Jump to content
CorporalWings0

Should sprint be included in Halo moving forward?

  

238 members have voted

  1. 1. Keep or remove sprint

    • Remove sprint
      199
    • Keep sprint
      39


Recommended Posts

Social should be an incubator for all new developments and flashiness.

 

Would anyone here disagree with me when I say that Halo 5 is basically the best social experience Halo has ever had? I'm serious. Cut out Halo 3's Social Matchmaking and replace it with Halo 5 in its entirety, and that is absolutely an improvement. To make an investing analogy, can Ranked not be the classic experience, or the "safety bucket" to an ever-evolving Social's "risk bucket"?

 

No, I'll go further than this. If you make Social the incubator for new ideas, the rate at which new ideas are added increases rapidly, for obvious reasons. If one of those new features doesn't work, it won't be nearly as much of an image sacrifice on 343's part. And if one of those many new features works well in competitive, they can try it out in Ranked.

 

This is the most stable model for Halo. Seriously, problem solved. No more sprint-sized problems could come up in the series if this was the approach.

I would agree with this. I would make a caveat though and say that Halo 5 social at LAUNCH was piss poor. It's arguably the best in the series now, but it started off pretty bad. I think best case scenario right now is to start with a weekly playlist of classic settings (or slightly tweaked classic settings) just to see how the community responds. I bet you we will see classic settings become a part of Halo 5's matchmaking when we near Halo 3's anniversary (like they did with Reach for the CE anniversary).

 

Edit: went back and reread your post and had a couple more things to say: I made this post the other day, but I think that we are faced with a problem right now that 343 wants the gamemodes to be homogenized so that casual players might take interest in the competitive side. I don't think it's necessarily a bad intention, but the competitive community needs to have a game they enjoy playing in order for it to succeed. 

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I'd argue that a lot of those people have come back to Halo. It's population retention seems to be a lot better than Reach or 4. But I would say that the vast majority left because of Reach, 4, and MCC and didn't bother to come back. I don't necessarily agree that Halo 6 with similar mechanics to 5 would result in more of a loss of players. I'm sure not everyone would agree, but it seems as though Halo 5 has been pretty successful with the general audience if not the competitive audience. I wouldn't say that technical quality has only been an issue with only 343 games. For me, it started as early as Halo 3. The shot registration was (in my opinion) so poor that it was infuriating. And then of course Reach had bloom, but that's a whole different rabbit hole. I've been around since 2, and personally I have less technical issues with 5 than I have since 2, but I know that not everyone shares that opinion. I do wonder if just minor technical improvements on the Halo 2 formula could work. I think that it would start to suffer just because that's frowned upon, including in Madden. I think the competitive community would be MORE than happy with it, but the general audience might get a little tired of that. All in all, I guess my point is that I don't find thrust to be a game breaking gimmick. The armor abilities were game breaking, and I wish them a horrible life in hell, but thrust just doesn't seem even close to the same category for me. I think that change can be good, but NOT change for change's sake like equipment and armor abilities were, but if something is purpose built and fits into the game well, I guess I don't see anything wrong with it.

 

Comparing literally only spotty hit registration when playing against people across the world from you, and bloom in Reach (which was INTENTIONAL... not a technical quality issue) vs the myriad of issues literally every 343-made game has had is an absolute fucking farce dude. Do you want me to link the 45 minute video Act Man made on youtube just for detailing glitches in Warzone Firefight alone? Nevermind the rest of the game which is almost as buggy? Also Halo 5 has bad hit registration at times too. And the only reason the hit registration is better than Halo 3 is because Halo 5 uses massive amounts of bullet magnetism and hitscan weapons. I would wager the bullet registration is just as inconsistent as Halo 5 if you were to visualize that every player on the battlefield has a hitbox much larger than Halo 3's.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Uh

 

Ya, probably everyone. H5 is a horrible social experience.

 

-The game is in general a fucking sweat encrusted sauna.

-There is a low amount of playlist variety.

-BTB is an absolute afterthought.

-Warzone is meant to be the social haven but it's boring as all hell and incredibly prone to snowballing out of control in favour of one team.

-The gameplay is overly complicated with a huge barrier of entry to new players.

-Campaign is literally terrible.

