• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Should Halo 6 keep or remove sprinting?

Trup1aya

Member
If they can run fast and still shoot surely they can run even faster and no be able to shoot?

I don't actually think this is a reasonable argument for sprint, but if you are going to consider lore then it makes sense.



Depends what you consider "broken" to be. You might not like H5's maps but they're not broken.

Im actually not a fan of using the lore to justify gameplay mechanics. There are an infinite number of things Spartans can do in the lore, that would never be included in a game.

But the sprint Mechanic itself doesn't make sense from a lore perspective. There's no reason that running really fast would prevent someone from pulling a trigger. You might argue that attempting to do so with accuracy would cause you to limit your speed... or it would negatively impact your accuracy. But there's no reason sprinting while shooting would ever be an impossibility for a Spartan or anyone else.

Also you can always right lore to explain a game mechanic. "During training simulations, Spartans are expected to have their gun ready to fire at all times". There's no need to do this, because games should be games first, but it's doable.

The question to be asked is whether or not having players move faster in one direction than all of the others is an improvement on design standards for arena shooters, and there are a plethora of reasons why it isnt- and actually makes the arena worse.
 

Gestault

Member
Clamber breaks maps more than Sprint, but nobody will ever admit it. You can play every previous Halo map with Sprint and it'll simply play worse. But if you throw Clamber into the mix, all the paths would become irrelevant.

Clamber lets designers break line-of-sight (to prevent unintentional sniper control) without dividing the map itself. It also creates a risk window while players try to take that shortcut. I think you don't hear people complain about clamber as much because they don't mind it (or like it).
 
Clamber lets designers break line-of-sight (to prevent unintentional sniper control) without dividing the map itself. It also creates a risk window while players try to take that shortcut. I think you don't hear people complain about clamber as much because they don't mind it (or like it).

Or just don't make the Sniper Rifle fucking stupid.
 

mcrommert

Banned
no sprint, just make it so you move faster, look at Doom 2016.

Incredible multiplayer experience that game was

oh wait...

EDIT: i'm out...like many things in life (star wars being the most notable) its amazing how often people like something without comprehending why a thing is good...halo was never good because there was no sprint...that was merely a feature of the early 2000's in which it was originally developed
 

watership

Member
Keep it. The movement in Halo 5 as close to perfect as I've played in FPS. Overwatch as a comparison is laughable. The games are not remotely alike.
 

_Nemo

Member
I'd actually make a bigger push to get Halo closer to its roots. No aim-down-sights, no sprinting, no classes. Go back to that old school Halo formula. It would help Halo stand out from Battlefield and COD and honestly I think the old school formula can still work with a few minor tweaks.

The Halo 2 Anniversary multiplayer in Master Chief Collection actually had a lot of what I wanted. And when the game actually worked, it was glorious.

Agreed. I wonder if the majority of people who like sprinting were like 4 years old or something when Halo CE came out and hence grew up with these new mechanics. Encounters were glorious when sprinting didn't exist.
 

jem0208

Member
Im actually not a fan of using the lore to justify gameplay mechanics. There are an infinite number of things Spartans can do in the lore, that would never be included in a game.
I agree.

Hence why I wrote the spoilered part of the previous comment.

But the sprint Mechanic itself doesn't make sense from a lore perspective. There's no reason that running really fast would prevent someone from pulling a trigger. You might argue that attempting to do so with accuracy would cause you to limit your speed... or it would negatively impact your accuracy. But there's no reason sprinting while shooting would ever be an impossibility for a Spartan or anyone else.

Also you can always right lore to explain a game mechanic. "During training simulations, Spartans are expected to have their gun ready to fire at all times"

The question to be asked is whether or not having players move faster in one direction than all of the others is an improvement on design standards for arena shooters, and there are a plethora of reasons why it isnt- and actually makes the arena worse.

That said, the reason we swing our arms whilst sprinting is because it allows us to run faster, the same could be said for a Spartan. There will be a max speed they can run at whilst still being accurate with a gun, they would be able to run faster than that by sacrificing accuracy.
 
Depends what you consider "broken" to be. You might not like H5's maps but they're not broken.

