The Scyphozoa wrote: collegestudent22 wrote:
The Scyphozoa wrote:Actually, based on what we've seen in trailers, it does look like a CoD clone.
The game is based on realistic warfighting. Of course, it will look similar to other games with the same concept. That doesn't make it a clone.
CoD is not based on that. And the trailer looked like CoD because of the annoying slow motion, the quick-time event handfighting, the overly cinematic feeling.
Let me rephrase it for collegestudent22 (if I may - if I may not, I'm going to do it anyways). Any game based on modern war and combat is going to look pretty similar to any other game based on modern war and combat. The slang(/jargon) 'clone' is a slight on a game company that unashamedly rips a mechanic from a successful game with the intent to capitulate on another game companies success. Battlefield has done no such thing, ever; Battlefield: Bad Company, on the other hand....
The marketing campaign for BF3, while a little generic, is what you would expect from a modern-era shooter: shocking visuals, epic set pieces, and a mix of suspension-building inaction with attention-grabbing action. Even the inaction within the first few trailers released showed the audience that DICE was committed to producing a truly well-made shooter based on the Battlefield franchise. The characters didn't just shamble, they didn't just waddle or stumble, or pivot their backs on the wall - the characters in the single-player campaign moved
, and they moved like a soldier. More or less.
Your argument basically boils down to, "anything within the same genre is a clone of anything else in the same genre". Does that sound right to you? Without even looking at the full story of BF3 and MW3, I can tell you this: BF3 will focus on fighting the modern war as the U.S. knows it, dealing with terrorist forces in an urban/desert/mountainous environment. Will the story go somewhere else and escalate? Damn straight it will. But will it escalate or evolve to the same extremes Modern Warfare did? I don't think so. Battlefield has always been about opposing forces on relatively equal footing, fighting an actual war. Modern Warfare was about a squad of elite commandos who uncovered some huge terrorist plot and then went above-and-beyond the call of duty to stop it. I don't think the focus will be taken too far from stock Battlefield, honestly. DICE should hopefully know better.
MW3, on the other hand, will probably drop you right in to World War 3 and then take the same direction the first Modern Warfare did - an elite squad tracking down those responsible for whatever the hell is going on. While the escalation will still exist, and there will still be plot-lines to unravel, it won't be as steep a change as I expect from BF3. And, frankly, I don't think it will be nearly as meaningful to players... because it will be Modern Warfare (1), but with more countries.
I think there is already a large enough difference in story here to avoid the use of, "CoD clone", and to suggest that something is a clone based on a rough idea of the story in two games within the same genre... I don't think that that is fair at all, to either game.
But then you get in to the mechanics, and /lol your way through a comparison because BF3 offers so much more
than CoD ever will - and has from the start.