I am sick of hearing how Halo compares to Call Of Duty.
People constantly comparing the two games is idiotic. Lets just think about this rationally.
The most common complaint launched at COD is that it has ‘no skill gap’ and anyone can pick it up and get ‘cheap’ kills. It is for this reason that many Halo fans believe their game is so much more superior.
Then Halo is charged with implementing COD features to trying to compete with the title in an attempt to steal their fans away from COD.
Lets think about this rationally:
If you want Halo to be focused purely on competitive play and skill gap it will not appeal to the masses. The ‘casual’ gamers. Those who want to pick up and shoot.
In that case Halo will become a title that is aimed at a small audience, a small audience means less sales, less sales means less revenue, less revenue means no future investment, no future investment means NO FUTURE TITLES, and limited support/servers etc
Come on guys, you cant have your cake and eat it. Halo is Microsoft’s flagship title. It is big business, and if they dont sell sell sell, the business leaders at Microsoft will shut the production down.
This is not a land of fairies and Unicorns (even though i am master of them) this is the land of boardroom CEO’s, investment and Capitalism.
I am not saying i am totally happy about this, but it is the real world, and some of you need to wake up and start living in it.
Halo either competes with COD and is open to the mass market or it dies, it is that simple.
Cod= 3 months of good gameplay then your inbox gets raped by 10 year olds wanting you to join a 10th prestige lobby, modders, and 9 months of waiting for the next piece of crap to come out.
I dont see a contest here. Spend 60 dollars once for years of good gameplay, or spend 60 dollars every year on the same game…hmmmmm…Ill stick to halo
> Halo= years of amazing fun and gameplay.
>
> Cod= 3 months of good gameplay then your inbox gets raped by 10 year olds wanting you to join a 10th prestige lobby, modders, and 9 months of waiting for the next piece of crap to come out.
>
> I dont see a contest here. Spend 60 dollars once for years of good gameplay, or spend 60 dollars every year on the same game…hmmmmm…Ill stick to halo
Not even close.
CoD charges for the game, dlc, a subscription, and also costs your braincells.
To see Halo take the first steps in a certain direction… I already have a headache.
> Halo= years of amazing fun and gameplay.
>
> Cod= 3 months of good gameplay then your inbox gets raped by 10 year olds wanting you to join a 10th prestige lobby, modders, and 9 months of waiting for the next piece of crap to come out.
>
> I dont see a contest here. Spend 60 dollars once for years of good gameplay, or spend 60 dollars every year on the same game…hmmmmm…Ill stick to halo
Comparing them doesn’t really get you anywhere since they’re so different and it all boils down to personal opinions in the end, where comparing starts flame wars and bashing from both sides.
Some say apples are superior, some say oranges are. Leave it at that, they’re different. Let people play what they like.
> > Halo= years of amazing fun and gameplay.
> >
> > Cod= 3 months of good gameplay then your inbox gets raped by 10 year olds wanting you to join a 10th prestige lobby, modders, and 9 months of waiting for the next piece of crap to come out.
> >
> > I dont see a contest here. Spend 60 dollars once for years of good gameplay, or spend 60 dollars every year on the same game…hmmmmm…Ill stick to halo
>
> Not even close.
>
> <mark>CoD charges for the game, dlc, a subscription, and also costs your braincells.</mark>
>
> To see Halo take the first steps in a certain direction… I already have a headache.
Shows just how little you know about CoD. Yeah they charge for the game, but they don’t charge for both DLC and subscription. With MW3, I subsribed to Elite. With that subscription I got every single bit of DLC for nothing. Those that didn’t get Elite had to pay around £80, total, for DLC. I can’t talk for BO2, because I haven’t got my copy but if you don’t play a game, do some research before you start talking down about it.
This would be the death of every Halo and CoD player, but they should make a Halo Vs CoD world, or something in that sense.
but then again, it all comes down to the world, halo is a futuristic game based 500 years in the future, BLOPS2 is just a dumbed down version of Ghost Recon: Future Soldier.
Imagine the Covenant and Prometheans, sided with the Spartans, CoD would not stand a -Yoink!- chance.
Halo 4 and COD are very different games and just not having ADS means it is a different type of game.
But there is no denying that Halo 4 is a lot closer to COD than the previous halo’s. The load outs, kill cams, point streaks and CTF totally reminds me of CTF from COD (which is a shame since halo’s version was always way better) and also I have a feeling that this Halo takes a lot less skill than previous ones.
I think a lot of people who play COD, might want to convert to this Halo. BTW I still like Halo 4 very much, but the “COD additions” shouldn’t go any further than this.
the lack of skill gap more or less comes from the aim assist and hit boxes, and not the ‘cod’ changes. Killcams do nothing, join in progress doesn’t affect gameplay, and the faster kill times are compensated for by AAs and sprint.
