Post: Battlefield vs COD [GIVE ME YOUR OPINION]
Options
04-06-2013, 12:59 AM
#1
Pinch-_The-Kuba
Banned
COD
small maps
bad graphics
run, shoot, die, rinse and repeat
expensive DLC (not much to add)
doesn't satisfy
full of 5 year olds
Battlefield
huge maps
awesome graphics
drive vehicles, shoot, play tactically, troll snipers, never get bored
expensive DLC (they add tons and tons of new stuff)
Battlefield does satisfy a lot
for mature players
My view may be a little biased but i did play COD, a lot! Before i discovered battlefield, i didn't know what good, tactical, meaningful and entertaining gameplay was like. Battlefield changed it all, i learnt that i shouldn't pay 60pounds every year for a game which only adds new maps and killstreaks.
Could you guys please give me your views on that topic? I want to know which game you prefer and why... Thx
The following user groaned Pinch-_The-Kuba for this awful post:
04-09-2013, 05:36 PM
#11
Pinch-_The-Kuba
Banned
04-09-2013, 06:24 PM
#13
Nickolas47
Vault dweller
04-09-2013, 06:48 PM
#14
RavagedBoom
Sing My Guitar
04-10-2013, 02:24 PM
#15
Pinch-_The-Kuba
Banned
I can't agree with you on that one. I enjoy playing BF3 solo as i can go on a hardcore server and plant c4 on my team's jets and then blow them up in the air hahaha
---------- Post added at 02:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:23 PM ----------
Yeah, COD is a noob game...
Originally posted by Nickolas47
CoD if You are playing solo
BF if You are playing as part of a team
BF if You are playing as part of a team
---------- Post added at 02:24 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:23 PM ----------
Yeah, COD is a noob game...
Originally posted by RavagedBoom
Well said. Well said indeed.
04-10-2013, 10:49 PM
#16
MRxNASHTY
Bounty hunter
Both have different play styles, for instance, Battlefield being slower as it has larger maps also the use of tanks planes etc...
this then gives a player a choice of what he may want to be a role'' for his team waiting for tanks to spawn again slowing gameplay down when he could be just getting into the thick of the action.
Battlefields story line was okay, the previous two Battlefields were much better off topic however Battlfiel does have stunning graphics as it uses the frostbite engine.
It is all well and good trashing, trolling, sh''itting on a game but if you want to define games, for what they are you have to be
technical as games are much more than just '' Popping the disk into a console or PC'' game developers design a game for specific
audiences also for specific reasons which I doubt most of the people in this thread know anything about unless they are game developers !.
Call of Duty revolutionized ''FPS'' First Person Shooters, for the current gen'' generation consoles from the 64 bit consoles ''ps2''
it improved vastly on many issues from prior console shooters in terms of ''Frame Rate association'' to kill streaks, an abundance
of new implementations.
If you really want to go in dept I could say well ''
OOM'' Thee very first ''FPS'' started it all and we should all look at it then judge
the modern ''FPS' games today but you can't.
It was made for different reasons play styles, as well as gamer's, threads like this just evolve into mindless ''NO COD IS BETTER !'' ........ '' NO BF IS BETTER STFU '' and actually have no meaning at all as the person who started the thread intended for his own personal entertainment as it just gets members here on NGU frustrated and start flaming each other.
They are two very different games COD'' , ''BF'' !!!!!..........
Although I will admit in recent time's COD is lacking in any originality but that happens with all games as they mature and die.
o if yOu bothered to read this thank you and if you FLAME I will not reply. , )
PEACE OUT.
---------- Post added at 10:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:46 PM ----------
forgot to quote
this then gives a player a choice of what he may want to be a role'' for his team waiting for tanks to spawn again slowing gameplay down when he could be just getting into the thick of the action.
Battlefields story line was okay, the previous two Battlefields were much better off topic however Battlfiel does have stunning graphics as it uses the frostbite engine.
It is all well and good trashing, trolling, sh''itting on a game but if you want to define games, for what they are you have to be
technical as games are much more than just '' Popping the disk into a console or PC'' game developers design a game for specific
audiences also for specific reasons which I doubt most of the people in this thread know anything about unless they are game developers !.
