Battlefield 3 and Call of Duty: Black Ops 2 Multiplayer compared
We purchased our XBox a little over a year ago now, and in that time, I have been the majority player of the system. I started, on the advice of a friend, with Modern Warfare 3, and after learning the ropes and getting good, I was feeling somewhat confident in my abilities as a First Person Shooter player on console.
Now, don't get me wrong! I am not saying I am a "Beast" or anything like that, but I can certainly hold my own against good players at times. I may die more than the top players (but who doesn't, really, other than other top players), but I can surprise people, and in public matches I am usually in the mid-range of the Lobby Leaderboard. I think that makes me an OK FPS gamer.
Then, this same friend got Battlefield 3 and recommended that I get into it as well. As it turned out, I got a copy for my anniversary, so he and I started playing together.
Now, I know that they appear to be similar types of games, with shooting, war, guns, and multiplayer that features a range of modes such as Team Deathmatch, Capture the Flag, and Conquest/Domination. But to say that they are very similar would be a mistake, in my opinion.
Show Us the Similarities!
Obvious points first:
- Each series was set during World War II at it's inception, and has progressed to more modern or future scenarios;
- Each game is in the First Person Shooter genre;
- Each game has a single player and a multiplayer component
- Each allows you to choose your weapon and accessory loadouts for multiplayer
That may not be an extensive or even complete list of similarities, but there is no denying that they have come from a similar beginning and have progressed along a similar path. While Battlefield went future warfare far sooner, it was not as well received for various reasons.
The ability to have a persistent soldier "build" in each game is somewhat of an RPG element (based on levels earned, you have different items that can be equipped and others that still need to be unlocked) though you are not necessarily locked into any particular choices and can freely change skills, weapons, etc., at will.
Also similar between Battlefield 3 and Black Ops 2 are many of the multiplayer game types:
- Team Deathmatch (TDM)
- Conquest (BF3)/Domination (BO2)
- Squad Deathmatch (BF3)/Multi-team TDM (BO2)
- Capture The Flag
- Gun Master (BF3)/Gun Game (BO2)
While the similar modes may not be exactly the same, the basic rules and objectives for each game are there. Rush in Battlefield 3 is somewhat similar to the Demolition or Search and Destroy modes in Black Ops 2, but are different enough that I didn't include them as a direct similarity.
In Demolition and Search And Destroy, the objectives are to bomb or defend a pair of sites with a number of rounds on the same map to determine a winner (Best of 11, if I remember correctly).
In Rush (and Squad Rush), however, there is an attacking team, and a defending team on a map, but there is only one round, and once one set of objectives is destroyed, a new area of the map opens up with two new M-COM sites to destroy, The defending team has unlimited respawns, while the attacking team has a limited number of respawn tickets to complete each area (the ticket count is replenished to 75, by default, after destroying both M-COM stations).
So What is Different?
The main difference that is immediately noticeable in the multiplayer portion is the size of the maps. Black Ops 2 has small, tight maps with multiple lanes to different parts of the map. There are specific places you can go, and many places that you cannot. In Battlefield 3, however, the maps are sprawling, open areas with no real set lanes to follow to get from one area to the next. You can walk across a vast expanse of open area, on some maps, though doing so puts you at a severe disadvantage as you have no cover, but you can go anywhere in that open space.
Other differences that I have noticed in the short time I have been playing:
- Levelling up is rather slow in Battlefield 3, whereas you can level up quite quickly in Black Ops 2. After 3 days of gaming, I am only level 6 in BF3 - in BO2, I would have been into the 30s in the same amount of time, starting from level 1.
- There are classes in Battlefield 3 (Assault, Engineer, Support, Recon) which allow you to heal teammates, fix damaged vehicles, resupply ammo, or provide spawn points (in that order). Black Ops 2 has no such similar classes or abilities.
- Battlefield 3 has various usable vehicles, such as tanks, Humvees, APCs, buggies, helicopters and planes. There are no vehicles in Black Ops 2 multiplayer (I don't count the RC-XD, as it is a one-use weapon, not really a vehicle).
- Destructible environments in Battlefield 3. Portions of buildings or other things you might use for cover can be destroyed leaving gaping holes in that house you previously used as a hiding spot. There is no such similarity in Black Ops 2 other than exploding barrels and cars.
One other major difference that is affected by the map sizes is the bullet dynamics that is present in Battlefield 3. I had thought it was simply a difference because of the game itself, but in thinking about it, the small sizes of the maps in Black Ops 2 don't really lend themselves to realistic bullet drop. Because the maps are so small and the distances from one place that can be seen to another are so short, it wouldn't make sense in BO2. Having an enemy over a mile away, and at several hundred feet lower altitude in Battlefield 3, it makes sense that you cannot just aim at someone and hit them; bullet drop over long distances only makes sense, and the massive map layouts lend themselves to this.
Cool! So Which One is Better?
Is country music or rock music better? Is dragonfruit or pomegranate better? There is no right or wrong answer here, because people's tastes are so different, they will each have to decide for themselves.
If I am in the mood for a long, drawn out fight with running and hiding, testing my skills as a sniper, and close support squads moving together to take an objective, then I will turn to Battlefield 3 with no hesitation. If, however, I have a short amount of time, and just feel like getting a bunch of quick, easy kills, I will bring up Black Ops 2 and get into a hockey-style, fast-paced brawl with a bunch of other like-minded individuals.
There is no answer I can give for you. You will have to decide which you like better, and either try them out, or take a chance based on the research into each game. Right now, I am loving Battlefield 3, but who knows - next week, I may take a break from it and kick some Black Ops 2 butt again!
Hope that was informative. If you have anything to add, or your own opinions on which you prefer, hit up my comments section below! Also, check out my Battlefield 3 review or my review of Black Ops 2 League Play.
More by this Author
A listing and brief description of the different game modes available in COD: Black Ops 2
League Play was a great idea to level the playing field for players at all skill levels, but it failed to do what was intended, and punishes players as opposed to rewarding them.
Having never played much in the way of Black Ops 2 Zombies, when a buddy encouraged me to try out Buried, and told me he could teach me to solo past wave 20, EASY, I was skeptical...