if yoyre into sci-fi then its halo and im huge fan of sci-fi though i like more realistic games like BFBC2. used to play cod4 but after 3000 (!) clan-matches got cod-overdose and decided to play BFBC2. same goes with halo 1,2 &3 got first edition of halo 1, bought it immediately when it was released,same thing with parts 2 & 3. guess i have playd halos also too much,hopefully ill get beta-code and got my interest for this hale-series back..time will tell

for me the MP in halo 3 is good and the campaign in MW2 left me almost litterly begging to find out what happened. i am divided

Also the latest issue of game informer had an article about the firing of the CEO and VP of infinity ward ( owns any COD game about anything after Vietnam) so they can't make a MW3 or anything past that without the written consent of them

If you like CoD more than Halo then get the F*** off this site and try GRAW 2 if you want realism, because CoD is just as unrealistic as halo. Besides, when you're playing multiplayer, who cares about realism. By the way, the multiplayer in Halo is ALOT better because you can't spawn with noob guns and you all have an equal shot at getting the power weapons and if you get to them first then you deserve it. So when you get killed 10 times over by a guy with tactical knife, marathon man, commando, and EBR w/ thermal scope, then tell me you like CoD better than halo (unless of course if you are a noob and do that to).

First of all, just because you live longer in halo doesn't mean it's less realistic; In halo you won't be able to sprint forever, see people with a thermal scope, or assasinate someone from 15 feet away. And the motion tracker has to be there to simulate the 6th sense. Second of all, I can't hear someone with that class because I am either walking or shooting someone. Third, I agree with you that there are too many noobs in Halo; in fact I am really worried about armor lock being a noob magnet. And last, Halo requires more skill because, with a BR lets say, you need to get half a clip all in the head to kill the guy, where as in CoD you only need one. Which also brings up that, in Halo, team work is rewarded with victory where as in Cod, you only need a little suprise and a good gun to mow down three people before they can even aim at you. So awesome, you found a good camping spot, but your team didn't help at all, which makes Halo better for a friends lobby. PS - You just call Halo a 1 on 1 game because you can never win a 1 on 1 fight.

You're correct with my idea of skill, except teamwork is also part of it; and I, like you, am glad to see that Reach will involve more teamwork, so the lone wolves will get tea bagged in TDM I guess I like the slower paced games because I care more about relaxing during video games. I respect the hard core players, I used to be that way (until I got a hard-ass job), although I still take some pride in being an awesome halo player And to everyone else that has looked at these last few posts, sorry if we annoyed you guys with our......disagreement. PS: I got a 100 - 0 in a FFA oddball game we should play sometime, my gamertag is the same as this user name

Both great games in their own way!

I've lost count of the number of hours I've spent killing and getting killed on Halo - I can't get enough of it!

Then again, it's so addictive levelling up 'just one more time' on COD multiplayer!

Lame answer I know, but they both rule in my book

I believe that halo is better for multiplayer then cod for these reasons

in cod you play gametypes but noone cares wether you win or not. most of the time you only care about how you did on the specific game wether you won or lost

Halo on the other hand you must go for the win. Most of the time with strategies with you and your teamates