The thing with COD and BF is that, although they're the same genre, they cater to completely different people. You can't really argue that one is better than the other because, tbh, it's not that objective - they both do their job extremely well.
COD is a no-holds-barred firefight, with action around you at all times. You can always get kills, and if you want you don't need to consider taking strategic strong points and planning pincer movements on enemy positions, you can just grab your gun and go solo. But that isn't to say that you can't use teamwork on COD. Hell, the extremely good COD players aren't better than everyone else because they can shoot better, but because they plan ahead. However, COD never claimed to have a multiplayer full of tactical decisions. It's just an all action frenzy. Put simply, it's mindless fun - which is why it's been so successful.
BF on the other hand, is completely different. If you go steaming into somewhere in BF, you're liable to get your ass handed to you on a plate, with a note asking you to come back again soon. It's all tactics, teamwork, more realism. It's a much more brainy game than COD, and as such it has a steeper learning curve. Games are longer and larger, but there's far less killing and much more planning involved. That's not to say it's less fun than COD - it's just a different type of fun. Which is the point I'm trying to get at.
They're both fantastic games, and both have other redeeming features which I'm not going to get into, but they both cater to different types of people. Hell, even the same person can enjoy both because sometimes you just want some mindless fun, going around with a UMP45 and spraying down everything you see, while other times you want to secure a major enemy route by laying down covering fire for your teammates with an LMG.
I'll be getting both.