 

I know this place mainly discusses the competitive side of Halo but H5 failed the casual playerbase hard.

I agree with some of these points, but my argument is mostly around abilities and sprint. I probably should have said "casual" instead of "social" (important distinction) and said "Halo 5's matchmaking" instead of "Halo 5 in its entirety". I also include Forge and custom game options. I'd absolutely replace Halo 3's social matchmaking with Halo 5's overall MM. I would absolutely sacrifice Sandtrap and the superior visuals of H3 for abilities and sprint in a purely casual context. But perhaps my opinion will change, and I digress. None of the merits of Halo 5 actually appear until you add classic gameplay into the mix, and that applies to casual players as much as competitive players. I doubt anyone would hail H3 BTB as such a positive experience if it had been the only matchmaking option of that game.

 

I'm convinced that having contrast is crucial. Just consider how you feel in the first few minutes of playing a game you need to re-adjust to after having played an entirely different game for a while. It's slightly intimidating and very quickly re-sensitizes you to its unique appeal. That's not extending an olive branch to casual, that's just doing the only thing that can make both casual and competitive consistently rewarding and fresh.

 

Also:

 

-There is a low amount of playlist variety.

-The gameplay is overly complicated with a huge barrier of entry to new players.

The first isn't a problem in my hypothetical, since the extra Ranked playlists would probably add sufficient variety. Having one mode with sprint/abilities and one without is the fastest way to get variety.

 

The second point is just bizarre. Are we talking about Halo 5 here? A huge barrier of entry to new players? In what universe? Newer players are the ones in moderate support of H5, but they tend to stop playing because it's too boring a game for most to stick with it. It is definitely true, however, that there's two skill gaps in H5: to use H3's ranks as a comparison, there's a skill gap roughly between HR 5s and 15s, and another one between 40s and 50s, with a huge plateau in the middle where everyone's about the same. This is why poorer players and (bizarrely) pros sometimes defend H5. This is by comparison to other Halos, obviously. However, those gaps are still not that wide or difficult to get over, and if anything, are appropriate for new players, but not for very long. Optimally, the gaps should be more evenly-distributed throughout the scale.

Share this post


Link to post

And the only reason the hit registration is better than Halo 3 is because Halo 5 uses massive amounts of bullet magnetism and hitscan weapons. I would wager the bullet registration is just as inconsistent as Halo 5 if you were to visualize that every player on the battlefield has a hitbox much larger than Halo 3's.

That's not what hit registration is. HR is how well the game picks up and registers your shots, i.e. how long it takes or how well the servers detect when your shots hit someone and apply the damage. Bullet magnetism is mostly client-side and related to aiming mechanics, which is completely different from hit registration, which is completely server-side and pretty much its own thing.

 

Halo 3 has terrible hit registration because the game's online netcode is trash. Even if the game had H5-tier bullet magnetism, the shot registration would still be terrible. For example, if you stuck the Suppressor in Halo 3, you'd have problems with shots not registering and the game literally deleting bullets from existence.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

Comparing literally only spotty hit registration when playing against people across the world from you, and bloom in Reach (which was INTENTIONAL... not a technical quality issue) vs the myriad of issues literally every 343-made game has had is an absolute fucking farce dude. Do you want me to link the 45 minute video Act Man made on youtube just for detailing glitches in Warzone Firefight alone? Nevermind the rest of the game which is almost as buggy? Also Halo 5 has bad hit registration at times too. And the only reason the hit registration is better than Halo 3 is because Halo 5 uses massive amounts of bullet magnetism and hitscan weapons. I would wager the bullet registration is just as inconsistent as Halo 5 if you were to visualize that every player on the battlefield has a hitbox much larger than Halo 3's.

