Slit Removals

This. Any time a person dislikes a change, it's not because they have a reason to, but rather because they're scared of change. No two ways about it. People would do well to learn the value of being able to adapt.

Nope, we don't need any playlists for people that liked Halo without sprint. Those people shouldn't even be playing FPS games as far as I'm concerned. What we need is for Halo to let go of the people who are scared of change and can't adapt, and in order to achieve that, it can't have any resemblance to the original games as far as gameplay goes, unless we're talking about the ability to shoot and use vehicles.

I didn't say anyone was I'm glad people are discussing this with me. @coldfreeze I don’t know why you’re telling me the good points about loadouts and sprint. I’m already aware of those. I’m trying to make you aware of the the other features that Halo 5 requires are also good and necessary. “Now I did not say that ADS doesn't fit into the "old" concept, I said it did not fit into the game in terms of gameplay,” – That’s exactly what I’m talking about. What do you mean it wouldn’t “fit”? What you mean is that it would change the experience in ways which change what was enjoyable to you personally about the original experience, right? Well sprint and loadouts changed what was enjoyable about the experience for many other people, yet you still have enough about you to recognise that those features should have been added anyway. It didn’t matter that part of the experience many people out there got out of Halo would be ruined by sprint and loadouts and all the other great stuff, what mattered was that it was change, and change is good. And what mattered was that it was enjoyable to other people and it made the game obviously better. It’s the exact same thing with ADS and all the other stuff that’s needed. Just because you’re in the same spot now as the anti-sprint fans, you’re suddenly not OK with changes happening. Suddenly it’s wrong that new additions which don’t appeal to everyone are added (such as ADS). Well as with sprint and loadouts, ADS and all the other stuff should be added in spite of how they will change the experience for the worse for people who can’t adapt, such as yourself. And I know that sounds harsh of me, but that’s exactly the attitude you rightly took when others were stupidly against the new features in Halo 4 like sprint. @Stinky You’re trying to use lore to argue against ADS? Seriously? Halo 4’s version of sprint isn’t accurate from a lore perspective, but it’s still one of Halo’s greatest additions. It isn’t accurate because there are many examples of Spartans sprinting and shooting accurately at the same time. But that’s not kept in the gameplay itself because that wouldn’t be good, for obvious reasons. We shouldn’t be able to shoot accurately and run at full speed at the same time, as this is just bad game design. And ADS would further help to separate movement and shooting, as exactly as sprint did. I still can’t believe there are people that don’t realize ADS is a necessity. Also, there's nothing stopping a Spartan from aiming down their sights if they choose to, it's just that it's not completely necessary for them. What's more important are the improvements to gameplay, which would be that you have to skillfully choose when to shoot and when to move at full speed. Sprint and ADS are both necessary because they both work towards separating the two.

That's like saying there's no reason sprint would benefit Halo just because we could already run around and have the maps small enough on average to make travelling fun and not a chore. But sprint adds more than simply getting around faster - sprint makes it so you have to cleverly know when to sprint, and when to shoot, because you can't do both at the same time. ADS is no different in that it would add a necessity for knowing when to utilise full shooting accuracy, and when to utilise faster movement speed. It's the exact same thing that makes sprint a great and skillful addition. What do you really mean when you say those things "fit" in to Halo gameplay? Think about that for a second. Sprint and loadouts change the way Halo functions on quite a significant level, and to say that they don't is to miss the point of them being there. Those changes were needed because they didn't fit into the old, archaic and outdated mold. They changed it up to create a new experience where you had to skillfully deal with the fact that players can now run away from you and you have to choose whether to keep shooting or whether to chase. Loadouts added randomness so that there was variety. People always talk about equal starts, and how it puts the control in the hands of the players alone and not on what inherent advantages they have over each other, as if those things were actually a good thing. Let's face it, it's an old concept and it was time to move into the new era where the focus is also (not exclusively) on having the right stuff at the right time. That makes it fun because you never know for sure whether or not your enemy is going to be advantaged or disadvantaged in any given encounter, and it's more like real life that way too. I'd just like to put an emphasis on what I was saying before. What do we really mean by it "fits" into Halo gameplay? Loadouts didn't "fit" into the old concept because the old concept was based around equal starts (I mean it's there. Just play those games). Loadouts gave us a NEW concept to work with; an improved concept that isn't broken like equal starts were. The whole point of it being there is that it doesn't "fit" with the old outdated stuff. I'm going to assume that when you say ADS wouldn't "fit" into Halo, you're saying that it hasn't been a part of Halo so far and would change the way it plays. Well what on Earth do you think sprint did? What is it that you think loadouts and Personal Ordnance did? They didn't "fit" in this sense either, and thank God they didn't as well.

