I somewhat disagree. Axing sprint completely takes away an option the player has. That's been one of the things I love about Halo; is that the player has so many ways to tackle an encounter whether it be multiplayer or against AI. Personally I'd love to see the customization options that Reach Firefight has implemented into campaign. I'd love to go The Ark only fighting Hunters and vehicles. I'm all for the return of sprint, jetpack, and everything else; but for the love of god don't ram it down my throat like Reach did.
-
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.
Halo 4 Announced (MS Conf, 2012, Start Of New Trilogy)
- Thread starter Sanic
- Start date
I somewhat disagree. Axing sprint completely takes away an option the player has. That's been one of the things I love about Halo; is that the player has so many ways to tackle an encounter whether it be multiplayer or against AI. Personally I'd love to see the customization options that Reach Firefight has implemented into campaign. I'd love to go The Ark only fighting Hunters and vehicles. I'm all for the return of sprint, jetpack, and everything else; but for the love of god don't ram it down my throat like Reach did.
HigherLevel
Member
With a fast base speed like Halo 2, you don't need sprint.
So a reason to not remove it because it presented another way to play out encounters, regardless of how it affected the gameplay? Seems a bit silly to say. Also, I don't think I ever had a moment where I though sprint added anything to the campaign while playing, it was only useful for getting past enemies faster in speed-runs.
I don't see what good an option of going slower does. I can just half press the stick if I really want to. Let me go fast all the time without some stupid animation tacked on.
Make the enemies faster, more agile, able to jump up to a length of their height. Elites in Halo 1 was fantastic. Had an enormous amount of tension fighting those guys, and they weren't detrimental to game in any way, and neither did it hurt the combat. I'm not in any way being for or against things like sprint here - just saying get away from the slow cement feet. But on that same notion, sprint isn't necessary in Halo, especially in multiplayer, if the settings are appropriately made.
The Xtortionist
Member
Halo doesn't really offer that many options in combat compared to games like Shadowrun, Crysis, Bioshock, or others.
The Librarian
Banned
Well, for one, if the base player speed is fast enough, you're not taking away any choice from the player.
Secondly, it's not so much as taking a way a choice as it is not giving the player something that has no consequence to it. I've been thinking about it for the past five minutes, and I can't think of a single consequence of Sprint – all ups and no downs. The equipment in Halo 3? Those had their down sides – one time use, stationary, mostly defensive.
My comment about counters came from here.
I can only speak for BioShock here, but Halo's encounters are far more dynamic than anything found in BioShock. Halo has a lot of options. I personally can't think of a more fun encounter in BioShock than the Brute hallway in Crow's Nest.
The Xtortionist
Member
Not speaking on fun factor. Bioshock simply offers more options to the player than Halo.
The Librarian
Banned
What's the point of offering more choices if that doesn't increase the fun? BioShock, in some ways, does offer more choice than Halo – upgrading weapons, manipulating environments – but there's a lot more to encounters than how many weapons you can carry or what you upgrade. Most of BioShock's encounters aren't that open, limiting the number of ways a player can approach an encounter, and the enemy AI – aside from the Big Daddy – is quite simple. Most of the time they rush at you, meaning that despite the location most encounters end the same way, and thus they all blur together. So while BioShock may offer the player more options in certain areas of the game, its encounters overall fall far shorter than Halo's, and have a higher chance of being the same between runs.
squidhands
Member
to get in on the Crysis talk, having a hold A to power jump would be a decent inclusion that wouldn't detract too much from the core mechanics everyone loves so much. I have to say that after playing Reach, I don't feel like the jumping in Halo was ever done to my liking; I just tolerated each iteration.
The last line of my post: I'm all for the return of abilities, but don't ram them down my throat like Reach did. It means if you want to play without abilities, go for it. If you want to play with sprint, go for it.
I would never put that as one of the high points of Halo 3's encounters.