I'm not here to attack your opinions. It's cool if you like the previous Halo's more and if you wish that Halo would come back to its roots. I personally do too (mainly only H2), but that doesn't mean I don't like 5. Halo 3 had TONS of issues aside from hit registration (which was a serious fucking deal. it was bad. I honestly loved the competitive scene, but found myself hating the competitive match making because it was biased towards host and had so many weird bullet registration problems).  Bad weapon balance, the BR had a randomized spread and bullets would often disappear, equipment was either OP or straight trash, vehicles were like god's own personal immortal chariots, weird ranking, the maps at launch were weird (The Pit attic was a thing.), people farming 50's like corn, grenades often got caught on different nooks and crannies on the map, etc. I realize that bloom was intentional, but it was just absurdly dumb, and Bungie did absolutely nothing other than laugh at the people that pointed that out (not hyperbole, I listened to my fair share of their podcasts and interviews). Halo 5 is buggy, yeah, but the other games have had their fair share of issues. Halo 2 is notorious for how it launched. Treating them like they were perfect and having selective rage towards 343 doesn't do any good. It's totally fine if you don't like 343 and it's only fair to expect top quality from them since they're literally funded by one of the richest companies in the world, but don't be mad at them for something only to pardon Bungie when they made nearly the same mistakes at times. 

 

Edit: I come down harsh on Halo 3, but I did love it. I played a lot of it. Same with Reach and even 4, but I just think they had their own issues that get glossed over when we look back at them (with the exception of 4)

  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I'd argue that a lot of those people have come back to Halo. It's population retention seems to be a lot better than Reach or 4. But I would say that the vast majority left because of Reach, 4, and MCC and didn't bother to come back. I don't necessarily agree that Halo 6 with similar mechanics to 5 would result in more of a loss of players. I'm sure not everyone would agree, but it seems as though Halo 5 has been pretty successful with the general audience if not the competitive audience. I wouldn't say that technical quality has only been an issue with only 343 games. For me, it started as early as Halo 3. The shot registration was (in my opinion) so poor that it was infuriating. And then of course Reach had bloom, but that's a whole different rabbit hole. I've been around since 2, and personally I have less technical issues with 5 than I have since 2, but I know that not everyone shares that opinion. I do wonder if just minor technical improvements on the Halo 2 formula could work. I think that it would start to suffer just because that's frowned upon, including in Madden. I think the competitive community would be MORE than happy with it, but the general audience might get a little tired of that. All in all, I guess my point is that I don't find thrust to be a game breaking gimmick. The armor abilities were game breaking, and I wish them a horrible life in hell, but thrust just doesn't seem even close to the same category for me. I think that change can be good, but NOT change for change's sake like equipment and armor abilities were, but if something is purpose built and fits into the game well, I guess I don't see anything wrong with it.

I would bet a lot of money that Halo 6 will sell even less than Halo 5. Halo 5 has not been a success, in fact it has been a total failure. The general audience hates Halo 5, hence why nobody plays it. Millions have left Halo since the H2/H3 glory days. And millions want a real Halo game to play again. Halo 3 was the last real Halo game and that was almost 10 years ago. Since then, the franchise has lost almost all of it's popularity. Game breaking gimmicks, armor abilities and Spartan abilities, do not improve gameplay at all and only make the games more stressful and rage inducing. If 343 continues with game breaking gimmicks, this franchise will be dead soon. The silver lining to that is so will 343.

 

Share this post


Link to post

I would bet a lot of money that Halo 6 will sell even less than Halo 5. Halo 5 has not been a success, in fact it has been a total failure. The general audience hates Halo 5, hence why nobody plays it. Millions have left Halo since the H2/H3 glory days. And millions want a real Halo game to play again. Halo 3 was the last real Halo game and that was almost 10 years ago. Since then, the franchise has lost almost all of it's popularity. Game breaking gimmicks, armor abilities and Spartan abilities, do not improve gameplay at all and only make the games more stressful and rage inducing. If 343 continues with game breaking gimmicks, this franchise will be dead soon. The silver lining to that is so will 343.

From personal experience, your first couple sentences aren't what I've seen. I have tons of friends that have returned to Halo after a long period of not playing. They would pick up whatever new Halo game it was, and play through the content available, then move to the next thing. They are still playing Halo 5 semi regularly. I also was able to get multiple friends (that previously had no interest in Halo, even during 2 and 3) to buy Xbox's just so they could play the game, and they also still play semi regularly. Additionally, Halo 5 is one of the games I see most often on r/all, and r/halo is one of the more active gaming subreddits that I know of, not that that means a whole lot (nor do I like r/halo much), but it's encouraging to see it there so often. The launch of Halo 5 was also the most positive that I had seen the gaming press be towards a Halo game since before Reach. That being said, I don't know the whole story. I don't know the sales figures. I don't know the online population. But NO ONE does. To say that it has been "a total failure" just isn't accurate even if it's just because there's no way you could know 100% that that's true. I don't even disagree with you. I'd LOVE to see a classic Halo game and have it be successful, but I just don't think Halo's in as bad of a place as you think it is. It has a LOT more potential, and I'd like to see it reach that, but I'm happy that 5 is more of a return to form than Reach and 4. I'd like to see more improvement, but I think that will come.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Anti-sprint voters don't understand nuance and subtlety.

