Support NeoGAF

[Ozzy Onya A2Z]

this is funny to hear, when Halo 5 has the most problems with aiming compared to any other Halo

I guess I've been pretty lucky in that department. I did prefer the beta aiming as many do but I just haven't had bad runs with the aiming updates they've been iterating all this time. One iteration I found total garbage but an elite controller later and all is well again.

I probably should have said "Halo" in general for moving, aiming, mechanics. The games I play the most enabled me with controls not disable me. I couldn't stand the janking mess of Witcher 3, loved the game but dropped it due to shite controls and movement. I'm not really enjoying the pacing or aiming of ME Andromeda either.

Halo ruined me

However the other poster said it perfectly, Halo is one of a few games for online multiplayer where I consistently know what I fucked up or how I got outplayed/gunned etc. They have nailed that aspect of H5 no doubt.

 

[Trup1aya]

Better yet, we should have a gif where someone in Halo 2/Halo 3 walks from red/blue base to top mid compared to Halo 5's sprint+thrust+clamber to top mid...That's where it gets even worse.

You just reminded me of my issues with clamber. I can forgive the sprint-thrust part because it does leave a man plenty vulnerable.

But clamber and the way it's been thrust into the map design bothers me. without it, he wouldn't be able to clear this jump. Which would be a good thing for map flow imo.

Then there are a number of jumps that require clamber- which again forces you to put your gun down and requires to be facing a particular direction. Positioning and movement skills were better highlights when any skill jump could be made while facing any direction.

I'm pretty neutral towards sprint. I wouldn't mind it being removed at all. If they do though, the base movement speed has to be fast, no returning to Halo 3 molasses. One reason I would like to see it removed is map design. With sprints removal we could have classic maps like Lockout again, that map is totally broken with sprint. Ground pound and thruster stays though, that's the hill I'll die on.

Map design is much better when not having to account for sprint. I think the weapon sandbox was better before too. It seems like the heavy magnetism and aim assists are implemented to account for targets who are using Spartan abilities. But they all become OP when a target is moving at base speed.

 

[Trup1aya]

Again true and again, not an inherent negative.

The negative space is a negative.

Its funny because simply bumping up the BMS eliminates the negative space. The maps play better when you can always move at the speed they were designed for.

 

[jem0208]

One thing I think this commentary is spot on about and has been echoed here, is that while Halo 5 isn't a "bad game", it doesn't feel like a proper Halo game. Enhanced mobility just seems like a trend that 343 has been chasing after (and many other developers too). People are getting sick of it.

It seems to me that whether or not you think sprint works is heavily dependent on how strictly you define Halo gameplay.

Personally I completely disagree with you, lol. I think 5 is just as much a Halo game as the original trilogy. I see the differences in how it plays but to me they fit and work. It's completely fair to feel otherwise though.

The negative space is a negative.

How so? (Besides the fact that they're the same word )

Also can you define exactly what you mean by negative space? Is it just somewhere which is mostly used for traversal rather than shooting?

 

[Masterz1337]

I probably should have been more clear. I was not talking about the gameplay of the missions, but on the narrative presentation.

If the Arbiter missions weren't fun, it wasn't BECAUSE you were the arbiter, it's because of the game didn't provide interesting gamplay scenarios. That can be an issue regardless of who the player is controlling.

From a narrative standpoint i think the Arbiter missions were a success. The same can't be said for Osiris. There was no value in playing in the wake of Blue Team. We didn't learn anything that couldn't have been learned playing AS Blue Team.

Ah, my misunderstanding.

But on the contrary, the fact they you play as the Arbiter does end up dictating what the gameplay scenarios were. While things certainly could have been better in the missions we were given, I don't think there is any way around that playing as the Covenant meant you couldn't really fight the Covenant, and instead fought the fragments and subsets of it are ultimately unsatisfying for a multititide of reasons. Never mind the mandatory Flood and Sentinel combat as dictated by the story.

Fighting the good fight.



Yeah the Arbiter missions are just not as interesting partially because they never have you fight humans. On one hand I understand it, but the fact that you spend Quarantine Zone/Sacred Icon chasing humans right next to you but you never engage them is just weird.

Most Halo games since CE have forgotten that multi-faction battles are one of the best parts of the original game and well-designed encounters with multiple ways to play can add up to a whole much better than the constituent parts (because yeah, the Sentinels were never a very interesting enemy, and the Flood were mostly designed to be dealt with one way.)

I've got to disagree about fighting the humans. I know it's something people wanted and you'd expect the Covenant to do. But from a gameplay perspective I can't see any way it would be fun as you'd be basically fighting grunts but with weapons that hit you instantly. Plus it probably wouldn't make the elites as sympathetic as they are in the game.

One of the most infuriating things about H3, 4 and 5 to me is how poorly they do multi faction battles. Covenant and Flood interact once in H3, while H4 the Prometheans and the Covenant only fight each other for like 1/3rd of a mission. Granted they do team up later which results in some interesting encounters. But H5 also squanders having the Covenant and Prometheans be enemies again, I can probably count the amount of times they fight on one hand.

The negative space is a negative.

Its funny because simply bumping up the BMS eliminates the negative space. The maps play better when you can always move at the speed they were designed for.

The problem with that is the other ripples it sends through the game. With everyone moving faster, people are harder to hit than they normally would, vehicle speeds would need to be adjusted, properties of ADS will need to be readjusted, and then the maps also would have all these design elements for the clambering, spartan charge (not so much in arena as campaign and warzone) vertical spots for ground pound which would become useless. While it would be an improvement for some I don't think you can predict all the side effects of it. I'd love to have a game night and see how they all play though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-S4PJ0tFVI8

Great commentary and thoughts on why classic Halo is so desirable, not just a nostalgic emotional knee-jerk response to how 343 has approached Halo.

