I need a shooter- Halo or Black Ops? THIS THREAD IS A MONTH OLD. STOP POSTING IN IT!

[Ulkjen]

If i had to select between these i dont think i could. You do seem like you have a preference for reach but black ops has its shining moments for me. With just focusing on only these two choices and the way you seem to lean to Reach then i would go for it as it is a really fun game. But also remember Black Ops has its own multiplayer co-op where the second player can use your weapons (or if he has his own account, his). I just dont have too much experience with the co-op as i have Black Ops for the pc.

If your just looking for a good shooter i could suggest call of duty 4 as its still an amazing game. Or if you can Global Agenda keeps going on sale for dirt cheap!

I better stop before i start talking about all the details of the other games i play xD

... edited in to mention Planetside because of its former glory

 

[kouriichi]

Reach bored the crap out of me. I rented it for 7 days, and returned it in 5.

I was a fan of Halo as a whole. But reach was just bland and easy. I went 23/1, 19/4, and then 33/6 one match after another. Simply because its to easy :/ It got old quick. I unlocked the only armor i thought looked good, and i returned the game because there was nothing to hook me.

The nade spam is beyond horrible, the jetpacks are more then annoying, and everygun is just a retexture of the ones from Halo 3.

Sure the same can be said for alot of Black Ops, but atleast you get Nazi Zombies. The story could be way worse, and the multiplayer is way more balanced then MW2. Quickscoping accually takes some skill now, so not every 13 yearold is running around doing it. The only REAL gripe i have is that the "Ghost" perk still exists, and people still use it to camp.

And if you think your going to get away from that with Reach, your wrong. Half the maps that pop up will be on gametypes you dont like, with people hiding in elevator rooms with swords and launchers.

Black Ops isnt without its problems, but i find it way more entertaining then Reach.

 

[BlueSinbad]

Hey guys.
I'm sorry if I ask for so many recommendations, but I really hate spending too much money on a game I won't play all that much, so I like to hear opinions from all around.

Lately, I've been playing a lot of RPGs and such, and I haven't actually bought a modern shooter since Bad Company 2. Now, I've got this itch for a solid shooter that I can spend a lot of time on, but I'm not sure what's good.

Black Ops is supposedly quite good, but seems a little more violent than I want. Is there a way to turn the violence down, like in Gears of War? The multiplayer looks cool, too, but I want a solid single-player campaign too.

Halo: Reach looks like grand old time. The new features seem to have gone past simply just adding one new gun and some new levels to the game (a major issue with previous titles in the series), and it appears that stealth is actually possible now, which is a Godsend.
The co-op appears to be something I can do with my dad, even if I have to yell at him a little.
Overall, it looks cool.

So, what do you know about these games that I don't?
I'd like to hear some opinions from both sides.

Don't get either....they're both mediocre and over-hyped.
and I'm not being contrarian for the sake of it...
People just take what they're given nowadays and don't push for Grade A stuff.
Find something different.

*Flame Shields to 100% power*

 

[AVATAR_RAGE]

Gonna hop on a "join Reach" bandwagon by encouraging you to join the errmm Reach Bandwaggon.

It will be cheaper over all compared to COD, and in my experience the multi player has ben much better in Reach (both in general enjoyment and the community). In addition the story is pretter good.

 

[Diligent]

Both games are royally awful. Do yourself a favor, and track "Unreal II the Awakening" down. Think halo, only good and with relate-able characters and a proper story. And it's quite old, so it won't cost you more then a few bucks.

Oh man, for real? Every time I think about playing that game I think of this:
http://www.somethingawful.com/d/game-reviews/unreal-awakening.php
I know it's satirical and whatnot, but I really do agree with much of it.

 

[The Real Sandman]

If you want a decent single player campaign, get Halo Reach

If you want decent multiplayer, get Black Ops

If you want a great single player campaign and fucking awesome multiplayer, get either...

or

 

[brunothepig]

The DS? That... That actually kind of sickens me.
Anyway, then yeah, that comes highly recommended from me. It's bound to be cheap in some store around you, and it really is an amazing game. Get it. Much better than BlOps. I'm not sure how the online community is doing though... Haven't played online, Australia, poor connection all that.

Well, at the time I only had a DS and a wii...

Also, I have played CoD4 and all of the games since then, thanks to generous friends who loaned me the games on occasion.

Oh don't get me wrong, I'm a DS/Wii owner myself. I just hate that that port even exists... And thank god for generous friends huh. It's how I play a lot of games, is just go over a mates place, since he has a rig that can actually run all the awesome games.
Anyway, if you've played COD4 enough to get bored with it (I know I haven't!) then as I said, I haven't played either, but going with which series has given me the most enjoyment out of Halo (next to none, except with friends) and COD (a whole metric shitton) I'd have to say BlOps.
Oh yeah... And there's zombies. Come on. Zombies.
Actually, I lied. I've played BlOps for about half an hour at a friends. Local multiplayer, and a little zombie slaughter. Good times, though I've heard MW2 still beats BlOps out on multiplayer.

 

[Zarmi]

Uh.. Neither. Go back to Bad Company 2, which is a better game, in all aspects. Of course unless you like broken gameplay.

