The Instigator
DefiantPage117
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
NIGHTMARE
Pro (for)
Winning
6 Points

Halo Or Call of Duty.

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
NIGHTMARE
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/19/2013 Category: Technology
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,061 times Debate No: 32683
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

DefiantPage117

Con

These are both very good games and... make your vote
NIGHTMARE

Pro

Let me start off by saying Halo and Call of Duty are both good games, but Call of Duty has the upper hand on Halo. This is because more players prefer the Cod expeirence, then Halo. I played all the Halo games through over many times, the Halo series is a good series for story, when you enter the realm of multiplayer though... it starts off as a rush and something new but then slowly dwindles into the same linear gameplay from Halo 3. Big maps, small maps, vehicles, team slayer. Not to mention when 343 took over the Halo franchise they really destroyed the Halo Reach multiplayer by allowing the players to move so fast they basically floated above ground and made it almost impossible to move swiftly in buildings because you would always over shoot the next corner. Not much has changed in Halo 4 either. Call of Duty offers an actiony story line in each game even if its the same over and over but the action continues in multiplayer.
Debate Round No. 1
DefiantPage117

Con

well halo (all of them) are really made for the campaign not muliplayer. bungie made halo for the intence co-op campaign, now bl2 was all for the multiplayer they had added exclent detail to the maps.
so in a summary call of duty is for a quick kill, fast paced multiplayer.
but halo is more strategic campaign.
NIGHTMARE

Pro

In the last round you basically rehashed everything I said in my argument. You said, "well halo (all of them) are really made for the campaign not muliplayer." Halo games strictly the numbered games have a good campaign story, but lots of time has been spent working on Halo's multiplayer. I found this statement, "In the Halo games, multiplayer has been regarded as a core element to the game's design and a giant part of the success of the Halo franchise." (http://halo.wikia.com...). It says right there that the multiplayer aspect of halo greatly related to its success as a frachise. Also on the same page in the Halo 2 section it says "Halo 2's multiplayer functionality was completely redesigned." This proves that the Halo creaters Bungie, and more recently 343 have indeed been trying to make Halo for multiplayer. You said "halo is more strategic campaign." The only Halo strategy game to be released on a video game system was Halo Wars, any other Halo (Combat Evolved, 2, 3, ODST, Reach, Combat Evolved Anniversary Editon, and 4) are all classified FPS (First Person Shooter). No strategy is in any Halo game but Halo Wars, making only one Halo have a "strategic campaign" not all, only one. Halo is just another FPS with the same formula as any other first person game. In Halo multiplayer you can custimize your armor, and the only time you get to see the armor is when you either die or your waiting in the lobby for the game to start. Also notice in Call of Duty there is a higher level of weapon costumization no armor to worry about not being able to see. But instead, Call of Duty allows substantial weapon costumization. Rail attachments, weapon skins, variety of scopes, dual magazines, and skills to enhance your combat preformance. Here is a list on this website that shows you what proficencies you can get for your weapons. http://www.themodernwarfare3.com.... Lastly most recently Halo 4 inserted custom classes to the multiplayer making it less Halo-like and more Call of Duty-like. But it still lacks the amount of customization ability, even armor costumization should be removed because it's not like you get to see it, like you get to see the weapon in Call of Duty. Call of Duty has action in the campaign, and the multiplayer continues to deliver this action to players. Halo constanty wants to improve its multiplayer but fails to do so for lack of originality.
Debate Round No. 2
DefiantPage117

Con

DefiantPage117 forfeited this round.
NIGHTMARE

Pro

Looks as if though I have already won.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by leojm 4 years ago
leojm
Call of Duty for me. Addicted to that game. ;P
Posted by GeekiTheGreat 4 years ago
GeekiTheGreat
Ya i don't understand, i would assume if you are talking about halo 4 you mean BLOPS 2 but, BLOPS2's story was crap compared to MW1-3 and even more so compared to CoD 1-3.
Posted by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
He's con, which means he is against choosing between them. Pro must argue in favor of the choice (joke).
Posted by LotusNG 4 years ago
LotusNG
Is the first round acceptance? Which Call of Duty game are we talking about? Which halo? You are con, so does that mean you are for Call of Duty?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Darong 4 years ago
Darong
DefiantPage117NIGHTMARETied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited a round, he had numerous spelling, capitalization, and punctuation errors. Con also did not have very convincing arguments as they were basically just stating that the games were both good and didn't give a whole lot more detail on them. Con didn't use any sources whereas Pro had 2.