 

I find it hilarious because that quote is so hypocritical on so many different levels.  Like there's so many things I could apply that mentality to.

 

As when I think "subtlety and nuance", I think of PIZUUUH, and flashy gimmick mechanics, and over the top cutscenes.

 

Dark Souls.  There is how you achieve subtlety and nuance.

  • Upvote (+1) 6

Share this post


Link to post

I find it hilarious because that quote is so hypocritical on so many different levels.  Like there's so many things I could apply that mentality to.

 

As when I think "subtlety and nuance", I think of PIZUUUH, and flashy gimmick mechanics, and over the top cutscenes.

 

Dark Souls.  There is how you achieve subtlety and nuance.

Dark Soul's story is the definition of subtlety.

 

P.S. I hope you realize this is a joke, mocking what Frank O'Connor once said about the Halo 5 skeptics. I'm an anti-sprint lad myself.

Share this post


Link to post

Dark Soul's story is the definition of subtlety.

 

P.S. I hope you realize this is a joke, mocking what Frank O'Connor once said about the Halo 5 skeptics. I'm an anti-sprint lad myself.

Why does every idiot use the phrase "subtlety and nuance" anyway? It's astonishing how accurate that is as a litmus test for being wrong. Virtue signalling of a sort, I guess.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah I know.  I just feel the need to comment whenever I hear that self-important quote from Frank.  Or especially when anyone goes on a tirade about "immersion", as how I define immersion is very different from how a lot of other people seem to view it.

 

For the people who voted Yes:

 

Why though?  This is Beyond so maybe I'll get some intelligent answers for once.

 

 

 

Why does every idiot use the phrase "subtlety and nuance" anyway?

 

I would also like to say this:

 

There are games I like for their subtle and atmospheric nature.

There are games that are very over the top and ridiculous that I also like.

 

I don't think any style of game is necessarily superior over another.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh yeah, something else I noticed. Delayed shield recharge for Sprint literally has no purpose in the game.

 

As in, its implementation is made completely redundant by something else. And surprisingly, it's because Desprint actually works correctly... For the most part, you can't commit to an engagement and just Sprint out when you're weak. The killtimes are too low for it to work and sprint acceleration is also low. After Halo 4 somebody apparently put 5 seconds of thought into how a mechanic that removes the escape aspect of Sprint should work, and it is (currently) the most effective.

 

You guys actually succeeded in making one mechanic from Halo 4 work in Halo 5 by implementing it better.

Share this post


Link to post

Oh yeah, something else I noticed. Delayed shield recharge for Sprint literally has no purpose in the game.

 

As in, its implementation is made completely redundant by something else. And surprisingly, it's because Desprint actually works correctly... For the most part, you can't commit to an engagement and just Sprint out when you're weak. The killtimes are too low for it to work and sprint acceleration is also low. After Halo 4 somebody apparently put 5 seconds of thought into how a mechanic that removes the escape aspect of Sprint should work, and it is (currently) the most effective.

 

You guys actually succeeded in making one mechanic from Halo 4 work in Halo 5 by implementing it better.

 

Think about how ridiculous that sentence sounds though. We have had to invent literally new terms never used or coined before in any game simply to describe 343's band-aid fix's to a problem they(and Bungie) created themselves by changing the movement of Halo fundamentally and for the worse. "De-sprint", "delayed shield recharge",  just in general all the instances in H5 when you cant move and shoot at the same time in a DM FPS that revolves around MAINLY moving and shooting at the same time. 