When you have large open levels in the campaign and humongous multiplayer maps like Forge World/Hemorrhage, sprint is pretty much a necessity. Most players already ignore the objectives (capturing flags, planting bombs, etc) because it's boring and pointless to spend five minutes making your way across the map on foot just to get sniped by the enemies base. Taking away sprint would just make that issue even worse.
Sprinting is one of the few features that should stay IMO (as a core gameplay element, not an armor ability or whatever).
Sprinting is one of the few features that should stay IMO (as a core gameplay element, not an armor ability or whatever).
The Xtortionist
Member
We're not on the same page here. Yes, Halo offers many options in it's encounter design, but I'm talking pure mechanics.
The Librarian
Banned
Fair enough.
HigherLevel
Member
Halo doesn't need sprint. The gameplay should look like this,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68kIO3mZMX8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68kIO3mZMX8
mechanics mean nothing if the encounters do not require you to actually take advantage of said mechanics.
Having meaningful options is far more important than just having options.
As for not having sprint in campaign; if the enemies weren't ass slow, then it wouldn't matter. Super fast elite-like enemies would be a terror even with sprint.
In multiplayer, sprint is less necessary, but it could probably be worked in, maybe at a lesser speed than what it is capable of in campaign.
Campaign could be 150% base speed when sprinting, multiplayer could be something like 115%, and also have a longer cooldown; then it is a slightly faster way to get around the map with the expense of putting your weapon down.
AllIsOneIsNone
Banned
The Xtortionist
Member
I can beat Crysis without ever cloaking, is cloaking a worthless mechanic in Crysis?
: /
You are obviously interpreting what I said incorrectly.
Being able to smartly use cloak in crysis to avoid encounters or play like the predator is a meaningful choice.
You heard the man. Don't make Halo 4, restore Halo 2's online capability.
Agreed. Hell, I don't even miss it when playing Anniversary Slayer in Reach.
The Xtortionist
Member
I tend to take things literally on the internet.
Then you look at small maps favored toward 4v4 and sprint KILLS objective modes. I'll take walking from a semi-distant spawn over getting assassinated in the back within seconds of touching a flag because he got to me immediately with sprint.
squidhands
Member
I'm old, I need my sleep. ;-)+1. Where were you when I was drowning in my words?
TheCongressman1
Member
How can they remove that which never existed?
Put me in the camp of people that don't feel a need for sprint in Halo and instead just raise the base speed.
What I think he's saying is in Halo, sometimes you have to consider and look at all the options within a given encounter. This includes what weapons you have, the weapons of the enemies, the types of enemies (attacking 4 grunts and an elite is different than attacking 3 elites with some jackals for ex.), how to best approach the encounter, any vehicles, etc. This is especially true if you're playing alone on the harder difficulty levels. On top of this, because of the amount of possibilities and options afforded to you and the AI, no two battles play out the same. So keeping said options and variables in mind are necessary to adapt to changes in the firefight.
These are all options and sometimes requirements that aren't usually found in other games. It's true you may have more "options" in Bioshock but the play style will differ far less from encounter to encounter than what you see in a Halo game.
At least that's been my experience with both games.
What I think he's saying is in Halo, sometimes you have to consider and look at all the options within a given encounter. This includes what weapons you have, the weapons of the enemies, the types of enemies (attacking 4 grunts and an elite is different than attacking 3 elites with some jackals for ex.), how to best approach the encounter, any vehicles, etc. This is especially true if you're playing alone on the harder difficulty levels. On top of this, because of the amount of possibilities and options afforded to you and the AI, no two battles play out the same. So keeping said options and variables in mind are necessary to adapt to changes in the firefight.
These are all options and sometimes requirements that aren't usually found in other games. It's true you may have more "options" in Bioshock but the play style will differ far less from encounter to encounter than what you see in a Halo game.
At least that's been my experience with both games.
This is exactly what I was saying, I'm not sure how it could be misinterpreted, 'literally' or not. I wasn't kidding in my original post or anything.
uh. no.
Pretty sure its actually quite good at detecting headshots in Reach. Hitscan bro.
