Modern Warfare 3 or Battlefield 3

WolfForager

Twilightning wrote: »

I'd be raging, trading it in and calling it muck if I was playing it on a console too.

YouSavedMyLife

Ive made a terrible mistake. This is the first and last BF game i buy on a console. The maps are way to big for only 24 players, not to mention the terrible screen tearing. Im gonna trade this in come monday. BF2 and BF:V where like my most played FPS games on PC back in the day, i really need to get myself a modern day gaming rig...

But still there is some **** in BF3 thats just awful. ****ing flashlights blinding other players and ****? The should just cut out all this Cod style **** and bring it back to basics....

BlastedGlute

Yeah 24 players is a ****ing joke. It makes public gaming boring as **** because everyone is just doing their own thing in the middle of nowhere. Battlefield is notorious for keeping you out of the action and queuing up for jets that haven't respawned and vehicles that are still in the field. You gut lull after lull just because of the basic game mechanics. Severally yawn. Gears of war, skyrim, call of duty, batman arkham city and a whole host of other games, would offer far more entertainment with only a smidge of the bull**** hype that dice so immaturely put forward before this title launched.

WolfForager

Phew, thank god my language filter is working fine.

hypermuse

Picked up BF3 and really enjoying it.. Still cant fly heli's properly and the jets.. well lets just admit defeat on that one!! must watch a tutorial!!


I'll be getting MW2.1/MW3 also but wont be in a rush to buy it.. Might just get it 2nd hand in a month after release maybe!


Skyrim is where its at! super excited!

5uspect

BlastedGlute wrote: »

Yeah 24 players is a ****ing joke. It makes public gaming boring as **** because everyone is just doing their own thing in the middle of nowhere. Battlefield is notorious for keeping you out of the action and queuing up for jets that haven't respawned and vehicles that are still in the field. You gut lull after lull just because of the basic game mechanics. Severally yawn. Gears of war, skyrim, call of duty, batman arkham city and a whole host of other games, would offer far more entertainment with only a smidge of the bull**** hype that dice so immaturely put forward before this title launched.

Developer in promoting their own game shocker! :eek:

nix

hypermuse wrote: »

Picked up BF3 and really enjoying it.. Still cant fly heli's properly and the jets.. well lets just admit defeat on that one!! must watch a tutorial!!


I'll be getting MW2.1/MW3 also but wont be in a rush to buy it.. Might just get it 2nd hand in a month after release maybe!


Skyrim is where its at! super excited!

TIP: Tinker with the mouse sensitivity on both vehicles, if your going out of control very easily in the chopper try reducing the sensitivity. increasing the sense for planes works best. Atleast thats how i found it in BF2

Frankly out of all the vehicles in the game, if the server was full of campers for plane/heli's id just jump in a jeep and fly out into the middle of the action. Or drive to other enemy base and blow the **** out of their vehicle campers and steal their heli/plane and rape their base

5uspect

I just use a 360 controller for aircraft. Mouse and keyboard are just not the right tools for the job when flying.

nix

I never had a problem with keyboard/mouse after adjusting sensitivity, if you're playing on console, your playing a handicapped version of the game. Whatever you're happy playing though

5uspect

PC port!

Trevor451

I have no doubt that the core game is good however I don't know whether or not I should get this over the whole origin/privacy fiasco.

Carlos_Ray

I've been a Battlefield fan for quite a while now, but the latest game has turned me right off. One of the endearing qualities of the battlefield games has been starting off a multiplayer game with a beautiful map and ending with a complete wasteland. That's all but gone in the latest instalment. It really hit me when I was playing online, running through a building in Paris and came to a closed wooden door. Being used to the wonderful destruction of battlefield 2, I merely cocked my grenade launcher and fired it at the door expecting it to be ripped apart in a thousand shards. To my disgust, it remained in pristine condition....Indestructible barriers such as this are common boundary makers in almost all shooters, however, battlefield prided itself on not having them. I cannot understand why they would suddenly take a massive step backwards and use them in BF3, when they had totally eradicated them in BF2.

It appears that Dice have tried to make the game too similar to Call of Duty and have totally messed it up in the process. I always buy both games because traditionally they both offered something different. BF provided epic team battles in huge landscapes requiring cooperation and vehicle use. Call of Duty offered more fast paced action without the need for team play but with greater ability to customise your style of play. Nobody does small map battles better than COD and nobody does Epic destruction like BF. In my opinion BF has neglected its strengths in the new game and by doing so delivered a "poor mans" Call of Duty.

