MW3 VS BF3
- Thread starter Camevil
- Start date
MagicForDummies
Well-Known Member
COD games are best.. why? Consistency. Getting 90% on every game review every year is no easy task.
MW3 also has epic singleplayer events that are incredible intense and insane. Remember Flynn? Of course not, everyone only remembers Ghost.
Anyways I love MW, MW2 ... MW3 is bound to kick ass.
MW3 also has epic singleplayer events that are incredible intense and insane. Remember Flynn? Of course not, everyone only remembers Ghost.
Anyways I love MW, MW2 ... MW3 is bound to kick ass.
JerzeyLegend
Well-Known Member
/me puts on flame proof jacket.
COD = super fast paced killing plus more killing and requires no brain.
BF = war sim thats not a sim and requires a brain.
COD = super fast paced killing plus more killing and requires no brain.
BF = war sim thats not a sim and requires a brain.
Camevil
Well-Known Member
Hawke
Well-Known Member
I don't trust scores they give to COD games anymore.
Aanyways, I agree with the way a person I subscribe to on youtube puts it: COD is the Angry Birds of the FPS market: It's incredibly simplistic, and requires almost no skill to reach maximum satisfaction, besides the twitch you develop after playing hours and hours of it. It's extremely casual, and doesn't require much of your attention. Note that I never said this was a bad thing, as this kind of game has formed itself a market, with parents buying these games as a defacto requirement along with a console.
Battlefield on the other hand is more teamwork oriented, or more precisely teamwork compatible, whereas it's almost impossible to have any actually cooperative fun in COD's multiplayer. Battlefield's skillsets branch out in multiple directions, as you can practice to be a great medic, a great tank driver or a great pilot, so you can't get everything from the get go, but feel more satisfied when you actually get the hang of flying or surviving in a tank.
Battlefield games never really had paid DLC COD style, most of their paid downloadable content being worthy of their own separate expansion packs, such as the BC2 Vietnam. They also giveout FREE new maps months after the game was released, and new modes to already existing maps. We already know it will have a Back to Karkand expansion, much similar to the Vietnam one, with it's own series of factions, weapons, vehicles and at least 3 classic maps (don't remember the right number).
They both have their market.
moondoggy23
Well-Known Member
I enjoyed CoD for a good while. I've gotten tired of it, however. They've come out with a new CoD every year (albeit the games are being mae by two different developers that stagger their releases) and have saturated the market ad nauseum. It makes some sense from a business standpoint, because you're keeping your brand out there for everyone to remember. It also helps that the multiplayer aspects of the games are fast-paced, adrenaline-pumping fun times. With the game being so main-stream, you're inviting more people to play, which in turns welcomes mroe trolls and flamers. Frankly, I can't really remember the last time I played a CoD game without someone being a complete ass the whole time. The game can be fun, but people have ruined it, as well as the new releases year after year.
BF3 is a little different. Yes, there have been different spin-offs of the Battlefield series (BF:BC, BF: 1943, et. al.) but each of those has felt like a different game, and not the same game with a different skin on it. The makers of the Battlefield series puts effort into their game, and try to give the user something different to look at, and a new game to play. There have been enhancements in one way or another to the BF game's engine, whereas the game engine for CoD has remained relatively the same.
I agree, it's not an easy task to consistently get a 9.0+ on each game released, but in the review for the latest CoD game, there were mentions of how old the game engine is, and how the gameplay hasn't changed much since the first CoD :MW game. Even the game reviewers are getting tired of seeing CoD every year. I'm looking forward to BF3 because it's going to be a change of pace than what has been out there the past 4 years.
BF3 is a little different. Yes, there have been different spin-offs of the Battlefield series (BF:BC, BF: 1943, et. al.) but each of those has felt like a different game, and not the same game with a different skin on it. The makers of the Battlefield series puts effort into their game, and try to give the user something different to look at, and a new game to play. There have been enhancements in one way or another to the BF game's engine, whereas the game engine for CoD has remained relatively the same.
