Infinity Ward’s Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare will be better than EA’s Battlefield 1. There, I said it. Forget all the hate surrounding Infinite Warfare and the record number of dislikes its reveal trailer received on YouTube, I firmly believe that Infinite Warfare will be a better game than Battlefield 1.
***Read Why Battlefield 1 Will Be Better Than Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare***
Don’t get me wrong, I love the Battlefield series and I enjoy all the carnage that a player can create by himself or with friends. I am ecstatic EA set the stage of Battlefield 1 during the World War I era. Much like Battlefield 4, the game will look beautiful with its stunning visuals powered by the all-so-mighty Frostbite 3 Engine. Just watching the multiplayer gameplay from EA Plays moved me to pre-order the Early Enlister Deluxe Edition and I’m eagerly waiting for its release in October.
With that being said, this game will still fail to outshine the quality and pure craftsmanship of Infinite Warfare. There are three main reasons why I believe and will continue to believe until proven wrong that Infinite Warfare will be better than Battlefield 1, lets get into it:
**Although being sold as part of a bundle, Modern Warfare Remastered is completely separate game to Infinite Warfare and will not be discussed**
1.) Co-op:
Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare by default takes the cake on this topic. EA has yet to announce any sort of co-op mode for Battlefield 1 and deducing from previous Battlefield instalments, I highly doubt there will be any sort of co-op mode.
Infinity Ward announced their new Zombie’s mode, which is the first of its kind from their developing team. The new map called Spaceland has a 1980’s theme theme park for players to survive in. Just like previous games, there are four playable characters, but there won’t be the traditional Russian, Japanese, American, and German. Instead, there will be the rapper, the girl, the nerd and the jock. It appears that instead of the famous mystery box, Infinity Ward will produce a magic box which has the same concept of its predecessor.
Call of Duty in the past had a plethora of co-op modes from Treyarch’s original Nazi Zombies in Nacht der Untoten to Infinity Ward’s Extinction mode and Sledgehammer’s Exo Zombies. Battlefield 3 had a co-operative mode that allowed two players to play in missions, but it was only available online and it didn’t have a split screen option.
The most important drawback to previous Battlefield co-op mode attempts was that they had no replay value to them. Once the player completed the missions, there was no incentive for him to go back and play them again. On the contrary, Infinity Ward’s zombie instalment will have a ton of replay value, just like every Zombies mode. Battlefield will never compete with the level of co-op modes that the Call of Duty franchise has produced.
2.) Campaign:
Call of Duty once again wins this category by a landslide. I can’t remember the last time I even thought about the campaigns of previous Battlefields. They are easily forgettable and the stories are sub-par with basic cliché moments involving each individual character, who had the personalities and emotions of carrots.
On the other hand, Infinity Ward, the creators of the cinematic masterpiece that is the Modern Warfare series is back to produce a campaign that is out of this world (literally). After watching the gameplay of the missions “Ship Assault” and “Black Sky”, I can say that I am extremely pumped for another campaign full of brutal fighting with a cinematic touch to make me feel as if I am in a movie.
3.) Multiplayer:
Yes, the “Definitive Multiplayer Experience” shall triumph and win the hearts of any and all gamer’s who may have their doubts. Call of Duty has always been known for its multiplayer since Modern Warfare. Many people who get the game don’t even touch the campaign and instead head straight to the multiplayer.
Infinity Ward has a massive track record to produce a multiplayer experience that players can enjoy and still come back to play even when the next Call of Duty title is out. After the let down from Ghosts, I cannot see Infinity Ward releasing another mediocre multiplayer experience.
Battlefield 1 boasts its dynamic maps that are fully destructible emphasising that “no where is safe”. However, with that comes a price and that price is frame rate drop and bugs. Battlefield is notorious for its bugs and it would not be surprising to see it hurt gameplay on its release. While Call of Duty has problems with overpowered guns and class setups, these trivialities never hinder game-play. Call of Duty is known for its smooth 60 FPS gameplay. While Battlefield is getting there, there is no way it is running at 60 FPS with all the destruction happening around the player on a massive map.
