The Instigator
toxicmaniac
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Jhate
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Halo V.S Call of duty

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/6/2011 Category: Technology
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 7,295 times Debate No: 19707
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (1)

 

toxicmaniac

Pro

Hello i wanted to make a debate on why i think Halo is better than call of duty since the whole FPS hype is now high.

This include every merchandise including games, novels, ECT and sales will not be used as an argument.

Here are some of my reasons why i think halo is the superior franchise.

1. Narratives and storytelling.

We can all agree that halo has the upper hand in storytelling, while call of duty has the basic idea of americans beating the crap out of everyone halo has its own massive lore mainly about the iconic protagonist Spartan John-117 who is a Spartan II super soldier originally created to fight the insurrection rebels and later to fight the covenant armada and the flood.

From the warrior culture of the Sangheili to the wacky Unggoy to the masterminds that are the prophets and the massive infection caused by gravemind and the mysteries of the ancient forerunners there is enough to talk about.

There is a reason why it has 10 novels, several marvel published comics, an anime collection and many directors including spielberg like the idea of a halo movie.

2. Campaign

Halo uses a far superior approach when it comes to the level design, it is designed in a way that you have the freedom to play the campaign however they want, this amazing alternative freedom of choice already makes call of duty feel like a rail shooter.

Do you want to snipe the enemies? Or are you gonna use heavy weaponary? Or maybe use a warthog? Its all possible in halo.

Another thing is the enemy A.I in the games. In call of duty the enemies are just like those fake enemy dummies in the training mission except they occasionally shoot. They will just either hide behind a wall for god knows how long and sometimes pop their head out.

Halo's A.I on the other hand is one of the greatest because every enemy is different and unique. The grunts are with a high quantity trying to take you down in teams and even commit suicide if they must, the jackals are small and are mostly at the back scouting or sniping, the elite leads a group and rolls and jumps side to side.

And those enemies don't just stand in front of you. No due to its massive scope you will be surrounded by these enemies literally.

3. Innovation

Well this is also pretty obvious if you ask me. I will say that call of duty 4 was one of the most innovative multiplayer games for its time and nazi zombies was a great addition thanks to treyarch, however after that they just kept repeating the same game over mainly because they are to afraid to make drastic changes to the game. Wager matches and kill confirmed? More killstreaks? No thanks you.

Halo was one of the first FPS's to feature a full fledged cinematic style to fit with its storyline. Hell the part were they first found out about the flood is one of the most memorable moments, halo 2 revolutionized online console gaming and is most likely the reason call of duty is so popular now.

Halo 3 featured a customizing tool called forge which has been amazingly improven in forge world in halo reach now being able to make your own gametypes. Further more you have theater mode which call of duty got the idea from and created machinima and you are able to customize your firefight options. You want to fight 6 hunters at the same time? Just customize it like you want. Ha yes nice try survival mode.

So those are some of the reasons my opponent can use for his counter arguments and we'll see how it ends up, i hope i can find someone to debate.

(excuse me for my grammar as english is not my native language)
Jhate

Con

I will base this round on counter arguing before i get into it.
1. I will not mention sales due to the fact Halo is Xbox exclusive.

Now to start We can all agree that halo has the upper hand in storytelling, while call of duty has the basic idea of americans beating the crap out of everyone halo has its own massive lore mainly about the iconic protagonist Spartan John-117 who is a Spartan II super soldier originally created to fight the insurrection rebels and later to fight the covenant armada and the flood.

From the warrior culture of the Sangheili to the wacky Unggoy to the masterminds that are the prophets and the massive infection caused by gravemind and the mysteries of the ancient forerunners there is enough to talk about.

There is a reason why it has 10 novels, several marvel published comics, an anime collection and many directors including spielberg like the idea of a halo movie."

My opponent states that Cod is based only on Americans beating the crap out of everyone?
This is a false accusation. Mw3 has characters people connect to just like halo. In Cod, Price, Ghost,Soap, are main key characters. To understand Cod you have to look how it has advanced. Cod 4 started as more of a history brief showing price's history's and many things as Russia trys to obtain launch codes.

