I have heard rumors that there is an amazing Halo God known as Red vs. Blue son of the amazing Rooster Teeth. That's just a myth though (sarcasm ends here)
how can it not be best selling on 360, but be best selling of all time ps3, wii pc yeah people play them too but ur site says halo 3 xbox and US as well and halo is not and international fenominon what ever black ops made more money I state MY case
I saw every episode up until the last season before Reach. Their older episodes are really nice. I stopped watching it though, not much time these days.
Anyways, I love the Plasma Launcher. It just seems so elegant to me. I also like how those plasma grenades never give up; puts a tear in your eye.
i like halo sometimes but im definetly a bigger fan of COD. because the guns are actually real and the gameplay is actually realistic (more so than Halo at least)
Well, I'm going to review these like I do flash games so here we go, first up: HALO
The Good: The biggest thing to me is that the game has a linear story, which is hard to come by in most shooters. I love the sci- fi environments and enemies. The idea is pretty unique, which is always a plus. The weapons are cool, It's always fun trying to find awesome dual- wield combinations and such. Chief is a very real yet mystifying character. He seems very human, yet such a super soldier and a total ******. The mystifying part is we never get to see his face, so it leaves a lot for the player to make up. I also like the relationship between Chief and Cortana, it's a very real yet very strange one.
The Bad: The bad thing is that they are trying to milk the Halo series for all it's worth. Halo ODST and Halo Reach are cool, but really unnecessary. It ruins the mysticism of the original story line, and the spin off games pale in comparison to the originals.
Overall: Halo is a fun game which will be remembered for ages to come: 9/10
Now CoD:
The Good: The games are very real and are the original WWII war games. The ideas are all pretty much original, and they are extremely popular. Modern Warfare takes on a different light as a hypothetical thriller game, based all over the country, and it's not stationary to one war, but an entire world conspiracy, which is really cool. The guns are all there, all very real. One cool thing I notice is that there is very little music, which gives it a little more realism with the character.
The Bad: There is no real linear story, it's more all over the place, and it doesn't tie in well. I think pretty much every game starts the same, as you going into a suicide mission and then just before you die, you go back in time, something like a memory, and play up until that point, maybe a little further. This has now gotten pretty cliche, and pretty annoying.
what ever black ops made more money I state MY case
How many copies of a game is sold is not related to how good the game is. one of the better-selling games until MW2 was Wii Play.
Anyway, i still don't understand why we must have this argument, they're both good shooters that fill their niches. Halo and Call of Duty actually differ wildly in the core gameplay and attempt at what its trying to be.
Call of Duty tries to be a realistic, gritty, modern shooter with an engrossing story, AND IT PULLS IT OFF.
Halo tries to be a Sci-Fi epic that throws reality out the window for a chance to make a fun experience, AND IT PULLS IT OFF.
Halo V. CoD threads compare two totally different games, despite being in the same genre. You wouldn't compare Gears of War to GTA would you? Rainbow Six Vegas, Battlefield: Bad co. 2, and Medal of Honor are more suitable battle opponents for CoD, why don't i see any of those threads??? hm....
Halo and Cod shouldn't be trying to steal each other's lunch money, but instead skipping merrily down the playground while trying to push down Bethesda and DICE while Mojang sits in the corner playing in the sandbox.
