Hey guys, its really hard to pick one and I want to limit myself to one game. I am both a call of duty and battlefield player. I have played Battlefield 3 recently and i liked it a lot but im not sure about mw3 since i never tried it out.
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Hey guys, its really hard to pick one and I want to limit myself to one game. I am both a call of duty and battlefield player. I have played Battlefield 3 recently and i liked it a lot but im not sure about mw3 since i never tried it out.
This is all you need: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bVceSSNiMg&list=FLD4QbvDvpafgQVW0-_PpLeA&index=5&feature=plpp_videoJebus213I would say that isn't anywhere close to all you need. Not everyone hates the game like he does, and saying you can't find a single good thing about the game? That's a clear sign of bias. He even mentioned that going in, his "viewers" already knew what he would think of it. In other words, he had his mind made up already.
I haven't played MW3 yet, but I have plenty of friends who have it and enjoy it just fine. I think it's just the cool thing to do to pile on to the popular franchise. Maybe the guy is a Battlefield player who wanted to take digs at MW3, I don't know. Personally, I'm not against either one(BF3 will be here this week, haven't ordered MW3 yet).
Sorry, that video shouldn't convince everyone, even if there are small valid points within it.
Brent
[QUOTE="koolkeys"]Sorry, that video shouldn't convince everyone, even if there are small valid points within it.Jebus213Alright, how about this video?: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tPNUhtOVLM&feature=channel_video_titleSorry, but no. Why? Because you can find haters for every game out there. I'm not saying MW3 is perfect or without issues. I'm sure it has several. But there are also plenty of people who do enjoy it. It may not be groundbreaking, but that doesn't mean it can't be fun for many people.
So I wouldn't take any random videos to determine if I like a game, and I would hope that others wouldn't either. Try the demo, watch some gameplay video without commentary(as every commentator is biased in some way, it's natural). Read all the reviews, etc. But most of all, try it for yourself. I guarantee you that these videos don't represent what everyone will like or not like.
Brent
Sorry, but no. Why? Because you can find haters for every game out there. I'm not saying MW3 is perfect or without issues. I'm sure it has several. But there are also plenty of people who do enjoy it. It may not be groundbreaking, but that doesn't mean it can't be fun for many people. So I wouldn't take any random videos to determine if I like a game, and I would hope that others wouldn't either. Try the demo, watch some gameplay video without commentary(as every commentator is biased in some way, it's natural). Read all the reviews, etc. But most of all, try it for yourself. I guarantee you that these videos don't represent what everyone will like or not like.koolkeysWell, my demo was going to my friends house and playing the game. Yeah I actually have one of those things called "friends". The game is no different from the last one and the last game didn't even impress me the slightest. The game also has P2P matchmaking which makes it a complete fail in my opinion and the fact that they have trash like that on PC is disgraceful.
I'm not going to go by what reviewers say. They're even more biased. Why? Because scores and opinions these days must live up to the hype to avoid backlash, honest opinions aren't allowed. I think It was Destructoid that gave The Witcher 2 a low score and dinged the game. I lol'd at all the backlash from fanboy's because Destructoid is known for writing a lot of bs, most likely to bait people of course. They're almost as bad as Kotaku and even IGN can get pretty bad. As for this website? I'm surpised BF3 and MW3 even got past an 8.0 and received so much praise... Oh but it must live up to hype right? What's funny is that there weren't any separate reviews for each platform.
It's so easy to be consumed by hype... All of a sudden BC2 wasn't a console port because they bolted on a dedicated server browser that barely worked on release..Well, my demo was going to my friends house and playing the game. Yeah I actually have one of those things called "friends". The game is no different from the last one and the last game didn't even impress me the slightest. The game also has P2P matchmaking which makes it a complete fail in my opinion and the fact that they have trash like that on PC is disgraceful.I'm not going to go by what reviewers say. They're even more biased. Why? Because scores and opinions these days must live up to the hype to avoid backlash, honest opinions aren't allowed. I think It was Destructoid that gave The Witcher 2 a low score and dinged the game. I lol'd at all the backlash from fanboy's because Destructoid is known for writing a lot of bs, most likely to bait people of course. They're almost as bad as Kotaku and even IGN can get pretty bad. As for this website? I'm surpised BF3 and MW3 even got past an 8.0 and received so much praise... Oh but it must live up to hype right? What's funny is that there weren't any separate reviews for each platform.
It's so easy to be consumed by hype... All of a sudden BC2 wasn't a console port because they bolted on a dedicated server browser that barely worked on release..Jebus213
Well, I have no problem with your opinion of it. I never said that you didn't demo it. But suggesting that a couple of hate videos on Youtube should be "all he needs" to make his mind up is just absurd. Not everyone hates the game, believe it or not. Surely you can acknowledge that?
I didn't say to go by just what reviewers say though. I only mentioned it as one of many tools to help make a decision. I also said to check out commentaries, and also gameplay footage without commentary, and most importantly, to demo it yourself. Nobody else can make the decision for you. Why should I choose to not buy a game because an obviously pre-biased Youtube video said it sucked? Sounds pretty ridiculous to me. Any time somebody says "I couldn't find one single good thing about it", it throws up a red flag. So I take it with a grain of salt.