Cod mw2 picks up the story and then moves on to MW3. Mw3 takes you into the future of the war being fought. It takes you into France, Germany, and gives you a view of what is happening around the world. Many people like Cod because the campaign takes you around the world and shows events and what is happening to other countries and really bases things of modern day time not a supposed future fairytale like halo.

"Halo uses a far superior approach when it comes to the level design, it is designed in a way that you have the freedom to play the campaign however they want, this amazing alternative freedom of choice already makes call of duty feel like a rail shooter.

Do you want to snipe the enemies? Or are you gonna use heavy weaponary? Or maybe use a warthog? Its all possible in halo.

Another thing is the enemy A.I in the games. In call of duty the enemies are just like those fake enemy dummies in the training mission except they occasionally shoot. They will just either hide behind a wall for god knows how long and sometimes pop their head out."

My opponent says sniping, heavy weapons, etc are available in Cod.
Answers this in Mw3 can you use light machine guns? Can you snipe? yes My opponent listed the same thing that Cod has allowed you to do in the attempt to say in halo you can only do it. My opponent dosent know much about Cod. Either that or has not played the campaign on a hard difficulty. For one in a real modern war enemies are not gonna run and give up flanking positions. But at the same time on veteran and hardened the enemies do rush you. My opponent is not showing any sources so far about how it is true.

Now in recent game Mw3 spec ops mode has suicide bombers who try to kill you just like how you said grunts try to kill you by suicide to. Cod allows you to have very possible weapon at some point. Halos weapon count is very low and has little variety in its latest. And past games halo has not had many weapons. Cod you are surrounded by enemies my opponent has several false arguments and hasn't researched this topic.

"Well this is also pretty obvious if you ask me. I will say that call of duty 4 was one of the most innovative multiplayer games for its time and nazi zombies was a great addition thanks to treyarch, however after that they just kept repeating the same game over mainly because they are to afraid to make drastic changes to the game. Wager matches and kill confirmed? More killstreaks? No thanks you."

I will rebuttal this by showing my opponent how the games have dramatically changed and the many differences and once again show my opponent did not read sources.

1. Cod 4
-Extensive multiplayer
-start of a very in depth campaign
-prestige mode updated
-Create a class enhanced
-No other features like spec ops
-Basic killstreak system

2.Cod Waw
- Start of one of the biggest zombie game franchises Nazi zombies.
-Extensive multiplayer.
-Different weapons
-New story based on world wars
-Somewhat improved Kill streak system

3. Mw2
-Continuation of the famous campaign
-Introduction to popular spec ops
-Extended Multiplayer
- New perks, Weapons, Equipment and frame rate
-Advanced kill streak system

4. Cod Black ops
- Nazi zombies brought back but not the same maps, new perks for it and weapons as well as continuing story
- New weapons
-Player customization
- New equipment
- New campaign
-Wager matches for gambler time players
-Even more advanced kill streak system

5. Mw3
-Better multiplayer
-More weapons
-Continued campaign with a huge twist and ending
-Return of Spec ops with new missions as well as survival
-More new Weapons
-New perks
-Team work focused
-Point streak system allowing kill streaks for players who are not constantly playing and are not that good (support package)

Now tell me how all of these games are the same? Everything is thoroughly improved for gamers as well as extra modes for players who do not have live. Nazi zombies allow players who dont have live to play zombies with friends and try to beat their high score. Also in Mw2 and MW3 spec ops and survival allow another thing for players who want to play with friends in the same room who dont have live.

My opponent says "halo 2 revolutionized online console gaming and is most likely the reason call of duty is so popular now."

Key word Most likely

My opponent did not research what games have really revolutionized halo and based it off of his opinion.

"Halo 3 featured a customizing tool called forge which has been amazingly improven in forge world in halo reach now being able to make your own gametypes. Further more you have theater mode which call of duty got the idea from and created machinima and you are able to customize your firefight options. You want to fight 6 hunters at the same time? Just customize it like you want. Ha yes nice try survival mode."

