Considering how much effort 343's been putting into the competitive scene on its own, I'm not so certain. Unless MLG comes back and says "screw the vanilla game we're making no sprint standard", seems like the devs will be deciding the tournament settings themselves and most people will probably hew closer to that.
In any sort of survey there's selection bias, in that you're more likely to get extreme results rather than nuanced feedback because it's the people at extremes who are more likely to respond to the survey.
Even if you give people a set of responses and/or a scale (1-5, agree to strongly disagree sort of stuff) it's almost pointless at capturing nuance. Wikipedia did a study on its article feedback tools and found that it was essentially meaningless to have a 1-5 rating for articles because people either said "this page sucks" and gave one star, or said it was great and gave five.
If there really was some huge anti-sprint contingent, you would expect that number to be a lot higher, because absolutism regarding sprint is pretty much mostly what gets talked about.
Thing is, the 11% is of how many people surveyed?
I understand that a scale of 1 to 5 is usually bad for getting a straight black and white answer on something.
Here's a tweet yesterday from Holmes:
https://twitter.com/JoshingtonState/with_replies
Josh Holmes @JoshingtonState
@Jawshe_XBL I thought it was pretty simple. “In Halo I like to sprint”; agree/disagree on 5 point scale. 11% includes both disagree picks.
I remember the question too when I took the survey. There were five options...first two were for sprint, middle was don't care, and last two were against sprint. So I understand where he's getting "includes both disagree picks", but we still don't know how many people were surveyed.
We all know it's not 19,000 people surveyed...it was far less than that.
If it was say...1000 people surveyed, then 11% would equal 110 people who voted for one of the two disagree picks.
If 19,000 people were surveyed (which they weren't) then 11% would equal 2090 people voting for one of the two disagree picks.
All things aside though...their sample size in my opinion isn't large enough to be making these types of interpretations.
Yeah, that will be nice. I remember watching Reach MLG and it honestly not being that engaging because it was so different from the game I knew from MM (mostly in terms of maps, but the settings were different, too). That gap is always going to be there since you make a game to sell to the Randy Randalls of the world to some degree, but Halo 5 looks to be a reasonable compromise compared to Reach and 4.
Poor Tashi, trying to get HCS going with the MCC of all things. Talk about an uphill struggle.
I posted over in beyond's forums...and I'll say it here...sprint is the least of everyone's worries when it comes to HCS. There is this fear that if HCS doesn't include sprint and default playlists obviously do...that it will somehow change the entire scope of the game and create a split in the community...I cannot believe that at all.
Things like starting weapons, weapons on map, player damage, player gravity, power weapon placement, powerup placement, etc....if all of that is drastically different from vanilla...then that's what will create the split. You're not going to have players going into HCS saying..."screw this im not playing without sprint."
