Poll: Is it just me or does MW3 look like a hell of a lot more fun then BF3?

[LiftYourSkinnyFists]

The first flaw in this debate is BF3 and COD arn't really the same in different aspects of war based FPS's they excel in their own ways.I myself love both series when I feel like playing either or, clocking atleast 4-5 weeks play time on both BF2 and MW2 individually.

For a fast paced action where I don't have to rely on teamwork and can do what I feel like I much prefer the Call of Duty games, When I feel like working in a squad supplying team mates or picking off the valuable targets supporting the opposition I'd play the Battlefield series.

Heck, I love them both but my PC can't run the newer Battlefield games so I'm going to get COD since I don't believe battlefield series is half as immersing when played on the XBOX

 

[PanicxBoss]

at least MW3 doesn't have as many elitest assholes associated with it
"oh, battlefield requires teamwork"
no it fucking doesn't, sit down and play your crappy FPS

Irony achieved! Increased flame intensity to factor 6!

 

[ezeroast]

For me they are completely different games, at least when it comes to the multi player.
BF3 looks freaking amazing and I cant wait to get into it. The return of massive maps and jets are just 2 of hundreds of reasons.

CODmw3 on the other hand looks to me like COD4 and CODmw2, no real changes but more like a patch or DLC, and paying full price for something like that seems crazy to me.

If the price comes down a bit I'll definitely buy it for the single player but if I want that multilayer experience I still have all the other CODs I can turn to.

 

[Twad]

I played the previous MWs and didnt find them fun. Too much dying in a split second in MP, too much mindless cinematic linearity in SP.

As of BF, i only got BC2 and found it fun (destructible environment sure help make things fun imho), despite some problems of its own both in SP and MP.
I liked the class system in MP, so even if im so-so at shooting i can contribute to the team. I liked the large maps, give some extra options for placement and movement. And then there are vehicles when i feel like raining explosive death on the other team.

So of both titles, im more interested in BF3.

 

[42]

I find more fun in slow paced games, heavily based in strategic combat, depending on good teamplay, and battlefield always delivered. CoD are fun, heck I got 4 Battlefields (1942; 1943 BC & BC2) and 5 CoD (1, 2, 4, MW2, Black OPS) but I still have more fun playing tactical, rather than run and gun.

This year, i'll have 5 Battlefields, and from what I've seen, I'll still have 5 CoD until next year.

 

[Ghengis John]

thanks!!! those fans are 100% unreasonable. i'd be brave enough to suggest right here on the escapist forums to suggest BF3 fans are like the Mac Elitists of the Shooter games. Yes i did go there.

Pot meet Kettle, Kettle meet Pot. Oh no Pot, you shouldn't go around saying things like that.

 

[El Cookio]

I'll get both, even if the multiplayer turns out to be unbalanced and frustrating, i'll just play through the campaigns.

 

[Ice Car]

thanks!!! those fans are 100% unreasonable. i'd be brave enough to suggest right here on the escapist forums to suggest BF3 fans are like the Mac Elitists of the Shooter games. Yes i did go there.

Pot meet Kettle, Kettle meet Pot. Oh no Pot, you shouldn't go around saying things like that.

I don't really see anything in there that indicates that he isn't open to the other side's arguments. I've seen better examples of hypocrisy.

OT: MW3. I'd rather stick to Call of Duty since the community seems at least somewhat tame compared to the shitstorm of elitism and hate coming from Battlefield.

I've only played Call of Duty thus far because I only recently got into FPSs. I hear too much about Battlefield being awesome and Call of Duty being crap. I would buy into that if the hate on Call of Duty from the Battlefield community, including EA didn't make me sick to my stomach.

I almost never see anything not hateful towards Call of Duty coming from Battlefield fans' mouths. Even EA spends a lot of time bashing CoD. Their community by large seems chock-full of elitist assholes. This is all based on pure observation and I've never experienced being in the community, but this is the only image I've ever had of the game.

