Halo: Reach vs Call of Duty: Black Ops?

[alb3rt]

I have not played either game or any of the previous versions. I would just like for some one to tell me which one is best for me. I don't play online but me and my brothers have three controllers so I am wondering if i can play multiplayer and if so which one has the best offline multiplayer. Also in the story mode can me and my brothers play together. Thank you please answer my question please

 

[Libara]

Forge would make Reach the best multiplayer, in my opinion .

 

[Strid]

I have not played either game or any of the previous versions. I would just like for some one to tell me which one is best for me. I don't play online but me and my brothers have three controllers so I am wondering if i can play multiplayer and if so which one has the best offline multiplayer. Also in the story mode can me and my brothers play together. Thank you please answer my question please

Black Ops has offline multiplayer with bots, Reach doesn't. They both have a horde mode gametype and I'm pretty sure as it stands now, Black Ops will have a co-op campaign as does Reach. That being said, if you're goin' fishing for turds you're better off with a solid one, I'd go with Reach any day over another CoD.

 

[bigbroon]

Reach, every day of the week, and I fucking hate Halo.

 

[Claudhert]

As a person that has played both Halo and CoD Games it comes down to a matter of what type of game you wish to play.

Halo is a GREat game but it is alot more Run and gun type game, where camping is almost discouraged, an unless your aiming for the head it can take a full clip to down another player in PVP modes. the Guns in halo are very diffrent, the good weapons effect the flow of battle towards whoever gets them. Halo also has a very rich and deep Level design feature called Forge where you can create almost any level you can dream of.

CoD on the other hand is very much NOT a run and gun type game. People that excel at CoD games have to be prepared to camp, use cover and over all think a bit more tacticly than in other FPS's. Cause the guns shoot fast and can drop you before you even have a chance to see where the bullets are coming from. Guns are very ballanced and no weapon seems to be overly powered.

So agian pick the game that best suits your play style. If you enjoy the more run and gun aspect.. go the halo route. If you perfer more tactical, realistc combat go the CoD route.

But even then renting the games is proably the best way to figurteout if you want one over the other.

As far as features go Both games are about equally Each gmae has its own things that apeal.

 

[Alereth]

I would say both are a great play, but I would go with Halo: Reach. Black Ops just feels like the same old Modern Warfare with a few cheap gimmicks thrown in to lure people into buying it.

Reach has a solid Campaign and the multiplayer is just as solid, with the Forge mode allowing you to create any kind of map imagineable.

I'd say that the Forge alone puts Reach above Black Ops.

 

[Strid]

CoD on the other hand is very much NOT a run and gun type game. People that excel at CoD games have to be prepared to camp, use cover and over all think a bit more tacticly than in other FPS's. Cause the guns shoot fast and can drop you before you even have a chance to see where the bullets are coming from. Guns are very ballanced and no weapon seems to be overly powered.

I would have been more inclined to agree with this before the release of MW2. I kept that kind of style for my first bit of time with the game and it worked, flawlessly. However, as I learned the maps I was more prone to spawn out with Scavenger, Lightweight, Ninja, and the semi-auto shotgun. I never went back to camping and I was far more a force to be reckoned with, especially in game types like CTF. Despite running and gunning I still put up the classic high 40-2 games consistently and maintained a near 3.0 to slightly over 3.0 k/d the entire duration.

On the Halo end I tend to perch up, beware of vehicles, and just pop out for some quick headshots when the opportunity is rich. Unless I have the shotgun. I feel this to be the more campish game for me, but run and gun style also works for others.

I think the only good thing that can be said for -both- games is that they don't either promote one style of play over the other. You can do both and you can do both well, the only limitations thrust upon the player is their own. That being said, there is a time to camp and a time to run and gun in both and effectively doing so will make you a better player in either. If your entire team is camping, you're better off running and gunning to keep the pursuers more inclined to watch their backs and on the reverse end if your entire team is just handing the opposition your tickets, you need to set back and try to assist them in doin' the reverse.

 

[Strid]

CoD on the other hand is very much NOT a run and gun type game. People that excel at CoD games have to be prepared to camp, use cover and over all think a bit more tacticly than in other FPS's. Cause the guns shoot fast and can drop you before you even have a chance to see where the bullets are coming from. Guns are very ballanced and no weapon seems to be overly powered.

I would have been more inclined to agree with this before the release of MW2. I kept that kind of style for my first bit of time with the game and it worked, flawlessly. However, as I learned the maps I was more prone to spawn out with Scavenger, Lightweight, Ninja, and the semi-auto shotgun. I never went back to camping and I was far more a force to be reckoned with, especially in game types like CTF. Despite running and gunning I still put up the classic high 40-2 games consistently and maintained a near 3.0 to slightly over 3.0 k/d the entire duration.

On the Halo end I tend to perch up, beware of vehicles, and just pop out for some quick headshots when the opportunity is rich. Unless I have the shotgun. I feel this to be the more campish game for me, but run and gun style also works for others.

I think the only good thing that can be said for -both- games is that they don't either promote one style of play over the other. You can do both and you can do both well, the only limitations thrust upon the player is their own. That being said, there is a time to camp and a time to run and gun in both and effectively doing so will make you a better player in either. If your entire team is camping, you're better off running and gunning to keep the pursuers more inclined to watch their backs and on the reverse end if your entire team is just handing the opposition your tickets, you need to set back and try to assist them in doin' the reverse.