My opponent says Cod got theater from Halo this is also a lie. Theater is much different as it allows games to be saved as well as screen shots and several things. Cod survival and Nazi zombies allows players to try and beat their own score. Instead of using consuming time and making what you want and setting things up you can easily go to survival and try to beat your friends high score or your highest round. Again Halo has hardly anything that is close to beating Survival, Spec ops, or Zombies.

Cod has updates to patch glitches yet in halo i see people do the same glitches without them being patched. Cod has always had better variety and also has a stat tracker in black ops and also you can earn cal signs, emblems, do challenges, get camos, customize sights on guns and alot more up creating your own emblem in black ops. Cod has really given fans the edge on designing what they want and giving players something more to fight for besides map control.

I would like my opponent to quit basing things off opinion. Saying Halo revolutionized and started Cod is a lie. Halo is based on future and has very little realism when it comes down to graphics. Cod is based on Wars and Modern times. Their were several games really revolutionized Fps games and here is my source

http://www.freeinfosociety.com...

One of the biggest games to revolutionize games is Battlefield as it started on Pc and made several marks on many shooter games.

I wish my opponent the best of luck in the next round
Debate Round No. 1
toxicmaniac

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate and for his well spoken response in the first round. However it appears that you have misunderstood some things which is partly my fault so let me explain some things.
"My opponent states that Cod is based only on Americans beating the crap out of everyone?
This is a false accusation. Mw3 has characters people connect to just like halo. In Cod, Price, Ghost,Soap, are main key characters. To understand Cod you have to look how it has advanced. Cod 4 started as more of a history brief showing price's history's and many things as Russia trys to obtain launch codes.

Cod mw2 picks up the story and then moves on to MW3. Mw3 takes you into the future of the war being fought. It takes you into France, Germany, and gives you a view of what is happening around the world. Many people like Cod because the campaign takes you around the world and shows events and what is happening to other countries and really bases things of modern day time not a supposed future fairytale like halo"

You have not given any reason why call of duty's storyline is better than any other basic shooter. It is pretty common for games to pick up were they last left but that does not determine the quality of the story itself.
You say that the game is based on modern events and what happens to other countries, this is not true since the storyline is based on a very unlikely alternative universe were in CoD4 russians and terrorists make a timed alliance and in MW2 and 3 marakov wants to cause genocide.

The storyline and action set pieces in call of duty are false and gives people a wrong image of a true war scenario.
You are also implying that halo's storyline is inferior because its a "supposed future fairytale" yet you accuse me of basing things off opinions.
It is irrelevant whenever the story is based on sci-fi or an alternative modern scenario its about the universe and variety of the story within the games.

"My opponent says sniping, heavy weapons, etc are available in Cod.
Answers this in Mw3 can you use light machine guns? Can you snipe? yes My opponent listed the same thing that Cod has allowed you to do in the attempt to say in halo you can only do it. My opponent dosent know much about Cod. Either that or has not played the campaign on a hard difficulty. For one in a real modern war enemies are not gonna run and give up flanking positions. But at the same time on veteran and hardened the enemies do rush you. My opponent is not showing any sources so far about how it is true."

What i was implying was that the objective and lvl design in call of duty is more straight forward and linear than halo's. Halo's lvl design is based on a larger scope in which far bigger vehicles and more enemies fit.

As example:
http://www.supercheats.com...
http://faqsmedia.ign.com...

As for call of duty i still stand behind my argument that call of duty's A.I is very basic compared to halo's. Difficulty is irrelevant for enemy A.I as it only improves that the enemies deal more damage not that they move more. In veteran it is mostly common that you get either encountered by a nearby enemy with a shotgun or a sniper on the roof which corners you into a little place because the scope of the lvls are to small and straight forward.

As example:
http://media.giantbomb.com...
http://www.gamepodunk.com...

Ofcourse these are only a couple of pictures which is why they are called examples but if you're not in an action set piece moment you often find yourself stuck between buildings or inside a building.
Here are some examples of the scope and enemies in survival mode/firefight and it is clear that once again that soldiers in call of duty are more straight forward while halo's enemies have more variety

"I will rebuttal this by showing my opponent how the games have dramatically changed and the many differences and once again show my opponent did not read sources."