The maps are fine. They're just dull, monotonous, repetitive and sterile boxes in every sense of the word. The designers took no risks and catered to the basest level of gameplay imaginable (or lowest, as is the case with Overgrowth). As a map pool, it does a terrible job of showcasing the variety of Halo gameplay, and thematically, the majority of them don't make any sense.

Fortunately, there doesn't seem to be much debate here, so perhaps Halo 6 will have better design.

You say all that, but then why does Halo 5 still play really fucking well?

Oh wait, maybe it is based on personal preference.

I mean, the game is 16 years old? Arguably shorter if you consider anything after Halo 3 to be "Halo". Every game, there is a crowd that prefers it to the previous iteration or heralds it as the best, so that doesn't mean anything. The only constant is that Halo CE still plays better competitively and casually on a fundamental level than anything that followed it, because there was no sandbox junk and no hand holding mechanics. And I say that as someone who would rather play Halo 5 than Halo CE because the game doesn't "feel good" to play these days, as a result of it being a game from 2001 lol.
 

Trup1aya

Member
Incredible multiplayer experience that game was

oh wait...

EDIT: i'm out...like many things in life (star wars being the most notable) its amazing how often people like something without comprehending why a thing is good...halo was never good because there was no sprint...that was merely a feature of the early 2000's in which it was originally developed

Wasn't the fact that Doom MP had different mechanics from the SP part of the reason people hated it?

The singular base movement speed is a key characteristic of the depth of Halo engagements. It allowed for a skill gap to be derived based on the 1) Run & Gun nature of the combat and 2) the 360 degree, mid-combat platforming.

The lack of sprint ABSOLUTLEY was a part of the reason why halo was good. And the the inclusion of sprint has nuetered these two concepts.

It's crazy that a pro sprint person would accuse someone else of not understanding why previous halo's were good.
 
Maps feeling pointlessly oppressive from sniping isn't just about how powerful each shot from the sniper rifle is. People want effective BRs and pistols.

So let's give the Pistol a short range, and then make literally every other weapon easier to use and have more range.
 
Incredible multiplayer experience that game was

oh wait...

EDIT: i'm out...like many things in life (star wars being the most notable) its amazing how often people like something without comprehending why a thing is good...halo was never good because there was no sprint...that was merely a feature of the early 2000's in which it was originally developed

Not to split hairs, but no sprint isn't why DOOM had bad multiplayer, so you kinda fell for your own edited point you just made there. It had the potential to be incredible, but was marred by loadouts/perks, demons and terrible gametype selection. The gameplay itself was incredible.
 

psyfi

Banned
I think sprinting is really well implemented in Halo 5, definitely better balanced than Reach and H4, but I still find it unnecessary. Give us a strong base movement speed + thruster and I'm happy.

And clamber's gotta go, yeah. I find it even worse than sprint.
 

VDenter

Banned
The best Halo games dont have sprinting. So going by that piece of logic yes they should remove it but of course they probably wont.
 

Trup1aya

Member
That said, the reason we swing our arms whilst sprinting is because it allows us to run faster, the same could be said for a Spartan. There will be a max speed they can run at whilst still being accurate with a gun, they would be able to run faster than that by sacrificing accuracy.

Sure but this means nothing when it comes to designing a game. I mean by that logic I guess we should also incorporate hipfire penalties and reinstate fall damage and stun.

I'm of the position that we should never be sacrificing our accuracy or ability to shoot in exchange for faster speeds in game... we should just be free to move at max speed w/o any penalty.

This allows for the run&gun 360 degree platforming engagements that sparked the meteoric rise of the franchise.

Edit: To be clear, they can add all the arm swinging animations they want, but when I pull the trigger, a bullet/grenade and hit where my cursor is pointed.
 

Sephzilla

Member
If the base running speed was fast like Doom, sure, try it. If it was tediously slow like Halo 3, fuck no.

I want the Halo 1 movement speed again. Going back to Halo 1 was an eye opening experience, I wasn't used to feeling that fast in Halo anymore
 
Incredible multiplayer experience that game was

oh wait...

EDIT: i'm out...like many things in life (star wars being the most notable) its amazing how often people like something without comprehending why a thing is good...halo was never good because there was no sprint...that was merely a feature of the early 2000's in which it was originally developed

No, there were a lot of factors that contributed to Halo being "good" before you account for the fact that there was less competition and different psychological trends for shooter fans back then. On a fundamental level, Halo CE, and Halo 2 and Halo 3 to a lesser extent, had solid core gameplay mechanics and map design. Regardless of how anyone feels about the quality of the following games compared to one another, they largely fail to measure up to the first three in one of those areas.

