Why Battlefield is inferior to Call of Duty in almost every way.

I agree CoD gets hated on way to much around here. All of a sudden Dice hypes up how the new battlefield is gonna have a few perks on the PC version and some hermits are ready to worship them as Gods. Lets call battlefield what it is: a me too wannabe CoD clone that's just not quite as fun.

Pray_to_me

I dont' hate cod....i hate the cheating...and the erogant ppl who play it...Some guy goes 40 and 2 camping in demo or dom and doesn't even come near an objective.....he just wants kills. So he should play death match not dom or demo. Also most ppl think controller mods are awesome???? like rapid fire or the drop shot button...wtf is with that???? thats cheating if you need something a little extrato help you win gun fights then you are in fact cheating. If you can't use it in a pro circuit you should not be allowed to use it at all.

I completely disagree about bf. The guns feel more realistic....and pee shooters don't chew up walls. You can't head glitch. You can't go prone. You can't be running full speed stop and hip fire with a light machine gun? You can't reloadfasterthan a world class speed shooter. I don't hate cod....just don't make a bogus arguement that cod is more realistic....cause it's obviously not. It's about the primal urge to kill in fast paced arcade shooter. Thats what cod is....a arcade shooter....think about how you get rewarded for almost anything...andthereisalways a little celebration. Bf is far more realistic in everyway and definitely bf3 is raising the bar in realism.

L1k3 duh! Battlefield suks compared to CoD! What is this teamwork I keep hearing? Online gaming isn' about teamwork, it's about getting the most kills and showing how much better you are at the game. Who cares about vehicles? Only noobs who are afraid of dieing use vehicles. Real men fight on foot.Pvt_r3d

There has to be reason why CoD games have so many sales each year and that reason is that more find CoD fun than BF.

There has to be reason why CoD games have so many sales each year and that reason is that more find CoD fun than BF.

gameking5000

After listening to all the rediculous hype from Battlefield fanboys about how BF "destroys" COD, I finally decided to pick up Bad Company 2 the other day. Seriously? This is the game that has been getting so much hype? . .

• The graphics are terrible.
• The guns feel terrible as well. Terrible sound design, terrible feedback and weak rumble (almost on Uncharted 2 levels). As much as you guys may hate COD, there is no denying that CoD has set the industry standard for shooting mechanics. CoD's guns feel perfect. But this isnt so much a comparison to Bad Company, as it is simply pointing out how unpolished BC2's guns are compared to CoD. Everything in the game feels like its made out of cardboard when you shoot it.
• The character movement is nowhere near as polished and fluid as in CoD, especially black ops. It feels like you are on a boat, or on roller skates. (which is funny because this was one of the things i've heard BF fanboys make fun of CoD for :lol: )(which is also weird because you dont even feel yourself running in BC2).
• ZOMG teh destructable environments! Lol, refer to my "made of cardboard"comment.
• ZOMG, teh vehicles. They are not polished at all, nor do they ad anything relevant to the gameplay. Basically, they dont need to be there. They are there for the sake of being in there.
• ZOMG CoD just rehashes every year, and never does anything new....From what im seeing, Battlefield 3 looks like the exact same thing as Bad Company 2, just with better graphics.

Sometimes I really dont think people even know why they hate CoD so much.

StrongDeadlift

I love BF and I love CoD. But you sir are totally wrong with all of your points.

There has to be reason why CoD games have so many sales each year and that reason is that more find CoD fun than BF.

gameking5000

[QUOTE="Pray_to_me"]

I agree CoD gets hated on way to much around here. All of a sudden Dice hypes up how the new battlefield is gonna have a few perks on the PC version and some hermits are ready to worship them as Gods. Lets call battlefield what it is: a me too wannabe CoD clone that's just not quite as fun.

incuensuocha

The guns feel terrible as well. Terrible sound design, terrible feedback and weak rumble (almost on Uncharted 2 levels).StrongDeadlift

First of LOL @ comparing BC game to a main BF game. Next up, poor graphics......yea an CoD is running on what? Id Tech 3 :lol:. Bad sound design....holy **** the sound design in BC2 is absolutely brilliant. Vehicles don't hold any relevance.....what in the hell guy? I mean I could go on and on.

millerlight89

There has to be reason why CoD games have so many sales each year and that reason is that more find CoD fun than BF.

gameking5000

they are different games, very different, BUT Battlefield series is VERY different from Bad Company series

After listening to all the rediculous hype from Battlefield fanboys about how BF "destroys" COD, I finally decided to pick up Bad Company 2 the other day. Seriously? This is the game that has been getting so much hype? . .

