+- World Beyblade Organization by Fighting Spirits Inc. (https://worldbeyblade.org)
+-- Forum: Off-Topic Forums (https://worldbeyblade.org/Forum-Off-Topic-Forums)
+--- Forum: Video Games (https://worldbeyblade.org/Forum-Video-Games)
+--- Thread: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? (/Thread-Which-is-better-Halo-Reach-or-Call-of-Duty-Black-Ops)
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Thresher - Dec. 24, 2010
Let's start with Zombies vs. Firefight
I have a problem calling these similar. In Firefight you begin with every weapon, and you select your choice of the given load-out. These depend based on gametype. Some gametypes only give the option to sprint with an assault rifle, other gametypes give various weapons(DMR, pistol, sniper, rockets,and so on) and load outs(armor lock, jet-pack, sprint, hologram, and so on). The largest difference is that Firefight is completely customizable, from weapon selection, to number of waves, and the amount of heath you start with. You can change the armor abilities, activated skulls(which have various
effects), you can even change the enemies, and their health. You can change the number of lives, make yourself virtually invencible, change the spawn points of your enemies.There is a ridiculous amount of depth to the customization.
Zombies isn't customizable, you do not start with all the weapons, you have to buy everything but the pistol you start with, including ammo. You get money by killing Zombies. You have to set up barricades to keep the zombies at bay. You almost must have a teammate and a strategy to survive. There are only 3 maps to chose from, and overall It is much harder than the base difficulty of Firefight.
In the aspect of space marine vs soldiers, they are similar, but when it comes to actual gameplay they are hard to compare.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - KidTala - Dec. 25, 2010
Its got to be Black Ops for me. Halo Reach is a decent game but all the aliens... Naa, not for me.
Black Ops have the best maps I've ever played on, mentioning 'Nuketown' and the online modes are crazy!
For me, I'd rather compare CoD & Killzone
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Temporal - Dec. 26, 2010
They are two completely different games, each trying to appeal to their own respective fanbase. I admire both, and see it as no use to compare them. The expectations are completely different past "It should be good." They developers, and producers have a lot to do in order to make the games they do, so I like both for the effort put in, and the end result. One is not clearly better than the other. Though Nuketown is fun, and the flaming hat avatar commercial for Reach was funny.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Khel - Dec. 27, 2010
(Dec. 24, 2010 12:36 AM)Thresher Wrote: Let's start with Zombies vs. Firefight
I have a problem calling these similar. In Firefight you begin with every weapon, and you select your choice of the given load-out. These depend based on gametype. Some gametypes only give the option to sprint with an assault rifle, other gametypes give various weapons(DMR, pistol, sniper, rockets,and so on) and load outs(armor lock, jet-pack, sprint, hologram, and so on). The largest difference is that Firefight is completely customizable, from weapon selection, to number of waves, and the amount of heath you start with. You can change the armor abilities, activated skulls(which have various
effects), you can even change the enemies, and their health. You can change the number of lives, make yourself virtually invencible, change the spawn points of your enemies.There is a ridiculous amount of depth to the customization.
Zombies isn't customizable, you do not start with all the weapons, you have to buy everything but the pistol you start with, including ammo. You get money by killing Zombies. You have to set up barricades to keep the zombies at bay. You almost must have a teammate and a strategy to survive. There are only 3 maps to chose from, and overall It is much harder than the base difficulty of Firefight.
In the aspect of space marine vs soldiers, they are similar, but when it comes to actual gameplay they are hard to compare.
These differences are not genre defining. They don't inhibit a player from putting one down and quickly familiarizing oneself with the other one. If we consider these differences to be large enough to create an 'apples vs. oranges' then fair comparisons between most games would not be possible. Their inherent strengths and target markets are quite similar.
Keep in mind I'm not questioning the fact that there are differences that exist, but not large enough to create as a previous poster said 'apples vs. carrots situation'.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Thresher - Dec. 27, 2010
That's the thing, there is no quick familiarization. The games play differently, Halo isn't in the COD, BFBC2, MOH, catagory. It's not the same 3 bullet kill shooter. There is a reason they appeal to two different kinds of players, not that some people don't enjoy playing both games. If you want to claim they are comparable simply because they are in the FPS category than, Soul Calibur IV is comparable to Def Jam Vendetta. No they aren't in different genres but the gamplay is very different. Yes my "apples to carrots" comparison was an exaggeration, but it isn't like apples and carrots cannot be compared. They just can't be compared easily, something a large number of people in this thread are attempting to do.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - |Joe| - Dec. 27, 2010
It really depends what kind of a mood I'm in since they are so similar. I think Halo is more of a fun environment, whereas CoD is more competitive. This is mainly because Halo has the custom maps feature and Forge mode which make the game more aimed at people who just want to play some weird, messed up games. CoD however, is much more tense because you can be killed so much easier (comparing the amount of bullets it takes to kill you in each game).
