Makes me wonder if CoD4 had significantly more users, or if they're pretty much neck and neck.

I would guess neck and neck. COD4 on 360 was the best selling video game on any system during December 07. I'm guessing that big month finally turned into XBL Gold memberships that put COD4 over the top. It may even be a one week wonder. I'm actually hoping it will be interesting to review the numbers each week when Major Nelson releases them. H3 will surely get the nod when the next DLC maps are released, and COD4 will probably take it back after the much awaited patch (that's been almost 3 months in the making).

As I've said before Halo 3's newness is related to the campaign and the out-of-game experiences (from the user interface, to Theater, to integration with Bungie.net).

As for the multiplayer gameplay, it's not very different than Halo 2. It's as if Halo 3 were downloadable content for Halo 2 (if you can look past the graphics).

Perhaps 360 gamers are looking for a next-gen multiplayer game and are ditching Halo 3?

Yes, people like to mix it up sometimes. Hell, halo has been at the top of live since H2 released so with so many other good games coming out the players were bound to get split up sometime. Does that mean H3 sucks and is inferior to cod4...no it's just a change of pace for many I would presume.

I play a good next gen multiplayer game by the name of Halo 3. Cod4 is not a bad game and is a great next-gen title, but I just like halo still and don't really see how all of you have compared cod4 to halo 1...I have yet to see the similarities except maybe super grenades and auto aim? Flame away, but I think halo 2 and 3 were much better games than halo 1. Nothing will ever replace the joy of first playing the halo series, but the longevity of halo is not what it once was.

The gameplay of being able to dominate through superior skill is what links H1 and COD4 and distinguishes them from H2 and H3.

I can understand the frustration of being dominated at h3, it does take some time to get better at being able to shoot without out extreme auto aim assistance. Hell, we get dominated every night I have played at some point and I do get angry and pissed alot. That anger at halo is what keeps me playing so maybe I can get better instead of quitting.Dual wielding is a thing of the h2 past, now it's more focused on battle rifle, sniper, rocket, and imo that is what h2 missed that h3 has gotten much better on. If i get on live and decide to play cod4 that does not mean I think h3 sucks, its because it's different and a break from the norm.

The TruSkill rankings are totally different in CoD4 and Halo 3.

The reason you can dominate in CoD4 is because you are playing against an average of all the gamers with little to no regard to that player's skill.

In Halo 3, you are matched up to people with a similar TruSkill ranking. Therefore, over time you are more likely to win half of your games than in a game like CoD4 where there's no regard for TruSkill rankings. Right now, in CoD4 we are pretty much rolling over a mass of average gamers. Some are good. Some are bad. Most are playing individually or in a very small party (Halo 3 also tries to make parties of like size together).

If CoD4 took into account TruSkill rankings, we'd get beat about half of the time (right now we win most of our games). But, CoD4 would still be fun for me. Halo 3 isn't less fun because the competition is tougher. CoD4 isn't more fun because we win more often. CoD4 is fun because it's a game of quick kills and map control. Bungie has worked to build balanced gameplay in Halo 2/3. Infinity Ward doesn't have a balanced gameplay system. In fact, they reward success through being able to call in Air Strikes and Helicopters as well as unlock new weapons and equipment. But then again, IW allows you to reset your ranking and play back through again. When you do that, you lose your equipment and guns. But, you still get to call in Air Strikes and Helos.

The spawn system of CoD4 is also very much like Halo. There aren't as many spawn points as Halo 3 and the spawn locations are usually very close. Additionally, like in Halo 1, you can great control over the spawn location of your enemy.

What's all this "we" stuff?

FYI, Page 23 of this month's issue of EGM has an interview with a COD4 developer. He says "Also, the 360 and PS3 versions both do skill-based matching."

J: If you like H3 better, that's fine. I just like COD4 better, and I think in COD4 the better player wins more often than in Halo 3.

EA: We do roll over a lot of noobs, but the usual five of us (me, Will, John, Andy, James) have all played around 1000 games. We've met a lot of organized teams of 6 and come out on top. When we get beat we usually have random noobs as our 5th and 6th players. We've also been beat handily by some teams, but that's not the norm. Our strategies (and we do have and use strategies, for each map) that result in a pounding for noobs usually give us a 200-170ish win over decent teams. We're not the best in the country, and not the best on XBL, but IMO to imply that we aren't a skilled, communicative team is wrong. You can always raise the bar to a level where we'll get beat. Everyone knows that. None of us are auditioning for MLG. In our world, by our standards, we ARE good at COD4.

To each his own...I will still play cod4 again soon. Halo 3 just always gets the first chance to anger me everynight.

I'm a bit surprised but I can't say I'm THAT surprised. I love CoD4 and Halo 3...I'm glad CoD4 won this time around, though. I agree they probably are neck and neck. One of these days I'll get around to playing more CoD4 MP...I'm still a newb.

