Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

[deleted]

OP

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 6
no idea maybe just warxzone but I HATE theat they removed the split screen
0
There's really nothing you can tell them about what sets Halo 5 apart from other games. It's pretty obvious to anyone willing to look passed their die-hard fandom that Halo is no longer the unique game it used to be. I mean, aside from equal starts and a higher time to kill in Halo, mechanics-wise, Halo is the same as CoD, minus wall running and going prone.

343 is trying to make Halo fall in line with every other game to attract people who don't want to play anyway. Which explains why your friend said he'd be better off playing CoD over Halo.
Completely disagree but I respect your opinion. Here are just a "few" counterpoints:
  • Halo has vehicle gameplay.
  • Halo has a longer TTK.
  • Halo is set in the future not the present or past.
  • Halo has a higher jump height and less gravity.
  • Halo has two different health systems, health (armor) and shields.
  • Halo does not have a prone feature.
  • Halo has playable Alien species.
  • Halo games tend to have big changes after every game.
  • Halo has enemies that are many different Alien species.
  • Halo hasn't directly stolen assets from other video games.
  • Halo's hip-fire is accurate.
  • Halo takes much more skill to win.
  • Halo usually requires more strategy.
  • Halo's art style is much more "cartoon-like" and colorful.
0

This post has been hidden.

1
There's really nothing you can tell them about what sets Halo 5 apart from other games. It's pretty obvious to anyone willing to look passed their die-hard fandom that Halo is no longer the unique game it used to be. I mean, aside from equal starts and a higher time to kill in Halo, mechanics-wise, Halo is the same as CoD, minus wall running and going prone.

343 is trying to make Halo fall in line with every other game to attract people who don't want to play anyway. Which explains why your friend said he'd be better off playing CoD over Halo.
Completely disagree but I respect your opinion. Here are just a "few" counterpoints:
  • Halo has vehicle gameplay. Agreed
  • Halo has a longer TTK. Half Agree, you'll see why when we get to your health/shield comment
  • Halo is set in the future not the present or past. Ok? Doesn't really separate the gameplay though does it? Not to mention CoD has taken a futuristic approach with the robots and space setting in the newer games.
  • Halo has a higher jump height and less gravity. Really isn't enough to justify a difference
  • Halo has two different health systems, health (armor) and shields. Agreed, however weapon damage increases have started making this irrelevant as ttk has gotten slower in h5
  • Halo does not have a prone feature.another minor feature that doesn't justify the difference, I mean, halo does have sprint after all.
  • Halo has playable Alien species. Reach was the last halo game to use this, h4 and h5 lack it so it's a moot point as what matters is the current games (the ones in question)
  • Halo games tend to have big changes after every game. More like drastic changes which isn't good, I also hope you're not implying CoD doesn't do the same cuz I could show you the most disliked CoD trailor proving you wrong.
  • Halo has enemies that are many different Alien species. Ok? CoD has various enemies as well, they just aren't aliens, both still rehash enemies in the end.
  • Halo hasn't directly stolen assets from other video games. Explain? Are you implying CoD copies other games? Cuz halo is also an offender if this and there's nothing wrong with that, every game literally does it. It's all about who can do it better than the other.
  • Halo's hip-fire is accurate. True, however the addition of ADS has made hip fire far less useful, especially when ADS give certain weapons a bonus in damage or accuracy.
  • Halo takes much more skill to win. Agreed
  • Halo usually requires more strategy. Subjective matter that can't be proven objectively but I agree myself
  • Halo's art style is much more "cartoon-like" and colorful. CoD seems cartoonish as well, and for halo specifically it's art style has been scrutinized for going generic instead of staying to what made it unique and stand out in the first place.
Reply is bold
1
Unknown wrote:
There's really nothing you can tell them about what sets Halo 5 apart from other games. It's pretty obvious to anyone willing to look passed their die-hard fandom that Halo is no longer the unique game it used to be. I mean, aside from equal starts and a higher time to kill in Halo, mechanics-wise, Halo is the same as CoD, minus wall running and going prone.

