Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Call of Duty vs Battlefield?

Pros and Cons

Call of Duty Pros

- Realistic

- competitive

- Vehicles

- it for Men

- Better graphics

Cons

- None

Battlefield Pros

- None

Cons

- Same graphic engine from BF2

- too many 10 year olds

- no vehicles

- less Weapons then COD

- Crappy maps

- Terrible story

- noob tubing

- Quickscoping

- campers

6 Answers

Relevance
  • ?
    Lv 4
    8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    I believe you're trying to be funny by changing the games around.

    Call of Duty Pros

    - Realistic - Opinion. I don't play for realism; it's a game ...

    - competitive - You've never played apparently.

    - Vehicles - Yeah, let's all horde the vehicles to get kills instead of using actual skill.

    - it for Men - Biased opinion.

    - Better graphics - I HATE "better graphics." I bet you're also one of those guys that think a 52in HDTV is better than a standard TV.

    Cons

    - None

    Battlefield Pros

    - None

    Cons

    - Same graphic engine from BF2 - I wish more games did this. Halo 2 graphics were perfect ...

    - too many 10 year olds - Not many actually. All games have a range of age groups.

    - no vehicles - *See above*

    - less Weapons then COD - So? Next it's going to be "Reach is better than Halo 2/3 because you can buy armor."

    - Crappy maps - Matter of opinion. MW3 actually has only 2-3 maps I hate.

    - Terrible story - Don't care about campaign.

    - noob tubing - Fixed in later CoDs

    - Quickscoping - Mad that some guy with a sniper killed you at close range?

    - campers - Any game has campers.

  • 8 years ago

    I think you have them switched buddy.

    COD:

    Pros- Gun customization, smaller maps for for intense play, easier to play with a multitude of friends.

    Cons- Little kids, campers, nube tubes, crappy host migration.

    BF:

    Pros-Beautiful graphics, actual use of vehicles, higher skill level, large maps for in depth play.

    Cons- Only 4 man squads, glitches(maps are large), server owners can kick and ban you.

    I play both frequently so I am not biased at all.

  • 4 years ago

    i will attempt the two . I even have performed the two sequence and honestly Love Them. even although I performed BF3 on My friends Console , nonetheless It replaced right into a solid interest and that i Kinda cherished All COD video games different than contemporary conflict 3 . i think of Ghosts would be an staggering interest regardless of if I predicted somewhat greater while they stated next-Gen Engine , yet nonetheless , The photos Have more suitable . i actually Wanna See what it incredibly is Multiplayer feels like. Oh , and that i do no longer think of you will desire to evaluate those 2 video games . COD is according to close-Quarter , quickly-paced , competetive gameplay on an identical time as BF4 is extensive Maps , real looking interest-play and team artwork utilising additionally automobiles to end objectives and that i admire the two one among them for their very own form.

  • 8 years ago

    Are you doing this just to see if anyone would realize? Switch COD and Battlefield

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    There is no way you should have to think about that question...it so obvious...CALL OF DUTY all the way...:)

    Source(s): I'm cool
  • 8 years ago

    COD COD COD

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.