my opinion on this whole MW3 vs BF3 crap (not a lot of discussion value and more or less a rant )

[cryogeist]

I've been seeing more and more Bf3 vs Mw3 and have gotten pissed off quite a bit at a lot of it. it's also funny how i seem like one of the few that likes both games... anyway now that i have more built up anger than an angry marine who isn't punching someones face in i thought i should go ahead and say this... Warning! opinions and shitty grammar ahead!

I should start off by saying that the games I've played in both of these series i as followed:
battlefield:
Bad company 1 & 2
1943 (XBLA)
Free to play (which if i am correct is just BF2 only free)

Call of Duty:
all of them except 1 and The big red one

Now i'm sure some BF fans will be like "Well you haven't played all of the BF games so you opinion is invalid!!!!1!" but i have played enough to get a decent feel of the games (i think) so first off both the games single players were fun having lots of squishy Russians, Nazis etc to pump bullets into and they both have enough shit to blow up and vehicles to drive. The Multiplayer in both games are really fun BF for more objective based CoD for Run-n-Gun he communities are...both....meeeh BF has it's fair share of retards for example i've seen someone try to quickscope a helicopter...not to mention the people who jack choppers fly them over the enemy base then jump out... and i'm sure most of you know about the CoD community...

as for realism in the games...well...the WW2 one are good but the modern ones...well one thing that annoys me is that neither of them have the Russians using their standard issue rifle (which is the AK-74 and it's variants) i mean CoD has them using the ak-47 which in real life is only a reserve rifle bad company is close...but the AEK-971 is only used by various police force and the US doesn't use the XM-8 the project was canceled but this doesn't really matter as to actually enjoying the games other than that they're ok....i think

Me personally will be getting MW3 and BF3 but one thing that bothers me is that everyone is calling MW3 a re-skin while i dont see what bf3 is doing new...this is what bugs me the most...anyway...rant over...cyrogeist out.

Troll comment: Brink;3

 

[cryogeist]

also is the escapist fucking up for anyone else?
i cant refresh the forums at all...

 

[NerfedFalcon]

...And you didn't even read about how the PC version of Battlefield 3 requires you to use EA's Origin (which was clearly designed by someone who wanted to test how many of Orwell's bits they could put in before people started complaining), won't have dedicated servers or even a server browser (which the other consoles will), and all this AFTER saying that the PC was the focus of the game?

 

[cryogeist]

...And you didn't even read about how the PC version of Battlefield 3 requires you to use EA's Origin (which was clearly designed by someone who wanted to test how many of Orwell's bits they could put in before people started complaining), won't have dedicated servers of even a server browser (which the other consoles will), and all this AFTER saying that the PC was the focus of the game?

sorry I'm a console gamer. i really read up on PC news

 

[AJax_21]

...And you didn't even read about how the PC version of Battlefield 3 requires you to use EA's Origin (which was clearly designed by someone who wanted to test how many of Orwell's bits they could put in before people started complaining), won't have dedicated servers or even a server browser (which the other consoles will), and all this AFTER saying that the PC was the focus of the game?

That's false. BF3 on PC does have dedicated servers and the server browser is accessible through Battlelog, I honestly don't know if that's a good or a bad thing but it's worth noting that the majority of the Alpha testers didn't have a problem with it.

OT: Fanboys will be fanboys. Ignore the screaming idiots and just enjoy your games. I'll be picking both BF3 and MW3 and have a blast with both games.

The best thing to come out from the "MW3 vs BF3" mess is the pissing contest between EA and Activision. It's absolutely hilarious.

 

[J_Monsterface]

i didnt even know there was a debate

theyre such similar games in the same genre of very similar production value

i think if youre someone who loves one of them youd be missing out not to play the other

its like pizza enthusiasts arguing cheese vs pepperoni (vegetarianism not withstanding)

its either a genre you dont like, or more of that sweet fps action you love

be glad there doesnt have to be a best

 

[Da Orky Man]

People are calling MW3 a re-skin because, so far, I can't see much difference between it and MW2 besides graphics and a couple of features like hot-swappable scopes.
BF3 on the other hand has a new engine, more destructibility, and appears to take place in a more realistic setting.

For the record, I likely won't be getting either. I'm short on cash, and there are other games like Skyrim and Space Marine that just look more unique, and I like unique games.

