I never played Battlefield, how does it compare to COD?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by kingoflife9 (1987 posts) -

I never played a bf game, played all the cod's. How does the gameplay compare...like what makes better or worse.

#2 Posted by marcheegsr (2835 posts) -

Call of duty is all about run and gun. Mindless shooting especially online.

Battlefield is more about teamwork and a slower battle. It feels like a real war. Its more realistic.

It comes down to what you like better. I loved call of duty up until 2-3. Black ops was ok. But after getting into battlefield, I would never go back to the cod series.

#3 Posted by slim_chance (319 posts) -

The new battlefield 4 feels a lot like COD, in a good way. Shooting feels like COD now except there is bullet drop, more realistic, unlike COD. It's a bit slower pace sometimes. Spawn system is different, you can spawn on your squad teammates and bases you have control of. You cannot spawn on your other teammates unless they are in your squad. You can have up to 5 squad teammates. There are perks like COD but you also have Squad perks that goes to your whole squad if you equip them. There are 4 classes Assault, Engineer, Support, Recon. Each one has unique abilities, like revive, provide extra ammo, repair vehicles, c4/rockets to blow up Vehicles, ect, ect.

Also there is no kill streaks like COD, which can be a good or bad thing. There is no spy plane but you can press a button if you see an enemy, and that enemy shows up on your teams mini map, and also a triangle above the enemy's head pops up, making them easier to spot for everyone.

Driving vehicles is easier now in BF4. Vehicles can be fun, but they can be very frustrating, if some good players get one. They become impossible to kill sometimes. Vehicles also level up the more you use them, unlocking perks to make them stronger. The graphics are better in my opinion to COD also.

#4 Posted by ShoTTyMcNaDeS (2101 posts) -

BF and CoD are night and day. BF is EXTREMELY team based. If you try and lone wolf it in a BF game, you will get murdered!!! The maps are huge and you have to know your role and stick to it. BF is not a game that you just randomly switch up classes. You need to find what works for you play style and stick with and master that class. Unless you have friends that are going to play BF4 with you, I'd avoid it. Communication is key!

CoD is run and gun, but also takes patience and tactics. You can run and gun and still play smart. Most people that I play with prefer CoD simply because the matches are fun and frenetic and the pacing is much more fun in CoD. One match of Conquest in BF4 might take 30 minutes whereas you can probably play 3 or 4 matches of Domination or TDM in CoD in that same time frame. Again like in BF, you should find the class typoe tjhat works for you and stick to it. Now because of the smaller map size and player count in CoD, you can have multiple classes set up and get good at a few and get away with it. BF is much more dependent on its players maxing out a particular class to be the most effective with it.

For me, the biggest downfall for BF games is the fact that if you die and your team loses control of a certain point, you may have no choice but to spawn back at your original spawn if you team gets wiped out. Couple that scenario with the high probability that your team has already plundered all of the vehicles, you may actually get stuck running to the action which on some maps might in reality take you 10 minutes.

Now, Ill readily admit that I am nowhere near the BF player that I am the CoD player simply because I have devoted more time to CoD than I have to BF. But at the end of the day, you will have to decide for yourself which game fits your play style and which one has attracted more of your friends.

#6 Posted by The_Last_Ride (72279 posts) -

COD is very arcady and it's quick shooting in small maps. Always something happening, but it's a lone wolf game. It also doesn't have the graphics of Battlefield

Battlefield relies more on teamwork, is slower. Has better graphics. Destructability and bunch of other stuff like tanks, choppers, jets. It's a better package

#7 Posted by The_Rick_14 (9945 posts) -

@kingoflife9 said:

I never played a bf game, played all the cod's. How does the gameplay compare...like what makes better or worse.

If you were interested a few weeks back you should have hopped in the Open Beta and could have come to your own conclusions on it.

That said, other responses in this thread have echoed my own opinions. While it's possible to run solo in BF, it's extremely difficult and you're much better off working with others.

#8 Posted by kingoflife9 (1987 posts) -

Sounds good, very sick of the run and gun annoying boredom of cod. I was looking for a shooter to get with the ps4 that has more brains and strategy.

#9 Posted by Geminon (1095 posts) -

@kingoflife9 said:

I never played a bf game, played all the cod's. How does the gameplay compare...like what makes better or worse.

how does it compare? uh... better... in every way possible.

#10 Posted by SgtSutton (347 posts) -

I agree with most everything people have already said. BF is way more team oriented. You can't win a war by yourself. COD is about individual skill, 1 vs 1 battles. Battlefield is much more realistic, and if you actually coordinate as a team or squad you can dominate a match.