343 is trying to make Halo fall in line with every other game to attract people who don't want to play anyway. Which explains why your friend said he'd be better off playing CoD over Halo.
Completely disagree but I respect your opinion. Here are just a "few" counterpoints:
  • Halo has vehicle gameplay.
  • Halo has a longer TTK.
  • Halo is set in the future not the present or past.
  • Halo has a higher jump height and less gravity.
  • Halo has two different health systems, health (armor) and shields.
  • Halo does not have a prone feature.
  • Halo has playable Alien species.
  • Halo games tend to have big changes after every game.
  • Halo has enemies that are many different Alien species.
  • Halo hasn't directly stolen assets from other video games.
  • Halo's hip-fire is accurate.
  • Halo takes much more skill to win.
  • Halo usually requires more strategy.
  • Halo's art style is much more "cartoon-like" and colorful.
If we're talking about the whole series, I completely agree, but what about just Halo 5? Arena literally has no vehicles at all (from what I've played), and time-to-kill, health systems, and weapon accuracy are completely superficial differences to casuals. Prone and player gravity are much more noticable to casuals than the previous three parts because of them "feeling" the difference in control. Other users made much better points about the two games' differences through Warzone, Action Sack, and Forge.

Also, if you've forgotten, Call of Duty is in the future now (with exoskeletons as well), so the lines between both franchises are getting blurrier and blurrier for casuals.
BTB and Team Snipers (before the change) both have vehicles; although, they could use some more emphasis in BTB.

The fact that CoD is changing itself so that it becomes more like Halo is irritating. It's fueling the argument that 343i is making Halo more like CoD (other way around) and CoD's gameplay would be better without exoskeletons and thrusters. IMO, they should've done what Battlefield did and go back in time a little, a very futuristic CoD doesn't work for many people.
0
The thing that seperates Halo 5 from other Halos is how it's just like CoD.
Halo 4 approves this message. lol
Just cause there was loadouts didn't change how the game played.
That's wrong. It ruined equal starts, went vs one of halos philosophies and was partly why MLG dropped competitive halo. if there was a halo game closer to CoD it's h4 with its loadouts and ordnances mixed in with the abilities (which still get carried over every 343 game).
It's still equal starts with loud outs. Equal starts argument makes very little sence against it. Every one would have access to them.

I don't really care if halo is MLG either
Everyone having equal access doesn't = equal starts dude. What's so equal if one person uses a dmr, plasma pistol while the other uses an AR and a br? With both using a completely different ability as well. You can say how little sense it makes all you want but the fact that they removed them from arena play shows they weren't received well.
But we aren't talking about having a plasma pistol.
0
Quote:
Halo games tend to have big changes after every game. More like drastic changes which isn't good, I also hope you're not implying CoD doesn't do the same cuz I could show you the most disliked CoD trailor proving you wrong.
Generally speaking, CoD is pretty much the same thing every year. Yes, I've seen Infinite Warfare but like many others, I'd rather not talk about it.

Quote:
  • Halo hasn't directly stolen assets from other video games. Explain? Are you implying CoD copies other games? Cuz halo is also an offender if this and there's nothing wrong with that, every game literally does it. It's all about who can do it better than the other.
I'm specifically talking about Infinite Warfare, which is one of the "games in question". Several Halo YouTubers have proven that they've stolen several Halo assets, including:
  • The Pelican
  • The Halo Ring
  • Spartan Jorge
  • The Halo 5 Rocket Launcher (named "Spartan")
  • Grifball (Ball)
  • Breakout (Entire Game Mode)
  • The Mantis (Arguable)
  • Halo: Reach Concept Art (Title Screen Background)
  • The Bubble Shield
  • Spartan Charge (Arguable)
Quote:
  • Halo does not have a prone feature.another minor feature that doesn't justify the difference, I mean, halo does have sprint after all.
But so does Titanfall, For Honor, Battlefield, Battlefront, etc. Pretty much a generic feature for games, which makes since because humans do it in real life everyday and games keep wanting to get more and more complicated.

@UEG ShadowAngel
0
The thing that seperates Halo 5 from other Halos is how it's just like CoD.
Halo 4 approves this message. lol
Just cause there was loadouts didn't change how the game played.
That's wrong. It ruined equal starts, went vs one of halos philosophies and was partly why MLG dropped competitive halo. if there was a halo game closer to CoD it's h4 with its loadouts and ordnances mixed in with the abilities (which still get carried over every 343 game).
Is this a bad thing? Spartan Abilities are pretty balanced, IMO (except for Spartan Charge) and they're pretty damn cool (looking at you Ground Pound).
0
The thing that seperates Halo 5 from other Halos is how it's just like CoD.
Halo 4 approves this message. lol
Just cause there was loadouts didn't change how the game played.
That's wrong. It ruined equal starts, went vs one of halos philosophies and was partly why MLG dropped competitive halo. if there was a halo game closer to CoD it's h4 with its loadouts and ordnances mixed in with the abilities (which still get carried over every 343 game).
It's still equal starts with loud outs. Equal starts argument makes very little sence against it. Every one would have access to them.