One thing I think this commentary is spot on about and has been echoed here, is that while Halo 5 isn't a "bad game", it doesn't feel like a proper Halo game. Enhanced mobility just seems like a trend that 343 has been chasing after (and many other developers too). People are getting sick of it.



It always delights me when I can find some common ground with you lol

Favyn does some really great videos. Even if you don't agree with all his points, there is always interesting thoughts, facts, and intelligent opinions expressed in them.

 

[Trup1aya]

Ah, my misunderstanding.

But on the contrary, the fact they you play as the Arbiter does end up dictating what the gameplay scenarios were. While things certainly could have been better in the missions we were given, I don't think there is any way around that playing as the Covenant meant you couldn't really fight the Covenant, and instead fought the fragments and subsets of it are ultimately unsatisfying for a multititide of reasons. Never mind the mandatory Flood and Sentinel combat as dictated by the story.

I don't see how fights against "subsets" of the covenant impacted the gameplay. The Covenant enemies exhibit the same behaviors regardless of the factions you were fighting against. And the if Flood and Sentinels are bad enemies, it's because of poor enemy design, not because you are Arby. Also, the story couldn't have had you fighting anyone species Bungie wanted you to fight. Chief has had to fight sentinels and Flood too.

 

[Fata1moose]

Favyn does some really great videos. Even if you don't agree with all his points, there is always interesting thoughts, facts, and intelligent opinions expressed in them.

I really like Favyn and Act Man they both always bring up good points. Really hope 343 listens to that crowd as well. Even if they're "vocal minorities" they understand why they like Halo and what makes Halo good.

 

[Trup1aya]

It seems to me that whether or not you think sprint works is heavily dependent on how strictly you define Halo gameplay.

Personally I completely disagree with you, lol. I think 5 is just as much a Halo game as the original trilogy. I see the differences in how it plays but to me they fit and work. It's completely fair to feel otherwise though.


How so? (Besides the fact that they're the same word )

Also can you define exactly what you mean by negative space? Is it just somewhere which is mostly used for traversal rather than shooting?

yeah, So again, if you use this gif as a reference, https://gfycat.com/DizzyNegativeAmethystsunbird, you can see how maps have been elongated to accommodate sprint.

Traveling through these elongated areas without sprinting means that he player is traversing at a rate much slower than the space is intended for, which increases the his exposure.

But time spent sprinting through these areas is time where the player can't deal damage. Also since sprint only works forwards, he has to cut his special awareness in half in order to traverse this area at the optimal speed.

So if you walk through it you are a sitting duck. But if you sprint through it as designed, you have to sacrifice your ability to engage enemies with 360 deg awareness

The result is large areas of the map that becomes strategically useless - and they wouldn't be if BMS = sprint speed. The negative space is 'no mans land'

I was once one who really liked how sprint was implemented in H5. But the more I play the more I see how it actually limits combat options and slows down the gameplay, despite the illusion of the opposite.

 

[Trup1aya]

The problem with that is the other ripples it sends through the game. With everyone moving faster, people are harder to hit than they normally would, vehicle speeds would need to be adjusted, properties of ADS will need to be readjusted, and then the maps also would have all these design elements for the clambering, spartan charge (not so much in arena as campaign and warzone) vertical spots for ground pound which would become useless. While it would be an improvement for some I don't think you can predict all the side effects of it. I'd love to have a game night and see how they all play though.
.

There's already been plenty of testing of 110% BMS with tweaked jump heights. The game simply flows better. SC is not needed, and GP doesn't need special consideration. (I'm talking about Arena... campain and Warzone I'm open for whatever)

Weapons are already tuned for hitting sprinting targets, that's why every gun has so much magnesium in comparison to previous interatuons

 

[Fahzgoolin]

Lol this analysis of Halo 5's campaign is hilarious, articulate, and relevant to what we were recently training about. Great "review" of the story imo.

Part 1 of 3
https://youtu.be/Rwwyb_5jJHc

 

[Deputy Moonman]

yeah, So again, if you use this gif as a reference, https://gfycat.com/DizzyNegativeAmethystsunbird, you can see how maps have been elongated to accommodate sprint.

Traveling through these elongated areas without sprinting means that he player is traversing at a rate much slower than the space is intended for, which increases the his exposure.

But time spent sprinting through these areas is time where the player can't deal damage. Also since sprint only works forwards, he has to cut his special awareness in half in order to traverse this area at the optimal speed.

So if you walk through it you are a sitting duck. But if you sprint through it as designed, you have to sacrifice your ability to engage enemies with 360 deg awareness

The result is large areas of the map that becomes strategically useless - and they wouldn't be if BMS = sprint speed. The negative space is 'no mans land'

I was once one who really liked how sprint was implemented in H5. But the more I play the more I see how it actually limits combat options and slows down the gameplay, despite the illusion of the opposite.

I would be more than fine with its removal in Halo 6, but I don't think it's going to happen. I prefer traditional movement a la Halo's 1-3. There is just something different about it. I dunno. Maybe change sprint to a power up and throw it in the mix with overshield and invis. I'd also like the number of abilities to manage on the controller to be reduced. holy shizbucket it's too many imo.

 

[Trup1aya]

I would be more than fine with its removal in Halo 6, but I don't think it's going to happen. I prefer traditional movement a la Halo's 1-3. There is just something different about it. I dunno. Maybe change sprint to a power up and throw it in the mix with overshield and invis. I'd also like the number of abilities to manage on the controller to be reduced. holy shizbucket it's too many imo.

The only thing sprint provides is a greater sense of speed. But the larger maps essential cancel out the speed boost it provides.

