Call of Duty: Ghost. The Reveal.

[CodeDenzy]

You know the definition of insanity?... Making the same call of duty game over and over...and over...

BF4 for me.

[Harry Ford]

*facepalm*

People still try to compare Battlefield and Call of Duty, but what you don't realize is they're aiming for different things? Battlefield is aiming for a realistic shooter which they have done very well, and Call of Duty is aiming for the arcade type shooter, which they also have done very well. So to compare the both and say that Battlefield is better is simply a matter of what shooter you like, not one game being better than another. I admit I like battlefield more than Call of Duty because I love playing realistic shooters but I also like my fair share of CoD because it's just fun to run and gun and get cool killstreaks. Battlefield will always have better graphics because they're putting their effort into making the game look as realistic as possible, and CoD are working on dynamic maps, different killstreaks and only slightly improved graphics.

They're both aiming at different target audiences, so therefore you can't compare the two.

battlefield isn't that realistic

• health regen
  
• vehicle health regen
  
• endless ammunition for vehicle or mortar
  
• stamina on par with a world class marathon runner
  
• shooting tanks from behind is not as effective as it should be
  
• reviving swiss cheese with a defibrilator
  
• range on shotguns is underestimated in a lot of games including battlefield
  

if anything arma and VBS2(both made by bohemia) is the closest you'll get to the experience of combat.

[Freezak]

*facepalm*

People still try to compare Battlefield and Call of Duty, but what you don't realize is they're aiming for different things? Battlefield is aiming for a realistic shooter which they have done very well, and Call of Duty is aiming for the arcade type shooter, which they also have done very well. So to compare the both and say that Battlefield is better is simply a matter of what shooter you like, not one game being better than another. I admit I like battlefield more than Call of Duty because I love playing realistic shooters but I also like my fair share of CoD because it's just fun to run and gun and get cool killstreaks. Battlefield will always have better graphics because they're putting their effort into making the game look as realistic as possible, and CoD are working on dynamic maps, different killstreaks and only slightly improved graphics.

They're both aiming at different target audiences, so therefore you can't compare the two.

battlefield isn't that realistic

• health regen
  
• vehicle health regen
  
• endless ammunition for vehicle or mortar
  
• stamina on par with a world class marathon runner
  
• shooting tanks from behind is not as effective as it should be
  
• reviving swiss cheese with a defibrilator
  
• range on shotguns is underestimated in a lot of games including battlefield
  

if anything arma and VBS2(both made by bohemia) is the closest you'll get to the experience of combat.

Therefore comparision of BF and CoD is possible.

[Teh Time Rider]

COD is fun to play for about 10 minutes of mindless shooting.
BF3 is fun to play for some slightly more tactical shooting.