 

Not only that, but if you want to get technical it throws off the fundamental "offense-defense" equilibrium that an Arena-style FPS is built on(by punishing the offensive player for ATTACKING in WAY too many scenarios in a game that already has regen shields) and relies on for the majority of its strategical mind-games and game flow. On the defensive side, you get shot in H5 and 95 percent of the time you're first reaction is still to thrust and sprint away. Not to fight back, not to cover you're ground with grenades, not to double-back, all of the potential actions a player has to weigh in a properly balanced Arena-style FPS is simplified to one dominant strategy that takes no skill or strategy. Halo 5 does not flow well in a battle between two players so how can it flow well overall as a game? It has little ebb-and-flow, instead opting for muddled chaos causing the player to spend more time in unnecessary animations fighting its bad design and mechanics. Think about it, you are stuck in an animation most of the time in an action-based shooter instead of free to shoot+move in unison and being forced to make more nuanced strategical decisions(other than it being simplified to RUN away) how in the world does this make any sense or add anything of value to the gameplay?

 

Now, I am no rocket scientist but even the average fan can see something is fundamentally wrong about sprint in Halo. Animations like clamber, sprint,and spartan charge in Halo do not mesh with the core gameplay. its just plan bad design(ask anyone knowledgeable about the situation), it adds very little gameplay value to the game outside of visible semantics, and the worst part is we know there is a WAY better way to implement movement mechanics into Halo if they are to be added where they could actually add value and depth to the gameplay, fitting seemlessly into the core gameplay in the process, and 343 seems to be blind or deaf to that fact. Again, Romero says it best. 

 

quote-i-completely-love-playing-and-desi

 

How many times will the Halo community be let down by designers (intentionally or not) designing crappy nonsensical titles? Halo has not improved and has not improved under the leadership of 343 with the faulty core game they keep on pushing us in different (albeit slightly improved) forms, the end result will always be failure unless the core design issue is recognized and fixed. You cant keep on pushing the same failed ideas and get different results. You cant design Halo like its every other game, because its not.

  • Upvote (+1) 8

Share this post


Link to post

I agree with some of these points, but my argument is mostly around abilities and sprint. I probably should have said "casual" instead of "social" (important distinction) and said "Halo 5's matchmaking" instead of "Halo 5 in its entirety". I also include Forge and custom game options. I'd absolutely replace Halo 3's social matchmaking with Halo 5's overall MM. I would absolutely sacrifice Sandtrap and the superior visuals of H3 for abilities and sprint in a purely casual context. But perhaps my opinion will change, and I digress. None of the merits of Halo 5 actually appear until you add classic gameplay into the mix, and that applies to casual players as much as competitive players. I doubt anyone would hail H3 BTB as such a positive experience if it had been the only matchmaking option of that game.

 

I'm convinced that having contrast is crucial. Just consider how you feel in the first few minutes of playing a game you need to re-adjust to after having played an entirely different game for a while. It's slightly intimidating and very quickly re-sensitizes you to its unique appeal. That's not extending an olive branch to casual, that's just doing the only thing that can make both casual and competitive consistently rewarding and fresh.

 

Also:

 

The first isn't a problem in my hypothetical, since the extra Ranked playlists would probably add sufficient variety. Having one mode with sprint/abilities and one without is the fastest way to get variety.

 

The second point is just bizarre. Are we talking about Halo 5 here? A huge barrier of entry to new players? In what universe? Newer players are the ones in moderate support of H5, but they tend to stop playing because it's too boring a game for most to stick with it. It is definitely true, however, that there's two skill gaps in H5: to use H3's ranks as a comparison, there's a skill gap roughly between HR 5s and 15s, and another one between 40s and 50s, with a huge plateau in the middle where everyone's about the same. This is why poorer players and (bizarrely) pros sometimes defend H5. This is by comparison to other Halos, obviously. However, those gaps are still not that wide or difficult to get over, and if anything, are appropriate for new players, but not for very long. Optimally, the gaps should be more evenly-distributed throughout the scale.

This is where I big time disagree with the general train of thought of "all these new abilities are super fun for casuals". No, they are not. It's too complicated. When we as a community get the opinion of "casual" players we are hearing the opinion of someone who's usually been playing FPS games and Halo for years with hundreds, if not thousands of games played. They just happen to suck so they've never advanced in the meta. Those are not the real casual players. Real casual players don't provide written feedback and if they do it is usually ignored because they cannot properly articulate their feelings about the game.

