Now this is a battle between the two most famous game owners. If you don't know which side to pick, there will be information given after this paragraph and couple notifications and etc. Pick wisely. NOTE: This is just for the fun of it and also because I was bored. There should be no trolling against others. Call Of Duty Franchise: Call of Duty first started when Infinity Ward created Call of Duty (The first one) and was soon then a outstanding game that gained a lot of popularity. Treyarch then joined in and made Call of Duty 3. Which was a new type of Call of Duty where it had Vehicle Based Combat and such. There was then Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare which was the new era that they both created. The story mode was incredibly amazing and so was the multiplayer mode... Only to a certain limit that is. After COD4, there was soon noobtubers and such and M16 noobs and so forth. But that didn't bring them down. In fact, Treyarch did the same exact thing only with vehicle based combat. There was a new high explosive perk and a couple others that again made call of duty look like a noob friendly game. The Story had seem to be, okay... not as good as players thought. Soon then, after awhile was Modern Warfare 2. This was the most annoying game that the Call of Duty's have ever had. There were overpowered weapons, same tactics from call of duty 4, incredibly high hatred and more facts that Call of Duty has ever gotten. I'm not trying to make Call of Duty look like a stupid push over but this is actual real facts. A lot of players that play COD know this and most of them don't like to admit and just keep playing it despite it's annoying factors. A lot of players would still give the rating of the game a 9.5 rating or something. Battlefield Franchise: This game franchise didn't suffer the same fate call of duty did. Their first game Battlefield 1942 was a good hit. Not a lot of people knew about it at the time because it was on the computer. But soon after their Battlefield 2 hit, literally 2 million people played the game. It's probably still 2 million right now. It was incredibly realistic tactical. The noobtubes and such did not suffer as much hatred because those could be easily countered with long range sniping, vehicle combat and such. The game literally had all types of vehicles in it. UAV's, Attack Helicopters, Transport Helicopters, Jet Bombers, Jet Fighters, APC's, Tanks and ilght vehicels and such. This allowed for a extremely high amount of fun and unknown possibilities. The only thing that players suffered from the game were the bugs and glitches known to the game. Such as being able walk through buildings or literally sink into the environment and be able to shoot through it and such. But if bugs like these were found, EA and DICE (Owners of BF) would patch them up as soon as possible. Soon, there was a futuristic type: The BF2142. This one was actually as famous as BF2 because of it's futurism and capabilities that BF2 didn't have. It had a EXTREMELY HIGH engine that BF2 couldn't keep up and was basically the big brother of Battlefield 2. There were soon the Bad Company series. It wasn't like call of duty but more like a medium-action paced first person shooter along with vehicle combat. It had squads you could join and use to win your battles and there weren't as nooby tactics out there was modern. But soon after BFBC2 appeared, it sort had that nooby area in again. There were Rocket Launcher noobs, spawn killing faggots who used apaches or sniped at a single spawn point or something. Then there was the hardcore sniper realm where literally everybody, 24 players sniped. It was known for it's incredible sniping realm which EA and DICE have not found a solution to yet. So now it's your turn to vote. This is completely from the fans of both sides and as well as me and people like me. Both Franchises suffered consequences and lost popularity as well as gained popularity for it's incredible gameplay. Seriously though, vote.
I voted Battlefield. It may take a while to get to a spot sometimes only to die quickly, but that isn't nearly as bad as how much COD has ticked me off. It's much more balanced. Also you left out Battlefield 'Nam. (that's Vietnam if you aren;t cool with the lingo)
Am i supposed to be choosing which franchise I think is better? If that is the case, I vote Battlefield. But tbh, I think that the arguements you gave were very opinionated, rather than factual (although they were also fairly factual).
If I was going on a single player campaign opinion. I would say Battlefield. As for Multiplayer, I have no input on this subject.
They're both pretty **** at this current state. Especially Battlefield considering how it's more focused around a destructible environment gimmick and the piss bad Frostbite engine that they masturbate to. The fact that they're making Battlefield 3 on consoles makes me want to break somebodies neck. At this point, they're pretty much pulling a Call of Duty and shitting out Battlefield games for money instead of focusing on more original games like Mirrors Edge (which I would absolutely LOVE to see a sequel for.)
i love battlefield, probably mt favorite game to play with friends. i dont care if it was "original," mirrors edge was one of the worst games ive ever seen.
I bet you that they made half of the money on Mirror's Edge than they made on Bad Company 2. On topic: It really depends what your into. If you hate getting sniped every 10 seconds, you should play COD, if you hate getting noob tubed every 10 seconds, you should play Battlefield. BTW, COD 4 had an enhanced explosives perk, and noob tubing wasn't that bad in WAW, mainly because it was more difficult to acquire the rifle grenades. As for fixing sniping in Bad Company... I think they should take the TF2 approach and limit the amount of snipers per team. It's harsh, but it has to be done. At least make a separate playlist and test it. If it doesn't work out, delete the playlist and save the server space. Also, I enjoy both franchises, so there should be a third option.
I haven't played any Battlefield game, but have three of the Call of duty games. I like call of duty, but it really disgusts me when they come out with a new game once a year. Recently in COD 4, 5, and 6 it seems like little time/care goes into making the game and they are just trying to make money by coming up with more stories. The same goes for Battle field games, there are quite a few of them, which were developed over a relatively short time period. In the halo franchise (dare I bring halo into this) there isn't a new game ever year (with the exception of Halo:ODST Fall 2009 and now Halo: Reach 2010. But still years of work was put into each halo game. Anyway, If I had to pick, it would be the COD franchise, I mean there are so many fans and players. And I learned about it first before Battlefield.... so it must be more popular.