I agree, it's not an easy task to consistently get a 9.0+ on each game released, but in the review for the latest CoD game, there were mentions of how old the game engine is, and how the gameplay hasn't changed much since the first CoD :MW game. Even the game reviewers are getting tired of seeing CoD every year. I'm looking forward to BF3 because it's going to be a change of pace than what has been out there the past 4 years.
shadowwolf
Member
From what I've heard from the 12 year olds on xbox live....
A lot of people did my mom.
I hate when people are all like
"DOIN YAH MUM" on xbox live. Thank god for mute.
A lot of people did my mom.
I hate when people are all like
"DOIN YAH MUM" on xbox live. Thank god for mute.
Hawke
Well-Known Member
Then jumps over it while making a 360 spin and blowing up the cliff into a marvellous explosionThis thread is headed towards a cliff....
GiftedNarwhals
Active Member
I dont like Call of duty as much as battlefield. I actually Hate Call of duty , but not mainly for the game itself. It has some great game play mechanics and is a very in your face fast paced crazy infantry fighting game. Its Campaigns are kinda Terrible in terms of story (well ever since cod 4 they suck) However the campaigns still are a fun shooting gallery and offer a somewhat difficult experience if your playing on Veteran. The Single player also has the crazy off the wall stunts that not many other games can compete with. However they do get a little bit old and after almost 8 games of it, im getting sick of it. The online for call of duty has always been fun, no doubt there. Its just that the people that tend to hover around those games are, well, Jerks. The community is terrible. They don't care about game-play mechanics or how fun the game is. They normally just take the Cheesiest gun and Strategies they can find to get the most kills. If this means letting the enemy kill you first then they will do that. For example: Boosters have always been a huge problem on Call of duty,also the model 1987's ,and of course Drop shotting. I never did any of this and got my 10th prestige the right way, going almost 50 - 10 in about every game , and it was annoying to see other people beat me to it by means such as boosting. Thats why i have moved away from call of duty for the most part. Black ops Looked better then mw2, but i never actually ended up getting it because i didnt want to deal with those kind of people and strategies. If you have ever played a call of duty game, you know what i mean. And if you have played one and still dont know what im talking about, Then try using a different gun or two.
Battlefield on the other hand, also has great mechanics, is still very fast paced (not as fast as cod) , and requires Teamwork. From what i have seen on battlefield, people for the most part wont leave you hanging at a point all alone. Some people will yes, but thats something you cant avoid, theres always those people in every game you play. Cod is just composed of 90% of them. The vehicles and huge landscapes in battlefield were also a major turning point for me. There nothing more fun then running people over with a humvee or desperately trying to dodge a rocket in a helicopter. Alot of people who dont play battlefield and prefer cod over it say that they dont like the vehicles. I can understand that because vehicles in shooting games are not for everyone. However if most of them Tried Adapting to different situations, instead of using the cheesiest guns over and over, such as the vehicles they would realize they are not that hard to deal with. Also i have noticed for the most part that battlefield Dosent have and Really Cheesy guns. They are all very well balanced and require a different amount of skill to use.
TL;DR = Cods community sucks, they normally lean towards cheesy strategies.
Battlefields Community is better, with not to many cheesy strategies being used. and TEAMWORK
Battlefield on the other hand, also has great mechanics, is still very fast paced (not as fast as cod) , and requires Teamwork. From what i have seen on battlefield, people for the most part wont leave you hanging at a point all alone. Some people will yes, but thats something you cant avoid, theres always those people in every game you play. Cod is just composed of 90% of them. The vehicles and huge landscapes in battlefield were also a major turning point for me. There nothing more fun then running people over with a humvee or desperately trying to dodge a rocket in a helicopter. Alot of people who dont play battlefield and prefer cod over it say that they dont like the vehicles. I can understand that because vehicles in shooting games are not for everyone. However if most of them Tried Adapting to different situations, instead of using the cheesiest guns over and over, such as the vehicles they would realize they are not that hard to deal with. Also i have noticed for the most part that battlefield Dosent have and Really Cheesy guns. They are all very well balanced and require a different amount of skill to use.
TL;DR = Cods community sucks, they normally lean towards cheesy strategies.
Battlefields Community is better, with not to many cheesy strategies being used. and TEAMWORK
Donvittorio
Well-Known Member
Mw3 or bf3?