Furthermore its very messy. The console graphics leave a lot to be desired. Stacks of sand bags look like giant blocks of lego. Indeed everything looks very blocky and lazily put together. Kill cam often shows players floating into walls or sinking in to the ground.

Some of the other idiotic things in the game are unbelievable. Particularly when you consider they weren't in BF2.

Why can't you exit in the menu between games for example? Really stupid.

Why do you regularly spawn directly in front of a flying bullet?

Why did they alter the kits and upset the balance that worked so well in the previous games?

Why redesign the game in such away that advantage is firmly in the hands of the campers? You're better of lying flat in a bush, on a corner of the map then you are trying to take bases etc. Campers were soon routed out in previous games, in BF3 its much harder. Why not just crawl under a train and shoot people as they walk onto the platform ffs.


I've really tried to give the game a chance since its release but it hasn't grown on me at all. I reckon its time to sell it on ebay. COD and BF2 will give me my fix for the next while.

al28283

Ugh, I really hate when people say they tried to make it more like CoD, it's nothing at all like it. I think every change they made in the game has been blamed on CoD at this point and it gets tiresome. It's essentially the same game it ever was. Some people seem to hate that it's not exactly the same as the previous games

Big Knox

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

I've been a Battlefield fan for quite a while now, but the latest game has turned me right off. One of the endearing qualities of the battlefield games has been starting off a multiplayer game with a beautiful map and ending with a complete wasteland. That's all but gone in the latest instalment. It really hit me when I was playing online, running through a building in Paris and came to a closed wooden door. Being used to the wonderful destruction of battlefield 2, I merely cocked my grenade launcher and fired it at the door expecting it to be ripped apart in a thousand shards. To my disgust, it remained in pristine condition....Indestructible barriers such as this are common boundary makers in almost all shooters, however, battlefield prided itself on not having them. I cannot understand why they would suddenly take a massive step backwards and use them in BF3, when they had totally eradicated them in BF2.

It appears that Dice have tried to make the game too similar to Call of Duty and have totally messed it up in the process. I always buy both games because traditionally they both offered something different. BF provided epic team battles in huge landscapes requiring cooperation and vehicle use. Call of Duty offered more fast paced action without the need for team play but with greater ability to customise your style of play. Nobody does small map battles better than COD and nobody does Epic destruction like BF. In my opinion BF has neglected its strengths in the new game and by doing so delivered a "poor mans" Call of Duty.

Furthermore its very messy. The console graphics leave a lot to be desired. Stacks of sand bags look like giant blocks of lego. Indeed everything looks very blocky and lazily put together. Kill cam often shows players floating into walls or sinking in to the ground.

Some of the other idiotic things in the game are unbelievable. Particularly when you consider they weren't in BF2.

Why can't you exit in the menu between games for example? Really stupid.

Why do you regularly spawn directly in front of a flying bullet?

Why did they alter the kits and upset the balance that worked so well in the previous games?

Why redesign the game in such away that advantage is firmly in the hands of the campers? You're better of lying flat in a bush, on a corner of the map then you are trying to take bases etc. Campers were soon routed out in previous games, in BF3 its much harder. Why not just crawl under a train and shoot people as they walk onto the platform ffs.


I've really tried to give the game a chance since its release but it hasn't grown on me at all. I reckon its time to sell it on ebay. COD and BF2 will give me my fix for the next while.

lol sorry but you didn't even play the full game did you?? None of your points make any sense or are true with the final release!! They all seem to be from Operation Metro hmmmm!!

It's ok you can tell us!!

Your point about the maps being too similar makes no sense if you actually played them, BF3 has the most varied maps out of series. Also your point about the door.... seriously it's called the edge of the map. How exactly should Dice get around this?

Care to elaborate more on the different maps for us? :pac:

Carlos_Ray

Big Knox wrote: »

lol sorry but you didn't even play the full game did you?? None of your points make any sense or are true with the final release!! They all seem to be from Operation Metro hmmmm!!

It's ok you can tell us!!

Your point about the maps being too similar makes no sense if you actually played them, BF3 has the most varied maps out of series. Also your point about the door.... seriously it's called the edge of the map. How exactly should Dice get around this?