Call of Duty revolutionized ''FPS'' First Person Shooters, for the current gen'' generation consoles from the 64 bit consoles ''ps2''
it improved vastly on many issues from prior console shooters in terms of ''Frame Rate association'' to kill streaks, an abundance
of new implementations.
If you really want to go in dept I could say well ''
OOM'' Thee very first ''FPS'' started it all and we should all look at it then judge the modern ''FPS' games today but you can't.
It was made for different reasons play styles, as well as gamer's, threads like this just evolve into mindless ''NO COD IS BETTER !'' ........ '' NO BF IS BETTER STFU '' and actually have no meaning at all as the person who started the thread intended for his own personal entertainment as it just gets members here on NGU frustrated and start flaming each other.
They are two very different games COD'' , ''BF'' !!!!!..........
Although I will admit in recent time's COD is lacking in any originality but that happens with all games as they mature and die.
o if yOu bothered to read this thank you and if you FLAME I will not reply. , )
PEACE OUT.
---------- Post added at 10:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:46 PM ----------
Originally posted by MRxNASHTY
Both have different play styles, for instance, Battlefield being slower as it has larger maps also the use of tanks planes etc...
this then gives a player a choice of what he may want to be a role'' for his team waiting for tanks to spawn again slowing gameplay down when he could be just getting into the thick of the action.
Battlefields story line was okay, the previous two Battlefields were much better off topic however Battlfiel does have stunning graphics as it uses the frostbite engine.
It is all well and good trashing, trolling, sh''itting on a game but if you want to define games, for what they are you have to be
technical as games are much more than just '' Popping the disk into a console or PC'' game developers design a game for specific
audiences also for specific reasons which I doubt most of the people in this thread know anything about unless they are game developers !.
Call of Duty revolutionized ''FPS'' First Person Shooters, for the current gen'' generation consoles from the 64 bit consoles ''ps2''
it improved vastly on many issues from prior console shooters in terms of ''Frame Rate association'' to kill streaks, an abundance
of new implementations.
If you really want to go in dept I could say well ''OOM'' Thee very first ''FPS'' started it all and we should all look at it then judge
the modern ''FPS' games today but you can't.
It was made for different reasons play styles, as well as gamer's, threads like this just evolve into mindless ''NO COD IS BETTER !'' ........ '' NO BF IS BETTER STFU '' and actually have no meaning at all as the person who started the thread intended for his own personal entertainment as it just gets members here on NGU frustrated and start flaming each other.
They are two very different games COD'' , ''BF'' !!!!!..........
Although I will admit in recent time's COD is lacking in any originality but that happens with all games as they mature and die.
o if yOu bothered to read this thank you and if you FLAME I will not reply. , )
PEACE OUT.
this then gives a player a choice of what he may want to be a role'' for his team waiting for tanks to spawn again slowing gameplay down when he could be just getting into the thick of the action.
Battlefields story line was okay, the previous two Battlefields were much better off topic however Battlfiel does have stunning graphics as it uses the frostbite engine.
It is all well and good trashing, trolling, sh''itting on a game but if you want to define games, for what they are you have to be
technical as games are much more than just '' Popping the disk into a console or PC'' game developers design a game for specific
audiences also for specific reasons which I doubt most of the people in this thread know anything about unless they are game developers !.
Call of Duty revolutionized ''FPS'' First Person Shooters, for the current gen'' generation consoles from the 64 bit consoles ''ps2''
it improved vastly on many issues from prior console shooters in terms of ''Frame Rate association'' to kill streaks, an abundance
of new implementations.
If you really want to go in dept I could say well ''
OOM'' Thee very first ''FPS'' started it all and we should all look at it then judge the modern ''FPS' games today but you can't.
It was made for different reasons play styles, as well as gamer's, threads like this just evolve into mindless ''NO COD IS BETTER !'' ........ '' NO BF IS BETTER STFU '' and actually have no meaning at all as the person who started the thread intended for his own personal entertainment as it just gets members here on NGU frustrated and start flaming each other.
They are two very different games COD'' , ''BF'' !!!!!..........
Although I will admit in recent time's COD is lacking in any originality but that happens with all games as they mature and die.
o if yOu bothered to read this thank you and if you FLAME I will not reply. , )
PEACE OUT.
Originally posted by Kuba
Why do people love COD so much? I personally love Battlefield 3 more than any of the COD games, i just don't understand why someone might choose COD over BF3! Just look at the differences...
