Input Lag Tested: COD vs Battlefield - Which is the Most Responsive FPS?

Input lag - it's a crucial factor in defining the 'feel' of a game, and especially important for gameplay in the first-person shooter genre. Right now, two franchise giants battle it out for supremacy in this key market: Call of Duty and Battlefield. Which offers the fastest, most responsive controls? And in turn, how to do they compare with other key titles in this most competitive of genres?

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.

As much as I'm not a Call of Duty fan anymore I do have to say it's very impressive. They have the lowest input lag as well as always targeting 60 frames a second

Ghost_of_Tsushima173d ago

Very responsive controls, 60fps, and ability to get back into the game instantly after dying. That’s the basic formula to get players hooked.

boomtube1987173d ago (Edited 173d ago )

@The_Infected that is why CoD is greates MP shooter. I hate on CoD all the time but u appreciate CoD more when u play other MP shootere. That fast paced smooth low letency, 60fps is just too good. Killcamps. killstreaks and no wait 10 second after u die in a game mode and people keep wondering why CoD still dominates console sales every year last 10 years. Even weak IW still best selling game this year lol.

After playing Destiny 2 in small 4vs4 30fps uglyness. I am convinced that vast majority of devs just dont get it. If u gotta make a MP it has to be 60fps, low letency and in game modes like TDM when u may die allot...why the hell u have to wait 10sec to respawn. Just spawn. Keep the match going. CoD just gets everything right except the same sticking with same future or ww2 setting. Every year CoD shoulf have a different setting.

173d ago
Relientk77173d ago

I've never had trouble with input lag in Call of Duty games. They're definitely on point there

Apocalypze172d ago

Of course battlefield would have some lag, battlefield is like 3x the size of Call of Duty