What you say is that the games have dramatically changed, yet the examples you mentioned are basic things that you expect in every sequel. (new story, campaign, weapons ect) However those changes are not that drastic. Ofcourse it defeats the idea of the exact same game but what i meant was that the core mechanics play the same as its prequel were as halo always changes things up like in halo with armor customization, removing bloom and the previous things i mentioned.

One of my main arguments for that is the engine. All that call of duty does lately is update its engine. For example the MW3 engine it uses right now is a slightly updated version the IW 4.0 engine which is just a modified quake III engine.
This results into similiar sound, textures and design. Halo on the other hand with the exception of ODST has always been redone. Even halo anniversary which is a remake uses the saber3d engine which heavily improves on graphics, textures and ofcourse sound effects.

"Nazi zombies allow players who dont have live to play zombies with friends and try to beat their high score"
You can also do this in firefight 2.0 of halo reach which can imply that you didn't look that up carefully.

"Saying Halo revolutionized and started Cod is a lie. Halo is based on future and has very little realism when it comes down to graphics."

I think you misunderstood this one and i apologize for not explaining it correctly. What i meant was that halo revolutionized and popularize multiplayer gaming on consoles which is a major key factor to CoD's succes.

It is a fact that online first person shooters are now dominant on consoles and call of duty, battlefield and halo are examples of that. But what is now so extreme popular started with xbox live. I know that there were consoles with online before but none of them were as groundbreaking nor had it the technology that the xbox had.

With over 8 million copies sold you cannot deny that halo 2 was the flagship title that popularized xbox live and therefor online gaming on consoles.

"Their were several games really revolutionized Fps games and here is my source

http://www.freeinfosociety.com...;

With this source you've only helped my argument that halo was more revolutionizing than call of duty as halo is mentioned in this source and call of duty isn't.

I'd like to thank my opponent for taking the time to read this and i'm looking forward to his response.
Jhate

Con

I prove that my opponent is not understanding any meaning of what i say so far. "You have not given any reason why call of duty's storyline is better than any other basic shooter." Did i say i was gonna give a reason? the argument i posted was arguing against an assumption he made about Cod. Theres no way of proving one campaign is better. MY opponent dosent understand that it is two different games and campaigns cant be better because weather a campaign is better can not be determined when comparing two different things as such as Cod vs battlefield. In that case you would say which is a better war game? Halo vs Cod isn't really based on the same type of war. Cod: modern war Halo:future alien war
It is determined by whether a person likes realistic wars or alien fantasy wars so his argument that the story line or campaign is invalid. I should have been more clear. I meant Cod Waw is based more on what happened to countries.

"You are also implying that halo's storyline is inferior because its a "supposed future fairytale" yet you accuse me of basing things off opinions."

No i am not. First nothing in Halo is remotely realistic to any war today or in the past. Halo is basically from the future and aliens are considered a myth as well and do go under a fairytale type category.

" i said My opponent says sniping, heavy weapons, etc are available in Cod.
Answers this in Mw3 can you use light machine guns? Can you snipe? yes My opponent listed the same thing that Cod has allowed you to do in the attempt to say in halo you can only do it. My opponent dosent know much about Cod. Either that or has not played the campaign on a hard difficulty. For one in a real modern war enemies are not gonna run and give up flanking positions. But at the same time on veteran and hardened the enemies do rush you. My opponent is not showing any sources so far about how it is true."

My opponent then said:
What i was implying was that the objective and lvl design in call of duty is more straight forward and linear than halo's. Halo's lvl design is based on a larger scope in which far bigger vehicles and more enemies fit.

My opponent didnt deny that he hasn't played any campaign in Cod leading me to believe he is just arguing with what he knows about Cod which makes his Arguments pretty much invalid.

you stated
"Difficulty is irrelevant for enemy A.I"
and then in first round you stated "

Halo's A.I on the other hand is one of the greatest because every enemy is different and unique. The grunts are with a high quantity trying to take you down in teams and even commit suicide if they must, the jackals are small and are mostly at the back scouting or sniping, the elite leads a group and rolls and jumps side to side.

