade any off the grenate's easy there trow on you?
its not about that spartans armor that are heavy since in the cutsence from halo 3
Spoiler:
Show
I don't see why AI, vehicles, etc..(except controller schemes) need to be changed.
Sprint does not allow the player to shoot while moving at an increased speed. Adding/removing sprint to/from a shooter is a drastic change in gameplay, everything needs to be rebalanced accordingly.
Maps need to be scaled and possibly even remade to adjust to the different pace of players moving either at a higher speed always guns up or at a lower speed than before. This needs to be done for every single map independently.
Therefore, weapon ranges, with damage dropoff, red reticle range, spread, fire rate, etc. must be adjusted both to the new movement as well as the modified maps. This needs to be done for every single weapon individually.
Therefore, vehilcles need to be tweaked in terms of damage resistance, turning radius, top speed, accelleration, etc. in order to account for players now being able to move out of the way at high speed and fight back at the same time or moving at a lower speed altogether. Then you also needs to account for the changes in map geometry at the same time. This needs to be done for every single vehicle individually.
Therefore enemy AI, including speed, firing rates, etc. in the camapaign has to be modified to not be over- or underpowered when using these weapons and vehicles, as well as not being at a significant advantage or disatvantage against the player with the modified movement, weapon and vehicle set. Once more, maps changes neet to be also taken into account. This needs to be done for every single enemy.... I think you can see where I'm going with this.
And these are just the things that I can think of off the top of my head. I've probably forgotten a dozen more.
If you are not prepared to put all this work in, it will always stay nothing more than a band-aid-solution....
Celestis wrote:
I don't see why AI, vehicles, etc..(except controller schemes) need to be changed.
Sprint does not allow the player to shoot while moving at an increased speed. Adding/removing sprint to/from a shooter is a drastic change in gameplay, everything needs to be rebalanced accordingly.
Maps need to be scaled and possibly even remade to adjust to the different pace of players moving either at a higher speed always guns up or at a lower speed than before. This needs to be done for every single map independently.
Therefore, weapon ranges, with damage dropoff, red reticle range, spread, fire rate, etc. must be adjusted both to the new movement as well as the modified maps. This needs to be done for every single weapon individually.
Therefore, vehilcles need to be tweaked in terms of damage resistance, turning radius, top speed, accelleration, etc. in order to account for players now being able to move out of the way at high speed and fight back at the same time or moving at a lower speed altogether. Then you also needs to account for the changes in map geometry at the same time. This needs to be done for every single vehicle individually.
Therefore enemy AI, including speed, firing rates, etc. in the camapaign has to be modified to not be over- or underpowered when using these weapons and vehicles, as well as not being at a significant advantage or disatvantage against the player with the modified movement, weapon and vehicle set. Once more, maps changes neet to be also taken into account. This needs to be done for every single enemy.... I think you can see where I'm going with this.
And these are just the things that I can think of off the top of my head. I've probably forgotten a dozen more.
If you are not prepared to put all this work in, it will always stay nothing more than a band-aid-solution....
Ok, gotcha. I really don't believe all of this needs to be changed. Yes, Ai fire rate but, idk about speed it doesn't seem necessary. I still don't understand why weapons need to be changed. The only thing I believe needs to be changed in vehicles is when they fire. In 'modern' the player who is sprinting "won't have their gun up"(I believe that sprint should be a thing with weapons still up but for the sake of argument) the vehicle should take a second longer to fire so that the player has a chance.
Spikanor wrote:
easy in halo 4 mission 2 Requiem you start all with no Warthog for some time since there are in the other place before you can pick
That's not story related. You also described the second mission of Halo CE.

Spikanor wrote:
same go's for mission 3 Forerunner.
at some point if you run fast you can steal a banshee from a elite before he take's it
That's not story related. Answer my question.

Spikanor wrote:
same as for halo reach how long some off the missions are with sprint.
will you see that some off the missions from halo 3 are shorter then from halo reach and halo 4.
Not story related. Answer. My. Question.
Ok, gotcha. I really don't believe all of this needs to be changed. Yes, Ai fire rate but, idk about speed it doesn't seem necessary. I still don't understand why weapons need to be changed. The only thing I believe needs to be changed in vehicles is when they fire. In 'modern' the player who is sprinting "won't have their gun up"(I believe that sprint should be a thing with weapons still up but for the sake of argument) the vehicle should take a second longer to fire so that the player has a chance.
Maybe you're right. Maybe you don't need to change all of those settings.
But the problem is that during development, you don't know that yet. So you have to change all of these things at least once to see if they make the game better or worse.
More than likely, however, you'll need to adjust them again and again, in conjunction with one another, to figure out what works and what doesn't. Maybe reducing the top speed of the warthog makes it worse, but increasing the acceleration makes it overall better. Or increasing spread on the AR is worse until you also increase the damage output, then it's an improvement. Overall it doesn't very much matter what needs to be adjusted in the end, because the trial-and-error to arrive at this point still takes forever and costs money, time and manpower.

And just to be clear, this process would be identical if you were to start with classic mechanics and would then add sprint and whatnot on top. It would play horrible and need to be rebalanced.
Nooga wrote:
Id rather keep sprint.
Sprint, thrusters and clamber should be the only movement mechanics
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 832
  4. 833
  5. 834
  6. 835
  7. 836
  8. ...
  9. 838