Which one would you choose? Call of Duty or Battlefield :)

[ava notty]

I am a huge videogames lover. And I prefer mostly action games. Although I have not played too many high graphics games sometimes I am lucky to play them over a friend's place. I have played call of duty 1,2,4 modern warfare, modern warfare 2, call of duty 5 but I haven't played any of the battlefield game. But I have seen its video. Which game is your favorite between these two and why? :)

[Lord Vukodlak]

I am a huge videogames lover. And I prefer mostly action games. Although I have not played too many high graphics games sometimes I am lucky to play them over a friend's place. I have played call of duty 1,2,4 modern warfare, modern warfare 2, call of duty 5 but I haven't played any of the battlefield game. But I have seen its video. Which game is your favorite between these two and why? :)

Wolfenstein, I haven’t actually played battlefield so I can’t compare it to call of duty.

[HolyDraconus]

Before battlefield 5 and its sequels, Battlefield was closer to a sim than CoD, who wanted to be an arena arcade shooter. BF usually had better balance of guns, and maps were actual maps and not someone's closet that was labeled a map like in CoD. Downside though is that cause the maps are big its real easy to get picked off by snipers on some. They also been doing the projectile hitscan hybrid engine longer than CoD and as such it feels better. The old saying tho is true: you can go on kill streaks and get a killstreak in CoD, but you can do most of that at anytime in BF. Calling in a jet for 1 minute in CoD is fun but doesn't compare to flying it and routing a team for a full match in BF.

[Anonymouswizard]

Spec-Ops: The Line.

I don't like multiplayer games, and I don't care about graphics, and so to me it'll all come down to story, themes, and gameplay. As far as I'm concerned a shooter is a shooter is a shooter, they don't feel that different to play to me and it's not my preferred genre so 'gameplay in shooters' as a differentiation isn't much of a concern to me. Maybe one game has more big guns or special powers, maybe another hashas better balance between various assault rifles, I don't really have the tastes to have a major opinion on it. So it comes down to story and themes, and I honestly think that Spec-Ops: The Line has some of the best themes I've ever seen in a shooter, including the entire 'you should not be playing this' one.

Now I will admit that from what I've seen Wolfenstein: The New Order is probably it's equal storytelling-wise, and has better gameplay due to using health items rather than regenerating health (or maybe that's just my preferred method). But I couldn't beat an early mission on the lowest difficulty, so I have a less favourable opinion of it.

[warty goblin]

On the whole Battlefield is more interesting to me than CoD. Both have generally terrible campaigns, and both seem to be following the typical industry trend away from simulationesque mechanics towards more RPG mechanics you can pointlessly fiddle with to get that sweet sweet illusion of progress and impact. But Battlefield seems a bit more reluctant to go full RPG stupid, and retains things like destroyable terrain, larger maps making ballistics matter more, and at least the vestiges of creative risk taking.

Really though, the correct answer is Titanfall 2. Better campaign, and a flexible player toolkit that offers vast opportunities for expressive play and player skill.

[Corsair14]

Although I haven't played since Battlefield 3 and spent hundreds of hours on 2 in the Paris subway map chucking grenades down the stairs and trying to get that little edge in the inevitable sniper duals. Why the hell sniper scopes act like spotlights I have no idea since the whole purpose of snipers is to stay hidden and no one would use a scope if it actually gave away their position like it does in the game. There was the occasional cheat that someone could sneak past like an auto aim cheat but the mods usually shut that down pretty quick. I couldn't get into CoD, it was too limiting. Map sizes were too small, battle sizes were too small, no vehicles and so on. Battlefield was just a better game overall. Not sure what edition Battlefield is on now days.

[Man_Over_Game]

On the whole Battlefield is more interesting to me than CoD. Both have generally terrible campaigns, and both seem to be following the typical industry trend away from simulationesque mechanics towards more RPG mechanics you can pointlessly fiddle with to get that sweet sweet illusion of progress and impact. But Battlefield seems a bit more reluctant to go full RPG stupid, and retains things like destroyable terrain, larger maps making ballistics matter more, and at least the vestiges of creative risk taking.

Really though, the correct answer is Titanfall 2. Better campaign, and a flexible player toolkit that offers vast opportunities for expressive play and player skill.

Seconded. Once you go Titanfall 2, it's hard to play another FPS. Everything afterwards just feels so sad and slow and....two-dimensional.

Also, while the campaign is pretty short (like 5 hours), and it's basically the tutorial for the main gameplay, it is by far one of the best FPS campaigns I've ever played. Intense 3d platforming segments that I could only describe as "Guacamelee but 3d".

At one point, you have to wallrun forward between two sloped walls, warping between two different realities as you jump between each wall, because in one reality a segment of the wall is on fire, and in the other reality the wall isn't even there, so you're blinking trying not to fall through a missing wall or getting set on fire.

And then you get to use your blinking tech to warp around hordes of badguys that are trying to surround you while they think you have some kind of invisibility/teleportation tech while you butcher them between blinks. It's a ride, man.