Battlefield 1 will feature a thrilling multiplayer which I will dive into come release day. However, the sheer addiction of levelling up, completing challenges, earning kill streaks, and unlocking camos from Call of Duty’s multiplayer will have me playing for hours on end.
this is dumb you just contradicted yourself saying the cod campaign is good yet no one even plays the campaign and they go straight to multiplayer. The only good thing about this is the modern warfare remaster where the game actually goes back to regular warfare and people are not jumping 50 feet in the air to quick scope you from across the map and all the other insanely dumb little trick s that they added because they think its fun or trying to make this into some kind of halo wannabe crap.
What a dumbass fucking article.
Infinite Warfare has no principles and serves no purpose. it exists solely to be a milk-job. Activision has been forcing developers to stay on the futuristic bandwagon and now we have Infinite Warfare. There would be nothing wrong with an experimental COD space game if it came in between another setting. This is the equivalent of Jason X (friday the 13th in space) or Hellraiser in Space. Its when the creators begin to be mentally bankrupt and run out of ideas. How would you like a Halo game set in World War 2? Seems stupid, doesn’t it? I want to like COD. I really want to like it. But I can’t get on board with Infinite Warfare. Its nothing more than a rip off of every other trendy FPS game, such as Titanfall with the robots. Please don’t talk about zombies either. The zombies are goofy and lack any bit of the original horror or mythologies that it was tied to in the original Treyarch games. This Infinity Ward is not the original Infinity Ward. They left after Modern Warfare 2. This is a hodgepodge of developers simply taking orders from Activision and milking the franchise for whatever they can. Sorry, but BF1 actually has purpose. It actually has principle. Infinite Warfare will only be better for die-har
Infinite Warfare will only be better for die-hard fanboys who are delusional no matter what. There is a real stigma attached to Infinite Warfare. This goes beyond the bubble-bias that has existed in certain segments of the gaming community. This is a real stigma that is causing the perception of lameness even to casual gamers. This is a lot different than people saying in the past So and So game is a COD killer. That was bubble logic. This stigma is real and you can’t hide from it.
Zombies as a reason for it to be considered better? Really??
Battlefield does run at 60 fps. Battlefield has its glitches sometimes, yes, but their servers are also very good, and I can honestly say I have always had connectivity problems with Call of Duty. Also Call of Duty campaigns have been trash for the past couple. BO1 was alright, MW1 and 2 were good, and WAW was really good, but any since then have been awful, and yes I have played them all.
I whole heatedly agree with the author. There is something fundamentally different about the two titles when it comes to FPS game play. Battlefield’s multiplayer is just too slow and doesn’t have feel for a quick FPS game. You’re either in the mood for long conquests in Battlefield or short “get in and kill” CoD matches but not both.
Heck even the pre-order numbers tell you that Infinite Warfare is in much higher demand than Battlefield.
Preorder numbers have nothing to with higher demands. If you look at charts and multiple websites about statistical data then you would be one to probably not think so subjectively on what you had just stated.
You must be high
“However, the sheer addiction of levelling up … and unlocking camos from Call of Duty’s multiplayer from Call of Duty’s multiplayer will have me playing for hours on end.”
Match.com are doing free 30 day sign ups.
Wholly hell……..this is one stuuuuuuuuupid ass article. Speculation at best, but such bias it is almost sickening.
Bugs and glitches in battlefield games…..?! HAHAHAHAHA nice! So sad. So stupidly sad. Just hang up the journalism act “E Rap!” Sad man…..so sad.!
How old are you? More of the younger generation plays Call of Duty games, as you get older you kind of want a change up, so therefore you would get into battlefield. You’ll want more stuff to do instead of running around on small maps getting killed by every killstreak every two seconds. Unless if you are just an adult who is still rather immature and doesn’t know how to think objectively about things rather than be so subjective as you are being in this article, then of course, you would be considered as an immature adult.
So you say that one of the reasons Infinite warfare will be better because it will have a good campaign, but then you later state that people don’t even play cod campaigns and go straight to the multiplayer.
God you’re a fucking idiot