PS4 NewsWill Battlefield Overtake Call Of Duty In The Next Generation? - PS4 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Will Battlefield Overtake Call Of Duty In The Next Generation?

At one point, this seemed absolutely impossible.

But we could be seeing a changing of the guard in the new generation. There's no chance Battlefield 4 outsells Call of Duty: Ghosts, but perhaps the day when a new BF sequel outstrips a new CoD entry isn't that far off...

Electronic Arts has made their goal plain from the start: With each new Battlefield installment, they want to steal a little more market share away from Activision's blockbuster Call of Duty. And if we check the statistics, it appears EA has - for the most part - achieved its goal. This year, analysts are saying Ghosts will be the first CoD title in a long time to not outsell its predecessor out of the gate. In short, records may not fall and on the flip side, Battlefield 4 has a good chance of selling the most copies in the franchise's history.

Looking down the road, it does seem like DICE and EA are a little more willing to innovate and try new things, despite the fact that Activision continually defends the innovation on display with each new CoD. I think the bottom line is this- CoD feels like it's on the way down, while Battlefield feels like it's rapidly rising. The mainstream masses will still side with CoD for at least a year or two more, but maybe after the new generation is several years old, you might see a new BF title outsell a new CoD game. Treyarch or Infinity Ward will have to do something pretty impressive to stop that from happening, and another Black Ops or Modern Warfare may not do it. Even the casuals will get tired of those.

What do you think? Can Battlefield become the reigning FPS king in the next generation? Or will the CoD stranglehold continue?

Tags: battlefield, call of duty, battlefield sequel, call of duty games

10/27/2013 10:25:32 PM Ben Dutka

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous

Comments (31 posts)

MrAnonymity
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 12:29:50 AM
Reply

The game deserves it. DICE continually works at making the experience even more epic than the last entry while CoD stagnates.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Geobaldi
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 12:44:36 AM
Reply

The Battlefield franchise has always been a more fun, and exciting, experience then any of the CoD games, minus the original. I haven't touched a CoD title since Modern Warfare, but I've bought every Battlefield title since the franchise began with Codename Eagle.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Jalex
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 2:31:58 AM
Reply

I certainly hope so. Most of my complaints concerning 'Call of Duty' are centered around the fact that the publisher/developers seem(s) to be resting on their laurels. 'Battlefield' isn't perfect, but their definitely seems to be a lot more passion behind that franchise (and of course, one hopes it stays that way, however well it sells).

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Knightzane
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 2:50:23 AM
Reply

Besides the Microtransactions being a definite negative thing on the game, Battlefield 3 was something new that i've never played before. They really could deserve overtaking CoD. Personally, I would much prefer some RPGs taking over.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Akuma07
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 7:39:04 PM

What microtransactions?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

yaaaamove
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 3:20:11 AM
Reply

I enjoyed the bad company and battlefield franchises so far and play bf3/bf4.

One of the top things that comes to mind when i hear battlefied are the microtransactions and the dlc gods of ea. One of the top things of this generation are microtransactions. While its great for the people who work on the game get paid, I just don't like it when they leave out content.

Game is great. Only downside is I have to upgrade my pc everytime a new one comes out. The graphics were stunning on my pc. One of the problems when i had playing always was my friends and I were never on the same team. They increased squad sizes to 5 from 4 which was necessary.

I don't think it will overtake, but a lot more players will be playing it on each system.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Lawless SXE
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 3:58:33 AM
Reply

Frankly, from what I've played of Battlefield (the Bad Company subseries), I don't see how it is so much better than CoD. It's still ultimately the very same tripe.

I want a first person shooter that is a shooter, but plays differently. *sigh* And don't bring up Wolfenstein; it may be more traditional in its gameplay and more interesting in its enemies, but those are tame differences compared to what I want.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 4:07:30 AM
Reply

just because BFs popularity has increased significantly does not mean that will continue.
the day BF sells better than CoD is the day KZ sells better than halo.
its the day a indie title outsells diablo.
its the day resistance outsells gears.
its the day, well, you get the point by now.
ie, never gonna happen!

Agree with this comment 2 up, 9 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 8:27:59 AM

The day Rockband sells better than guitar hero...
The day any shooter outsells Doom or Duke Nukem...
The day any RPG outsells a Final Fantasy...
The day any racing game outsells a Gran Turismo...


Waidaminut.... Holy crap... it seems everything has it's day...

Agree with this comment 4 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

___________
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 8:54:12 AM

good luck with that.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Akuma07
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 7:40:46 PM

You can't compare the difference between COD and BF, with the difference between Killzone and Halo.

Killzone could do it, but they need to take it in a different direction and make changes to their design. But that won't happen.

Battlefield is much more likely to beat COD.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

mk ultra
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 5:45:17 AM
Reply

I'm thinking something new we're not expecting takes over. When CoD exploded with the first modern warfare, no one was really expecting it to outsell its predecessor by 700%. It might be Titanfall, people seem to really like what they're seeing from that. That would be funny too, it coming from West and Zampella and all.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

PlatformGamerNZ
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 6:00:41 AM
Reply

well it'dlike to way in here ad say that i think it is entirely possible.myabe not for a for a couple more battlefield games but i think it is possible like you say battlefield continues to improve and COD has stayed stagnate since MW2 n my opinion but thats just me. it will be a glorious day when battlefield outsells COD that'll em' who's boss i think it is a far better game(again thats me my opinion don't judge me)

happy gaming =)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Bio
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 7:30:02 AM
Reply

They're both pretty terrible franchises at this point, but I do hope they both remain successful enough to keep all the tweens away from the better multiplayer games.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

slow and smart
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 @ 11:01:33 AM

yeah hahaha exactly

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Sir Dan
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 7:38:50 AM
Reply

Both of these games can take a flying leap in my opinion.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 3 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 10:36:14 AM
Reply

I see this as very unlikely, simply because Battlefield is more complicated than COD. And that means less mass appeal.
COD gamers may try Battlefield, but a lot of them will return to COD again cause it's a game they know by heart.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 11:05:52 AM

How is Battlefield more complicated?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

souljah92
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 12:03:25 PM

Because battlefield requires more than just running and gunning, which most cod gamers just simply cannot comprehend.

