EA: ‘Battlefield’ vs. ‘Call of Duty’ Competition ‘Good For The Industry’

Published 1 year ago by

Battlefield 4 vs Call of Duty Ghosts

For the past five years Electronic Arts has been trying to take a bite out of Activision’s stranglehold in the modern FPS market. While Call of Duty has long been the record-breaking shooter champion, EA is pushing harder than ever to compete.

President of EA Labels  Frank Gibeau spoke with CVG at Gamescom about the upcoming Battlefield vs. Call of Duty rematch which just so happens to occur during a console transition.

“Look, we are absolutely going for it. It’s a competition and we feel really good about Battlefield 4…”

EA is looking to utilize its various teams to release better content year after year, not unlike Activision has done so with multiple developers working to ensure there’s a new Call of Duty every year, supported by DLC.

This battle began with Battlefield: Bad Company in 2008. BC’s sales figures were relatively low and compared to COD4’s many millions, EA barely made a dent. Since 2008, Battlefield has seen consistently seen massive jumps in sales, with Battlefield 3 representing EA’s fastest-selling title ever.

While Battlefield 3’s numbers were quite an improvement over previous titles, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 still sold more than double. Figures do show a slowdown for Call of Duty over the past two years, with some analysts claiming franchise sales have peaked and sales for Black Ops 2 dipping below that of MW3.

With the mixed reactions from the unveil of Call of Duty: Ghosts and Infinity Ward’s questionable use of term “next-gen” when talking about specifics of their game engine (see: AI fish), EA aims to capitalize on the popularity of BF3 and the hype surrounding the Frostbite 3 engine and BF4’s visuals.

Gibeau has been in this situation before, as he experienced it during the battle of Madden vs. 2K days, and explains that this sort of competition is good for the industry and consumers. Gamers benefit by more innovation as dev teams are pushed to create new and original content. The biggest threat to this model is that Activision releases a new Call of Duty every year where EA will be forced to rely on other titles when Battlefield takes a year off.

Their triple-A shooter rotation will include Battlefield, Titanfall, and Star Wars: Battlefront. Medal of Honor has since been taken out of rotation.

“With regards to Medal of Honor, you try things in entertainment and if they don’t work you try something else. From our perspective, Battlefield 3 and Battlefield Premium continue to grow.”

EA is focusing on Battlefield to position it as their COD killer, and team at DICE have proven themselves before.  With a little help from the exclusive Star Wars license, EA may be on top of the heap sooner rather than later and they may be the best-prepared for the next-gen when it comes to FPS.

It will be interesting to see how the two series differentiate themselves from one another, and how this competition will make them both grow. Gamers may expect more variety from EA, with their collection of licenses, but that doesn’t mean COD will not reign supreme with its established fanbase and eSports support.

This fall we will see the next round of this fight as Battlefield 4 takes on Call of Duty: Ghosts.

[poll id=”52″]

Source: CVG

TAGS: Activision, Battlefield, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Bad Company, Battlefield Bad Company 2, Call of Duty, Call of Duty Ghosts, DICE, Electronic Arts

  • Edwards rocky

    I would love for BF4(I’m a WAY bigger fan of Battlefield as Rob the editor on game rant might know haha) to be the biggger game but I highly doubt it can happen. COD is just too damn popular in the sense that people who don’t even play video games buy COD. It’s a odd thing I think BF4 would be the better game(Bad company 2 and BF3 had crapped on the last CODS bar none) but in terms of sales it may go to COD.

  • ATG

    I’m up in the air about getting either one. Getting tired of both. If I HAD to pick, Battlefield 4.

  • X

    I’m getting BF4, it was a “good?” 3 years with CoD (Bo1-Mw3-Bo2)
    only one I enjoyed was Black Ops 1. Mw3 too many campers going for moabs and Bo2 was just terrible all around. From what I’ve seen from BF4 gameplay they made snipers stronger (you can actually get OSK with snipers now) which was my main concern from BF3.

  • Ken J

    I will make up my mind for sure after the beta. I know for sure I’m not going to buy COD, but I’m going to wait and see for BF4. If it’s more like a BF2 experience than a BF3 experience, then I’m definitely going to buy it…

  • Nick

    COD and anything involved with is bad for the industry so, no.

  • Ninja

    The sales cod brings to the industry is only good for the industry. That said i have played every cod since mw1, and its time for a change. Only difference is, I’m going for titanfall. Looks sick!

  • ablebob

    Used to play Cod, now I play battlefield. I just prefer it now. Its how I like to play and BF4 looks like its bringing back stuff that I miss from BC2 and BF2 so I’m definitely getting it this fall.

