Regarding changes to Halo's core gameplay.

[VivaLebowski]

Heres a bit of a rant about two arguments I am always reading.

 

1) "But that's not Halo!" -Traditionalist Halo player complaining about changes.

2) "Adapt" -Progressive Halo player complaining about people complaining about changes.

 

Neither argument means much of anything because neither argument really says much of anything about the nature of the change being made. The first argument isn't as bad because there are a few cases when it actually applies...for example, I personally don't think the perk system in Call of Duty detracts from Call of Duty but it certainly does not belong in Halo, so I guess its okay to say "But that's not Halo!" but then (for example) when people talk about something like universal sprint or 1st person vehicles, people say "but that's not Halo!". Yeah...its not Halo because it hasn't been in Halo. Might as well say Brutes "aren't Halo" (before Halo 2) or Forge isn't Halo (before Halo 3). What I'm wondering is what is this strange intangible "Halo-ness" which we are comparing these new elements to?

 

Then you get people saying "adapt", like when talking about changes in Reach. This is even worse than the previous argument because at least saying something wasn't Halo was making some sort of value judgement about something...with "adapt" we could be talking about any change in the book and the progressive Halo player might blindly insist that the change is for the best and that we should blindly keep singing the particular Halo game (and its developers) praises even though people might very well know in their heart of hearts that the new element is at best neutral in terms of improving the game and at worst completely stupid.

 

Point is, the community should just judge a particular element by its own merits, not based on a need to freeze Halo as it currently is, or to deceive yourself into thinking that the last Halo is as good or better than the last.

[Constantly]

What I'm wondering is what is this strange intangible "Halo-ness" which we are comparing these new elements to?

 

The gameplay. It doesn't matter if you've added in brutes or forge or not. That isn't changing the gameplay. Sprint along with other AA does. Halo 1, 2, and 3 expanded on it's gameplay. That's why they were hits. Reach changed the gameplay, that's why it flopped.

[Zuko 'Zarhamee]

The gameplay. It doesn't matter if you've added in brutes or forge or not. That isn't changing the gameplay. Sprint along with other AA does. Halo 1, 2, and 3 expanded on it's gameplay. That's why they were hits. Reach changed the gameplay, that's why it flopped.

you could just as easily say that CoD "expands" on it's gameplay, when it really does is ship what is basically the same gameplay each game. Gameplay should change and become better, not just "expand".

[VivaLebowski]

The gameplay. It doesn't matter if you've added in brutes or forge or not. That isn't changing the gameplay. Sprint along with other AA does. Halo 1, 2, and 3 expanded on it's gameplay. That's why they were hits. Reach changed the gameplay, that's why it flopped.

 

I have allot of problems with Reach, but Sprint did not invalidate its core "Halo-ness" it simply didn't. Yeah, it changed the "gameplay" but as I already covered and I'm sure you agree, you can't judge something simply because it changes Halo's gameplay.

 

I was playing Big team Slayer on Sandtrap in H3 just a few hours ago...boy, it felt good. And looking back, if I could sprint somewhere and everyone else could, would that really alter my feelings about the game? No. At worst, we can say Sprint isn't really a good or bad feature. You have this notion for what "Halo" gameplay is and I challenge you to define it. For me its a few things: A good degree of symmetry on both teams, good gameplay and aesthetically pleasing map design, straightforward vehicular combat, etc etc. I can go on. If Reach went wrong with Sprint at all, it was maybe not making it universal. If 4 has Sprint for everyone and now no one can choose Armor Lock, I will be happy. Point is, Sprint does not inherently go against what is Halo gameplay. You seem to disagree, so identify what element it is thats so important and then explain how Sprint contradicts that.

 

Also, in sales, Reach beat Halo 3. It was not a flop. I think allot of Halo fans, myself included, agree that Reach was definitely not all it could be, but don't throw the word flop around because A) Reach wasn't a flop and how well it did financially doesn't have that much to do with how good a game it is.

[Constantly]

you could just as easily say that CoD "expands" on it's gameplay, when it really does is ship what is basically the same gameplay each game.

 

I think that's why CoD is so popular. It doesn't need to change, it needs to expand on it's popular gameplay. If you want a different game, go buy a different game. imo

 

Sprint does not inherently go against what is Halo gameplay. You seem to disagree, so identify what element it is thats so important and then explain how Sprint contradicts that.

 

Also, in sales, Reach beat Halo 3. It was not a flop. I think allot of Halo fans, myself included, agree that Reach was definitely not all it could be, but don't throw the word flop around because A) Reach wasn't a flop and how well it did financially doesn't have that much to do with how good a game it is.

 

Remember how frustrating it was in H3 to have someone 1 shot and not being able to finish them off before they escape around a corner? Add sprint and you're getting one, maybe two shots on that guy now. Assuming he was out of position, he doesn't get penalized for that. And it's prolonging the game.

 

Add the guy sprinting around with sword. When he comes out of hiding anywhere near you, you're going to die. Oh, and what is it called that everyone does now where they make no attempt to shoot but just sprint up, melee, and then try to get the head shot? Is it, "I don't have what it takes to kill someone simply by shooting them because I get out played so this way I may get lucky and catch someone off guard or somehow manage to get a headshot first?"

