Modern Warfare 2 destroyed Battlefield 3 (GameSpot, Metacritic, Sales)

[QUOTE="Jankarcop"][QUOTE="TREAL_Since"]

MW3 will score higher, sell more, and have more online players. And no, not just because Activision paid everyone off.

TREAL_Since

[QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

[QUOTE="TREAL_Since"]

MW3 will score higher, sell more, and have more online players. And no, not just because Activision paid everyone off.

GTAV2012

Probably true, but this also isn't because it's a better game. It's just more popular.

Instead, we should look at what the game offers. It's not a rehash of MW2. And no, saying that the graphics are the same =/= rehash.

[QUOTE="GTAV2012"][QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

Probably true, but this also isn't because it's a better game. It's just more popular.

TREAL_Since

Instead, we should look at what the game offers. It's not a rehash of MW2. And no, saying that the graphics are the same =/= rehash.

Give it a rest SHR3D.

On topic, I don't think MW2 is "terrible" but I wouldn't even call it good. I'd say mediocre.

[QUOTE="BPoole96"]

MW2 also has a 3.7 user score on metacritic

2Chalupas

So basically what you are saying is people that get paid (directly, or indrectly through ads, by Activision) to review the game, score it a 94.

Customers that actually paid to play the game, score it a 37.

Interesting. :lol:

We are awaiting your reply, TC! :lol:

Am_Confucius

[QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

[QUOTE="TREAL_Since"]

MW3 will score higher, sell more, and have more online players. And no, not just because Activision paid everyone off.

TREAL_Since

Probably true, but this also isn't because it's a better game. It's just more popular.

No, no, no. Read my post, I never say anything about my opinion on MW and I never even mention it being overrated. I was merely saying that review scores, sales, and the size of the community do not make a game good or bad.

[QUOTE="TREAL_Since"]

[QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

Probably true, but this also isn't because it's a better game. It's just more popular.

Blueresident87

No, no, no. Read my post, I never say anything about my opinion on MW and I never even mention it being overrated. I was merely saying that review scores, sales, and the size of the community do not make a game good or bad.

[QUOTE="2Chalupas"]

[QUOTE="BPoole96"]

MW2 also has a 3.7 user score on metacritic

Am_Confucius

So basically what you are saying is people that get paid (directly, or indrectly through ads, by Activision) to review the game, score it a 94.

Customers that actually paid to play the game, score it a 37.

Interesting. :lol:

[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]

[QUOTE="2Chalupas"]

So basically what you are saying is people that get paid (directly, or indrectly through ads, by Activision) to review the game, score it a 94.

Customers that actually paid to play the game, score it a 37.

Interesting. :lol:

GTAV2012

So you're suggesting that none of the users who scored it low have played the game?

sweet elitist attitudes on this board as always. the infinity ward CoD games are a lot of fun. don't really care for the treyarch entries, but to each their own.

[QUOTE="GTAV2012"][QUOTE="Am_Confucius"] We are awaiting your reply, TC! :lol:

turtlethetaffer

So you're suggesting that none of the users who scored it low have played the game?

[QUOTE="turtlethetaffer"]

[QUOTE="GTAV2012"] Here it is: you don't even have to play the game in order to "score" it on MC. So do you understand how bad that argument is?Loegi

So you're suggesting that none of the users who scored it low have played the game?

I never said anything about BF3. Also some user reviews are valid I'd say. you can clearly tell they played the game. I fail to see how a critic's opinion is more valid than a user's.

[QUOTE="Loegi"][QUOTE="turtlethetaffer"]

So you're suggesting that none of the users who scored it low have played the game?

turtlethetaffer

I never said anything about BF3. Also some user reviews are valid I'd say. you can clearly tell they played the game. I fail to see how a critic's opinion is more valid than a user's.

[QUOTE="turtlethetaffer"]

[QUOTE="Loegi"] That's a generalization. I could say that everyone who scored BF3 high hasn't played the game, user scores aren't valid.freedomfreak

I never said anything about BF3. Also some user reviews are valid I'd say. you can clearly tell they played the game. I fail to see how a critic's opinion is more valid than a user's.

so? That doesn't mean every user review is like that. Plus, look at GS's scores recently. They've been the outlier more than a few times.

