COD4 vs. BF2

[SosmanSA]

Having not yet bought this... was talking to mate at work who has.
he reckons it blows BF2 out of the water... in about every department... and probably will steal many from BF2.

What's your take guys? Is it worth buying?? (must add... did buy Crysis... still haven't opened the packaging yet)

[stoke]

The multiplayer game is completely ruined by grenade spamming morons and impossible shot tricksters and people running mouse-programs that allow them to fire a pistol at 12 shots a millisecond and of course, they know the terrain so well, you'll be dead before you even peek around a corner.

The playing fields are too small for a noob to be able to sit back and get into the game, and the games are over in less than 4 minutes. If there was a noob server, that restricted by rank or something, then perhaps it would be feasable.

Otherwise, the multiplayer has several game-modes that are interesting to say the least, and you can hear the enemy approaching and the graphics are fast and excellent and the weapon accuracy is really good, aim carefully!

Singleplayer is freaking beautiful though. Short, but beautiful.

[Hoss]

This is the kind of comparison I've been waiting for, an opportunity for the BF2 fanatics to diss COD4.

Before that happens let me just say this.

BF2 and COD 4 are two different games, don't compare them, they're just not the same, so don't diss the COD style if you're a fan of the BF style. I'm a fan of both so I don’t get it why it has to be one or the other.

If you like close quarter fighting where you have to think before you run around a corner (most likely into an incoming grenade), where moving about slowly, thoughtfully and methodically can leave you on top, then get COD 4.
The multiplayer game is not ruined by grenade throwing moron's (yes they're there and they are morons, but they don't ruin it), because as I said, move slowly, adapt tactics, and the grenade boys will become insignificant, because you've just out flanked them and mowed them all down, grenades in hand!

Really, I was wondering how long I'll be into this game, till I had a round with Carrion, where the two of us moved through an underground tunnel to the opposite side of the map, in short by moving together and getting behind the enemy, we hurt them. That was it for me; this game is like SWAT on steroids.

And PS. Nothing stops you from playing both!

[SunnyCash]

The game is great all round and probably will permanently take peeps from Bf, but and this is a big but it is very 1 dimensional spawn kill die pawn kill die pawn kill die and so forth. can never replace bf because the game play in bf is more than running around shooting. Its kinda like playing 64 peeps on a 16 player map io style in battlefield. Lots of fun for a hour or two but thats it.

[SlappY]

I will look mainly from a COD 4 perspective, cause I gave up on BF when the retards screwed the game up.

They are 2 completely different games, drawing a comparison would be doing both an injustice. However, being the more recent of the 2 COD4 is obviously more technically advanced (graphics, sounds, penetreble surfaces, etc).

Also, it is a lot more than shoot and be shot, when you get into it COD4 is VERY tactical. If you going to score and KD, you better know your maps and the flow of battle.

Things I like about COD4 over BF:
Firing giving enemy position away = not campers.
Penetreble surfaces.. once you played this... and really played it, you will never want to go back.
Easy knife work, click, whoosh, dead.
Upgrade and unlock system. Perks and weapon mods RAWK, can swing the battle.
Varying game modes, just adds a little spice.
Challenges... man some of those things are pretty creative.
The way arial support works. No more whoring.

What I felt they could have added:
A cover system. I have yet to see a mainstream online game pull this off.
Stat tracking.

[doobiwan]

I agree with 100% of Slappy's comments, but I'll add this...

CoD4 owes a heck of a lot to BF2. They took all the good and added more. I'll say it's success is not totally due to innovation, but more to lack of comparably high grade tactical squad shooters out at the moment, it got its timing perfect.

A biggee is also that CoD4 is a lot more confined, There are no playable vehicles which makes a lot of the stuff like C4 and RPG's superfluous. I think if BF:BC / BF3 just give a little hat tip back to CoD4 they'll pwn it with destructible environments and vehicles.

Having said that, it is a great game and if you're a bit tired of BF2 it's a nice diversion.

[CarRi0n]

I play both, but give much more attention to BF. When I bought COD it took me +- 10H to finish the single player and it was really good fun. Then I started playing online and was hooked for about 3 weeks and went back to BF. The ranking and stat system in BF attracts me more and currently I want to gain more experience to get on par with some other players.

When I played with HosstheBoss the other night it was the first time in 4 months, but I really had fun. I also agree that you can't compare the 2 games cause you can't go and play COD with your BF style and tactics. To me Cod has alot of CSS style mixed with some BF in it.

[SlappY]

I reckon thats the BF drug. The stats and ranking, which is why when 2142, QW: ET comes along you get lackluster response despite the innovations to the gameplay they introduced. (albeit 2142 had some serious bugs) The fellas dont wanna give up their hard earned ranks. It is what has made BF the success it is but I suspect it will also be the successors undoing. (plus the fact that it runs really well on a low end machine). Which is also why COD 4 is a success. It is more revolutionary than evolutionary. I think the attitude would be "Well why do I want to pick up something that is more of what I already got. (2142, QW:ET)", where COD4 is so completely different you see a lot of BF peeps using it as the alternative.

[stoke]

In BF2, I can spawn miles away from the action, get into a vodnik and do nothing but shoot at passing choppers if i feel like it, and still be doing something useful. I can also drive around in a fast jeep and roadkill, or ride up to a tank and jump out and watch the tank driver bail and then laugh my ass off while trying to shoot him before he jumps back into the tank.

BF2 just has more playable depth, and can actually be relaxing.

COD4 multiplayer is far from relaxing.

[BambisRevenge]

yeah i agree with some of what has been said.

you cant really compare the games directly.

i often thoroughly enjoy CoD 4 but then again i sometimes hate it. then again lately ive grown a strong dislike for bf2, suppose ive just got over it.

in CoD 4 howerver i have a different beef to what people have said here, then again maybe they just havnt noticed it. comming from a pretty competitive CSS background for almost all of my serious online gaming life, i find that CoD 4 PROMOTES noobish game play; i feel this for quite a multitude of reasons

-Headshots do not kill with one hit, only with the M14 rifle (with damage increase) and snipers... i think this is absolute bullocks, it only does 40-50% more damage, weapon depending.

-Practically no recoil, holding down attack and spraying an ENTIRE CLIP has little affect on weapon accuracy and is the tactic of preference with most people that play, and it works. Ive been disgusted to see people spray an AFKer (that they knew was afk) to death in the midsection.

-delay to aim down sights, makes it really difficult to aim down sights then accurately shoot them before you are dead.

-the above points in my opinion actually will make your aim WORSE, as the game PROMOTES spraying and little need for aim whatsover and headshots barely being rewarded, mild pointing in their direction is more like what it aims for.

- NADE SPAMMAGE FTWzOrS! i mean nades are fully cookable (ie no fuse time if done right), have a huge instant kill radius and even bigger damage and shellshock radius. and then guess what? u get a triple nade perk! woohoo!!! *sigh*

- Grenade launcher, it was actually proven that mentally handicapped people can get kills reasonably easily with the grenade launcher, its leathal at all ranges (arming range is total bullocks, it just kills instantly unexploded) has a large damage area and large instant kill area, also there is no aiming/firing delay unlike the RPG, witch also goes totaly squiff! haha.

This is my main beef with the game, then again i think this is one of the main reasons why the game has sold so well, as anyone can play it i think.

I still enjoy the game often and would say its a good buy, dispite my whining.

[edited by stoke : requested to put the real contents of his post here after the problems wif da internet last night]