• The graphics are terrible.
• The guns feel terrible as well. Terrible sound design, terrible feedback and weak rumble (almost on Uncharted 2 levels). As much as you guys may hate COD, there is no denying that CoD has set the industry standard for shooting mechanics. CoD's guns feel perfect. But this isnt so much a comparison to Bad Company, as it is simply pointing out how unpolished BC2's guns are compared to CoD. Everything in the game feels like its made out of cardboard when you shoot it.
• The character movement is nowhere near as polished and fluid as in CoD, especially black ops. It feels like you are on a boat, or on roller skates. (which is funny because this was one of the things i've heard BF fanboys make fun of CoD for :lol: )(which is also weird because you dont even feel yourself running in BC2).
• ZOMG teh destructable environments! Lol, refer to my "made of cardboard"comment.
• ZOMG, teh vehicles. They are not polished at all, nor do they ad anything relevant to the gameplay. Basically, they dont need to be there. They are there for the sake of being in there.
• ZOMG CoD just rehashes every year, and never does anything new....From what im seeing, Battlefield 3 looks like the exact same thing as Bad Company 2, just with better graphics.

Sometimes I really dont think people even know why they hate CoD so much.

StrongDeadlift

I don't know if your referring to the console versions, but Mw graphics are subpar on pc, and terrible on console....... but some of your opinions are almost valid(cardboard) and i love battlefield games to death... just don't complain about graphics please..... It labels consolites as hypocrites

[QUOTE="DangerousLiquid"]

I approve of this ownage!

The arguments CoD haters have been having are ludicrous! They get graphics and visuals, everything else belongs to COD.

I honestly think they hate CoD because they've been nuked too many times. :idea:

StrongDeadlift

Here's why BF > COD:

1. COD has no vehicles worth mentioning and you can't control them, BFBC2 has many, BF2/BF3 have so many its rediculous
2. COD has small maps but BF has huge maps
3. COD guns shoot straight line bullets, unrelistic, BF has bullet drop which is affected by gravity, realistic
4. COD has random spawn points and only teams, BF lets you choose your spawn point and has groups insideteams for better gameplay
5. COD guns make shooting sounds but the guns have no kickback, BF guns have kickback andgive the feeling of actual shooting
6. COD has a console market of 12 year olds forrun and gun, BF has experienced players that want a real challenge with advanced gameplay
7. COD came out in 2003, BF came out in 2002 which means that if anything COD is a BF wannabe game
8. COD killstreaks kill the fun of the game, seeing as you get a killstreak almost every kill or 2, BF doesn't need gimmicks like that to be fun
9. COD has plain sound design, guns sound fake, footsteps are always the same, BF has amazing sound design and everyone knows it
10. COD graphics use an outdated engine, BF series keeps updating with better graphics each generation using newer engines
11. COD console and PC look and feel the same, BF console and PC uses PC's extra hardware for improved graphics over console
12. COD 4 to 8 are reskinned and added killstreaks but otherwise the same game, BF =/= BC (different gameplay and design of gameplay)
13. COD has static level designs, BF has destructable environments that change where players can and can't go (ground and buildings)
14. COD has gun ****s, but no type ****s, BF has medic, engineer, Assault, and more
15. COD UAV is automatic, BFBC2 UAV is controlled by the player fully, fun and strategic

There, I just gave you 15 reasons why BF series >>> COD series. Also, its August 20th at 11:00AM... this is a timestamp for you to remember the exact time and date i owned your thread.

/Thread

[QUOTE="StrongDeadlift"][QUOTE="DangerousLiquid"]

I approve of this ownage!

The arguments CoD haters have been having are ludicrous! They get graphics and visuals, everything else belongs to COD.

I honestly think they hate CoD because they've been nuked too many times. :idea:

Phazevariance

Here's why BF > COD:

1. COD has no vehicles worth mentioning and you can't control them, BFBC2 has many, BF2/BF3 have so many its rediculous
2. COD has small maps but BF has huge maps
3. COD guns shoot straight line bullets, unrelistic, BF has bullet drop which is affected by gravity, realistic
4. COD has random spawn points and only teams, BF lets you choose your spawn point and has groups insideteams for better gameplay
5. COD guns make shooting sounds but the guns have no kickback, BF guns have kickback andgive the feeling of actual shooting
6. COD has a console market of 12 year olds forrun and gun, BF has experienced players that want a real challenge with advanced gameplay
7. COD came out in 2003, BF came out in 2002 which means that if anything COD is a BF wannabe game
8. COD killstreaks kill the fun of the game, seeing as you get a killstreak almost every kill or 2, BF doesn't need gimmicks like that to be fun
9. COD has plain sound design, guns sound fake, footsteps are always the same, BF has amazing sound design and everyone knows it
10. COD graphics use an outdated engine, BF series keeps updating with better graphics each generation using newer engines
11. COD console and PC look and feel the same, BF console and PC uses PC's extra hardware for improved graphics over console
12. COD 4 to 8 are reskinned and added killstreaks but otherwise the same game, BF =/= BC (different gameplay and design of gameplay)

There, I just gave you 12 reasons why BF series >>> COD series. Also, its August 20th at 11:00AM... this is a timestamp for you to remember the exact time and date i owned your thread.