COD
small maps
bad graphics
run, shoot, die, rinse and repeat
expensive DLC (not much to add)
doesn't satisfy
full of 5 year olds
Battlefield
huge maps
awesome graphics
drive vehicles, shoot, play tactically, troll snipers, never get bored
expensive DLC (they add tons and tons of new stuff)
Battlefield does satisfy a lot
for mature players
My view may be a little biased but i did play COD, a lot! Before i discovered battlefield, i didn't know what good, tactical, meaningful and entertaining gameplay was like. Battlefield changed it all, i learnt that i shouldn't pay 60pounds every year for a game which only adds new maps and killstreaks.
Could you guys please give me your views on that topic? I want to know which game you prefer and why... Thx
COD
small maps
bad graphics
run, shoot, die, rinse and repeat
expensive DLC (not much to add)
doesn't satisfy
full of 5 year olds
Battlefield
huge maps
awesome graphics
drive vehicles, shoot, play tactically, troll snipers, never get bored
expensive DLC (they add tons and tons of new stuff)
Battlefield does satisfy a lot
for mature players
My view may be a little biased but i did play COD, a lot! Before i discovered battlefield, i didn't know what good, tactical, meaningful and entertaining gameplay was like. Battlefield changed it all, i learnt that i shouldn't pay 60pounds every year for a game which only adds new maps and killstreaks.
Could you guys please give me your views on that topic? I want to know which game you prefer and why... Thx
forgot to quote
04-10-2013, 11:08 PM
#17
Pichu
PICHU.
PICHU.
Originally posted by MRxNASHTY
Both have different play styles, for instance, Battlefield being slower as it has larger maps also the use of tanks planes etc...
You can set up matches to be very quick fast pace matches. There are about 5-6 different maps that allow you to do so in about 2-3 different game modes.
Yea, it's not as fast as cod because you don't spawn right next to someone but BF3 makes up for that by allowing you to spawn near a teammate which makes up for the distance and the time.
I used to play COD a lot, I played Battlefield 1943 and wasn't a huge fan. My friend told me get BF3 as I was growing tired of raping everyone in matches. (I swear, MW3, I slaughtered people, always at the top... when it was my and my friend, fuck death everywhere).
I got BF3, I got a few kills and a few deaths. The more I played the better I got. Then, now I generally score within the top 3; (If I join at the beginning) or the top 5 if I join sorta late.
---------- Post added at 04:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:04 PM ----------
Originally posted by MRxNASHTY
Although I will admit in recent time's COD is lacking in any originality but that happens with all games as they mature and die.
I agree here. I feel as though they need to move onto a different series. Give COD a rest for 5 years and then come back.
Hell, they can come up with fake wars and shit or bring back and recreate COD 1 and 2 as a full on complete game with a historic time jump. Then make it all one online game with the older weapons being used and then the newer ones being a combination of possibly zombies or some shit.
04-10-2013, 11:23 PM
#18
MRxNASHTY
Bounty hunter
Originally posted by MRxNASHTY
Both have different play styles, for instance, Battlefield being slower as it has larger maps also the use of tanks planes etc...
this then gives a player a choice of what he may want to be a role'' for his team waiting for tanks to spawn again slowing gameplay down when he could be just getting into the thick of the action.
Battlefields story line was okay, the previous two Battlefields were much better off topic however Battlfiel does have stunning graphics as it uses the frostbite engine.
It is all well and good trashing, trolling, sh''itting on a game but if you want to define games, for what they are you have to be
technical as games are much more than just '' Popping the disk into a console or PC'' game developers design a game for specific
audiences also for specific reasons which I doubt most of the people in this thread know anything about unless they are game developers !.
Call of Duty revolutionized ''FPS'' First Person Shooters, for the current gen'' generation consoles from the 64 bit consoles ''ps2''
it improved vastly on many issues from prior console shooters in terms of ''Frame Rate association'' to kill streaks, an abundance
of new implementations.
If you really want to go in dept I could say well ''OOM'' Thee very first ''FPS'' started it all and we should all look at it then judge
the modern ''FPS' games today but you can't.
It was made for different reasons play styles, as well as gamer's, threads like this just evolve into mindless ''NO COD IS BETTER !'' ........ '' NO BF IS BETTER STFU '' and actually have no meaning at all as the person who started the thread intended for his own personal entertainment as it just gets members here on NGU frustrated and start flaming each other.