Edit: If you really need a few good FPS' though. Unreal Tournament 2004, and Unreal Tournament III. The old Quake games also rock, mind you, this is from my perspective. Team Fortress 2 is also a relatively fun game. However, if you like the loot aspect of RPGs, I can warmly suggest Borderlands, though only if you got some friends willing to play with ya! It's a grand game. Bad story though, but otherwise fun when ya got some mates to play with.

 

[dakorok]

I'd recommend staying with Tf2.

 

[cainx10a]

Halo Reach's campaign and single player content is top notch. I don't have x-box live, since I do all of my online gaming on le PC (yay for Rift!). But I definitely would go back to replay Halo: Reach's campaign or firefight once in a while. What I like the most about Halo: Reach is the combat and the options to make it last a little bit longer than your usual encounter in say, Black Ops.

Killing a few hundred VCs, with a hail of bullets faster than I can eat a bowl of cereal, got old fast. I would rather have a gun fight against enemies with shield and extra health who last long enough to give me a real challenge.

 

[BENZOOKA]

Counter-Strike: Source.

Yeah, that's about it.

 

[imnot]

Halo, simple really.
heres extra convinsing

 

[BrownGaijin]

Black Ops or Reach? McDonald's or Burger King? I would say Red Robin yum! (Modern Warfare)

 

[TilMorrow]

Halo: Reach - Futuristic awesomeness, great campaign, multiplayer and prologue!

COD: BlOps - Vietnam War setting, with more vehicles usage! Has a good campaign with a slighty confusing but reveal all at ending plot, brings back a character from a previous game. MP has same level of customisation for weapons as well as a few added features and zombies return!

Your choice. Also Halo: Reach has only a small description from me as the awesomeness of it can be described in a small amount of words.

 

[Dygen Entreri]

I'd have to go with Reach myself. I admit that I am an avid Halo fan, even buying most of the novels to read. I've never played Black Ops, but I've played MW2, and from what I've seen of my step brother playing in Ops, it's just more of the same. The same can be said of Reach though, and I don't deny it. Reach did add some more things to the system though.

It boils down to what you think is important. Reach is a basic shooter, but it's equipment abilites, weapons that are all quite different in some ways, and vehicles sell it for me. COD has always annoyed me about the lack of vehicles, and I am not a fan of the 3-shot death setup the series has. I always think it's kind of stupid that it al boils down to the person who sees the other one first wins, unless they are REALLY good. And there isn't really much variety in the weapons that COD has, beyond the basic weapon types.

And of course, Reach has a much better campaign and story, and the Firefight is the best co-operative game mode I've ever tried. Nothing feels as good as beating an entire army back with your friends beside you.

 

[similar.squirrel]

I would recommend Halo: Reach.
I'm not saying Black Ops is bad [I have only played World at War, which was okay], but if Battlefield 2 was your last shooter then Halo may be a nice change of pace.

I wasn't too thrilled with the first four games, but Reach is a lot of fun.
Elements like the jet-pack and Shield-lock make it very versatile in terms of playing styles, and Firefight will while away many an hour, especially on co-operative mode.
It's also less disturbing, as you're not slaughtering graphically-realistic human beings.

 

[alfawx]

Black Ops is supposedly quite good, but seems a little more violent than I want. Is there a way to turn the violence down, like in Gears of War?

Yes, you can turn off the high level of gore in the singleplayer, although I'm not sure whether or not that carries over to MP; it's basically either blood or blood with chunks, along with getting rid of some torture scenes.

OT: I'd go with BlOps. The higher level of customization in terms of weapons and loadouts is great, and in my experience it has a lot more replay value, as theres many more options for different play styles. Plus.. nazi zombies. I love me some nazi zombies.

 

[Nautical Honors Society]

It seems like you have already decided on Reach.

So I'd get it. I have it and it is very fun. The campaign is meh though.

 

[ChipSandwich]

Single Player story: CoD 4

Co-op campaign: Any Halo game

Online Multiplayer: Monday Night Combat or wait for BF3

As for Reach vs Blops, I'm gonna have to say Reach. Blops' single player is somewhat silly and wears thin pretty quickly, and Halo Reach has a fairly muddled and "wtf why should I even care" kind of plot, but it's multiplayer is a bit better. As far as nitpicking goes, Blops has a lot of random frustrating crap, but Reach has god awful spawning in some maps, particularly Forge World maps. Blops has "variety", but it is superficial since most guns are either reskins of another or completely redundant. If you want variety, pick MW2, if you can handle MAJOR bullshit (still my favorite CoD, although with a lot of objection). Reach also has some stupid elements. If you don't like grenade spam or corner camping, then you've gotta be on the lookout. If you're not a fan of a certain much-loved ability which allows temporary invulnerability at the cost of being completely immobile, then you've gotta deal with that too (personally I don't care).
Blops is easier to get into, but Halo offers more reward for teamwork. Halo's online playlists are usually updated once every fortnight, but people don't really play anything that's not deathmatch anyway. Still, team deathmatch in Reach has a whole bunch of changes and some new maps every now and then, for free.

As far as campaign gameplay goes, Blops is ridiculous and unmemorable, while Halo Reach is okay on your own and a bit better with co-op. Halo CE had the best co-op though, since the levels were pretty long.

 

[Thegreatoz]

Not going to lie, both of those games were terrible in my opinion, but if I had to choose, I say black ops because of the zombies survival game where you play as president Kenedy.