*Where did the CoD vs Halo argument start from?
People just can't stop complaining about both of these games in comparison despite how radically different they are. I've heard two theories as to where this debate started off from.
1. The Arby 'n' the Chief episode "Attitude".
There's no denying that the Halo series is followed by many fanboys (especially the Xbox fanbase in general), many of which are prepubescent kids who cannot distinguish sarcasm or satire from serious information. As such, after the crude renaming of CoD4 in this episode, along with the game being destroyed, the Halo kiddies saw this and said "LOL!!11 CALL O DUTY SUX!!11 HALO 4 LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1"

2. Supposedly, Halo 3's servers were less populous than CoD4's (the 360 version) servers at one point. The Halo fans (probably a lot of them being the kiddies) were baffled/outraged that such a different game would've been more popular than their beloved Halo, causing them to bash Call of Duty in an effort to make more people play Halo 3.

Now don't just post your theory that the Halo fanbase hates CoD for being the same game every year because the hate began when CoD4 came out and it was a very different game from its predecessors. If the Halo fanbase hates CoD for this reason now, then they would also hate Pokemon, Mario and even Halo to a certain degree.
Edited by Oskarmandude on Dec 8, 2014 at 02:09 AM

no wear little kids are stupid cod sucks and it will always suck

Two large franchises popular with juveniles. There'll always be arguments. It's the same with most fanbases, really.

I think the argument should be monopoly vs halo

They're like the same game

Trying to trace the origins of Halo vs Call of Duty is like trying to trace the origins of cats vs dogs or Star Wars vs Star Trek.

They're two popular FPS franchises with a number of traits that are often used to distinguish them from one another. It's a matter of energy shields vs a lack thereof, fast-paced vs (comparatively) slower-paced gunplay, loadouts vs an equal footing, integrated vehicular combat or every man an infantryman, space opera vs "realism" (although after CoD 3, the games seemed to shift towards more of a Hollywood interpretation of reality), a multitude of similar weapons for each role vs a unique weapon for each role, level customization vs standardization, maneuverability vs resilience. It was easy to put the two on opposite ends of the spectrum as of Halo 3, so it was easy to see why a fan of one of the games might prefer the traits of one over the other. With each new installment to each franchise, however, they both seem to be melding into a nebulous gray area between the two games, full of sci-fi powered armor and handheld rotary guns and loadouts (in Reach and H4, at least) and lasers and high maneuverability.
Edited by Echo77 on Dec 8, 2014 at 11:48 AM

Naw. I have to say I'm really sick of the whole "THEY'RE NOT THE SAME THING ANYWAY!" conversation-stopper. They're both FPS, they're both more or less sci fi nowadays; there's absolutely no reason they shouldn't be comparable.

I thought the whole argument started when Halo started adding in sprint and aiming down the sights of weapons.

Pretty much. Comparisons started mostly with Halo 3 (you'll find CoD vs Halo 2 comparisons but CoD wasn't as reviled in the earlier days) but really took off with the Reach reveal and kept on going with Halo 4 and now 5.

There's no mystery to it.
Edited by Btcc22 on Dec 8, 2014 at 02:39 PM

Idve thought the argument would've started the moment halo starts giving airstrikes and other retarded perks for killstreaking.

But ADS and sprint? This comparison is retarded

Really? I thought that was when it started to die off, or I started to ignore it. The most I've seen it was during the Halo 3-Reach times.

Well at this point, it's not just ADS and sprint. It's thruster packs, power armor, clambering, energy weapons, man-portable rotary guns, hover bikes, tanks with quad tread bogeys, orbital drop pods, thermal vision (in the form of "Promethean" vision in H4), and so on and so forth.

Whether or not these things make either game good or bad is up for debate, but they are most definitely becoming more and more similar to one another.

It's becuz halo is way better than cod cod is a scrub unrelistics graphics logic not sesne power armours and plazmas weapons FTw ccsrubz

I can't tell if you're serious, but this is how anyone bashing COD on this forum sounds like to me.

I was joking. Duh. You scrubzy cod fan halo more skill ovibluosly dotn know about reach vs black ops m8

It started when Halo 4 decided to employ the sprint ability as standard and unlike halo reach where you could choose it as an ability rather than being able to use it all the time.

And also......ADS for the 80th freaking time.

You think somewhere in a COD forum people are arguing how COD copied halo?

Actually a lot of CoD players (many of them being on the idiotic side of its community) made comparisons to Halo and Titanfall when CoD Advanced Warfare was announced (even though there are very few comparisons that could be made between CoD AW and Halo before the H5G announcement gameplay.)
Edited by ZOBI3KING on Dec 9, 2014 at 06:13 PM

people got upset when their generic colourful fps series got overtaken in popularity by a generic brown fps on multiple platforms.

I dunno, CoD was never revolutionary, like halo.

ur right we don't need to argue...

HAlO IS BETTER ANYWAYS!!!!!! Even CE and it's a 10 year old game

Why even argue... it's pointless, if you like either game better than the other then well done, go play it.

Just words on the screen, like any difference is going to be made to anyone's opinions...

Your words on the screen did not make any difference to my opinion :V

I never joined live until late 2009 so I wouldn't know what is so good in 07

HALO5 = COD7