I think a higher BMS and greater field of view, the heightened sense of speed can be maintained without sprint. Also they could still use the arm waving animation and allow Spartan Charge ( nerfed )and Slide if someone pushes forward for at least 1 second w/o being shot. But don't make me put my gun down, and dont keep me from moving in all directions at top speed.

The whole mechanic is about feeling faster- like a Spartan. Well why not actually BE faster AND be able to multitask like you'd expect a super soldier to?

 

[Fahzgoolin]

Also, increasing FOV and pushing the gun/hand view model further away from the face makes things look faster in motion. It looks good too.

A higher base movement speed would be a fine compromise! Always thought big team battle modes or WarZone modes could use sprint if they wanted to, but the bulk gameplay and arena stuff should remain more "pure."

 

[jem0208]

yeah, So again, if you use this gif as a reference, https://gfycat.com/DizzyNegativeAmethystsunbird, you can see how maps have been elongated to accommodate sprint.

Traveling through these elongated areas without sprinting means that he player is traversing at a rate much slower than the space is intended for, which increases the his exposure.

But time spent sprinting through these areas is time where the player can't deal damage. Also since sprint only works forwards, he has to cut his special awareness in half in order to traverse this area at the optimal speed.

So if you walk through it you are a sitting duck. But if you sprint through it as designed, you have to sacrifice your ability to engage enemies with 360 deg awareness

The result is large areas of the map that becomes strategically useless - and they wouldn't be if BMS = sprint speed. The negative space is 'no mans land'

I was once one who really liked how sprint was implemented in H5. But the more I play the more I see how it actually limits combat options and slows down the gameplay, despite the illusion of the opposite.

Again, you've explained the effect but you haven't explained why it's a negative. You could argue that larger areas of negative space further emphasise map and power position control therefore they're a good thing. How do you decide how much negative space is too much?


Besides that, every Halo map has areas of 'no man's land'. And whilst what you're saying sounds reasonable in theory, the majority of 5's maps don't have tonnes of negative space. The example you're going to point to, Truth, is a map who's design is rooted in a Halo which didn't have sprint. So of course for it to work in 5 it would have to literally be scaled up which would increase the amount of negative space. Other maps in 5 have far fewer areas of no man's land. However, despite that, Truth is generally regarded as one of the best playing maps in the game. Is that not an indication that negative space may not be an inherent negative?

 

[Trup1aya]

Again, you've explained the effect but you haven't explained why it's a negative. You could argue that larger areas of negative space further emphasise map and power position control therefore they're a good thing. How do you decide how much negative space is too much?


Besides that, every Halo map has areas of 'no man's land'. And whilst what you're saying sounds reasonable in theory, the majority of 5's maps don't have tonnes of negative space. The example you're going to point to, Truth, is a map who's design is rooted in a Halo which didn't have sprint. So of course for it to work in 5 it would have to literally be scaled up which would increase the amount of negative space. Other maps in 5 have far fewer areas of no man's land. However, despite that, Truth is generally regarded as one of the best playing maps in the game. Is that not an indication that negative space may not be an inherent negative?

This is why it's bad

The result is large areas of the map that becomes strategically useless - and they wouldn't be if BMS = sprint speed. The negative space is 'no mans land'

The amount of negative space is relative to the difference between max movement speed and base movement speed. If BMS was increased to equal sprint speed, there would be no more negative space.

Sprint doesn't further emphasis map control or power positions. It just provides the illusion of larger play spaces, while actually making the space less playable.

What 'benefit' does sprint provide? How does it positively impact map design?

Increased sense of speed and bigger maps right? Well, The increased sense of speed is nullified by the increased size of the map. RELATIVELY, your aren't covering any more ground with sprint, compared to games that didn't have it. RELATIVELY, you cover much less when gun ready- resulting in slower game flow. Also despite the larger map, less of the map is useful for combat.

How does sprint positively effect weapon design?

Weapons must be tuned to for targets who are moving at sprint speed. the resulting aim assist and magnetism makes them exceedingly effective against players who aren't sprinting- which cheapens the gunplay and amplifies the 'no mans land' effect.

How does sprint positively impact enemy engagements?

It doesn't. It discourages them. If a player is engaged while sprinting through an area designed to be sprinted through, his only recourse is to evade- especially since sprint imposes tunnel vision on the sprinter, making it impossible for him to cover his flanks. It also leads to cat and mouse, since the sprinter is always creating distance between someone who is trying to shoot them, due to the speed difference.

How does sprint positively enhance mobility?

It doesn't. at best, there's no RELATIVE increase in velocity when sprinting, because the maps have been scaled up. You've traded combat readiness for no actual relative speed increase- it's a bad deal. At worse your options are severely hampered when you are not sprinting. Skill jumping with 360 degree positional awareness during combat is now largely impossible, because the jumps have all been scaled for Sprint's forward momentum (and a clamber that only works forward). I can only imagine the moves Frosty or Shottzy would be able to pull off if the map design didn't require players to push forward to do everything.

Truth IS one of the best playing maps in the game... because it's based on a good map. But it's negatively impacted by Sprints effect on the game and doesn't play as well as previous interations. That's why 343 is STILL trying to find a suitable weapons layout 1.5 years later.... we don't even have a power weapon on it anymore.

The only benefit of sprint (sense of speed) can be provided without sprint, and without the imbalaces created by trying to design against two movement speeds.

 

[Fahzgoolin]

There are tons of ways its been documented on how sprint affects gameplay and how it's negatives can far outweigh the positives (if any). The only real gripe that no-sprint seems to get is either an inconsistent plea for it to match lore expectations (even our boy Jem realizes this is a rabbit hole) or that on really huge vehicular based maps you can feel shafted into holding forward and dying (that's another subject).

However, I really do think it's the overall SA's together that impact things the most. Are they fun to use and do they feel good? Ya, mhm...but I'm sorry to say they fundamentally break core map design, flow, and player readability.

