When it comes to first-person shooters there is none more redundant that the military based shooter. The concept has been done so many times by a number of different publishers ever since 3D environments were possible. However in 2013, I feel like publishers have significantly cut down on putting out generic military shooters. The reason being is because there is only one military based shooter that dominates the market every single year, and that game is Call of Duty.
I’m a Call of Duty player myself, and have been since Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare. Therefore, I can fully understand the appeal of these games. The single player offers some of the most exhilarating action set-pieces and the multiplayer is addictive. Call of Duty changed the face of military based first-person shooters, to the extent that every FPS now follows their formula. I never thought there would be a first-person shooter series that could rival the Call of Duty experience until I played Battlefield 3.
Many would argue that these two games are for two different types of gamer. The reason being that Call of Duty is designed for fast paced arena style action, and Battlefield 3 is designed for slow paced strategic gameplay. For that reason Call of Duty is more accessible to all types of gamers, whether casual or hardcore.
This is the exact reason why Call of Duty continues to become more dumbed down and frustrating to play. Meanwhile, Battlefield 3 is pleasing those who truly wish to know what it means to experience war. So here are a few reasons that support my opinion on why Battlefield is a better series than Call of Duty.
Battlefield 3 vehicles include Tanks, APC’s, Helicopters and Jets. All of these can be utilized at anytime during selected match types. Sure Call of Duty may have vehicles to an extent with kill-streaks, but it’s a very small extent. In Battlefield 3 matches like conquest rely on at least a handful of players utilizing the vehicles at their disposal. There may be some who aren’t fond of using vehicles, and I’m somewhat one of them. You don’t have to use these vehicle if you prefer to approach combat on foot, but it sure adds a whole new level of intensity to know they are there.
Accurate Hit Detection
Something that infuriates me about Call of Duty is the inaccurate hit detection. It’s something that I’ve found to be more apparent in recent Call of Duty games, and it’s enough to make me rage quit. Not only that but there is a noticeable delay in the field of view between players, explained in the video below.
I’ve never had to complain about hit detection or delays in Battlefield 3, and I die a shit ton in that game. The difference is that when I die I know it’s because I must have taken the wrong approach, or I wasn’t quick enough. It’s hardly ever down to the mechanics of the game itself.
More Visually Immersive
This is one of the more obvious reasons. There’s no denying that Battlefield 3 excels when it comes to graphics. All of this is thanks to Dice’s Frostbite engine. With Frostbite 3 on the horizon I just don’t see Acitvision’s developers coming up with an engine more powerful anytime soon.
Another one of the Frostbite engines advantages is the destructible environments. As you continue to do battle against the opposing forces, you’ll see all your fighting take its toll on the surrounding area. It seems like Treyarch and other Activision developers have been finding creative ways to mimic this on their engine, but it’s clearly not the same.
Working As A Team Feels Rewarding
The teamwork element is definitely not absent in Call of Duty games, as there are match types specifically designed for team play such as Team Deathmatch, Domination, Hardpoint and Demolition. However, it still feels like I could go off on my own and achieve self glory with little to no team strategy.
In Battlefield however, team strategy is vital in games like Rush and Conquest. It’s in your best favor to work with your team if you want to dominate the opposing team, and therefore it feels much more fun and rewarding to work with your teammates. Also classes like Medic are important when it comes to your teams endurance.
Ultimately the topic of Battlefield or Call of Duty is something that boils down to preference and style of gameplay; but I personally believe that Battlefield is hands down the better series, and this article represents my reasoning. If your opinion either differs or favors my own then please feel free to drop your own views in the comment section below. With the new Call of Duty game set to be revealed in the coming weeks, it will be interesting to see whether Activision can add enough innovation to the series to change my opinion.