/Thread

1. Vehicles should NOT be in the multiplayer. No balance, and just boring.

2. Huge maps = / = more fun. Does that mean more players = more fun? You FAIL.

3. Battlefield is more realistic, CONGRATULATIONS. More realistic = more fun? Yeah, ARMA is the best game in the world. :roll:

4. This is true. The spawn points in COD can be very bad some times.

5. Once again, more realistic = more fun? NO.

6. Advanced gameplay. :lol: BF is more slow, nothing more. It's not more advanced, just slower and tiring.

7. LOL@CoD wanting to be like BF. The entire industry wants to be COD. Nobody gives attention to BF, sorry.

8. Killstreaks = more fun. That's one of the reasons it's so popular. You know this. :lol:

9. BF has better sound effects. This is true.

10. BF3 > MW3 in graphics. This is true.

11. CoD on the PC looks a lot better than on consoles. You fail.

12. It doesn't matter how much you improve on your last game, if it ends up being BORING TO PLAY. FAIL.

---

Out of your 12 points, you got 4 that are genuine.

The rest don't, in any way, add up to the fun of the game, which is what games are about.

So, to sum it up:

You have self-owned yourself badly.

DICE can stupidly pour $40 billion into amazing graphics, sound effects and visuals, if it's still boring to play, nobody will buy the game and they will just lose money on it. Stupid EA and Dice. :lol::lol::lol::lol:

[QUOTE="Phazevariance"]

[QUOTE="StrongDeadlift"] This. People on here take the hate to far. They refuse to acknowlege that CoD does ANYTHING good and forget that the games are actually good games :roll: / Fluid character movement, The best shooting mechanics in the industry, and best gun customization. Battlefield isnt even on the radar in these categories when compared to Call of Duty. Graphics, vehicles, and environmental destruction are the only things Battlefield 3 has over CoD.DangerousLiquid

Here's why BF > COD:

1. COD has no vehicles worth mentioning and you can't control them, BFBC2 has many, BF2/BF3 have so many its rediculous
2. COD has small maps but BF has huge maps
3. COD guns shoot straight line bullets, unrelistic, BF has bullet drop which is affected by gravity, realistic
4. COD has random spawn points and only teams, BF lets you choose your spawn point and has groups insideteams for better gameplay
5. COD guns make shooting sounds but the guns have no kickback, BF guns have kickback andgive the feeling of actual shooting
6. COD has a console market of 12 year olds forrun and gun, BF has experienced players that want a real challenge with advanced gameplay
7. COD came out in 2003, BF came out in 2002 which means that if anything COD is a BF wannabe game
8. COD killstreaks kill the fun of the game, seeing as you get a killstreak almost every kill or 2, BF doesn't need gimmicks like that to be fun
9. COD has plain sound design, guns sound fake, footsteps are always the same, BF has amazing sound design and everyone knows it
10. COD graphics use an outdated engine, BF series keeps updating with better graphics each generation using newer engines
11. COD console and PC look and feel the same, BF console and PC uses PC's extra hardware for improved graphics over console
12. COD 4 to 8 are reskinned and added killstreaks but otherwise the same game, BF =/= BC (different gameplay and design of gameplay)

There, I just gave you 12 reasons why BF series >>> COD series. Also, its August 20th at 11:00AM... this is a timestamp for you to remember the exact time and date i owned your thread.

/Thread

1. Vehicles should NOT be in the multiplayer. No balance, and just boring.

2. Huge maps = / = more fun. Does that mean more players = more fun? You FAIL.

3. Battlefield is more realistic, CONGRATULATIONS. More realistic = more fun? Yeah, ARMA is the best game in the world. :roll:

4. This is true. The spawn points in COD can be very bad some times.

5. Once again, more realistic = more fun? NO.

6. Advanced gameplay. :lol: BF is more slow, nothing more. It's not more advanced, just slower and tiring.

7. LOL@CoD wanting to be like BF. The entire industry wants to be COD. Nobody gives attention to BF, sorry.

8. Killstreaks = more fun. That's one of the reasons it's so popular. You know this. :lol:

9. BF has better sound effects. This is true.

10. BF3 > MW3 in graphics. This is true.

11. CoD on the PC looks a lot better than on consoles. You fail.

12. It doesn't matter how much you improve on your last game, if it ends up being BORING TO PLAY. FAIL.

---

Out of your 12 points, you got 4 that are genuine.

