Battlefield V. Call of Duty

[Saleena]

*snip*

[Thafoo]

No.

[God Kefka]

Battlefield could potentially be decisively better if they simply removed aircraft...

airplanes are too overpowered right now.

[New Europa Union]

Battlefield could potentially be decisively better if they simply removed aircraft...

airplanes are too overpowered right now.

I haven't played battlefield 4 yet. But in battlefield 3 I didn't find them op at all.

[Ancient Magmia]

1. This should be in Arts & Fiction.
2. Battlefield 4*
3. Haven't played BF4 yet, only 3. But Call of Duty sucks.

[Ikania]

I like Call of Duty: Ghosts more, but I'd rather play World at War, or any of the great but underrated WWII games that used to be mainstream and are the only mainstream thing I'd ever like and why can't we have world war 2 games again and modern stuff is mainstream and overused and boring WAAAAAAAAAH I WANT WAW BACK

[Republic of Vietnam]

I like Call of Duty: Ghosts more, but I'd rather play World at War, or any of the great but underrated WWII games that used to be mainstream and are the only mainstream thing I'd ever like and why can't we have world war 2 games again and modern stuff is mainstream and overused and boring WAAAAAAAAAH I WANT WAW BACK

You sir, are just like me. For me COD WaW was the best and most realistic.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Real Gamers duke it out on Arma 3, which also, trumps both those shitty games.

[Bezombia]

ARMA 3 master race

[New haven america]

Battlefield

[Bratislavskaya]

Its a choice between a broken game or a shit game. Guess which is which.

[Bezombia]

ARMA 3 master race

Actually, forget that. ARMA 3 for when I'm in srsgaming mood, Counter-Strike: Global Offensive for when I just want to have a good time.

[Desmendura]

Battlefield, the only thing I don't like about it is the airplanes, they're too OP.

[Spoder]

When It comes to which one is better as far as the experience goes, I say Battlefield.
You have better campaigns (still bad, but better) better gameplay, and the difference between weapons is more than what scope you pick it up with.
The visuals are also much better, and the game has more options (i.e, vehicles).
As far as which game is actually programmed better, I have to say CoD takes that one.
Battlefield games have been known for having tons of bugs at release, and even a few after they've been out for a while.
CoD games still have bugs, but far fewer and less obvious and cheaty ones.
Does anybody recall the bug in which you could detonate explosives while dead? (BF3)

Battlefield is still more real, and fun. In multiplayer, the winners aren't always determined by one man carrying the team and getting all the kills. Kills don't even determine who wins sometimes.

[Threlizdun]

Battlefield by far

[Paddy O Fernature]

When It comes to which one is better as far as the experience goes, I say Battlefield.
You have better campaigns (still bad, but better) better gameplay, and the difference between weapons is more than what scope you pick it up with.
The visuals are also much better, and the game has more options (i.e, vehicles).
As far as which game is actually programmed better, I have to say CoD takes that one.
Battlefield games have been known for having tons of bugs at release, and even a few after they've been out for a while.
CoD games still have bugs, but far fewer and less obvious and cheaty ones.
Does anybody recall the bug in which you could detonate explosives while dead? (BF3)

Battlefield is still more real, and fun. In multiplayer, the winners aren't always determined by one man carrying the team and getting all the kills. Kills don't even determine who wins sometimes.

Nah, the winning team in BF is never determined by one man carrying the team and getting all the kills.

Your kidding me, right? The team with the most kills 9/10 times is the winning team in that match. And id bet a good portion of that is done by 50 cal snipers using aimbots, as that weapon system is a script kids wet dream as the fucktards in charge of balance allowed you to run and gun with them with zero penalty.

[Bezombia]

When It comes to which one is better as far as the experience goes, I say Battlefield.
You have better campaigns (still bad, but better) better gameplay, and the difference between weapons is more than what scope you pick it up with.
The visuals are also much better, and the game has more options (i.e, vehicles).
As far as which game is actually programmed better, I have to say CoD takes that one.
Battlefield games have been known for having tons of bugs at release, and even a few after they've been out for a while.
CoD games still have bugs, but far fewer and less obvious and cheaty ones.
Does anybody recall the bug in which you could detonate explosives while dead? (BF3)

Battlefield is still more real, and fun. In multiplayer, the winners aren't always determined by one man carrying the team and getting all the kills. Kills don't even determine who wins sometimes.

Nah, the winning team in BF is never determined by one man carrying the team and getting all the kills.

Your kidding me, right? The team with the most kills 9/10 times is the winning team in that match. And id bet a good portion of that is done by 50 cal snipers using aimbots, as that weapon system is a script kids wet dream as the fucktards in charge of balance allowed you to run and gun with them with zero penalty.

what are you even talking about anymroe

[Britannic Realms]

I'll admit that the only reason I prefer CoD is because of Nazi Zombies, although even that has become terribly convoluted at this point.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Nah, the winning team in BF is never determined by one man carrying the team and getting all the kills.

Your kidding me, right? The team with the most kills 9/10 times is the winning team in that match. And id bet a good portion of that is done by 50 cal snipers using aimbots, as that weapon system is a script kids wet dream as the fucktards in charge of balance allowed you to run and gun with them with zero penalty.

what are you even talking about anymroe

LulOfDuty and Patchfield4 I believe.

Peasants know not of Arma 3 Glory!

[Bezombia]

what are you even talking about anymroe

LulOfDuty and Patchfield4 I believe.

Peasants no not of Arma 3 Glory!

>2014
>Not playing Counter-Strike: Source

[Mike the Progressive]

Battlefield could potentially be decisively better if they simply removed aircraft...

airplanes are too overpowered right now.

No, as long as I could remember, I wanted to be a pilot.... and teabag dead people. But my vision in my left eye means I can never be a fighter jet pilot, but with an Xbox, sixty dollars, a controller, I can be. And with those things I can also teabag dead bodies.

So battlefield.

[Solaray]

Battlefield. Although I did quite enjoy the first Black Ops.

[-The Unified Earth Governments-]

Halo beats both of them and tea bags the corpse...

Though I admit, Halo 4 is a bit lacking because a good deal of the official maps are not as good (Nowhere near Reach and 3's levels) But a lot of the custom Forge maps are great.

So there is your answer, as a whole the Halo series beats the piss out of both COD an Battlefield.

But...special credit goes to Black Ops 1 and II as well as Ghost, the games are entertaining, good and the multieplayer was rich for me, and Ghost didn't have Russians as a bad guy or something for once.

[Cadonica]

Battlefield 1942.
Didn't really like BF2, 2142 is way too sci-fi for me and from what I've seen, CoD is bullshit.

[USSR Reborn]

Halo beats both of them and tea bags the corpse...

Though I admit, Halo 4 is a bit lacking because a good deal of the official maps are not as good (Nowhere near Reach and 3's levels) But a lot of the custom Forge maps are great.

So there is your answer, as a whole the Halo series beats the piss out of both COD an Battlefield.

But...special credit goes to Black Ops 1 and II as well as Ghost, the games are entertaining, good and the multieplayer was rich for me, and Ghost didn't have Russians as a bad guy or something for once.

I completely agree. Halo is way better.