Jump to content

MW 3 or BF 3


JOSEPH X

What are you going to get?  

135 members have voted

  1. 1. What are you going to get?

    • Modern Warfare 3
      19
    • Battlefield 3
      57
    • Both
      37
    • Neither
      12


Recommended Posts

For the purposes of scientific investigation I'm conducting a survey on two military FPSs and their merits. Consumers will then be able to make a rational choice based on empirical evidence.

 

Also, I like a good fight. Let's 'av it!

9322068076_d79a001db2_o.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Narcis_speed6
We will eventually get bored of one of them and move to the other, so is both.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

darthYENIK

 

Uh, can we wait to vote until the games are released?

Uh, I think this is more of a what one do you plan on buying, if you had to choose one, type of deal.

 

I'm going with BF3. The Battlefield series has never let me down. The CoD series on the other hand...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CryptReaperDorian

I definitely prefer Battlefield 3. Guns are meant for long range, and COD does never has you shooting a long ranges. Oh, and it's very bad game design when a knife has more range than a shotgun.

 

F*ck shooting a M134 out from the passenger bay of a Huey when Battlefield allows an entire crew to operate a helicopter. This not to mention that COD has the most flawed game concept ever. That concept is letting players that are already owning to own even more. Many games do this, but I've never seen any other game do it to the point that COD does it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

darthYENIK
I dont see them as comparable.

They are FPS war games. How much more do you need to compare?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will be purchasing both, hopefully. Battlefield 3 is of a higher priority, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont see them as comparable.

They are FPS war games. How much more do you need to compare?

Command and conquer and starcraft is the same thing right?

 

Ohwait.

QF1SfST.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://arstechnica.com/gaming/news/2011/05...s-in-the-pc.ars icon14.gif .

 

I just happen to agree with that guy, 64 players, dedicated servers, large maps, vehicles.. EA is trying harder to convince me that their product is worth my money.

Never liked COD, will never understand why so many people do, theres nothing great about it and theres not even much of it inside the package..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I think Battlefield is the better series, my friends play a lot of CoD so I'm probably going to get both.

Edited by Sam998
Banned, now stay the f*ck out
Link to comment
Share on other sites

darthYENIK
I dont see them as comparable.

They are FPS war games. How much more do you need to compare?

Command and conquer and starcraft is the same thing right?

 

Ohwait.

Yeah they are. Just because a game looks different, or has different features, does not make them incomparable.

 

At their core, these games are FPSs. Just like Starcraft and C&C are RTSs. As a matter of fact I'll go as far as to say that you can compare CoD to Starcraft, and Battlefield to C&C, because they're all video games.

 

It seems like a cop out to just claim "apples and oranges".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like a cop out to just claim "apples and oranges".

Which, in itself, is a flawed argument. I mean, apples and oranges can be compared against each other, because of their differences.

Slosten.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

getting my popcorn for the incoming fanboy wars

not talking about you guys above me,actually a good discussion.

user posted image
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

getting my popcorn for the incoming fanboy wars

not talking about you guys above me,actually a good discussion.

Haha, hopefully people stay relatively civil. tounge.gif

 

 

 

 

I would probably buy BF3 over MW3, I just have more fun with it.

38773_s.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My qualm with Cod is the lack of WOW in multiplayer, whenever I play any of the recent cods my mind is dulled. I don't go "OH CRAP did you see what I just did" it's more just....."duhhhhh" You know?

 

Cod dulls my mind and makes me switch off, BF has always had exciting moments.

 

That's my main argument against, that and maps, the maps seem so lifeless to me in Cod. They are just there, but that's it.

 

That's my main problem with cod. confused.gif

 

Hopefully this was insightful and not pure fanboyism.

el1e0jer0qpyjd2fg.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Both will have a great single player story, and that's all what I need in games like this, so I voted for both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never been a huge fan of the BF series... I'll probably rent it a couple months after release but i plan on getting MW3 on release day...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be buying Battlefield 3 on release.

 

I will be getting MW3 to see the conclusion of the story but no way I'll be paying for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam Jensen

 

I dont see them as comparable.

They are FPS war games. How much more do you need to compare?

Command and conquer and starcraft is the same thing right?

 

Ohwait.

So two games have to be exactly the same to be comparable? What's to compare if nothing is different? Is that really your logic? What exactly isn't comparable about these 2 games?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finn 7 five 11

i will buy both but if i had to I would buy BF3 over MW3 anyday of the week, Neither have been released yet, judging by the last installments of both games i would say BF is a much more advanced game in my opinion (graphics, animations, sound) but COD is a lot of fun as well and has a lot of customization.

 

Edited by finn4life
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do we know MW3 as alot of customisation? We haven't heard anything concerning that! Same about BF3... we 'heard and read' alot about how they're pushing it and how they were tweaking/searching for the right ammount of customisation concerning the look of your character and whatnot... but we know jack sh*t about how it effectively will work out.

 

All I know is... or let me correct myself, all I assume is that MW3 will be another slightly "advanced" installment in the CoD franchise concerning the whole CoD concept (weaponcustomisation, perks, cahllenges and whatnot). Nothing big, nothing mindblowing. Sells like hot cakes and the massesare happy because they have their big and revolutionary game of the year.