The rest don't, in any way, add up to the fun of the game, which is what games are about.

So, to sum it up:

You have self-owned yourself badly.

DICE can stupidly pour $40 billion into amazing graphics, sound effects and visuals, if it's still boring to play, nobody will buy the game and they will just lose money on it. Stupid EA and Dice. :lol::lol::lol::lol:

I like the added challenge of compensating for bullet drop when playign FPS games, therefore your points about realism not adding to fun are false so those poitns are now reinstated. bigger maps ARE better especialyl when vehicles are involved.

Unfortunately, self ownage is on yourself fella, you failed to provide a lick of proof for anything you 'argued' back besides saying "nuh uh, i say its the other way for the hell of it".

Sorry to say but vehicles in multiplayer add greatly to the fun. Bullet drop adds to the fun, changing terrain and building structures is more fun. Killstreaks are lame and gimmicky and don't add to the fun when they are as common as bullets.

The FAIL is all yours

[QUOTE="DangerousLiquid"]

[QUOTE="Phazevariance"]

Here's why BF > COD:

1. COD has no vehicles worth mentioning and you can't control them, BFBC2 has many, BF2/BF3 have so many its rediculous
2. COD has small maps but BF has huge maps
3. COD guns shoot straight line bullets, unrelistic, BF has bullet drop which is affected by gravity, realistic
4. COD has random spawn points and only teams, BF lets you choose your spawn point and has groups insideteams for better gameplay
5. COD guns make shooting sounds but the guns have no kickback, BF guns have kickback andgive the feeling of actual shooting
6. COD has a console market of 12 year olds forrun and gun, BF has experienced players that want a real challenge with advanced gameplay
7. COD came out in 2003, BF came out in 2002 which means that if anything COD is a BF wannabe game
8. COD killstreaks kill the fun of the game, seeing as you get a killstreak almost every kill or 2, BF doesn't need gimmicks like that to be fun
9. COD has plain sound design, guns sound fake, footsteps are always the same, BF has amazing sound design and everyone knows it
10. COD graphics use an outdated engine, BF series keeps updating with better graphics each generation using newer engines
11. COD console and PC look and feel the same, BF console and PC uses PC's extra hardware for improved graphics over console
12. COD 4 to 8 are reskinned and added killstreaks but otherwise the same game, BF =/= BC (different gameplay and design of gameplay)

There, I just gave you 12 reasons why BF series >>> COD series. Also, its August 20th at 11:00AM... this is a timestamp for you to remember the exact time and date i owned your thread.

/Thread

Phazevariance

1. Vehicles should NOT be in the multiplayer. No balance, and just boring.

2. Huge maps = / = more fun. Does that mean more players = more fun? You FAIL.

3. Battlefield is more realistic, CONGRATULATIONS. More realistic = more fun? Yeah, ARMA is the best game in the world. :roll:

4. This is true. The spawn points in COD can be very bad some times.

5. Once again, more realistic = more fun? NO.

6. Advanced gameplay. :lol: BF is more slow, nothing more. It's not more advanced, just slower and tiring.

7. LOL@CoD wanting to be like BF. The entire industry wants to be COD. Nobody gives attention to BF, sorry.

8. Killstreaks = more fun. That's one of the reasons it's so popular. You know this. :lol:

9. BF has better sound effects. This is true.

10. BF3 > MW3 in graphics. This is true.

11. CoD on the PC looks a lot better than on consoles. You fail.

12. It doesn't matter how much you improve on your last game, if it ends up being BORING TO PLAY. FAIL.

---

Out of your 12 points, you got 4 that are genuine.

The rest don't, in any way, add up to the fun of the game, which is what games are about.

So, to sum it up:

You have self-owned yourself badly.

DICE can stupidly pour $40 billion into amazing graphics, sound effects and visuals, if it's still boring to play, nobody will buy the game and they will just lose money on it. Stupid EA and Dice. :lol::lol::lol::lol:

I like the added challenge of compensating for bullet drop when playign FPS games, therefore your points about realism not adding to fun are false so those poitns are now reinstated. bigger maps ARE better especialyl when vehicles are involved.

Unfortunately, self ownage is on yourself fella, you failed to provide a lick of proof for anything you 'argued' back besides saying "nuh uh, i say its the other way for the hell of it".

