Battlefield BC2 vs COD

[Finn 7 five 11]

Call Of Duty is the most popular shooter, Battlefield is also very popular, i really love Battlefield BC2 i think it is so much more fun than Call Of Duty considering all the special effects and teamwork that is involved.

 

I also do play call of duty with friends since many do not own BC2, i was just wondering if people here also thought BC2 was the better game despite its short campaign.

 

I only put BC2 and black ops since both series are so varied.

Edited March 22, 2011 by finn4life

[NinjaWJ]

where is cod1??!?!?!

[Adler]

lol 1 vote for each option so far. I have only played Black Ops.

[CryptReaperDorian]

Uh-oh, here comes the fanboyism. Anyways, let me start the war by flaming COD. Seriously, why would anyone want to play a game that allows somebody to own even more when they are already owning (that kill streak sh*t)? I'd say helicopters (the circle strafers anyways) are quite overpowered in BC2, but atleast everything is made to have a weakness. Also, I laugh at anybody who thinks guns are even remotely realistic in COD. Seriously, since when does an assault rifle have no recoil? Since when were red dots and ACOGS, let alone RC vehicles, used in Vietnam? Sorry, but it's quite impossible to even take COD seriously. One can say it's ridiculous for the humor, but not much can ever beat a "Battlefield moment" (like recons strapping C4 to a Jeep or UAV).

[Robinski]

To be fair, they're two really different games, to me at least. One is heavily grounded in twitch/arcade reactions and the other is more about tactics and planning. It's most obvious in the size of the maps: BLOPS' biggest map is probably on par with the smaller "zones" on a BC2 Rush map, and as such all the action is heavily concentrated and you'll struggle to go 15ft without an encounter. With BC2, there's a lot less emphasis on running around and popping dudes left, right and centre and more on positioning, holding and proper attacks.

 

I voted saying that I prefer BC2, but that's only really because I'm really new to the BF series, having only played a bit of BC1 and now BC2. With the amount of CoD games I've played (from CoD2 -> BLOPS) the game's evolved quite a bit but it still feels like I've just played it all before. I'm just so damn tired of COD at the moment, but that doesn't mean it's a bad game just that I've played too much of it.

[Creed Bratton]

I prefer Battlefield 2 actually.

[boxmonster]

I prefer BC2. I got Black Ops and was instantly annoyed by the spawning system, every once in a while teams will switch bases and just own the people they spawned behind. Sniping is also useless in that game. I like BC2's sandbox-like approach and it is what you get, a battlefield. A lot of people will disagree with me here, but I also prefer the campaign, it again has a more sandbox approach; I got tired of COD's campaign after the first couple days I played it.

[shahmen]

BC2, i hate BO it's boring not much fun and campers.

[baptiste]

They are hardly comparable games. I would say I prefer BC2 if I had to choose, but both satisfy something extremly different. Both remain quite fun. BC2 will never satisfy me when I'm up for some cod and vice versa.

 

@CryptReaperDorian, shut up please.

[Dnero]

Battlefield 3

 

Anyways, I chose BBC2 mainly because it's more team play than run and gunning. You get that satisfied feeling everytime you get a kill with a sniper in BBC2. Unlike CoD, the only 'cool' kills is with a tomahawk, anything else is just a common kill

[Brad]

Sorry, but it's quite impossible to even take COD seriously.

Why should you take games seriously?

[foohy]

I didn't vote. I like both games and I think they both have their merits.

 

-Black Ops is a very dumbed-down shooter but is great for quick, drop-in/drop-out games with friends. It's more of a social experience. It's not as good as MW2 by any means, though, and it suffers from frequent, random connection issues.

 

-BC2, on the other hand, is so much more in-depth and makes for great 'battlefield moments' on those rare occasions when I can get enough friends together to form a squad and play a few full games. It's too bad it suffers from wonky controls and lag due to most people playing CoD.

 

I honestly can't pick one. Though I can say I'm looking forward to Battlefield 3 MUCH more than Modern Warfare 3.

 

Also; CryptReaperDorian can blow it out his ass. Isn't the 'hurr durr, COD is teh worst game ever!!1' spiel getting a bit old now? You make fun of CoD for being unrealistic...as opposed to the uber-realistic BC2 which centers around finding a giant spinny blue orb thingy that knocks out electronics and makes tidal waves. Yeah, that's realistic. I'm sure that existed in the '40s. You know -- historical accuracy and all.

Edited March 22, 2011 by foohy

[Xboxless]

I didn't vote. I like both games and I think they both have their merits.

 

-Black Ops is a very dumbed-down shooter but is great for quick, drop-in/drop-out games with friends. It's more of a social experience. It's not as good as MW2 by any means, though, and it suffers from frequent, random connection issues.

 

-BC2, on the other hand, is so much more in-depth and makes for great 'battlefield moments' on those rare occasions when I can get enough friends together to form a squad and play a few full games. It's too bad it suffers from wonky controls and lag due to most people playing CoD.

 

I honestly can't pick one. Though I can say I'm looking forward to Battlefield 3 MUCH more than Modern Warfare 3.

 

Also; CryptReaperDorian can blow it out his ass. Isn't the 'hurr durr, COD is teh worst game ever!!1' spiel getting a bit old now? You make fun of CoD for being unrealistic...as opposed to the uber-realistic BC2 which centers around finding a giant spinny blue orb thingy that knocks out electronics and makes tidal waves. Yeah, that's realistic. I'm sure that existed in the '40s. You know -- historical accuracy and all.

Blame that story line on the french. EA decided that they needed a serious storyline and hired some french guys to write. Absolutely dreadful singleplayer, I liked the first ones WAY WAY WAY better.

 

BC2 of course, I like to be wowed by a cool "Battlefield Moment" rather than have my brain dulled by cod.