They are two very different games COD'' , ''BF'' !!!!!..........
Although I will admit in recent time's COD is lacking in any originality but that happens with all games as they mature and die.
o if yOu bothered to read this thank you and if you FLAME I will not reply. , )
PEACE OUT.
---------- Post added at 10:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:46 PM ----------
forgot to quote
this then gives a player a choice of what he may want to be a role'' for his team waiting for tanks to spawn again slowing gameplay down when he could be just getting into the thick of the action.
Battlefields story line was okay, the previous two Battlefields were much better off topic however Battlfiel does have stunning graphics as it uses the frostbite engine.
It is all well and good trashing, trolling, sh''itting on a game but if you want to define games, for what they are you have to be
technical as games are much more than just '' Popping the disk into a console or PC'' game developers design a game for specific
audiences also for specific reasons which I doubt most of the people in this thread know anything about unless they are game developers !.
Call of Duty revolutionized ''FPS'' First Person Shooters, for the current gen'' generation consoles from the 64 bit consoles ''ps2''
it improved vastly on many issues from prior console shooters in terms of ''Frame Rate association'' to kill streaks, an abundance
of new implementations.
If you really want to go in dept I could say well ''
OOM'' Thee very first ''FPS'' started it all and we should all look at it then judge the modern ''FPS' games today but you can't.
It was made for different reasons play styles, as well as gamer's, threads like this just evolve into mindless ''NO COD IS BETTER !'' ........ '' NO BF IS BETTER STFU '' and actually have no meaning at all as the person who started the thread intended for his own personal entertainment as it just gets members here on NGU frustrated and start flaming each other.
They are two very different games COD'' , ''BF'' !!!!!..........
Although I will admit in recent time's COD is lacking in any originality but that happens with all games as they mature and die.
o if yOu bothered to read this thank you and if you FLAME I will not reply. , )
PEACE OUT.
---------- Post added at 10:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:46 PM ----------
forgot to quote
Originally posted by Pichu
You can set up matches to be very quick fast pace matches. There are about 5-6 different maps that allow you to do so in about 2-3 different game modes.
Yea, it's not as fast as cod because you don't spawn right next to someone but BF3 makes up for that by allowing you to spawn near a teammate which makes up for the distance and the time.
I used to play COD a lot, I played Battlefield 1943 and wasn't a huge fan. My friend told me get BF3 as I was growing tired of raping everyone in matches. (I swear, MW3, I slaughtered people, always at the top... when it was my and my friend, fuck death everywhere).
I got BF3, I got a few kills and a few deaths. The more I played the better I got. Then, now I generally score within the top 3; (If I join at the beginning) or the top 5 if I join sorta late.
---------- Post added at 04:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:04 PM ----------
I agree here. I feel as though they need to move onto a different series. Give COD a rest for 5 years and then come back.
Hell, they can come up with fake wars and shit or bring back and recreate COD 1 and 2 as a full on complete game with a historic time jump. Then make it all one online game with the older weapons being used and then the newer ones being a combination of possibly zombies or some shit.
Yea, it's not as fast as cod because you don't spawn right next to someone but BF3 makes up for that by allowing you to spawn near a teammate which makes up for the distance and the time.
I used to play COD a lot, I played Battlefield 1943 and wasn't a huge fan. My friend told me get BF3 as I was growing tired of raping everyone in matches. (I swear, MW3, I slaughtered people, always at the top... when it was my and my friend, fuck death everywhere).
I got BF3, I got a few kills and a few deaths. The more I played the better I got. Then, now I generally score within the top 3; (If I join at the beginning) or the top 5 if I join sorta late.
---------- Post added at 04:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:04 PM ----------
I agree here. I feel as though they need to move onto a different series. Give COD a rest for 5 years and then come back.
Hell, they can come up with fake wars and shit or bring back and recreate COD 1 and 2 as a full on complete game with a historic time jump. Then make it all one online game with the older weapons being used and then the newer ones being a combination of possibly zombies or some shit.
In both quotes you made good points however I just feel they are both very different and for different play styles.
Thank you though for your reply much appreciated.
Copyright © 2026, NextGenUpdate.
All Rights Reserved.