The Battlefield fans might have me effectively convinced that Battlefield is probably better and I should get it, if they weren't busy hating on Call of Duty 24/7 while EA does the same. A lot of the people I've seen reeeeeeeally seem biased towards Battlefield.

At least on Escapist, most people aren't open to mindlessly bashing and hating without stating a reason, and being mostly civil while doing so. That I can respect. From what I've seen everywhere else, the majority of the community seems like the type I want to avoid. It doesn't really matter if there are a few who are reasonable if the majority are assholes, in my opinion. If people really want to evoke the right image for their franchise, focus more on praising your game with reasoning rather than spending every waking hour bashing Call of Duty and being an elitist asshole.

I'd rather stick to Call of Duty. My image of Battlefield right now is very bad. I don't care if I get "a bad game", if I have fun with it, and have a much lesser chance of meeting the kinds of people I don't like, then I'll play it.

 

[Nomanslander]

I don't like shooter so both look boring to me. I demand more open world RPGs!

My exact thoughts (except I like shooters), that's why I'm getting Rage and completely overlooking those two Michael Bay shallow fragfests...-_-

 

[tipp6353]

at least MW3 doesn't have as many elitest assholes associated with it
"oh, battlefield requires teamwork"
no it fucking doesn't, sit down and play your crappy FPS

No need to get hostile...

 

[Drizzitdude]

Im getting battlefield 3. Way more tactical and larger scales. Less spamming of noob tubes and panic knifing. Vehicles are sweet

Modern warfare 3, well, I like call of duty's camapgin modes? Otherwise its basically this.

 

[octafish]

I prefer team play to Deathmatch, so I like the look of BF3.

Some of the mechanics look great, they have lifted suppression from Project Reality/Red Orchestra and I am quite excited about that. You should be able to set up a decent bounding overwatch system to flank opponents and even to defensively withdraw. Finally all those suppressive weapons have a purpose.

While I tend to prefer to play a foot slogging medic vehicular combat is a massive part of Battlefield, even if you don't use them they add a terrific element to multiplayer.

Any single player you get in a Battlefield game should be considered a bonus as it is not traditionally a single-player game. Shame there won't be bots, but the co-op mode looks to be pretty good.

 

[Violator[xL]]

64 players, vehicle combat. 'nuff said.

 

[Korten12]

You know... After playing the BF3 alpha, it isn't an innovative and tatical as some claim it to be. In Rush I took out three of the spots, alone. I was able to solo it, no tactical play. For the most part, it played a lot like COD, with less customization.

Bad Company 2 feels more different then COD, while BF3 plays a whole lot like COD.

 

[Jake Lewis Clayton]

I came into this thread knowing I was going to buy both on launch.

Now I'm just going to pick up Skyrim (as I'm on holiday for the maybe early november madness again, but don't fancy being unable to play as not enough servers for everyone).

So I'll pick up Skyrim and then sometime after christmass battlefield 3, then sometime round april CoD (can generally pick them up for about 15-20 new at that point of the year).


Both sound like good games, but Skyrim just offers me something I've been missing for a much longer time.

Oh and to which looks more fun. I never get bored of COD, but vechile multiplayer in BF makes me jizz.

 

[WickedSkin]

In contrast BF2 was paced to my liking, it felt almost like an Indiana Jones movie, the story isn't deep but it has a nice consistent progression in a coherent world, some quiet time and then some action, some character moments and some action again.
And then they announced BF3 will throw away the Indiana Jones part and just go dark and gritty... well that's nice..

The REAL BF2 had damned close to no single player at all. You mean BF: BC2

BF: BC, BF: BC2 and BF: MW are the lesser console versions of the greatest online shooter franchise ever. Not as good as the real Battlefields:
BF1942, BFV, BF2, BF2142 and now (apparently)BF3. Not entirely sure about that one though.

But since I can't be hit on the head hard enough to pay for CoD: MW3. BF3 wins by default.