Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Someone who would say there's no skill to COD other than point and shoot would perform very poorly in it!

There's tons of things you don't realise about the game until you've been playing it for a long time. Many of these are specific to a COD game like Blops 2, others knowledges transfer from release to release.

A mate and I were discussing this question at the gym last night. He is more BF and I am more COD. We came to the conclusion that COD is the game you play when you want quick start up, fast action, fast kills; an intense experience in a short amount of time. It's a modern day counter-strike with no respawn times. BF is more properly team oriented, with open maps, use of vehicles, a higher degree of dependency on your team - going for the realism factor.

I draw the line at people saying BF is more strategic or tactical, because it's not, really. No game is, as the best players at any game will have devised and autonomous tactics for how they do what they do. I will say though, that the initial learning curve for a newbie to either is probably shorter for COD, simply cause you can get in there and point and shoot if you want, and feel like you are playing it properly straight up, unlike BF - but you will die and die as players who know maps better, who know how to use radar and exploit other functions of the game know exactly where you're going to go, will overcome you. There are psychologies and things you don't properly understand about it until you've been playing for a long time. It gets to a point where you can literally predict what people are going to do because like poker you become very familiar with tells.

The two are often pitted against each other - undeservedly so, I feel. This is probably only done because they would both be the biggest selling and longest running titles in the FPS genre. So same genre, but very different games in their own right, which is why they should not be compared. I know many who own both and play them seperately because of the difference. Others swap back and forth as each new title gets released. And really, with both games fetching the sales that they do...no one in their right mind could say either is "crap" beyond their own subjective opinion. Both have plenty of market share, so it's a case of take your pick or get both.

tl;dr: COD is better :P

Someone who would say there's no skill to COD other than point and shoot would perform very poorly in it!

There's tons of things you don't realise about the game until you've been playing it for a long time. Many of these are specific to a COD game like Blops 2, others knowledges transfer from release to release.

A mate and I were discussing this question at the gym last night. He is more BF and I am more COD. We came to the conclusion that COD is the game you play when you want quick start up, fast action, fast kills; an intense experience in a short amount of time. It's a modern day counter-strike with no respawn times. BF is more properly team oriented, with open maps, use of vehicles, a higher degree of dependency on your team - going for the realism factor.

I draw the line at people saying BF is more strategic or tactical, because it's not, really. No game is, as the best players at any game will have devised and autonomous tactics for how they do what they do. I will say though, that the initial learning curve for a newbie to either is probably shorter for COD, simply cause you can get in there and point and shoot if you want, and feel like you are playing it properly straight up, unlike BF - but you will die and die as players who know maps better, who know how to use radar and exploit other functions of the game know exactly where you're going to go, will overcome you. There are psychologies and things you don't properly understand about it until you've been playing for a long time. It gets to a point where you can literally predict what people are going to do because like poker you become very familiar with tells.

The two are often pitted against each other - undeservedly so, I feel. This is probably only done because they would both be the biggest selling and longest running titles in the FPS genre. So same genre, but very different games in their own right, which is why they should not be compared. I know many who own both and play them seperately because of the difference. Others swap back and forth as each new title gets released. And really, with both games fetching the sales that they do...no one in their right mind could say either is "crap" beyond their own subjective opinion. Both have plenty of market share, so it's a case of take your pick or get both.

tl;dr: COD is better :P

Battlefield way better than COD!

Dat dere strategic gameplay

I have been a huge Battlefield fan from day one - back with BF 1945 - I have played all expansions from desert storm, to spec ops to BF4. BF4 is a good game if you're new to the scene - it's a lot easier and noob friendly. They have changed the mechanics of a few things (Notable is the Helicopter) which have turn things for the worse if you're wanting more "Pro style" type of playing - nowadays the Helicopter auto-hovers and turns are easier to make but are not forgiving for more harder turns.

The gameplay itself has improved with buildings and maps and boats / content. However, when you fiddle with the mechanics of a game you're up the greek - even worse when a game has been playing for over 10+ years.