Denying that Sprint among many other things has any influence on that, whether it's indirect or direct, is simply obtuse.

If the base running speed was fast like Doom, sure, try it. If it was tediously slow like Halo 3, fuck no.

With the exception of the Reach beta, the walk speed has been the same since Halo 2. Halo 3 just felt slower because of the FOV and movement acceleration.
 

Gestault

Member
So let's give the Pistol a short range, and then make literally every other weapon easier to use and have more range.

We'll have to agree to disagree. Like I mentioned before, since you noticed not seeing a lot of complaints about clamber, you may have some unique feelings on it. You're talking about rebuilding the weapon hierarchy to "solve" it.
 

jem0208

Member
The maps are fine. They're just dull, monotonous, repetitive and sterile boxes in every sense of the word. The designers took no risks and catered to the basest level of gameplay imaginable (or lowest, as is the case with Overgrowth). As a map pool, it does a terrible job of showcasing the variety of Halo gameplay, and thematically, the majority of them don't make any sense.

Fortunately, there doesn't seem to be much debate here, so perhaps Halo 6 will have better design.
In terms of my personal enjoyment of the map I'd consider Plaza to be up there with Halo's best maps. Coliseum is a fantastic CTF map, Rig and Eden Strongholds are both amazing gametypes.

I completely disagree with pretty much everything you just said (except maybe that Overgrowth sucks).

What do you actually mean by risks? I'd much rather have a bunch solid maps than ones defined by gimmicks because the designers took a "risk".
 

psyfi

Banned
I want the Halo 1 movement speed again. Going back to Halo 1 was an eye opening experience, I wasn't used to feeling that fast in Halo anymore
The movement speed combined with the visceral power of the pistol makes Halo CE feel so good. It's still the only Halo campaign I enjoy replaying.
 

mcrommert

Banned
In terms of my personal enjoyment of the map I'd consider Plaza to be up there with Halo's best maps. Coliseum is a fantastic CTF map, Rig and Eden Strongholds are both amazing gametypes.

I completely disagree with pretty much everything you just said (except maybe that Overgrowth sucks).

Everyone can agree that overgrowth sucks

EDIT: 343 need to focus on a few things for halo 6...map design is a huge one...even with their well designed maps the design language is too samey for too many people...but they shouldn't go too far down the hole like bungie has for destiny where they have build super overdesigned maps that actually hurt gameplay and flow

They need to focus on campaign design...that one needs no explanation

And they should make halo 6 multi a platform that they update continuously like csgo or overhype...halo doesn't need a new version every 3 years and the increased focus on one release would give the team time to build new maps and not just start over every so often. My understanding is the reqs have sold well and there are more things on the microtransactions side they could sell (directly sell animations for game beginnings, assasinations and really really stupid gun decals...i mean i want them straight stupid as hell...glowing animated nonsense)
 
In terms of my personal enjoyment of the map I'd consider Plaza to be up there with Halo's best maps. Coliseum is a fantastic CTF map, Rig and Eden Strongholds are both amazing gametypes.

I completely disagree with pretty much everything you just said (except maybe that Overgrowth sucks).

I know you do that's why I have you on ignore. You've never said anything to show you understand Halo because you can't see past your enjoyment of the game.
 

Deadly Cyclone

Pride of Iowa State
This comes up every year, and they need to keep it. I loved Halo 1-3 but times change, it can still be Halo with the ability to move around maps quickly. Replaying 1-3 really feels like you're walking or sliding around the maps. Big team maps take forever to get around.
 

Gestault

Member
And that's what people want out of a sprintless halo. A Base movement speed that is effectively a run. No need for two speeds, one of which restricts your combat options. Halo is best as a run AND gun shooter, not run or gun.

Considering Halo has had relatively slow base movement speed compared to other series (and loved for it), I think that solution will either poison the feel that a lot of the audience wants, or disrupt the rest of the game systems/modes in unintended ways.

Halo isn't Doom 2016 or Quake Arena (even for those who love all three).
 