I like to "run and gun" more. It suits my style of play better. And you can do that in H3 and be successful (positive K/D ratio). You cannot do it in COD4. Although strategy can be helpful in H3, it is not always necessary. In order to do well (i.e. have fun) in COD4, it is critical to use strat.

That is why I prefer H3.

Tack on the fact that COD4s multiplayer sh*ts on itself constantly, and they STILL haven't fixed it, and you see why I play H3 more often than COD4.

That said, COD4 is a great game, and if they finally fix the multiplayer aspect of it, then I could see how it would have more unique players than H3.

Nothing beats the fun I had with Gears of War. The team oriented aspect of it is what is so fun about it. I really don't think my heart has ever been pumping as hard playing a video game than with GOW. It really felt like a sport.

COD4 touches that a little bit and with a halfway decent team it's possible to do really well and have a lot of fun.

Being able to control your opponents spawns in COD4 and wrap your head around where the other team is makes it a bit more fun to play.

Lately, I've found myself getting bored and tired when playing Halo 3. The last meetup we had turned out to flop as nobody seemed to get really excited about it, even during the games. I still like it, but just can't put my finger on why I'm getting bored.

A GOW II would take all of my time away from both games.

----------------------------
"Oculus is just this guy, you know?"

I can see how they're neck and neck guys easily but...I like halo3 a little more than cod4,cod4 ending of game is pretty funny i guess...so i guess they both have my vote this time!!!!!

Same here i like halo 3 better beacause u have more fun but cod4 capaign is really beating halo 3's capaign so i guess cod4 wins!

I'm not saying Gears of War is a better game than H3 or CoD4, but I completely agree with you. I don't think I've ever been more riled up than when I've just turned the tide in the last ten seconds of a round with a few well-placed shotgun blasts in GOW.

I like all three games. I couldn't pick a favorite.

While being completely clueless to CoD4, (not playing it yet) , I've heard that the campaign is great, and that multiplayer is sweet. However, I'd play the game for 2 weeks, and I'd be longing lots of great gameplay weapons, vehicles, and components. I'd moan for my Forge, creating and playing wicked, player made maps. However, the fact that CoD4 has like, 20 maps is just dumb sounding to me. Honestly, as if you would play all the maps all the time. I've also heard moping about how H3 has not enough close quarter maps, and how CoD4 players enjoy the fact that the maps have much in common with Campaign. People, the cool thing about Multiplayer is learning all the nooks, crannies, and camping spots. Definite plus there for Halo 3. Also, while CoD4 might have realistic weapons and vehicles, you'll definitely miss all the goodies:Spartan Laser, Energy Sword, Gravity Hammer, detachable turrets, Sniper, all the grenades, the Banshee, Wraith, Ghost, Mongoose(Still a maybe), Chopper, aww, you guys know what I'm talking about. Also, equipment definitely plays an esential part in H3. Drop down a Bubble Shield, or laugh maniacly when you throw down the Power Drain. While I'm pretty sure CoD4 supports some pretty bad-ass vehicles, if any of you are familiar with Battlefield 2, I'm guessing they're much alike. The basic, bland Humvee, Tanks, Helicopters....Halo 3's surrealism definitely plays one of the most important roles in creating a fun atmosphere.

As for GoW, I've played against my friend 1-on-1, and sure as hell makes you jump off the couch, I predict I won't see Halo 3-esque waiting lines. Nothing gets your blood pumping like chainsawing through someone's innards, or tagging someone with a grenade, and even curb-stompig an enemy. I'm guessing there's gonna lotsa blood in GoWII.
--
I'm a complete and utter Halo fan. I've read the books and actually enjoy the plot, unlike those who bought it for the online gaming. Am hoping for XBOX LIVE.

I definitely wouldn't miss the energy sword. That's just another plus for COD4. It doesn't have any babydoll weapons, like the sword.

I originally used the word "que-er" (remove the "-"), which is obviously a filtered word, but I do feel the word "babydoll" is a more suitable adjective in this case, given the context in reference to the sword in H3.

GG THX admins!

Try being a PC gamer and playing on a console without custom maps, dedicated servers, Xfire, and customizable input devices. There's a whole culture in CoD4 PC that won't ever be able to be a part of the CoD4 360 version. Bungie's including of Forge will raise the bar for other developers and they'll eventually start shipping editors with their console games. But you are right. Halo 3's culture is much different than CoD4's.

Remember that Gears of War is really a close-combat fighter. Aim is less important in GoW than in CoD4 or H3 where you are able to kill the enemy from medium to long range. If aiming in GoW were important, Epic would have gone with the first person perspective. But, they gave us the third-person perspective. GoW is basically Mortal Combat in a 3D space. We've even got fatalities.

-----
n00btube
rapture.thx

ditto,oc & mintz..Although I do hate the GoW shotty,with a passion

][-][ //-\\ ][_ {()} ][

Speaking of COD4 PC, JayWhy mentioned to me that the grenades are causing chaos in some matches of COD4 on PC because up to 32 people can play in a match. If they are all over level 40 and have the 3 frags perk...things get hairy.