 

Now you sprint around a corner and get two shotted by their sniper because your weapon wasn't drawn. In H3 you would probably have time to fire on him, maybe making him miss his second shot. I'm just a fan of having my reticule up and ready to fire without being hindered by speed. I'll bet campers like sprint because they can get that first shot off.

 

All the maps in H3 seemed designed around the fact that you ran so fast, and jumped so high. IMO they were perfect. Now they'll have to figure out how to make sprint feel seamless without jumping into walls and junk.

 

I don't have that big of a problem with sprint. It's the lesser of the AA evils. I got pretty picky there, but it's how I feel sprint takes away from gameplay. A lot of people always ask what is wrong with Sprint. So let me ask, Why is Sprint good for the game? Can anyone answer that in terms of gameplay? In fact, I haven't heard any argument as to why sprint is good other than it changes the game. Being able to fly a kite in Halo would change it, would you like that to?

 

As for the flop, I was referring to it's fanbase/popularity. I should have been more clear.

[Constantly]

You have this notion for what "Halo" gameplay is and I challenge you to define it.

 

I want the guy who is better than me at Halo to kick my ass.

[Zuko 'Zarhamee]

 

I don't have that big of a problem with sprint. It's the lesser of the AA evils. I got pretty picky there, but it's how I feel sprint takes away from gameplay. A lot of people always ask what is wrong with Sprint. So let me ask, Why is Sprint good for the game? Can anyone answer that in terms of gameplay? In fact, I haven't heard any argument as to why sprint is good other than it changes the game. Being able to fly a kite in Halo would change it, would you like that to?

 

It means that people can get to different areas of the map faster. That's good for the game, in my opinion.

[Constantly]

It means that people can get to different areas of the map faster. That's good for the game, in my opinion.

 

Why?

[VivaLebowski]

@Constantly

 

The problem with your argument here is that Sprint is universal. I run, you chase. Its as simple as that. And don't appeal to me about trying to get that "last shot" off as they run around the corner...I was the guy running around the corner. And as a result of that tiny amount of lag between when they pull the trigger on their TV and when I move around the corner on mine, I will die even though I am already around the corner. Its one of my pet peeves.

 

People's Sprint rate should be decreased dramatically whenever they are hit by anything, as in Gears of War, and that alone would help solve some of your problems.

[Constantly]

@Constantly

 

The problem with your argument here is that Sprint is universal. I run, you chase. Its as simple as that. And don't appeal to me about trying to get that "last shot" off as they run around the corner...I was the guy running around the corner. And as a result of that tiny amount of lag between when they pull the trigger on their TV and when I move around the corner on mine, I will die even though I am already around the corner. Its one of my pet peeves.

 

People's Sprint rate should be decreased dramatically whenever they are hit by anything, as in Gears of War, and that alone would help solve some of your problems.

People running around a corner will happen whether there is sprint or not. I'm just saying that with sprint, you wouldn't be able to put as many shots on that person, as they would SPRINT around the corner. Again, I'm being picky here. I just don't see the need for sprint.

 

It means that people can get to different areas of the map faster. That's good for the game, in my opinion.

Make maps smaller.

[fzdw11]

People running around a corner will happen whether there is sprint or not. I'm just saying that with sprint, you wouldn't be able to put as many shots on that person, as they would SPRINT around the corner. Again, I'm being picky here. I just don't see the need for sprint.

 

But what's stopping you from sprinting around the corner after them, if sprint is a universal ability, and then finishing him off? You don't see a need for sprint because somebody can get away with less damage? What if that person is you that's getting away? Would you like to get behind cover faster if you're being shot and don't know from where? Like you said, people will always run around a corner, it's just a matter of how fast they can do it, and whether the person chases or not.

[Constantly]

But what's stopping you from sprinting around the corner after them, if sprint is a universal ability, and then finishing him off?

 

Distance.

 

Sprint adds unnecessary steps. He sprints, now I have to. I sprint, now they have to. It doesn't really affect the gameplay much, it's just adding an element that the community seems pretty indifferent about. No one is like "PLEASE KEEP SPRINT, OMG ME AND MY FRIENDS JUST SPRINT AROUND ALL THE TIME AND IT'S SO FUN!"

 

Then again, that would be if Sprint was in Halo 3. 343 may implement Sprint beautifuly making it flow perfectly with their maps and improve the overall gameplay.

[fzdw11]

I'll agree, distance is definitely a factor. But you hit the nail on the head with your final comment. Who knows how 343 will implement sprint? They may do a fantastic job, and the game will be better for it. It's not really something we can judge until we play the game.

[VivaLebowski]

All this just proves my point. We should judge a feature by its own merits and by how effectively it is implemented. Not just because it is new. Progress can be very bad and very good, so best to judge individually.

 

But I will concede this, Constant, with Sprint in particular I do not care that much either way. That said, the scale of Halo maps does make it helpfull in terms of mobility and Halo maps are getting bigger. Hemorrhage dwarfed Blood Gulch. In the future, not necessarily this Halo but say the Halo's on the next gen,I'm anticipating larger maps and larger teams. Having a high degree of mobility for everyone on foot might well necessitate Sprint as we see certain maps get larger and larger. goes without saying that 343 needs to keep at least half the maps the small arena style that we all know and love too though.