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Temporal - Dec. 27, 2010
(Dec. 27, 2010 5:47 AM)Thresher Wrote: That's the thing, there is no quick familiarization. The games play differently, Halo isn't in the COD, BFBC2, MOH, catagory. It's not the same 3 bullet kill shooter. There is a reason they appeal to two different kinds of players, not that some people don't enjoy playing both games. If you want to claim they are comparable simply because they are in the FPS category than, Soul Calibur IV is comparable to Def Jam Vendetta. No they aren't in different genres but the gamplay is very different. Yes my "apples to carrots" comparison was an exaggeration, but it isn't like apples and carrots cannot be compared. They just can't be compared easily, something a large number of people in this thread are attempting to do.
Beat. I said that first. But it is still so true. Halo and CoD are both FPS, and Apples and Carroths are both healthy. If we are gonna be that vague, we could compare Beyblade to Battle Strikers, but you can't, they are too different.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Odin - Dec. 29, 2010
Definitely Reach. I love building in Forge, I love firefight, and the story is good, too.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Devilbat - Dec. 29, 2010
I own both games and I liked Black Ops a lot more than thought I was going to, but as much I like Black Ops Halo: Reach is the one that always has me coming back for more. Halo: Reach is the better game.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Temporal - Dec. 31, 2010
They cannot be compared. They both have their own appeal. Each game is different. Plus, Run-and-Gun does not work in Black Ops, let me say that now. It WILL get you
a) sniped
b)shanked
c)Blown Up
d)killed by Attack Dogs. (Did you know that they can go up stairs? Don't sit in a bedroom against attack dogs. Zombie attack dogs are worse.)
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - C-Dub - Dec. 31, 2010
Reach is the best they have better snipers and it's harder and let's face it firefight is beast reach is beast reach is beast!!!!!!!!
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Temporal - Dec. 31, 2010
Not a good argument. Try to have a reason that is not based on being a fan of the series. If that isyour reason, then it is insignificant. Plus, this is untrue. Have you seen a sniper in NukeTown or Array? They can snipe you using anything, and still kill you even if they miss. Very versatile people, Black Ops snipers are.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - XBlader - Dec. 31, 2010
(Dec. 31, 2010 10:15 PM)Megablader9 Wrote: Not a good argument. Try to have a reason that is not based on being a fan of the series. If that isyour reason, then it is insignificant. Plus, this is untrue. Have you seen a sniper in NukeTown or Array? They can snipe you using anything, and still kill you even if they miss. Very versatile people, Black Ops snipers are.That is just you being bad, sniping is horrible in black ops. They removed quick scoping and no scoping.Plus without scout, you can't even hold ur breath long enough to snipe efficiently. Plus, snipers in nuketown don't last very long. It is a small map and once you snipe, ur as good as dead.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - pegasis - Dec. 31, 2010
Halo Reach is way better than black ops. My favorite group of people are the spartans.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Temporal - Jan. 01, 2011
(Dec. 31, 2010 10:21 PM)XBlader Wrote:I said in Array too. Plus, some people are better than other. I said they are versatile, and usually have a crossbow as a secondary. That means that they don't have to hit you to kill you. NukeTown isn't normally good for campers, but if you know how to use C4s and other equipment, you can at least get a few killstreaks. That's really all you need when you snipe.(Dec. 31, 2010 10:15 PM)Megablader9 Wrote: Not a good argument. Try to have a reason that is not based on being a fan of the series. If that is your reason, then it is insignificant. Plus, this is untrue. Have you seen a sniper in NukeTown or Array? They can snipe you using anything, and still kill you even if they miss. Very versatile people, Black Ops snipers are.That is just you being bad, sniping is horrible in black ops. They removed quick scoping and no scoping.Plus without scout, you can't even hold ur breath long enough to snipe efficiently. Plus, snipers in nuketown don't last very long. It is a small map and once you snipe, ur as good as dead.
@ pegasis That reason is not valid. Just because Black Ops doesn't have Spartans does not mean it is worse. That is just being a fan of a series.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - torchpegasus541 - Feb. 27, 2011
I am Halo:Reach all the way!
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Brooklyn-Z - Feb. 27, 2011
In my opion, reach is the better game, because(I Dont care if these are strong reasons,this is my thoughts and such,if we were doing a world debate over which one was better thing you could say not good enough reasons or whatever)
1. for me,the gameplay is way better
2. better stages (since halo is space stuff it's sorta of a no contest in this area)
3. the storyline isn't the best but not the worst
4. you can build stuff,who doesn't like doing that?
