Battlefield is not CoD

[ChupathingyX]

Eh...I'm confused. Everyone here is saying "the maps are bigger and the multiplayer is played differently". I still don't get how that overcomes massive similarities in gameplay, story telling style, story itself, graphical style (Grey sweater over one eye, used teabag over other) and emphasis on multiplayer. I don't see how that is a massive difference.

I spent a match of conquest in BF3 going around capping flags and helping my team, I was near the top of the scoreboard at the end.

I spent a match of domination in MW2 going around capping flags and helping my team, I was near the bottom of the scoreboard at the end.

In neither of those matches did a I barely get any kills.

 

[Squilookle]

And in other news: Pigs do not fly, the sky is blue, and space is black.

Do we really need to be told that which we already know? As far as I can see, just about everyone out there does pretty well at telling the two apart, much like they did with older CODs and MOH games, which you would think would be much more difficult to spot the difference with...

 

[5t3v0]

And in other news: Pigs do not fly, the sky is blue, and space is black.

Do we really need to be told that which we already know? As far as I can see, just about everyone out there does pretty well at telling the two apart, much like they did with older CODs and MOH games, which you would think would be much more difficult to spot the difference with...

Well if you talk to a great deal of the people who use this forum, they claim they can't tell the difference. Thats what a lot of people here want to clear up, but no, they are all going off saying how we are all idiots who like samey-games with "No" differences and are especially retarded because "ITS NUT TEH SKYRUM SO WHY ARE YOU INETERESTED?!?!?!"/Rant off.

 

[cryogeist]

the difference is that Cod is a fish while Battlefield 3 is a video game

 

[ElPatron]

2. CoD is a squad shooter

You must have nice team-mates. Battlefield was easily the only franchise where people actually helped each other, sans the carrier TK.

 

[Midnight Crossroads]

Eh...I'm confused. Everyone here is saying "the maps are bigger and the multiplayer is played differently". I still don't get how that overcomes massive similarities in gameplay, story telling style, story itself, graphical style (Grey sweater over one eye, used teabag over other) and emphasis on multiplayer. I don't see how that is a massive difference.

Battlefield tends to not have an actual single-player campaign.

1942's campaign was the maps played in order from either the point of view of the Axis or the Allies with victory or defeat depending on how you performed. It was remarkable in that the Axis could win WW2 in that game. There was no named character. Recent releases have begun to introduce actual campaigns. Bad Company had a humorous campaign about four men in a suicide squad caught up in a quest for mercenary gold. BF3 had a more serious campaign reminiscent of Black Ops.

Call of Duty always has a single-player campaign.

Call of Duty's first campaign was told from the point of view of three different characters, an American paratrooper, a British SAS, and a Russian conscript. There was a story, but it was basically a war story. It was unique at the time for focusing on the combined efforts of all the major Allied powers. Later games would incorporate campaigns by the British and the Poles. Treyarch has made two games which focus on one characters: Big Red One and Black Ops. Black Ops and the recent MW have started to focus on a tighter cast of special forces.



As for gameplay, there's not a huge difference here. You shoot stuff to make them die. Battlefield has always had vehicles. Call of Duty had vehicles in United Offensive and World at War. All the campaigns in Call of Duty as far as I know included vehicle sections. Mostly it comes down to an emphasis on teamwork vs individual ability. One person can carry a team to victory in Call of Duty. It's far harder to do that in Battlefield. Call of Duty's movement is more fluid. Battlefield has more satisfying shooting. Call of Duty encourages individual initiative (kill streaks.) Battlefield rewards players who work together (marking targets.)

 

[Kamelmann]

the difference is that Cod is a fish while Battlefield 3 is a video game

HAH.. that caught me offguard and made me literally laugh out loud.. touche good sir..

*ahem* Call of Duty is *supposed* to be a squad shooter.. but ends up being more an individual competition.. Battlefield is a literal squad/war shooter where making use of the different classes with your team mates will help massively towards success and patience and strategy are quite useful..

Whereas in Call of Duty.. well if you've played Halo its just like that.. but with people starting with one hit kill knifes and grenade launchers (which call of duty 3 appears to bringing back.. and then adding more of..)..

 

[vivalahelvig]

F4LL3N - "If run n' gun was on one end of the scale, Battlefield (3) is on the very opposite end"

LOL. I guess you never played real tactical shooters like these.

Oh yea, Ghost recon, i remember playing that on elite in custom maps where the bots instantly kill you and you can't even see them. OICW w/ OICW grenade launcher ftw!

The yare both good, bf3 being more tactical and cod being more fighty.

TF2 is betters.

 

[MetallicaRulez0]

Battlefield is a much slower, larger-scale, campier shooter. If you like to run and gun, stay the hell away from this series.

If camping a hallway or inside a bush waiting on people sounds like fun to you, you will love Battlefield 3.

 

[Windcaler]

Battlefield has a ton of seperate aspects to it, unlike call of duty. Vehicles are the big thing but you can also play a mostly supportive role if you want. If you want to play a run and gun shooter then Halo or CoD is more for you. However Battlefield is more about tactics and teamwork. If you dont coordinate with or help your team mates you will loose, doesnt matter if its deathmatch, rush, or Conquest

The key phrase to winning is probably "Use everything at your disposal". Dont be afraid to drive a Humvee right up to an objective and take it, then hide and shoot anyone that rushes in. You might get killed but a single ticket is worth taking out a high value target like an enemy Mcom, tank, or defending squad. At the same time, dont waste tickets either. Each player needs to balance cowering in the corner with storming an objective

 

[afroebob]

Nope, its worse!

In all honesty, I haven't played BF in a long time, but considering it was just a clone of CoD 4 (aka the last good one) it didn't appeal to me. I would rather play a game I enjoy.