 

Halo and even COD have stopped bringing in casual players. These players are now gravitating towards games like Minecraft, rocket league and sports games. Halo, COD, and pretty much every FPS game has become bloated and overly complicated. This is why 5-10 years ago if you looked the XBL most played top 10 list it was almost always comprised of 80%+ FPS games. Now, that's down to 20-30%.

 

Just think about it. If you were to sit down a friend that barely plays games at all(or doesn't at all) or you dad or something and try to teach them how to play H5, think of how much that entails just for them to be able to play the game at a bronze level. There's here how you walk, aim, shoot, throw a grenade, melee. Ok here how you sprint, slide, clamber, slide boost, stabalise, ground pound, thrust. It's too much. On the flip side you could show them FIFA. Heres how to move, shoot and pass. Or H3, walk, shoot, melee, nade. COD4/Mw2/MW3...walk, ADS, sprint, melee.

 

There is a reason those 2000-2010 FPS games hit critical mass in terms of popularity. They struck a balance between being accessible to true causal players while also being fun for seasoned players. Newer FPS games don't do this. They're too complicated. Hell, if you really want to play H5 properly you have to go out and buy a controller that has 4 extra buttons ffs.

  • Upvote (+1) 8

Share this post


Link to post

Simple question, should Halo 6 and onwards include sprint? Personally, I want sprint removed, and I want to gauge TB's opinion on this, similar to my radar thread. The thread will be anonymous, so don't worry if you have an unpopular opinion.

 

@@Deez @@Sal1ent @@Bravo

 

SPRINT PROS CONS

- Immersion (Putting your weapon down to run is immersive? Pretty sure spartans can sprint and shoot accurately at the same time.)

- Risk vs reward (Intentionally putting yourself at risk is a bad move competitively, and you can get rewarded for making bad plays.)

- You move faster-Waypoint (A fast moving base movement speed IS sprinting, putting your weapon down to simulate going faster is a placebo effect.)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

The second point is just bizarre. Are we talking about Halo 5 here? A huge barrier of entry to new players? In what universe? Newer players are the ones in moderate support of H5, but they tend to stop playing because it's too boring a game for most to stick with it. It is definitely true, however, that there's two skill gaps in H5: to use H3's ranks as a comparison, there's a skill gap roughly between HR 5s and 15s, and another one between 40s and 50s, with a huge plateau in the middle where everyone's about the same. This is why poorer players and (bizarrely) pros sometimes defend H5. This is by comparison to other Halos, obviously. However, those gaps are still not that wide or difficult to get over, and if anything, are appropriate for new players, but not for very long. Optimally, the gaps should be more evenly-distributed throughout the scale.

 

I think that case can very easily be made and for one pretty simple reason: input requirement and complexity. I certainly don't think H5 has a comparable skill gap to a game like Halo CE and probably H2 as well. What it has is, for lack of a better term, a higher skill floor. Remember when simply switching to bumper jumper was enough to manage most significant functions without constantly removing your thumb from the right stick? Well, now we have sprint and thrust, which you need to use all the time. Now we have extra functions mapped to buttons as well. Jump/clamber, crouch/slide, zoom/auto-stabilize, sprint/manual stabilize. Basic skill jumps have become like fighting game button combos. Sprint + jump + release LS + zoom + manual stabilize (sprint) + crouch + clamber (jump). That's a basic, running stabilize jump. What a mess. You basically need to have paddles or claw in order to play this game competently. Don't have that? Have fun thrusting in the middle of a fight (which you need to do).

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

I've been around and playing since H:CE, and started watching MLG in Halo 2. I voted to keep sprint. Times are changing, and as much as us OG people would love to have sprint removed, the way the younger generation is these days would result in the game becoming even less popular IMO. It would feel "clunky" and "slow" to the younger generation that is used to more fast paced, quick moving games.

 

So I voted to keep sprint not because I like it more, but because I think it's necessary for Halo to get larger AT THIS TIME IN IT'S LIFE.

Please play Doom.

 

Also, the 3 Halo games with sprint are also the 3 least popular Halo games. It's astounding how pro sprint people always fail to acknowledge this fact.  The ice cream sundae with the turd on it doesn't need a different type of turd on it. It needs to not have a turd on it.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

 

Here's a batshit idea. In test groups, stop measuring for comfort and start measuring for total volume of wall indentation due to controllers. How do you increase that volume?

