Is Assassins Creed better than Call Of Duty?
Debate Rounds (5)
While Assassins Creed is a stealth based game where you get to wander in the past Call Of Duty is a shooting game which you find almost everywhere in today's era.
Assassins Creed introduces you to a new wide range of medieval weapons while in COD it is just normal guns.
Also, Assassins Creed helps in our history which most of our weak subjects.
My opponent claims that Assassin's creed is better than Call of Duty by virtue of having a special genre. I disagree with this point. It is not true that Call of Duty is "just another shooter game". Firstly, many other shooter games have no multiplayer, which is one of the key selling points to the franchise. Secondly, Call of Duty offers a wide variety of game modes as well as custom configuration options. Even if Call of Duty was in no way special, a large number of video games in today's era are also stealth themed. For example, Dishonored, Thief, Splinter Cell, and Metal Gear, the last three being franchises like assassin's creed. As for the historical setting making it special, the argument does not hold water, given that settings will always vary from game to game.
For this point, I would like to seek clarification as to what "wide range of medieval weapons" my opponent refers to. The main forms of weapons seen are the iconic tomahawk, the hidden blade, the sword, the bow, and pistols. Given that the hidden blades never truly existed, this leaves us with two melee and two ranged weapons. Contrast this with those provided in Call of Duty, a range of weaponry far from being "normal guns". There are assault rifles, pistols, grenades, knives, sniper rifles, and mines, just for starters. Following that is an arsenal of more exotic weaponry like the explosive crossbow or the ballistic knife. As for historical accuracy, the hidden blade has already been addressed, and furthermore, I do not see why the players would be so excited to use a small number of outdated weapons as compared to the spectrum of guns, explosives, and traps offered by Call of Duty.
3. Helping in History
I concede the point that assassin's creed may help in history, albeit to a small degree (tell your teacher about Edward Kenway or anything here : http://www.1up.com... , then get ready to be slapped). However, Call of Duty achieves much the same thing:
In fact, it also teaches science and current events!
It may be said that these lessons are indirect, but that is true for Assassin's creed as well.
1. Games are unrelated
Assassin's Creed and Call of Duty are games from entirely separate genres, and cannot be properly compared. For example, comparing the Beatles to Beethoven is pointless. Both may be music, but they are entirely different genres as well. Call of Duty and Assassin's Creed also appeal to separate audiences. Call of Duty towards fans of Run and Gun, adrenaline rush games, while Assassin's Creed appeals to the players who prefer waiting in the shadows, and striking with surgical precision.
With that, I end my speech.
best ever graphics- I mean yes the graphics are good, and yes they are (marginally) superior to AC's... but they're certainly not the best ever. In terms of graphics variety AC is far better. COD is just grey, grey, brown, dusty-brown, grey.
better multiplayer - you like the headless-chicken mindless run around no-skill approach. Well, that's a little unfair I suppose... but seriously, AC's multiplayer is far MORE strategic. And entertaining. Even now I'm still finding new strategies, whereas with COD I got bored after a week.
realistic-So being shot several times and not dying is realistic? Operation Flash point is realistic; COD chose to make the game entertaining at the cost of realism. (Note that I'm not arguing the case that AC is realistic... it isn't.)
can immerse yourself in a different time period
educational (historically) FRENCH REVOLUTION, CRUSADES, PIRATE AGE, RENAISSANCE
better single player
proper developing story line
the COD series is just a dead horse on some strings. It's MP hasn't changed in 4 games, and the maps keep getting worse. It is also becoming less and less PC friendly every release, which is ironic considering where the series started.
AC on the other hand at least changes it up more every game compared to COD. Plus it doesn't have the lame 90s action movie plot lines like COD does
1. Strategic multiplayer.
There is not purely one method to play Call of Duty either. Certainly, Assassin's Creed has some strategy, but Call of Duty has some as well. A game that didn't require strategy and skill would not have competitive teams.
Those two links were merely basic tips, basically, but it still shows a glimpse of the strategy required. With the sniper rifles, mines, and modes like CTF, Capture and Hold, and Team Deathmatch, the teamwork and strategy required only grows.
As my opponent has conceded that Assassin's Creed is not realistic, I do not have to argue the point. Let me reinforce that the burden of proof lies with him to prove that Assassin's Creed is better, while I only have to show that they are equal, or that Call of Duty is better.
As for graphics, my opponent has already conceded that Call of Duty has better graphics. Graphical variety is, perhaps, important in a game where much time is spent waiting, which Call of Duty does not have that much of. Time not engaging in combat is usually spent laying down traps, relocating, or hunting people down.
4. 'The COD series is just a dead horse on some strings. It's MP hasn't changed in 4 games, and the maps keep getting worse. It is also becoming less and less PC friendly every release, which is ironic considering where the series started... ... Plus it doesn't have the lame 90s action movie plot lines like COD does'
Entirely subjective. I'd like my opponent to show changes in the Assassin's Creed multiplayer, if he wishes to salvage the one non-subjective point.
It is not shown how this is good
6.can immerse yourself in a different time period
I argue that World War 2 is a different time period, while the other games are separate timelines.
7.educational (historically) FRENCH REVOLUTION, CRUSADES, PIRATE AGE, RENAISSANCE
I have already rebutted this point in my previous speech.
8.better single player
I'd like to challenge my opponent to support this point with evidence or explanations.
9.proper developing story line
Note that my previous point has not been engaged on by my opponent.
Call of Duty provides a better immersion than Assassin's Creed. In Call of Duty, the players play as soldiers, but in Assassin's Creed, a long, convoluted backstory about genetic coding is required. Assassin's Creed actually breaks immersion with their constant flashes into "real life" In fact, Call of Duty Ghost's singleplayer campaign ends in a seamless merge into the multiplayer.
raakash14 forfeited this round.
raakash14 forfeited this round.
Poiyurt forfeited this round.
raakash14 forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Phoenix61397 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||7|
Reasons for voting decision: FF, Pro's structure was hard on the eyes.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.