Best Of
Call of Duty vs. Battlefield (2024)
This article doesn’t aim to declare a winner in the ongoing debate between these two games. Instead, it compares their different aspects and how they align differently for each player’s preferences. Here is a comprehensive overview of Call of Duty versus Battlefield.
What is Call of Duty?

Call of Duty is one of the best, and earliest FPS games developed and published by Activision. The series launched in 2003 and has released 24 mainline games since then and counting, including a few mobile-based games. It offers a bit of everything, including war-themed single-player and multiplayer modes, plus a fun zombie mode.
What is Battlefield?

Battlefield is another outstanding FPS game, often compared with Call of Duty. The game is a developed by EA Dice, a Swedish studio, and published by Electronic Arts, an American developer. The series launched in 2002 and has since released over a dozen games. The game features both a single-player and multiplayer mode, although it leans more towards the latter in most of its titles.
Story & Game Variety

Call of Duty and Battlefield are both based on world wars. Interestingly, the first six games in the CoD series were based on World Wars I and II, while the rest take inspiration from the Cold War and futuristic wars. Similarly, most Battlefield games are based on actual and fictional World Wars, including futuristic, high-tech wars.
Notably, both games aren’t too vested in storytelling and instead focus on action. However, it is also worth mentioning that CoD does a better job at storytelling and features more memorable characters with distinct personalities.
The Call of Duty series includes more games than the Battlefield series. Notably, the developers have launched a new game every year since 2005. They also have another game in the works for 2024: Call of Duty: Black Ops 6. In contrast, Battlefield has fewer games, limiting the available options for its audience.
Campaign & Multiplayer Modes

Most of the games in Call of Duty and Battlefield feature single-player campaign and multiplayer modes. Interestingly, Battlefield focuses more on the multiplayer mode, treating the single-player mode more like an unnecessary addition. Notably, Battlefield 2042 doesn’t feature a single-player mode. However, it makes up for that with an outstanding multiplayer mode, especially with its choice of historically accurate events and weapons.
In contrast, CoD focuses more on the single-player mode, although the multiplayer mode is also okay. Interestingly, it also features a unique and fun zombie mode.
Gameplay

Call of Duty and Battlefield have mixed performances in the overall gameplay domain. Notably, Battlefield is better at teamwork, realistic combat, graphics, sounds, and gameplay variety options, while CoD excels at accessibility, Battle Royale, and fast-paced action.
Call of Duty’s best feature is its fast-paced gameplay style. The action is intense and quick, giving players an adrenaline rush. Additionally, the multiplayer matches are quick, providing instant gratification. In contrast, the missions in Battlefield require more planning and coordination and thus take some time.
CoD is also preferable for players looking to engage in intense, fast-paced Battle Royale action. Battle Royale mood is a new craze in the FPS genre, and the CoD series includes a game entirely based on the concept. Interestingly, the Battle Royale mode in CoD is quite distinct from the multiplayer mode. Unfortunately, while Battlefield offers more elaborate multiplayer modes, it still hasn’t adopted the Battle Royale mode.
Notably, Call of Duty’s simple gameplay and easy learning curve make it easier to access than Battlefield. To this end, most players in the CoD gaming community are teenagers and young adults. In contrast, Battlefield games have a steeper learning curve and require partnerships with other players for multiplayer gaming.
Battlefield’s best aspect is its variety of gameplay options through its combined arms feature. Players can use cars, planes, tanks, airships, and even horses whenever they wish, which is convenient for taking shelter or getting around. This level of variety and versatility is not available in CoD games, and is only incorporated in a limited capacity in Battle Royale modes.
The combat mechanics in Battlefield are also more realistic than in CoD. Most of the combat mechanics, such as shooting and hand-to-hand fights, are based on real-world physics, although not to the extent of a simulator. For example, gun recoils and the characters’ head bobbing appear more realistic. Notably, the physics-based mechanics make long-range fights and snipping more enjoyable.
Battlefield is also ideal for players who prefer working as teams. The gameplay is not as fast-paced as in CoD, and most missions often require team coordination. Notably, the player community for Battlefield is more mature and patient, enabling them to work together in teams. Teamwork is also possible in CoD, but it is not as elaborate or popular as in Battlefield.
Graphics & Sound Design

Both games do a great job with their games’ graphics and sound designs, and none lacks in quality. However, Battlefield has an outstanding reputation for sharp graphics, starting with the initial game released in 2002.
Moreover, Battlefield also does a better job with its sound designs than CoD. Everything sounds realistic, including gun shots, groans, and artillery echoes. Orchestral sounds for monumental movements and achievements are also immersive, making the game feel more exciting.
Verdict

The comparison between Call of Duty and Battlefield is too close to call. Overall, both games are impressive and outperform each other in various aspects. The series depends on your unique tastes and preferences. Ultimately, Battlefield is ideal if you prefer slow-paced, multiplayer action that is more realistic, while Call of Duty is recommendable for fast-paced solo or multiplayer action.