Call of duty vs Battlefield
- Thread starter Ninjapro
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2010
- Messages
- 182
In all honesty the games are not as similar as many are lead to believe. While the weapons and modern combat genre are the same, the game play is completely different from a PC gamers perspective. COD is close quarter where as in BF3 the map sizes can be enormous. There is more of a tactical mindset where as in COD you can be Rambo.
Game Review sites and the Gaming Industry alike ([DICE] and Infinity Ward) love the fanboys who fight over which game is better because it is free publicity for each game. After playing both for several years, the games are just too different in regards to game type. For a while now [DICE] has taken the large map approach and Infinity Ward / Treyarch have put players right into combat within seconds you are shooting at someone.
I prefer BF (clearly based on my division), but the development behind BF3 felt rushed given the unbalance and bug issues. I am not 100% sure if I will buy a new battlefield game. I left COD once Activision started having a say in its development and its release dates.
Game Review sites and the Gaming Industry alike ([DICE] and Infinity Ward) love the fanboys who fight over which game is better because it is free publicity for each game. After playing both for several years, the games are just too different in regards to game type. For a while now [DICE] has taken the large map approach and Infinity Ward / Treyarch have put players right into combat within seconds you are shooting at someone.
I prefer BF (clearly based on my division), but the development behind BF3 felt rushed given the unbalance and bug issues. I am not 100% sure if I will buy a new battlefield game. I left COD once Activision started having a say in its development and its release dates.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 261
I have to agree with liquid. They are two diffrent games. Each one has their strong points. Each one has their negatives. its all about what you like.
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2010
- Messages
- 9,709
i like both
If you want to compare MW3 to a game it would be CS:S
If you want to compare BF3 to a game it would be the ArmA series
- CS:S takes no skill whatsoever as there is no recoil, no sway, getting a headshot across the map without having to zoom in with the sniper let alone a pistol is ridiculous.
- BF3 or ArmA not sure haven't played BF3 so no opinion but those are the comparable games
If you want to compare BF3 to a game it would be the ArmA series
- CS:S takes no skill whatsoever as there is no recoil, no sway, getting a headshot across the map without having to zoom in with the sniper let alone a pistol is ridiculous.
- BF3 or ArmA not sure haven't played BF3 so no opinion but those are the comparable games
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 2,013
NO WAI
Okay, in both CoD games and Counter-Strike the weapons are both mainly hitscan, but I don't see that many more similarities. There is a lot of recoil in Counter-Strike, and if you think it is easy to get a headshot across the map without zooming in with a sniper, I suggest you try it yourself. :blink:
Also, ArmA is more of a realistic-type game while BF3 isn't really all that realistic. So they're different. Of course, I play BF3, but I haven't played ArmA so I don't have a lot to say on this one.
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2009
- Messages
- 6,556
I do not really like both, but they both have their moments.
BF3 is more of eye candy then great game play.
MW3 is more of casual no skill game that can be awesome at first then suck a big one at the end.
The last great BF game was the 1942 series closely followed by BF2 series and the Last great Call of duty game had to be Call of Duty 2. They were both great and enjoyed them a lot myself.....now it seems its more so of making more money then the other. Call of Duty a year was the worst idea and BF3 was suppose to be something else, but instead they gave us battlelog and origin. Not to mention made a lot of people mad and they lost a lot of sales on how they handled the early forum complaints and the teamspeak meeting.
BF3 is more of eye candy then great game play.
MW3 is more of casual no skill game that can be awesome at first then suck a big one at the end.
The last great BF game was the 1942 series closely followed by BF2 series and the Last great Call of duty game had to be Call of Duty 2. They were both great and enjoyed them a lot myself.....now it seems its more so of making more money then the other. Call of Duty a year was the worst idea and BF3 was suppose to be something else, but instead they gave us battlelog and origin. Not to mention made a lot of people mad and they lost a lot of sales on how they handled the early forum complaints and the teamspeak meeting.
