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

Sprint is one of the things that made me quit Halo, so I might return if they took out sprint. I miss playing Halo, but I just got tired bitching about gameplay that I know 343i is never going to change.

 

 

 

Modern AAA gaming(and specifically FPS) at large is just a sad state of affairs honestly. and i dont believe its bias or nostalgia. The last thing i want in my games are pseudo-realism(REAL realistic FPS games actually dont do well contrary to popular belief) and brown, black, gray colors. Again,that is not to be confused with great REALISTIC FPS like Rainbow Six 1-3 and modern day Arma like I said, those games brought great innovation, gameplay, and their own style of play. I respect RS just as much as I do Quake for example.If you are a new gamer, try going back and looking at how vibrant the FPS genre used to be with creative game IP's before everything became boring pseudo-realistic modern military shooters and clones. Just to name a few of those i remember that really stands out.
 
Shadow Warrior
Blood 1 and 2
Duke Nukem 3D.
Quake 1,2,3
Unreal/Unreal Tournament 99/UT 2004
Serious Sam first and second encounter "really enjoyed these" they were different and the first fps to put hundreds of enemies on the screen,
Halflife 1 and 2
Wolfenstein 3d & Spear of destiny.
Doom 1 and 2.
System Shock 2
Rise of the triad.
Deus Ex 1 and 3
PowerSlave "it had another name also" exsumed or something
Corridor 7
BlakeStone 1 and 2.
TImesplitters
Tribes 1+2
 
Modern AAA devs are freakin lazy or hand-cuffed(by publishers assuming) and are far too quick to just settle for psedo-realism or "immersion" 343 devs would say as the basis for all of their decisions over actual innovative and challenging gameplay mechanics and gameplay.
 
The ONLY reason why sprint, clamber, spartan charge, and ADS are in Halo, make no mistake about it, is because the modern military shooters use the same(or similar) mechanics and 343 thinks attracting that type of player to Halo is more important than making a quality and innovative Halo game for their fan-base, and that has been their MO since they took over the franchise. I honestly cant even stomach AAA FPS games anymore, the genre needs a revival or a jolt of new life now more than it ever has if its to regain its former greatness.
 
There is even more i cant even remember, but the amount of variety the fps genre had back then was actually kind of amazing. You never knew what to expect from a new FPS game.
 
In the recent years i can name very few fps games i actually enjoyed. Duke Nukem Forever shows how badly it goes when you try and "modernize" a good design with spawning waves of monsters in one place. on rails levels. weapon carry limit because of realism. Had that game had levels like Duke 3D it would have been amazing.
 
Bioshock infinite had amazing story, but mediocre gameplay, goes from arena to arena, and not in a good way like the Serious Sam games. Then they put some artificial weapon limit on and for what? they say its for players to make interesting choices, yet everyone i know and i played Bioshock infinite myself, was to find the 2 best weapons and use them through the entire game. 
 
To be honest health regen has not really done much for me either. Not only does it add challenge to not have it, but you actually have to go out there and search the level and find secrets, obviously in a on rails shooter, they dont allow to do that, so health regen was born. Why is it in ALL modern AAA games now?
 
For me the thing i miss most about shooters from my childhood is, finding secrets, open levels with multiple paths to go around. colors in my games. ability to carry all the weapons i want. simple but skillful and in depth movement based on player autonomy, not handholding the player through every level like were stupid, playing different shooters for different experiences,ect.. i guess that is why the build engine games and serious sam is some of my favorite of all time, serious sam games has insane amount of secrets and variety much like DOOM.
 
It just makes me sad that FPS has become such a shallow shell of it self. If this continues the FPS genre will die out, mark my words, at some point even the hardcore CoD and MMS players will say stop and what then, what can they do? When they conditioned an entire generation of players to only like call of duty type/MMS fps gameplay and 90 percent of the player-base has no concept of dodging, no concept of exploration, no concept of clans, no concept of community past a year at best before moving on, no concept of 3D map design, no concept of weapon variety, no concept of the FPS genre before annual releases and F2P money-sucking tactics which is just as bad, and new IP's being truly "ground-breaking" because of true innovation and creativity they exhibit compared to other games. Its just troubling to think about the present state and future of the genre, its truly soul-crushing to me and I know im not the only one.