[Moth]

Out of the two, I prefer Bad Company 2. Does that make COD a bad game? No it does not. I find them to be two different types of games. COD to me is the game I play when friends come over, especially if the game has Nazi Zombies. Bad Company 2 is a game I play online, because the battle just feel better that way. COD is running and gunning for the most. Bad Company 2, on the other hand requires thinking, especially when it comes to sniping because of the bullet drop. In the end though, I enjoy both of those games, and don't go hating on either of them.

[foohy]

Out of the two, I prefer Bad Company 2. Does that make COD a bad game? No it does not. I find them to be two different types of games. COD to me is the game I play when friends come over, especially if the game has Nazi Zombies. Bad Company 2 is a game I play online, because the battle just feel better that way. COD is running and gunning for the most. Bad Company 2, on the other hand requires thinking, especially when it comes to sniping because of the bullet drop. In the end though, I enjoy both of those games, and don't go hating on either of them.

They both require thinking, actually. Just different kinds of thinking. The difference is that Battlefield's thinking is mostly 'how should I approach the area' and 'where should I camp' while CoD is almost entirely about spur-of-the-moment decisions and route planning. Have you watched TmarTn's Breaking Down Black Ops videos? They work like a 'choose your own adventure' book and really highlight how you really do have to think learn from your experiences to do well in CoD.

 

 

[The Killa]

 

Dreadful videos. I actually like how he thinks he's acting all tactically sound and "breaking it down" to make him look smart. I also liked the bit where he recommends against completing the mission objective. Just another 16 yr old obsessed with KD ratios among everything

 

 

 

'how should I approach the area' and 'where should I camp' while CoD is almost entirely about spur-of-the-moment decisions and route planning

 

As if every FPS game ever didn't contain all of those elements in some major way.

Edited March 23, 2011 by The Killa

[foohy]

<snip>

These forums have really gone downhill over the past couple years.

[The Killa]

 

<snip>

These forums have really gone downhill over the past couple years.

.. and giving a whingy reply like that will only help get this thread get the lock faster. Acting like you're some forum messiah who dictates what posts are worthy and what aren't? Let me take that role and go ahead and press the logout button and don't bother coming back

 

If you disagree with me say why. Otherwise you can continue taking your time "breaking down" BLOPS when in reality you're watching "my-first-FPS" tactic videos. What a complete waste of time that is. I believe there is very little, if not no, "skill" in BLAPPERSS in comparison to BC2

Edited March 23, 2011 by The Killa

[NinjaWJ]

hmm not sure if you can really analyze that COD match because it was only 4v4....

[PHCharls]

Black Ops

[foohy]

 

...press the logout button and don't bother coming back...

Sounds like a plan!

Edited March 26, 2011 by foohy

[Minus the Boom]

BC2 any day. Not only is it technically a better game (on PS3 atleast), it also actually feels like you're in a fight and not as if you're playing a mix of hide-and-seek and tag-you're-it.

[darthYENIK]

On BC2, the battlefield is constantly changing. It's different from match to match, and even from spawn to spawn. A wall or building that you may have taken cover in one second could be gone the next time you spawn.

 

That said, I can't really have an opinion either way, considering I've never played black ops. But BC2 is pretty awesome.

[Ronmar The Only]

I've only played Bad Company 2 out of these two, but I would still say I prefer it over Modern Warfare 2. It mostly lies in the gameplay, too much twitch based with guns that seemingly don't have any negatives.

 

Also, I've had plenty crazy moments in BC2. Just today I was playing hardcore mode with some friends and walked right into three people who had two people spawn on them (I hate when that happens). I was playing around with the Uzi at that point and quickly ran out of aim after downing two of them. Killed two more with my pistol and then turn and ran. The other guy either didn't know I was there or was quickly taken down by someone else. All I know is, that was pretty epic.

 

And then there was the time on Onslaught when some ship off the coast was firing on our location. I tore down a door to hid in a building (not really thinking, mind you) and was greeted with the rest of said building already blown to hell and saw the two giant shells that blew my guy to kingdom come.

 

 

 

But I will give the COD franchise props. There are plenty of people who enjoy the killstreaks and the modifications you can do with your weapons. And some people love twitch shooters with poor realism (concerning weapons). I mean, I would mess around with it if my friends came over and played it, just like I would mess around with Halo.

 

Doesn't mean I would really play the multiplayer myself.

[Cheat]

I own both, and before Black Ops it was clear for me that Bad Companies were better than Call of Duties.

However, nowadays I'm not so sure, I like Black Ops really much, but so do I like Bad Company 2.

 

So I guess I'll go with they're equally great.

[BabeRuth]

were's CALL OF DUTY 3 man?!?!?!?!?!?!

[Long Haired Freaky Guy]

Uh-oh, here comes the fanboyism. Anyways, let me start the war by flaming COD. Seriously, why would anyone want to play a game that allows somebody to own even more when they are already owning (that kill streak sh*t)? I'd say helicopters (the circle strafers anyways) are quite overpowered in BC2, but atleast everything is made to have a weakness. Also, I laugh at anybody who thinks guns are even remotely realistic in COD. Seriously, since when does an assault rifle have no recoil? Since when were red dots and ACOGS, let alone RC vehicles, used in Vietnam? Sorry, but it's quite impossible to even take COD seriously. One can say it's ridiculous for the humor, but not much can ever beat a "Battlefield moment" (like recons strapping C4 to a Jeep or UAV).

I'm pretty certain that the AR's have recoil, and very bad ones at that. When I first started off one the game, I was trying to unload a full magazine into an enemy, only to find out I'd missed due to the recoil. That's why I tend to prefer the M16 now, due to the 3 round blast, cutting down on the recoil. And the KR are there for the fun, nothing else...