The Instigator
Johnicle
Pro (for)
Losing
37 Points
The Contender
lumpyballsIV
Con (against)
Winning
58 Points

Halo 3 is better than Call of Duty 4.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/10/2008 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,625 times Debate No: 3586
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (27)

 

Johnicle

Pro

To begin, I offer the following arguments...

I. Halo 3 has a better fan base.
This is obvious, more people play Halo 3. Sure Call of Duty is fun to play once in a while, but it gets old fast. Halo 3 is ALWAYS a fun game to play no matter how much you've played it before.

II. Halo 3 is not just another sequal.
With every sequel of Halo comes ACTUAL new stuff. COD4 is just a money-maker while Halo 3 has meaning. It's meaning is to spread Halo to the 360 with added new features (and better graphics). COD4 is the same as COD3.

III. Halo 3 is more fun.
Again, Halo 3 isn't just a fling of fun gaming. When a new game comes out, people take a break to play that new game, but after a while, people go back to Halo 3. COD4 is just one of those new games. People play that as of now but soon people will begin moving back to Halo 3 (if they haven't already)...

Therefore, Halo 3 is better than Call of Duty 4.

Thank You!
lumpyballsIV

Con

I. Well the first point is opinion only so there is nothing to debate, no fact.

II. COD 4 has brought much more compared to Halo 3. There is a huge difference because COD 3 was World War II and COD 4 was modern warfare. Warfare and technology like our army uses today. Halo 3 only added graphics, SOME new weapons and vehicles and that was it. COD 4 managed to switch from WW2 to something completely different and it worked successfully. I dont think Halo contains as much stuff such as upgrading weapons and earning Prestige online. Halo 3, doesnt offer nearly as much, rewarding wise, for the online players. If I was to play a game online for hours, I would want more than just a rank, I would want to upgrade maybe a weapon or something.

III. Unless you can give me statistics about that statement there is no way that can be proven. Im sure the Halo fans get bored and switch to COD 4. COD 4 also came out in November so it, is not that new.

YOu have to look at the difference between Halo 2 - Halo 3 and than look at the change from COD 3 - COD 4 and the people that made the change to COD 4 actually made something original and different than its predecessor.
Debate Round No. 1
Johnicle

Pro

I-->What you have to see here is that my argument that is MOST fact is being called an opinion. More people get excited for Halo 3 when compared to COD 4.
Halo 3 is the only FPS that I can play for hours on end. I play COD 4 from time to time, but after only 3 games (or so) I'm bored out of my mind. However, with Halo 3, I can always play for a good 4 hours. COD 4 is another "phase" that people will go through until they eventually move back to the better game...... HALO 3...

II.-->The advances made in Halo 3 far outweigh the advances in COD 4 (even though we're not debating the advances but merely the game itself)... However, Halo 3 made the move to the 360 while COD 4 made a move to "modern warfare"... But the only difference with the modern warfare is a war strike you can call in. Sorry... but that isn't enough for me to play for "hours on end. The new guns in Halo 3 and the new Maps (not just some random cities again) make for a new exciting game.

III. COD 4 is just a fling. If I were to tell you that a Halo 4 is coming out... People would be exciting. If I were to tell you that COD 5 will be coming out, it would be a reacting such as... OK, just another Call of Duty game. Halo 3 is so much better, that people get excited for a new "Map Pack" being released. COD 4 maps have some buildings while Halo 3 has difference with every map (with launching pads and... well... not just buildings)... In the end, Halo 3 is better than COD 4.

Thank You!
lumpyballsIV

Con

I.Just because you get bored with 3 rounds of COD 4 doesnt mean everyone is the same. Again its an opinion that you would rather play Halo 3 than COD 4. I will need some statistics to believe that most people agree with what you say.

II. Just because Halo 3 jumped from xbox to the 360 doesnt mean its an achievement. While we are highlighting Halo 3 and its INCREDIBLE jump to the 360, why dont we highlight other games that have done it as well. Ummm, like Madden, Grand Theft Auto, or Medal of Honor. Its a game its not like its hard to switch to a different system. Halo 3 only managed to add a COUPLE new guns not ALL. Everything was World war II meaning ALL the guns, and COD 4 was modern warfare meaning ALL modern guns. So if that isnt new enough, gun or weapon wise I dont know what it is. Map wise you arent fighting on alien maps, its different locations in the world. Its not just France like in COD 3, COD 4 provides different locales. If you are looking for new features for both games. Halo has added graphics, SOME new weapons and vehicles, and new maps. COD 4 is ALL new with added graphics, new weapons and vehicles and new maps. You would be blind to not notice the difference between COD 3 and COD 4.
But Halo 3 doesnt offer enough new stuff to stand out compared to Halo 2. The game isnt completely new and genuine compared to COD 4. If all it can offer is SOME new stuff that isnt genuine enough. COD 4 is completely and 100% new compared to its predecessors.

