Battlefield 3 or MW3

Which one are you looking forward to the most?

  • Battlefield 3

    Votes: 16 37.2%

  • Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

    Votes: 18 41.9%

  • Both

    Votes: 9 20.9%
  • Total voters
    43
Apathy

Apathy

New member
Now that E3 has kicked off and we've seen some sneak peek videos of both Battlefield 3 and COD Modern Warfare 3 which one are you looking forward to the most and why. If you choose both thats fine too. I'll provide some videos below of each game.

For me and this is just my opinion but I'm looking forward to BF3 over MW3 because it seems that COD is just a 'Copy and Paste' game every year with some new features. I was a huge MW2 gamer and played that for hours apon hours until one day I got bored with the game. Black Ops Oops came out and again I played that for hours apon hours and got bored with it real quick. I just don't see anything new with MW3 that sticks out and screams "BUY ME!" COD hasn't updated their graphics or changed anything dramatically to keep me from buying their games and thats why I've stopped after Black Ops. DICE took their time and created a new engine to build something new never seen before to compete with the COD series. DICE has publically bragged that BF3 will be a better FPS than the new COD game and decided to release it during the same time as MW3 because they are that confident in their product. Right now in my opinion Battlefield 3 looks like the more promising game.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Already have BF3 pre-ordered. I've purchased Call of Duty 4 (Modern Warfare), Modern Warfare 2 and Black Ops. Although I can't deny the hours of fun and enjoyment it brought me, I've had enough of their type of online warfare. After awhile it just lost it's flavor with me. They bring back the same formula every year. I'm not saying that it's a bad thing that they do that, but I've lost interest in playing that type of game.

At some point I think I'll get it just to play the storyline out, but BF3 looks far more entertaining. If only xbox supported 64 player maps though :(

 
I'm gonna preorder mine right after work. I would love to play this game with 64 players on the battlefield but I've never been into playing games on the PC plus you have to have the right PC to play games. This would be the first game I would be willing to buy a new desktop thats capable of playing this game.

I'm happy with it being 12 vs 12 for the PS3 and its no different than the Bad Company games but it would've been nice to see 32 players or so. To bad I'm selling my 360 other wise I'd team up with ya and own some noobs.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
huskerjock said:
I'm gonna preorder mine right after work. I would love to play this game with 64 players on the battlefield but I've never been into playing games on the PC plus you have to have the right PC to play games. This would be the first game I would be willing to buy a new desktop thats capable of playing this game.

I'm happy with it being 12 vs 12 for the PS3 and its no different than the Bad Company games but it would've been nice to see 32 players or so. To bad I'm selling my 360 other wise I'd team up with ya and own some noobs.
Click to expand...
I really hope they add a server browser and allow people with better connections to get into 32 player games. The game is going to be really cool even if there is a 24 player cap, but I think it will be a lot better if we can get it up to 32.

 
^agree with Landlord.

I am a sucker in terms of consumer loyalty. I played both MW1 and MW2 on the PC and thought they were fantastic. Black Ops had its cool points too. But my integrated graphics could barely handle that, and certainly can't handle either Battlefield 3 or MW3. I don't have a console either, so I don't have much of a stake in this, as I likely won't get to play either.

So from my distant standpoint, I have to say, BF3 looks hella more impressive than MW3. I know MW3 just did their reveal trailers and BF3 has gotten more hype, gameplay footage, etc. But c'mon...BF3 looks sick. MW3 looks like MW2. And "fictional world war 3" seems a little too grand for that universe. Or maybe it's, who wants to play that kind of game anyway? Seems a little too future-war, a little less modern war.

Sounds like it could be the last Modern Warfare, which is sad in a nostalgic way, but I'm skeptical if they are taking this storyline in the right direction anyway.

Anyway, if I could, I'd get both. But I'd get MW out of nostalgia, and BF3 because it looks like it kicks a$$.

Also is it just me, or do the graphics in BF3 gameplay footage look WAY better than the graphics in the rendered MW trailer?

PS, can't wait to see what Gaz's next voiceover reincarnation is named.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
zoogies said:
^agree with Landlord.

I am a sucker in terms of consumer loyalty. I played both MW1 and MW2 on the PC and thought they were fantastic. Black Ops had its cool points too. But my integrated graphics could barely handle that, and certainly can't handle either Battlefield 3 or MW3. I don't have a console either, so I don't have much of a stake in this, as I likely won't get to play either.

So from my distant standpoint, I have to say, BF3 looks hella more impressive than MW3. I know MW3 just did their reveal trailers and BF3 has gotten more hype, gameplay footage, etc. But c'mon...BF3 looks sick. MW3 looks like MW2. And "fictional world war 3" seems a little too grand for that universe. Or maybe it's, who wants to play that kind of game anyway? Seems a little too future-war, a little less modern war.

Sounds like it could be the last Modern Warfare, which is sad in a nostalgic way, but I'm skeptical if they are taking this storyline in the right direction anyway.

Anyway, if I could, I'd get both. But I'd get MW out of nostalgia, and BF3 because it looks like it kicks a$$.

Also is it just me, or do the graphics in BF3 gameplay footage look WAY better than the graphics in the rendered MW trailer?

PS, can't wait to see what Gaz's next voiceover reincarnation is named.
Click to expand...


This is, to the best of my knowledge, because of two main reasons:

1) MW3 is running on an old engine. Really, COD4 came out in '07 (and that wasn't even a new engine at the time), and four years is ancient in terms of video-game tech. Sure, you can try making it more shiny and give it a little bit nicer textures and etc., but that engine was good when it first came out, and is significantly dated by now.

2) While the Call of Duty games have had the majority of their success on consoles, Battlefield games have always been PC-oriented at heart. Truth of the matter is, consoles are holding back gaming in a very severe way when it comes to what is possible technologically, with physics, graphics, etc., and BF3 is being built primarily on the PC, which doesn't have those restrictions, and then ported over to consoles. I would venture to say that the console versions of BF3 won't look that much greater than MW3, but we'll find out.

 
Thought this was hilarios. People were wondering why there was a dinosaur at the beginning of the demo played during the EA press conference, well, this is why:

chan-noscale.jpg


 
Battlefield, and it ain't close. Destructible environments change the way you play shooters. COD is still using static environments, and going back to it in Black Ops made me realize how limiting it is. Might as well play Quake.

 
Back
Top