CoD4 dedicated servers can host up to 32 people in a match. In some of the Battlefield games, you could have 64 players in a map. The games are also totally different when the populations go up.

-----
n00btube
rapture.thx

Yeah, it's got something better, a knife which lunges at people in the blink of an eye at a distance that's not too easy to consistently determine.Excellent points. Forge is a piece of crap for amateurs compared to the real tools people use for PC games. What riles me about that is Far Cry for the original Xbox had a freaking map editor that let you edit geometry, whereas Halo 3, a game that was just released on the 360 does not let you create your own maps? Please. Also, I never heard of the "Mortal Combat" analogy before.Indeed, it really does. TF2 is so different on the 360 due to its smaller sixteen player limit, although you wouldn't notice it if you didn't play the PC version.

"Call of Duty 4: 5 categories won: Story, Graphics, Sound, Single-Player, Replayability

Halo 3: 4 categories won: Arsenal, Controls, Multiplayer, Innovation

It's almost unbelievable, right? CoD4 is the better game based on the nine categories that we feel every developer should take into account when making games. This was a close fight, almost too close to determine a winner, but the games speak for themselves. GamePro would like to add that both CoD4 and Halo 3 should both be in every gamer's Xbox 360 library."

from: http://gamepro.com/microsoft/xbox360/games/features/146489.shtml

Who was the retard who thought Halo 3 was innovative? No, Crysis is innovative. Half-Life 2 was innovative. Everything in Halo 3 has been done before, and better. What's so innovative about it?

The forge, screenshots, video clips, sharing gametypes, downloading fan favorite gametypes, and other new features are definitely innovative. Gameplay...not so much.

Forge is not innovative. We've seen in-game editors before. And better. As I mentioned earlier, Far Cry for the original Xbox had a more powerful creator that actually let you edit map geometry. Screen shots? Saved films? That's nothing new. Although Halo 3's in-game File Share is a concept not frequently done with console games, it's not like I can't show somebody an awesome screenshot in a game I took over the Internet. Downloading fan game types, images, videos? It's more stream lined and more straight forward to use, maybe, but gamers have been downloading user content for years for PC games. The concept of a replay feature is nothing new. That is not innovative.

@MasterKim: I think Midnight is talking about being innovative on a console and when comparing CoD4 360 to Halo 3 360. Yeah, all that stuff has been around for 20 years on a PC. But, you don't see that every day on the console. Bungie essentially created a pseudo peer-to-peer filesharing application that is integrated with Bungie.net and Windows Live. CoD4 has problems networking two gamers together in a multi-player party. CoD4 360 lacks the innovation that we saw with Halo 3.

Hrmm, although it's hopping across platform lines, when you compare Halo 3 to CoD4 for the PC, Halo 3 loses even more of its appeal. It suddenly doesn't seem so innovative.

Forge is innovative when you talk about the UI. The way Bungie presents Forge on the screen and makes it easy to use is innovative. Now, the direct output of Forge isn't that advanced. But the act of using Forge is.

"Halo 3 is as if it were downloadable content for Halo 2".

As rapture hinted, the result is not innovative, but the way you get there is absolutely innovative.

Using a mouse with Windows 95 is not innovative. Mice had long been used with computers before Win 95. However, using a mouse without the user having to set data flow settings (interrupts and all kind of weird crap) like in Windows 3.1 made Windows 95 innovative in that regard.

I can show a friend on XBL a Halo 3 screenshot 90 seconds after the game is done and without leaving my couch. Also, he's not required to have any equipment other than the same 360/H3/TV equipment I have. That is innovative.

You don't have to reinvent the wheel to please consumers. Often a better axle will do just fine.

Valid points; you've made it much clearer to me now, thank you. I just didn't know what you meant by "innovation." I suppose Halo 3, much like the first game, instead of introducing a new, revolutionary concept, merely just made existing features better. Still, I think Crysis is more worthy of an award for innovation.

Wasn't CoD4 the best-selling game of 2007? 7 million units or something like that? Being multi-platform sure made it easier.

http://www.majornelson.com/archive/2008/01/29/live-activity-for-week-of-1-21.aspx

"arsenal,controls"?? WTF mate!? halo3 is NOTHING special in those areas.

Looks like H3 is back on top. I wonder if COD4 will overtake it semi-regularly, or if it was a fluke.

In the first game, Halo had a unique design regarding weapons. Instead of having 32 weapons (not that there's something wrong with that per se), they decided to have less than ten weapons, each with a specific purpose. And you could only carry two weapons at a time. Halo also had some great controls, and proved once again you could play shooters on a console. Something like that should have won the Arsenal and Controls category, because Halo 3 messes with the design by adding twenty new weapons that we didn't need and its controls aren't as special.

i agree.halo3 controls are pretty standard,since H1.

][-][ //-\\ ][_ {()} ][