Halo 3: ODST Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: How is ODST more of an expansion than COD: MW2?
  • Subject: How is ODST more of an expansion than COD: MW2?
Subject: How is ODST more of an expansion than COD: MW2?

I'm just curious on what you guys have to say in response to this.

Besides nominal qualities alone, why is ODST considered more of an expansion, and therefore not worth full price, when compared to Modern Warfare 2?

Let's just remind you guys.

Call of Duty, judging off the past, will have gameplay that is nearly identical. The campaign will pretty much be new levels and total about 5-7 hours. It'll include a multiplayer with perhaps a couple of new gametypes and basically be just new maps (ripped from campaign) besides that.

With ODST, you've got a new campaign as well. However, the gameplay is obviously much different as it's a (relatively) small open world acting as a hub and an with an original storyline that's not typical of halo. Then, it comes with Firefight, which is essentially a whole new game mode, and then pretty much what COD6 is dong with it's multiplayer--> taking it's old game and using new maps. Granted, there is only 3 new ones here, 13, if you haven't got the new maps, but pretty much the DLC is equal to the new mp in COD.


So umm.... yea. Explicate. What's the difference when it comes to the reality of it all? I don't think there's anything. In fact, I'd say COD6 is more of an expansion than Halo: ODST in reality. Remember again, as I said, I'm talking about actual product, not nominal qualities.

And anyway, inarguably, Isn't Halo 3: ODST actually a spin-off at least, not an expansion?As by tradition an expansion is just the same as what new levels are? Spin offs can be to a lower scale than the main series like an expansion, but they're not something you'd expect to come up in a latter level of the game.



[Edited on 07.05.2009 3:03 PM PDT]

  • 07.05.2009 3:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

1. It's called Modern Warfare 2. Call of Duty has been taken out of the title.

2. Halo 3: ODST. Note the Halo 3 part.

3. Modern Warfare 2 is a sequel to the first game (CoD: Modern Warfare)

4. Halo 3: ODST is simply an expansion to the Halo 3 game.

5. My logic wins, your's fails.

6. You haven't played either game yet. How do you know the multiplayer maps in MW2 will be ripped off the Campaign? Idiot. Same with all the things you suddenly "assumed" will be/won't be in the game.

[Edited on 07.05.2009 3:05 PM PDT]

  • 07.05.2009 3:03 PM PDT

Posted by: Slegger
1. It's called Modern Warfare 2. Call of Duty has been taken out of the title.

2. Halo 3: ODST. Note the Halo 3 part.

3. Modern Warfare 2 is a sequel to the first game (CoD: Modern Warfare)

4. Halo 3: ODST is simply an expansion to the Halo 3 game.

5. My logic wins, your's fails.

6. You haven't played either game yet. How do you know the multiplayer maps in MW2 will be ripped of the Campaign? Idiot.

I said "Besides nominal qualities alone"

Your only points fall into that category.
Truth though, I think that's the only points people can come up with.

As for the final one, I'm using history as a reference. Truth is none of us have played either game fully, so we can only go by the past and what we see. Since every single COD I have played pretty much straight up ripped their maps from the campaign, i have to assume MW2 will do the same. And regardlessly, that really doesn't matter in regards to the points I made.


[Edited on 07.05.2009 3:07 PM PDT]

  • 07.05.2009 3:04 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Posted by: Slegger
1. It's called Modern Warfare 2. Call of Duty has been taken out of the title.

2. Halo 3: ODST. Note the Halo 3 part.

3. Modern Warfare 2 is a sequel to the first game (CoD: Modern Warfare)

4. Halo 3: ODST is simply an expansion to the Halo 3 game.

5. My logic wins, your's fails.

6. You haven't played either game yet. How do you know the multiplayer maps in MW2 will be ripped of the Campaign? Idiot.

I said "Besides nominal qualities alone"

Your only points fall into that category.
Truth though, I think that's the only points people can come up with.

As for the final one, I'm using history as a reference. Truth is none of us have played either game fully, so we can only go by the past and what we see.