What's great about classic Halo (competitive settings or not) is there is a level of readability to the options of where a player can go. You can read a players options and make a smart assumption of where they went. You could trap players simply by good positioning. In Halo 5 there are now a lot more options of unpredictable escape routes/gun shot/grenade evasions.

In any game where movements are "enhanced" like this, this readability is much harder and messy. However, in games like COD and TF2 the time to kill (ttk) is much lower and even the aiming is a bit easier. In H5 we have lower aim assist, a much higher ttk, and sometimes even more vertically layered maps. This creates a lot of chasing and easy escapes. It creates a far less readable gameplay experience, which ends up annoying at casual AND competitive levels.

Also, I'd argue a lot of areas in maps are not designed properly with sprint in mind. However, if you did that then all of the maps would feel too open and empty. So you end up with areas that are jungle gyms of easy clamber/thrust escapes. With thrust and sprint and hover you now have key positions and logically superior angles being made trivial by the ease of thrust and clamber.

Remember that vidoc where Frank says "it feels good to make a jump and just barely make the clamber." I'd argue that Frank and players shouldn't be able to make those jumps in the first place. Being sloppy and getting away with it feels good because it's easy. Super jumping in Halo 2 "felt good" because you break core map design and get an advantage, but at least it was harder to accomplish, took practice, and often takes time to actually do it during a match. Not saying super bounces are more balanced (lol), but clamber + thrust creates a compounding issue of quick and smooth getaways or positional advantages that are super easy to pull off. Add a sprint or thrust as soon as you clamber and you now have an even worse issue...

I've used this example many times: on Truth you can reach an extremely important position that you probably shouldn't way too quickly--red/blue base to top-mid or bottom-mid to top-mid. This creates a similar issue that jet packs do like Reach, but it's obviously not as broken. The community has focused on sprint as the primary problem, but I'd say it's all of the above in combination that is the problem. That might sound all too convenient for someone advocating classic Halo design, but it's not without its demonstrable reasons.

Frank has said himself that H6 will be similar with its gameplay, so these discussions are probably falling on deaf ears... Here, other forums, and YouTube.

sprint discussion

Great post! Hopefully I wasn't too redundant after what you said.

 

[Karl2177]

Hitscan makes sprint issues worse. Why sprint when a shot is almost guaranteed to be a hit?

 

[Samurai G0SU]

I really am intrigued how they will reveal Halo 6. Do they evolve the system overall or keep things very similar to how halo 5's sandbox gameplay is? (hitbox/MM/rank/ui/abilities/map design/etc)

A lot of great things have been done with Halo 5 MP, but as this thread can detail, there is still much work and/or recommendations for improvement.

I also hope we receive more Vidocs about their Sprints like what we seen with Halo 5. I absolutely loved them.

 

[jem0208]

This is why it's bad

The result is large areas of the map that becomes strategically useless - and they wouldn't be if BMS = sprint speed. The negative space is 'no mans land'

What does this actually mean?

You claim they're strategically useless yet controlling them obviously allows you to control the movement of the enemy team. Do you mean that if you were to position yourself in one of these areas you were in a poor position?

And as I said before, negative space is present on every Halo map. They all have areas of "no man's land". I'd argue that this so called "negative space" is actually useful in map design for a number of reasons. They can be used to provide movement options with a high risk to reward ratio (top mid on Lockout for example is extremely exposed but allows for you to quickly traverse across the map). And as I said before you can use no man's land to emphasise and increase the strength of power positions. No man's land is not an inherent negative, it's an important aspect of map design which needs to be balanced properly. A map with absolutely no areas of no man's land wouldn't play very well, just like a map too much no man's land wouldn't work.

Frankly, I disagree that Halo 5's maps aren't filled with "negative space". As I said before Truth is probably the map with the most but still plays very well.

What 'benefit' does sprint provide? How does it positively impact map design?

Increased sense of speed and bigger maps right? Well, The increased sense of speed is nullified by the increased size of the map. RELATIVELY, your aren't covering any more ground with sprint, compared to games that didn't have it. RELATIVELY, you cover much less when gun ready- resulting in slower game flow. Also despite the larger map, less of the map is useful for combat.

How does sprint positively effect weapon design?

Weapons must be tuned to for targets who are moving at sprint speed. the resulting aim assist and magnetism makes them exceedingly effective against players who aren't sprinting- which cheapens the gunplay and amplifies the 'no mans land' effect.

How does sprint positively impact enemy engagements?

It doesn't. It discourages them. If a player is engaged while sprinting through an area designed to be sprinted through, his only recourse is to evade- especially since sprint imposes tunnel vision on the sprinter, making it impossible for him to cover his flanks. It also leads to cat and mouse, since the sprinter is always creating distance between someone who is trying to shoot them, due to the speed difference.

How does sprint positively enhance mobility?

It doesn't. at best, there's no RELATIVE increase in velocity when sprinting, because the maps have been scaled up. You've traded combat readiness for no actual relative speed increase- it's a bad deal. At worse your options are severely hampered when you are not sprinting. Skill jumping with 360 degree positional awareness during combat is now largely impossible, because the jumps have all been scaled for Sprint's forward momentum (and a clamber that only works forward). I can only imagine the moves Frosty or Shottzy would be able to pull off if the map design didn't require players to push forward to do everything.

First off we're discussing sprint's effects on map design, I really can't be bothered to branch out to everything else sprint has an effect on.

Secondly, I'm very much arguing devil's advocate here; I also dislike a number of the effects of sprint. I'm neutral on the topic, I enjoying playing Halo with and without sprint. What I disagree with is that any of these effects are somehow objectively negative.