The biggest difference between Halo and CoD is there are little to no BS deaths. Do you see spartans dropping to the ground and killing you as they scoot across the floor, or Explode like a hail of missiles hit the map.
Sure you can get pissed when you get sniped, or rocketed, but its always nice to get that ordnance drop and get revenge.
> > > Halo= years of amazing fun and gameplay.
> > >
> > > Cod= 3 months of good gameplay then your inbox gets raped by 10 year olds wanting you to join a 10th prestige lobby, modders, and 9 months of waiting for the next piece of crap to come out.
> > >
> > > I dont see a contest here. Spend 60 dollars once for years of good gameplay, or spend 60 dollars every year on the same game…hmmmmm…Ill stick to halo
> >
> > Not even close.
> >
> > <mark>CoD charges for the game, dlc, a subscription, and also costs your braincells.</mark>
> >
> > To see Halo take the first steps in a certain direction… I already have a headache.
>
> Shows just how little you know about CoD. Yeah they charge for the game, but they don’t charge for both DLC and subscription. With MW3, I subsribed to Elite. With that subscription I got every single bit of DLC for nothing. Those that didn’t get Elite had to pay around £80, total, for DLC. I can’t talk for BO2, because I haven’t got my copy but if you don’t play a game, do some research before you start talking down about it.
I’ve played Cod since MW2 (bought and played COD 4 later) so my research is done. My numbers are going to be different than yours since I’m Canadian but yea it is either you pay for DLC each time or a sub to Elite. Now the numbers:
COD Black ops and MW3 have the same pricing:
$60 for the game then 4000 MS points which is $60 here. So that is $120 without the taxes.
Halo 4: $60 for the game then it’s 2000 MS points = $30. So that is $90.
Now looking at the numbers solely Halo 4 is going to last 2-3 years till a sequel and that is $90 while COD is going to last 1 year till a sequel. There is already a $30 difference. Now taking that in with the life span you can multiply by 2-3 and it is either $60 difference or a $90 difference depending on Halo 4’s lifespan.
And I’m going to bring this up too, this is the first COD I’m not getting since I got MW2 because it is the same polished -Yoink- again and again. Do I really want to pay for the same game every year? No of course not, soon COD sales are going to crash unless they change and the same was going for Halo. If Halo 4 was the same thing from 3 or even 2, I would’ve already traded it in and the sales whould be much worse than the amazing sales that have been made ($220 million in the first 24 hours). There needs to be change.
Pokemon achieves something the other two haven’t been able to pull off for quite some time. Provide a regular, non competitive experience up front but beneath the surface is one of the most deep gaming experiences known in existence (this not a biased opinion, go to Smogon.com if you think i am lying. Anything after this is sentence is biased) AND be successful without really alienating either populations. I believe CE was the first and only Halo do this. Now it’s ranking this, my k/d and 50 ranking pwns you that, these settings are the best or you are try harder this or you stupid MLG noob that. In CODs case, just zombies and presteiging really (dat depth)
COD isn’t known to be competitively viable but attracts the masses. Halo 4 does the same but caters to the more skill based player and while having non competitive features, is not as attractive as COD in this regard and doesn’t keep a million 12 year olds and regular joes coming back as often. Not to say Halo 4 is lacking in the mini game department (or overall quality) because it’s not but the non competitive elements and competitive elements within the game simply do not mesh (let alone co-exist in the same game I.E the communities).
…What? Oh this is the most ridiculous thing you’ve read all day? Come on, the stuff said in the infamous COD VS Halo war is insane and have done worse. At least there is some grain of truth to what I’ve said.
CoD to me is same -Yoink- different year. Also CoD has never had epic soundtracks like Halo. Last time I played CoD was over 2 years ago and I don’t plan on playing it anytime soon. It is nothing special compared to Halo.
> > > > Halo= years of amazing fun and gameplay.
> > > >
> > > > Cod= 3 months of good gameplay then your inbox gets raped by 10 year olds wanting you to join a 10th prestige lobby, modders, and 9 months of waiting for the next piece of crap to come out.
> > > >
> > > > I dont see a contest here. Spend 60 dollars once for years of good gameplay, or spend 60 dollars every year on the same game…hmmmmm…Ill stick to halo
> > >
> > > Not even close.
> > >
> > > <mark>CoD charges for the game, dlc, a subscription, and also costs your braincells.</mark>
> > >
> > > To see Halo take the first steps in a certain direction… I already have a headache.
> >
> > Shows just how little you know about CoD. Yeah they charge for the game, but they don’t charge for both DLC and subscription. With MW3, I subsribed to Elite. With that subscription I got every single bit of DLC for nothing. Those that didn’t get Elite had to pay around £80, total, for DLC. I can’t talk for BO2, because I haven’t got my copy but if you don’t play a game, do some research before you start talking down about it.
