Battlefield is the next COD

Everyone on here talks smack on COD because it's so rehashed and it "sucks" and then praises Battlefield. I bet you that in the next few years it will become the same thing COD became. An infinitely rehashed moneymaker. (i'm not saying i dislike either cod or battlefield because i don't)

Dice will never fall to the darkside! :x

What are you basing this off? :?

*eats popcorn*

I can kind of see it. EA is if anything, greedier then Activision, just more savvy in how they go about it. They'll say Battlelog is free for everyone to conveniently ignore that Elite is also free (but comes with a non free variant), then release day 1 DLC that's already on the disc and consists of nothing more then gun camo (Spec Act).

So I can see it. You people forget IW made CoD4 and 2, the really, really amazing ones.

I can actually see it now. BF becomes overblown and dated in between MoH releases, then next gen Activision promises a super awesome revamp in CoD, for teh PC audience and hardcore fans, and everyone eats it up while BF starts to fester and grow old. That's kind of a long shot though, but if anything yeah BF will get old and everyone will move on to something else, whether its the return of CoD or not I don't know.

In terms of release cycle, they're kind of already there. In terms of quality and just rehashing and not advancing anything, I doubt it.

What are you basing this off? :?

lundy86_4

Well gaming is a business where companies make money. Battlefield is on a huge rise in terms of popularity. So as more and more people buy the game, more and more games will be made. It may eventually just turn into a rehashing for the money, that's what COD became. Basically my basis is off of COD and other game series such as Street Fighter and Grand Theft Auto.

What are you basing this off? :?

lundy86_4

It makes sense. Battlefield makes EA a lot of money and EA, like every other company ever, likes money.

Dice will never fall to the darkside! :x

Steameffekt

Well gaming is a business where companies make money. Battlefield is on a huge rise in terms of popularity. So as more and more people buy the game, more and more games will be made. It may eventually just turn into a rehashing for the money, that's what COD became. Basically my basis is off of COD and other game series such as Street Fighter and Grand Theft Auto.

drummerdave9099

Naturally, businesses are in it to make money. Unfortunately, it's not a gigantic indication of which way a franchise will go. SF and CoD are good examples, but I dunno about GTA... It's not exactly had continuous releases.

Dice will never fall to the darkside! :x

Steameffekt

[QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

Dice will never fall to the darkside! :x

Lost-Memory

What do you mean? They have Crytek for that.

I can kind of see it. EA is if anything, greedier then Activision, just more savvy in how they go about it. They'll say Battlelog is free for everyone to conveniently ignore that Elite is also free (but comes with a non free variant), then release day 1 DLC that's already on the disc and consists of nothing more then gun camo (Spec Act).

So I can see it. You people forget IW made CoD4 and 2, the really, really amazing ones.

I can actually see it now. BF becomes overblown and dated in between MoH releases, then next gen Activision promises a super awesome revamp in CoD, for teh PC audience and hardcore fans, and everyone eats it up while BF starts to fester and grow old. That's kind of a long shot though, but if anything yeah BF will get old and everyone will move on to something else, whether its the return of CoD or not I don't know.

SPYDER0416

Gun camo DLC doesn't matter. It's not game content. It's cosmetic. They can release all the cosetmic crap they want. I still won't be buying it.

And they took a **** on the people that got them where they are. Plus CoD2 and 4 are average at best.

Maybe it will, maybe it won't. If they keep going the same pace right now, where each release isn't some overpriced DLC map pack, then there's no way it'll become the "next CoD."

I hope not.

I doubt it.

[QUOTE="Lost-Memory"][QUOTE="Steameffekt"]

Dice will never fall to the darkside! :x

ChubbyGuy40

What do you mean? They have Crytek for that.

As for Dice, I expect it will go about the same as it has in the past, and Dice will actually change and develop the franchise as it goes along, unlike CoD.

actually it is..so is MOH

now that a new MOH and BF is coming out everyother year, they are playing the same ballgame as activision and IW/3arc

[QUOTE="lundy86_4"]

What are you basing this off? :?

drummerdave9099

Well gaming is a business where companies make money. Battlefield is on a huge rise in terms of popularity. So as more and more people buy the game, more and more games will be made. It may eventually just turn into a rehashing for the money, that's what COD became. Basically my basis is off of COD and other game series such as Street Fighter and Grand Theft Auto.

actually it is..so is MOH

now that a new MOH and BF is coming out everyother year, they are playing the same ballgame as activision and IW/3arc

eboyishere

I still don't understand this train of thought. The two are different enough that they shouldn't be lumped together.