Gotta Aderpt to 'dat bloom tho.
Zeouterlimits
Member
Someone is extremely mopey today.
Mopey that the game he spent money on sucks? Yes.
Tingles. I just got tingles.
I didn't miss the option to sprint in Halo 1-ODST. The only scenario I would welcome sprint is if 1) our base traits are not neutered to balance it out - taking away from base movement to make sprint more valuable - and 2) if enemies have was to counter a sprinting player. Say, by charging at the same or greater speed. But that introduces its own problems.
I'm sort of expecting sprint to be a default base ability we always have in Halo 4. If that's the case, I hope we can still move decently and the enemy can as well.
I just wanted to make sure the conversation wasn't totally MP focused. This stuff matters in Campaign and Firefight as well.I feel like one set of you guys are talking single player, while the other half is talking multiplayer.
Agree.
Sprint and bloom only work in a game with fast kill times like Call Of Duty. Reach should have had the fastest kill times of any Halo game after adding those in, but ironically it has the longest kill times. Complete failure.
If sprint is kept it should only be able to be used if you have a full shield. Get shot even once and you should have to wait for your shield to recharge to sprint again.
Bloom can die in a fire.
If sprint is kept it should only be able to be used if you have a full shield. Get shot even once and you should have to wait for your shield to recharge to sprint again.
Bloom can die in a fire.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
You complain about accuracy and then you say you like Vanilla settings better?
I don't get it.
Edit : N/M, sorry, misread your post. I now realize you're talking about headshots. Still, headshots are way easier to land with 85% bloom...
Dude, you suck. You've got a k/d of like .7
That has nothing to do with the game registering headshot correctly or not.
Good point. I tend to stick to the larger Big Team Battle games, so I don't run into that problem on smaller maps.
But what happens in BTB objective gametypes in Halo 3 and Reach most of the time is that both sides seem to just camp their base without moving in and it's stupid. Maybe one guy will try to get the flag by himself but he stands no chance against 7-8 campers defending their flag. So the objective matches are pretty much 20 minutes of nothing really happening.
This problem can be solved with better map design rather than sprint though I guess. Valhalla was a decent sized map but they had the man cannons that warped you right to the middle, so it wasn't as much of a time sink making your way across the map.
My suckage has nothing to do with anything. It's not fun, it's the game's fault. I spent the money, I have the right to fun.
Brolic Gaoler
formerly Alienshogun
You're more likely to hate a game you suck at.
Also, your complaints can probably be directly attributed to you sucking.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
But if you're complaining about getting only two kills in a Slayer Pro match... That isn't the game's fault. And don't you generally have more fun when you're winning / not spending half the game respawning? I know I do.
Try to get better at the game and maybe you'll have more fun. The dysfunctional Trueskill system isn't helping the situation at all, I'll give you that.
I wouldn't look to a Little League player who is on the losing team most of the time to have valid complaints about the rules of baseball.
This applies to your posts. I don't expect everyone to be an MLG player to have valid criticism, but there's a cutoff point.
What is this garbage.
I spent 50 bucks. That's where it ends.
scar tissue
Banned
I love the lore of halo, and the core gameplay. Sans the floaty jumps and slow movement, that is. Reach had sprint and quicker jumps. Fucking perfect.
I have no issue with high jumps, just make the fall quick for fucks sake. Earth didn't turn into the moon overnight, did it?
Where do I sign up?
Bro, no one cares how much money you spent on anything.
Just because you spend money doesn't mean you are owed fun.
lol
Did you just say this. Do you think of yourself as a servant to a game?
You bought the product as-is. There is a demo. You knew what you were getting into. The game should not automatically bequeath skill unto you from on high so you can manage to have fun.
You got what you paid for, your entitlement is ridiculous.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
Try playing different playlists maybe? Or stick to custom games? Firefight? Campaign?
Or try to get better at competitive multiplayer. Stick with it. Learn its intricacies and (unfortunate) inconsistencies. You might like it more.