I don't really care if halo is MLG either
Everyone having equal access doesn't = equal starts dude. What's so equal if one person uses a dmr, plasma pistol while the other uses an AR and a br? With both using a completely different ability as well. You can say how little sense it makes all you want but the fact that they removed them from arena play shows they weren't received well.
But we aren't talking about having a plasma pistol.
Did you already forget what we were arguing? I only mention the plasma pistol as it was an option for custom loadouts in h4. You said there was no issue including the equal start rule, and I said it does giving an example on how it's not equal if players choose different weapons off spawn. Equal opportunity isn't equal starts as people will not all pick the same loadouts.
0
The thing that seperates Halo 5 from other Halos is how it's just like CoD.
Halo 4 approves this message. lol
Just cause there was loadouts didn't change how the game played.
That's wrong. It ruined equal starts, went vs one of halos philosophies and was partly why MLG dropped competitive halo. if there was a halo game closer to CoD it's h4 with its loadouts and ordnances mixed in with the abilities (which still get carried over every 343 game).
Is this a bad thing? Spartan Abilities are pretty balanced, IMO (except for Spartan Charge) and they're pretty damn cool (looking at you Ground Pound).
They aren't balanced if they're constantly changing them. What ability from h4 carried over besides thrusters (the only ability I actually do like and can support in future titles)? If halo 6 ends up removing h5s abilities it will only further prove my point that people aren't sold on the abilities.

Theyre cool in theory but fail on execution. They touch the original gameplay to much (could elaborate if needed).

@your other reply on the CoD comparison: much of it is just my view and some speculation, ultimately if CoD did steal assets Microsoft would've already sued long ago, as said games constantly borrow off one another from mechanics to art style to game modes. (Many games had what halo has long before halo was even made, so game modes are really excluded as no one has the rights to a game mode). It's all about trying to one up everyone and just doing it better than whom you ripped it off from. That's exactly what halo did when it took mechanics from UT, quake, doom,wolfenstein and then borrowed story from aliens and ring world.

As for the looks that CoD uses: many games and movies use ship designs very similar to what halos pelican is, it's what your practical space ship would look like as any other look wouldn't make sense, and being how CoD is originally a realistic game, that's what it's going to use as a basis to its looks. People can speculate that CoD stole from halo (cuzit is only speculation), but until Microsoft sees an issue, CoD is free to continue ripping designs from other games.
0
Unknown wrote:
There's really nothing you can tell them about what sets Halo 5 apart from other games. It's pretty obvious to anyone willing to look passed their die-hard fandom that Halo is no longer the unique game it used to be. I mean, aside from equal starts and a higher time to kill in Halo, mechanics-wise, Halo is the same as CoD, minus wall running and going prone.

343 is trying to make Halo fall in line with every other game to attract people who don't want to play anyway. Which explains why your friend said he'd be better off playing CoD over Halo.
Completely disagree but I respect your opinion. Here are just a "few" counterpoints:
  • Halo has vehicle gameplay.
  • Halo has a longer TTK.
  • Halo is set in the future not the present or past.
  • Halo has a higher jump height and less gravity.
  • Halo has two different health systems, health (armor) and shields.
  • Halo does not have a prone feature.
  • Halo has playable Alien species.
  • Halo games tend to have big changes after every game.
  • Halo has enemies that are many different Alien species.
  • Halo hasn't directly stolen assets from other video games.
  • Halo's hip-fire is accurate.
  • Halo takes much more skill to win.
  • Halo usually requires more strategy.
  • Halo's art style is much more "cartoon-like" and colorful.
If we're talking about the whole series, I completely agree, but what about just Halo 5? Arena literally has no vehicles at all (from what I've played), and time-to-kill, health systems, and weapon accuracy are completely superficial differences to casuals. Prone and player gravity are much more noticable to casuals than the previous three parts because of them "feeling" the difference in control. Other users made much better points about the two games' differences through Warzone, Action Sack, and Forge.