Cod every enemy is unique to my opponent forgets to realize.
1. Juggernauts
2. Regular gunmen
3. advanced gunmen
4. Rpg enemes
5. Snipers
6. Shotgun type enemies
7. Suicide bombers
8. helicopters

and more

Cod lets you face a variety of different enemies. Now the big issues my opponent havent argued is
1. multiplayer
2. realism
3. system link/and people who dont have live
4.Split screen multiplayer
5. Halo has pretty much most of the same guns every time and it seems like the maps are constantly the same
6. Halo still dosent patch glitches often
7. Cod offers elite, it costs but it allows players to earn prizes in contests when you normally pay to enter contests and tournaments in Mlg and allow special unlocks. you dont have to pay unless you buy premium edition and even without this upgrade you still get most things you would with it.

My opponent said Cod changed only basics. Heres proof that he is wrong.
1. Cod 4, Had little expansion of weapons, basic camo, and only a 3 5 7 kill streak system that wasn't customizable

Cod Waw added- split screen campaign, whole new system of weapons- Nazi zombies which became one of the top selling and popular zombie games of all time- new kill streaks

Cod Mw2 added- More customizable options- Spec ops- for players who cant play online or want to play with a friend beside them or online with a friend- system link option which i believe may have been available in past games not sure.- entirely new weapons with little repeats- many new perks and equipment- customizable killstreaks

Cod Black ops added- theater- brought back Nazi zombies and sold more Zombie dlcs then before- Brand new weapons very little repeats maybe 3 or 4 weapons at most. Video saving, Screen shot saving etc., Wager matches for people to increase money, Camo, Attachments with specialized reticules.

Cod mw3- Survival mode, online spec ops, both allowing you research for a match (note you could int do this in MW2)
New weapons, Gun sway where breathing affects gun control, Weapon proficiency making it where the better you get with a gun the more things you unlock for it. New game modes team defender and Kill confirmed, Well based maps and the realism makes it really great game.

Mw3 broke the record for most people on xbox live at once. Important because halo is exclusive to xbox and hasn't done this.
Cod games also added, call signs, titles and designable emblems.
Cod just offer player the creatibility edge and allow them to play really organized games online with various options:
Guns that were the same in Cod that were used twice or more:
1.M16
2. Desert eagle
3. Famas
4.Aug
5. Usp
6. Spas
7. Aa 12
8 striker
9. Model
Not mentioning acr or scar M14 because they are different versions of the weapon
10. M4A1
11.Ak 47
12. Barret

There may be 1 or more but more than likely not more than 15 guns have been reused out of more than 50 guns total and even more
Cod has also made it where LMGs and snipers are even more effective when laying down which is another sense of realism.
Debate Round No. 2
toxicmaniac

Pro

First i would like to show that my opponent has only attempted to counter my arguments in the 1st and 2nd round and has yet to give reasons and sources to back it up why call of duty is the superior game over halo while i have given reasons and sources in the first round and countered my opponent in the 2nd round.
"It is determined by whether a person likes realistic wars or alien fantasy wars so his argument that the story line or campaign is invalid"
I was not talking about the singleplayer experience. I was talking about the universes, storyline and narrative telling of both franchises. I've also said in the 1st round that every merchandise is allowed for that.
Halo and Call of duty do indeed have different genres however that doesn't determine the quality of the characters and the narratives at all. The only difference that i can see is that science fiction has the advantage over realistic warfare do to the reason that realistic warfare is limited to modern technology were in science fiction you have no limits and you can let your creativity go.
Here are some examples of that:
http://halo.wikia.com...
http://halo.wikia.com...
http://halo.wikia.com...
http://halo.wikia.com...
Whenever you prefer realistic warfare or science fiction is irrelevant for this debate. As for facts science fiction has more creativity and can create a longer backstory. This may give halo an unfair advantage but i have not made any rules that we can't compare them in story.
"No i am not. First nothing in Halo is remotely realistic to any war today or in the past"
Then i would like to request that from now on my opponent refers halo to "science fiction" as "future fairytale" can be taken the wrong way especially since most halo fans don't refer it as that.
"Cod every enemy is unique to my opponent forgets to realize"
Players in Call of Duty suffer from a case of rush and attack, where you are constantly moving forward, sidelined in a vehicle or hunkering down fighting a helicopter. For the most part, the AI remains relatively unchanged regardless of the selected difficulty and will rarely demonstrate anything that could be considered remarkably creative in a way that a digital character could surprise a human. Thanks to the difficulty curve prevalent in the game, Veteran merely makes it a case of pushing forward crouched and only killing what is directly in front of you. This merely serves to illustrate distinguishable challenge, creating an invisible wall for players to press through by sheer ingenuity.
If we are talking about different enemy types halo has over 70 different enemy types which includes vehicles, covenant ememies, ranks of each covenant enemy and the flood enemies
In total it is 71 different enemy types compared to the 8 you mentioned as i calculated on halo wikia.
I'd also like to add some enemies for CoD's side which include attack dogs, suicide attack dogs, zombies, hellhounds, zombie monkeys and crawlers.
Not only have you still yet to prove why call of duty's A.I is not inferior to halo's but also does this show that call of duty lacks in variety of enemies which is understandable as call of duty is only limited when the kinds of enemies they can include in games.