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"]

[QUOTE="turtlethetaffer"]

I never said anything about BF3. Also some user reviews are valid I'd say. you can clearly tell they played the game. I fail to see how a critic's opinion is more valid than a user's.

turtlethetaffer

so? That doesn't mean every user review is like that. Plus, look at GS's scores recently. They've been the outlier more than a few times.

[QUOTE="Loegi"][QUOTE="turtlethetaffer"]

So you're suggesting that none of the users who scored it low have played the game?

turtlethetaffer

I never said anything about BF3. Also some user reviews are valid I'd say. you can clearly tell they played the game. I fail to see how a critic's opinion is more valid than a user's.

You could have said all that on your real account ...

[QUOTE="turtlethetaffer"]

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"] Because there are a lot of people that just hand out 1s and 10s that corrupt the average scores.Reviewers don't do that.

freedomfreak

so? That doesn't mean every user review is like that. Plus, look at GS's scores recently. They've been the outlier more than a few times.

I think the website Gamefaqs has some decent user reviews, because you actually need to write a review, unlike on this website. Not all user reviews are bad, but I see what you mean.

Battlefield 3 has a slightly lower average 2 years later when standards are higher, yet MW2 is superior? No. An 8.5 on GameSpot now means a heck of a lot more than a 9.0 did 2 years ago. Standards change. Hence why sometimes sequels score less than the predecessor which is clearly inferior.

[QUOTE="BPoole96"]

MW2 also has a 3.7 user score on metacritic

2Chalupas

So basically what you are saying is people that get paid (directly, or indrectly through ads, by Activision) to review the game, score it a 94.

Customers that actually paid to play the game, score it a 37.

Interesting. :lol:

Alot of people don't even play the game before rating. They just jump on the hate train

[QUOTE="2Chalupas"]

[QUOTE="BPoole96"]

MW2 also has a 3.7 user score on metacritic

Am_Confucius

So basically what you are saying is people that get paid (directly, or indrectly through ads, by Activision) to review the game, score it a 94.

Customers that actually paid to play the game, score it a 37.

Interesting. :lol:

I'll tell you something about core gamers in particular. They go above and beyond to voice their opinion. Sometimes to sickening heights. And don't think just because they are core gamers, they're intelligent and provide insightful opinions. There are a lot of dumb ass gamers out there, everywhere lol. Look at Youtube for example. COD videos are bashed and the dislike meter is raped. Do you honestly believe that genuine COD fans coming out of the wood works to bash the game(sure there are some, but not to that extent)? It's Battlefield fans. I'm not calling out Battlefield fans only, though they make up a large number of the hate on the internet. There are also gamers who don't play either game, but hate COD for whatever reason, and they do the same on these sites.People hitching rides on the 'let's bash COD because it's the new thing to do' train.

But know this: for every dislike a COD video gets, there are a thousand fans who don't give a damn. They're playing the game. Numbers don't lie. If someone doesn't like the game, then that is completely acceptable. But to call every COD game since 2007 a rehash is unacceptable in my eyes.

It's not a rehash of MW2. And no, saying that the graphics are the same =/= rehash.

TREAL_Since

Man.. That's like saying that Morgan Webb doesn't look like Dolph Ludgren with a wig on.

[QUOTE="Am_Confucius"]

[QUOTE="2Chalupas"]

So basically what you are saying is people that get paid (directly, or indrectly through ads, by Activision) to review the game, score it a 94.

Customers that actually paid to play the game, score it a 37.

Interesting. :lol:

TREAL_Since

I'll tell you something about core gamers in particular. They go above and beyond to voice their opinion. Sometimes to sickening heights. And don't think, just because they are core gamers, they're intelligent. There are a lot of dumb ass gamers out there lol. Look at Youtube for example. COD videos are bashed and the dislike meter is raped. Do you honestly believe that genuine COD fans coming out of the wood works to bash the game lol (sure there are some, but not to that extent)? It's Battlefield fans. I'm not calling out Battlefield fans only, though they make up a large number of the hate on the internet. There are also gamers who don't play either game, but hate COD for whatever reason, and they do the same on these sites.People hitching rides on the 'let's bash COD because it's the new thing to do' train.