Can you re-type that? You made no -blam!- sense what-so-ever, this time at least tell me which fact you're responding to.

  • 07.05.2009 3:07 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

GRAW 2 was a "whole new game" but the campaign was pathetic, the new maps pretty much just rehashes of GRAW's, and the game-play was identical except for one or two new weapons.

So I think that Halo 3: ODST is perfectly able to consider itself a new game, closely tied in with Halo 3 if it would like to.

  • 07.05.2009 3:08 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

okay... I'm only going to stat the most basic of facts.... ODST was made using the same engine as halo3... MW2 is a game built from the ground up... making it a sequal to COD4.

theoretically... COD:WAW was an expansion for COD4... although having a stand alone story makes the title not fit.

[Edited on 07.05.2009 3:12 PM PDT]

  • 07.05.2009 3:08 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Unholymethod
okay... I'm only going to stat the most basic of facts.... ODST was made using the same engine as halo3... MW2 is a game built from the ground up.


This. This is what I forgot to say in my original post.

  • 07.05.2009 3:09 PM PDT

Posted by: Slegger
Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Posted by: Slegger
1. It's called Modern Warfare 2. Call of Duty has been taken out of the title.

2. Halo 3: ODST. Note the Halo 3 part.

3. Modern Warfare 2 is a sequel to the first game (CoD: Modern Warfare)

4. Halo 3: ODST is simply an expansion to the Halo 3 game.

5. My logic wins, your's fails.

6. You haven't played either game yet. How do you know the multiplayer maps in MW2 will be ripped of the Campaign? Idiot.

I said "Besides nominal qualities alone"

Your only points fall into that category.
Truthfully though, I think those are the only points anyone can make (nominal points)

As for the final reponse you made (#6), I'm using history as a reference. Truth is none of us have played either game fully, so we can only go by history and what we see about each game presently.


Can you re-type that? You made no -blam!- sense what-so-ever, this time at least tell me which fact you're responding to.

What doesn't make sense about my post? I did change "those" to more specific nouns now in this quote, but other than that, I really just think your reading comprehension might not be there.

  • 07.05.2009 3:10 PM PDT

OP is completely uninformed. Modern warfare 2 also has a new mode with co-op. It is called special forces and it is essentially a bunch of scenarios (like mile high club) that can be played with a partner for highscores.


How do you know there won't be even more in modern warfare 2?

[Edited on 07.05.2009 3:25 PM PDT]

  • 07.05.2009 3:11 PM PDT

The search bar is like a DMR.

Anyone can use it effectively if they try.
Smart people do use it effectively.
Idiots don't, then complain about how it doesn't work.
The only problem is that, the DMR is used in Reach, but the search bar isn't used in the Reach forum.

MW2 has a brand new multiplayer, new maps, new guns, and looks friggen amazing. Halo 3, while also looking amazing, doesn't have a new multiplayer besides firefight, and it only has a few new guns which are only in campaign and firefight. There're many differences between a sequel and an expansion. If your logic were how things turned out Halo 3 would be an expansion of Halo 2....

  • 07.05.2009 3:11 PM PDT

Posted by: Slegger
Posted by: Unholymethod
okay... I'm only going to stat the most basic of facts.... ODST was made using the same engine as halo3... MW2 is a game built from the ground up.


This. This is what I forgot to say in my original post.

No it wasn't. Every new COD uses the same principles from the last. Saying it uses a new engine is an assumption.

And even then, that'd just be referencing technical aspects, which isn't really a good point.

  • 07.05.2009 3:11 PM PDT

PEANUT-BUTTER SLAP!

Well, since Modern Warfare 2 won't have Modern Warfare's multiplayer copy and pasted into a new game, I think that it's more qualified as a sequel. By the way, having a campaign that's atypical from previous games doesn't make it a full fledged sequel.

  • 07.05.2009 3:11 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Posted by: Slegger
Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Posted by: Slegger
1. It's called Modern Warfare 2. Call of Duty has been taken out of the title.