"Now the big issues my opponent havent argued is"
1. multiplayer
Ah multiplayer probably the most controversial argument for these 2 games. The main reason why i will go with multiplayer are these reasons: 4 player co-op in campaign were as CoD's co-op is limited to multiplayer and spec ops, far more playlists and unique gametypes like girfball, invasion, infection, oddball, headhunters, stockpile aswell as classics like king of the hill.
And thanks to forge the amount of gametypes is almost unlimited like the gametypes in the youtube video's

2. realism
Realism is irrelevant as it is opinionated.
3. system link/and people who dont have live
2 player co-op, custom games, custom firefight, custom forge.
4.Split screen multiplayer
Ranking up and 4 player split screen are all able in halo when being offline in multiplayer. You also have split screen co-op in the campaign which call of duty still lacks.
5. Halo has pretty much most of the same guns every time and it seems like the maps are constantly the same
This statement proves that my opponent has not played halo reach and assumes that the weapons are the same purely on the way they look and not how they play.
I will give my opponent an example of the difference between the weapons in halo 3 and halo reach.
halo 3's assualt rifle is the MA5 is changed by halo reach's assault rifle the MA37
Halo reach's assault rifle has:
Slightly slower rate of fire (by about 100 rounds per minute), Larger reticle, Max ammunition is decreased from 352 to 288, Short controlled bursts are much more accurate, Slightly less damage (19 rounds to kill a fully-shielded SPARTAN player, rather than 16 rounds).
I also have to notice that while call of duty has more weapons. It is unbalanced and unfair as you need to unlock most weapons as a reward for playing for a long time. Were as in halo you have a more fair chance as you start with a standard weapon and then need to find the more powerfull ones yourself.
Also call of duty's weapons are based on real life weaponary were as halo has some of the most unique weapons like the energy sword, gravity hammer, needler, focus rifle, spartan laser, dual rocket holding rocket launcher and quite more.
Also halo includes vehicles like the scorpion, warthog, wraith, ghost, prowler, banshee, falcon, hornet and more.
6. Halo still dosent patch glitches often
This statement is false as glitches of halo are occasionally updated and fixed.
7. Cod offers elite, it costs but it allows players to earn prizes in contests when you normally pay to enter contests and tournaments in Mlg and allow special unlocks. you dont have to pay unless you buy premium edition and even without this upgrade you still get most things you would with it.
Everything you mentioned was featured in bungie.net and will probably be taken over by halowaypoint.
"My opponent said Cod changed only basics. Heres proof that he is wrong"
That is because my opponent only includes basics besides a few points. I've said it before and i'll repeat myself that adding new weapons, a new campaign and new game modes are mandatory for a sequel.
For something to justify 60 bucks a year you expect them to tweak and change things from the core mechanics. This include art design, sound effects, difference in pace and a new engine.
"Mw3 broke the record for most people on xbox live at once. Important because halo is exclusive to xbox and hasn't done this"
Irrelevant this debate is about the quality of the games. The amount of people playing a game does not make a game better, only more crowded.