That said, the idea that the weapons have to be tuned for sprint is completely speculative. Sprint absolutely does not necessitate higher aim assist. Halo 2 for example has far easier aiming than 5. Also, the pistol is probably one of the more difficult to use weapons in the series.

Truth IS one of the best playing maps in the game... because it's based on a good map. But it's negatively impacted by Sprints effect on the game and doesn't play as well as previous interations. That's why 343 is STILL trying to find a suitable weapons layout 1.5 years later.... we don't even have a power weapon on it anymore.

The only benefit of sprint (sense of speed) can be provided without sprint, and without the imbalaces created by trying to design against two movement speeds.

I don't agree, I prefer playing on Truth than I do Midship. The weapon layout has nothing to do with sprint, that's a fault of the sandbox design.


On a side note, this idea that players need to always be moving at one speed to be predictable is just wrong. The only difference which sprint makes to movement predictability is the exact time of arrival at a given position. Even then all it does is slightly increase the range in possible arrival times. Movement in 5 is still predictable, even with maps which allow you to go almost anywhere at any time. It makes movement marginally more difficult to predict but even so is that actually a bad thing? If anything, making movement slightly more difficult to predict makes it require more greater skill.


This idea seems to be almost unique to the Halo community as well. Look at games like TF2 and Overwatch; they're very competitive games which allow for different players to move at wildly different speeds. Quake has bms, strafe jumping, rocket jumping etc. but movement is still predictable. Sprint does not ruin movement predictability.

 

[Zeus The Dino]

I really am intrigued how they will reveal Halo 6. Do they evolve the system overall or keep things very similar to how halo 5's sandbox gameplay is? (hitbox/MM/rank/ui/abilities/map design/etc)

A lot of great things have been done with Halo 5 MP, but as this thread can detail, there is still much work and/or recommendations for improvement.

I also hope we receive more Vidocs about their Sprints like what we seen with Halo 5. I absolutely loved them.

They definetly have to revamp the fucking UI, they went back 10 years on it. You cant view gamertags in lobby, no pre game or post game lobby voice chat, smh.

 

[Munch Poke]

This idea seems to be almost unique to the Halo community as well. Look at games like TF2 and Overwatch; they're very competitive games which allow for different players to move at wildly different speeds. Quake has bms, strafe jumping, rocket jumping etc. but movement is still predictable. Sprint does not ruin movement predictability.

QFT. I can't believe it's been almost seven years since Reach and yet we're still debating about Sprint. At this point I have nothing to really add that hasn't been discussed to death. But for them to do away with Sprint after three games that would be an interesting choice to say the least.

As always it comes down to what Halo is to you as an individual. So many people enjoy the different aspects in different amounts. I'd have no problem with a faster base speed and a reworked thrust to compensate but I would never want to go back to slow ass H2/H3 movement.

At this point 343 is clearly trying new things such as the updated Radar that we might see play out in H6 but I still think H5 is the most balanced fair gameplay we've had thus far so I find very little offensive with it.

Just please god no flat out radar or thrust removal.

 

[BizzyBum]

You cant view gamertags in lobby

I feel like they did that so people didn't quit out of the lobby as soon as they see people's names. Though now people can tell who certain people and teams are just based on their emblem.

 

[Zeus The Dino]

I feel like they did that so people didn't quit out of the lobby as soon as they see people's names. Though now people can tell who certain people and teams are just based on their emblem.

Ok, good for ranked playlists
But for social and warzone? Nope

 

[User 73706]

I mainly see Sprint as a gateway to things like sliding or Spartan Charging from a control standpoint, really. I can't imagine it'd be fun moving at top (non-sprinting) speed and then try and crouch only to fling yourself right into an enemy's sights or something. That being said, I think there's other ways they could implement it.

 

[jem0208]

Ok, good for ranked playlists
But for social and warzone? Nope

I really don't get why people care about this. How much does it actually affect you experience being able to see the names of people in the lobby?

 

[FyreWulff]

What major game has actually shipped with pre or post game chat recently? Party chat killed it off and then games started dropping it. Reach de-emphasized it, then 4 dropped it, and Destiny didn't even ship with rando voice chat at all (and nobody used it after they patched it in)

Party chat thoroughly killed "social chat". The new update for Xbox that will finally show who's talking in party at all times sort of feels like the final stake through the heart for game chat as now we have the full functionality of being able to see who's talking like game chat can.

 

[Fahzgoolin]

As much as I poo poo on sprint and express how I think SA's affect gameplay negatively, I look back on the Halo CE playlist in H5 with fondness. The maps in Halo CE were simpler, with less places to grab onto with clamber. With the lower TTK of the M6D pistol, it really helped mitigate a lot of the issues I have.

I don't know how everyone else here felt about it, but I think it was a really good demonstration that SA's and sprint could even work decently with Halo CE's map design style (of course not every CE map is great) and weapon tuning...

 

[SmartWaffles]

They definetly have to revamp the fucking UI, they went back 10 years on it. You cant view gamertags in lobby, no pre game or post game lobby voice chat, smh.

I'm pretty sure pre and post game lobby voice chat is there, you can even mute everyone with the right stick.

 

[Munch Poke]

As much as I poo poo on sprint and express how I think SA's affect gameplay negatively, I look back on the Halo CE playlist in H5 with fondness. The maps in Halo CE were simpler, with less places to grab onto with clamber. With the lower TTK of the M6D pistol, it really helped mitigate a lot of the issues I have.

I don't know how everyone else here felt about it, but I think it was a really good demonstration that SA's and sprint could even work decently with Halo CE's map design style (of course not every CE map is great) and weapon tuning...

I always felt like H1 had the same issue with the Pistol that 2/3 had with BR. You either use that weapon or most situations you lose. Which it's fine having a main weapon but it always gave me the opposite feeling of standard H5, in which everything feels usable.