So you're saying that because it wasn't in Halo originally, therefore it isn't "Halo"? Well of course it's "not Halo", but we need to make it part of Halo from now on for the objective benefits. in exactly the same way we did with sprint. You're telling me you accepted the addition of sprint, yet you wont accept ADS in Halo? Why not? it's a change to the way the game plays, just like sprint. It's an improvement and it brings the game into the future. 1) I'm a Spartan, I should be able to ADS. Even though we can use the smart-link system, we should still have the option of aiming down sights because that's what a Spartan could do if they wanted to. Same thing with sprint. 2) It will modernize the franchise. We don't need old, archaic mechanics. Let's face it, the game wasn't going to survive the modern era without sprint and loadouts, and it certainly wont survive without ADS. It's pretty much essential at this point. 3) It's change, and change is good. I can't figure out why people are so against change. Also, with all due respect, just because there have been certain changes you've accepted so far does not mean you aren't scared of change. The sprint haters accepted changes that happened within the first 3 games, yet they somehow suddenly have something against a new feature like sprint, which can only be good for gameplay? They're still scared of change, and they demonstrate that by whining about a feature just because it's new. You're doing the exact same thing here. You're saying this new feature is bad just because it's "not Halo". Well then we might as well get rid of sprint and loadouts too, because they're "not Halo" either, but think about how bad the gameplay would be if the franchise devolved like that. I think you should try to open your mind to the benefits of new features like ADS. It really is a great feature for any game.

I have to be honest with you guys here, and I don't mean to cause offense, but all I'm getting from this is "I'm scared of change". If you don't want aim-down-sights or going prone in Halo, then you want Halo to stick in the past, right? Change is good! It really is! And Halo needs change right now. Halo needed change from the very start - it was broken. Think about it, what's more important, that Halo stays "feeling" like Halo, or that Halo makes improvements through additions such as ADS and going prone (and sprint, but we've already got that)? As long as the addition will bring the game into the modern experience, then it doesn't matter if it doesn't "feel" like Halo originally did. Getting away from what Halo has felt like is exactly what we're trying to achieve! Let's face it, the experience was broken. I wouldn't even be here commenting on Halo if it weren't for the major overhauling that took place in Halo 4. I'd have just carried on ignoring the franchise, because it wasn't for me. Simple as that. But due to these great changes to the way the multiplayer works, I can actually find enjoyment in the experience. It's like how people say "sprint doesn't feel like Halo", "it makes Halo play differently on a fundamental level". I don't care if it makes Halo vastly different! I just want it to actually be an enjoyable experience for once. And you guys are doing the exact same thing by arguing against these new features just because they would change the way Halo plays. If you don't want Halo with going prone, grenade cooking, and aim-down-sights (which are all expected in a modern FPS), then you can always play the outdated games. Halo 1, 2, 3 and 4 will all be in the MCC collection, and if you want those outdated experiences (and yes, even Halo 4 is outdated), then they'll be there for you to play. I personally wont be on the first 3 games because they don't appeal to me. As for going prone promoting camping, well that's kind of the point.... It allows people to utilise the skill of knowing how, when and where to hide themselves, but it's balanced because you lose mobility and become more vulnerable. Look at Call of Duty (a perfect example of what Halo could be) - in CoD, you can go prone and it means that snipers can conveniently hide themselves and this adds another option to their style of play. This is why going prone is objectively a good thing for any shooter, and I see no excuse not to put it in Halo. It's 2014 people! ADS makes it so you have to know when to shoot and when to run, and it's balanced because of that. I don't care whether or not it feels like Halo, I care about if it's going to make Halo an improved experience, and ADS of course would. And when Halo improves, players who wouldn't otherwise have been interested will be more likely to come to the experience. As for those people who actually thought that Halo not having those features (sprint, ADS, loadouts, going prone) was a good thing, well they will just have to live with it I'm afraid. Halo has to change. Those people think that a lack of a certain gameplay feature actually helps the game in some way? Well I'm sorry, but that's just not how it works. What other modern features do you guys think Halo needs moving forward?

Yes thank you. I know what I've said is controversial, but i still hope we can all remain civil about it.

