lol?
I'd have well over 5000 games in Reach.
Over 8000 in Halo 3.
400 games is a pathetically small amount...
For a game you ostensibly don't like very much, 400 games at what, ~10 minutes each? - is a lot of time in any objective sense. Why aren't you playing MCC or any other game?
Because - oh shit - the Halo 5 is actually pretty okay. A truly bad game you wouldn't continue to play that much, which is exactly what happened for a lot of people with Reach, 4, and MCC. This is why people are sticking around and even coming back, per OP.
Anyway, your basic points are pretty bad:
On aiming, you must have some massive nostalgia goggles on if you think aiming is easier in Halo 5 for everything except the sniper, which seems about the same as Reach and 4. Unless you thought flinch and bloom were positives.
Bullet magnetism has
always been there, it might just be more apparent now since auto-aim is lower than previous iterations so your reticle doesn't automagically track to who you're shooting at as much. Higher framerate also makes it easier to see the mismatch between what you're
shown and what the game registers. That mismatch has been a fundamental part of Halo on Live since forever (and is a basic part of how multiplayer works), but is much, much more fair with dedicated servers. Here,
learn some stuff about Halo multiplayer networking.
Sprint is a tradeoff- it makes larger maps easier to navigate at the expense of increasing the minimum map size (classic-size maps would be be too easy to get across). It can interfere with the design play spaces which is bad, but leisurely walking across Hemorrhage and Valhalla was never that fun, either.
Thruster is basically fine since unlike Halo 4, it adds variety to encounters while keeping everyone on an even playing field.
Automatics make much more sense in the sandbox than before, since skilled players actually have a reason to use them other than being out of precision ammo.
Maps... pretty subjective, but after Halo 4 and Reach I have to say, really?