Switch to full style
100% GAMES! Use this forum to discuss any game in any context and to organize get-togethers, guilds, and tournaments with your fellow Snafu posters.
Post a reply

Which one is better

Sat Jan 05, 2013 7:24 pm

Call of Duty



In my opinion Halo has the best story.
Call of duty has the best multi player(NOT ONLINE PLAY).
Battlefield i dont know enough about to make a proper judgement or even have an opinion.

Re: Which one is better

Sat Jan 05, 2013 9:28 pm

I like Halo. I enjoy the universe, and the multi-player for Halo 4 is fantastic (save that grenades are a joke and there's no Free for All matches). They did steal a page from Call of Duty where you can design your own Loadouts, and get XP based on performance, instead of if your team wins.

Call of duty is still a favorite, but I haven't played much since MW2. I'm a sniper, and I don't like any of the maps for MW3, they are just too balls-to-the-wall for me. The Black Ops games just has too much going on inside of it for me to care.

Never played Battlefeild. I don't know anyone who has it.

Re: Which one is better

Sat Jan 05, 2013 9:39 pm

I've only ever seriously played Black Ops.

Re: Which one is better

Sun Jan 06, 2013 3:08 am

I enjoy Halo's storyline and campaign, and their multiplayer fills a certain niche of non-realistic first person shooter that is fun.

CoD has a bit of a ridiculous storyline, but it is enjoyable like an 80s action flick. The multiplayer is thinly treading the line between realistic and non-realistic that it is annoying. It can tote itself as a realistic shooter, but the sniper rifles don't kill you quickly, you heal from the strawberry jelly in cover fairly quickly, and a grenade which has a lethal range of 15m won't kill you from 15m. Obviously some of these are because a perfectly realistic shooter would be hard as balls.

BF3 had a rather cookie cutter campaign which is only really memorable if you realize that the multiplayer is the aftermath of the campaign, and that the protagonist loses. Doesn't happen often. But their multiplayer is definitely fun. I feel that they do add a bit more realism with the multiplayer, with added physics engines and Frostbite, however, they still aren't too realistic, but as I said, a perfectly realistic shooter would be hard as balls. I enjoy their multiplayer because the games feel immense. The matches are huge, the availability of equipment allows for variety in gameplay, and the guns feel more... gunlike. I never really feel like I'm shooting marshmallows in BF3, compared to CoD where I often feel like my gun is less lethal than it should be.

Re: Which one is better

Sun Jan 20, 2013 2:40 pm

1. Halo
2. Battlefield
3. Call of Duty

1. Halo
2. Call of Duty
3. Battlefield

I'm a pretty big fan of halo. The story is fantastic, the universe is very interesting, and the gameplay is a blast. It's really the only reason I still have X-Box Live. I like to forge maps and play on them with friends.

The campaign in each Call of Duty is fun to play. It feels kinda like playing an action film. I like watching things explode. :3 The multiplayer, however, is boring.

In my experience with Battlefield, the multiplayer has always been the best part. Adding vehicles, making the maps huge, giving a game a somewhat realistic feel, and making things destructible can really do a lot for a game.
Post a reply