But know this: for every dislike a COD video gets, there are a thousand fans who dont give a damn. They're playing the game. Numbers don't lie. If someone doesn't like the game, then that is completely acceptable. But to call every COD game since 2006 a rehash is unacceptable in my eyes.

[QUOTE="GTAV2012"]Many, many people claim MW2 is a terrible game here on these boards. Many people also claimed prior to release that Battlefield 3 would be something truly special and much better than the CoD franchise. Guess what? Metacritic: MW2 - 94 BF3 - 91 GS: MW2 - 9 BF3 - 8.5 Modern Warfare 2, although being more imbalanced, is the better game by a wide margin. Agreed? The ammo for the CoD haters has run out. They can't turn to GS scores, not to Metacritic scores, not to sales. They have nothing left but their opinion. And we are all laughing.chaplainDMK

Hold on now, BF3 is in nowhere near the bad state BF2 was launched. To this day I cannot play BF2 without it crashing on me within a couple hours. Not even 2142.

[QUOTE="TREAL_Since"]

It's not a rehash of MW2. And no, saying that the graphics are the same =/= rehash.

Lucianu

Man.. That's like saying that Morgan Webb doesn't look like Dolph Ludgren with a wig on.

[QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

[QUOTE="DemoPan7"]nope.avi MW2 = 86 on MC BF3 = 91 on MC PC . GTAV2012

Ownage approved, TC is getting ripped apart

There is no logic in this post^. TC's intent with this thread can't get anymore obvious at this point..

[QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

[QUOTE="TREAL_Since"]A can of problems opens when you say that. If you categorize COD as overrated only because its popular, then bundle Halo, Mario, and Star Craft with it.

freedomfreak

No, no, no. Read my post, I never say anything about my opinion on MW and I never even mention it being overrated. I was merely saying that review scores, sales, and the size of the community do not make a game good or bad.

no it doesint.

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

No, no, no. Read my post, I never say anything about my opinion on MW and I never even mention it being overrated. I was merely saying that review scores, sales, and the size of the community do not make a game good or bad.

finalfantasy94

no it doesint.

Gamespot, metacritic, and sales doesn't change the fact that is was a broken and unbalanced trash of a game.

el3m2tigre

pretty much this and the sp was crap to and proboly one of the worst.

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"] They indicate quality.But everyone has their opinion.freedomfreak

no it doesint.

the point of a review is to tell people the persons opinion. Its not solid fact.

Battlefield 3 has a slightly lower average 2 years later when standards are higher, yet MW2 is superior? No. An 8.5 on GameSpot now means a heck of a lot more than a 9.0 did 2 years ago. Standards change. Hence why sometimes sequels score less than the predecessor which is clearly inferior.

Doolz2024

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

no it doesint.

finalfantasy94

the point of a review is to tell people the person opinion. Its not solid fact.

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"] Yes,they do.It's the point of a review.freedomfreak

the point of a review is to tell people the person opinion. Its not solid fact.

Those are quality judgments, which are inherently subjective and thus, opinion based.

[QUOTE="GTAV2012"][QUOTE="kozzy1234"]

Ownage approved, TC is getting ripped apart

Jebus213

There is no logic in this post^. TC's intent with this thread can't get anymore obvious at this point..

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"] Yes,they do.It's the point of a review.freedomfreak

the point of a review is to tell people the person opinion. Its not solid fact.

Most of it is opinoin. If a game is fun is opinoin. If the game story is good is opinion. If the character are great or suck is opinion. Basicly only thing that can be looked at as fact is tech issues,balance issues and proboly length. After that tis all opinion.

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="Blueresident87"]

No, no, no. Read my post, I never say anything about my opinion on MW and I never even mention it being overrated. I was merely saying that review scores, sales, and the size of the community do not make a game good or bad.

finalfantasy94

no it doesint.

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

the point of a review is to tell people the person opinion. Its not solid fact.

The_Game21x

Those are quality judgments, which are inherently subjective and thus, opinion based.