They're not going to get rid of sprinting.

It's a mechanic that many simply find fun.

Considering Halo has had relatively slow base movement speed compared to other series (and loved for it), I think that solution will either poison the feel that a lot of the audience wants, or disrupt the rest of the game systems/modes in unintended ways.

Halo isn't Doom 2016 or Quake Arena (even for those who love all three).

Yup,

The comparisons and people pointing out "Doom 2016 didn't have sprint!" strike me as pretty lame. Having a far faster base movement speed would result in far more fundamental gameplay changes instead of just having sprint.
 
I hate sprint simply because it seems to fuck up vehicle balancing in Halo. Because of how Halo vehicles are instantly lost if someone gets into melee range to jump on and either remove the driver or shove a grenade in his face.

So this makes ground vehicles very weak as it's much easier to hide behind something and sprint out. Most times you can't even turn a Scorpion fast enough to get someone sprinting right beside you.

Plus, map balance itself seems to fuck up. Large maps feel smaller because it takes less time to traverse.

And then objective PvP modes fuck up for the same reason. Even if you can't sprint while holding a flag, everyone else can.


Basically, I feel like sprint fucks up the balance of way too many other aspects of the game.
 
Keep sprint and this comes from a guy who's playing halo since OG Xbox. 5 has the most refreshing multiplayer in the series and fps genre. Way better than 3
 

Source

Member
I wish they would do away with sprinting. I know they will not, but I would love if they did. We can't ever have small maps again because of it. Or at least not have them and they be balanced and fun to play on. We can not have small, fantastic maps like Lockout, Wizard or Battle Creek with sprinting in the game.
 
What do you actually mean by risks? I'd much rather have a bunch solid maps than ones defined by gimmicks because the designers took a "risk".

Damnation is exceptionally designed and arguably the best Halo map. Narrows is a brilliant CTF map. Chill Out could have easily been a terrible room-based map, but it worked with intelligently placed teleporters and micro pathing (convoluted ramps and fine tuned segmentation). Zanzibar is built around assaulting a base with many interactive elements and it excels. Most people would say Terminal was a brilliant 1 Flag map as well. I don't think Sanctuary is anything special, but it's a tried and true design for competitive gameplay. Obviously Midship played well in Halo 2. There are others I don't necessarily agree with - Beaver Creek, Ivory Tower, etc. - but it's hard to deny their impact on the game and their versatility. Also, shoutout to MLG's King of the HIll on Construct for its dynamic team oriented gameplay.

All of those maps took risks, and all of them could be played "competitively". Compared to these, Plaza is a series of ramps and clamber ledges, and that's the high note for Halo 5's "competitive map pool".

Coliseum in particular is a design that was made in Forge by amateur designers a million times. It's as generic as two base two tower maps come, so of course it'll play well.The design is already proven to work.
 

Calibos

Member
I wish they would do away with sprinting. I know they will not, but I would love if they did. We can't ever have small maps again because of it. Or at least not have them and they be balanced and fun to play on. We can not have small, fantastic maps like Lockout, Wizard or Battle Creek with sprinting in the game.

Seems like most of the maps in H5 Arena are pretty small. They are dense and intricate and extremely balanced...not sure if we are playing the same Halo 5?

If people played this game's MP alot, I can't see how they would want to go back to the old mechanics...seems sublime to me. But it's all just opinion anyways...

Keep the MP exactly the same with all modes at launch and I am happy.
 

jem0208

Member
I know you do that's why I have you on ignore. You've never said anything to show you understand Halo because you can't see past your enjoyment of the game.

Well if you can post a reasonable explanation of why Plaza is so bad I'll explain why I like it.

Or, I can happily continue to enjoy the game and you can continue to be an elitest douche.


Also have you ever considered that Halo isn't some well defined thing that everyone agrees on. What one person considers to be Halo could be very different to another. You claim I don't understand Halo, however, what you fail to realise is that we likely have fundamental disagreement as to what constitutes Halo.

