I would agree but Battlefield did announce their game first and I'm not sure if MW3 was already announced I don't think it was though.omega_peaches said:
The MW3-BF3 debate
- Thread starter omega_peaches
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That's true, but I think Dice/EA knew that MW3 was coming out, and it would follow the early November thing, and on top of that, they said that they want to go head-to-head with Call of Duty.Hawk eye1466 said:
Well that's just stupid of them they had a good time of year to release their game they didn't have any real compeition and both games made the most money and now I have to make a choice and am stuck. Thanks Dice you really know how to test my loyaltyomega_peaches said:
Eh I don't play the CoD games, I am a big fan of Battlefield. BF3 has Frostbite, I love the destructable environments, it is developed for PC and then ported to consoles (maybe I'm foolish to trust DICE but trust I do), I only play on PC, and it encourages team play, my few experiences of CoD have all been deathmatches by default no matter what game mode it nominally is. I don't hold much hope for a singleplayer campaign in BF3, although that is what I enjoy most in games, but BF is a multiplayer PC game.
I've brought both series on the 360 and while I still love Battlefield bad company 2 I find myself annoyed when I boot up COD because my friends want to play it. Honestly, I only got Black ops because my friends did, and I like playing with them online.
I don't want to do that again, so personally i'm buying BF3 and staying far away from MW3 as I've discovered playing with alot of my friends won't make that franchise any good to me.
I don't want to do that again, so personally i'm buying BF3 and staying far away from MW3 as I've discovered playing with alot of my friends won't make that franchise any good to me.
I no longer support Activision so I will not be buying the next MW game, they have lost me as a customer for the time being. I want to see them go down in flames. Same goes for EA but I may still buy BF3 given an excellent series of reviews when it releases.
Personally, I can't stand Call of Duty. The reason is the line-based ballistic engine Infinity Ward and Treyarch share. To paraphrase it: when you fire your digital gun, a point is generated on a surface in the environment, usually within the reticle. The bullet then hits there, no questions asked. But this system is known to glitch, sending a bullet behind the shooter, around corners, etc. On the other hand, Battlefield uses a more realistic trajectory-based ballistic system, meaning that if you're using a sniper rifle at extreme range, you need to compensate slightly for distance, and you have to lead moving targets. It doesn't reward spray-and-pray tactics. While it's not as realistic as say, Sniper Elite, it still takes a bit more work to master it, and I personally like that sort of challenge.
I've always preferred BF over CoD, probably because I've always liked how BF is more team oriented and, well, I just like it more, I can't really say why, but it's gameplay has always been funner than Cod's for some reason. While I'm defenatly getting BF3, I'm only getting CoD MW3 if there is a splitscreen co-op mode or splitscreen online. The only redeeming quality Blops had for me was that I could play it with people in the same room while still playing online play.
Well, the hate originates from DICE's marketing strategy towards CoD players. This kind of marketing can only degrade the gameplay quality of multyplayer cause bf games play different than CoD ones. Ergo CoD players will behave stupidly in vehicle oriented matches. And on top of that I don't think they'll spend the time needed to master vehicle tactics.
This kind of thinking is what feeds this hate. Nobody wants to see a match full of n00bs. Ergo the training mode some have been asking for in EA forums.
For me CoD is dead. If I want a fast paced match I'll join one with my friends and it'll get really fast, really quick. Of course this is relative to the map we're playing. But still slow maps can have their moments which can only add to the reward factor bf games have.
The dynamics of bf games are far more interesting and dynamic than CoD's. This is what keeps CoD out of my list. And to top that there is a smell of honor in bf's air that extends beyond the gun.
This kind of thinking is what feeds this hate. Nobody wants to see a match full of n00bs. Ergo the training mode some have been asking for in EA forums.
For me CoD is dead. If I want a fast paced match I'll join one with my friends and it'll get really fast, really quick. Of course this is relative to the map we're playing. But still slow maps can have their moments which can only add to the reward factor bf games have.
The dynamics of bf games are far more interesting and dynamic than CoD's. This is what keeps CoD out of my list. And to top that there is a smell of honor in bf's air that extends beyond the gun.
What about EA charging a tenner for... I think it was 3 maps on that co-op mode that wasn't even that good?omega_peaches said:
At least Activision's maps are replayable.
I love the battlefield series, I've played every game to some degree. (Though Vietnam was waaaay back when I was but a mini-me, and it was only one hours or so. Still.)
CoD... Well, it passes the time well enough, and all my friends have it, so I don't mind a game now and again.
CoD... Well, it passes the time well enough, and all my friends have it, so I don't mind a game now and again.
I am not touching MW3 with a long pole attached to another long pole. It has nothing to do with BF3 being better it has to do with no dedicated servers. No dedicated = a no buy from me. I don't care if it will cure cancer if it doesn't have dedicated servers I am not playing it.
BF3 should blow CoD out of the water, but it won't.
For some reason even though The BF series has always been better than CoD (along with MoH, ArMA, and Operation Flashpoint), and number 4 was the only really great CoD game to date, CoD for some reason just has the kind of brand loyalty the others can only dream of.
For some reason even though The BF series has always been better than CoD (along with MoH, ArMA, and Operation Flashpoint), and number 4 was the only really great CoD game to date, CoD for some reason just has the kind of brand loyalty the others can only dream of.
The thing is that BF3 really wowed me in a way nothing has for a long time. The MW3 gameplay was just flat out boring, It was so safe and felt like the exact same thing. People say that all the time but looking closely it's even more noticeable.
In MW3 reveal everything sounded exactly the same in MW2, And the entire sub section felt like I really have been there before. It looks, and sounds, like a CoD reskin more than any other CoD has.
BF3 on the other hand looked amazing. The sound, the visuals, the destruction, it gave me of feeling of something new for mainstream Modern shooters which have been "Lets be CoD" for so long.
In MW3 reveal everything sounded exactly the same in MW2, And the entire sub section felt like I really have been there before. It looks, and sounds, like a CoD reskin more than any other CoD has.
BF3 on the other hand looked amazing. The sound, the visuals, the destruction, it gave me of feeling of something new for mainstream Modern shooters which have been "Lets be CoD" for so long.