Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Halo Franchise VS. Call of Duty Franchise
Transcript of Halo Franchise VS. Call of Duty Franchise
developing since Halo: Combat Evolved.
However, if you are starting a game at random
in the series, say Halo 3, you won't find yourself
lost. Only wanting to play the previous two
because this one is drawing you in. The series'
first game, Combat Evolved, is as described as
the mulitiplayer standard for first person shooter
games. With Call of Duty you get these campaigns that you are just thrown into. With that I mean that you don't really recieve any follow up on previous games. New main characters, new plot, and just plain new. The weapons do seem to stay consistent though. With Halo you recieve new weapons with the release of every game, but with the perks of having the favorite old weapons also. Probably the main reason most people buy video games is to play the mulitplayer. Which on xbox is called Live. Live connects you to other players where you either fight with or agianst them on various maps. The servers needed for this were built by none other than the creators of Halo themselves. If not for Halo, Call Of Duty wouldn't have Live to play on. That being said, Halo's mulitiplayer trumps Call Of Duty's. They both have different varients of games played through live, mainly just first team to reach this amount of kills, wins. In Call of Duty, players are allowed to shoot others through trees, walls, bascially any solid object. The game is supposedly prasied as being realistic, but I don't see how one can fire a bullet through a wall and accuartely kill someone. In Call of Duty, if you are shot once, you die. Now granted this is realistic, depending on the location of the shot, not everyone wants the game to be that much like real life. In Halo you have "sheilds", which is basically your armor. Once that is taken away, you are died within the next few shots, all depending on the accuarcy of the opposing enemy. Those that critize Halo as being unreal need to see that it is a video game. If you wanted realistic shooting, join the military. The game is meant to be played as a game, not taken as being real. As stated before, Halo surpasses Call of Duty as one of, if not the best, first person shooter games ever created. The series has better campaigns that are interconnected, better servers that lead to a better mulitiplayer, and the aspects of the games themselves are better. VS Halo Call of Duty Halo made 2 billion with 6 games; Call of Duty made 3 billion with 17 games. More money for Call of Duty but also more games. At the rate if Halo had 12 games, they would pass Call of Duty by with 1 billion while still having less games. Not only are they making money for Halo; they're making money for Xbox. Halo 2 took off right where Combat Evolved left off. Playing as Master Chief you must fight the Covenant but now must also deal with the Flood; a parasitic life form that posses dead bodies in order to do their will. In this game you also play as the Arbiter, the Elite that turns on the Covenant after he is set to death. The game involves a mix of both Master Chief and Arbiter and eventually they team up and take on the Covenant and the Flood together. Playing as the Arbiter lets you see into the Covenant from the inside and you learn new things about them. You learn of Halo, the ring planet for which the game is named after, and you start to scratch the surface on it's powers. Halo 3 has been the most popular games in the series breaking the sales record on it's first day of release making 170 million dollars. The game ends the epic tale of Master Chief and leaves room for another if ever wanted to be created. In 3, Master Chief battles his way through a horde of Covenant forces and Flood finding himself on Halo at last. The true power of Halo is finally explained; to wipe out life in the galaxy. It was created to stop the Flood; no more life means no food for the Flood. Chief simply blows up the ring planet in an epic final mission. The mission is to get off of Halo. Now. Driving a Warthog, similar to a marine humvee, Chief rides over the planet missing holes left in the ground all while trying to make it to the edge. Overall the end mission does the whole series justice. In Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, you experience alot of different settings of warfare from urban, arcitc wilderness, to an air plane graveyard. It incorporates the stealth of covert missions and the cut throat brawl of storming enemy lines. You use vehicles from snowmobiles to Hueys mounted with mini guns. Overall the game was one of the best in the series. The Live of Moder Warfare 2 is quick-paced, no holds barred rampage. All players have overpowered weapons which takes the tactal aspect of the game out all together. No one in their right mind would go around shoving people with riot shields when they are up against someone with a M60 or a RPG. For claiming to be so realistic, the game seems to fall short here. Call of Duty: World At War has more of a historic take on the first person shooter aspect. You experience fighting through Germany, Russia, and various asian enemies. Your character is from either Russia or America depending on how far you are into the game. This gives a sense of why you're fighting the fight you are. It builds the characters up so you feel the need to protect your team mates. Overall the game is one of the most historic and better ones in the series. World at War's Live however falls short among fans. With the weapons being more historically accurate they then become inaccurate. Not too high of a selling point for people who played Modern Warfare 2 and loved the overpowered unneccassry weapons. Warrant When someone plays a video game series they want a good story line, multiplayer, and good game in general. The story line should connect games to each other while still bringing in new aspects to the game. The Live for Halo 2 has been used for the main platform for the Major League Gaming or MLG. MLG actually recieved much of it's popularity from the game itself. The soundtrack that is featured in Halo has actually won awards for it's pure epicness. Call of Duty however has no true soundtrack whatsoever. When Halo 3 was released critics actually praise it for being the "Savior of Xbox". This comes from recent drops in Xbox sales because of the release of the Wii. Claim The Halo franchise is better than
the Call of Duty franchise in the sense that Halo has better Story Lines, Servers, Multiplayer, and Sales than Call of Duty does. Evidence!