Sorry to say but vehicles in multiplayer add greatly to the fun. Bullet drop adds to the fun, changing terrain and building structures is more fun. Killstreaks are lame and gimmicky and don't add to the fun when they are as common as bullets.

The FAIL is all yours

I don't even need to argue with you. The numbers speak for themselves. 30 million people don't play COD because there is a man pointing a gun to their head, forcing them to do it. They play it because it's FUN. Nobody plays your **** boring BF games. Maybe 500k at most? :lol::lol:

[QUOTE="Phazevariance"]

[QUOTE="DangerousLiquid"]

1. Vehicles should NOT be in the multiplayer. No balance, and just boring.

2. Huge maps = / = more fun. Does that mean more players = more fun? You FAIL.

3. Battlefield is more realistic, CONGRATULATIONS. More realistic = more fun? Yeah, ARMA is the best game in the world. :roll:

4. This is true. The spawn points in COD can be very bad some times.

5. Once again, more realistic = more fun? NO.

6. Advanced gameplay. :lol: BF is more slow, nothing more. It's not more advanced, just slower and tiring.

7. LOL@CoD wanting to be like BF. The entire industry wants to be COD. Nobody gives attention to BF, sorry.

8. Killstreaks = more fun. That's one of the reasons it's so popular. You know this. :lol:

9. BF has better sound effects. This is true.

10. BF3 > MW3 in graphics. This is true.

11. CoD on the PC looks a lot better than on consoles. You fail.

12. It doesn't matter how much you improve on your last game, if it ends up being BORING TO PLAY. FAIL.

---

Out of your 12 points, you got 4 that are genuine.

The rest don't, in any way, add up to the fun of the game, which is what games are about.

So, to sum it up:

You have self-owned yourself badly.

DICE can stupidly pour $40 billion into amazing graphics, sound effects and visuals, if it's still boring to play, nobody will buy the game and they will just lose money on it. Stupid EA and Dice. :lol::lol::lol::lol:

DangerousLiquid

I like the added challenge of compensating for bullet drop when playign FPS games, therefore your points about realism not adding to fun are false so those poitns are now reinstated. bigger maps ARE better especialyl when vehicles are involved.

Unfortunately, self ownage is on yourself fella, you failed to provide a lick of proof for anything you 'argued' back besides saying "nuh uh, i say its the other way for the hell of it".

Sorry to say but vehicles in multiplayer add greatly to the fun. Bullet drop adds to the fun, changing terrain and building structures is more fun. Killstreaks are lame and gimmicky and don't add to the fun when they are as common as bullets.

The FAIL is all yours

I don't even need to argue with you. The numbers speak for themselves. 30 million people don't play COD because there is a man pointing a gun to their head, forcing them to do it. They play it because it's FUN. Nobody plays your **** boring BF games. Maybe 500k at most? :lol::lol:

Inb4 "bu..bu..bu...saelz dont mattar!". You guys forget the games ALSO are higher critically acclaimed and have more people playing at once.

[QUOTE="DangerousLiquid"]

[QUOTE="Phazevariance"] Vehicles are supposed to be unbalanced, think about it, you can't kill a tank with one bullet like you can with a person. Also the range of vehicles in the BF series are quite balanced. Yes, many times more realistic is mroe fun.

I like the added challenge of compensating for bullet drop when playign FPS games, therefore your points about realism not adding to fun are false so those poitns are now reinstated. bigger maps ARE better especialyl when vehicles are involved.

Unfortunately, self ownage is on yourself fella, you failed to provide a lick of proof for anything you 'argued' back besides saying "nuh uh, i say its the other way for the hell of it".

Sorry to say but vehicles in multiplayer add greatly to the fun. Bullet drop adds to the fun, changing terrain and building structures is more fun. Killstreaks are lame and gimmicky and don't add to the fun when they are as common as bullets.

The FAIL is all yours

StrongDeadlift

I don't even need to argue with you. The numbers speak for themselves. 30 million people don't play COD because there is a man pointing a gun to their head, forcing them to do it. They play it because it's FUN. Nobody plays your **** boring BF games. Maybe 500k at most? :lol::lol:

Inb4 "bu..bu..bu...saelz dont mattar!". You guys forget the games ALSO are higher critically acclaimed and have more people playing at once.

This. I don't even know why BF fans are arguing over this fight. MW beats BF in both scores and sales. They are simply beaten as much as they can be beaten. COD is so superior to BF, it's not even interesting.

Now, if it were Halo or Half-Life, it would have been another story, but this... is a finished fight.