As a player of both CoD and Battlefield online multiplayer, it’s safe to say that while we love Battlefield’s emphasis on playing a role in the game, it’s hard not to agree with Michael Pachter’s assessment that Battlefield 3 will not be outselling the next Call of Duty, even though EA and DICE have designed it to do so.

Here’s why…

Battlefield 2 matches force players to commit for long periods of time. The same can be said of a Bad Company multiplayer as well. Matches can last up to half an hour and might not be full of action all the time, depending on what role you play.

It’s hard to imagine players who would want to commit to long matches in Battlefield 3, where the action won’t be as constant as in a Call of Duty game. However, the fun factor in BF3 or BC2 emerges when a player can actually serve his team as a functioning member, fulfilling a relatively specific job rather than zooming off at the outset of a match and getting killed. Taking out enemy armor or air support is just as helpful and satisfying as going on a standard killstreak, although many gamers have started to associate getting consecutive kills in a game with success – sometimes even more than scoring an actual victory in a match.

BF3 and its incredible marketing budget will do what the Bad Company games failed to do: start appealing to players who want to try out something that offers a different type of reward, a change of pace, and a more realistic experience than Call of Duty. The arcade values of the CoD games are certainly what leads to their huge success among hardcore gamers – their gameplay is immediately rewarding and fast paced. Battlefield, though, is much more rewarding to players who want to be part of a team rather than just a gung-ho gamer. It’s fun trying to keep my teammates alive with a defibrillator, throwing out med packs, and being useful. Battlefield isn’t a franchise that is conducive to the kind of player who wants to be the one man who can win a match by player kills alone.

It is saddening to believe that BF3, as awesome as it does look (and will hopefully play), will not be outselling Call of Duty, even if Modern Warfare 3 ends up failing to offer many new features, as with the past few CoD games. That “coasting” mentality of giving gamers what has worked in the past can only last for so long, especially with so much competition in the FPS market. As time goes on, though, and more information about BF3 emerges, maybe there will be enough to pull gamers away from the safety of Call of Duty.

Homefront, a title whose multiplayer is an amalgamation of elements of both BF and CoD, does move in a direction that should appeal to fans of both franchises. As our Homefront review makes clear, the game is not perfect, but the Battle Point system it offers is ingenious, and takes pressure off of players who aren’t as quick on the trigger as the rest of their team. Everyone has the ability to be the chopper gunner, even if it might take longer for some players than others. Homefront was willing to try something different and did a decent job of it.

Continue to page 2 of The State of the Shooter: A Plea for Battlefield 3…

The current crop of first person shooters has been largely aimed toward the player who can get into them without too high a learning curve. Halo and Call of Duty specifically are both games that have been aimed toward a demographic that can easily attain a competetive level of ability - given enough time. Battlefield is aimed toward gamers who have to break previously formed habits in order to improve. I won’t lie. When I played Battlefield: Bad Company for the first time, I was taken aback by the gameplay. I could no longer rely on my sharpshooting capabilities alone and had – here’s a thought – to act as a member of a team to win.

Halo and CoD are two games that embodied a “one man can win” mentality. Yes, you can run into groups that have played together for a while and act as a team with roles and such, but Battlefield forces you into that role and can possibly make players feel uncomfortable, and maybe even resentful. That’s the beauty of the franchise, though. It doesn’t adhere to the strict “kill-crazy” mentality that gamers can find themselves in when they play first person shooters.

There is no doubt that when Modern Warfare came out, it changed the FPS genre in a huge way. It’s hard to find an online shooter that doesn’t feature something akin to killstreaks, a CoD-like control scheme, or a “perk” system. These are things that are familiar to FPS fans now and allow them to jump into games easily. Not necessarily something bad, but DICE’s Karl Magnus Troeddson’s thoughts on how the FPS genre is stagnating, and how other developers are treading water, do ring true.

I want Battlefield 3 to succeed as a viable game that fans will think of when they want to play a serious FPS. Gamers should be able to have just as much fun hopping into a helicopter and playing a support role in a match as they would gunning down numerous enemies in a row and setting attack dogs on the opposing team. Is that philosophy something FPS gamers will be quick to embody though? Maybe not. Why? Because Battlefield 3 won’t appeal to an instant gratification mentality, almost akin to “snack gaming.” Players won’t be able to just get into a game, shoot until the match is over, and notch their score higher than the enemy team’s.

In the end, there is little doubt that Battlefield 3 is going to be a highly impressive game and will succeed on the fronts it has set out to accomplish. Will it be able to overthrow the Call of Duty series as the king of online first person shooters? Odds are low. It’s sad to say, but a lot of gamers seem to prefer a re-skinned version of a game they know than something new. I do not say those words lightly, but when it comes to Call of Duty, have we really seen anything new since MW1? Cosmetic changes aside, there has been very little. We’ll have to wait until later this month to see if the next Call of Duty will offer something significantly new and improved this year.

When Battlefield 3 comes out, I urge hardcore CoD fans to give the game a chance. Get into the mentality and take it for what it is: a shooter that puts one player in the role of one soldier in a huge battlefield.

Even if you’re not going to play the game online, let’s not forget that Battlefield is coming with a lengthy and immersive campaign this time around which is also aiming to top Call of Duty. For a look at that, check out this epic Inception-Battlefield 3 mash-up trailer. You’d also be doing yourself a service to check out the Fault Line series DICE has been releasing, which depicts Battlefield 3 single-player gameplay:

Fault Line Episode I: Bad Part of Town Fault Line Episode II: Good Effect on Target Fault Line Epsiode III: Get That Wire Cut

Battlefield 3 will be releasing November 2, 2011, on Xbox 360, PlayStation 3 and PC.