All that said, I think CoD is past the point of repair. It's easy, cheap, and broken. Not to mention Activision is about to saturate the hell out of it. Despite my high k/d and objective ability, I can honestly say the skill level to get there was extremely minimal.

 

[Icewolf]

People are comparing two games, and most are saying go with halo.. when black ops isn't even out yet. So are you going off how mw2 is? Cause this makes no sense. Black ops looks pretty amazing to me, but then again they try to make you think its the greatest game before it comes out. So we'll have to wait and see.

I'm still a solid mw2 player since it came out (almost prestige 8, all legit) and I've tried halo reach a few times. A thing most people haven't mentioned is the speed of the gameplay. Halo is a moderate pace, mw2 is fast paced. The main reason I don't like halo as much is it feels slow to me, like halo runs at 1.0x speed where mw2 would be 1.5x. Even with the added sprinting it doesn't make much of a difference. I actually heard that MLG raises the games speed, so I'm not the only one who feels it's too slow. But I'm not 100% on that, just what I heard.

Also in halo when you see someone, generally you'll shoot and the first thing they do is jump/sprint around a wall or corner and it's just annoying to chase them down and kill them. In mw2 this almost is never the case, in hardcore or normal mode. You see someone, you kill them, as long as you can aim decent.

Black ops added the point system from halo (currency), and the theater. Along with the option to battle bots if that's your thing. But the best addition I think is the wager matches. Gambling your earnings in a game of skill has always been something I've loved. And the games are very unique. Like starting with a weak gun and every kill you get you upgrade to a new, slightly better gun, until you kill someone with the final gun and win the match. There is a ton of customization as well, but I'll stop there.

About what Claudhert said, halo being run and gun and mw2 being camp friendly, I really disagree. I agree more with strid, it's all about how you play. I probably sit still maybe 5% of my playtime in mw2 and halo. Either game welcomes both, camp or run. As far as strategy goes, back in the halo 2 days I really noticed people talked a lot more about where people were and such. In mw2 you pretty much hear bickering unless your with a clan. Can't say for reach cause I havn't played it nearly as much as halo 2/3.

 

[Strid]

People are comparing two games, and most are saying go with halo.. when black ops isn't even out yet. So are you going off how mw2 is? Cause this makes no sense.

I can get wanting for it to be amazing, but you have to also realize what the status quo for the series is now and what Treyarch has always done... IW formula > ctrl+c > turn page > ctrl+v > add an unnecessary feature (i.e. tanks in W@W) > done. Since the vehicles didn't go over so well in MP I look for them to even take out that step of an unnecessary addition out right. So I look for the gameplay to be pretty much the same, changing it would be detrimental, very detrimental.

 

[Chasym]

i was on the fence over which i would like more.
I unexpectedly fell in love with reach, i had no interest in it but i stick to my roots and since Halo got me started in the FPS realm, i stay true and play whatever Halo there is.
I was shocked to see that reach reminded me of Halo 2, the last Halo game that interested me before 3 came out and ruined everything that made it fun for me.
So Instantly all the hype and excitement i had for Black ops was gone, i have NEVER had that happen with a game i was hyped for, no game has been able to take that hype away...but reach did.

of course over time i got a little more excited again for black ops as more information came out, but nowhere near as excited as i was before i played reach.
But recently...Black ops made me not so excited for it anymore on its own.
Kill streaks do not stack. Seriously?! WTF?!
They said they did it to counter campers...Guess what, Now that people wont have the supply of kill streaks to help them achieve kills, those who cannot pull up a great amount of kills on their own are gonna do what? CAMP!
So, in explanation, If i have my kill streaks set at 3, 5, 6 (There are only 11 kill streaks total) and i got me 3rd kill streak and lets say it was some sort of predator missile. I Use it, get 2 kills with it, i should have my next kill streak right? Not in black ops i wont. It only counts if YOU kill them with your gun,grenade,Knife or whatever.
Now, on the other hand i think thats great in a way, it requires more skill, but when i think about the sheer amount of campers it will bring, it saddens me a little.
I have no problem with every single kill streak requiring the player to control it instead of calling out a helicopter that just flys around and gets all your kills for you, but that also will leave me vulnerable and its going to cost you those kill streaks countless times. Also, those kill streaks do not add on to your streak on the leader boards either if you get the kill with a kill streak. Wtf is that?! I earned that kill when i earned that kill streak so it should count toward my career streak.
in their own words "its not fair for the rich to get richer" Umm, if i am dominating in a match it is most certainly fair.
but whatever, I'm complaining prior to playing so i guess i will see how it plays out since i am going to be playing the game anyway.

 

[Strid]

Ha, I guess I was wrong. That's one of the better things they could have done aside from all out nixing the retarded things.

 

[Icewolf]

Honestly I think that's a great addition. I hated the fact that I could be nuked by the other team, because my team was letting a chopper gunner rape them every time they spawned. Shit like that annoys me. And I've never really never complained too much about campers (at times I will). I know where they all hide, and I do a quick check on all those spots as I run around, it's easy kills. I know that's not the case for everyone, but that's how I feel about it. Some people will like this change, some will not. That's pretty much how it always works, you cant please everyone. I just like that they are mixing things up, trying new things and seeing how they work out. Over a long period of time you will have the perfect combination of a shooter. And that's from combining things from all shooters, not just the cod series.