I can kind of see it. EA is if anything, greedier then Activision, just more savvy in how they go about it. They'll say Battlelog is free for everyone to conveniently ignore that Elite is also free (but comes with a non free variant), then release day 1 DLC that's already on the disc and consists of nothing more then gun camo (Spec Act).

So I can see it. You people forget IW made CoD4 and 2, the really, really amazing ones.

I can actually see it now. BF becomes overblown and dated in between MoH releases, then next gen Activision promises a super awesome revamp in CoD, for teh PC audience and hardcore fans, and everyone eats it up while BF starts to fester and grow old. That's kind of a long shot though, but if anything yeah BF will get old and everyone will move on to something else, whether its the return of CoD or not I don't know.

[QUOTE="eboyishere"]

actually it is..so is MOH

now that a new MOH and BF is coming out everyother year, they are playing the same ballgame as activision and IW/3arc

Phoenix534

I still don't understand this train of thought. The two are different enough that they shouldn't be lumped together.

you mean MOH and BF? im talking about having down time to make a newer game instead of the "pump em out as fast as we can" idea..but this is a business and i understand

[QUOTE="Phoenix534"]

[QUOTE="eboyishere"]

actually it is..so is MOH

now that a new MOH and BF is coming out everyother year, they are playing the same ballgame as activision and IW/3arc

eboyishere

I still don't understand this train of thought. The two are different enough that they shouldn't be lumped together.

you mean MOH and BF? im talking about having down time to make a newer game instead of the "pump em out as fast as we can" idea..but this is a business and i understand

Oh. Well, that I do understand. But at least MOH and BF have noticeably different games and if they each get a biannual release, I could get behind that.

I highly doubt it because DICE will try to cater as best as possible to all their fans unlike Activsion/IW.

[QUOTE="eboyishere"]

[QUOTE="Phoenix534"]

I still don't understand this train of thought. The two are different enough that they shouldn't be lumped together.

Phoenix534

you mean MOH and BF? im talking about having down time to make a newer game instead of the "pump em out as fast as we can" idea..but this is a business and i understand

Oh. Well, that I do understand. But at least MOH and BF have noticeably different games and if they each get a biannual release, I could get behind that.

well i look at it like this

BF3

MOH

Bad comapny

MOH

BF4

so i mean if they do it like that, then it might not be completely like activision

[QUOTE="Phoenix534"]

[QUOTE="eboyishere"]

you mean MOH and BF? im talking about having down time to make a newer game instead of the "pump em out as fast as we can" idea..but this is a business and i understand

eboyishere

Oh. Well, that I do understand. But at least MOH and BF have noticeably different games and if they each get a biannual release, I could get behind that.

well i look at it like this

BF3

MOH

Bad comapny

MOH

BF4

so i mean if they do it like that, then it might not be completely like activision

I'd be perfectly fine with a schedule like that.

Everyone on here talks smack on COD because it's so rehashed and it "sucks" and then praises Battlefield. I bet you that in the next few years it will become the same thing COD became. An infinitely rehashed moneymaker. (i'm not saying i dislike either cod or battlefield because i don't)

drummerdave9099

thanks for the insight in the future, maybe want to tell me the numbers of the lottery next?

[QUOTE="Phoenix534"]

[QUOTE="eboyishere"]

you mean MOH and BF? im talking about having down time to make a newer game instead of the "pump em out as fast as we can" idea..but this is a business and i understand

eboyishere

Oh. Well, that I do understand. But at least MOH and BF have noticeably different games and if they each get a biannual release, I could get behind that.

well i look at it like this

BF3

MOH

Bad comapny

MOH

BF4

so i mean if they do it like that, then it might not be completely like activision

[QUOTE="eboyishere"]

[QUOTE="Phoenix534"]

Oh. Well, that I do understand. But at least MOH and BF have noticeably different games and if they each get a biannual release, I could get behind that.

Mystic-G

well i look at it like this

BF3

MOH

Bad comapny

MOH

BF4

so i mean if they do it like that, then it might not be completely like activision

MOH was rushed/used to promote BF3...your in for a shock when BF's style will be noticable

You all just need to stop comparing COD and Battlefield. They aren't even near the same type of gameplay and BF3 will not be a COD clone because no game whatsoever has been able to pull that off.

