While you might just be okay with using an SMG through every map in CoD, you would experiment more with each weapon class in Battlefield, due to the map's large size. The use of on-ground vehicles as well as aircrafts make for even more intense larger-scale battles.
Campaigns in Call of Duty: The CoD franchise has had several campaigns that have been received very positively, while others have received flak. But more often than not, CoD campaigns are great and offer tons of great cinematic action. While the developers aren't breaking any new ground in storytelling or narrative, the campaigns are fun and engaging. Campaigns in Battlefield: While the campaigns have mostly been serviceable in Battlefield, none particularly stand out as great or memorable.
The makers have experimented with more narrative-based games in Battlefield, like Hardline and Bad Company, but received only mixed reviews at best. New User posted their first comment. Log in. Battlefield v Call of Duty. Modified 19 Jun Feature.
How to decide if Call of Duty or Battlefield suits you better? Mobility Mobility has always been an essential part of the FPS experience, and fluid movement can often make or break a game. How many Call of Duty games are there? Battlefield has been delayed; does that give Call of Duty: Vanguard the edge?
There's a reason why a big chunk of its players are kids ; it's highly accessible and simple. Whereas Battlefield games require communication, team reliance, and coordination for victories, Call of Duty games are more of an arcade experience. Each player can become a one-man army if they want and the bullet and gun physics are more streamlined. Battlefield games try to mix in some realism with their arcade aspects and it ends up having a higher learning curve.
Battlefield 1 is the prime example of this franchise strength. Each artillery echo, bellows of pain, and orchestral score during pivotal moments of an Operation or a Conquest is worth more than any single-player campaign from Call of Duty or Battlefield.
It all adds up to make Battlefield a more immersive experience even in a multiplayer aspect. Gun sounds are also more impactful and just the general rattling of weapons-fire in the faraway distance makes the experience more palpable. The game is so fast-paced you'd need as much sugar as you can to cope with the adrenaline rush and Doritos are just there because they're accessible snacks.
Seriously though, Call of Duty's multiplayer is better suited for people looking for quick matches that provide instant gratification. Your team lost? Jump into another match and keep doing that until you win. The recoil-less guns and superhuman player avatars make that possible. Then again, players might be looking for something more grounded in reality as much as possible.
In that field, Battlefield wins due to its adherence to real-world physics which isn't saying much because Battlefield games are actually terrible simulators.
Still, they're more realistic compared to Call of Duty. This is easily seen in the head bobbing animations of the characters and even the recoil of the guns. Sniping and long-range firefights for that matter, are more satisfying in Battlefield games because of all the calculations involved.
Call of Duty stories aren't exactly that "good," sometimes they're even worse than B military movies made only with the intent of army recruitment. Call of Duty's characters are a lot more memorable and they actually have personalities.
The Black Ops titles are some of the most riveting ones in the series when it comes to story. Battlefield just can't capture that same level of narrative presentation. Speaking of presentation, this is a tough one as Call of Duty games look like they're catching up but the latest Battlefield titles remain as some of the most graphically impressive FPS games out there. Even Battlefield 1 is difficult to top these days.
The general atmosphere of that game as well as its faithfulness to the setting is quite unparalleled. Since Call of Duty's multiplayer is more suited to people looking to frag others and then move one, then it's more emotionally fulfilling. It allows for more wins and more exciting encounters whereas Battlefield games and their large maps compress the combat mostly to the frontlines.
Additionally, the progression tiers or leveling system in Call of Duty games gives more frequent and substantial rewards compared to Battlefield games. Don't believe me? Let me count the ways:. Unlike stupid Battlefield 4 , 16 people in a match is just fine and cozy for some multiplayer Call of Duty action.
You know how awful it feels when you're romping about with your boys and you get shot in the head from across the map? It feels awful. And that person who shot you? They're probably 10 years old.
0コメント