Battlefield has the scale, Titanfall has the speed. In some ways, they're ideal games to own and play on rotation, because the more slow, methodic battles in Battlefield are the perfect foil to the quick, nimble, visceral battles of Titanfall.
Oh, and I wouldn't outright discount Garden Warfare. It's actually a surprisingly good median between those two examples, but focusing more on Team Fortress-style cooperation and heavier focus on class specifics.
Double Jump Game Comics: http://doublejump.thecomicseries.com/
ok im thinking cod becuase of the dlc. but battlefield does seem cool with all to do. destiny is coming in spetember and i know that game for sure. titanfall i have but its so unbalanced its not fun to play.
Bf4, 32vs32 tanks, planes, helicopters and they've fixed online. It plays perfect looks great. I own titanfall and bf4, titanfall is great also but nothing like bf4.
Xbox one, PS3, Wii
Play for the games not the evil corporation, they're all evil in the end.
The battlefield 4 dlc is leagues ahead of cod dlc. With bf4 dlc you get actual expansions with new weapons, vehicles, and gadgets. So if you are basing your purchase on dlc, bf4 is the best choice by far.
I feel like I should like BF4. I really do. It's the most technically impressive, with the most to do, but it just doesn't "click" with me. In CoD, and now TF as well, I can be a screaming-death-god-one-man-army just burning through the maps. I feel like BF tries to be a simulation style game, with a lot of complexity, while CoD tries to be a speed sport, with no time for vehicles and long-range bullet modeling physics. I definitely prefer the latter.
Whenever I play BF4, I'm just lost. Guns all feel too inaccurate, there are too many physics based variables, good players in vehicles are just OP, and there's an overall lack of teamwork whenever I play. I definitely ditch my solo mentality whenever I play BF, and legitimately try to be careful and calculating in my actions. It's never any use though.
I bought BF 3 and 4, and premium for both, but I rarely play them because nothing satisfies my console shooter itch like fast paced CoD/TF gameplay. I'm one of the minority/majority (hard to tell, depending if you consider yourself a hardcore gamer or a mass media consumer LOL) that applies, "If it ain't broke don't fix it," to CoD. Except for the Treyarch developed games. Those games seem more technically sound, but control like a Weimaraner is trying to claw the controller out of your hands while you're playing.
Wow, I didn't mean to write all that.
Edit: Huh. I just thought back to my Halo glory days. 50 SWAT, 50 Lone Wolves, and that game is all about physics based weapon and vehicle silliness. Maybe I've just gotten lazy as the years went by. Maybe this entire post was useless. Who knows?
Take it easy. It's all just fun and games. Don't turn it into something ugly.
XBL: Chief Kief MAUI PSN: VirusX77
Battlefield 4 because of 64 player Conquest.
We must reverse Citizens United, Restore our Democracy, and Save the Republic. Join the Fight for Free and Fair Elections in America!
I haven't played Battlefield 4, so I can't comment on that other than I heard the community on Xbox One is extremely paltry compared to its other console brethren.
I have played roughly the same amount of Titanfall as I have Ghosts, both in the same time period too so they're both fresh in my mind.
Titanfall is my choice between those. It's a different kind of FPS and the verticality and free reign you have over running anywhere in the environment is something that sounds like it wouldn't matter so much, but oh boy does it ever! It's super fun to run on walls, hang on billboards and snipe, rodeo titans, eject out of a titan that is nuclear...
So cool. It's a great game with some amazing balancing. Something I can say is rough about Ghosts is that it's not very balanced and not inviting at all to new players. It's overwhelming the amount of stuff you can unlock with your squad points, almost the point that it becomes to not be fun. Also the levels in Ghosts are drab and not very memorable or fun. I swear the maps I've played have appeared in past Call of Duty games, and for a game series that already gets made fun of for being "rehashed" every year, it shocks me just how boring these maps can be.
Ghosts is still fun, and you can play it offline and play split-screen with friends... even play online with those friends in split-screen too. And it's not a bad game... I'm not sure why so many people seem to hate it. It's perfectly serviceable, just not that memorable. Especially playing it after Titanfall brings to the surface the problem of pacing and balance. Titanfall doesn't have as many weapons or customization options, but the ones that are there are all so unique and fun to use, not to mention so balanced, that the smaller roster doesn't matter so much.
If you want quantity of weapons and levels and an offline mode, Ghosts would likely be an okay choice. But personally, I prefer the quality of Titanfall and the fresh nature of its gameplay in comparison to other FPS games of the modern age. It's just so... fun. And memorable. I still remember all the things that happened over my first month playing the game, whereas with Ghosts I can't be arsed to think of even one memorable moment at all.
I'd go with Titanfall. I have CoD: Ghosts and BF4, bought Titanfall when it launched, haven't looked back. It didn't reinvent FPS's or anything, but it changed things just enough so that I don't want to go back to Cod or BF.
People say I'm no good, crazy as a loon.
'Cause I get stoned in the morning, and drunk in the afternoon.
Titanfall > BF4 >>>>>> Ghosts
I asked God for a bike, but I know God doesn't work that way. So I stole a bike and asked for forgiveness.
Add user to Ignore List after reporting