I think most avid gamers can cut through the hype. FWIW, BC2 is a pretty decent game for me(bought it last Christmastime). Not for everyone, not perfect, but still a good game IMO, hype or no hype.
I haven't played MW3 yet personally. Plan to demo it soon, but I have a backlog of games to work through. I do know several friends who DO enjoy it quite a bit. It's a fact that a couple of videos doesn't represent what everyone thinks or should think, which is all I'm saying.
Brent
If you don't mind the price and that MW 3 is more of the same (slightly altered but pretty much the same), go for MW 3 without looking back. BF 3 was a waste of money, until they actually make it stable and they don't destroy it with the next patch, it's not worth taking the risk.DanielDust
This,This and THIS!!!
And you could add the hit detection which is the worst ived seen in my entire life as gamer...and i play shooters since '98...
BF3 is a catastrophe...
I own BF3 and i play it...i am beginning to think about myself that iam a sadomasochist...
But if i had to choose between BF3 and MW3...ill go with MW3 all the way...
P.S. I hate MW2,BO and MW2 from my guts...i cant stand them...but they are playable...
Ever since the dedicated servers thing with MW2, a lot of the PC community has a huge (and somewhat highly unreasonable) bias against MW, so you won't have much luck. Outside of the internet, most people you talk to might suggest MW3, in the internet, everyone will do the opposite.
Here's my (totally unbiased) breakdown:
If you like fast paced close quarters gunplay, prefer campaign mode and co-op, like games that look decent but don't need a lot of power in your set up to run, and have a more individual skill focus then on teamwork and strategizing, and you hate Origin, MW3 is for you.
If you don't care for campaign and co-op very much, like big open battlefields (lol), various vehicles you don't need to earn to use, teamwork and strategizing (best with a good clan and squad), have a great PC set up and hopefully some friends to play it with (it plays WAY better with a squad of buddies), then BF3 is for you.
Both games are pretty good, after MW2 I've always considered the MW series to belong on consoles more though so if you don't have any consoles and are asking specifically for PC here (which you probably are given the board), then I think its a better fit with a gamepad, has fun splitscreen and is more optimized for consoles with its engine, though its still a blast on PC. BF3 is MUCH more suitable on PC though then on consoles, has a larger PC community, and if you can get a good squad going, deal with some launch balance issues and deal with battlelog, then I think you'll enjoy it.
Personally if you haven't gotten into either series before then its a big coin toss since you could love either one. Maybe go with the series you've played and enjoyed before (or conversely, try something new).
Now that I've told you my unbiased breakdown, I'll say that I haven't played much of MW3, though I did enjoy it, but I own BF3 and I enjoy that too. BF3's multiplayer is undoubtedly better in my opinion but BF3's co-op and campaign feel really tacked on and suffer compared to MW3, though I didn't care for MW3's multiplayer that much since it was a bit too hectic and reminiscent of MW2 (which I played way too much of).
In my opinion, multiplayer goes to BF3, other modes go to MW3.
I think I would say it like this:
If you prefer a more lone wolf approach, and more arcady MP, good SP, and Co-OPthen MW3 is for you.
If you prefer teamplay oriented MP, with big scale, and vehicles, so-so Sp campaign andCO-OPthen BF3 is for you.
To be honest despite the talk of SP and Co-OP most people only play MP. (well CO-OP is MP but anyways :P)
so it really comes down to what you prefer MP wise.
No bias, no hate, and no fanboyism here, the MP part of the games are very unfamilier with one another. I prefer BF3, mainly due to the thrills of coordinated attacks and defences, the sheer chaos and flexibility the MP has.
That does not mean that I will sell MW3 short, there is alot to say for easy to pick up, more arcadey fps fun. which requires far less time, and can be almost over the top silly (in a good way).
So in the end it comes down to the individual, and what they seek. So Im afraid no one can tell you what is the better pick for you.
BF3 = Camper
MW3 = Hacker, Cheater
by the way. i love MW3
momunoy
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=bf3+hacker&oq=bf3+hacker&aq=f&aqi=g2g-s1g7&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=483l2605l0l2701l16l14l2l0l0l0l280l1472l4.5.2l11l0
just saying...
just saying...A lot of those are from BF3 Beta. I've come across about 2 hackers in my 50 hours of play. BF3 has hackers for sure, just not to the extent of CoD.FelipeInside
A lot of those are from BF3 Beta. I've come across about 2 hackers in my 50 hours of play. BF3 has hackers for sure, just not to the extent of CoD. Yeah... seems that the CoD engine is a lot easier to hack then FB2.[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]just saying...
millerlight89
Single player - COD : MW3
Multi-player - BF3gameofthering
^ this.
there is also mw3 vs bf3 poll on this forum you can search for.... it was locked by a biased console gamer moderator .... but its still very telling.... bf3 won around 100-10. 90% of the people on the pc gamer forum prefer bf3. and I'm sure thats for the multiplayer.
and the reason why there is less hackers in bf3..... is because the spotting takes wall hackers out of the game. and because it rewards team play more then a k/d ratio. and so contrary to what many think... camping and getting the most frags... doesn't guarantee your gonna be the top score. In fact if your not a team player... its extremely unlikely.
