Halo V.S Call of duty

My opponent has only given videos of what halo can do. This is a verbal debate im not suppose to look up videos of Cod and post them it would defeat the purpose. My opponent says Cod lacks co-op campaign this is a lie Cod Waw has it. Co -op campaign is pointless in Mw4 and MW2 and MW3 and other games because you are playing as a certain player and it'd be a little stupid to have both players doing the same ending. I have given sources on things that need to be sourced which my opponent is not understanding. MY opponent only gave one example of guns being different and i stated every repeated gun in Cod. "This statement is false as glitches of halo are occasionally updated and fixed. " This is a false rebuttal. The glitches are not patched i play infection on Halo alot and see people camp in one spot on several maps on the side of the building which they used glitches to get to. My opponent is Wrong on his statement "The amount of people playing a game does not make a game better, only more crowded. " If more people are playing Cod then halo dosent that mean its more preferred and more people like to play it. "In halo you have emblems, do daily and weekly challenges, unlock new armor, give those armor primary and secondary colors, commendation which are sort of rewards and you can create your own emblem as well" I am a fan of Cod and Halo i have reach, and all it does is let you pick from a bunch of pictures and put together emblem. In Cod you get emblems for challenges and titles and in Cod black ops you can create one. Yes you have armor and gt to customize it. Im not ignoring t main features im stating how it dosent matter because its still not high tech as in advanced. Yes halo has many game modes But if you look at the most popular game modes there are not many people int heir and there are not many people online. Key voting issues * my opponents only argument for spec ops for people who dont have online is halos forge mode. as i mention that Cod has Co-op campaign in Waw and Nazi zombies which again is one of the top rated zombie games * MY opponent still has no argument for Nazi zombies as it is one of the biggest factors for Cod * I havent easily rebuttaled against my opponent and my opponent responds by doing the old three year old move and saying no its not when i give him reasons is is he says the same thing even when i prove him wrong *Cod gives people a better feeling towards ranking and allows players the challenge of developing their skill based o point streaks and kill streaks which my opponent didnt mention anymore after i stated it. *My opponent says i listed basic things that a sequel has to change lets compare Cod4 - Cod Mw2, IW didnt have to put spec ops in their, they didnt have to add more than 4 times more kill streaks, they did not have to bring new guns, they did not have to start the cal sign and emblem tradition, these are big factors that my opp dosent look at. *Cod mw3- Spec ops didnt have to be updated, Survival didnt have to be added, More wens didnt have to be added, Kill streaks didnt have to be added based on skill level, but they did. Again key factors *thins my opponent didnt argue and or ignored. * Cod offers better experience as i mentioned the support package allows players who die more than they get kills to still get kill streaks which really boosts game confidence. *Cod is more Team work focused because of point streak awarding you for objective. *More perks/Weapons/Equipment/Kill streaks = More variety and choices for players to make endless setups for their create a class * Had no comment about Nazi zombies * Seems like he based everything on one game as he stated Cod dosent have co-op Campaign but Waw did it also had Nazi zombies that had endless rounds you could play with friends to giving the game another edge. *Prestige Mode *Here are some statements my opponent made that show he is basing things off opinion 1. "Answers this in Mw3 can you use light machine guns? Can you snipe? yes My opponent listed the same thing that Cod has allowed you to do in the attempt to say in halo you can only do it" 2. "My opponent didnt deny that he hasn't played any campaign in Cod leading me to believe he is just arguing with what he knows about Cod which makes his Arguments pretty much invalid. " 3. MY opponent stated enemies are more unique and variant. i stated "Cod every enemy is unique to my opponent forgets to realize. 1. Juggernauts 2. Regular gunmen 3. advanced gunmen 4. Rpg enemes 5. Snipers 6. Shotgun type enemies 7. Suicide bombers 8. helicopters and more These are just a few things my opponent never argued back against me. Cod has broken every record know to man also according to this source please read when voting. . http://www.escapistmagazine.com... Reasons i believe i have one (My opponent has done very well in this debate and i thank him) 1. I rebuttal ed almost every time and my opponent changed topic 2. When i stated big things my opponent didnt argue. 3. My Opponent based things off f opinion. 4. My opponent seems to have come into this debate without info on Cod 5. My opponent mentions campaign being better and stated realism is irrelevant because it is based of opinion. I also stated that whether either campaign is better is irrelevant to because it is more of whether you prefer a science fiction story mode or real war based so his Campaign argument is irrelevant.