III. COD 4 hasnt had the chance for 2 more sequels. We dont know if they will or not but im sure when the first Halo came out everyoen couldnt wait for the second. If a sequel to COD 4 came out people would be just as anxious as they would Halo. COD 4 also has a map pack that you can purchase for more maps.
If there was another Halo to come out it would be ONLY for money. As I recall the advertising for it "Finish the Fight", but I understand lets just start another fight so we can make another game. If another COD 4 was to come out, after all its success how could anyone say "Oh its just going to be another COD game".

After COD 3, COD 4 established something entirely new. You could say Halo is maybe 50% new since it has only new grahics and some added weapons and vehicles.
Debate Round No. 2
Johnicle

Pro

First of all I would just like to thank my opponent for a good debate. On that note... I begin...

OVERVIEW: My opponent seems to be intent on saying that I can't speak for all people, well... I don't have to. Debate is a clash of opinions and as my opponent has been intent on putting the burden of proof on me, CON also has a burden of proof as well. Him being CON, he has to prove that COD 4 is better than Halo 3 (or at least that they are equal)... As this has not yet been proven, you must look towards the PRO in this debate.

I. Here is where my overview takes full effect. My opponent has not met his burden of proof. I have shown my personal opinions (and real world effects) towards playing the two games. It's not much, BUT it IS more than my opponent has offered. He has hardly put arguments toward why COD 4 is great and why Halo 3 is bad AND has NOT compared the two. As of now, my opinion is the only real world affects put into this round and I think Halo 3 is better than COD 4. As my opinion can't be changed, it is the only actual "evidence" presented in this round. NOTE: Any other evidence or opinion presented in the final round must be seen as abusive and unacceptable in this debate. Sorry Kappler :(

II. When looking at the advancement of the two games (as argument "II" does), you will see Halo's as begin greater. COD 1 is arguably one of the greater of the COD series. Halo (1) was the great break through. HOWEVER, if you compare the advancement of the two game series, you will see that if you go from playing Halo 3 to Halo (1), that you will want to go back to Halo 3. However with COD, you will probably like the original better. The advancement to the 360 was great, the game play is still as amazing as ever. And something that COD can never claim, is the "originalness" that Halo has to offer. They are able to offer alien weaponry (specifically the plasma grenade) that COD can't even begin to dream of. Halo CAN be unrealistic because of its story. COD IS current warfare, which is its downfall when compared to the Halo series. There are maps on Halo 3, such as the one where you fly across the map, that COD 4 can't even dream of. If you look at it, COD 4 is just a bunch of buildings in different environments that make it EXTREMELY repetitive. Even if you get sick of the advanced (over the top) maps, you still have your basic maps and basic guns to enjoy. In other words, Halo 3 has it all. Better maps, better graphics, better campaign mode (which really hasn't been argued but it does), better character abilities (such as jumping higher and "lunging" farther), and MUCH better game play. It's just better...

III. Let's get this straight, EVEN if Bungie went against what it originally said and DID make another game, people wouldn't care. They would just be excited to get more advances in a GREAT game. People get excited for a new COD game, but they come out so often and they are all so similar that people don't care. Look at the advances between each Halo, they are so great of advances that you can ACTUALLY tell the difference between each game. If you were to take 100 average gamers and have them randomly play each of the Halo's and each of the COD games, they would EASILY be able to tell the difference between the Halo games but the COD games are so similar that it's just not worth it.

In conclusion, I leave with a statement that you said in your 2nd round... "but im sure when the first Halo came out everyoen couldnt wait for the second.

Thank you for a good debate Mr. Kappler and I hope to debate you again.
lumpyballsIV

Con

I would imagine in debate that as the people that read this would not just want our standings and opinions but FACTS about our topics. In my previous arguments above I have managed to display FACT that COD 4 is new, fresh, and genuine and stands out completely compared to Halo 3. COD 4 is original and has brought brand new stuff to the COD franchise, if you cannot see the transition from WORLD WAR II to MODERN WARFARE than you are not reading this. Halo 3 only managed to bring SOME and I'll say it again SOME new things to its franchise, making the game more of just a sequel or cleche instead of brand NEW.