 

 

Did you try Shadow Warrior 2? I have heard good things about it.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Sprint is one of the things that made me quit Halo, so I might return if they took out sprint. I miss playing Halo, but I just got tired bitching about gameplay that I know 343i is never going to change.

 

 

 

Did you try Shadow Warrior 2? I have heard good things about it.

 

TBH wasn't even aware of this game until now. Shadow Warrior sounds familiar, but I dont think I ever played the first one. It looks pretty awesome though like a Borderlands type game with crazy movement, thanks for the recommendation I think ill get it on Steam!  :D

Share this post


Link to post

The 31% here make me weep.

 

What is the legitimate argument for it at this point? Without treading down the same debate we've had for the last 6 years, its compromising zoning, map design, verticality, individual encounters, and engagement in general for the sake of "feeling like a Spartan".

 

Pls Beyond dont do this

  • Upvote (+1) 8

Share this post


Link to post

I'm pretty sure everyone who voted to keep sprint is from the HCS thread. There's no other explanation

Share this post


Link to post

The 31% here make me weep.

 

What is the legitimate argument for it at this point? Without treading down the same debate we've had for the last 6 years, its compromising zoning, map design, verticality, individual encounters, and engagement in general for the sake of "feeling like a Spartan".

 

Pls Beyond dont do this

 

It's actually 15%, to be fair.

Share this post


Link to post

I voted remove it,i dont like sprint  and the rest of the armor abilities like clamber,thrust,ground pount and the very hated spartan charge,It does not belong in halo and has made halo a more generic fps shooter.Halo should have stayed unique like during halo 1-3.Its  simple mechanics that works well with offensive and defensive play,you have more time to plan and react,why add sprint when it was despised in reach and halo 4,I dont expect to have sprint in a halo game which is something 343 thinks is so.Imagine if games like cs go added double jump or halos classic movement speed and how that would have turned out

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Risk/Reward is not a positive.

 

Halo is not a tactical game. In fact the entire game is built upon the idea of providing a superhuman power trip to the player and this is accomplished by limiting(or outright eliminating) risk/reward gameplay mechanics.Let's look at Halo's core mechanics here.

 

Rebounding health
When HCE launched FPS games did not use rebounding health/shields they used health and shield pick ups. Pick ups created a very risk/reward heavy mechanic. You often had to decide whether you where on the defensive looking for health or on the offensive searching for players. With rebounding health Halo big time lessened the risk/reward of health decisions. All you had to do was wait a few seconds and your shields were back.

 

Two Weapon Limit
Again, when HCE launched FPS didn't have two weapon limits. They let you carry all kinds of weapons at once. These weapons were usually incredibly niche. Halo limited you to two and then gave you more utilitarian type weapons. This lessened the risk/reward nature of weapon choices.

 

Hotkey Nades
Instead of having to scroll through a list to grenades, switch to them, throw them and then switch back to a weapon you just needed to press one button in Halo. This lessened the risk/reward of using grenades.

 

Movement
Unlike most games you don't bloom and lose accuracy for moving, strafing or jumping. This totally removed the risk/reward of picking between movement and combat.

 

Shooting
You don't bloom when you're not aiming down sights. You don't bloom due to ROF. There are no alt functions on weapons. The entirety of shooting is designed around not having risk/reward.

 

These were the core pillars of Halo gameplay and they all strove to eliminate or lessen the importance of risk/reward gameplay. So...why does it make any sense to throw in one single mechanic that is entirely built around the concept of risk/reward? That mechanic would be actively working in the complete opposite direction of the rest of the mechanics in the game? Can someone explain to me how sprint being "tactical" is a good thing? How it providing risk/reward is a good thing?

