Let me start off by saying that I will appreciate any input on these comparisons and I will also accept any new major play offs. I will be comparing:
Final Fantasy XII (PS2) with Final Fantasy XIII (X360),
Assassins Creed (X360, original game) with Grand Theft Auto IV (X360),
Halo Wars (X360) with Fallout 3 (X360),
Pokemon Blue (GBC) with Carsh Bandicoot (PS1),
And finally, the big one: Halo Reach (X360) with Call Of Duty Black Ops (X360),
Final Fantasy Play-off:
Two of my favourite games. They both offer unique styles and are exceedingly good games.
12:
The free-roaming aspect is the best thing with this game, the characters are a lot better designed for this aspect but could use a little more depth in themselves. The game is very good if you enjoy games like Fallout or Fable. You get a lot of different permuations of characters and this game has an storyline. It has very good graphics for a PS2 game and cost very little. Very good game.
13:
Linear. Big difference. There are discs that are frankly, annoying as they can easily be misplaced. The only time the game is not linear is during the third disc. Not giving away any plot but when you leave the area with the Cie'th waystones then you are bak to being linear until a place called Edenhall. It's not all doom and gloom with being linear, however, as it allows for a greater plot and you are constantly feeling the characters emotions. You tend to fall in love with the game. In 12, when you lose a battle you have to go back to the last save point, 13 allows you to restart the battle. But no escape is allowed. The only bad part? Skipping scenes you've previously seen and the ending. I liked it but I wanted something different.
Conclusion?
12 is better as a free-playing game as you can do more and it is more enthralling throughout most of the game. 13 features no level system but has better plot, graphics and Gran Pulse is my happy place. 13 is a very good game with VERY hot girls. I like both but in moderation. 12 for roaming and freedom (And Dalmasca) and 13 for its plot and graphics (And Lightning and Vanille)
Assasins Creed VS GTA4
My AC game is faulty and I would like to borrow another game from the series. It is awesome.
AC:
Really, really, really good game for stragedy, life and enjoyment. It is a little annoying towards the end but when you beat the game, it is fun to go back to the last level and doing anything you like. Very good old-timey game and the lack of profanities was a bonus to me. More surreal character but that is the point of fantasy games.
GTA4:
More freedom than most games, except maybe Fallout... A lot of shooting people goes on but the story is terrible. You get realism but frankly, there are some really bad systems in it. The amount of sidequests is good but there is no replay to missions.
Fallout 3:
Forget the above Halo Wars thing, this is better. Fallout 3 gives a lot of freedom and has replayability. You make choices and have to live with them. Character interaction is brilliant. This game is a very good game and I strongly recommend it. Or at least borrowing it.
Conclusion?
Fallout is the best game as you get more freedom, AC is good as the game takes longer to get old and GTA is very good but not as good as the others. Just my opinion though.
PokeCoot?
Two games. My first two games. Lets keep it short.
Pokémon:
Awesomeness, thy name is pokémon. This game launched the series. Roaming, customisation and hours of gameplay. Ever since I got this game I have been enthralled but games of the like. Only recently I have stopped playing them as my DS broke. Good games, good storyline. Recommended to all.
Crash Bandicoot:
Platform games... Play these before shooters. They are computer games in the best form. I played the first level too much of the original and still know how to beat the level without sustaining damage... Every one of these games have been a joy to play. I applaud thee, wild dog.
Conclusion?
Both are best. Foundation of the best games in history. Sure, there might be others that are better but you cannot appreciate the beauty of other games without playing these games. Add Super Mario Games especially '64 and I have my childhood back... And my father. (Note that Mario is not my father.)
Viva Pinata VS Bratz:
The above title has been shot to hell.
Soap-117:
A game is to be pleasured. A game is to be won. A game mentioned in this note is epic. Now, I write.
Halo Reach:
A very good game with an impressive storyline and multiplayer. Character customisation has improved since 3 and ODST and this is apparent through even the storyline. You can forge your own map objects for a fun experience and live a lifestyle around this game. This game requires skill to be good, not just hacking to get money and then buying the best weapons and getting lucky to win. Everyone is equal in this game, you start with the same weapons as a MLG person. True skill comes not in CoD but in Halo. You can kill people with grenades but this is not too important. There are no nade-spams and sniping requires pure skill. Teamwork is important.
Call of Duty, With Black Ops being the most recent installment:
Treyarch made one good thing with their previous game WaW, and that was dismemberment (Nazi Zombies VS Firefight is completely different) Now they are here to mess up this game too. If you have a rapid firing weapon that enables you to easily look down the sight then you've won. You walk in to a room full of enemies guns firing and you come out not only alive, but in first place. It is more realistic but the lack of required skill is disappointing. It is a very fun game and attracts a larger community than Halo, however, so you may get more fun matches online. Everything new is ripped off of Halo, the character customisation is ripped off Halo, the points to buy stuff is ripped off of Halo. Hell, even the custom gametype is ripped off of Halo. Treyarach is original...
Conclusion?
Well, for more skilled based, more equal games play Halo. For friend-play, realism and the ability to easily feel like a god at the game, play CoD. I don't play online anymore. I prefer offline. I have not compared the storylines at all.
Nazi Zombies VS Firefight, who would win?
Well, if the hordes were to collide then I'd say it'll be Firefight. Zombies die easily and aliens have ranged attacks. I will add Horde on as well (From Gears od War 2 (X360)) in this as well.
Zombies:
Some plot, feels like more skill is needed, un-customisable test of your mettle. Fun, progressable and fustrating... That was quick.
Firefight:
No plot, you need to be careful, you have a lot more chance of dying and it is pretty much the main storyline all over again... Still quick.
Horde:
Both games need offline AI so you can just play for ages with a cusom game. Fun, very fun, very good but only 50 rounds. I recommend this game for its AI. If 3 is out then get that instead.
Conclusion?
If you like hard fights, lots of skill and have an abundance of luck, go for firefight. If you're lucky, horror-challenging, prefer CoD and don't mind getting cornered a lot, go for Nazi Zombies. If you want a gory stand off then go for Horde.
And that, is my opinions. Disagree? Tell me, I may add your opinion in.
