CoD has so much creativity, too much in my opinion. Every attachment in real life is available on your gun, plus a heartbeat sensor which doesn't exist and a thermal that isn't used on much other than sniper rifles. Also chopper gunner, harrier strike instead of airstrike, emp and nuke are pretty creative imo.Mgalekgolo wrote:cod has no creativity, and you die after three shots. the enemy is boring and the campaign is far from epic. people like it because they spurt games out every 4 months or whatever. and for reach, i hated that they took the health bar away. one of the many reasons i play halo 1
@threeshots: If you were shot once in real life with a freaking L86 7.62mm Heavy Machine Gun, you'd probably be hurting like a bitch too. Which is one reason why if I ever play campaign or special ops it's always on veteran, everything else is too boring and unreal for me. Not that the game IS very real in the first place, many aspects runied the game for me.
I agree with Mota on the sheilds part, I think it takes way too long to kill someone in Reach. IMO it should be a matter of who sees first wins, not who has the biggest gun. Which brings me back to CoD, while most of the AR's, SMG's, Snipers etc are all the same-ish, it's like a game of choosing which gun feels good for you. Eg. Do you want the gun with the high accuracy but low power or the one with the small clip but high power? I like that alot over halo. And gun customization, having fall camo on your Mini UZI is just the most epic way of saying "I kick ass, no matter what the fuck you do. Look out".
That being said...
Mota wrote:Conclusion is CoD and Halo are for 2 very different types of gamers.