My personal opinion as follows :
Single player, while both are nothing spectacular I prefare MW3.. As for multiplayer while both are fun, BF3 wins due to its larger scaled maps, vehicles & teamwork possibilities which make the mp experience even better... Mw3's mp is a much more frentic but still fun and there is survival mode which is really good.
However I still hate origin and the frequent freezing or disconnection problems i encounter with BF3, but hopefully these will be sorted soon by DICE/EA..
If i had to suggest which game to buy, well if you're into shooters both differenciate enough from eachother to make it worth getting both.. :)
MW3 is better. I said it earlier too and now the result shows.Want a good game? Get BF3.
Am_Confucius
[QUOTE="millerlight89"]A lot of those are from BF3 Beta. I've come across about 2 hackers in my 50 hours of play. BF3 has hackers for sure, just not to the extent of CoD. Yeah... seems that the CoD engine is a lot easier to hack then FB2. Well it doesn't help that they reuse a crap ton of code. I'm not a programming expert, but I would imagine that creating hacks for one CoD isn't much different from doing it for another. How is Revelations by the way? Pretty solid port? I got it shipped to me on the way, not sure when it will be here as I did the supper saver shipping on Amazon :P. I don't need it here anyways while I have final exams for classes.[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]just saying...
FelipeInside
MW3 is better. I said it earlier too and now the result shows. Both games have their ups and downs. BF3 is my personal choice for MP at the time being, but nothing shows where one is better from another..... of course graphics is a total different game though.[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]
Want a good game? Get BF3.
true_gamer007
[QUOTE="millerlight89"]A lot of those are from BF3 Beta. I've come across about 2 hackers in my 50 hours of play. BF3 has hackers for sure, just not to the extent of CoD. Yeah... seems that the CoD engine is a lot easier to hack then FB2. BF games aren't any easier/harder to hack than COD 4, AA and various freelance bot programmers have proven this as well as the fact that a little too much information is handled on the client side(much like the old days of WoW :lol: ), but having admins on dedicated servers that will ban players for suspicious behavior as well as having servers that people want to go back to will make bot users less obvious, but for example a guy I've seen had his weapon accuracies around 30% and this was in his first 3 hours of playing and all he had to do was grind his stats(especially his accuracy) down and play normally so the admin would let him stay, and luckily for him the admin was kind, I wouldn't be so. The unfortunate part of MWF3 is that to even access the server browser for unranked dedicated servers, one must first enable it in options so as far as a lot of the players can tell at first glance, it's not even available. Even then, IIRC the lag compensation on the ranked but p2p servers tries to even out everyone's connection advantage/disadvantage so the games play a bit more fairly, whereas previously on COD p2p, hoster always had the advantage, and of course people who abused this would be upset with lag compensation since things are no longer in their favor. I haven't been playing much of either game lately with ACR, BAC, SR3, and especially Mount & Blade as of late on my plate, but as someone who really likes gifting games to friends, I don't see myself gifting MWF3 very often considering it's never on sale when one of the big selling points of PC, especially for avid gamers like myself, is saving tons of money from game sales. Heck, even Blizzard had a sale recently for SC2, and guess what, I gifted it to two friends, that's two sales they wouldn't get otherwise...[QUOTE="FelipeInside"]just saying...
FelipeInside
Not in every category.There's no comparison. BF3 outclasses MW3 on the PC in every category.
airshocker
[QUOTE="airshocker"]
There's no comparison. BF3 outclasses MW3 on the PC in every category.
rhazzy
BF3 dosent outclasses s***...BF3 is a poor game and any other multiplayer shooter on the market is better than bf3...
:lol:[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]Fanboy suggestion? MW3 is a good game too to some people. I never said MW3 isn't a good game.Want a good game? Get BF3.
FelipeInside
BF3 dosent outclasses s***...BF3 is a poor game and any other multiplayer shooter on the market is better than bf3...
rhazzy
On the PC it does. If you don't think so then you've never played a MW game on the PC before.
[QUOTE="rhazzy"]
BF3 dosent outclasses s***...BF3 is a poor game and any other multiplayer shooter on the market is better than bf3...
airshocker
On the PC it does. If you don't think so then you've never played a MW game on the PC before.
On the PC it's great, and BF3 does a lot of things better than MW3, but NOT EVERYTHING. I don't want to go into the whole BF3 vs MW3 things cause it's tiring and they can't be compared anyway.... but to say one game does EVERYTHING better than the other is wrong.BF3 is only good on pc, not so good on console but MW3 is favoured as a whole by both console and pc gamers as sales prove.
I prefer the graphics of BF3 but the origin service hasn't played nice for me. And the disconnects and crashes when getting into a game gets annoying where as MW3 hasn't crashed once on two very different computers.
I like both games but MW3 has been less problematic.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment