I just got done reading a Game Informer article about Battlefield 3, and from the looks of it Call of Duty doesn't even stand a chance. With the decline in general quality of COD games since Cod 4 and how outdated the COD engine is becoming, the only way that Activision can save it is to step up their game. The current COD engine is no match the Frostbite 2 engine overall and unless Activision does something about this then they will be left in the dust. If Activision hopes to compete this year then they are going to have to pull a trick out of their sleeves, and a major one at that. Unless the can make a major advancement in the COD series or the COD engine this year might signal the rise of Battlefield as the dominant FPS
This post has been the honest opinion of a hardcore gamer and highly experienced Call of Duty player I now open up the floor for discussion on the topic.
Yup i use to be hardcore COD fan, then i bought BFBC2 for $2 and it destroyes it, the call of duty will LIVE ON however, becuase stupid people like me go from MW2 and saying "oh my god im never buying a COD game ever again" yet a new COD comes out and i buy it....
Call of duty is like the sports game franchise, they will always come out with a new one every year as long as it still sells and it will sell... Which is really sad.
I'm a hardcore Call of Duty person but, I find it harder and harder to play. BFBC3 is going to have Call of Duty trying to catch up but, the new Call of Duty doesn't sound good at all.
Six games took place in WW2 One game in the Cold War and two in the modern day...
Not sure where else they're gonna go to spice up the formula, but whatev.
I think that 2010 was teh defining year of old video games returning tearing teh industry a new one. Take a look at Starcraft II, 12 years since the original and its easily one of the greatest games ever! How about the semi-sequel to the last-gen game "Red Dead: revolver"; Red Dead Redemption?? Before Call of Duty, before Rainbow Six, before Halo, there was Battlefield. With the new release of Battlefield 3, coupled with teh loss of Infinity Ward, Call of Duty will finally have to give up its (now shared) crown of Multiplayer king and return it to the true titan of Multiplayer, DICE's Battlefield series.
I hope so. Battlefield really deserves the attention and they have much more games, ideas and activity among even their oldest games. Also, they actually do it right - Battlefield: Bad Company 2 was Console-orientated, that's kind of obvious, but Battlefield 2 (and thus 3) is going to be PC focused with: 64-player maps Jets Prone Dragging Players back to safety Mounting Weapons on virtually any kind of Terrain
Woo! :> One thing I adore about DICE is that, unlike CoD they bring in new things but also they don't ruin their own series (the Battlefield series), because instead they shot off with Bad Company instead, it helps alot, and it was very well done.
Now, I've heard that Activision might introduce a pay-to-play feature for CODs multiplayer. I've never been a fan of the series but I'm sure this move would dissuade potential buyers.
On a side note, Battlefield 3 looks amazing! I can't wait to lay my hands on it. I been anticipating it since BF2.
CODs not great but its the only arcade (easy) shooter out there, battlefield a tactical shooter and is one of many i play MAG, SOCOM and soon im gettin battlefield 3
I suck on a game like Crysis, where people often out-shoot me where I would easily win in CoD.
Ya well thats why you change the settings in CoD to something harder, but i do agree alittle that CoD needs something new to make into a game and change there game styles like make something futureistic like halo, now that sounds like it'd be pretty sweet!!!
i could careless about the new battlefield and sense i dont suck at cod i dont complain i think its fun but tbh all the new ones seem exactly the same just with new maps and guns
FINALLY! people are realising that CoD is an arcade shooter! One shot and the enemy's dead! That's why games like Halo have it right, more health gives 1 v 1 and hectic (yet awesome with a skilled player) 2 v 1 skirmishes tactical options. As soon as you get shot in Halo, you don't assume "whoops, ran out into the sun, gotta spawn now" you think "Ok, where's the shots coming from? Can i activate Armor Lock? How about my Shotgun? is that 'Hog available?" and with a larger health bar in Bad Co. 2, DICE shows taht these seconds of tactical thinking in the midst of the skirmish are key FPS components, and this increased Health will prolly carry on into BF3
To add to my original post Another problem facing COD is the lack of variety. Battlefield has always had a large selection of vehicles which adds a great deal of variety to the experience. COD however, is based entirely on Man vs Man infantry combat, no vehicles involved. This works fine for a while but after so many games it severely limits the advancement of the game. In order for COD to progress then its developers need to come up with something new, REALLY new.
