I'm not a COD nor a BF fan but I have played both and have realeased one thing. That in my opinion COD is better if it tries a little to make itself attrective to new players. MW was so good that it was keeping, it keeps,and will be keeping (as it seems) the COD running for years to come. It has one of the most addicted multiplayers but it doesnt use it. They dont care as it seems to make an improvement over not the last two but the original four years ago! On the other side BF has make big improvements and each game look different from the other in many ways. But all tis is not their fault but our fault. They make the same game over and over again and we keep buying it. And I ask myself why? There are two reasons. The first reason is not in casual gamers like the most who see the good and the bad things in a game and they buy the better but on gamers who are devoted to a game and they don't buy nothing else. That what keeps COD running. That's that one hyphotetic reason the game made so much sales. The other is that when one gamer wnts to buy one of the popular shouters (BF3 or MW3) he is seeing that the COD has much more sales so he thinks that this is the most popular with the most and all his friends play this so why will I not play it.

The same thing happened to Assassins Creed. The first from the second had major improvements but after that the other two was just like copies of the second. The developers once they found the ingredients that make their game the best the keep on that because they are afraid what will happen if they change the game. But we have to blame ourselves for this. If a sequel is just a little different from the other we say it is bad and we don't buy. That is what the developers think. If we change we risk to lose the fans and it will be very hard to win them back or not cahnge it almost a bit and be the same? At the place of COD they think that now that they have found the perfect game they will keep it the same. ONCE SOMEONE WILL WAKE THEM UP! WE!