Also, if you've forgotten, Call of Duty is in the future now (with exoskeletons as well), so the lines between both franchises are getting blurrier and blurrier for casuals.
BTB and Team Snipers (before the change) both have vehicles; although, they could use some more emphasis in BTB.

The fact that CoD is changing itself so that it becomes more like Halo is irritating. It's fueling the argument that 343i is making Halo more like CoD (other way around) and CoD's gameplay would be better without exoskeletons and thrusters. IMO, they should've done what Battlefield did and go back in time a little, a very futuristic CoD doesn't work for many people.
Same can be said for Halo. Halo would do much better if it wouldn't confirm to current trends and would simply go back in time(in terms of gameplay). By the way, COD did it before Halo so how is COD becoming more like Halo?
1

This post has been hidden.

1
Unknown wrote:
There's really nothing you can tell them about what sets Halo 5 apart from other games. It's pretty obvious to anyone willing to look passed their die-hard fandom that Halo is no longer the unique game it used to be. I mean, aside from equal starts and a higher time to kill in Halo, mechanics-wise, Halo is the same as CoD, minus wall running and going prone.

343 is trying to make Halo fall in line with every other game to attract people who don't want to play anyway. Which explains why your friend said he'd be better off playing CoD over Halo.
Completely disagree but I respect your opinion. Here are just a "few" counterpoints:
  • Halo has vehicle gameplay.
  • Halo has a longer TTK.
  • Halo is set in the future not the present or past.
  • Halo has a higher jump height and less gravity.
  • Halo has two different health systems, health (armor) and shields.
  • Halo does not have a prone feature.
  • Halo has playable Alien species.
  • Halo games tend to have big changes after every game.
  • Halo has enemies that are many different Alien species.
  • Halo hasn't directly stolen assets from other video games.
  • Halo's hip-fire is accurate.
  • Halo takes much more skill to win.
  • Halo usually requires more strategy.
  • Halo's art style is much more "cartoon-like" and colorful.
If we're talking about the whole series, I completely agree, but what about just Halo 5? Arena literally has no vehicles at all (from what I've played), and time-to-kill, health systems, and weapon accuracy are completely superficial differences to casuals. Prone and player gravity are much more noticable to casuals than the previous three parts because of them "feeling" the difference in control. Other users made much better points about the two games' differences through Warzone, Action Sack, and Forge.

Also, if you've forgotten, Call of Duty is in the future now (with exoskeletons as well), so the lines between both franchises are getting blurrier and blurrier for casuals.
BTB and Team Snipers (before the change) both have vehicles; although, they could use some more emphasis in BTB.

The fact that CoD is changing itself so that it becomes more like Halo is irritating. It's fueling the argument that 343i is making Halo more like CoD (other way around) and CoD's gameplay would be better without exoskeletons and thrusters. IMO, they should've done what Battlefield did and go back in time a little, a very futuristic CoD doesn't work for many people.
Same can be said for Halo. Halo would do much better if it wouldn't confirm to current trends and would simply go back in time(in terms of gameplay). By the way, COD did it before Halo so how is COD becoming more like Halo?
Did what?

Halo "evolving" for better or worse is simply blending in with the rest of FPSs and adapting its gameplay to appeal to newer generations of gamers. Halo going back in time and sending the gameplay back would feel slow for, what I'm assuming to be, the majority of the Community. I'm a veteran and I've loved both types of Halo gameplay, old and new, but when I go back everything feels so slow and dull (if my nostalgia glasses are clouding my vision, of course).
0
Unknown wrote:
Unknown wrote:
There's really nothing you can tell them about what sets Halo 5 apart from other games. It's pretty obvious to anyone willing to look passed their die-hard fandom that Halo is no longer the unique game it used to be. I mean, aside from equal starts and a higher time to kill in Halo, mechanics-wise, Halo is the same as CoD, minus wall running and going prone.

343 is trying to make Halo fall in line with every other game to attract people who don't want to play anyway. Which explains why your friend said he'd be better off playing CoD over Halo.
Completely disagree but I respect your opinion. Here are just a "few" counterpoints:
  • Halo has vehicle gameplay.
  • Halo has a longer TTK.
  • Halo is set in the future not the present or past.
  • Halo has a higher jump height and less gravity.
  • Halo has two different health systems, health (armor) and shields.
  • Halo does not have a prone feature.
  • Halo has playable Alien species.
  • Halo games tend to have big changes after every game.
  • Halo has enemies that are many different Alien species.
  • Halo hasn't directly stolen assets from other video games.
  • Halo's hip-fire is accurate.
  • Halo takes much more skill to win.
  • Halo usually requires more strategy.
  • Halo's art style is much more "cartoon-like" and colorful.
If we're talking about the whole series, I completely agree, but what about just Halo 5? Arena literally has no vehicles at all (from what I've played), and time-to-kill, health systems, and weapon accuracy are completely superficial differences to casuals. Prone and player gravity are much more noticable to casuals than the previous three parts because of them "feeling" the difference in control. Other users made much better points about the two games' differences through Warzone, Action Sack, and Forge.