To sum it up - BF4 is kind of like a HUGE expansion of BF3. BF4 has the better content but BF3 the better mechanics.

I'd rate BF2 (for it's time) 8/10

BF3 - 8.5/10

and BF4 - 7/10.

To mention: BFBC2 - 8/10.

^This will give my opinon on the other games EA has come out with so you know how I have summed up rating BF4.

I played hours and hours of capture the flag on 1942
The biggest let down of the most recent BF games is the lack of large vehicles.
You used to be able to drive the massive air craft carrier around the map and the massive B52 wasn't static

I checked out the china rising DLC on youtube and the bomber from china rising also only flys in a straight line across the map.

That's probably the biggest let down of all these.

Other than that I have been really enjoying BF4

  • 3 weeks later...

I hope you didn't forget about BF Vietnam either...

Would never forget BFV - My favourite addition to the BF serious. I was comparing the 3 latest type of modern warefare - BF3, BF4 and BFBC2. BFBC2's gameplay was far more superior to BF3/4. They got the Anti-Air right - stationairy AA's that are in one spot only - Troops with Stingers on their soldiers is hard enough.

But in saying that - it took me a good couple of months for me to start enjoying BF4 - starting to get into it now. Not a fan of the China DLC though.

  • 1 month later...

I'm still playing it. Have been playing a bit of Black Ops 2 on 360 again, though...it's just much more fun for me than BF4. Getting 25-0 kill scores and the fast paced movement of the game can't be replicated in the BF genre.

Prefer the snipers from BF4 though, not as much quickscoping and they usually miss if you're quick enough.

  • 1 month later...

I only just bought it. Don't know why it took my so long i played the shit out of BF3. probably because it is the first game i have had to pay for myself in 4 years. Loving it so much at the moment.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Latest Posts

    • I'm thinking that this is such a small part of the problem that you could easily forego the vac pump and just achieve 90% of what you need, which is keeping the gate open when off boost. It's not as if there are not already techniques to keep a gate fully closed under boost. After all, you have boost. Just use a wastegate actuator that will allow you to apply the boost on the appropriate side, just like every external gate out there.
    • Heres another fitment photo. redrilled the pattern to 5x112, and threw my audi´s rims on. had to touch the upper control arms with grinder, because the "sharp corner" was sticking about 2-3mm on the tire path. i have the "fender lip" mostly cut off, otherwise these (too) would contact with it. 20x9.5 ET25 rear    265/30 20x8.5 ET20 front    255/30 they are temporary, and look too big for the chassis. searching for 19s to it.
    • From experience, it will come back to bite you haha.
    • Background: my BMW 225i hatchback (rebodied MINI/X1) came with 3x RE003 and 1x Goodyear Asymmetric something. The RE003 roared and slid around, the Goodyear side was quiet and grippy. Definitely my car was thrashed before it got sent to dealers. My brother also got RE003 all round on his old VA WRX STI, I wasn't impressed with them, car was loud so can't comment on noise. Anyway, Hankook stopped making/updating V12 Evo2. So bought S1 Evo3 runflats. Great daily duties tyre and not that harsh ride. Tyre reviews site/youtube rated them as best stopping in the rain and I believe them. Next set, Goodyear Asymmetric 5 non-RFT. It beat PS4 in tests and is like $100 cheaper, so put them on. Great tyre, more grip then S1 Evo3 but a tad noisier as expected, still rocking them. Next set I am looking to go runflats, probably the new Hankook Evo. Although the new Pirelli PZ5 did well in tyrereviews test. Or go Goodyear Asymmetric 6 which was top tyre last year. The V12 Evo2 on my gen5 Liberty GT wagon did great in cold condition (drove to snowy mountains for a day so my husky can feel his ancestor's roots). Super impressive performance for $120 each lol. Never skimp on tyres, brakes, suspension. There's old pics of my R31's crappy random brake pads bending in the caliper at Oran Park track day somewhere around here. Anyway, my 2 cents.
×
×
  • Create New...