2. Halo 3: ODST. Note the Halo 3 part.

3. Modern Warfare 2 is a sequel to the first game (CoD: Modern Warfare)

4. Halo 3: ODST is simply an expansion to the Halo 3 game.

5. My logic wins, your's fails.

6. You haven't played either game yet. How do you know the multiplayer maps in MW2 will be ripped of the Campaign? Idiot.

I said "Besides nominal qualities alone"

Your only points fall into that category.
Truthfully though, I think those are the only points anyone can make (nominal points)

As for the final reponse you made (#6), I'm using history as a reference. Truth is none of us have played either game fully, so we can only go by history and what we see about each game presently.


Can you re-type that? You made no -blam!- sense what-so-ever, this time at least tell me which fact you're responding to.

What doesn't make sense about my post? I did change "those" to more specific nouns now in this quote, but other than that, I really just think your reading comprehension might not be there.


1. You edited it. Nice try trying to make me look stupid.
2. "I said "Besides nominal qualities alone" Your only points fall into that category"
That made no sense, what are you trying to reply to?

Also, this game has the same Multiplayer as Halo 3, the exact same. So that proves even more it's an expansion.

  • 07.05.2009 3:13 PM PDT

Posted by: Dtrav
MW2 has a brand new multiplayer, new maps, new guns, and looks friggen amazing. Halo 3, while also looking amazing, doesn't have a new multiplayer besides firefight, and it only has a few new guns which are only in campaign and firefight. There're many differences between a sequel and an expansion. If your logic were how things turned out Halo 3 would be an expansion of Halo 2....

But what makes the multiplayer new? World at War's multiplayer was "new" but it was just the same crap.

As for new guns, yea, but does anyone care about new guns in COD? They play the same for the most part. Regardlessly, so does ODST. It has new maps and guns. Point again? Or are you trying to say both games are new full games?

I guess I can't debate this with people who can't see that World at War was just a reskin of Call of Duty though and what the difference is between that and say how, I dunno, Final Fantasy does their sequels.

  • 07.05.2009 3:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Posted by: Slegger
Posted by: Unholymethod
okay... I'm only going to stat the most basic of facts.... ODST was made using the same engine as halo3... MW2 is a game built from the ground up.


This. This is what I forgot to say in my original post.

No it wasn't. Every new COD uses the same principles from the last. Saying it uses a new engine is an assumption.

And even then, that'd just be referencing technical aspects, which isn't really a good point.


You fail again. The developers said they made a new engine so you no longer have to step over an invisible line to stop the enemies from coming, they will stop coming once you kill them all. (Infinite amount of enemies).

You are failing all over the place today, quite sad.

  • 07.05.2009 3:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Slegger
Posted by: Unholymethod
okay... I'm only going to stat the most basic of facts.... ODST was made using the same engine as halo3... MW2 is a game built from the ground up.


This. This is what I forgot to say in my original post.



yeh... I knew what you ment... the OP didn't catch that though... so I thought i'd clarify.

  • 07.05.2009 3:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

ODST : We're paying for something twice

MW2: We're paying for new content.

  • 07.05.2009 3:16 PM PDT

Posted by: Slegger


1. You edited it. Nice try trying to make me look stupid.
2. "I said "Besides nominal qualities alone" Your only points fall into that category"
That made no sense, what are you trying to reply to?

Also, this game has the same Multiplayer as Halo 3, the exact same. So that proves even more it's an expansion.

Yes, I did edit it. " I did change "those" to more specific nouns now in this quote".

And I want to know how #2 doesn't make sense.
All your points fall into that category. I take it you don't know what saying nominal means? It means qualities existing essentiallyy by name only. Therefore, I'm saying, besides the fact that it's not called an expansion, has a 2 (or 6), etc.

Nominal = existing by name only

  • 07.05.2009 3:17 PM PDT

Posted by: tdawg5041
OP is completely uninformed. Modern warfare 2 also has a new mode with co-op. I doesn't have a name yet but it is essentially a bunch of scenarios (like mile high club) that can be played with a partner for highscores.


How do you know there won't be even more in modern warfare 2?


Read this!!!!!! So now we've got 2 games.