 

BF3: because of the huge hype it will have it's flaws and on certaub fronts it will disappoint people because we all expected more from it. But in the end a really solid product and solid SP and especially MP experience. Embraced by the 'hardcore community' and tons of fun.

 

I guess I'll prefer BF3 over MW3 big time. Though I'll end up getting MW3 aswell just like any other previous CoD game. I just wonder how crappy their script writing will be this time around and what awesome movie and/or TV series they're going to rip off again this time. And rip off from it a bad way so they actually piss on the masterpiece.

 

Oscar Mike to Burger Town Ramirez, ten foot mobiles incoming loaded for bear! STAY FROSTY!!111!!!11!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm buying both of them on the first day of release but I think Battlefield 3 will be better icon14.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm getting both but MW3 won't be really a highlight. Sure the world setting is nice but the game doesn't show anything new. So I voted BF3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I dont see them as comparable.

They are FPS war games. How much more do you need to compare?

Command and conquer and starcraft is the same thing right?

 

Ohwait.

Yeah they are. Just because a game looks different, or has different features, does not make them incomparable.

 

At their core, these games are FPSs. Just like Starcraft and C&C are RTSs. As a matter of fact I'll go as far as to say that you can compare CoD to Starcraft, and Battlefield to C&C, because they're all video games.

 

It seems like a cop out to just claim "apples and oranges".

lawl

 

Ok then. Personally, I cant compare. And I would be one to argue you cant compare games at all rather than compare them all.

QF1SfST.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And I would be one to argue you cant compare games at all rather than compare them all.

I'm very interested in hearing the logic behind your argument. Please do elaborate.

Slosten.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So are you saying it's impossible to compare computers, cause if it's impossible to compare games, because games are similar than we can't compare computers.

 

By your logic, we can't compare anything. Why the hell was the Venn Diagram created? It apparently serves no purpose since you can't compare.

 

 

As other people have mentioned, I think your copping out to avoid having to see what cod is, the same thing every year.

el1e0jer0qpyjd2fg.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And I would be one to argue you cant compare games at all rather than compare them all.

I'm very interested in hearing the logic behind your argument. Please do elaborate.

Really?

 

All games are different, as they all have unique mechanics, level design and gameplay behind them, thus, they cant be compared.

Its like before when people would compare Cod4 to Halo 3, its ridiculous. You can prefer one, because you prefer the mechanics in that particular game (IE the power up in halo 3 or wtv), but objectively their not comparable because apart from some far fetched general statement like "shoot things with guns" they have nothing in common, and thus cant be compared.

 

The farthest I'll compare is something like cod4 to MW2.

 

 

@Xboxless, what the f*ck are you on about?

 

As for coping out or some sh*t? What? What the f*ck does that even mean, I'm ashamed that I enjoy cod or smth? I sure as hell am not, I enjoy the f*ck out of cod, just like I enjoy the f*ck out of BF2 and BC2, but if some retard asks me to compare them and objectively point out the better game, well I cant do that. To me its the same as comparing Diablo II with Sim-City, how can you compare that which has nothing in common? Its like a bad joke that you laugh at because its so random.

Edited by baptiste

QF1SfST.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All games are different, as they all have unique mechanics, level design and gameplay behind them, thus, they cant be compared.

Their unique mechanics, level design and gameplay is exactly what makes them comparable. That's what comparison is: taking two things and judging them based on what each has to offer. If both of the things in question are exactly the same... what is there to compare?

 

That's why I said apples vs. oranges is a flawed argument. Someone might prefer oranges over apples because they prefer the color orange to red, or they might prefer the taste of oranges over the taste of apples. In the same vein, some may prefer Halo to Call of Duty because of the time frames that both games are set in; they might like the distant future more than the present. You said yourself that personal preferences come into play here, and personal preferences are the body of comparisons.

Slosten.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

All games are different, as they all have unique mechanics, level design and gameplay behind them, thus, they cant be compared.

Their unique mechanics, level design and gameplay is exactly what makes them comparable. That's what comparison is: taking two things and judging them based on what each has to offer. If both of the things in question are exactly the same... what is there to compare?

 

That's why I said apples vs. oranges is a flawed argument. Someone might prefer oranges over apples because they prefer the color orange to red, or they might prefer the taste of oranges over the taste of apples. In the same vein, some may prefer Halo to Call of Duty because of the time frames that both games are set in; they might like the distant future more than the present. You said yourself that personal preferences come into play here, and personal preferences are the body of comparisons.

I simply disagree. As comparing things that have nothing to do with each other is confusing and retarded to me.

 

I agree with what you say in general, but I dont agree with the use of the word compare. IE, I prefer Halo 3 because of the mechanic behind power ups, or I prefer cod4 because of perks and their effect on the game. NOT Power ups in halo are BETTER than perks in Cod4, thats just ridiculous, theirs no background or setting for the comparison.

 

What you can compare are raw things, things that have no or not much setting or background. So for example, between MM3 and BF3, you'd be able to compare shooting mechanics, just raw shooting mechanics. Which feels the most realistic, which is most satisfying.

 

 

personal preferences are the body of comparisons.

This is essentially what I disagree with.

QF1SfST.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • 1 User Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 1 Guest

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.