Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

imark789 wrote:There is no doubt that both series have influenced one another. I think you could have told me you disagreed with me without flaming me, here at dakka we can hold different opinions without insulting people can't we?


Modern Warfare didn't necessarily revolutionize anything, but Modern Warfare 1, 2 and Black Ops are definitely some of the most popular fps games ever made and therefore Battlefield 3 has tried to appeal to the Call of Duty fanbase in some aspects.

First of all I wasn't "flaming" you to begin with, however you began to push the issue after my response to your opinion. People seem to wantonly use the word "flaming" in order to describe someone they think is a "troll" or even when an idiot(not you, I am presenting a general example) is attempting to cover their lack of knowledge by saying that they are just trolling someone.

However, Modern Warfare did not influence Battlefield because Battlefield 2 and Battlefield: Modern Combat came out well before Modern Warfare. Now Modern Warfare may have influenced Bad Company, but that was only because they were making fun of Modern Warfare.

I never said or thought you were a troll. Flaming, ripping on me whatever you want to call it.

I wasn't pushing the issue, I was letting you know you were misinterpreting what I was saying and putting words in my mouth.

That point alone shows Call of Duty influenced Battlefield. Honestly, even if that was the only effect COD had on BF, then it means it was influenced. So I don't see why you had a problem with my statement in the first place. Beyond that, it is very easy to make an argument that the single player becoming more linear is an influence from COD.

imark789 wrote:I don't see why I'm getting ripped on for this...

imark789 wrote:I think you could have told me you disagreed with me without flaming me,

Yes, you didn't say you were being ripped or flamed right before you called me a fanboy. I like good games and I like giving games credit for what they bring to the table but I hate it when some game is held above the others just because it was more mass produced than other titles and thrown on a mass market. CoD was always a console franchise while Battlefield was a PC franchise so the CoD games were more widely spread and seen while the Battlefield games did not get any credit for what they did.

There is a slight difference between influence and making fun of. Bad Company 2 called a "bunch of spec ops guys with heartbeat sensors and thermal" a bunch of sissies. Then they had another moment where they're racing ATVs and make fun of people who ride snowmobiles. Oh and before you go on the whole driving sequences and the likes, Battlefield had that, and you know those nice little challenges Modern Warfare 2 had? Battlefield: Modern Combat had them, in fact they had some better ones like sniping targets from a blackhawk.

A campaign being linear isn't influenced by CoD its influenced by previous games being linear because a story being linear is mostly the point of a FPS game compared to a sandbox game where you can go where you please.

I don't give Call of Duty that much credit, I like Battlefield a heck of a lot more than Battlefield. And yes, COD was much more widely spread, and the fact is in the last few years they have become ridiculously popular. Not necessarily for being wonderful games or anything, but they have.

Influence: the action or process of producing effects on the actions, behavior, opinions, etc., of another or others. (from dictionary.com)

So that isn't having any effect at all on Bad Company? And both Bad Company games were linear, yes, but you had more freedom in moving around the map and attacking targets as you pleased. Battlefield has always had much more open environments than in Battlefield 3 in terms of single player.

So Battlefield 3 got more linear because it wanted to tell a serious story. Because it got linear it was influenced by CoD? I would say that it was influenced by movies and books that tell a story through a linear plot, its not influenced by anything, its how someone tells a story.

If anything I would say that its influenced by Tom Clancy or something along those lines.

Anyways, multiplayer is fantastic. When someone vaults over a barrier they actually vault over the barrier and the assassinations are cool.

Your statement about Bad Company making fun of COD is influence in itself. That point alone justifies my statement that COD influenced BF, so I don't see why you have such a problem.

As for the linearity, you can still tell a story effectively with a more open approach to single player. It just means you have more room to move around and wander, or attack your objective from different directions. Look at Assassins Creed, very story driven game, missions are still scripted, but very open world. Linearity has nothing to do with story, it has to do with how much room you have in each encounter with the enemy.

Definitely agree with you about the multiplayer. It is amazing, and I love Damavand Peak. An all around great map.

CoD was influenced by books because both of them are linear and tell stories. You can also share a book with another person by reading aloud to them and they can also read along with you so in effect books have co-op in them. If you read them together in a group you're experiencing multiplayer.

That means if you want to play the original videogame you should read a book instead.