• avantguardian - November 29, 2012 8:52 p.m.

    does anybody really like spartan ops? or do they just like the 'idea' of spartan ops? i can't say i support episodic content if it's a vapid rehash of ideas thrown together to prolong the game. point and click offers a unique take on video game narratives, so it's use of episodes (a la walking dead) is understandable (even though i just waited until all five were out to play them straight through:). but games like halo, using the same levels and such to try to fool people into thinking you're giving them this epic unfolding side narrative feels a little dirty to me. maybe it will be good, i don't know. is it good right now? and no, them being 'free' does not not matter, as it is irrelevent. free shit doesn't smell any better.
  • zombi3grim - November 30, 2012 10:31 a.m.

    Judging by your post, Im assuming you havent played Spartan Ops yet because your asking if its any good right now. It seems to me though you've already made up your mind about it.
  • avantguardian - November 30, 2012 8:08 p.m.

    yes, that's why i'm asking, because my mind is already made up. brilliant strand of logic there, grim. that time of the month, buddy?
  • zombi3grim - November 30, 2012 9:12 p.m.

    Woah woah woah, sir. No need to get all offended. All I said was it looks like you made your mind up. Mostly because of lines like "free shit doesn't smell any better." or "to fool people into thinking you're giving them this epic unfolding side narrative feels a little dirty to me" or "can't say i support episodic content if it's a vapid rehash of ideas thrown together to prolong the game." It looks like you dont like it before you tried it. Not saying you DONT like it. Im saying it LOOKS that way. Just relax. Not a personal attack. Just a discussion. Put the guns away, its going to be allright...
  • avantguardian - November 30, 2012 11:16 p.m.

    i don't get offended. waste of time and energy. i DO however, get annoyed by pointless responses that don't make any attempt actually answer my questions (or at least be funny). i listed some hypotheticals. if you would like to infer my judgement based on those, that's your prerogative. if someone would like to actually tell me that these hypotheticals are easily assuaged, that would be much more helpful. i have yet to hear a single positive thing about this mode (cutscenes do not impress me anymore), amid numerous dissings. this mode replaced firefight - it should be good. halo has yet to live up to its ridiculous amount of hype for me. i'm curious to see if this game might actually justify a bit of it.
  • zombi3grim - December 1, 2012 6:32 a.m.

    Well, sorry if you got "annoyed" by someone replying to you on a comment board. As you well know, I can make this very ugly and turn it into a 20 page comment thread, but I'll just save us all the hassle. If you have yet to hear something positive about Spartan Ops that are not from game journalists or developers, allow me to tell you it is pretty damn fun. Its not just the cutscenes but the entire narrative that drive the story around the missions. They ARE built for co-op however so you would have more fun with more people. Firefight was jus the typical horde mode. It was fun. But thats all it was. This puts objectives for you to accomplish with vehicles and other weapons and new wide open maps with alot of variety between each mission. This Halo game is VERY different from the others. If you didnt like those, I highly suggest you go into this with an open mind. The sound is different, the enemies are different, and the emphasis on story is way more prevalent.
  • XMetalGekoX - April 4, 2013 1:08 a.m.

    Google translate, cover me.
  • talleyXIV - November 29, 2012 8:25 p.m.

    I am not going to say what side I voted for but I found it hilarious that Black Ops 2 won most major things and then out of nowhere it wasn't the better overall game. And by major things I mean Campaign, Multiplayer, and Co-Op, Black Ops won 2/3 of those.
  • Score - November 29, 2012 8:46 p.m.

    It only won co-op by a little bit I would say and I think originality was a biggie.
  • shayne-galloway - November 30, 2012 7:20 a.m.

    Actually, they tied in co-op, and Halo 4 won in campaign. Black Ops II only won multiplayer. Skewing the facts makes it pretty obvious which side you're on.
  • talleyXIV - November 30, 2012 6:24 p.m.

    And by answering like a dickhead you are obviously a Halo fanboy. I "skewed" the facts accidentally. Originality doesn't mean shit by the way, both series have been the exact thing rehashed for the last 5 or 6 games.
  • kingsmikefan - November 29, 2012 7:44 p.m.

    I was really hoping that this would be a lot funnier. I expected at least one Adventure Time or MLP joke from Coop.
  • The_King_of_Nothing - November 29, 2012 6 p.m.

    Neither game is flat out better. They play differently and have different audiences. Both games are great. (I'm assuming Halo 4 is, haven't played it) My problem with the article was the Originality tile. They ruled Halo 4 as the winner because, "Treyarch moved Call of Duty forward, but it’s still wrapped up in the same tropes as before, whereas Halo definitely upped the ante." The only thing Halo 4 did over CoD there was not involve the previous story at all. They have the same protagonist whereas CoD introduced a new one to play as while still involving they old ones too. They both have a new enemy to fight in a new war on new terrains with new weapons. "You'll still feel like you're playing a CoD game." Everything I've seen about Halo 4 made me feel the same about it. You're still playing a Halo game. Is this the first Halo game not fighting the Covenant? Because, at least since CoD 4, The only time you fought the same enemy was MW2 and MW3 and even that is only half the story of those.
  • brickman409 - November 29, 2012 9:29 p.m.

    yeah, I was about to say the same thing. I thought Blackops 2 was more original than Halo 4. The only huge changes made in halo 4 were in the campaign. Blackops 2 made huge changes in both campaign, multiplayer and zombies.
  • TheLoneOstrich - November 30, 2012 7:49 a.m.

    I think what they mean by it is that they added a new type of enemy to fight in Halo. Though the Promethians aren't dramatically different than fighting the normal Covenant, they add something new. Call of Duty can't really do anything new in that aspect, because you'll always be shooting the same humans who all die the same and there's no real distinction between them other than their outfits. If they made juggernauts and other "special" enemies, like riot shield-users more common, maybe they would get some Originality points, but there's only so much you can do with human enemies.
  • ObliqueZombie - November 29, 2012 5:41 p.m.

  • GoldenEagle1476 - November 29, 2012 5:06 p.m.

    You guys recommend Black Ops II's multiplayer over Halo 4's-yet Halo 4 is listed above Black Ops II on your must play multiplayer shooters list. Interesting...
  • Redeater - November 29, 2012 4:43 p.m.

    Damn browser. I clicked on Gamesradar and it lead me to IGN.
  • Redeater - November 29, 2012 4:47 p.m.

    Now that we have the Hulk vs The Internet and Halo vs COD out of the way could you guys please settle the age old question of Gumbercules vs Mighty Thor?
  • BackwaterRifle - November 29, 2012 5 p.m.

    Hulk vs. The Internet was crazy good.
  • DrDevious - November 29, 2012 4:43 p.m.

    Wow, surprised you guys chose Halo, but I definitely agree. I am still having a blast with it.
  • Turtman - November 29, 2012 4:33 p.m.

    Battlefield 3.
  • brickman409 - November 29, 2012 9:31 p.m.


Showing 21-40 of 48 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.