The Call of Duty Versus Battlefield Rivalry Is Not a Good Thing

[coolness]

The biggest first person shooters of the fall are now out and gamers can now pick up both Battlefield 3, from Swedish studio DICE and publisher Electronic Arts, and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, from Infinity Ward, Sledgehammer Games and Raven with publishing handled by Activision, and measure the quality for themselves.

But earlier during the year representatives of both publishers, sometimes up to the CEO level, launched some pretty barbed attacks at the other side, suggesting that the quality would be low and that sales would fail to materialize.

Both companies realized that these kind of comments only pushed some players away and a kind of ceasefire developed before representatives of the development teams involved talked about playing each other's games and having respect for the amount of effort both required.

And they seemed to settle on the line that the fact that both franchises fought for the same space meant that the entire genre was pushed forward and the video game industry benefited from the rivalry, tough talk and all.

I don't agree with this position, mainly because one of the essences of innovation, be it in video games or mot other fields, lies in fierce competition, in tough choices, ultimately in someone maybe going out of business.

Sure, it's not good to hear executives and developers at DICE, Infinity Ward, Electronic Arts and Activision trash talk each other like over excited amateur football players but that shows they want to be better than each other, that they try to drive the other game out of the minds of players.

This is competition and it's great for the future of the industry, much better than any forced civil interactions between people who would probably like nothing better than see the other team get out of the first person shooter genre and into social games.

Source

 

[Chikaku-chan]

Spoiler: Here is where my fucks are kept~

As you can see I am all out of fucks to give

ON-TOPIC=
I dont see this as news worthy as it was obvious~

 

[Guild McCommunist]

This is basically an editorial and not news. I'm gonna move this to General Consoles for now.

As for the topic, the rivalry isn't a "good thing" yet MW3 breaks entertainment records and BF3 still sells millions. RIVALRY IS BAD INDEED.

EDIT: Fuck, forgot to fix the title first, my bad.

 

[coolness]

ow ok im sorry it looked like news in the first place

 

[Guild McCommunist]

ow ok im sorry it looked like news in the first place

It's not your fault, they even labeled it as news at the source. It's definitely an interesting editorial though so thank you for posting it.

 

[Hells Malice]

It's not so much competition as it is DICE attempting to change up the norm and add new things to a stale FPS archetype, and Activsion sitting on their hands and releasing the same game with a new name every now and then.

I like when DICE/EA bashes CoD. They deserve to, it's a piece of crap that's only popular because it's fueled by its own popularity.

 

[yusuo]

I dont think it was a good thing, because of Batllefields expected release date the new COD was pushed in development to compete directly with Battlefield thus not losing interest in the series, because of this bugs happened on both games which means that we the end user suffer and are expected to put up with mandatory fixes.

Gone are the good ol days where after a release no extra work could be done, thus forcing developers to implement strict quality control to assure no game killing bugs remain.

While the new generation has bought good graphics its taken away the consumer right to a quality product

 

[Foxi4]

In a Battlefield vs COD "battle", the only real result is "Battlefield wins, no contest".

With all due respect, I really like Call of Duty games - most of the gamers do. At the end of the day though, a COD title lasts you up to a year, a Battlefield game lasts you years upon years.

Can you fly a jetfighter, eject and shoot down another jetfighter with a bazooka in Call of Duty? No, you can't. Can you shoot a tank cannon straight into a building and cover your enemies with its debris, killing all of them in one clean swipe in COD? No, you can't. Why?

Because that game was not designed for it. Call of Duty are Counter Strike-like shooters with high focus put on Player vs Player multi. Vehicles, physics and everything else connected to an actual "war zone" is just set in the background and treated as decoration.

Battlefield wins againts COD not because it's a better "game", it's a different genre within genre. It's just as unrealistic, but it's more of a simulation game, with its focus set upon the entire concept of "war" rather than the concept of being an everyday trooper.

 

[Hells Malice]

Because that game was not designed for it. Call of Duty are Counter Strike-like shooters with high focus put on Player vs Player multi. Vehicles, physics and everything else connected to an actual "war zone" is just set in the background and treated as decoration.

I should kill you where you stand for that statement.

 

[Gahars]

I dont think it was a good thing, because of Batllefields expected release date the new COD was pushed in development to compete directly with Battlefield thus not losing interest in the series, because of this bugs happened on both games which means that we the end user suffer and are expected to put up with mandatory fixes.

Nope. The Call of Duty games have been yearly affairs for a while now; MW3's launch time was probably planned out well before EA announced Battlefield 3's.

I am glad there is competition, but I'm not sure if it's enough; can we get a game with a smart, well written campaign that emotionally connects to the audience AND fun multiplayer?

Please? I don't think that's too much to ask.

 

[Foxi4]

Because that game was not designed for it. Call of Duty are Counter Strike-like shooters with high focus put on Player vs Player multi. Vehicles, physics and everything else connected to an actual "war zone" is just set in the background and treated as decoration.

I should kill you where you stand for that statement.

You're right - CS did the same thing, just much earlier and much better.

 

[Deleted User]

Spoiler: Here is where my fucks are kept~

As you can see I am all out of fucks to give

ON-TOPIC=
I dont see this as news worthy as it was obvious~