  • tyranno

    i think i will get them both because i like both CoD and BF, CoD gives me a great campaign and a special ops mod and some entertaining multiplayer and BF gives me interesting and realistic multiplayer. CoD and BF both rocks

  • Ghosty

    I Will for sure buy BF4.. oh wait i have already nvm :D. I like a more realistic feel to a game. I just hate small maps where everyone spams the run key non stop or camp their behinds. And the only way to win is if you shoot first and have a rocketluncher. I much prefer the feel when you are Capturing a flag and out of no were a TANK rolls in and you have to think fast of what do, and then you see that you have no Anti-Tank weapons so you are toast D:. or tell a Buddy to help you you mark the tank and he just makes it rain with the Missiles from a Attack helicopter :D. COD just has to many people that have been pilling up over the years some buy it and never play or just buy it and camp. I don’t hate the company i just hate the way the Multiplayer is Close action is annoying.

  • GuyMontag

    Like noted so many times before, COD is far too small for some real team gameplay. Too many campers, too many noobs. BF3 and now 4 are for people who know how to play FPS games and those who know how to work at a team. I am voting for battlefield 4 because of the immense amount of abilities that Battlefield brings to the table compared to COD. When COD gets vehicles, ill buy both.

    • ATG

      You discredit the game because of the players? Very rarely do I come across team players in Battlefield as well. Both games can use, but do not require, team work. Size doesn’t determine “real” teamwork, just type. Call of Duty is more close quarters, Battlefield is large scale. Teamwork and tactics can be implemented in both, Battlefield’s design just puts more emphasis on it.

      • GuyMontag

        The players make the game what it is. Without a great community, battlefield wouldn’t be what it is today.

  • Smitywerbenjagermanjensen

    Many people try to compare CoD and Battlefield, but they are 2 totally different games. Although it does seem like the Battlefield players “attack” the CoD community more. The people who are getting CoD are the people who have played it forever, while the people who’ve played Battlefield forever are going to get BF4.

  • Black_Mapogo

    To be honest, ive played every BF including the Beta Version of BF4, and only MW3 and Black OPS 2, ive gotta say that COD is by far the best multiplayer/campain game ever, the zombie mode in BO vs the one in BF is soo different, BF zombie mode suck realtime. Cant wait for Ghosts to come out 😀

    COD wins over BF anytime.

    • Ken J

      *in your opinion.

      I think you forgot that. I’ve played both too, I get bored of COD every time…

      • http://ggggggggggggggggggggggggg jason

        cod is mint battlefield maps are massive and is boring

        • GuyMontag

          COD maps,” not as detailed nor as intuitive as BF. Maps. BF maps, large, evolutionary, intuitive”. BF brings the player the ability to interact with map elements like elevators, bridge gates, and other such things. COD, lets the player shoot barrels and cars that explode.

  • GuyMontag

    I’ve owned most of the COD games (excluding the older games), and all of the BF games. COD has lingered on the same game style since its start, a simple point and shoot action with no relation to real physics. COD, having been in the FPS game longer, should have mastered all concepts of the game play, but they have not done so. BF jumped on the FPS stage and brought with it new game play. In doing so, they eliminated the common “campers” and “noobs” with game elements that are made to cancel them out.
    On the COD side, they brought the “killstreak” to light, allowing the player rewards for doing well. But time after time, as I’ve previously stated, the multiplayer stays the same. Never are new game elements brought in whereas EA and DICE bring new elements in every new release. In COD BO 2, dynamic map elements such as the train that blows through the map every once in a while added a new element to the game. COD has lived on the same multiplayer basis for quite some time and now the game is paying the Price. BF4 brings full map dynamics into play. The “Paracel Storm” map brings full dynamics across the server. No longer does each player experience a different wave than another, a single wave moves through the map and each player experiences it. EA and DICE brought other dynamics to the world too. From an American warship tearing across an island to a skyscraper plummeting to the earth, they (EA and DICE) have revolutionized what we know as online multiplayer. BF is big among players because of these dynamics, but also because of the flexibility of game play. Dedicated game modes allow for players to experience what they prefer. Both BF and COD have these, but BF’s are more numerous than that of COD. While each have great game modes, BF brings the player into the game where he/she must pay attention to all surrounding elements. Again, COD should have mastered these elements, but they have steered clear of them. There is no reason that COD shouldn’t have these elements, they’ve been here long enough, and they have the abilities, but they have stuck to the small make game play. Why they have done so is anybody’s guess.

  • drew

    im getting battlefeild 4 I am sick of the same cod engine with minor improvements also I think they should make a bf2143 it would be a good 15.00 add on