User blog comment:Rampantlion513/BattleNews June 21st, 2012/@comment-72.173.243.205-20120622084838

I'm kind of getting tired of people comparing CoD to Battlefield. There should NEVER be any sort of correlation between the two. Just because they both have guns does not mean they are the same type of game. Call of duty is purely a FPS. You basically run in a circle until the one team wins or loses. This can come to some really interesting things. I'm not down playing it, because I have enjoyed playing the game in general. Battlefield puts a nice line between War simulator, and FPS. You choose many different play styles and have strategies to go about capturing objectives based on differing situations. Most of these play styles are the most successful when coupled with team work. If you lose because they have an overpowered or even glitched gun, fuckin' deal with it and change how you play. (Aside from the m26 dart. I got sniped out of a helicopter from that thing once. That was bullshit. XD) Complaining because you lost is just childish, especially in a game like battlefield. Further on copying other people... a news post every week is a good idea. Just because they did it before this wiki doesn't mean that they have fucking dibs on it, and whenever someone uses the idea they have right to complain about it. Again, It's just childish. On the same note, I read about people screaming that DICE is copying CoD by making the AC-130 not drivable. That's just stupid. It's Completely different. First of all, not a kill streak. Second of all, they are completely justifiable in doing this. I stopped and thought, "Thank you DICE for doing this." after many frustrating situations involving both types of helicopters, (Both having crappy gunners, and crappy drivers) Although you'll still get these very same crappy players in armored kill, at least the extremely attractive AC-130 will not become a glorified object being used for the sole purpose of griefing. Just my two 1/2 cents : )