First of all I just want to say that if you disagree with anything I'm about to say, I'm totally fine with that. Please don't get offended by it, but try to take into mind what I'm saying here. I don't think you'll regret it. A lot of people (whom I consider to be scared of chance, personally) claim that Halo multiplayer was ruined with Halo Reach and even further with Halo 4. They say that Halo needs to go back (devolve, basically) to the way it played originally. I've always sat back and watched as so many people have made these ridiculous claims, but today I'm taking it upon myself to explain why these claims are in fact, wrong. Halo's gameplay for the first 3 games was broken, and Halo Reach (and especially Halo 4) took the right steps to fix the many glaring problems with the franchise. For the sake of keeping things fact-based, I'm going to leave out those things from the original trilgoy which were only bad in my opinion, and stick to disussing those things which were in fact, bad. One of the biggest faults with the way Halo originally played was that you couldn't start with the weapon you wanted. The reason this is never a good thing, without fail, is because when you're playing a game, you need to be able to play to your own play-style. I can't even begin to fathom what benefits are gained when players all have to start out with the same abilities. Let's take perks, for example. If there's something I'm not particularly good at, such as throwing and timing grenades accurately, then I should be given an opportunity from the game to compensate for that inability, because I bought the game like everyone else and therefore I've purchased the right to having fun (if you will). So in this example, I would use the perk that lets me carry an extra grenade. This way, I'm more likely to achieve success with my grenade throwing, which is only fair. Like I said, all players payed the same money for the game, so it's only fair that the game ensures that all players are given the same opportunity for success. But when there were no perks, the game was broken in this sense because it meant that lesser skilled players had to suffer for merely lacking in a particular skill. Should people really have to suffer due to only being human and having weaknesses? Of course not. So luckily, Halo Reach and Halo 4 began to fix this fault with loadouts, which is great. Now Halo can finally begin to have legs of its own, and I find it quite saddening that so many people start to hate on the franchise when it finally gets to be an experience that works. Another fault with the way the original Halo games played was that they were too predictable, meaning that the game didn't create enough random elements for the experience. Do I really need to go into why this is blatantly a bad thing? I guess so. Not having randomness means: 1) There is less variety in gameplay. If I know what power weapon is going to be in the hallway on a map, and I know when it's going to be there, where's the fun in that? Fun comes in to play when we don't know what it is we might get or when we might get it. 2) It gives too much power to skilled players. All players should have equal opportunity to achieve success in the game, because as I pointed out earlier, all players payed the same money for the game. This means that it is objectively bad game design to provide players with opportunities which can require large amounts of skill to take advantage of. When you put a power weapon in a certain spot on a map, then the skilled players will more often than not get it because they can target their skills to attain that weapon. Whereas when the power weapons spawn in random places and at random times, it takes most of the control away from the players themselves, and therefore ALL players are given equal opportunity over time. Random ordnance and personal ordnance fixed this particular problem, which is why they were such great additions. The next fault with the original Halo trilogy was that they didn't have sprint. I'm always hearing the most ridiculous reasons for why sprint is bad for Halo, and all I can really hear is "I'm scared of change", "I can't adapt", "I can't help but whine at everything new", and "it's not Bungie so it's bad". A lack of sprint was a fault that needed to be fixed. Period. Why shouldn't I be able to run away from encounters I'm losing? Why should my enemy be able to chase and shoot me at the same speed? These things are claimed to be "good" for Halo by many, believe it or not. The obvious reason that being able to move at full speed and shoot at the same time is a bad thing is because FPS games should revolve around choosing whether to shoot or to sprint. It should never be about doing both at the same time. Having to know when to sprint and when to stop so you can shoot makes it more like real life, and it also adds another skill you have to think about, and that's why it's nothing short of one of the best additions to the franchise that has happened. So as we can see, Halo 4 has in fact done many things to make the franchise actually worthy of being played. But unfortunately, we still have a way to go. Here are some things that absolutely need to happen in order for Halo to really become a great experience: 1) Aim-down-sights MUST be included. What happens when a person aims in real life? That's it! They have to slow their movement down to gain that accuracy. They have to know when to use the advantage of one and when to use the advantage of the other. Halo is doing this wrong, even to this day, and it simply can't go unfixed as we move forward. 2) Going prone needs to be included. Which was the last Halo book you read which stated that Spartans can't go prone? Oh, you didn't? Then think twice before you start talking some nonsense about how it shouldn't be in Halo. We need to progress, people. Change is good. 3) Grenade cooking. I'm sorry, but saying that a Spartan can't go prone is one thing, but to claim that they wouldn't be able to hold a grenade for a few seconds if they wanted to? That's ridiculous. This feature absolutely must be put in Halo if it's going to be taken seriously. No game should ever not have grenade cooking, or any of these features for that matter. I must be honest, I wasn't even interested in Halo multiplayer in the slightest until Halo Reach just started to grab my attention with its improvements. What does that tell you about the franchise? Then when Halo 4 came along, I knew that something really good was finally happening with the game. I really don't care how much it resembles Call of Duty or any other shooter, as long as it starts to become a playable experience, then that's what matters. Let's keep this forward progression going with Halo 5, 343i. Only good can come of it. I beg of you, don't listen to all these people who are stuck in the past.