 

[The Cap]

Well you ought to play the first Call of Duty, it's great!

yeah Call of Duty 1 is awesome to the extremities of MR Extreme's Pants, it also has a single player that takes more time than blowing your nose

and its old school

 

[Jacco]

I've never played a Battlefield game but what im seeing of BF3 looks fantastic. I also like COD. Basically if the game has a good story, I'll play it and generally like it. I'm interested in MW3 simply because im interested in the continuing of the story from MW2. BF3 looks Iike it could be cool all around.

 

[5t3v0]

as for realism in the games...well...the WW2 one are good but the modern ones...well one thing that annoys me is that neither of them have the Russians using their standard issue rifle (which is the AK-74 and it's variants) i mean CoD has them using the ak-47 which in real life is only a reserve rifle bad company is close...but the AEK-971 is only used by various police force and the US doesn't use the XM-8 the project was canceled but this doesn't really matter as to actually enjoying the games other than that they're ok....i think

Me personally will be getting MW3 and BF3 but one thing that bothers me is that everyone is calling MW3 a re-skin while i dont see what bf3 is doing new...this is what bugs me the most...anyway...rant over...cyrogeist out.

Troll comment: Brink;3

Actually, BF3 has the AK74M in it as the russian Assault rifle. So there is that. Also, its been said before, Battlefield IS trying something new. They have been using and perfecting a new engine, while CoD has been using the same engine since release, which is now at breaking point in possibly every way.

This isn't directed at you, but I'm really sick and tired of the news sites talking up the lack of ingame server browser. The tagline for the escapists article about it, "Want to browse for servers? Too bad". Dammit people THERE STILL IS A FUCKING SERVER BROWSER ITS JUST NOT FUCKING IN GAME. Knowing DICE's track record with ingame server browsers, a new system (that was reported as good by you know, people who have actually played it)is probably a must. I know, I can't stop people from expressing opinions, but shit like that spreads ignorance really badly.

 

[Gammayun]

If im being honnest i probably get bf3 first because it has change from it previous games though as far as i see call of duty hasnt budged an inch it not bad thing but paying once a year basically what is a glorifided exspantion pack is a bit anoying but that doesnt change the fact they are really good games and are unfortionate to be very popular which mean the will be a group of people finding any excuse to put it down. But what i am hoping for s that the mw3 sales are going to be down not cause i want call of duty to die but so activion will take more of a risk with the series instead of stagnating it. But i totaly agree that people should stfu and judge the games when they are actually released.

 

[DarkRyter]

I have no idea why people keep comparing them.

They're completely different.

One is a military shooter, and the other is a military shooter.

 

[AlphaEcho]

...And you didn't even read about how the PC version of Battlefield 3 requires you to use EA's Origin (which was clearly designed by someone who wanted to test how many of Orwell's bits they could put in before people started complaining), won't have dedicated servers or even a server browser (which the other consoles will), and all this AFTER saying that the PC was the focus of the game?

The whole origin argument is bull because you can uninstall it right after installing BF3 and it will play fine.

 

[Vicarious Vangaurd]

Ive played Battlefield Bad Companies and 1943 that means I know BF! Oh wait I didnt play the best Battlefields so I cant even form a real opinion about the series...nvm...

 

[cryogeist]

Ive played Battlefield Bad Companies and 1943 that means I know BF! Oh wait I didnt play the best Battlefields so I cant even form a real opinion about the series...nvm...

apparently you didn't read the (i think) part...
beside technically I've played 2 if free to play is BF2...

 

[LiftYourSkinnyFists]

I love Battlefield and I love COD, they're two completely different styles of FPS I wouldn't even bother comparing them.

 

[HotFezz8]

Now i'm sure some BF fans will be like "Well you haven't played all of the BF games so you opinion is invalid!!!!1!"

addressing this first; i only played bad company 1 and 2, and they were completely differnet games. fucking different, the first was a awesome massively open shooter where you could spend (and i did) 3 hours walking around a level you were meant to fly around. number 2 on the other hand was a fucking cod knock off.

tbh and OT im going to buy both, im a FPS fan, but not a fanboy. so i should enjoy both. for the record i think bf3 will look better, mw3 will play better and be the superior game because of it.