People still comparing BF to CoD... they aren't even competing with each other really. They're two halves of the same coin. They're both military themed shooters... that doesn't make them the same. They only seem to compete because of that similarity, and that is played off of because it is easy and people are stupid. That's called... *dramatic pause* MARKETING.
Now, 50gb, if that's accurate, seems a bit unreasonable unless there is some epic length single player here. Like a full on episodic experience here. I have skipped the past few CoD games (which I mainly play for the single player), but I don't have CoD. I just don't like the multiplayer. Arcade/twitch shooting just isn't my, or many others, thing. As for the single player in CoD... yes, usually love it. IF this game gets rave reviews, I'll buy it for single player, and hopefully it has jumped ahead in all areas like it claims to have.
For the other points brought up, HDD storage is cheap, but many of us want a SSD... which is still not super cheap. I have a 240gb SSD and don't have the extra space JUST for a single CoD game. I'm not alone here, and many others would have to upgrade/buy a new drive just to accomdate this game as smoothly as any other game. That means not having to delete every other game just to make room. I'm not dishing out the $60 for this game, PLUS another $300+ for a decent SSD to make it all worth it. Internet is reasonably cheap, in the US, but there are speed issues in many areas. My area falls under a region where I'm supposed to be able to get 50-100 down... marketing only. My entire town, a prominent town just outside the city, is stuck in the 10-20 down limit, with my street stuck on 10 down. Heck, I pay for 10 down and only get 7 if i'm lucky... even after they claim to have updated my area. Just remember, everyone situation is different and blanket statements are usually wrong. 50gb 'required' is excessive for many.