Care to elaborate more on the different maps for us? :pac:

Yea you got me there. I like to go on internet forums and comment on games that I don't have. Its makes me feel special.:rolleyes:

Anybody with half a brain questioned why they the beta version was so close to the release of the actual game. It was obvious that they had neither the time nor inclination to change it at that stage. And yes, the beta did contain some of the flaws mentioned above. But not all of them are restricted to metro and even the ones that are, haven't been fixed in the full version.

Furthermore, I suggest you read over my post. This time without the fanboy blinkers on, as I never said the maps were too similar.

Basically the whole dynamic of the game has shifted away from BF2 towards the COD franchise. Evidently something which some people hate hearing. But it begs the question, why are so many people saying it if there isn't an element of truth in it.

I'd also like to point out that I am well aware that the "indestructible door" was the edge of the map. And again, if you read my post correctly instead of spending time thinking up a retort worthy of a five year old, you'd realise i already addressed that issue. How can they get around it???? Hmmmm maybe just do what they did in BF2!

Also how do none of the points make sense in the final release? If you're playing the game on a console, you can't but be disappointed by the graphics. You can't quit between games for some idiotic reason. Spawning is appalling. The level of destruction has drastically been reduced. The new kits are unbalanced in relation to BF2, and camping has increased ten fold.

Dice hyped this game up beyond belief, and although I didn't expect it to be as good as they were trying to portray it to be, I did expect it to be a lot better. In my opinion BF2 is better than BF3. I'm certainly not alone in this assessment. If my opinion offends you so much that you have to try and convince yourself that I don't have the game, then so be it.

Potential-Monke

See, at least with CoD you knew what you were getting! CoD FTW!!! /fanboyism

ktulu123

In fairness lad, your calling Bad Company 2 Battlefield 2. Not really a long time fan if your doing that. Also the beta was separated from the main game a few months before release. Most if not all of the issues your talking about have been long since fixed. Even more with today's patch.

Battlefield 3 is a sequel to Battlefield 2, its a flawed game sure, but at least give it a proper chance and play the thing for a bit.

If not wait for Bad Company 3...

al28283

Carlos_Ray wrote: »

Basically the whole dynamic of the game has shifted away from BF2 towards the COD franchise.

No it hasn't. And you saying this is why people assume you haven't played the full game. It's nothing like CoD

gimli2112

al28283 wrote: »

No it hasn't. And you saying this is why people assume you haven't played the full game. It's nothing like CoD

I'd agree. I'm a COD fanboy but appreciate BF3 is a very good game. It just doesn't do it for me. Why can't we all just get along

Korvanica

ktulu123 wrote: »

In fairness lad, your calling Bad Company 2 Battlefield 2. Not really a long time fan if your doing that. Also the beta was separated from the main game a few months before release. Most if not all of the issues your talking about have been long since fixed. Even more with today's patch.

Battlefield 3 is a sequel to Battlefield 2, its a flawed game sure, but at least give it a proper chance and play the thing for a bit.

If not wait for Bad Company 3...

To add to this: DICE developed a whole new engine for this Game. (as opposed to just updating and tweaking their old engine - Mw3)

So there are bugs they didn't foresee, these issues will all be patched out in time.

MW£s campaign is class, as are the spec-ops missions. IW destroy Dice when it comes to single player/coop missions. But for me it fails to deliver on the multiplayer, giving an all too familiar experience when something new is desired.

Basically I find trying to cover my teammates as they capture a flag by shooting rocket launchers at tanks out of a chopper thats under heavy fire from stingers and mobile anti air, while the guy beside me repairs said chopper more fun than what happens in MW3.

Nothing is more satisfying than getting a Roadkill in a jet on someone who thought they could jump out of the chopper you've locked onto and fired at with your heatseekers while 100 meters in the air... not even getting a Juggernaut Recon!

Dont get me wrong I love COD and play it when i've mates over as I can do split screen online ... which is class ! But I'd usually pick BF.

sink

I bough BF3 for PC as it's the best version, and MW3 for Xbox so I could play with friends and having played both thoroughly I can say the two games are entirely different.

BF3 on PC looks amazing, it's better looking than any game I've ever seen on console, it blows MW3 away, the sound is also amazing and the guns feel punchier and more physical.

MW3 is a laugh, it's the equivalent of a fast paced arcade game. Split screen with a few beers is pretty much the most fun you can have on a console, but it's not very deep.