I much prefer BF due to the teamwork and scope of the maps. If your into run and gun/smaller maps, stick with COD. If you want a more realistic war experience go with BF. I don't think either is better or worse, its about knowing how you like to play shooter games and pick one to your skills/wants. COD is way better if you just want deathmatch and small maps/battles

#11 Posted by wolf503 (128 posts) -

@The_Last_Ride said:

COD is very arcady and it's quick shooting in small maps. Always something happening, but it's a lone wolf game. It also doesn't have the graphics of Battlefield

Battlefield relies more on teamwork, is slower. Has better graphics. Destructability and bunch of other stuff like tanks, choppers, jets. It's a better package

Actually BF does have the CQ maps in BF3 to cater to the CoD fans more. I have no doubt they will have smaller CQ maps in BF4 as well.

If I could sum them up.:

CoD: nothing but a better version of Counter Strike when it comes to MP, SP is stunning but short. You can do things as a team or lone wolf but it doesn't matter either way as a single guy can wipe out a whole team, by accident.

BF: Better version of most competitive MP FPSs out there, when it comes to MP they usually cater to all players with big and small maps. You can actually go lone wolf in BF, but in a more realistic way, you don't survive as long going solo. But! when you do go solo, it's a very 'behind enemy lines' kind of feeling, you actually feel that once you're alone even you're guns can't help you, this still ruins the game a bit as you either will or won't get killed by a lone wolf once in a while, especially if they are skilled or typical CoD gamers. BF also has teams, it is encouraged by lots of people and the developers, but I have yet to see them actually enforce team work in a BF game. SP in BF is atrocious.

BF would be my choice because it creates better immersion and delivers a much better experience for MP. I just wish 1 day either of the companies would combine the 2 in a way to create a game that has both great SP and MP. Not just 1 or the other.

#13 Edited by The_Last_Ride (72279 posts) -

@wolf503 said:

@The_Last_Ride said:

COD is very arcady and it's quick shooting in small maps. Always something happening, but it's a lone wolf game. It also doesn't have the graphics of Battlefield

Battlefield relies more on teamwork, is slower. Has better graphics. Destructability and bunch of other stuff like tanks, choppers, jets. It's a better package

Actually BF does have the CQ maps in BF3 to cater to the CoD fans more. I have no doubt they will have smaller CQ maps in BF4 as well.

If I could sum them up.:

CoD: nothing but a better version of Counter Strike when it comes to MP, SP is stunning but short. You can do things as a team or lone wolf but it doesn't matter either way as a single guy can wipe out a whole team, by accident.

BF: Better version of

most

competitive MP FPSs out there, when it comes to MP they usually cater to all players with big and small maps. You

can

actually go lone wolf in BF, but in a more realistic way, you don't survive as long going solo. But! when you do go solo, it's a very 'behind enemy lines' kind of feeling, you actually feel that once you're alone even you're guns can't help you, this still ruins the game a bit as you either will or won't get killed by a lone wolf once in a while, especially if they are skilled or typical CoD gamers. BF also has teams, it is encouraged by lots of people and the developers, but I have yet to see them actually enforce team work in a BF game. SP in BF is atrocious.

BF would be my choice because it creates better immersion and delivers a much better experience for MP. I just wish 1 day either of the companies would combine the 2 in a way to create a game that has both great SP and MP. Not just 1 or the other.

Personally i like the Battlefield experience more. Because of the team play and it is less arcady. But that is just me

#14 Posted by CommanderShiro (21746 posts) -

As others have said, Battlefield is more team oriented. If you're able to play with friends on the same squad its even better.

#15 Posted by MarcRecon (5842 posts) -

Even though I'm a bigger fan of COD I can honestly say that there is NO comparison! BF is a team based strategical shooter while COD is based around fun,run and gun shooting. That's not to say that BF is not fun, but if you are the lone wolf type it could get pretty miserable for you!

#16 Posted by jukev2424 (244 posts) -

I also have not played BF, I own all of the CODs from my PS3. I do not feel like i will be disappointed with BF on my PS4 (my bundle comes with it). I think i will get COD ghosts sometime next year to see how it plays on with next gen. The comments make me feel better as i sometimes get very frusterated with some of the things on COD. The "levolution" on BF is exciting and something COD does not have to the depth BF has.

#18 Edited by MarcRecon (5842 posts) -

@jukev2424 said:

I also have not played BF, I own all of the CODs from my PS3. I do not feel like i will be disappointed with BF on my PS4 (my bundle comes with it). I think i will get COD ghosts sometime next year to see how it plays on with next gen. The comments make me feel better as i sometimes get very frusterated with some of the things on COD. The "levolution" on BF is exciting and something COD does not have to the depth BF has.

Yeah dude, I still love COD but BF is a nice change of pace.

#19 Edited by lonewolf604 (8526 posts) -

Funny how you guys play the "COD is running and gunning" card. Have you seen BF3 and BF4 videos? Aside from the vehicles, it is just as arcady and run and gun as COD is. Not saying that it is a bad thing, but its just silly how divided the communities are between these two games.

