Call of Duty:MW3 or Battlefield 3? Keep it clean

[Xatrez]

Basically what I’m trying to understand is what are the opinions of people who play Call of Duty, Battlefield or both. They both are good games, but each have a hardcore following of gamers from both games. Over the years I’ve notice many Pros and Cons of each game. Yesterday I read a post from a Sledgehammer developer that Call Of duty: MW3 will ship with “60” FPS on consoles while Battlefield 3 will ship with “30” FPS on consoles. While this may set these games apart, some people still don’t understand the amount of content each games offer.

Call of Duty offers amazing set pieces and a semi-amazing multiplayer. Now before you go all roid rage on me, I only say that about the multiplayer because no multiplayer game is perfect. Like every FPS (First-Person Shooter) there are gamers who are there to strictly make the others gamers life a living hell. They shout, curse, threaten, team kill, and the age old thing that seems to be kryptonite to people is camping. Call of Duty and Battlefield both offer a story that really grabs the gamer and doesn’t let go. When playing CoD: BO I found myself hurrying to the next level to find out what happens next.

Now the age old argument on which game will be better, and which will steal players this winter. Both games offer the same thing, and that is a competitive multiplayer that steals the life of players for months. But each game offers unique extras that sets them apart. Two major things that set them apart is the new Elite service MW3 is offering and the new Frostbite2 engine that BF3 is using. Battlefield 3 offers what I think is the coolest thing in an FPS multiplayer is the destructible environments. Personally I think I will playing Battlefield 3 this fall.

I’d like to know your thoughts on the two. Please keep this forum post clean and non-hating threads please.

[HAWT5AUCE]

This is just my opinion, so feel free to take it in or leave it be:

I've played both and I love both. Modern Warefare for it's quick quake-like shooting style and Battlefield for it's realism i.e, the sniper class and how gravity is taken into account as you shoot.

Both game has a compelling story line that any action film fan would love to spend a day watching/experiencing.

Now to choose which one is the "best" is quite difficult because both games are designed differently in all aspects. Modern Warfare is built to be a fast pace, jump into the action, and who can score the most kills in one game sort of deal where as Battlefield requires more preparation and team work to achieve a specific goal; that is why there are classes to choose from and the terrain is expansive.

If I really had to choose, I would choose Battlefield to be my pick; I say this because I enjoy the huge maps they offer, the vehicle aspect adds a new level of game play, and the class level up system has always been a major replay value for me.

[JustintimeSS]

I love both so very much.

I play MW for arena fast paced run and gun. When I play with friends we add in some strats and annihilate randoms. The SP is fucking amazing imo because it's like playing a blockbuster action movie that has great pacing, fun gameplay and cool twists. The drawbacks are no dedicated servers every other MW, hackers and balance issues with weapons and KS's. I'll play this out of the two the longest due to friends I play with.

I play BF for more of a vehicle, team based, "realism" MP. It's slower paced for me (I stick with sniper 100%) and I enjoy creeping, hiding and being a dick. I play heavy support like tagging, mortors and suppression. With BF3 having a suppressing fire for machine guns, I might try another class for once because I enjoy support roles a lot and they seem to be underplayed, at least correctly. The SP is usually heart pounding and realistic enough to make me sweat. Being a Marine myself means that I will thoroughly enjoy the SP to no ends. The draw back for me is I usually play this game alone (which is why I learned sniper I suppose to begin with).

I am an avid supporter for both games and just tire over the constant "one game is superior" thing. I am a firm believer that two games (or more) of the same genre can be successful and good at the same time. And I dont feel the need to say that whichever game I'm playing is the best in the world and everything else sucks.

[Edge-]

I'm leaning towards Battlefield 3. I like that they built a brand new engine for the game, created it for PC first, and are scaling it back for consoles.

Additionally, I always felt that BF3 had more depth in the online play. Yeah, it requires more teamwork ect. (which can be annoying), and I'm not the biggest fan of vehicles, but I enjoyed BF2 and they seem to be adding more multiplayer modes in.

[Creatinebrah]

I'm leaning towards Battlefield 3. I like that they built a brand new engine for the game, created it for PC first, and are scaling it back for consoles.

Additionally, I always felt that BF3 had more depth in the online play. Yeah, it requires more teamwork ect. (which can be annoying), and I'm not the biggest fan of vehicles, but I enjoyed BF2 and they seem to be adding more multiplayer modes in.

so rare these days (statement in bold).

[Mykk]

Well for me its battlefield 3 if i had to pick one of those. I bought CoD: MW in past well it was bit of disappointment. It felt more like arcane shooting game. And i had BF: BC 2 beta key and fell in love that how many ways it was more realistic than MW. But this is from my point of view.

