I mean, when it first came out, it was great. Single player was shallow but done well and action packed to the point where it was enjoyable. Multiplayer was addictive and eventful. And the theater was the best thing I had ever seen in a game. But as time went on, and better games came out, Halo 3 just seemed less and less appealing. The single player was beaten into dust by Half-Life 2 and COD4, and COD4 took nearly everything that was awesome about MP in Halo (Leveling system, character customization, etc.), and improved upon them. The only thing missing was my coveted theater, but that was forgivable as the type of gameplay in COD4 doesn't lend itself to many recordable moments. Not that that's even a bad thing though, for Halo gameplay minimized the skill involved and discouraged action. It was nearly impossible for one person with an assault rifle to beat two or more with assault rifles, while in COD a well laid ambush can spell disaster for everyone on the enemy team. The sheer level of strategy that can be used when in choosing your class, how to attack, to be aggressive or passive, beats the "mad dash" style of getting weapons any day of the week. I can also say that I rarely, if ever, get pissed off playing COD like I did in Halo. I have vids in my file share including plasma grenades tagging people and dissapearing and bouncing off of people, people not dying from nearby rocket hits, etc. That stuff just doesn't happen in COD4, which leads to a deeper yet less frustrating game experience.

Well I usually dont like comparing games like COD4 and H-L 2 because their different in areas. But whatever. I did play more of the COD4 beta then I did Haloz and Half Life is just plain awesome.

You know what? Instead of saying about our games fading out we should be glad we have awesome games or we'd just be playing Blu- Ray Disks and Warhawk. ;)

Not to me. I hate the AR start in Halo 3, but then I usually just play MLG games anyway. Those have BR starts and no radar, which puts emphasis on working with your team so everyone is aware where the other team is and is working together.

Halo has things that, while unrealistic, make it a completely different game than CoD4. You can jump high and aim while jumping, for example, which makes a deeper part of the combat in the game: since it takes more than a shot or two to kill someone, there's a type of close-up strategy where you want to throw off the enemy's aim while keeping your own.

I prefer the unrealism. Just me though.

Not to me. I hate the AR start in Halo 3, but then I usually just play MLG games anyway. Those have BR starts and no radar, which puts emphasis on working with your team so everyone is aware where the other team is and is working together.

Halo has things that, while unrealistic, make it a completely different game than CoD4. You can jump high and aim while jumping, for example, which makes a deeper part of the combat in the game: since it takes more than a shot or two to kill someone, there's a type of close-up strategy where you want to throw off the enemy's aim while keeping your own.

I prefer the unrealism. Just me though.

Yes thats what I mean. Halo is a more "arcade" futuristics game while CoD 4 is a tactical modern shooter.

(no message)

Yes thats what I mean. Halo is a more "arcade" futuristics game while CoD 4 is a tactical modern shooter.

Doesnt make Halo any less tactical. It just plays differently. There is no more/less skill in getting a kill through a few shots in COD or through lots of shots in Halo. Its down to how a team plays together.

Doesnt make Halo any less tactical. It just plays differently. There is no more/less skill in getting a kill through a few shots in COD or through lots of shots in Halo. Its down to how a team plays together.


Yeah but have you played matchmaking? The only teamwork is when some kid says "Veto this Crap" and no body does. Now a course it can be played just as or even more tactical as COD but most people dont.

I mean, when it first came out, it was great. Single player was shallow but done well and action packed to the point where it was enjoyable. Multiplayer was addictive and eventful. And the theater was the best thing I had ever seen in a game. But as time went on, and better games came out, Halo 3 just seemed less and less appealing. The single player was beaten into dust by Half-Life 2 and COD4, and COD4 took nearly everything that was awesome about MP in Halo (Leveling system, character customization, etc.), and improved upon them. The only thing missing was my coveted theater, but that was forgivable as the type of gameplay in COD4 doesn't lend itself to many recordable moments. Not that that's even a bad thing though, for Halo gameplay minimized the skill involved and discouraged action. It was nearly impossible for one person with an assault rifle to beat two or more with assault rifles, while in COD a well laid ambush can spell disaster for everyone on the enemy team. The sheer level of strategy that can be used when in choosing your class, how to attack, to be aggressive or passive, beats the "mad dash" style of getting weapons any day of the week. I can also say that I rarely, if ever, get pissed off playing COD like I did in Halo. I have vids in my file share including plasma grenades tagging people and dissapearing and bouncing off of people, people not dying from nearby rocket hits, etc. That stuff just doesn't happen in COD4, which leads to a deeper yet less frustrating game experience.

I completely agree. I loved Halo 3 when it first came out, but now it's become a really shallow, frustrating experience. CoD 4 has damned-near-perfect multiplayer, and when I die, I know that it's either me sucking or the enemy owning. Singleplayer, on the other hand, is an entirely different story.

