Call of Duty vs Battlefield

As a long time fan of CoD since COD: 4 I may be slightly biased on this subject. BF has many different features, usually more realistic, like vehicles that you can actually use without having to get a killstreak unlike in CoD. Also, in BF there is a lot more destroyable stuff, which is always great. However, in Ghosts (the newest edition to the CoD franchise) there is stuff outside of red barrels and cars which can be destroyed now, it still doesn't live up to BF on that level. In CoD you can blow up a tree or such, and it will always fall in the same place, every time no matter where you shoot it from, BF, however, you can blow up walls at the bottom of a massive skyscraper and it can fall to crush your enemies, and, quite often, you. I have never played BF4 but I have played BF3 quite a bit back in my time, and quite frankly I wish I'd had BF before CoD because then I might not suck at it, as, it is a better game, however, I find CoD more fun as I can successfully kill people every now and then. So, if you have neither CoD or BF I would suggest BF4 over Ghosts, however if you're on a tight budget and are going for an old game, you should stick with CoD as the early ones like CoD 4 and MW2 are quite frankly, superb and immensely fun, but BF2 and BF1 are pretty damn shoddy, BF3 is great but much more expensive then the very old CoDs.