U should try test both of them. If u have friends who plays one of them or both try ask their account for testing

[Duronos]

I personally am getting both but Modern Warfare 3 is what my brother will be playing whereas I will be playing Battlefield 3.

Overall I think Battlefield has more depth in the multiplayer (as if that doesn't sound original) and the destructible environments are just amazing, the amount of times I have been killed by Destruction 2.0 pisses me off but that aspect of the game makes it better.

[Abominator]

I know graphics are not the most important thing when it comes to a game but the fact that MW3 didn't even get a new engine is kind of pathetic. All they have done is add probably a few guns, some lame gimmics and made some new maps and in reality all it really is, is DLC for MW2. Now I preferred MW2 to BFBC2 mainly because of the horrific lag in BFBC2 (hopefully this is fixed for australians for BF3) but I will 100% be buying BF3 first day and maybe 25% chance of buying MW3 a month or 2 after release to see how it ends up.

[Penguin FTW]

This will turn into a shitstorm by the 3rd page at the latest; there have been like 4 threads on this already and all that we've established is that there are fanboys for both sides, and both are ignorant as fuck of the other game and couldn't care less.

[Edge-]

so rare these days (statement in bold).

Yeah, I'm gonna get the game just to support that kind of development. I hate terrible console ports, and sadly most FPS/TPS games nowadays are just that : /

[AfroPope]

Call of Duty is the pokemon of the FPS genre, releasing the same game every year with a new coat of paint.

I'll stick with my Battlefield games

[Edge-]

Call of Duty is the pokemon of the FPS genre, releasing the same game every year with a new coat of paint.

I'll stick with my Battlefield games

Speak of the devil...

[harrygoboom]

I've been playing CoD for years, but I did try Battlefield 2. I liked it, mainly because I like sniping and I feel it added more of a challenge than "quickscoping". Anywho, both are different games. CoD, for me, is for mindless killing while Battlefield would be more based around teamplay ie. advancing through areas, destroying bombs and whatnot. I like the simplicity of CoD, and I'll probably buy both when they come out but only play MW3 for the majority of time.

[Zeta333]

I've played both and I love both. Modern Warefare for it's quick quake-like shooting style and Battlefield for it's realism i.e, the sniper class and how gravity is taken into account as you shoot.

BF never has and never will be realistic, it is as far from it as COD is.

[Zarroc504]

Well chances are that my home will have both MW3 and Battlefield 3. My little brother loves MW2 but I couldn't play it for more than a few days before getting bored with it, but I know he'll be getting MW3. BF3 however seems a lot more intriguing to me somehow. Maybe it's the graphics or just the mechanics like tank battles or the building destruction. I guess I've always had a distaste towards shooters in general but BF3 looks like it can beat out MW3 in my opinion.

[Dragonshardz]

Had great fun playing both.

The overall story and campaign structure of Modern Warfare (1) and the intense pacing and interesting combat mechanics of the second were excellent. Battlefield on the other hand, has this incredible visuals and state of the art, erm, "destructibility" engine but also, manages to raise the bar in both the atmospheric and sound departments.

Since I care not for multyplayer, I will probably be getting Battlefield 3 first (just so I can experience that awesome "realistic" feel of actual bombardment in battle) and then MW3.

[Uwibami]

Hm, I think it's one of those things where you can't really make a choice.
Both of the games have their aspects to them, and their own play style.

Story wise, I always enjoyed CoD more so than I did Battlefield, however multiplayer is a whole lot more fun when you have 64 players and vehicles around.
Now with MW3 and BF3 coming out, they both seem to be amazing games, but if I had to give my vote to one of them, I think it'd be BF3 simply due to the ridiculously amazing graphics.

[Zarroc504]

This will turn into a shitstorm by the 3rd page at the latest; there have been like 4 threads on this already and all that we've established is that there are fanboys for both sides, and both are ignorant as fuck of the other game and couldn't care less.

Heyyy...I remember you from the Starcraft Arena forums, I still remember the "fancy time" thread. Too bad Starcraft Arena died ...I sure hope I'm not mistaking you for someone else :P Have to agree with you there by the way. This will undoubtedly become a condemned thread.

[Deleted]

As an amatuer games designer I simply cannot buy MW3 out of the priciple that it is still using the Quake 3 engine after so many years and with so many other engines coming out that can be much more effective.

Plus the shit netcode, poorly balanced weapons, one hit kill knife and terrible hitboxes. From a creative point of view it's a nightmare.

[Deleted]

I prefer Battlefield over CoD as I simply find the confined environments in CoD not to suit my playstyle (I like taking it slow and cautiously, but it isn't because I like camping or something) and vehicles are a ton of fun that the CoD series simply doesn't provide.