Also, if you've forgotten, Call of Duty is in the future now (with exoskeletons as well), so the lines between both franchises are getting blurrier and blurrier for casuals.
BTB and Team Snipers (before the change) both have vehicles; although, they could use some more emphasis in BTB.

The fact that CoD is changing itself so that it becomes more like Halo is irritating. It's fueling the argument that 343i is making Halo more like CoD (other way around) and CoD's gameplay would be better without exoskeletons and thrusters. IMO, they should've done what Battlefield did and go back in time a little, a very futuristic CoD doesn't work for many people.
I bolded the part I'm responding to, and I'm sorry, but that just reminded totally me of this GDC Presentation by one of Halo 5's designers. They said they didn't want to alienate modern shooter fans at exactly 15 minutes. I can't believe I completely forgot about that until right now...
That's a good point, which justifies what I've been saying about how it's OK that Halo is slowly becoming more like other modern FPS but not directly ripping assets from other games or completely copying stories.

P.S. Thanks for the link, the video is pretty interesting!
0

This post has been hidden.

1
There's really nothing you can tell them about what sets Halo 5 apart from other games. It's pretty obvious to anyone willing to look passed their die-hard fandom that Halo is no longer the unique game it used to be. I mean, aside from equal starts and a higher time to kill in Halo, mechanics-wise, Halo is the same as CoD, minus wall running and going prone.

343 is trying to make Halo fall in line with every other game to attract people who don't want to play anyway. Which explains why your friend said he'd be better off playing CoD over Halo.
Completely disagree but I respect your opinion. Here are just a "few" counterpoints:
  • Halo has vehicle gameplay.
  • Halo has a longer TTK.
  • Halo is set in the future not the present or past.
  • Halo has a higher jump height and less gravity.
  • Halo has two different health systems, health (armor) and shields.
  • Halo does not have a prone feature.
  • Halo has playable Alien species.
  • Halo games tend to have big changes after every game.
  • Halo has enemies that are many different Alien species.
  • Halo hasn't directly stolen assets from other video games.
  • Halo's hip-fire is accurate.
  • Halo takes much more skill to win.
  • Halo usually requires more strategy.
  • Halo's art style is much more "cartoon-like" and colorful.
While I agree with you on all those points, those are things that you need to play the game thoroughly in order to see and experience. But as the OP stated, his friends just saw him playing. So at a quick glance, the majority of the things you mentioned aren't readily seen. When people watch others play a game or two, all you see is how the game plays. And to anyone who isn't too into gaming, it's understandable that they would confuse the new Halos with games like CoD and Battlefield.

And to touch on the whole skill thing, each game takes a different type of skill level. With Halo, it's about outmaneuvering your opponent, landing your shots while making them miss theirs. Battlefield on the other hand, requires a different type. It requires an incredible amount of teamwork and strategy not seen in Halo and it requires that each player use their class to its fullest potential in order to succeed. It's not a game about individual performance, unlike Halo and CoD, but about how well you work as a team. Because you can be a great medic, or support, but if you aren't using your class to benefit your squad specifically, your entire team will lose the match.

Now with CoD, it may be easy to rack up kills, but you can't do it if you aren't fast enough. And that may not sound skillful to us who prefer Halo, but again, it's a different type of skill from Halo. It rewards speed and reflexes over well placed, timed shots. For example, I went to E3 this year and was offered to play in a little CoD tournament they were having there. Now I did pretty well, because let's be honest, it's not hard to be quick. But there were people who were doing things I didn't know were possible in a CoD game, mostly because I haven't played one since Modern Warfare 3, but regardless, the people I played against were more skilled in the game than I was.
0
The thing that seperates Halo 5 from other Halos is how it's just like CoD.

