Add a comment
You must be logged in to be able to post comments!
Create my account Sign in
Top comments

I know I'm going to get downvoted if I say something bad about Call of Duty, but I don't give a shit. CoD is ruining the first person shooter genre and video games in general. They're basically putting out an expansion pack for CoD4 every year. I think it's on CoD4.75 now.
I know all the little 12 year olds are going to say "but CoD is the best series ever!". To that, I say, "no, just no".


BF3 is definetely not a disappointment. Elite isn't amazing, it even crashed because of all the users trying to log in. Battlefield is a much better series with better multiplayer, which is what FPSs focus on anyway. I tried to play MW3 and quit becuase of the lack of jets, and vehicles in general. Both games have pretty bad campaigns, I just thought BF's was a little better because of all the cinematic scenes (first and last "missions")

  ricerboy  |  0

Two companies make the CoD games: Treyarch and IW. They take turns every other year on the games... So it might not have taken less than a year to make. I do agree on it looking similar to MW2, though. I personally like the story, and MP is fun to play as well. I couldnt get used to BF3 because ive played CoD too much to adjust.

But, to each their own. :)


160-I say something bad about CoD so you say I know nothing about video games? I've been playing video games ever since I was 3 or 4, and I am now learning programming. Who knows nothing about video games? I think the answer is you.

  bitchslapped22  |  14

As much as I somewhat agree with that, the other top shooters are pretty much the same way. Look at Halo for example (great game). Since Halo 2, the biggest contrubution to Halo was Forge mode, which was a massive addition. But it's pretty much the same game every time. Same for Gears and Call of Duty, although I am really getting sick of Activision throwing out the new CoD games every year but yet us as consumer buy it every time a new one comes out, and Activision knows they can make a lot of money throwing out the same game every November. So it is the Publisher's fault or the consumers' fault?

  copy125  |  0

All you battlefield fan boys are all the same, just because mw3 attracts more fans because it's easier to play and actually has a fun online experience doesn't mean you bffb (battelfield fan boys) have to bash it. Seriously


I don't have battlefield 3 because I didn't really want it. I've been playing CoD since the very first one and haven't stopped buying them since. Could we all not be douchebags and chill with our fucking console already? Jesus...


Battlefield > Call of Duty

Now, before anyone says otherwise, here are the games of the series I have played:

Battlefield 2 (including Special Forces expansion), BF 2142 (including Northern Strike expansion), BF:BC2, BF3

Call of Duty 3, CoD:WaW, CoD:MW, CoD: MW2, CoD:BO

Even though I played more of CoD, I still find that BF is better because CoD is just repetitive.

Look at CoD, every one of CoD games in multiplayer is exactly the same except for weapons, perks, kill streaks and maps. It's still a "run, shoot, kill/death, repeat" cycle. The only thing that was different and significant was the Nazi Zombies mode. All the other game modes are still the same. There are still weapons that are overpowered. I'm not going to get into the campaign mode. Overall, this is a Solo-focused game where when something pops up, you shoot.

Now look at BF, they ALL have vehicles which may be a bit annoying at times, but they're all easy to take care of with little to no effort. They all have more of a "teamwork" focus on all games, which means that it's not "run, shoot, kill/death, repeat" all the time. In fact, it's better to revive/heal/supply/repair someone for even more points (Assualt/Medic class FTW). In BF2142, the game introduced the "Titan" mode, in BF:BC2, there was "Rush" mode. There may not have a too big of a variety of modes, but that is all they need. The maps are nicely done where "x" is best used at location "y", the weapons and perks are quite similar. Graphics and gameplay are different in comparison between BF2 and BF3. Most things are well balanced (*cough* BF2 G36E Medic class *cough*). Overall, this is a Team-based game where you have to work together and coordinate attacks.

tl;dr: Battlefield better than CoD because of a more dynamic gameplay.

  jabfinch  |  9

I disagree, there were never dedicated servers on cod4 or mw2 and not to be a complete asshole, but bf3 is a poor mans call of duty, truth be told. Vehicles? Which game came out first? Yeah bf3 is a good game in the eyes of the guy who continually gets smacked by the m16 or p90 in cod4. Or the ump and acr in mw2. Almost being prestiged in mw3 after on a few days of playing I have to say all the guns are actually fair everything is evened out. Bf3 and mw3 are only comparable in a few ways truth be told. Campaigns, multiplayer. They have both, and they're both first person shooters, call of duty never started with putting vehicles to drive in or to shoot someone down in while you're in a jet. Because that is ridiculous and takes absolutely no skill. Now if that's your thing then I don't blame you, it's a great game really. But you must understand these 2 games are what they are for a reason, every games enhancements are usually requests from the public therefore, bf3 users got what they wanted in bf3. And mw3 users got what they wanted too.

It's all personal preference, everyone's entitled to an opinion, but you're talking shit on one of the absolute best first person shooters ever? I'm confused.

  Freeze_fml  |  16

Actually, Battlefield 1942 came out before the first Call of Duty game came out. So your "which game came first" argument backfired.

And if you want to talk about "skill," calling in a nuke requires none.

Of the BF games I've played (2, 2142, BC, BC2, H), BF2142 was the best.

  Link5794  |  18

No mention of Skyward Sword? I know I'm late, but these games came out around the same time.

  conholio33  |  28

Im sorry but the dad shouldnt make him quit just cause his video games lagg

  c00lguy89  |  1

See how u commented nearly at the same time? That's obviosly ur ferns and u guys decided to comment together to mak ur point look better. Wel it dosnt. So gtfo.

  iliketurdles  |  7

^ best comment ever. Not because the Red Wings suck, I have no idea who they are, but because of the way I imagined you saying it. Just casually walking back into the room and saying that statement.

If you didn't find what I said funny, then I guess you just had to be here. Inside my brain. Where the hilarity nonchalantly ensues.

  pie29302930  |  0

How the fuck do you not know who the red Wings are? I get not a lot of people like hockey, but everyone know who the Red Wings are. Btw Flyers and wingnuts suck. All about the sabres.

  aeroliontvw  |  4

Don't know about all servers, but the ones I've seen women make up a good bit of the population as well. And yes it is 2004, they may be thinking Warcraft instead of wow.

  Seduisant  |  7

It doesn't really matter where you're from. It depends on the people and your teachers. It's an opinion. Obviously OP doesn't like the school they went to and neither do I.