I've just been watching Achievement Hunter's ODST Firefight video (http://youtu.be/ko3UEuC53C0), and it really struck me just how much I enjoyed Firefight in this game. I enjoyed it so much more than in Reach or H4 (if we're counting SpOps as Firefight, which I'm doing for the purpose of this post).

I feel like the level design was much better in ODST. Each map was pretty unique, with a high mix of differing areas within each map that promoted the use of different tactics. For example, closed, indoor areas that would promote close quarter fighting; large open areas for vehicle use; areas to defend; verticality, etc etc. It was like the levels were designed for Firefight, and then were then placed in campaign.

In Reach it was more the other way around, the level design didn't seem to incorporate as much variety (although the DLC maps changed this somewhat). I could almost imagine Bungie just lifting what areas they thought would be best for Firefight from what was already available in campaign. Not that the Firefight maps in Reach were necessarily bad, just not as good as those in ODST. Less variety and not as much call for actual tactics.

As for H4, it was a mix of both. Some of the levels were really spectacular (Apex, Warrens), but others were too small or linear to justify being used in a firefight type environment (The Gate, Sniper Alley). There's only so much you can run around one level before you're tired of the same gameplay it offers you. The SpOps story forced you to revisit these areas enough times that the flaws became apparent, but even if it hadn't the flaws would still be there.

What does everyone else think? What version of Firefight did you prefer and why?