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.
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.
Sounds a bit like planetside
It has a fair few similarities with Planetside, yeah.