A few weeks ago, we looked at five different gameplay elements which the Battlefield series does better than Call of Duty, so we felt it was only fair to flip things around and look at some of the things that Call of Duty does better than Battlefield. From story campaigns to gender diversity in multiplayer, below are five different areas where the Call of Duty series definitely has an edge over Battlefield.
Co-op multiplayer is something the Battlefield series has been glacially slow to embrace. In the entire history of the Battlefield series, there have been only two instances where a game had included co-op mode; the one-off Onslaught co-op horde mode from 2010’s Battlefield: Bad Company 2, and the barebones co-op mission series from Battlefield 3.
In both cases, the longevity of each mode was also severely hampered by the fact that they had their own progression/unlock trees that were separate from the standard competitive multiplayer, making it clear that DICE didn’t see them as long-term additions to the series.
Meanwhile, Call of Duty has had a variety of different standalone co-op modes (the most popular of which is the Zombies archetype) ever since 2008’s Call of Duty: World at War. Co-op in the Call of Duty franchise has grown more robust over the years, even to the point where it’s now considered to be one of the three core “pillars” of the franchise (with the other two being the story campaign and competitive multiplayer).
Sure, Call of Duty’s co-op has been slow in offering the same sorts of ancillary benefits (progression, unlocks, etc.) as its competitive multiplayer, but even a less-robust co-op mode is better than what the Battlefield series offers.Load Comments