 

PS duel wielding, AAs, bloom, perks, loudouts, fall damge and equipment all providing risk/reward and they were all removed from Halo.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Emotional risk/reward is important. Pure gameplay risk/reward is not (necessarily).

Share this post


Link to post

I don't mind sprint as it is in H5.

But i would like to see a return to the H2/H3 days.

With quicker base movement speed.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

It's actually 15%, to be fair.

Also most lumely a moving percentage and neither of your statements will be true for long ;)

Share this post


Link to post

Risk/Reward is not a positive.

 

Halo is not a tactical game. In fact the entire game is built upon the idea of providing a superhuman power trip to the player and this is accomplished by limiting(or outright eliminating) risk/reward gameplay mechanics.Let's look at Halo's core mechanics here.

 

Rebounding health

When HCE launched FPS games did not use rebounding health/shields they used health and shield pick ups. Pick ups created a very risk/reward heavy mechanic. You often had to decide whether you where on the defensive looking for health or on the offensive searching for players. With rebounding health Halo big time lessened the risk/reward of health decisions. All you had to do was wait a few seconds and your shields were back.

 

Two Weapon Limit

Again, when HCE launched FPS didn't have two weapon limits. They let you carry all kinds of weapons at once. These weapons were usually incredibly niche. Halo limited you to two and then gave you more utilitarian type weapons. This lessened the risk/reward nature of weapon choices.

 

Hotkey Nades

Instead of having to scroll through a list to grenades, switch to them, throw them and then switch back to a weapon you just needed to press one button in Halo. This lessened the risk/reward of using grenades.

 

Movement

Unlike most games you don't bloom and lose accuracy for moving, strafing or jumping. This totally removed the risk/reward of picking between movement and combat.

 

Shooting

You don't bloom when you're not aiming down sights. You don't bloom due to ROF. There are no alt functions on weapons. The entirety of shooting is designed around not having risk/reward.

 

These were the core pillars of Halo gameplay and they all strove to eliminate or lessen the importance of risk/reward gameplay. So...why does it make any sense to throw in one single mechanic that is entirely built around the concept of risk/reward? That mechanic would be actively working in the complete opposite direction of the rest of the mechanics in the game? Can someone explain to me how sprint being "tactical" is a good thing? How it providing risk/reward is a good thing?

 

PS duel wielding, AAs, bloom, perks, loudouts, fall damge and equipment all providing risk/reward and they were all removed from Halo.

 

I think the bottom line of what you're saying is that Halo is like chess in that it doesn't force you to make a lot of decisions without perfect information. Kind of like the opposite of poker. 

 

I don't think some of your examples are great though. How is forcing the player to choose 2 weapons not a risk/reward premise? You have to make a fuzzy decision about which of these weapons can be best put to use given the situations you expect to encounter in the next minute. 

 

 

 

Maybe there's a more compromising point that while some risk reward mechanics can be fine, they belong at the level of overall strategic decisions, where it's very clear that a poker-like "highest expectation" decision is being made. Contrast that with the obvious degenerate case of bloom, where the "decision" to fire slightly earlier is so split-second that it can hardly be called strategic.

 

I think sprint lands somewhere in the middle. I think I'd prefer a game that removes sprint, but I'm pretty hooked on thrust and slide. I also like the way thrust interacts with ground pound and stabilize, though I have no great love for those particular abilities per se. If you could retain the movement mechanic depth while taking out some of the cheese associated with ground pounding, I'd be pretty happy.

Share this post


Link to post

I think the bottom line of what you're saying is that Halo is like chess in that it doesn't force you to make a lot of decisions without perfect information. Kind of like the opposite of poker. 

 

I don't think some of your examples are great though. How is forcing the player to choose 2 weapons not a risk/reward premise? You have to make a fuzzy decision about which of these weapons can be best put to use given the situations you expect to encounter in the next minute. 

 

 

 

Maybe there's a more compromising point that while some risk reward mechanics can be fine, they belong at the level of overall strategic decisions, where it's very clear that a poker-like "highest expectation" decision is being made. Contrast that with the obvious degenerate case of bloom, where the "decision" to fire slightly earlier is so split-second that it can hardly be called strategic.