Now that i countered my opponents arguments in the 2nd round i would like counter some arguments my opponent stated in the 1st round i skipped over.
"cal signs, emblems, do challenges, get camos, customize sights on guns and alot more up creating your own emblem in black ops. Cod has really given fans the edge on designing what they want and giving players something more to fight for besides map control"
Once again my opponent has proven that he has not played halo reach as most of the things he mentioned are in halo reach aswell and he ignores halo's main features
In halo you have emblems, do daily and weekly challenges, unlock new armor, give those armor primary and secondary colors, commendation which are sort of rewards and you can create your own emblem aswell.
http://halo.wikia.com...
http://halo.wikia.com...
http://halo.wikia.com...
As this is this the final round and i cannot counter my opponent i wish him the best of luck for his final verdict.

Vote pro.
Jhate

Con

My opponent has only given videos of what halo can do. This is a verbal debate im not suppose to look up videos of Cod and post them it would defeat the purpose.
My opponent says Cod lacks co-op campaign this is a lie Cod Waw has it. Co -op campaign is pointless in Mw4 and MW2 and MW3 and other games because you are playing as a certain player and it'd be a little stupid to have both players doing the same ending.

I have given sources on things that need to be sourced which my opponent is not understanding.
MY opponent only gave one example of guns being different and i stated every repeated gun in Cod.

"This statement is false as glitches of halo are occasionally updated and fixed."

This is a false rebuttal. The glitches are not patched i play infection on Halo alot and see people camp in one spot on several maps on the side of the building which they used glitches to get to.

My opponent is Wrong on his statement "The amount of people playing a game does not make a game better, only more crowded." If more people are playing Cod then halo dosent that mean its more preferred and more people like to play it.

"In halo you have emblems, do daily and weekly challenges, unlock new armor, give those armor primary and secondary colors, commendation which are sort of rewards and you can create your own emblem as well"

I am a fan of Cod and Halo i have reach, and all it does is let you pick from a bunch of pictures and put together emblem. In Cod you get emblems for challenges and titles and in Cod black ops you can create one. Yes you have armor and gt to customize it. Im not ignoring t main features im stating how it dosent matter because its still not high tech as in advanced.

Yes halo has many game modes But if you look at the most popular game modes there are not many people int heir and there are not many people online.

Key voting issues
* my opponents only argument for spec ops for people who dont have online is halos forge mode. as i mention that Cod has Co-op campaign in Waw and Nazi zombies which again is one of the top rated zombie games

* MY opponent still has no argument for Nazi zombies as it is one of the biggest factors for Cod
* I havent easily rebuttaled against my opponent and my opponent responds by doing the old three year old move and saying no its not when i give him reasons is is he says the same thing even when i prove him wrong

*Cod gives people a better feeling towards ranking and allows players the challenge of developing their skill based o point streaks and kill streaks which my opponent didnt mention anymore after i stated it.

*My opponent says i listed basic things that a sequel has to change lets compare
Cod4 - Cod Mw2, IW didnt have to put spec ops in their, they didnt have to add more than 4 times more kill streaks, they did not have to bring new guns, they did not have to start the cal sign and emblem tradition, these are big factors that my opp dosent look at.

*Cod mw3- Spec ops didnt have to be updated, Survival didnt have to be added, More wens didnt have to be added, Kill streaks didnt have to be added based on skill level, but they did. Again key factors

*thins my opponent didnt argue and or ignored.

* Cod offers better experience as i mentioned the support package allows players who die more than they get kills to still get kill streaks which really boosts game confidence.

*Cod is more Team work focused because of point streak awarding you for objective.

*More perks/Weapons/Equipment/Kill streaks = More variety and choices for players to make endless setups for their create a class

* Had no comment about Nazi zombies

* Seems like he based everything on one game as he stated Cod dosent have co-op Campaign but Waw did it also had Nazi zombies that had endless rounds you could play with friends to giving the game another edge.