I prefer video games
I prefer video games
rsmv2you
Well-Known Member
Well said xD
shadowwolf
Member
CASTLE CRASHERS FTW!!!!!
DerDo
Active Member
I only played Call of Duty games until yet and only watched a friend for an hour playing BF.
My point of view so far of the multiplayer mode:
for example CoD MW2: Teamwork is an unknown word, the chat is only a big hill made out of hate and bad language and most of the people seem to forget that its only a game. But I also think playing as team is also nearly imposible: 1, Because its nearly all the time who gets the most kills 2, the map structure 3, it's simply about single player action.
I need to say this game doesnt need lots of skill, but that depends on your playing style. It's also better to play it as a single person rather than in a team, it's simply more fun then and the game simply isnt structured for teamply.
It was lots of fun to me, but sometimes its hard to have the feeling of playing a game since people just throw bad words at each others head and don't think about that they are just playing a game, making it sometimes impossible to even play a match (teamkilling)
BF(2): Teamplay!!! If you don't know this word, then U'r having a hard time playing this, the maps are pretty huge and U are able to make a strategy to defeat the enemy. What will decide the outcome of the match wont be the skill of one ore a view persons playing on their own, it will be the team which knows how to pull the strings on the battlefield to reach the goal. There are much more options to play and defeat an enemy. You'll need to think for a little while before you rush a house full of enemys. But it's also this what actually made me dislike the game a little bit. It takes some time before something actually happens and if something goes worng, it will make U overthink the situation again.
Simply: CoD is more about getting lots of kills by thinking fast about and how to take down a bunch of players without U dying and BF is more about thinking which player will do what, how to reach the goal and trying to do this without dying all the time.
I'll get MW3 and BF3, I think both game series have something which wants you to play it hour for hour, and a poll outcome about these two will be simply decided by what kind of gamer you are.
(Hope eveyrone knows what I wanted to say here)
My point of view so far of the multiplayer mode:
for example CoD MW2: Teamwork is an unknown word, the chat is only a big hill made out of hate and bad language and most of the people seem to forget that its only a game. But I also think playing as team is also nearly imposible: 1, Because its nearly all the time who gets the most kills 2, the map structure 3, it's simply about single player action.
I need to say this game doesnt need lots of skill, but that depends on your playing style. It's also better to play it as a single person rather than in a team, it's simply more fun then and the game simply isnt structured for teamply.
It was lots of fun to me, but sometimes its hard to have the feeling of playing a game since people just throw bad words at each others head and don't think about that they are just playing a game, making it sometimes impossible to even play a match (teamkilling)
BF(2): Teamplay!!! If you don't know this word, then U'r having a hard time playing this, the maps are pretty huge and U are able to make a strategy to defeat the enemy. What will decide the outcome of the match wont be the skill of one ore a view persons playing on their own, it will be the team which knows how to pull the strings on the battlefield to reach the goal. There are much more options to play and defeat an enemy. You'll need to think for a little while before you rush a house full of enemys. But it's also this what actually made me dislike the game a little bit. It takes some time before something actually happens and if something goes worng, it will make U overthink the situation again.
Simply: CoD is more about getting lots of kills by thinking fast about and how to take down a bunch of players without U dying and BF is more about thinking which player will do what, how to reach the goal and trying to do this without dying all the time.
I'll get MW3 and BF3, I think both game series have something which wants you to play it hour for hour, and a poll outcome about these two will be simply decided by what kind of gamer you are.
(Hope eveyrone knows what I wanted to say here)
Marcus89
New Member
BF3 for sure
Bf3 is hardcore on coop and the teamwork is what i play for. tIn COD you have the people that camp like MOFO's (not saying BF doesnt have campers, but its alot harder to camp when you try.) CODmw3 is also losing some aspects from from Black Ops which is a little depressing even though the new killstreak system is going to be cool, but not worth what they took out of Black Ops.
Bf3 is hardcore on coop and the teamwork is what i play for. tIn COD you have the people that camp like MOFO's (not saying BF doesnt have campers, but its alot harder to camp when you try.) CODmw3 is also losing some aspects from from Black Ops which is a little depressing even though the new killstreak system is going to be cool, but not worth what they took out of Black Ops.