Originally Posted by refeek
Publishers always have more say than developers. This is a fact. Unless you are your own publisher, you will constantly have someone breathing down your neck to change something if they don't like it for one reason or another. Basis being on my brother working as a developer for Microsoft, and general knowledge of how terrible certain publishers are to their developers. People do not fully comprehend how big of an impact a publisher will have on how a game turns out - and even how a publisher who did wonders for one game in a franchise, will destroy the next game because they got greedy. Halo, CoD, Dragon Age (read: Microsoft, Activision, EA).
Your basis on progress is absolutely null, as it appears you haven't touched a CoD game since CoD4.
Battlefield, like CoD and Quake, and many others, always have the same feel as those before them. They may have slightly better engine, some neat new graphics, some fancy new vehicles - but they all come down to the same exact core gameplay as the game directly before them. EA will have them go with what works, believe it or not. Yes, I'm sure there's differences - some could be huge - but that doesn't take away the feeling that you're playing the same game with some new toys. As I said earlier, FPS games lack innovation.
You are right that publishers have the final say, and if they don't like something, then it's most likely going to be scrapped. However, like I said, there's no way of knowing for sure what went on behind the scenes with EA/DICE. You can make assumptions based on EA's track record, and the fact that other publishers do it, but you will never know for sure. Therefore, it isn't fact. It is likely, it just isn't fact. And to be honest the only reason I even brought that up was because you criticized the other guy for holding his opinions as fact, and then you go and do the same thing. I never said I disagreed with you, I just merely pointed out the fact that you did the exact same thing the other guy did, and you criticized him for it.
Actually, I own every CoD since CoD4, and have been underwhelmed time and time again since then. The only new thing I enjoyed, as I previously stated, were the wager matches in BLOPS, and the zombie modes, which were both done by Treyarch. Spec Ops was ok, but I would have rather had a co-op campaign instead, but IW really can't since they end up killing off half of their protagonists midway through the game, seemingly to produce some sort of "shock value".
And as I said before, this game is the successor to BF2, not BC2, and will feel as such. And BF2 being so old now, it will be nearly impossible to create the same feel as BF2, on the new engine, therefore BF3 will most likely feel like a combination, of what I'm hoping is the best of the two games, with it leaning a little more towards BF2.