Everyone on here talks smack on COD because it's so rehashed and it "sucks" and then praises Battlefield. I bet you that in the next few years it will become the same thing COD became. An infinitely rehashed moneymaker. (i'm not saying i dislike either cod or battlefield because i don't)

drummerdave9099

I'll quit playing BF if it had killstreaks, mainly small maps and no vehicles.

COD is just a fad. People buy it because a lot of people play it, Not because it's a good game. I'm not hating on it or anything, but it only takes one person to convince an army of gamers that a game is good. In short - "A Person is Smart, but People are Dumb." HomelessNinja21

Honestly, I don't see how it's much less rehashed than Call of Duty. Battlefield fans just defend their game more viciously since it's less popular. Double standards really. Battlefield is still a very milked franchise and just as "generic" as Call of Duty at this point.vashkey

Battlefield has been out longer and has had 5 main games. 1942, Vietnam, Battlefield 2, 2142, and Battlefield 3. Then it's had spin-offs like Bad Company and Play4Free, as well as multiple expansions like Special Forces and Vietnam. Battlefield also changes each game to make it different from the last, where as releasing the same thing for the third time is alright with Activision.

CoD has been out for a shorter period, going onto it's ninth main game, has overpriced DLC, downgrades with every release, it's main developer doesn't care about the community, and that same dev abandons the game after 6 months in which you'll never see patches or tweaks again. It also has a pay-to-use stat tracker/recorder. Not to mention multiple versions of the game (CoD2, CoD2:BRO)

Side by side, CoD has put out more games in less time than Battlefield has. Who was milked again? And Battlefield fans defend more viciously? Have you seen the CoD fanatics around here? They're in complete denial. Not to mention milked is used for squeezing as much money as possible in the shortest amount of time. Very apparent when CoD gets a yearly release. DICE will support and patch their games from 2005 even though sales have dead for awhile.

[QUOTE="vashkey"]Honestly, I don't see how it's much less rehashed than Call of Duty. Battlefield fans just defend their game more viciously since it's less popular. Double standards really. Battlefield is still a very milked franchise and just as "generic" as Call of Duty at this point.ChubbyGuy40

Battlefield has been out longer and has had 5 main games. 1942, Vietnam, Battlefield 2, 2142, and Battlefield 3. Then it's had spin-offs like Bad Company and Play4Free, as well as multiple expansions like Special Forces and Vietnam. Battlefield also changes each game to make it different from the last, where as releasing the same thing for the third time is alright with Activision.

CoD has been out for a shorter period, going onto it's ninth main game, has overpriced DLC, downgrades with every release, it's main developer doesn't care about the community, and that same dev abandons the game after 6 months in which you'll never see patches or tweaks again. It also has a pay-to-use stat tracker/recorder. Not to mention multiple versions of the game (CoD2, CoD2:BRO)

Side by side, CoD has put out more games in less time than Battlefield has. Who was milked again? And Battlefield fans defend more viciously? Have you seen the CoD fanatics around here? They're in complete denial. Not to mention milked is used for squeezing as much money as possible in the shortest amount of time. Very apparent when CoD gets a yearly release. DICE will support and patch their games from 2005 even though sales have dead for awhile.

I play Battlefield Play4Free cause I'm poor:( does nayone still play 2142 cause it looks interesting.

I play Battlefield Play4Free cause I'm poor:( does nayone still play 2142 cause it looks interesting.

NoodleFighter

Battlefield 2 + Bad Company controls = no bueno. Why couldn't they just have made BF2 F2P? One really stupid move by EA.

Not that I know of. I remember logging on awhile ago but the game had the worst hit detection ever. Put 2 full clips into a guy who was laying down and he turned around and got me in 2 shots. I haven't played since. Could've been a hacker or something but there were only like 5 servers active.

[QUOTE="Phoenix534"]

[QUOTE="eboyishere"]

you mean MOH and BF? im talking about having down time to make a newer game instead of the "pump em out as fast as we can" idea..but this is a business and i understand

Oh. Well, that I do understand. But at least MOH and BF have noticeably different games and if they each get a biannual release, I could get behind that.

well i look at it like this

BF3

MOH

Bad comapny

MOH

BF4

so i mean if they do it like that, then it might not be completely like activision

oh great. Just what we need. Another Call of Duty............

