I have my problems with the Halo franchize, but i hate when people say CoD4 is better because it is more realistic. Well no sh** it is more realistic because when has Halo ever tried to be realistic? It has always been an arcade shooter and thats what makes it different CoD4.
I like both games because they both give me two different styles of gameplay. One more realistic and one more arcady.
My big gripe with the CoD franchise has always been the lack of co-op. The game has always pushed not letting you be alone in the war and actually making it feel as if you and your team is the fighting, yet there was no co-op. Halo on the other hand made out MC to be a one man army and them put in co-op. Those two things never made sense to me, but i always disliked how CoD4 didn't have it.
Also a lot of people say they hate Halo because it wasn't revolutionary and while i completely agree with that when has a game ever had car jacking in it (this is more pointed to the sequal Halo 2). You look at CoD4 and there isn't that much revolutionary about the game. Yeah it has perks, but look at the perks and look at the Halo 3 equipment. Halo 3 has a bubbleshield while CoD4 has juggernaut.
I think both games arn't revolutionary by any means, but they just go more in depth on what they do (like CoD4s weapon cutomization). Games have had customization, but i think CoD4 does it extremely well.
Both are great and fun to play (IMO) and i really can't see which one was better.
Log in to comment