 

I think sprint lands somewhere in the middle. I think I'd prefer a game that removes sprint, but I'm pretty hooked on thrust and slide. I also like the way thrust interacts with ground pound and stabilize, though I have no great love for those particular abilities per se. If you could retain the movement mechanic depth while taking out some of the cheese associated with ground pounding, I'd be pretty happy.

Out of your two weapons you generally always have a utility weapon on you. Utility weapons limit binary weapon choices.

Share this post


Link to post

I think the bottom line of what you're saying is that Halo is like chess in that it doesn't force you to make a lot of decisions without perfect information. Kind of like the opposite of poker. 

 

I don't think some of your examples are great though. How is forcing the player to choose 2 weapons not a risk/reward premise? You have to make a fuzzy decision about which of these weapons can be best put to use given the situations you expect to encounter in the next minute. 

 

 

 

Maybe there's a more compromising point that while some risk reward mechanics can be fine, they belong at the level of overall strategic decisions, where it's very clear that a poker-like "highest expectation" decision is being made. Contrast that with the obvious degenerate case of bloom, where the "decision" to fire slightly earlier is so split-second that it can hardly be called strategic.

 

I think sprint lands somewhere in the middle. I think I'd prefer a game that removes sprint, but I'm pretty hooked on thrust and slide. I also like the way thrust interacts with ground pound and stabilize, though I have no great love for those particular abilities per se. If you could retain the movement mechanic depth while taking out some of the cheese associated with ground pounding, I'd be pretty happy.

 

I feel like all GP needs is a smaller damage radius and it'd be perfect. The idea, and for the most part the implementation were very good. It's just too generous with it's radius in making people one-shot.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think the bottom line of what you're saying is that Halo is like chess in that it doesn't force you to make a lot of decisions without perfect information. Kind of like the opposite of poker. 

 

I don't think some of your examples are great though. How is forcing the player to choose 2 weapons not a risk/reward premise? You have to make a fuzzy decision about which of these weapons can be best put to use given the situations you expect to encounter in the next minute. 

 

Maybe there's a more compromising point that while some risk reward mechanics can be fine, they belong at the level of overall strategic decisions, where it's very clear that a poker-like "highest expectation" decision is being made. Contrast that with the obvious degenerate case of bloom, where the "decision" to fire slightly earlier is so split-second that it can hardly be called strategic.

 

I think sprint lands somewhere in the middle. I think I'd prefer a game that removes sprint, but I'm pretty hooked on thrust and slide. I also like the way thrust interacts with ground pound and stabilize, though I have no great love for those particular abilities per se. If you could retain the movement mechanic depth while taking out some of the cheese associated with ground pounding, I'd be pretty happy.

 

The thrust is fine, I agree and probably one of the best additions to Halo in recent memory. Its essentially a dodge move, and flows into the movement system very nicely. I would take the delay out at the beginning when you cant shoot, but that is just me. Remove clamber(zero skill-gap,interrupts player movement flow, no risk-reward, little depth) and Add wall-jumping/dodging into that mix and then you have probably the most skilled and in depth Halo movement wise ever with tons of new options for movement chains,routes, 3D map design, and weapon interplay.

 

Wall-jumping eliminates the need for a million different "clamber" routes like it is on every H5 map, which might be fine if clamber wasn't a 100 percent assured every time, but its not its an animation and the "clamber route" becomes no different than a regular map route in the end so what is the point? Wall-jumping flows into player movement, temporarily speeds up player movement at the risk of being caught airborn and failing the execution of the jump, you can chain wall-jumps for even greater depth, you can chain wall-jumps+thrusts together naturally, and it can be selectively put on maps like it is in UT so it doesn't dominate player map movement, and can even be deemphasized on more "tactical" maps just as a Sanctuary in Halo which is important for map versatility and identity. Why you would want clamber over wall-jump in a game like Halo I have no idea from a player or devs standpoint.

