• Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
  • If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders

Halo 3 or Call of Duty 4/5

which game is superior?

  • Halo 3

    Votes: 14 42.4%
  • COD 4/5

    Votes: 19 57.6%

  • Total voters
I don't own a PS3 or XBox 360. I've just played them both against friends and find cod better and Halo extremely overrated but still mildly fun.

Dread Advocate

†Stay Metal†
Originally Posted by BlackwateR
Darth Feraligater: Halo takes more thatn "run jump and shoot" because of the added shield element. If you are getting battle rifled in the head then u need to run for cover. I agree with your statement about call of duty about how cover comes into effect more, but many times you can shoot right through cover with the deep impact ability, right. And in Halo jumping adds another element because you can escape by tactical jumping or get to a sniper spot by jumping. I dont agree when u say that snipers take no skill because if your opponent is strafing then its pretty hard to predict their movements. Ur right about splazer though.

the shield is what lets you do all the running, jumping and shooting and still not di within 1-3 hits unleass its a sniper or something that has magical splash damage. and how much skill the sniper takes depends on how stupid a person is.
plus, im ganna have to agree with everyone else: your logic is illogical. i respect the fact that youve tried both (and i dont respect alot of people), but you seem very "opinionated". have you ever given CoD a real try?


Takes Skill:Halo's skill level depends...skill level
You should write articles.
Not Very Realistic This argument isn't really the most valid because reality is relative to time period. Seeing as Halo takes place 500 odd years in the future, our technology may very well have developed to a point where the scenarios depicted in Halo are possible. On the other hand, some parts of it are mpretty unrealistic like slipspace, lightspeed, etc. because they break fundamental laws of physics.
That's not even close to a flaw.
Call Of Duty:
More Realistic? While Call of Duty does take place in the present or past (depending on what game you play) it stays fairly true to the actual story lines of the wars in campaign mode, can you really call it realistic? It seems to me that several of the "powers(?)" such as "juggernaut" "Iron Lung" etc. are pretty unrealistic. Furthermore, the last stand aspect of it is completely ridiculous. It is however, realistic in a sense that your health is very much the same that it would be in real life and the speed, jumping, etc. are very human.
So what you're saying is that some people can't take more bullets than others, and that some people can't hold their breath?
Takes Less Skill? but if you have a rapid fire weapon you need just point and shoot to get the kill.
That's amazing, you shoot guns to kill people? Please, combat in CoD only ends up being that if you're extremely low level.

That being said, I prefer Call of Duty. Halo 3 is more of a party game.

And WaW sucks.


Halo Fanatic
COD is fun, but it can be really boring. There are times when my entire team decides to snipe, or everyone just noob tubes. Beyond that, it is great. COD 4 on Hardcore is one of my favorites (as long as I only play an hour at a time).

Halo 3 has much more variety, and is a good counter balance for COD 4 (I switch back and forth). The good implementation of gametypes and vehicles gives it a slight edge over COD 4 (that, and the different maps).

You are always going to have fanboys that choose one side or the other though. It became "cool" to bash Halo after the 2nd game, but that shouldn't keep someone from trying both of these games.




i've seen these discussions all over the net. killzone 2 or cod4, battlefield bad company or cod4, and now halo 3 or cod4. it's a hint if you ask me.


Halo Fanatic
i've seen these discussions all over the net. killzone 2 or cod4, battlefield bad company or cod4, and now halo 3 or cod4. it's a hint if you ask me.

A hint that People like to compare things? A hint that COD 4 is a good median game since it is on every platform?
What are you getting at? :D


Well-Known Member
I'd have to go with CoD 4 on this, although Halo 3 is better than CoD 5 in my opinion. I like CoD 4 for the fact of it's realism, and that it takes place in modern times. Plus theres the create a class which i think is great because everybody has a chance to use the weapons, not, who gets to the weapon first (unless its oldschool but thats just a terrible game type.) I think that the main thing that Halo 3 has is that the game types are more flexible and that you can edit your map, something that all online FPS should try to have. Seriously, I bought Time Splitters: Future Perfect from my friend JUST because of the create a map option. Oh and CoD 5 is a watered down version of CoD4. All that CoD 5 has better is the Nazi Zombies, which I heard that theres going to be a zombie thing similar to that in Modern Warfare 2.


insert joke so dated I don't even remember it
I've played both as well as other FPS's extensively, and I have to say I prefer Halo. People complain about the realism, but to me gameplay>realism. Plus, Halo is alot more customizable with forge and the extensive custom game options.

Fine, keep on sucking Fhqwhgads dick for all I care.
I think I love you.