But a quicker time to kill does punish mistakes harder so you're either really using the spartan abilities correctly or you're dead. And I can see why you'd like it.

 

[TCKaos]

ITT: "I don't care whether or not the game actually feels good to play from a player empowerment perspective."

And that's not a good thing. Sprint, in its modern form, could use tweaking, sure, but to suggest that it should be removed or that you should just move as fast as you sprint is just absurd. Sprinting is an incredibly important facet of control granted to players to make them feel empowered - as are assassinations, or ground pounds, or Spartan charging.

Like, reading over all of this, it sounds a lot like that argument a few threads back where a bunch of objectively bad people were arguing that Spartan charges are OP and needed to be nerfed or removed. It's something so well telegraphed that you're only getting charged if the guy gets the drop on you (punishing you for a lack of situational awareness) or they were just terrible and couldn't evade the charge in time (punishing you for just being really bad).

Take it from one of the three or four people in the company that uses the Spartan charge: you're really only getting hit by it if you're shit or drop the ball.

In this iteration of the game, if you can't chase some guy that's sprinting and kill him you're either not trying hard enough or you're dropping the ball. If you shoot them they slow down, if they sprint you KNOW they don't have their shields back, and if you have situational awareness you're going to know where they ran off to. Kill times are fast enough that if you're letting somebody sprint out of your engagements and you're not in a position to pursue them and clean up your kill then you got outplayed. And if you're getting outplayed by shit players, then what does that say about you?

 

[Trup1aya]

What does this actually mean?

You claim they're strategically useless yet controlling them obviously allows you to control the movement of the enemy team. Do you mean that if you were to position yourself in one of these areas you were in a poor position?

Controlling what? The areas that people rarely traverse? What's the value of controlling these areas? The power positions on Truth ARE the exact same as they ever were.

The difference is, if you want to travel from blue base to P2 for example, you can't do so at the optimal speed for the route unless you sacrifce your ability to engage enemies or scan the area 360 deg around you.

In contrast, in H3, you can move from blue base to P2 at optimal speed, while simultaneous engaging an enemy who could threaten from any direction.

And as I said before, negative space is present on every Halo map. They all have areas of "no man's land". I'd argue that this so called "negative space" is actually useful in map design for a number of reasons. They can be used to provide movement options with a high risk to reward ratio (top mid on Lockout for example is extremely exposed but allows for you to quickly traverse across the map). And as I said before you can use no man's land to emphasise and increase the strength of power positions. No man's land is not an inherent negative, it's an important aspect of map design which needs to be balanced properly. A map with absolutely no areas of no man's land wouldn't play very well, just like a map too much no man's land wouldn't work.

A map designer can emphasize power positions without implementing mechanics that negatively influence the game in several other ways. map control has been a central component in Halo long before sprint was screwing up scaling.

Frankly, I disagree that Halo 5's maps aren't filled with "negative space". As I said before Truth is probably the map with the most but still plays very well.

Is Truth and improvement on midship?

First off we're discussing sprint's effects on map design, I really can't be bothered to branch out to everything else sprint has an effect on.

Nothing happens in a vaccum. The mechanics, map design, and weapons design all go hand in hand. You can't really talk about one without recognizing how they impact the other.

Secondly, I'm very much arguing devil's advocate here; I also dislike a number of the effects of sprint. I'm neutral on the topic, I enjoying playing Halo with and without sprint. What I disagree with is that any of these effects are somehow objectively negative.

Agree to disagree. I like playing halo with And without sprint . That said I can't ignore the fact that the inclusion of sprint has limited combat opportunities- a direct result of "push forward" map design. Objectively, There's nothing that sprint adds that can't be added without it. Objectively, there are plenty of good things it inclusion has taken away.

That said, the idea that the weapons have to be tuned for sprint is completely speculative. Sprint absolutely does not necessitate higher aim assist. Halo 2 for example has far easier aiming than 5. Also, the pistol is probably one of the more difficult to use weapons in the series.

I suppose devs don't HAVE to tune weapons for anything , but you'd be a mad man if you believed mechanics don't play a part in how weapons are designed.

H2 was poised to be THE Blockbuster console FPS and it took several drastic measures beyond heavy aim assist to make the game palatable for people who never even played a twin stick shooter before. The games that followed took extra measures to make shooting more skillful. Now we're approaching H2 levels of handholding again. Why?

The H5 magnum isn't hard. It's just weak within the sandbox

I don't agree, I prefer playing on Truth than I do Midship. The weapon layout has nothing to do with sprint, that's a fault of the sandbox design.

Again, these things aren't designed in a vacuum.

On a side note, this idea that players need to always be moving at one speed to be predictable is just wrong. The only difference which sprint makes to movement predictability is the exact time of arrival at a given position. Even then all it does is slightly increase the range in possible arrival times. Movement in 5 is still predictable, even with maps which allow you to go almost anywhere at any time. It makes movement marginally more difficult to predict but even so is that actually a bad thing? If anything, making movement slightly more difficult to predict makes it require more greater skill.

I know this isn't for me, but sprint isn't required to make movement unpredictable. And the sprint mechanic hasn't increased the skill gap.

This idea seems to be almost unique to the Halo community as well. Look at games like TF2 and Overwatch; they're very competitive games which allow for different players to move at wildly different speeds. Quake has bms, strafe jumping, rocket jumping etc. but movement is still predictable. Sprint does not ruin movement predictability.

I feel like this is a terrible comparison to make. TF2 and OW are hero shooters. Varied player attributes are the genres defining characteristic- what works for those games doesn't neccisarily work for Halo. That's like saying COD has kill streaks...

I don't think predictability in Halo is a problem, let alone a Sprint problem. But I don't think bringing up quake helps your argument. The best Quake games are prime examples of an Arena shooters enabling a ton of mobility, without mechanic like sprint forcing players to constantly push forward.