 

Then take sprint out, and increase base movement speed to just a tad faster than HCE+H2 with a solid strafe+crouch and you have a great movement scheme in theory for an Arena-style FPS like Halo that fits with the core gun-play without drastically altering the flow, map design, and core pillars of the gameplay formula. Maybe you could even add a pseudo-sprint mechanic that allows you to go like 20 percent faster than base movement, but doesn't lower you're weapon(again getting this idea from UT4 but its a good one) so the sprint lovers wont cry too much and the casuals might not even notice.Taking sprint out also allows classic Halo maps to be reintroduced, which are just objectively superior in comp play than the newer maps. People dont realize it, but this also allows lower TTK weapons like the CE pistol to be re-introduced as well or potentially more non-hitscan weaponry to spice up the sandbox, because players are now harder to hit. Of course, the average ttk to optimal ttk skill-gap between good and great players also increases. In most any other game, the Quake RL would be greatly OP, but its not in Quake because of the speed and elusiveness of the movement.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I hate how people use (risk vs reward) as an argument. If i'm playing chess, I'm not gonna put my queen in the path of a pawn to line up a move next round in hopes the other player won't notice...

Share this post


Link to post

How do we feel about clamber if it doesn't prevent you from shooting?

 

 

I'm 50/50 on clamber because it really helps with the map design. Halo 5 makes it feel like you can just fly, but the maps are still very vertical. Imagine how impossible a map like plaza becomes when you get rid of clamber.

 

Another thing is that it's easy to say that clamber made jumping easier, but really it just expanded which jumps are possible. The hardest jumps are still hard to hit, it's just that you're barely reaching the clamber range rather than barely clearing the platform with your feet. In the case of jumps that are possible but tricky to make without clamber, it gives you a way to add some skillgap while keeping the movement lane a main thoroughfare. For instance, you can jump from snipe to the couch on Coliseum without clambering, but you have to jump and crouch exactly right. It gives you a nice advantage when you're trying to push up on somebody top rockets because it doesn't leave you open for the first shot mid-clamber. However, if people missed that jump 75% of the time, it would significantly reduce the flow in that area of the map, because going up snipe ramp suddenly traps you.

 

This concept is an important point: you can't go around making every jump and every gun impossible to use, because while it sets a theoretically huge skill ceiling, it causes a race to the bottom. Imagine basketball where the hoop was the same size of the ball + 1 inch. Nobody is that consistently accurate, so essentially the only thing you can do is dunk. Halo is no different.

 

---

Separate idea:

What if sliding gave you a general technique for becoming nearly frictionless for a half second? This is pretty close to what it does now. But suppose you could build up some speed and then slide into a sloped surface, essentially launching off of it like a ramp? With this mechanic, you might be able to get some CPMA-like movement where vertical movement was possible without clamber.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I hate how people use (risk vs reward) as an argument. If i'm playing chess, I'm not gonna put my queen in the path of a pawn to line up a move next round in hopes the other player won't notice...

 

Yes, but Chess is not the only game in the world. Risk vs. reward is exactly how you play, for instance, poker. Uncertainty due to true randomness is a bad gameplay element in my opinion, but uncertainty due to unknown opponent strategy is more interesting.

 

Imagine a game like Chess where you both decide on a move simultaneously, and then reveal your selection at the same time. You would need some rules to resolve captures, but this would definitely be an interesting game. (EDIT: Apparently this is already a thing. Check it out: http://www.hexenspiel.de/engl/synchronous-chess/)

 

Part of what makes Halo cool is that it is not turn-based. You have to simultaneously make moves and predict moves. You don't KNOW that somebody is coming around the corner, but you can reason that they might. I would describe pre-nading a cutoff as a risk vs. reward proposition, because you are potentially wasting a grenade and betraying your own position based on the potential reward of dropping their shields. It's not as simple as "all risk vs. reward elements are bad".

Share this post


Link to post

How do we feel about clamber if it doesn't prevent you from shooting?