Both have (pretty much) new campaigns
Both have a new online mode
MW2 has a new engine ODST does not
MW2 has new online ODST does not

It's really not even close.

  • 07.05.2009 3:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: The_omen
ODST : We're paying for something twice

MW2: We're paying for new content.


This too. the only new thing in ODST is Campaign and Firefight.

  • 07.05.2009 3:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Posted by: Slegger


1. You edited it. Nice try trying to make me look stupid.
2. "I said "Besides nominal qualities alone" Your only points fall into that category"
That made no sense, what are you trying to reply to?

Also, this game has the same Multiplayer as Halo 3, the exact same. So that proves even more it's an expansion.

Yes, I did edit it. " I did change "those" to more specific nouns now in this quote".

And I want to know how #2 doesn't make sense.
All your points fall into that category. I take it you don't know what saying nominal means? It means qualities existing essentiallyy by name only. Therefore, I'm saying, besides the fact that it's not called an expansion, has a 2 (or 6), etc.

Nominal = existing by name only


I mis-read. I thought nominal was normal, read too fast.

  • 07.05.2009 3:20 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
Posted by: Slegger
Posted by: Unholymethod
okay... I'm only going to stat the most basic of facts.... ODST was made using the same engine as halo3... MW2 is a game built from the ground up.


This. This is what I forgot to say in my original post.

No it wasn't. Every new COD uses the same principles from the last. Saying it uses a new engine is an assumption.

And even then, that'd just be referencing technical aspects, which isn't really a good point.



WOW!! JUST WOW!! ... DUDE... are you going to stfu and listen or are you going to keep arguing your uninformed biased opinion... even though you stated in the first post that you don't know what makes a game an expansion? grow up.

  • 07.05.2009 3:21 PM PDT

Posted by: Slegger
Posted by: The_omen
ODST : We're paying for something twice

MW2: We're paying for new content.


This too. the only new thing in ODST is Campaign and Firefight.

How about MW2's?

MW2 is essentially just new levels to COD4. ODST's is a new type of campaign setup.

MW2's multiplayer is just what you have in COD4, but new maps. Halo ODST's is firefight and just Halo 3's but with 3- 13 new maps.

MW2 reminds me of GRAW2/Vegas2, sequels only by name. Truly just an expansion that seperates the content onto seperate discs.

  • 07.05.2009 3:21 PM PDT

Posted by: Smug Dark Loser
How about MW2's?

MW2 is essentially just new levels to COD4. ODST's is a new type of campaign setup.

MW2's multiplayer is just what you have in COD4, but new maps. Halo ODST's is firefight and just Halo 3's but with 3- 13 new maps.

MW2 reminds me of GRAW2/Vegas2, sequels only by name. Truly just an expansion that seperates the content onto seperate discs.


For the love of foman's mom would you read my post! MW2 has an answer to firefight!

  • 07.05.2009 3:23 PM PDT

Posted by: tdawg5041
Posted by: tdawg5041
OP is completely uninformed. Modern warfare 2 also has a new mode with co-op. I doesn't have a name yet but it is essentially a bunch of scenarios (like mile high club) that can be played with a partner for highscores.


How do you know there won't be even more in modern warfare 2?


Read this!!!!!! So now we've got 2 games.

Both have (pretty much) new campaigns
Both have a new online mode
MW2 has a new engine ODST does not
MW2 has new online ODST does not

It's really not even close.

Now if you answer this question, I'll say you win.

Why is Modern Warfare 2 anything more than an expansion?

The campaign to MW2 is just new levels to what could be COD4 and so is the multiplayer.

ODST's is a new setup, more like a spinoff. It too has what you could call a new multiplayer(the halo 3 disc) as it's what Call of Duty does--> same game, new maps.


Modern Warfare 2 is just a new game by name alone really. Just new maps and campaign.



I say Bungie should just take Halo 3's muliplayer, add 10 new maps, don't include the old maps, reskin the spartans to odsts, and then say it's a whole new multiplayer.

Pretty funny imo.

[Edited on 07.05.2009 3:28 PM PDT]

  • 07.05.2009 3:23 PM PDT