BF3 has far more scope to employ tactics, to win a match by out-thinking your foe. There is not a lot to think about in MW3, it's all about reacting, run and gunning.

I've played BF3 4 times as much as I've played MW3, it's the one that keeps drawing me back. The only time I play MW3 now is when I want to play with one of my mates whereas I'm perfectly happy to jump into a public server and get my BF3 on.

Nuri Sahin

*drumroll*

Personally I'm enjoying BF3 more so than MW3. Perhaps being relatively new to BF (1943 being my one and proper experience with the series) and thus it's all very fresh compared to COD which I've been burned out on and a tad disillusioned in how the series has gone since COD4. I liked Black Ops for a good chunk of it's relative time frame in fairness. But COD2 and 4 were excellent experiences and even with MW3, false promises of returning to the COD4 glory days was more BS IMHO.

Massively helps that I've taken to BF very easily too.

In saying that, I've given BF3 a few days break and am trying to rank up in MW3. Bought on release day, didn't properly play it till Sunday i think. Getting on better with it despite some major issues so there is still some hope for it I guess.

Both are very different games however and should be enjoyed for the different FPS experience they bring to the table.

ShadowHearth

sink wrote: »

I bough BF3 for PC as it's the best version, and MW3 for Xbox so I could play with friends and having played both thoroughly I can say the two games are entirely different.

BF3 on PC looks amazing, it's better looking than any game I've ever seen on console, it blows MW3 away, the sound is also amazing and the guns feel punchier and more physical.

MW3 is a laugh, it's the equivalent of a fast paced arcade game. Split screen with a few beers is pretty much the most fun you can have on a console, but it's not very deep.

BF3 has far more scope to employ tactics, to win a match by out-thinking your foe. There is not a lot to think about in MW3, it's all about reacting, run and gunning.

I've played BF3 4 times as much as I've played MW3, it's the one that keeps drawing me back. The only time I play MW3 now is when I want to play with one of my mates whereas I'm perfectly happy to jump into a public server and get my BF3 on.

You actuolly nailed it for me too.

I play bf3 on pc. I am fallowing my stats. Checking out my progress, awards, my efficiency as a class or when I use different weapons. Basically when I sit down to play bf3 I will go in to serious mode. ( well last time I played with friends on our server where we used only knife or sniper riffle, it was some crazy stupid funny crap )

I spent few hours last night on Xbox playing mw3. I didn't cared about my stats at all. I was just: oh look new weapon! Looks shiny! Let's trololol with it! It is just mindless fun when I want to relax and don't care about my gameplay.

Bf3 is just not great for console. You need to be extremely accurate and watch your surroundings. It's hard to do all this with washed out graphics and controller. Where's mw3 has more auto aim then self guiding missiles. Just press button and your iron sight will fallow your victim. Easy, fun, mindless.

Big Knox

Korvanica wrote: »

To add to this: DICE developed a whole new engine for this Game. (as opposed to just updating and tweaking their old engine - Mw3)

So there are bugs they didn't foresee, these issues will all be patched out in time.

MW£s campaign is class, as are the spec-ops missions. IW destroy Dice when it comes to single player/coop missions. But for me it fails to deliver on the multiplayer, giving an all too familiar experience when something new is desired.

Basically I find trying to cover my teammates as they capture a flag by shooting rocket launchers at tanks out of a chopper thats under heavy fire from stingers and mobile anti air, while the guy beside me repairs said chopper more fun than what happens in MW3.

Nothing is more satisfying than getting a Roadkill in a jet on someone who thought they could jump out of the chopper you've locked onto and fired at with your heatseekers while 100 meters in the air... not even getting a Juggernaut Recon!

Dont get me wrong I love COD and play it when i've mates over as I can do split screen online ... which is class ! But I'd usually pick BF.

This basically, I love spec ops favorite part of the MW series and loved clearing them on vet with a friend of mine. Fantastic bit of gaming right there!

The campaigns have been good but a bit hit and miss. Absolutely loved the original MW campaign but was not a fan of MW2. Haven't got around to playing MW3 campaign yet with the amount of games out right now but I will play it.

I've prestiged at least once in every CoD game since WaW so i've played the series extensively online and I enjoyed them without a doubt but MW3 was in my opinion a joke of a game online, glorified DLC. Got to level 30 in one sitting with double XP and haven't touched it since. The series won't get another penny from me unless it seriously gets a revamp and changes it's ways.