I.If you read my argument above you can clearly see that I have established the LARGE differences between COD 4, PRO saying"He has hardly put arguments toward why COD 4 is great and why Halo 3 is bad AND has NOT compared the two."
All I have done is compared to why COD 4 is better than Halo 3. The Pro has shown no evidence but just opinions why Halo 3 is better. Everyone has opinions and you cant win with just an opinion. My opinion is obvously stated COD 4 is better than Halo 3, why do you think Im debating this?

II.Pro manages to compare COD 1 and Halo 1 in his argument, this is COD 4 and Halo 3. Halo IS unrealistic and COD 4 is more real, heck we are fighting a war in the middle east right now.There is nothing more to say about Halo 3 and COD 4 and its predeccor games, only that Halo has managed to stay in the alien world and COD 4 has moved on from the WWII to Modern Warfare seen today. "If you look at it, COD 4 is just a bunch of buildings in different environments that make it EXTREMELY repetitive.", that is a Pro opinion and does he speak for everyone?

III.People obviously care about the COD franchise when it still is making big money today. If they didnt care COD 4 would not have been a hit, so does that mean the next will be even bigger? The final piece of the Pro argument talks about testing 100 gamers and picking up the differences in Halo. Lets try that from COD 3 to COD 4 and see if anyone can see the differnence(in which i have explained in my last 2 arguments, in fact and not in opinion.), if 100 players could see the difference between COD 3 and 4.

And with that I'll leave you with a quote from his 3rd round. " People get excited for a new COD game".

Thank you for reading and this was fun
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by NOK_Domination 7 years ago
NOK_Domination
COD: WaW. Make that 40% pluto. Who wins now? Shutup.
Posted by lumpyballsIV 8 years ago
lumpyballsIV
Actually i think the best game is probably one of the Grand Theft Auto games or Hitman Blood Money but I didnt get a chance to debate them. I just like COD 4 more because when you shoot somebody they die. YOu dont here a conversation like "How did you kill me i shot you with 2 clips?",
" Well I had an over shield"
Posted by Shorack 8 years ago
Shorack
Seems to me that Con made an attempt at using less subjective material.

So Con.
Posted by leethal 8 years ago
leethal
While we're talking subjectively here, I might as well throw my two cents in... Halo is overrated crud. As the debate topic was about as subjective as it gets, I voted CON because I agree with him.
Posted by Rob1Billion 8 years ago
Rob1Billion
You guys are all wrong. Perfect Dark and 007 for the N64 are still the best 1st person shooters ever made, the newer ones don't give you the same control that those games had. The graphics are better, but everything seems clumsier... Plus you have to give them extra credit because they are 7 and ten years old, respectfully. If you can't drastically improve a game in ten years then you have a big problem...
Posted by Pluto2493 8 years ago
Pluto2493
dude those are not in the main series... that's like saying halo has halo wars
Posted by Converge 8 years ago
Converge
Honestly, there wasn't much to debate about here. I prefer COD4, while some of my friends prefer Halo 3. It's really an opinion thing, nothing more.
Posted by lumpyballsIV 8 years ago
lumpyballsIV
Right, and you also forgot Call of Duty 2 Finest Hour or Call of Duty United Offensive or Call of Duty The Big Red One.... yeah next time think before you speak
Posted by Pluto2493 8 years ago
Pluto2493
Also, WTF? Its called f-ing Halo: Combat Evolved. Halo= 1 out of 3 creative names for 33%, COD= 1/4 for 25%. You lose.
Posted by Pluto2493 8 years ago
Pluto2493
@ lumpyballs-

neglecting the fact that COD4 was COD 1, 2, and 3 with nothing else, I could see how you say that...
27 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by jamie8sora 6 years ago
jamie8sora
JohniclelumpyballsIVTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by NOK_Domination 7 years ago
NOK_Domination
JohniclelumpyballsIVTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DeadLeaves93 8 years ago
DeadLeaves93
JohniclelumpyballsIVTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by Johnicle 8 years ago
Johnicle
JohniclelumpyballsIVTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Jenova 8 years ago
Jenova
JohniclelumpyballsIVTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Reacquire-truth 8 years ago
Reacquire-truth
JohniclelumpyballsIVTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by LedLegend 8 years ago
LedLegend
JohniclelumpyballsIVTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by jiffy 8 years ago
jiffy
JohniclelumpyballsIVTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Nismo69 8 years ago
Nismo69
JohniclelumpyballsIVTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by babybeatdown 8 years ago
babybeatdown
JohniclelumpyballsIVTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30