I think each franchise has its strong points of course, Ground War is a valiant effort, but nothing close to the great experience you can have with battlefield on similar scale. That's being said, i'd argue that Call of Duty games have been taking more risks than Battlefield for the better part of the decade. The only risk Battlefield took in 10+ years, which ended up in a financial success nonetheless, was Battlefield 1 and going WW1. Meanwhile CoD went from modern to slight Futuristic, to Scifi, to WWII, to modern. As far as gunplay is concerned, both franchise are great really, but with Call Of Duty : Modern Warfare, i feel a new level has been reached regarding immersive first person experience. The mix of procedural and handcrafted animations in the weapon handling in CoD:MW is just unmatched, it's stunning. Weapon sounds have always been great for both CoD/BF. As much as i liked BFV and the improvements its brought to the table with 3D spotting gone and recoil camera shake tone down, as well as smaller ttk, they really need to iterate faster on new content and surprise me more with the orientation they're taking their game. Battlefield has been boring aside BF1. Disclaimer: Never been a Call of Duty player, only played Black Ops 2 campaign, but god do i love this modern warfare.