Battlefield and Call of Duty can successfully coexist, says analyst

"I am stupid, says analyst."

I wonder how much money that analyst guy got for saying this bull$hit.

Goddamn, these "analyst" comments are stupid.

@Deadman_est1982 @spartanx169x how are the multiplayer parts of series?

They already do on this gen. Why is this making news? "This just in, gamers purchase video games."

You don't say?

@Deadman_est1982 Never played Killzone, But I plan to on the PS4.

"...says analyst"

probably one of eddie's signature word

EA and Activision can successfully coexist. lolololololol

Awesome news. I'm so happy that perhaps for the first time, these 2 FPS games can be out at the same time! Oh wait..........

OBVIOUS SHIT IS OBVIOUS.

FPS is boring. :)

@Deadman_est1982 @Axile11 okay I will, its not gods gift to gaming but its not boring

@Deadman_est1982 @Axile11 are you tired of the shooter games?

@Deadman_est1982 battlefield is not boring

i had no idea there could be more than one multiplayer shooter out at one time....who knew

Lol of course they can mutually exist. CoD is for players under the age of16 and Battlefield is for everyone else.

This is not some grand statement, Mr Analyst. In fact, may I call you Mr. Analrapist?

These two franchises have been successfully coexisting for a few years now, and they seem to be printing cash for their publishers.

Next you will tell me gasoline will continue to sell well to those who drive.

Even if his numbers turn out to be accurate, I hope it won't affect CoD availability on the PC. MW3 was a blast and ran relatively smoothly with mid-high settings even on my mid-low end PC .

Saying that something that allready is, is possible...

Of course they can. Retarded fanboys just pit them against one another because they have to attempt to justify their purchase to themselves.

Oh wow this guy is a genius. Two games that are very different can co-exist. I'm so glad you said this because I was struggling to get my head around it.

COD is a well developed formula. It is fun because MW1 was fun and it hasn't really changed much since then. It is just a shame they feel the need to bring out a new one each year to try and get more money out of us, when an update and some DLC would suffice.

BF is also really good fun but for different reasons.

There is no reason why you can't flick between the two.

YOU MEAN LIKE THEY DO EVERY YEAR??? Fucking moron, sometimes i wish i could see an analyst's W2 just to prove they actually have a job doing this bullshit.

Of course they can they're completely different. Battlefield encourages and rewards teamwork while COD is more for the lone wolf type. That's not to say that you can't have teamwork in COD, and you can certainly go solo in Battlefield if you feel like it, it's just not the same. Obvious other differences such as the vehicles in BF, perks in COD, etc.

COD is easier to pick up play, while in BF it can be rough if you're playing with randoms who just run around and don't play the objective....but when you do find a few solid teammates I find BF a much more rewarding experience.

What a silly article to be posting, of course the games can coexist and they have been doing so for a long time.

Battlefield and Call of Duty appeal to different people. There are people who prefer Battlefield and those who prefer Call of Duty, in the same way there are gamers who prefer Pro Evolution Soccer and those prefer Fifa.

battlefield is a military simulation fps, cod is a arcade fps, ill take the simulation.

always loved cod single player though.