On the other hand I think Dice are going from strength to strength with Battlefield. I haven't played it on console but on the PC it's amazing. Having said that I haven't played it half as much as I would like, Dark Souls and Skyrim have been eating up my time.

Whatever you look at it though it's a great time to be a gamer!!

Optimalprimerib

ktulu123 wrote: »

In fairness lad, your calling Bad Company 2 Battlefield 2. Not really a long time fan if your doing that. Also the beta was separated from the main game a few months before release. Most if not all of the issues your talking about have been long since fixed. Even more with today's patch.

Battlefield 3 is a sequel to Battlefield 2, its a flawed game sure, but at least give it a proper chance and play the thing for a bit.

If not wait for Bad Company 3...

That is a load of bollox, call of duty has the guts of 7 games in it's franchise and is called up on it as being a yearly franchise. Battlefield has just as many. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

ktulu123

What?? Do you see Call of Duty mentioned anywhere in my post?

Optimalprimerib

ktulu123 wrote: »

What?? Do you see Call of Duty mentioned anywhere in my post?

My point is battlefield 3 is a sequel to bc2 in all but name. As the call of duty games are sequels to each other. The lessons learnt in making one are brought into the other.

Not a dig at your post as such, more of a reaction I have developed against the battlefield fanboys which I find far more irritating than cod ones.

Idioteque

ShadowHearth wrote: »

Bf3 is just not great for console. You need to be extremely accurate and watch your surroundings. It's hard to do all this with washed out graphics and controller. Where's mw3 has more auto aim then self guiding missiles. Just press button and your iron sight will fallow your victim. Easy, fun, mindless.

Sorry but this PC vs console thing is a load of kak! The game is deadly, the gameplay is deadly, the graphics on the Xbox are really good (particularly with the free HD texture pack download). They may not be as good as the PC version, but that doesn't matter much frankly (except to the PC players who generally have spent a good bit of money keeping their system up to date so it's important to go on about graphics all the time). To me it's like comparing 720p to 1020p...ok the latter is better but The Wire in 720p is just as enjoyable to me and most people
you still have all you stats via Battlelog, the sound and weapon realism that someone else was talking about are all there on the Xbox, along with choosing what server you want to play on and the decent chat system. All without the forever problematic STEAM system used for PC.

I have a decent I7 laptop only 2 months old which is fine for gaming so I'm not anti-PC...I just think we need a little balance in here for any Xbox users thinking of buying BF3 on xbox.

Magill

Idioteque wrote: »

Sorry but this PC vs console thing is a load of kak! The game is deadly, the gameplay is deadly, the graphics on the Xbox are really good (particularly with the free HD texture pack download). They may not be as good as the PC version, but that doesn't matter much frankly (except to the PC players who generally have spent a good bit of money keeping their system up to date so it's important to go on about graphics all the time). To me it's like comparing 720p to 1020p...ok the latter is better but The Wire in 720p is just as enjoyable to me and most people
you still have all you stats via Battlelog, the sound and weapon realism that someone else was talking about are all there on the Xbox, along with choosing what server you want to play on and the decent chat system. All without the forever problematic STEAM system used for PC.

I have a decent I7 laptop only 2 months old which is fine for gaming so I'm not anti-PC...I just think we need a little balance in here for any Xbox users thinking of buying BF3 on xbox.

I agree BF3 is good on consoles, but the biggest thing that sets the PC apart here is the amount of players. The maps were designed with PC and 64 (or is it more ?) players in mind. Being limited to 24 or whatever it is on console is a bit gay since the maps are so large.

Idioteque

Magill wrote: »

I agree BF3 is good on consoles, but the biggest thing that sets the PC apart here is the amount of players. The maps were designed with PC and 64 (or is it more ?) players in mind. Being limited to 24 or whatever it is on console is a bit gay since the maps are so large.

True, it'd be nice to have the larger player capacity at some stage. Funnily enough, I still really like the bigger maps with just 24 people...nothing like flanking around the main action, sweating it waiting for the feckin flag to change. Any team squad worth it's salt will usually just put a recon spawn at outer flags for quick access.
Overall, deadly game weather it be Xbox or Pc...just not PS3, cause it's crap on that platform (only messing )...