 

 

I'm 50/50 on clamber because it really helps with the map design. Halo 5 makes it feel like you can just fly, but the maps are still very vertical. Imagine how impossible a map like plaza becomes when you get rid of clamber.

Clamber is only helpful because the map design demands it. It's truly a pointless mechanic beyond that. Plaza would still work perfectly if you got rid of clamber and raised the jump height to compensate.
  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Clamber is only helpful because the map design demands it. It's truly a pointless mechanic beyond that. Plaza would still work perfectly if you got rid of clamber and raised the jump height to compensate.

 

So the jump from yard to top yellow would be make-able by simply crouch jumping up? That jump height would have to be 2x the height of a spartan, minimum. Don't think you've thought this through..

Share this post


Link to post

So the jump from yard to top yellow would be make-able by simply crouch jumping up? That jump height would have to be 2x the height of a spartan, minimum. Don't think you've thought this through..

Or, and stick with me this idea is very groundbreaking, you put a box to jump off of. It's almost like there were jumps like this in past Halo games.

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

So the jump from yard to top yellow would be make-able by simply crouch jumping up? That jump height would have to be 2x the height of a spartan, minimum. Don't think you've thought this through..

 

I don't think you fundamentally understand how MAP DESIGN works. The maps were explicitly designed to make clamber essential and valuable. Having played no shortage of games in settings without it (clamber), I know for a fact that most jumps can be made with slightly modified jump characteristics. And the jumps that you can't make result in a lot more coherent map flow in many cases (snipe side on coliseum, for example), because these maps are all honey-combed to hell and back and every room has to have 15 easy different routes into it in default settings. Though, based on your posts, I'm sure you think this is a good thing.

 

​As for the specific dilemma you propose. Possible solutions? Modify the wall geometry to make a crouch jump similar to the one to top mid on Fathom possible. Add a crate below the opening. Lower top yellow. It's really not that hard, kind of like that jump in default settings. It IS annoying having to fuck with 4-5 different buttons just to make a simple jump. Oh, I mean "skillful." My bad.

 

Clamber is a completely non-essential movement ability, designed for "immersion" and casual appeal and it has had clear negative impacts on the design of maps in H5, because they were designed FOR clamber. If it was not in the game, there would be no jumps that require it to begin with. Instead, there are clamber routes jammed into every square foot of space. The side effects of clamber are not the reason clamber is necessary.

Share this post


Link to post

it has had clear negative impacts on the design of maps in H5

 

Halo 5 has the best maps since Halo 2, so it can't have been that negative..

  • Downvote (-1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

Halo 5 has the best maps since Halo 2, so it can't have been that negative..

Halo 2's maps are pretty mediocre so that's not saying much. It's pretty sad that we haven't had any good developer maps since Halo 1. None of Halo 2's and Halo 5's maps come close to Halo 1 maps such as Chill Out, Damnation, and Prisoner. The only good maps in Halo 5 are community made forge maps and they don't even get utilized in matchmaking.

 

And yes Halo 5's Spartan Abilities do have a negative impact on map design, just ask forgers such as @@MultiLockOn

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

Sebastian has plenty of forge experience and knowledge.

I think this should be an obvious statement, but not all forgers agree on what's good and bad for level design.  I've disagreed with a lot of other forgers on clamber in particular (I personally like it, and think it opens up a lot of design opportunities that weren't available in previous Halo games).  Of course there are downsides to the Spartan abilities, but whether they result in a net positive or negative impact is debatable.  

 

Personally, I find that it's the combination of the Spartan abilities with the H5 weapon sandbox that frustrates me the most.  While there's pretty much nothing I like about the sandbox in this game, it's the starting weapon that makes things the most difficult.  If you take the Spartan Abilities and insert them into CE, my bet is that they're suddenly not so problematic.  Despite what you might think based upon this post, my preference would be to have all Spartan Abilities (and sprint) removed from the Halo franchise.  I feel they're a detriment to the game overall.  I just don't think they're quite as detrimental as most people are making them out to be.  There are other factors that are having a bigger impact on the game.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

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.