[QUOTE="vashkey"]Honestly, I don't see how it's much less rehashed than Call of Duty. Battlefield fans just defend their game more viciously since it's less popular. Double standards really. Battlefield is still a very milked franchise and just as "generic" as Call of Duty at this point.ChubbyGuy40

Battlefield has been out longer and has had 5 main games. 1942, Vietnam, Battlefield 2, 2142, and Battlefield 3. Then it's had spin-offs like Bad Company and Play4Free, as well as multiple expansions like Special Forces and Vietnam. Battlefield also changes each game to make it different from the last, where as releasing the same thing for the third time is alright with Activision.

CoD has been out for a shorter period, going onto it's ninth main game, has overpriced DLC, downgrades with every release, it's main developer doesn't care about the community, and that same dev abandons the game after 6 months in which you'll never see patches or tweaks again. It also has a pay-to-use stat tracker/recorder. Not to mention multiple versions of the game (CoD2, CoD2:BRO)

Side by side, CoD has put out more games in less time than Battlefield has. Who was milked again? And Battlefield fans defend more viciously? Have you seen the CoD fanatics around here? They're in complete denial. Not to mention milked is used for squeezing as much money as possible in the shortest amount of time. Very apparent when CoD gets a yearly release. DICE will support and patch their games from 2005 even though sales have dead for awhile.

Pau to use stat tracker? I am sure, I think, that everything I have heard out of the CoD camp has been CoD Elite is free to use. That everything that has been announced so far, the online stat tracking, clans, etc.. were completely free, And that the part that is 'paid for' is completely optional and NOT required. Which you may not believe it, is what optional means.

It's an interesting point.

First of all, BF had to start being produced yearly.

Second it has to adapt to what people want, which is fast gameplay and good score with low skill (even Pach says this).

The way i see it BF won't be as successful as COD, it is based more on teamwork and less on instant gratification and on top of it this iteration has been in the works for years and i doubt they have more teams to cycle through the years. Now if BF became hugely popular however...

I think while fans would love BF to rise above COD they would be pretty better served if it never happens, since the company can't be manipulated due to high sales.

COD will terminate it's cycle eventually, maybe BF will become that in the future (Hell, look what happened to Bioware with DA2...) but i don't think it's this year, let's see thou :P

I doubt it. EA milks the Sims, and Activision milks CoD. EA has no need to milk Battlefield just yet, not when they can still release a constant stream of expansion packs for the Sims.

[QUOTE="vashkey"]Honestly, I don't see how it's much less rehashed than Call of Duty. Battlefield fans just defend their game more viciously since it's less popular. Double standards really. Battlefield is still a very milked franchise and just as "generic" as Call of Duty at this point.ChubbyGuy40

Battlefield has been out longer and has had 5 main games. 1942, Vietnam, Battlefield 2, 2142, and Battlefield 3. Then it's had spin-offs like Bad Company and Play4Free, as well as multiple expansions like Special Forces and Vietnam. Battlefield also changes each game to make it different from the last, where as releasing the same thing for the third time is alright with Activision.

CoD has been out for a shorter period, going onto it's ninth main game, has overpriced DLC, downgrades with every release, it's main developer doesn't care about the community, and that same dev abandons the game after 6 months in which you'll never see patches or tweaks again. It also has a pay-to-use stat tracker/recorder. Not to mention multiple versions of the game (CoD2, CoD2:BRO)

Side by side, CoD has put out more games in less time than Battlefield has. Who was milked again? And Battlefield fans defend more viciously? Have you seen the CoD fanatics around here? They're in complete denial. Not to mention milked is used for squeezing as much money as possible in the shortest amount of time. Very apparent when CoD gets a yearly release. DICE will support and patch their games from 2005 even though sales have dead for awhile.

Bad Company certainly wasn't marketed and treated as spin offs. While they weren't "true successors" to Battlefield 2 I'd still call them full fledged entries similar to San Andreas and Vice City are to GTA. And really, this whole "releasing the same game over and over" is bs. Both game series are milked and fans of either series are delusional if they can't accept that. Arguing over whom is milked more is is petty.

[QUOTE="drummerdave9099"]

Everyone on here talks smack on COD because it's so rehashed and it "sucks" and then praises Battlefield. I bet you that in the next few years it will become the same thing COD became. An infinitely rehashed moneymaker. (i'm not saying i dislike either cod or battlefield because i don't)

vashkey

when was the last time cod changed the game engine or made any real change to the game other that recicling it? bf at least makes new games and put effort in them. For that alone they are way better than call of duty.