Call of duty vs Battlefield. Which is better?

[Malta]

I'm not speaking about the technical side with the controls and step...just the fact that you're flying a plane to gun someone down. Both games use realistic guns, aircrafts and helicopters. Both are based on real life warfare, they just have different approaches to it.

The shooting mechanics, the movement mechanics are eerily similar between both games.

That's the thing, you can't just say it's similar when one allows full control and the other doesn't. The whole premise is that you have to strip away key features for them to be the same, so clearly it's not the case. The games do not have the same feel either

 

[Camammal]

I'm not speaking about the technical side with the controls and step...just the fact that you're flying a plane to gun someone down. Both games use realistic guns, aircrafts and helicopters. Both are based on real life warfare, they just have different approaches to it.

The shooting mechanics, the movement mechanics are eerily similar between both games.

 

[AkaDemiK]

That's the thing, you can't just say it's similar when one allows full control and the other doesn't. The whole premise is that you have to strip away key features for them to be the same, so clearly it's not the case. The games do not have the same feel either

true

I think they do have the same feel. The guns are similar, the ADS, the killtimes, the way you run and shyt..I think it's similar.

 

[Juven]

I got both, and they both have their pros and cons.

BF3 did a lot of things right. Graphics, guns, they just seem to offer you much much more. I played it on the PC and it ran like garbage (even after I had the lowest settings on it would lag like crazy). Maps were way too big imo and games took forever. BO2 doesnt offer as much, but I just wanted something fast pace and play it more. If you know ppl on BF3 and dont mind how long the games take, then id day go for that.

 

[Michael9100]

I was big modern warfare fan until I bought bf3 late last year...... imo what makes bf3 better than cod are vehicles, period! While cod gives just infantry, bf3 gives you tanks, jets, helicopters and even amphibious vehicles..... its an all around experience.....



Now my one complaint with bf3 is on some maps you get players who are extremely good with a certain vehicle and can single handily hold off an entire team...... a perfect example of this would be damavand peak conquest where a player (usually lvl 100) can sit in the tunnel and pick off everyone with almost no resistance.....

 

[The G.O.D II]

I'm not speaking about the technical side with the controls and step...just the fact that you're flying a plane to gun someone down. Both games use realistic guns, aircrafts and helicopters. Both are based on real life warfare, they just have different approaches to it.

The shooting mechanics, the movement mechanics are eerily similar between both games.

Breh have u actually played a battlefield game?

 

[AkaDemiK]

Breh have u actually played a battlefield game?

yes nikka

 

[Camammal]

ayooo lets hop on this bf3 like good ole times on the ps3.

 

[Dirty Mcdrawz]

Neither of them is an arena shooter....do you know what arena shooters are? Both are in the same realistic, warfare genre when it comes to shooters.

they're nowhere near the same and the gameplay is totally different

 

[NonPareil]

Apples and oranges, chess and checkers.

I dont think theres a better game because theyre both fun, its a matter of what youre in the mood for. Youre cheating yourself not trying both.

I prefer BF though strictly because theres no killstreak camping nonsense. Go camping in BF and your ass is camping, enjoying some alone time. You have way more objective teamwork

 

[The G.O.D II]

yes nikka

You sure. Because the shyt your saying has me like And judging by the other responses in here I'm not the only one. You sure your not getting battlefield confused with some offbrand XBLA battleforce shyt?

 

[Jazzy B.]

Even though Call of Duty is recycled trash, it's smaller, simpler and arcade style gameplay makes it funner and more enjoyable than Battlefield which is why everyone hops on it. There's far more sense of enjoyment when you get a nuke, get the prestige rank or rack up 70 kills in one game than playing tactically and being a "medic", the big maps also tend to make the game boring as you find yourself running about for a while and searching for a target where as in COD unless you camp you'll see an enemy about every 10-15 seconds. It also doesn't help that people have the "lone gun" mindset and opt to go solo when your meant to play as a "team".

 

[Camammal]

nikkas act like there is not a deathmatch mode in bf3 and the maps are smaller for those modes

 

[newarkhiphop]

Men lie women lie, numbers dont lie.

 

[Tic Tac T O]

BF3 maps were too big on console plus opposing players were steady backing out on us when we rolled deep which only made matters worse. the infantry only matches were straight, but weren't as engaging as COD gameplay.

I've experienced both, enjoyed both, but Ghosts on X1 will be the last of either that I purchase