BFvsMW (Battlefield Versus Modern Warfare)

[Qwerty]

Thank you Nmagane for this thread idea. Anyone have opinions? Personally, I have no strong preference either way.

[priok]

I think Battlefield 3 is probably going to be a better game than Modern Warfare 3, but only for the PC. I think this, because BF3 on the consoles is going to be cut down, and it's the same price, which is not good, I think. If I owned a strong enough PC, I'd definitely get both, but my PC isn't too powerful, so I'll just get MW3 for the Xbox. I also think that BF3 is pretty over hyped, I know, it will be a good game, but I think it's gotten kind of overboard, with all of the praising of it. Another thing that comes up is, MW3 is no different from its previous titles, then they say BF3 is going to be some completely new game, when that isn't what's happening. BF3 is basically adding better destructible environments, better graphics, and some new vehicles/weapons(which would be obvious, for any type of game like this), while MW3 is basically doing the same thing. The graphics in MW3 aren't as good, but they're still improving them, and adding about the same amount, if not more, new things.

Basically, I think that the company making BF3 is sort of ripping the console users off, because they're paying the same thing for a worse version of the game. MW3 is most likely going to be the same on the consoles, and on Windows, which is a good idea. I don't really like it when companies do this.

[Necrotising Fasciitis]

i don't play either

[nmagain]

hey guys, let's take MW2 and rename it to MW3 and sell it earlier! they won't notice the difference!

[Artifact123]

Sept 22, 2011 20:35:02 GMT nmagain said:

hey guys, let's take MW2 and rename it to MW3 and sell it earlier! they won't notice the difference!

It is true that Treyarch and Infinity Ward are very well known for taking stuff that already exists and reskin it. they do this especially with the weapons. I prefer Halo but between these 2 i'd go for... MW3. Don't know why, but i think BF3 is simply overrated because, according to the stupid kids that make up most of the gaming community it has ''teh bezt grafikz adn lotz ov dustruyabul stuf''. I don't give a fuck about graphics as long as they're decent. I won't really notice the difference between BF3 and MW3. Besides, all this stuff causes some lag which will make a good connection even more important which can give unbalanced multiplayer gameplay. I think both aren't that great however in MW3 you can atleast push that off you by avoiding certain stuff. But BF3 is made up completely of shit so you can't try to play the game differently.

[priok]

Yeah, BF3 is pretty overrated, I think it is actually going to be the game with more little kids than MW3. I think that also, BF3 is only really worth it if you have a PC capable of playing it, there are a lot of people buying it for the consoles, but it is just a rip off. It's almost like buying a Valve game for a console, but at least Valve gives the full game, instead of some chopped up version of it.

[D_M-01]

I plan on getting both, so...

[nmagain]

I'm simply basing my opinion on Mono's since he played the BF3 beta and really liked it.

[Draxorion]

I already have both, and they're fine... However, Battlefield 3 only seemed extremely appealing to me for the first few days that I played it. Modern Warfare 3 has taken over the role of my gaming entertainment... I really should go back to Battlefield 3 and try it again.

[GloveParty]

Battlefield 3. I haven't played Modern Warfare, but I've watched a few videos, and I have friends who play it, they say it's small maps and stuff like that. Compare it to Battlefield 3 (which I have) and well... BF3 is epic, for lack of a better word. The maps are massive, there are tons of possibilities for customization, quite a few players, and great vehicles, like helicopters jets ifvs tanks. Trust me, you'd notice the difference.

[Zrined]

I personally don't like BF3 to be honest, because a lot of the mechanics aren't similar. Say, if I were in a building that collapsed, the first time I'd probably say "What the f**k? What the hell killed me?!" and the second time, I would probably understand it but still not like it.

[monokr0me]

No, you wouldn't, because you can see and hear the building start to collapse around you. It's not as if the building disappears through time and space, carrying you with it. Anyway, the main differences between Battlefield and Modern Warfare is size and playstyle. Battlefield's l\smallest map, for instance, is bigger than MW3's largest. Furthermore, Battlefield is focused on team, objective-based gameplay while Modern Warfare is based on run-n'-gun "team" deathmatch. Battlefield supports teamwork through rewarding points for things such as repairing allied vehicles, healing wounded friends or defending an objective, as well as even more bonus points for working with your squad (each team is divided up into squads of 4 players each, with 1 squad leader for each).