If anything we should be taking movement pointers from quake not Overwatch.

 

[Munch Poke]

Take it from one of the three or four people in the company that uses the Spartan charge: you're really only getting hit by it if you're shit or drop the ball.

In this iteration of the game, if you can't chase some guy that's sprinting and kill him you're either not trying hard enough or you're dropping the ball. If you shoot them they slow down, if they sprint you KNOW they don't have their shields back, and if you have situational awareness you're going to know where they ran off to. Kill times are fast enough that if you're letting somebody sprint out of your engagements and you're not in a position to pursue them and clean up your kill then you got outplayed. And if you're getting outplayed by shit players, then what does that say about you?

I like this guy.

That's how I've always felt about any of my melee kills. If you let me get the drop on you or run up in the correct way and you couldn't correct that situation with your BR or a thousand other ways to survive then it's on you. Why we're you not close enough to a teammate to get saved? Or at least avenged?

I play with some ridiculous no radar sniping types and they can BR or Pistol me out if I slip up in any situation, even after a solid spartan charge they've obliterated me before I could get the final shot in. So when people talk about the how a sword user or spartan charger is unfair what I hear from that is "That playstyle shouldn't be effective at all." Which in this game is just bullshit.

Everything is so balanced and usable to me in this game. I enjoy the rock paper scissors vibe that exists because there's a ton of variety in which a situation can play out.

 

[Trup1aya]

ITT: "I don't care whether or not the game actually feels good to play from a player empowerment perspective."

And that's not a good thing. Sprint, in its modern form, could use tweaking, sure, but to suggest that it should be removed or that you should just move as fast as you sprint is just absurd. Sprinting is an incredibly important facet of control granted to players to make them feel empowered - as are assassinations, or ground pounds, or Spartan charging.

Like, reading over all of this, it sounds a lot like that argument a few threads back where a bunch of objectively bad people were arguing that Spartan charges are OP and needed to be nerfed or removed. It's something so well telegraphed that you're only getting charged if the guy gets the drop on you (punishing you for a lack of situational awareness) or they were just terrible and couldn't evade the charge in time (punishing you for just being really bad).

Take it from one of the three or four people in the company that uses the Spartan charge: you're really only getting hit by it if you're shit or drop the ball.

In this iteration of the game, if you can't chase some guy that's sprinting and kill him you're either not trying hard enough or you're dropping the ball. If you shoot them they slow down, if they sprint you KNOW they don't have their shields back, and if you have situational awareness you're going to know where they ran off to. Kill times are fast enough that if you're letting somebody sprint out of your engagements and you're not in a position to pursue them and clean up your kill then you got outplayed. And if you're getting outplayed by shit players, then what does that say about you?

Meanwhile, you have objectively good players, the best halo 5 players in the world, also saying sprint and Spartan charge are bad.

Sprint makes you "feel" empowered while actually taking power away from you. You can't shoot, you can't check your flanks, and you can only make forward facing jumps. How powerful!

The only benefit is an animation that makes you "feel" empowered. Is it not better to ACTUALLY empower people?

They could easily have a max stick deflection, held for one second, trigger an animation that feels empowering. It could work in any direction, and not require you to put your gun down. It could also enable slides and Spartan charges. It would instantly have ALL of the benefits of sprint, with none of the negatives.

 

[TCKaos]

Meanwhile, you have objectively good players, the best halo 5 players in the world, also saying sprint and Spartan charge are bad.

Sprint makes you "feel" empowered while actually taking power away from you. You can't shoot, you can't check your flanks, and you can only make forward facing jumps. How powerful!

The only benefit is an animation that makes you "feel" empowered. Is it not better to ACTUALLY empower people?

They could easily have a max stick deflection, held for one second, trigger an animation that feels empowering. It could work in any direction, and not require you to put your gun down. It could also enable slides and Spartan charges. It would instantly have ALL of the benefits of sprint, with none of the negatives.

No, because directly empowering a player doesn't necessarily satisfy them or give them the actual sensation of being empowered. Some good examples in both directions that we're all familiar with include the Concussion Rifle and the Focus Rifle: the Concussion Rifle felt like a weak piece of shit in Reach and 4 because it had terrible graphical feedback and sound design, but it killed people in two hits, so it was actually a pretty powerful weapon. The Focus Rifle was a terrible weapon that sounded horrifying, creating a massive dissonance in the damage it appeared to do and the damage it actually did.

Removing the ability to sprint would create a similar dissonance: "As a super soldier, I should be able to run really fast." It feels good to run really fast. Also your stick deflection idea doesn't follow because 99% of people that play video games are accustomed to maximizing stick deflection for standard movement speeds. That's a cross genre and nearly cross medium mechanical norm that you're not going to abate anytime soon, even with attached bells and whistles. You're going to have people fumbling around and accidentally charging and sliding when they don't mean to.

Similarly, if you're unable to check your flanks or take lateral movement options because you're sprinting then that reflects poorly on player skill rather than the sprinting mechanic. It's not like sprinting changes your FOV or motion tracker, and it's not like you can't stop sprinting.

 

[Trup1aya]

No, because directly empowering a player doesn't necessarily satisfy them or give them the actual sensation of being empowered. Some good examples in both directions that we're all familiar with include the Concussion Rifle and the Focus Rifle: the Concussion Rifle felt like a weak piece of shit in Reach and 4 because it had terrible graphical feedback and sound design, but it killed people in two hits, so it was actually a pretty powerful weapon. The Focus Rifle was a terrible weapon that sounded horrifying, creating a massive dissonance in the damage it appeared to do and the damage it actually did.