[Corsair14]

But isn't multiplayer in Titan fall only a small number of people?

[Gwynchan'rGwyll]

Honestly, at this point, Battlefield moved to trying to be Call of Duty, and there are a lot of PC games now that do Battlefield's more simmish-but-still-fun shooter gameplay better than Battlefield did (Squad, Rising Storm, Red Orchestra, Post-Scriptum, etc)

I used to play Battlefield 1942 religiously as a kid, and then I once played in an organized campaign of the Forgotten Hope 2 WW2 total conversion mod for Battlefield 2 a lot.

[Corsair14]

I remember the old Battlefield 1942. You had to purchase another first person shooter to get the engine and then download Battlefield from somewhere else in order to get the WW2 game. Played that quite a bit as well. I guess it did well enough they started an actual company.

[Lord Fullbladder, Master of Goblins]

But isn't multiplayer in Titan fall only a small number of people?

I think it's usually 8v8 Pilots, with lots of NPC Grunts and Spectres reinforcing each side. I don't know how it compares to CoD or Battlefield.

[Corsair14]

BF had 64 per side.

[Jon talks a lot]

On the whole Battlefield is more interesting to me than CoD. Both have generally terrible campaigns

Hard disagree.

The Black Ops campaign is a top notch story. The emotional path towards the resolution in beautiful. The characters are amazing. You understand mason, you get why he does what he does.

The Black Ops 2 campaign, while very different from the first, has an interesting story of war, who you can trust, and what happens when you trust the wrong guy.

The Cold War Storyline is weaker than these, but it is still a good showing of what one can do with good characters. And the ending was impeccable.

[warty goblin]

I have very hazy memories of Black Ops, as in I know I played some of it but didn't finish. I can't say how far I got though. Mostly I recall having the same gripe I have with more or less every CoD campaign I've played; the combination of ultra-linearity, personality free guns and uninteresting AI combines to create a lower consciousness state of apathy and disengagement. Maybe they do pack a great story in there, it doesn't matter because accessing that requires playing the game, and I kinda hate the feel and mechanics of CoD. I've had this view since I played the Modern Warfare demo like 10,000 years ago, and every time I try a CoD I react the same way.

The only sort of exception was Infinite War, which I at least finished. The sci-fi guns edged into the realm of almost interesting, and the 0-g and space fighter bits broke up the corridor shooting a bit. It still wasn't good, but it wasn't as brain-meltingly flaccid as the other ones I've tried.

[NeoVid]

I still haven't found a game that can substitute for the experience I had playing Battlefield 2. Entire armies on both sides trying to hold control of a large region, with both team coordination and ninjacapping being critical to your team's progress, a few players specializing in vehicles being game-defining... and the most satisfying experience of all being when you managed to snag the Commander slot for that match, and have an impact on the entire map. Someone with a view of the entire map being able to issue orders to the squads on the field is a mechanic I wish I could experience again. A well-timed UAV or supply drop could change the results of a massive fight... unless an enemy commando had already sabotaged your HQ buildings and shut down your command abilities. Man... good times.

Call of Duty's multiplayer has never grabbed me, so the only ones of that series I've seriously played were the ones with the most interesting campaigns, Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops. Before I played Black Ops, I never would have expected a CoD to be one of the best-written games of that year, but it happened.

[warty goblin]

I still haven't found a game that can substitute for the experience I had playing Battlefield 2. Entire armies on both sides trying to hold control of a large region, with both team coordination and ninjacapping being critical to your team's progress, a few players specializing in vehicles being game-defining... and the most satisfying experience of all being when you managed to snag the Commander slot for that match, and have an impact on the entire map. Someone with a view of the entire map being able to issue orders to the squads on the field is a mechanic I wish I could experience again. A well-timed UAV or supply drop could change the results of a massive fight... unless an enemy commando had already sabotaged your HQ buildings and shut down your command abilities. Man... good times.


I haven't dug into it properly yet and it's definitely rougher round the edges than BF2, but Eximius (https://store.steampowered.com/app/505740/Eximius_Seize_the_Frontline/)might do the trick for you.

[JordanM]

I am a huge videogames lover. And I prefer mostly action games. Although I have not played too many high graphics games sometimes I am lucky to play them over a friend's place. I have played call of duty 1,2,4 modern warfare, modern warfare 2, call of duty 5 but I haven't played any of the battlefield game. But I have seen its video. Which game is your favorite between these two and why? :)

Most of time I play BF 5 despite it's "gender friendly game" but the physics and graphics both astounding. And sometimes I play COD: Warzone the best battle royale right now :smallamused:

[JordanM]

I am a huge videogames lover. And I prefer mostly action games. Although I have not played too many high graphics games sometimes I am lucky to play them over a friend's place. I have played call of duty 1,2,4 modern warfare, modern warfare 2, call of duty 5 but I haven't played any of the battlefield game. But I have seen its video. Which game is your favorite between these two and why? :)

Anyways both games have pros and cons :):smallcool: