Today’s Poll: Battlefield vs. Call of Duty

Here’s a simple poll for you today. I’d love to know which war-gaming franchise you prefer, Electronic Arts’ Battlefield or Activision’s Call of Duty. They’re both hugely popular franchises with lots of fans and plenty of detractors. Kindly vote in today’s poll and share your feelings about these games in the comments section.

[poll id=”124″]

Author: RPadTV

https://rpad.tv

13 thoughts on “Today’s Poll: Battlefield vs. Call of Duty”

  1. They both have their strong points to be honest. The problem I have with CoD is that it's damn near a subscription based game for run and gun multiplayer. The content packs are too expensive for what they offer. If they sold them by individual map, I hate buying the stupid zombie maps with DLC, then perhaps that would be better. Otherwise Acti releases a content pack for CoD every 2 months. BOps did a good job by not throwing everyone in the general lobby if you don't have the latest version. Right now though I have to give CoD the nod in the single player dept (that's 20 dkp). (i'm minusing 50 dkp for the heartbeat sensor)

    Battlefield to me is the epitome of the online shooter. Vehicles, not killstreaks, determine the outcome of the battle more often than not. Everyone can get a vehicle. Not everyone is as skilled in the vehicle. It also prevents alot of the bullshit camping that goes on in CoD games beyond MW1. Those damn customizable killstreaks up to 12 or whatever encourage camping. I hate it. The environment destruction and upgrades to the gfx engine are pretty big plusses. (plus 50 dkp).

    In the end, BF is more deserving of the price tag in my opinion.

  2. Battlefield is the much better online shooter. Each year CoD gets more an more broken. It's like they look for ways to unbalance the game and go with those choices. (Stopping power and commando much?) I don't see shooters (or at least CoD) staying popular for much longer. The market is overpopulated and Activision tries to milk everything to extinction.

  3. I'm not sure. Playing on PC is very tempting, but I may end up playing on 360 with my friends. I'll add you anyway, so that we can play sometime though :D

  4. I prefer Battlefield pretty much all around. I like the way the game moves and the destruction.

    With CoD the game has always felt jerky to me. The MP is just awful. I can spawn and die 10 times in 1 minute without a chance to even move. The SP isn't bad at all. I like the Special Ops missions.

  5. I prefer Battlefield pretty much all around. I like the way the game moves and the destruction.

    With CoD the game has always felt jerky to me. The MP is just awful. I can spawn and die 10 times in 1 minute without a chance to even move. The SP isn't bad at all. I like the Special Ops missions.

  6. FPS's in general aren't my thing. I play them, but I certainly won't pretend they're my favorite genre. But I generally like both of these series.

  7. I voted for Call of Duty, but right after I felt I should have chose neither of them. I prefer TF2 to any other FPS online multiplayer, it just sucks sometimes on 360 because of glitches and my laptop can't play it through Steam (I've tried, and it freezes the program every time before it lets me join a match). I've never played Battlefield other than 1943, the XBL game. That was ok, but it wasn't really a ton of fun for me. Call of Duty is pretty fun, but only if I'm playing with other people. If I'm just playing by myself I will choose Halo, or another game. TF2 is by far the best ever though. I'd really like to get a decent desktop just so I have something I'm able to play that game on through Steam. When that happens idk when the next time I play a game on my 360 will be.

  8. I don't always play war sims, but when I do, I prefer Battlefield.

    I reposted because I forgot we can edit now.

  9. I've only played Call of Duty 4 and Modern Warfare 2 (used, of course. I'll be a cold day in hell before I willingly give Kocklick my money directly.). I've only played the single-player campaigns in both and I found them enjoyable. Oddly enough, I've never played any CoD game online.

    Much like Big Blak, I generally suck at multiplayer games. Sometimes I feel like I can hold my own, but more often than not, small children, teenagers, and adults often kick my ass back to Humbletown.

    And, yes, I do think that $60 is way too much for such a short campaign. You only come close to getting your money's worth when you play on "veteran" setting. Activison should break the game into two stand-alone disks (or DLC). They should make a single-player game and a multiplayer game and sell them for anywhere from $20 to $35 each. I think someone on this site already mentioned this idea.

    -M

Comments are closed.