Damnation is exceptionally designed and arguably the best Halo map. Narrows is a brilliant CTF map. Chill Out could have easily been a terrible room-based map, but it worked with intelligently placed teleporters and micro pathing (convoluted ramps and fine tuned segmentation). Zanzibar is built around assaulting a base with many interactive elements and it excels. Most people would say Terminal was a brilliant 1 Flag map as well. I don't think Sanctuary is anything special, but it's a tried and true design for competitive gameplay. Obviously Midship played well in Halo 2. There are others I don't necessarily agree with - Beaver Creek, Ivory Tower, etc. - but it's hard to deny their impact on the game and their versatility. Also, shoutout to MLG's King of the HIll on Construct for its dynamic team oriented gameplay.

All of those maps took risks, and all of them could be played "competitively". Compared to these, Plaza is a series of ramps and clamber ledges, and that's the high note for Halo 5's "competitive map pool".

Coliseum in particular is a design that was made in Forge by amateur designers a million times. It's as generic as two base two tower maps come, so of course it'll play well.The design is already proven to work.

Narrows is a bridge with a couple of grav lifts.

See, I can make silly reductionist arguments too!

I don't actually disagree with any of that. It seems to me that your problem with 5's map design is that they focused on making set of maps which are specifically designed to play very well with a small set of gamemodes. I understand the disappointment with a lack of diversity in 5, however, that's no argument against the quality of the maps themselves. In that regard, you're right though, they didn't take many risks with 5's arena maps.
 

Temp_User

Member
Remove sprint. Designing around it stretches the stage which leaves less time engaging enemies and more time running around. Use vehicles, man-cannons, zip lines and teleporters instead to facilitate fast movement.

Thrust, slide(now crouch + thrust), clamber and ground pound should be retained but i feel the ground pound needs a small penalty like a slight shield deplete because its way too good a move. Its a repositioning AND an offensive tool.
 
Remove sprint. Designing around it stretches the stage which leaves less time engaging enemies and more time running around. Use vehicles, man-cannons, zip lines and teleporters instead to facilitate fast movement.

Thrust, slide(now crouch + thrust), clamber and ground pound should be retained but i feel the ground pound needs a small penalty like a slight shield deplete because its way too good a move. Its a repositioning AND an offensive tool.

It shouldn't be aimed. A fast fall mechanic with a movement cancel has potential in Halo, but being able to aim it adversely impacts level design and gives too much reward to the player who already has high ground.

In Halo CE, verticality was balanced by health and fall damage, and the player on the bottom could still outgun you with their utility weapon, especially if you were already weak from a previous engagement and decided to stay up top. The removal of both of those things contradict with the addition of ground pound.

Obviously it is a fun mechanic, but just because it's fun doesn't mean it belongs. Jetpack and Dual Wielding were also fun!
 

Trup1aya

Member
Considering Halo has had relatively slow base movement speed compared to other series (and loved for it), I think that solution will either poison the feel that a lot of the audience wants, or disrupt the rest of the game systems/modes in unintended ways.

Halo isn't Doom 2016 or Quake Arena (even for those who love all three).

Lol you think a faster base movement speed will disrupt core game systems in ways that sprint hasn't!

The main reason people support sprint is because they think it feels faster.

If you up base movement speed, you can scale up any other system proportionally. Alternatively you can keep BMS the same or reduce it and scale down other systems to match. Really it doesn't matter as long as the game is built to be played at one uniform speed.

I should add that Quake and doom are in Halo's DNA... it was slowed down to suit a new generation of FPS players who'd never played on twin sticks. Nowadays people are capable of handling increased speeds.
 
We'll have to agree to disagree. Like I mentioned before, since you noticed not seeing a lot of complaints about clamber, you may have some unique feelings on it. You're talking about rebuilding the weapon hierarchy to "solve" it.

My post you quoted was sarcasm because it looked like you said that clamber is a good mechanic since it makes it harder for a sniper to watch a "predictable" path. That to me sounds like a problem with the sniper rifle and utility weapon (and coincidentally, movement speed), and it's not something that needs to be solved with another mechanic. That's like adding the hardlight shield back to the game, or worse - giving players plasma pistols off of spawn to balance the vehicles.
 

Trup1aya

Member
You are naming old franchises that have failed as multiplayer shooters in the modern era...why would halo want to follow them to the grave?

How is this a thing any single person is for? Lets make the game worse because i'm nostalgic for pig slop

wtf

When halo followed those games closest is when halo's mp was most successful.