#20 Posted by MarcRecon (5842 posts) -

@lonewolf604 said:

Funny how you guys play the "COD is running and gunning" card. Have you seen BF3 and BF4 videos? Aside from the vehicles, it is just as arcady and run and gun as COD is. Not saying that it is a bad thing, but its just silly how divided the communities are between these two games.

No, I haven't seen the video I actually played the game....what about you?

#21 Edited by kingoflife9 (1987 posts) -

@MarcRecon:

@MarcRecon said:

@lonewolf604 said:

Funny how you guys play the "COD is running and gunning" card. Have you seen BF3 and BF4 videos? Aside from the vehicles, it is just as arcady and run and gun as COD is. Not saying that it is a bad thing, but its just silly how divided the communities are between these two games.

No, I haven't seen the video I actually played the game....what about you?

lol, I only seen the videos and i can say that I like what I see, It actually looks hard to kill someone from across the map. in cod its just annoying already, I play it just because its so fast to get into a game, I honestly treat it as a iPhone game its become so casual. BF4 looks like I have to strategize with my team, and the community seems to be a lot older as well. Nothing annoys me more than me going on a 10 killstreak in cod only to find out I just killed a bunch of 9 year olds.

see y'all nov 15!!

#22 Edited by Wallyh08 (535 posts) -

Echoing a few posts above, I totally agree that BF and COD are like Night and Day, which is mainly the reason why I purchase both, but will also be stopping with one.

I've played BF 1942 (the first in the series) since the beginning on the PC. The heavy emphasis on team play drew me into the series, with focus on 4 classes (Engineer, Assault, Support and Recon). The game has always featured squads (usually sizes of 4) which are great with friends, but just as fun with random players, when on the off chance you find a few players who know their roles and perform them. Again, as said above, you will be owned and flattened if you rush in solo like in COD! I prefer the larger scale maps of BF, though the vehicles sometimes annoy me. This doesn't matter so much now though since in the new BF there will be modes like domination which will take away the majority of vehicles allowing for more close combat :)

And thats why I won't be buying COD anymore. The series started to go downhill for me after COD4. I enjoyed the series previously for its close combat, allowing me to hop in online and get straight into the action if I didn't have time to sit and play a full map of the more tactical Rush mode in BF3. COD Is pretty fun with friends since you can almost control the game (if your good enough) as a solo player, and win for your team with practise and good aim. It's fun with friends to see who will come out on top in the leader boards, and not forgetting the ever popular zombie modes (brilliant with the sound up and lights down!).

Aside from gameplay though, I notice a huge difference in both communities. For me at least, the BF community is so much more mature and generally older I guess, while the COD community is much more full of kids and the like. This doesn't bother me as much as it should do since like I say, I play COD for a fast game of slaughtering people when I have a spare 10 min, so having the maturer side on BF is perfect.

TLDR; BF for more tactical, team play, COD for more running and gunning (fast passed action). Though I clearly prefer the BF series, it won't stop me from picking up COD when it's £10 pre-owned or something, but I certainly don't see myself paying full price for it anymore.

Happy to answer questions for either!

#23 Posted by lonewolf604 (8526 posts) -

@MarcRecon said:

@lonewolf604 said:

Funny how you guys play the "COD is running and gunning" card. Have you seen BF3 and BF4 videos? Aside from the vehicles, it is just as arcady and run and gun as COD is. Not saying that it is a bad thing, but its just silly how divided the communities are between these two games.

No, I haven't seen the video I actually played the game....what about you?

I have....And people saying BF is tactical or strategic have forgotten Rainbow 6, Americas Army, Counter-Strike. BF seems to get a free pass from its arcady fast paced style because of graphics.

#24 Posted by MarcRecon (5842 posts) -

@lonewolf604 said:

@MarcRecon said:

@lonewolf604 said:

Funny how you guys play the "COD is running and gunning" card. Have you seen BF3 and BF4 videos? Aside from the vehicles, it is just as arcady and run and gun as COD is. Not saying that it is a bad thing, but its just silly how divided the communities are between these two games.

No, I haven't seen the video I actually played the game....what about you?

I have....And people saying BF is tactical or strategic have forgotten Rainbow 6, Americas Army, Counter-Strike. BF seems to get a free pass from its arcady fast paced style because of graphics.

I respect your opinion but I still disagree. But it's all good, that's why we have these forums...to agree or disagree respectfully! :)

#25 Posted by ButDuuude (475 posts) -

Battlefield has bigger maps, vehicles and destructible environments, but I still think COD online is more fun.

#26 Posted by Tqricardinho (341 posts) -

It's very different from COD. The game itself is more realistic and the multiplayer is harder to control. I prefer COD because I'm an adept of easy gaming and I have no time to train my skills on Battlefield.

#27 Posted by Trail_Mix (2021 posts) -

I don't know why people are saying BF is more team oriented than CoD. I'd say they're about the same to be honest.