5. the graphics are better
6. better weapons and vechiles (lasers,plasma,and takes that hover,CoD is out matched
)7. you don't die as easy
(shields FTW)8. firefight is just a riot,though I haven't played the zombie mode on CoD,reach has infection
9. more multiplayer modes
10. halo has sticky grenades
can't beat sticking somebody in their spot ,though I guess this could go along with number 611. personally I like space and futuristic stuff more then modern weapons
12. reach has assignations
who doesn't like snapping an elites neck?those are all my reasons,though once I play my friends CoD I might add or take down some of these
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Temporal - Feb. 27, 2011
1. Untrue
2. Try playing against 9 CPUs or even 9 players in Nuketown
3. Black OPs beats it there
4. ...Okay, I'll give you that.
5. Erm...PS3 wins.
6. Eh. Nah? Attack Helicopter.
7. That takes the fun out of it.
8. See number 2.
9. Meh. That doesn't mean it's more fun.
10. Symtex.
11. Your opinion.
12. Ballistic Knife, Crossbow, Silenced Pistol, Tactical Knife, just a plain knife. The list goes on.
There. Almost all of you points have been refuted.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - TheSilverBlader - Feb. 27, 2011
black ops is better reason why is because in halo reach the aliens idea is stupid ,the armor looks stupid, the weapons are better. You get killstreaks. Gameplay is better graphics aren't as good so i can give you that. Zombies is pretty fun. its more challenging. it is cooler. etc etc
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Brooklyn-Z - Feb. 27, 2011
1. I said for me,I don't care if it's true,for me it beats CoD
2. I don't like small crampnstages with like 9 peoples running around in them,to crowded :V
3. fine whatever I dont really careto much about it
4.
5. this one I'll have to admit the graphics are better on Ps3. Though halo only being for Xbox helps make it more unique,and I don't think halo could be for wii,even if it wanted to. But Ps3 wins in graphics
6. well halo ODST and I think 3 have hornets which a bit like attack helicopters I guess,but we got banshees and falcons,so this one is up for debate I guess..
7. it makes it harder then just 3 shots and you die.
8. hmmm yeah I guess but like I said I am not a fan of small maps like nuke town(well to me nuke town is small,to my friend its big?) so I'll leave this one up for more debate I guess..
9. yeah but it gives you more erm I guess experiences and playing slayer all the time gets boring.
10. ???? what?
11. yup,like my entire list..
12. true but halo has different versions of assinations,like this is Sparta kick off the edge or knife in the back then neck or energy sword through the back.
and there again,my opion on why I prefer Halo,I could care less about convincing people halo is better,but I am surprised,most peo
le who like CoD more only say "CoD is way better!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" then give no reasons...
and about the graphics,to me Xbox graphics are better,if I am weird or stupid for that,I don't care
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Plasma lizard - Feb. 27, 2011
im with you threasher halo reach has more codes, cooler wwepons and it's in the future
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Brooklyn-Z - Feb. 27, 2011
(Feb. 27, 2011 10:37 PM)TheSilverBlader Wrote: black ops is better reason why is because in halo reach the aliens idea is stupid ,the armor looks stupid, the weapons are better. You get killstreaks. Gameplay is better graphics aren't as good so i can give you that. Zombies is pretty fun. its more challenging. it is cooler. etc etc
the first sentence of your post is your opion...
gameplay is pretty much personal preference so again opion..
the "its more challenging",umm since when is 3 shots and you die more challenging?
and in halo,you become the zombie
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Mc Frown - Feb. 28, 2011
Aside from this thread being really dumb, this game did the level creator, many many years ago (as did many others).
The fact that it's only just been added as a feature is quite sad for Halo: Reach.
Either way they're both just overhyped mainstream FPS's that aren't even that great, go play Timesplitters 2 or something.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - AxBlader - Feb. 28, 2011
I love Reach way better because I personally don't enjoy shooting human beings.
I think that shooting aliens is a better way to do things.
I also play Halo when I'm stressed.
I find it relaxing.
RE: Which is better, "Halo: Reach" or "Call of Duty: Black Ops"? - Nano - Feb. 28, 2011
(Feb. 28, 2011 2:47 AM)AxBlader Wrote: I love Reach way better because I personally don't enjoy shooting human beings.
I think that shooting aliens is a better way to do things.
I also play Halo when I'm stressed.
I find it relaxing.
What about on live? You shoot humans there.
I like Halo better. I die to easily in CoD.