>
> I’ve played Cod since MW2 (bought and played COD 4 later) so my research is done. My numbers are going to be different than yours since I’m Canadian but yea it is either you pay for DLC each time or a sub to Elite. Now the numbers:
>
> <mark>COD Black ops and MW3 have the same pricing:</mark>
> <mark>$60 for the game then 4000 MS points which is $60 here. So that is $120 without the taxes.</mark>
> <mark>Halo 4: $60 for the game then it’s 2000 MS points = $30. So that is $90.</mark>
>
> Now looking at the numbers solely Halo 4 is going to last 2-3 years till a sequel and that is $90 while COD is going to last 1 year till a sequel. There is already a $30 difference. Now taking that in with the life span you can multiply by 2-3 and it is either $60 difference or a $90 difference depending on Halo 4’s lifespan.
>
> And I’m going to bring this up too, this is the first COD I’m not getting since I got MW2 because it is the same polished Yoink! again and again. Do I really want to pay for the same game every year? No of course not, soon COD sales are going to crash unless they change and the same was going for Halo. If Halo 4 was the same thing from 3 or even 2, I would’ve already traded it in and the sales whould be much worse than the amazing sales that have been made ($220 million in the first 24 hours). There needs to be change.
The highlights needs explaining. Here are you getting the MS points from. So fair I’ve not had to spend any microsoft points on Halo or CoD.
And to say that BO2 will have a sequel next year is wrong. MW3 will have a sequel next year. Either that or a new CoD with another seperate story will come out.
It’s because both games are FPS. I know a lot of people want to say that it’s like comparing apples to oranges, but it’s really not. Comparing Halo to assassin’s creed is like comparing apples to oranges. Halo to CoD is more like comparing different types of oranges. A comparison between the two actually can be made legitimately. People want to know which type of orange is better. Since they’re both FPS, most people are gonna get one or the other and then probably buy a different type of game like AC3. This is why Halo and CoD will always be compared and debated. BF3 would’ve been thrown in too, but it still lies under the radar.
> > > > Halo= years of amazing fun and gameplay.
> > > >
> > > > Cod= 3 months of good gameplay then your inbox gets raped by 10 year olds wanting you to join a 10th prestige lobby, modders, and 9 months of waiting for the next piece of crap to come out.
> > > >
> > > > I dont see a contest here. Spend 60 dollars once for years of good gameplay, or spend 60 dollars every year on the same game…hmmmmm…Ill stick to halo
> > >
> > > Not even close.
> > >
> > > <mark>CoD charges for the game, dlc, a subscription, and also costs your braincells.</mark>
> > >
> > > To see Halo take the first steps in a certain direction… I already have a headache.
> >
> > Shows just how little you know about CoD. Yeah they charge for the game, but they don’t charge for both DLC and subscription. With MW3, I subsribed to Elite. With that subscription I got every single bit of DLC for nothing. Those that didn’t get Elite had to pay around £80, total, for DLC. I can’t talk for BO2, because I haven’t got my copy but if you don’t play a game, do some research before you start talking down about it.
>
> I’ve played Cod since MW2 (bought and played COD 4 later) so my research is done. My numbers are going to be different than yours since I’m Canadian but yea it is either you pay for DLC each time or a sub to Elite. Now the numbers:
>
> COD Black ops and MW3 have the same pricing:
>
> $60 for the game then 4000 MS points which is $60 here. So that is $120 without the taxes.
>
> Halo 4: $60 for the game then it’s 2000 MS points = $30. So that is $90.
>
> Now looking at the numbers solely Halo 4 is going to last 2-3 years till a sequel and that is $90 while COD is going to last 1 year till a sequel. There is already a $30 difference. Now taking that in with the life span you can multiply by 2-3 and it is either $60 difference or a $90 difference depending on Halo 4’s lifespan.
>
> And I’m going to bring this up too, this is the first COD I’m not getting since I got MW2 because it is the same polished Yoink! again and again. Do I really want to pay for the same game every year? No of course not, soon COD sales are going to crash unless they change and the same was going for Halo. If Halo 4 was the same thing from 3 or even 2, I would’ve already traded it in and the sales whould be much worse than the amazing sales that have been made ($220 million in the first 24 hours). There needs to be change.
30 dollars per year for a gold membership? never calculated it, but if that’s the case then we should include the cost of yearly additions to the cod franchise as 60 per piece. That’d make it 150-240 dollars more expensive.
Halo 4 is amazing, COD was brought just as a side game as i got it for £25 quid when brought with 2100 points (which i got for the war games pass)
So far COD is COD, but its much better than MW3, and seems much less Noob friendly due to harder to achieve kill streaks.
My main love from COD is the league system, the whole play 5 games works well to be placed, and league games are comepetitive and the teams want to win.
Halo will last longer for me, but both are good games.