Removing the ability to sprint would create a similar dissonance: "As a super soldier, I should be able to run really fast." It feels good to run really fast. Also your stick deflection idea doesn't follow because 99% of people that play video games are accustomed to maximizing stick deflection for standard movement speeds. That's a cross genre and nearly cross medium mechanical norm that you're not going to abate anytime soon, even with attached bells and whistles. You're going to have people fumbling around and accidentally charging and sliding when they don't mean to.

Similarly, if you're unable to check your flanks or take lateral movement options because you're sprinting then that reflects poorly on player skill rather than the sprinting mechanic. It's not like sprinting changes your FOV or motion tracker, and it's not like you can't stop sprinting.

These are crazy arguments.

1) a supersoldier SHOULD be able to run fast AND be able to shoot while doing it

2) people max there deflection when they want to move as fast as max deflection allows.When you want to run playing Mario 64 you don't press an extra button, you push the stick all the way, and he runs.

3) you literally can't check your flanks while sprinting, because you can only sprint forward. motion tracker, skill , and FOV have nothing to do with it.
If you want to sprint from A to B, you have to look at B

When you are not sprinting, the direction you are looking is completely independent of the direction you are traveling.

Stop trying to equate distaste for a mechanic, a distaste that is shared among many halo players at all skill levels, especially competitive players, to a matter of players not being good.

 

[Defect]

Remove Sprint pls thx

And make aiming not stupid

 

[Samurai G0SU]

i like sprint ...

so i can do infinite sprint - slides to annoy the person behind me looking at my buttocks

 

[Fahzgoolin]

If only MCC wasn't ass cheeks and then us nostalgic jerks that aren't willing to allow a game to evolve into something it never was could go play the real thing.

 

[FUNKNOWN iXi]

Meanwhile, you have objectively good players, the best halo 5 players in the world, also saying sprint and Spartan charge are bad.

This pretty much kills the skill argument imo, not to mention so many videos of unfair Spartan Charges (insane lock-on from around corners, etc.).

I'm not against SC if sprint is to remain, but it definitely needs some tweaks.

 

[Samurai G0SU]

This pretty much kills the skill argument imo, not to mention so many videos of unfair Spartan Charges (insane lock-on from around corners, etc.).

I'm not against SC if sprint is to remain, but it definitely needs some tweaks.

Tweak: when you spartan charge - you scream like the Cole Train with a loud WOOOO!. Now that will send Gangbusters buddy!

 

[Trup1aya]

This pretty much kills the skill argument imo, not to mention so many videos of unfair Spartan Charges (insane lock-on from around corners, etc.).

I'm not against SC if sprint is to remain, but it definitely needs some tweaks.

I'd be happy to keep it if it lost the magnetism.
It would be cool to see Charges landed if the player actually had to aim.

It's the same reason I don't mind GP.

But now, it's essentially a given that SCs, will connect.

I'm more surprised when someone misses a charge than when they land one.

 

[Cranster]

I have to agree that Spartan Charge needs to be either nerfed/tweaked or removed in Halo 6.

 

[wwm0nkey]

Remove Sprint, increase movement speed slightly, say that they are "always sprinting"

 

[Fahzgoolin]

Remove Sprint, increase movement speed slightly, say that they are "always sprinting"

You could even keep the white lines streaming at the edges of the screen to make it look like wind rushing past you!!!!!111

 

[Trup1aya]

Remove Sprint, increase movement speed slightly, say that they are "always sprinting"

You could even keep the white lines streaming at the edges of the screen to make it look like wind rushing past you!!!!!111

This is my take. Feel the empowerment.

 

[Finaj]

While the consensus on sprint seems to be "get rid of it," should things like boosters and clamber be left in?

 

[FyreWulff]

Remove Sprint, increase movement speed slightly, say that they are "always sprinting"

whenever i make a game, i'll put in sprint, but it'll just be the animation

it won't change speed or anything.

 

[Fahzgoolin]

While the consensus on sprint seems to be "get rid of it," should things like boosters and clamber be left in?

I think thrust is largely okay, but I think the ease of clambering on key parts of the map should be reconsidered. If you read my mega post earlier, then you'll see what I mean.

The CE anniversary playlist did demonstrate that Halo 5's movement can work quite nicely with more streamlined map design a la Halo CE.

A faster TTK with your starting utility weapon would be nice too, imo. You'll see a lot of pro players get salty about the pistol not being a good enough weapon to contest against the BR's, carbines, etc.

 

[Munch Poke]

I'd be happy to keep it if it lost the magnetism.
It would be cool to see Charges landed if the player actually had to aim.

It's the same reason I don't mind GP.

But now, it's essentially a given that SCs, will connect.

I'm more surprised when someone misses a charge than when they land one.

I'd have no problem with it having less magnetism. You'd still punish a player backed into a corner or someone who doesn't see you.

I've always thought it could remain where it is now, hell maybe even a smidge more range if it would use your thruster up and you'd be forced to recharge. That way it's essentially just a more powerful thrust forward to get you into and out of fights in a quick burst as well as a usable hard to aim attack.

 

[Madness]

Remove Sprint, increase movement speed slightly, say that they are "always sprinting"

You'll still get some complain that they need the gun wildly swinging from left to right or the air trails behind them etc.

I would remove sprint, buff movement speed quite a bit, remove spartan charge altogether. The argument they only get charged if they get the drop on you is so false. I could have saved 50 times of some guy spartan charging me with just 2-3 seconds sprint warmup from the most random places and even well placed shots wouldn't stop them from hitting. I am not a good player by any means, garbage tier but I hate this almost 5 foot melee they have given or instant kill from the back. And maybe I would also get rid of ground pound. None of this will happen though.

They wanted to discourage sprinting in this game with the penalty but then made sprint unlimited and even tied an offensive spartan charge to it which is more reward than risk. I have gotten more kills with it, more connects than whiffs.