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

the point of a review is to tell people the person opinion. Its not solid fact.

finalfantasy94

Most of it is opinoin. If a game is fun is opinoin. If the game story is good is opinion. If the character are great or suck is opinion. Basicly only thing that can be looked at as fact is tech issues,balance issues and proboly length. After that tis all opinion.

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"] A review isn't 100% opinion.A game with great production values,great gameplay mechanics and so on are rated high because they are quality.freedomfreak

Most of it is opinoin. If a game is fun is opinoin. If the game story is good is opinion. If the character are great or suck is opinion. Basicly only thing that can be looked at as fact is tech issues,balance issues and proboly length. After that tis all opinion.

[QUOTE="bobbetybob"]For all of MW2's problems at least I never had to spend 20 minutes trying to join games, I find it seriously pathetic that after all the effort they put into BF3 they still can't launch a game without broken servers.SaltyMeatballs

Rubbish.A game like street cleaning simulator has worse production values than Uncharted 3.It doesn't come down to opinion.freedomfreak

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"] A review isn't 100% opinion.A game with great production values,great gameplay mechanics and so on are rated high because they are quality.freedomfreak

Most of it is opinoin. If a game is fun is opinoin. If the game story is good is opinion. If the character are great or suck is opinion. Basicly only thing that can be looked at as fact is tech issues,balance issues and proboly length. After that tis all opinion.

Thank you for proving my point. Since thats what I just said. There are some facts in a review but very little. Most of it though is opinion. If I had to put a percent behind how much opinion is in a review i would put something around 98-99% opinoin with 1 or 2% fact.

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

[QUOTE="GTAV2012"] 94 >>>>>> 91. Yes, I am getting ripped apart by simple logic showing how you Battlefield fans are DESTROYED, I guess... The 360 is the best version of Modern Warfare 2 due to the PC version having no dedicated server. While the best version of Battlefield 3 only managed 91. Such a shame considering the hype for Battlefield 3.GTAV2012

There is no logic in this post^. TC's intent with this thread can't get anymore obvious at this point..

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

Most of it is opinoin. If a game is fun is opinoin. If the game story is good is opinion. If the character are great or suck is opinion. Basicly only thing that can be looked at as fact is tech issues,balance issues and proboly length. After that tis all opinion.

finalfantasy94

Thank you for proving my point. Since thats what I just said. There are some facts in a review but very little. Most of it though is opinion.

Funny part is, the "facts" is the only part of a review nobody ever gives the slightest **** about.

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

[QUOTE="GTAV2012"] 94 >>>>>> 91. Yes, I am getting ripped apart by simple logic showing how you Battlefield fans are DESTROYED, I guess... The 360 is the best version of Modern Warfare 2 due to the PC version having no dedicated server. While the best version of Battlefield 3 only managed 91. Such a shame considering the hype for Battlefield 3.GTAV2012

There is no logic in this post^. TC's intent with this thread can't get anymore obvious at this point..

I'm sorry but arbitrary numbers mean **** Especially when PC has higher standards than console games. Thats why Diablo 2, System Shock 2 or Deus Ex, 3 of the greatest games of all time, scored AA here.

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"][QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

Most of it is opinoin. If a game is fun is opinoin. If the game story is good is opinion. If the character are great or suck is opinion. Basicly only thing that can be looked at as fact is tech issues,balance issues and proboly length. After that tis all opinion.

finalfantasy94

Thank you for proving my point. Since thats what I just said. There are some facts in a review but very little. Most of it though is opinion.

[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"] A review isn't 100% opinion.A game with great production values,great gameplay mechanics and so on are rated high because they are quality.freedomfreak

Those are quality judgments, which are inherently subjective and thus, opinion based.

[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]

[QUOTE="freedomfreak"] There are still factors that indicate quality,like the ones you listed.Saying a reviewer is just a man's opinion is wrong.When a game has a terrible framerate or bad screentearing,it's factual.argetlam00

Thank you for proving my point. Since thats what I just said. There are some facts in a review but very little. Most of it though is opinion.

Funny part is, the "facts" is the only part of a review nobody ever gives the slightest **** about.