[priok]

Modern Warfare games support team work, it's just that nobody actually plays the objective on most objective game types(other than deathmatch, I mean things like domination and CTF). I didn't like the feeling of Battlefield 3 Beta, it seemed kind of like a bad mix of Bad Company 2 and Modern Warfare 2, I'm not sure how to explain it. I haven't played the full version, but I sort of doubt it's changed that much from the Beta.

MW3 is a really good game, though, maybe it's because I wasn't expecting it to be this good, because it got a lot of bad stuff said about it, and I didn't like the BF3 Beta because I thought it would be really great. MW3 is a pretty different game, too, the only thing that I think is similar is a few models/flashbacks from the previous games, and the HUD has only really been added onto. The Radar is a little bit different, I think it now shows the height of the buildings a little bit better.

[Artifact123]

With both games now released, I see BF3 is way better, skill is important and it's still very casual and fun. MW3 is frustrating, and as always, connection and luck reign over skill. I still stick to Halo but if I had to choose between BF3 and MW3, I'd definetely choose BF3.

[clockwork]

personally, MW3 is when I want to play a game and just mess around. BF3 is when i want to be serious or have a squad with my mates

[Zrined]

MW3 is shit, there, I said it.

BO is good, but only because it actually came with some goddamn change. MW3 is MW2 with a new skin.

[Qwerty]

Actually, I didn't even recognize the new skin at first.

[Zrined]

I know, but then I pressed start.

[priok]

What do you dislike so much about MW3? I think it's a pretty fun game. I would play BF3 too, but my PC cannot run it

[Zrined]

What I dislike is that the company basically re-released MW2. (I have played both of them)

[priok]

I don't know, I've played both of them for a long while and I think they're both pretty different. The HUD and general look is pretty much the same, but MW3 is really a huge improvement in pretty much all of the directions. I played them both today, and there are even some very basic features that MW2 doesn't have while MW3 has them. I think that if the companies remade the HUD, people wouldn't really think they are so similar. I guess they focused more on important things than the HUD, but I still think it is a good thing to change.

[Qwerty]

Maybe they did, I never really played MW3 a lot. I didn't notice a lot of gameplay changes, but I can't really tell the difference between most modern FPSes save a feature or two. They almost all have great potential for strategy, and none use it. It's just a bunch of people that want to avoid dying and kill randomly, no strategy at all.

[priok]

Not everybody plays the way that you've described in these games, a lot of people have different play styles. There can actually be a lot of team work going on in games like this. I was playing split screen a few months ago with somebody, we won nearly every game because we didn't sit down and try not to die while killing other people, we went to the objectives and used equipment to help the rest of the team win. The only game mode where killing many people is really going to help is team death match, but that is not a good game mode in any game it's in.

[Qwerty]

There can be, yes, and if you do split screen and actually help people win, great, but the problem is a lot of people don't. It's most effective when an entire team knows each other and can coordinate, which is tricky in MW3, at least Xbox. Never tried it on BF.

[priok]

A lot of people actually play in full groups, you can tell because they use the same clan tag or they all leave the lobby at the same second. It is pretty hard if you don't know anybody on online games, but if you are playing with friends then it can be alright. I remember running into some people doing this in Battlefield Bad Company 2, but we ended up losing anyway. I didn't talk with them because I don't have a microphone, but I think they were all friends. It seems like however communication is pretty easy in co-operative games, (against AI enemies) for some reason. The CoD games really are not as bad for team work as people say they are, it is just turned into one of those popular things to say, but most people who say it haven't even played these games.

[Qwerty]

No, I'm saying MW3 can be good for teamwork, but generally aren't, at least as far as I've seen during my playtime. Not that BF is any better; just look at all the people going after the jets.

[priok]

Yes, a lot of people don't play on the objective. I think the biggest problem with that is you do not get rewarded as much as you should when you capture a flag or something, but at least it is something. I believe you get 1 point for the point streak, so you're closer to getting vests or radar, or whatever you use. Another problem they did is they show kills in the game modes where it doesn't matter, they should almost not even show that and just show captures.

[clockwork]

Aug 11, 2012 22:04:29 GMT priok said:

Yes, a lot of people don't play on the objective. I think the biggest problem with that is you do not get rewarded as much as you should when you capture a flag or something, but at least it is something. I believe you get 1 point for the point streak, so you're closer to getting vests or radar, or whatever you use. Another problem they did is they show kills in the game modes where it doesn't matter, they should almost not even show that and just show captures.

ive got to agree with that last point