 

Here's how. Make speed higher than ever. That's it. Then tell me about how sprint and extra abilities are "expected".

 

"[Modern shooters,] they're really slow. Like Gears is crazy slow 'cause you're just a bullet sponge. They've altered the FPS paradigm to something I'm not even interested in playing. I don't want to be a bullet shield; I want to be skillful, nimble, and fast."- John Romero

 

Good choice of quote, @@Hitman.

 

 

 

 

If you're playing Gears at anything higher than absolute entry level, it is anything but slow. Once I finally learned how to play it, Gears became one of the fastest, most rythmic and intoxicating shooters Ive ever played.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Personally I always have and always will play games that capture my own interest, regardless of how popular they are or what popular trends they follow.

 

Apparently the younger generation isn't anything like that from what people are claiming.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think that case can very easily be made and for one pretty simple reason: input requirement and complexity. I certainly don't think H5 has a comparable skill gap to a game like Halo CE and probably H2 as well. What it has is, for lack of a better term, a higher skill floor. Remember when simply switching to bumper jumper was enough to manage most significant functions without constantly removing your thumb from the right stick? Well, now we have sprint and thrust, which you need to use all the time. Now we have extra functions mapped to buttons as well. Jump/clamber, crouch/slide, zoom/auto-stabilize, sprint/manual stabilize. Basic skill jumps have become like fighting game button combos. Sprint + jump + release LS + zoom + manual stabilize (sprint) + crouch + clamber (jump). That's a basic, running stabilize jump. What a mess. You basically need to have paddles or claw in order to play this game competently. Don't have that? Have fun thrusting in the middle of a fight (which you need to do).

 

I agree with the skill floor being higher, but god does that sequence you just described sound painful. The key is to having simple but skillful movement with alot of potential for depth. I hate to keep on bringing up AFPS because people are going to think I am a fanboy but what better example of that than Quake. Sure S-jumping takes some practice and timing, but what is hard about Quake movement is execution-based that is meant to be improved with practice, not the basics and all movements in Quake "flow" into each other and are momentum-based so it feels effortless and natural. Unlike modern FPS with their weird and cumbersome stance dancing and constant need to put the player into an animation or block the player's FOV with unnecessarily huge gun models and distracting gun sights. At no point when watching high-level Quake do you say "God that looks like a pain to play" because in reality Quake movement is easy on the basic level and can be learned fairly quickly, what you marvel at is the preciseness and masterful execution of the player's movement.

 

Quake is a fairly simple game in all compared to games like Starcraft or DOTA, but at the same time its one of the deepest and hardest to master games with no skill ceiling. Which is why I am puzzled as to why more games have not tried to copy or improve upon its simple but skillful and deep movement techniques/physics, or try to copy it but end up adding unnecessary complexity that makes it too difficult to learn. There is a reason why games like Q3/QL have been popular for more than a decade and still played today, while the big-name FPS today with all their gaudy marketing and huge fan-bases usually die out fairly quickly and are not as re-playable. Its good design vs crappy design. In the end, good design will always win out.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I would agree with this. I would make a caveat though and say that Halo 5 social at LAUNCH was piss poor. It's arguably the best in the series now

How is it the best in the series now? There are still a shockingly low amount of social playlist. NO SOCIAL SLAYER, WHAT WORLD AM I LIVING IN. Every time they do add a social list that comes remotely close to being a social place to play normal Halo the MM is so tight I may as well be playing on the MLG mainstage. BTB is a throwaway forge playlist. Warzone is a pay to win borefest.

Share this post


Link to post

Please play Doom.

 

Also, the 3 Halo games with sprint are also the 3 least popular Halo games. It's astounding how pro sprint people always fail to acknowledge this fact.  The ice cream sundae with the turd on it doesn't need a different type of turd on it. It needs to not have a turd on it.

I hope you aren't trying to argue that Doom is popular... Because it isn't anymore. Did have a lot of buzz when it first came out though.

 

To argue that sprint is the sole reason for Halo's decline in population is an exaggeration.

  • Downvote (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.