Meanwhile doom's most recent mp flop was BECAUSE it didn't adhere to mechanics that were championed by the SP.

Doom MP played like Doom should, it would have been a hit like the SP. instead they made it play like Halo 4.
 
Lol you think a faster base movement speed will disrupt core game systems in ways that sprint hasn't!

The main reason people support sprint is because they think it feels faster.

If you up base movement speed, you can scale up any other system proportionally. Alternatively you can keep BMS the same or reduce it and scale down other systems to match. Really it doesn't matter as long as the game is built to be played at one uniform speed.

I should add that Quake and doom are in Halo's DNA... it was slowed down to suit a new generation of FPS players who'd never played on twin sticks. Nowadays people are capable of handling increased speeds.

There's no pleasing fans of Sprint. The simple choice between moving at 100% and moving "faster" at 125% gives the illusion of speed, whereas if you increased base movement to 125%, they'd either want the option to move faster still, or complain that the player moves too fast in combat.

I personally like the game around 110% speed with no movement or strafe acceleration, meaning you're always moving that fast even when you change directions, unlike now where you move slower at first. If there's one comparison to make to Overwatch, it's that characters in that game don't seem to have acceleration on them, so they control fluidly. That would work very well for Halo without complicating the sandbox.
 

ryan299

Member
Im fine with how sprint was handled in 5. I want better maps though. That was the weakest part of 5's multiplayer. A lot of bland and bad maps
 
When halo followed those games closest is when halo's mp was most successful.

Meanwhile doom's most recent mp flop was BECAUSE it didn't adhere to mechanics that were championed by the SP.

Doom MP played like Doom should, it would have been a hit like the SP. instead they made it play like Halo 4.

I honestly don't enjoy how fast Doom's movement is but the game failed for reasons already mentioned here, not the fact that you couldn't Sprint lol. I didn't play the MP outside of the beta, but back then everyone had rockets and shotguns and the demon rune was a stupid mechanic.
 
Halo 1-3 had the best gameplay, with 3 having a great sandbox but several mechanical shortcomings (speed, fov, acceleration, bullet spread).

Sprint and all of their other additions sacrifice the core experience and great gameplay for a more "modern" game. It dilutes the entire experience.

Also art style was a huge part of what made the original games so iconic.

I really enjoy Halo 5 but I enjoy it a S a fun FPS rather than a Halo game.
 

Pizza

Member
I really wish they would take note from Doom and accept that you don't need to change the fundamentals of a game to modernize it.

Halo 5 multiplayer is pretty great, some of the best in the series at a core mechanics level. However, I still think they need to look back to Halo 2 more and simplify the game. Understand more why Halo 2 was so beloved (and Halo 1/3 as well).

Get rid of sprint, just make the game faster. Yeah, going back to how slow Halo 3 was would be really hard these days, so just make it an exaggerated form of what people remember Halo 2 being. Fast. Like Doom. You don't need ADS in Halo because outside of scoped weapons it's not how the games worked. So don't do it. Make everything fire from the hip. Like Doom. You don't need Spartan Abilities and clamboring and jetpack boosters and shit. That wasn't Halo.

Halo is map control, power weapons, balance, basic power-ups, and a wealth and variety of awesome and goofy gametypes. Make it fast, get rid of the extra layers that don't need to be there. Don't be afraid to strip back and just make it what it's supposed to be. You know, like Doom.

This!!

My ideal halo would be a riff on halo 3.

Slightly faster, balanced dual wielding, well designed maps with different aesthetics, free map updates, separating warzone crates from cosmetic unlocks, maybe a "bigger team battle" and dump warzone altogether

4 tried to iterate on reach and 5 iterated on 4 pretty successfully. Except now we're three games away from what people started playing these games for.
 

Toa Axis

Member
Sprint is and always shall be a mechanic that doesn't belong in Halo. By including it, you compartmentalize the "moving" and "shooting" parts of Halo that have previously been uniform. Not only that, but things like map design, movement, and flow suffer. And of course, increased escapability means poor positioning is punished less, and encounters are needlessly prolonged. This effectively means that the game is slowed down, which is the opposite intention of sprint.

There is nothing that sprint does that simply couldn't be accomplished through upping the base movement speed.
 
Top Bottom