It may have halo things in it but it plays more like CoD than a Halo game.
this is an absolutely ludicrous statement. I've played cod and I can tell you now that halo 5 feels absolutely nothing like cod, nothing AT ALL! other than the fact that it is an fps and you should other people.
0
LethalQ wrote:
Unlike other fps where kills come easy in Halo they have to be earned with good accurate shots. Also Halo has more variety of weapons and vehicles than most fps.... Also the biggest appeal to me is Halo is more than just a game story wise. There is books, movies, anime, comics, etc... the story line is so big and diverse no other game even compares.
Halo doesn't have more variety of weapons, it just has multiple variants of the standard ones. Games like CoD and Battlefield actually have more variety of weapons because they use many different real world guns.
No. Battlefield has many different guns that actually feel like different guns. CoD has lime 70 guns and 6 types, SMGs, ARs, Snipers, Shotguns, Rockets, and Pistols. But they all feel the same, all have negligible recoil, no need to aim, and very low TTK. Halo 5 actually has a bigger variety then CoD, but a bit less then BF. Halo has tracking bullets, explosive bullets, and needles! And each weapon plays differently.
0
CMDR Kai wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
Unlike other fps where kills come easy in Halo they have to be earned with good accurate shots. Also Halo has more variety of weapons and vehicles than most fps.... Also the biggest appeal to me is Halo is more than just a game story wise. There is books, movies, anime, comics, etc... the story line is so big and diverse no other game even compares.
Halo doesn't have more variety of weapons, it just has multiple variants of the standard ones. Games like CoD and Battlefield actually have more variety of weapons because they use many different real world guns.
No. Battlefield has many different guns that actually feel like different guns. CoD has lime 70 guns and 6 types, SMGs, ARs, Snipers, Shotguns, Rockets, and Pistols. But they all feel the same, all have negligible recoil, no need to aim, and very low TTK. Halo 5 actually has a bigger variety then CoD, but a bit less then BF. Halo has tracking bullets, explosive bullets, and needles! And each weapon plays differently.
And Halo 5's weapons aren't the same? How many ARs do we have? All with just different sights, scopes, some with a bayonet or laser sight. Same with all the BRs, DMRs, and SMGs. Then we have multiple variants of the shotgun, rockets, energy sword, gravity hammer, etc. Look, I get most Halo fans don't like CoD and don't ever have anything nice to say about it, but you really need to look passed your Halo fandom and see the reality here. Halo 5 has just as many useless variants of the base weapons as CoD.

And again, CoD isn't a sci-fi game, at least not to the extent that Halo is. So faulting it for not having the wild weapon types that Halo has is unfair. CoD has many different rifles, SMGs, shotguns, etc, just as in real life there are many different types of those weapons. And regardless of them being the same type of weapon, each individual one is still a different gun, despite having negligible damage, accuracy, or recoil differences. Because CoD is more based on the real world, it doesn't have to go by Halos standards of "variety".

Now don't take this as me defending CoD. I'm a Halo fan through and through, been one since around 2005 and haven't stopped, despite the many disappointments I've experienced under 343. But unlike most of you, I'm not so blinded by my fandom that I'll bash a game I don't play just because it's in direct competition with my favorite game.
0
Just show them how long it takes to kill another player, then they should see that it takes skill to kill someone instead of being a moron and killing everything in 3 or less shots. "But cod has way more different weapons-just look at these two automatic weapons that are identical but one has less damage and recoil", while with halo you don't need 50 different guns that do the same thing, just one for each faction.
Any game has their own skill to them, so I hope you're not saying halo is better in that department just cuz you think CoD lacks skill. It's fine if you think halo is better in terms of skill (which I'd agree with). The short ttk of CoD doesn't mean it lacks skill, it just means skill is decided by those who act faster and place themselves in a position to not be shot first.

fyi: halo does have a redundant weapon sandbox, something both CoD and halo 3 and after share in common.
While reaction time is a good skill, keeping focus on the target requires much more skill because you could get the first shot and still lose. And I don't really think that shooting 3 bullets at someone is considered "skillfull". The only thing to improve on with cod is reaction time and it's not that hard to improve, unlike keeping a steady aim when people are strafing everywhere.
You should not be referring to players of their chosen game as morons because you have a different view on skill. I play Titanfall and Titanfall 2 because of the fast TTK. Does that make me a moron ? Halo has a different skill set, BF has it's skill set, same with CoD and every other game. Add to that, working as a team in Titanfall, BF, Doom is also better. Halo is not a special snowflake.
1
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 6