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 5:42:43 PM

What Soul said. It's a lot more team-play focused and there are more rules in the game modes that's more than just variations of run&gun.
It simply is a game that is a bit harder to be a "good player" in comparison to COD, who is more focused on solo-play skills.


Last edited by Beamboom on 10/28/2013 5:45:07 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Underdog15
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 7:54:19 PM

I love me some hate on some CoD, but I don't think run and gunning is the best strategy in that game at all. I think most people run and gun, so it seems like that. I'm not exactly the most talented FPS player in the world. And when I play free-for-all, I get my ash handed to me. But when I'm on a team with my friends, we're unbeatable and my personal score is awesome. Because we know people will run and gun.

I think it's a culture difference more than anything. TLoU multiplayer is more easily done in teams working together like in Battlefield, but if everyone run and gunned, you can be sure there would always be some dominate players that are more skilled at 1v1.

Just because no one uses strategy in CoD doesn't mean it can't be used. That's your own fault for not playing wisely. Not the game's.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Akuma07
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 7:56:52 PM

have you guys ever played team deathmatch in BF3? It's exactly the same as COD. The best thing is that Sniper Rifles aren't 1 hit kills most of the time.

Other game modes, like domination, don't require too much thought. There is just a slightly higher level of thought required.

I have stopped playing BF3 because I am sick of all the people who just run and gun.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 @ 2:31:32 AM

@Underdog: Oh yes but of course that's true, there are indeed strategic elements in COD as well. It's not *just* r&g.
I don't know how to describe it precisely, I just think even the team-based game modes in COD are more "solo friendly" and easy to jump into.

Also let me just tress that I am not saying this to talk down on COD. I love COD style games as well - in fact I'd go as far as to say I *prefer* them, but I do so simply cause they are so much faster to get into and be a part of the game.
Battlefield were - at least for me - a lot larger and more complicated. I felt I had to really invest some time to learn the game, while in COD it all more boils more down to your own skills in a shooter - and that goes also for the team play modes.

But of course - the teams that will win are the ones who cooperate. That is true for most team games. :)


Last edited by Beamboom on 10/29/2013 2:39:32 AM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

ulsterscot
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 10:53:21 AM
Reply

I think TItanfall has more chance - well not if it stays an M$ exclusive.

BF is a far better PC experience than COD - but BF on consoles just doesn't seem to be as fun.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

AcHiLLiA
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 2:53:38 PM

Imo and I think some of you here would agree with me, that the Bad Company games were made for the consoles.

Last edited by AcHiLLiA on 10/28/2013 2:58:48 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Akuma07
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 7:58:06 PM

Uhhh.

This is a strange comment to make.

All FPS play better on PC's. BF is not at all singled out in this regard.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 11:01:31 AM
Reply

Personally one was never really "great" and the other is definitely on the decline. In terms of overall appeal the sp in the BF games is just not good. The mp is decent but too much going on. CoD's sp is a thrill ride of action but lacks substance while the mp is simple and defined. When I say defined, people know what they are getting and thats what they want.

Personally im hoping that a new ip comes along and not necessarily outsells but outplays both by using the original MW as a stepping stone. Because both franchises are trying to appeal to the masses; one trying to do to much and the other not doing anything innovative because of their sales.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Akuma07
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 7:58:50 PM

Too much going on?

Oh man. You don't like having fun do you?

In your last paragraph you are describing Titanfall right?

Last edited by Akuma07 on 10/28/2013 7:59:17 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

bigrailer19
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 11:49:51 PM

BF is always a mish mash and no its not always fun. Doesnt mean its bad but it does too much at once. Less is more in this case except in CoD's case it needs to do more.

But dont take that as me hating on either because I love both game franchises. But Im honest about them too and they both carry flaws that other developers wont capitolize on.

I suppose I am. Anything at this point would be nice. KZ: Shadow Fall looks very promising but being an exclusive hurts its overall appeal. Same goes for Titanfall until it releases on another console. Something else to talk about would be nice, something that gives these two games a reality check is all.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Akuma07
Monday, October 28, 2013 @ 8:06:31 PM
Reply

BF definitely has the potential to do it. They need to change some of the elements of the MP though.

I will admit that I enjoy the SP more in COD. I have only JUST finished the BLOPS2 SP last night, and I really enjoyed it.

BF3 MP had some VERY annoying elements. Like lvl 100 Colonels. I hate shitbuckets.

I have more laughs in BF MP though.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Shauneepeak
Tuesday, October 29, 2013 @ 7:52:51 PM
Reply

I can see it happening, not this time around but fairly soon. Gametrailers gave the new "levelution" high praise saying that it is liking switching to a new map right in the middle of the match. Only complaint that had in regards to it while fun it can be very annoying on the levels that become flooded if your right in the middle of a fire fight or just set the charge on a capture point.

I think the biggest factor is going to be the 64 player cap on BF4 versus the suspected 18 for CoD Ghosts.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

What do you think of the Destiny beta?
It's awesome! Can't wait for September!
It's only good, but I'm having fun.
Eh, it's okay, but I expected more.
It sucks, period.

Previous Poll Results