Yeah but have you played matchmaking? The only teamwork is when some kid says "Veto this Crap" and no body does. Now a course it can be played just as or even more tactical as COD but most people dont.

yeah agreed. It is best to go in game with friends. I put literally years into Halo 2 with my friends in RL etc and even had a team entering a big UK tournament.

I am already bored of Halo 3...lacks the magic somehow.

Doesnt make Halo any less tactical. It just plays differently. There is no more/less skill in getting a kill through a few shots in COD or through lots of shots in Halo. Its down to how a team plays together.

But you see, more shots=less tactical. All you need to do to be successful in Halo is either stick together or make a mad dash for the power weapons. The fragility of lives in COD 4 means more tactics are required to be successful because a group can easily be taken out be one guy.

yeah agreed. It is best to go in game with friends. I put literally years into Halo 2 with my friends in RL etc and even had a team entering a big UK tournament.

I am already bored of Halo 3...lacks the magic somehow.



See, thats how I feel. Not that the game is bad, just that with so many better options, why even play it?

See, thats how I feel. Not that the game is bad, just that with so many better options, why even play it?

yeah :( It is just the same as Halo 2 which is fine...but even Halo 2 got a bit boring (after a few years). Halo 3 only after a few weeks though...

I blame the maps alot as well though. None of them are "classics" so to speak.

Yeah, many I dread to see (snowbound, guardian, epitaph, highground)

But you see, more shots=less tactical. All you need to do to be successful in Halo is either stick together or make a mad dash for the power weapons. The fragility of lives in COD 4 means more tactics are required to be successful because a group can easily be taken out be one guy.

Not really. More shots to take down a guy can go the other way too. It can mean that your team has to work together for every kill. One guy will lose vs four if all four of the others are shooting at him and only he is shooting back, but that makes sense. But if everyone on the other team is sticking together then you can just throw a grenade or two and mop up with a few shots.

The way I play with my friends is that we set up, not next to eachother, but in spots where we can cover the rest of the map and cover eachother as well with team shooting. The fact that there are power weapons respawning on the map means that your team needs to control them to keep your setup working. This means that you have to keep moving around to either gain or maintain the upper edge. That to me is strategy.

But that guy should be able to win in some scenario other than all four people being retarded. Maybe if he had the rocket launcher he could win, but otherwise, even if he gets the ambush he won't kill more than one.

Halo draws me and probably a lot of people by the "Holy Shit" moments in the multiplayer. Sticking someone and having them run back toward their teammates just brings a smile to my face. Or when I get stuck, I try to run towards the guy who stuck me so I can get a kill out of it as well.

I enjoy both Halo and COD4 for their own uniqueness.

Halo 3 is pretty good. I can see myself playing this game for a while.

But that guy should be able to win in some scenario other than all four people being retarded. Maybe if he had the rocket launcher he could win, but otherwise, even if he gets the ambush he won't kill more than one.

If I catch a few guys at unawares then I pretty much always throw a grenade before I attack. They don't really have time to dodge if they don't know the grenade's coming until they hear it at their feet. If you have a BR and not an AR (which, like I said earlier, is how I like to play) then two guys with their shields down are easy targets. If there were four then you probably couldn't take them all down, that's true, but with even one teammate attacking too this could be easily done.

The difference between CoD 4 and Halo 3, apart from the arcade-like unrealism, is that in CoD 4 you have more power as an individual but are also more vulnerable. In that way there is a lot of tactical gameplay. Halo's type of strategy is more spur-of-the-moment based. Since it takes a bit of time for you to kill and a bit of time for you to die, the real strategy in it is either working with your team so you can kill faster, or by being able to carry out small maneuvers well so that you make people miss you a little and you take longer to die.

Two different types of strategy for two very different games. A matter of preference.

I've been only playing Half Life 2 and not playing anything else until I at least finish the original campaign. The longer I'm away the more I miss Halo 3.

Not to me. I hate the AR start in Halo 3, but then I usually just play MLG games anyway. Those have BR starts and no radar, which puts emphasis on working with your team so everyone is aware where the other team is and is working together.

Halo has things that, while unrealistic, make it a completely different game than CoD4. You can jump high and aim while jumping, for example, which makes a deeper part of the combat in the game: since it takes more than a shot or two to kill someone, there's a type of close-up strategy where you want to throw off the enemy's aim while keeping your own.

I prefer the unrealism. Just me though.

i agree with you +i didnt play cod 4

ya you cant compare them because you have to think i mean ya you can one hit kill people in halo 3 but than again it makes since for someone with all the high tech armor not to die from a near missile right?