Look at any clip of someone flying a helicopter in Wardogs and you’ll see a something that’s quite far from arcade. Same goes for the basic shooting. It also features 3 teams in a king-of-the-hill mode, which is very much not a Battlefield mode. It does not feature auto-regenerating health and so on.
If you watch gameplay you’ll see way more comparisons to ARMA Reforger than Battlefield, and many are downright warning that Battlefield players would probably not enjoy this, as the pace is much, much slower (it takes roughly 3 minutes driving from spawn until you reach the action). Then there is the very fundamental economy system, which once again has no equivalent in Battlefield but is instead much closer to Gray Zone Warfare, or the building system that also has no parallel in Battlefield.
Battlefield is all about kills (and the tickets that drain when you kill an enemy) whereas a player with 0 kills and 25 deaths can absolutely be the MVP in Wardogs because they transported other players or resources, built FOBs or did many other things that actually doesn’t involve shooting. In Battlefield this type of player would just be someone you’d hope was on the other team.
So no, it’s not dumb to make distinctions between Wardogs and Battlefield, because diving deeper than a cursory glance you’ll see they are completely different games for different audiences with little overlap.
Just because there are differences doesn’t mean there aren’t similarities. Another comment said it’s closer to Squad, which sounded like a contradiction but proves the point. Squad evolved off of Battlefield. It has many similarities, even though it is a very different game, and most Battlefield players would hate it.
I literally said it wasn’t a clone. The comment I replied to said they had nothing in common, which is totally wrong.
Anyway, the phrase “[thing]-clone” has a long history in gaming where it doesn’t literally mean a clone. What we know as the FPS genre was originally called “Doom clones” where Wikipedia literally redirects “Doom clone” to “first person shooters”. It’s the same for the [thing]-likes", like souls-likes. Most of them share little with souls games, but that’s still the term we use. I, and most gamers probably, would read “Battlefield clone” to mean a game that takes many components of Battlefield to make a new game, which this does. It’s not an exact copy, but it’s working with a lot of the same recipe.
Look at any clip of someone flying a helicopter in Wardogs and you’ll see a something that’s quite far from arcade. Same goes for the basic shooting. It also features 3 teams in a king-of-the-hill mode, which is very much not a Battlefield mode. It does not feature auto-regenerating health and so on. If you watch gameplay you’ll see way more comparisons to ARMA Reforger than Battlefield, and many are downright warning that Battlefield players would probably not enjoy this, as the pace is much, much slower (it takes roughly 3 minutes driving from spawn until you reach the action). Then there is the very fundamental economy system, which once again has no equivalent in Battlefield but is instead much closer to Gray Zone Warfare, or the building system that also has no parallel in Battlefield.
Battlefield is all about kills (and the tickets that drain when you kill an enemy) whereas a player with 0 kills and 25 deaths can absolutely be the MVP in Wardogs because they transported other players or resources, built FOBs or did many other things that actually doesn’t involve shooting. In Battlefield this type of player would just be someone you’d hope was on the other team.
So no, it’s not dumb to make distinctions between Wardogs and Battlefield, because diving deeper than a cursory glance you’ll see they are completely different games for different audiences with little overlap.
Just because there are differences doesn’t mean there aren’t similarities. Another comment said it’s closer to Squad, which sounded like a contradiction but proves the point. Squad evolved off of Battlefield. It has many similarities, even though it is a very different game, and most Battlefield players would hate it.
So I dont follow these games, but: similarities don’t make it a clone, either. I.E. every racing game isnt a clone of whatever the first big one was.
I literally said it wasn’t a clone. The comment I replied to said they had nothing in common, which is totally wrong.
Anyway, the phrase “[thing]-clone” has a long history in gaming where it doesn’t literally mean a clone. What we know as the FPS genre was originally called “Doom clones” where Wikipedia literally redirects “Doom clone” to “first person shooters”. It’s the same for the [thing]-likes", like souls-likes. Most of them share little with souls games, but that’s still the term we use. I, and most gamers probably, would read “Battlefield clone” to mean a game that takes many components of Battlefield to make a new game, which this does. It’s not an exact copy, but it’s working with a lot of the same recipe.
Sounds a bit like planetside
It has a fair few similarities with Planetside, yeah.