*Prestige Mode

*Here are some statements my opponent made that show he is basing things off opinion
1."Answers this in Mw3 can you use light machine guns? Can you snipe? yes My opponent listed the same thing that Cod has allowed you to do in the attempt to say in halo you can only do it"

2. "My opponent didnt deny that he hasn't played any campaign in Cod leading me to believe he is just arguing with what he knows about Cod which makes his Arguments pretty much invalid."

3. MY opponent stated enemies are more unique and variant. i stated "Cod every enemy is unique to my opponent forgets to realize.
1. Juggernauts
2. Regular gunmen
3. advanced gunmen
4. Rpg enemes
5. Snipers
6. Shotgun type enemies
7. Suicide bombers
8. helicopters
and more

These are just a few things my opponent never argued back against me.

Cod has broken every record know to man also according to this source please read when voting.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com...

Reasons i believe i have one
(My opponent has done very well in this debate and i thank him)
1. I rebuttal ed almost every time and my opponent changed topic
2. When i stated big things my opponent didnt argue.
3. My Opponent based things off f opinion.
4. My opponent seems to have come into this debate without info on Cod
5. My opponent mentions campaign being better and stated realism is irrelevant because it is based of opinion. I also stated that whether either campaign is better is irrelevant to because it is more of whether you prefer a science fiction story mode or real war based so his Campaign argument is irrelevant.

Thank you and vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by dont-out-of-line.1 4 years ago
dont-out-of-line.1
I feel the Halo won in her comments and how she talked about it.
Posted by ichigo85 5 years ago
ichigo85
*either Halo or CoD XD
Posted by ichigo85 5 years ago
ichigo85
Well, you just admitted CoD was a camping game and recently fixed. You admitted sometimes you need strategy. In Halo you need strategy all the time =). You say you just jump in the air and shoot. That is not always the case and this is a strategy =) If you wanna die fast in a game, go for CoD; if you want some strategy and skill, go for Halo =).

If you play either or then we could definitely put my theory to the test?? =)
Posted by Jhate 5 years ago
Jhate
Cod is not a camping game, Mw3 has fixed so much of that, there are at least 3 ways to enter almost every building and when you camp in a building and your teammates are not near you enemies will spawn near you to prevent spawn camping even if that person camps and gets one kill people well know where hes at. In Cod you have to have strategy sometimes and you get kill streaks for objectives and perks and multiple things. Cod is based on usually three types of players Campers, Rushers, tactical players. Campers improve the game and it teaches people to watch their corners and use tactical grenades. As here halo you just have to jump int he air and shoot the enemy. Trust m i do it all the time and halo is just a Lil to easy and cartoony and Cod offers e the better multiplayer experience which is why it is more popular on Xbox then halo not because its mainstream.
Posted by ichigo85 5 years ago
ichigo85
I could play CoD for 2wks and leave crap stains on kids, you could play Halo for a year and never get close to me =)
Posted by ichigo85 5 years ago
ichigo85
I disagree. Halo takes more strategy than CoD. Anyone that is a serious gamer knows that, even CoD players can tell you that. CoD is more of a camping game.
Posted by Jhate 5 years ago
Jhate
All halo multiplayer takes is being able to jump in the air and unload a whole clip into an enemy. Where in Cod if you are across the map or medium distance you aim down your sights. You only aim down your sights with launchers and sniper rifles in Halo
Posted by Jhate 5 years ago
Jhate
Its still selling more on Xbox the halo has, Mw3 just broke several records read my last source in the third round. Halo has been out before Cod and Cod on xbox still has more players and still has made it to mainstream on xbox. Halo could've had any chance to be a mainstream xbox game which it is but its not more or better than Cod. I didnt ignore your points you changed the subject every time i called you out on missing an argument. You'll see in the third round i gave examples of you basing things off your opinions and n answering my arguments and not researching this subject. I am sorry if it offends you but it is rue i do not care how you look at it im sorry but yea.
Posted by ichigo85 5 years ago
ichigo85
50Ts 49Td =)
Posted by ichigo85 5 years ago
ichigo85
HALO 3 ALL DAY XD!! Online Multiplayer takes a LOT more skill =)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Boogerdoctor 5 years ago
Boogerdoctor
toxicmaniacJhateTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Both had good arguments. It's a tie.