The People have Spoken: Modern Warfare 3 is better than Battlefield 3

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]lolvgaWickoSicko

You're so full of $#@^...

Well they are not to be taken seriously but who cares. The jokes are bad, the awards are BS, but we do get some premiers out of it.

[QUOTE="MlauTheDaft"]

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

The games aren't chosen by people online. Considering how BF fanboys completely downvoted MW3 on metacritic, does anyone really believe MW3 would have won if they allowed those same people the opportunity to pick BF3 over MW3 in Shooter of the Year?

They have judges instead, which honestly makes sense since people are idiots and you can't just turn it into a popularity contest.

SPYDER0416

I believe a worthy parellel is the "workplace of the year" award in my country.

Basically it's a large scale interview endeavour to gauge where the happiest employees are.

Catch is that a company has to pay one of two fees, depending on it's size, to participate and as such, your prestigeous reward merely reflects that you had the happiest employees out of the companies, who felt the PR was worthwhile.

For reference, Mcdonalds took one of the awards this year in Denmark, how do you rate a McDonalds job on your top 10?

Um... what?

Please give me some of what you are smoking, because it would let me make more sense of what you are saying.

It's called sense. I respect your MTV generational view of being swayed by what TV tells you, but you lack skeptisiscm and you seem far from the type of person to actually check your sources.

I still don't get it. Skyrim took the cake and frosting too at the VGA. Neither MW3 nor BF3 won GOTY at the VGA. Whatever their fans are fighting about, it's like fighting for scraps from a trash bin.

lolvgaBrunoBRS

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]lolvgaWickoSicko

the only thing they both have in common are disappointing winners

vgas have been a joke for a long time. Only thing good from them are the trailers.

The dataset for VGA is laughable.

As has been mentioned:

1. If you can watch these awards, chances are you are < 17 yrs old
2. If you are < 17 yrs old chances are you are a CoD ... fan

The dataset for VGA is laughable.

As has been mentioned:

1. If you can watch these awards, chances are you are < 17 yrs old
2. If you are < 17 yrs old chances are you are a CoD ... fan

haberman13

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]lolvgaWickoSicko

Both are disappointing

I dont understand why this is shocking to anyone? What is it about BF3 that the PC fanboys seems to think makes it so revolutionary? Get past the visuals, what is is so awesome? Huge maps? Whoooooopeeeeeee!! Vehicles?? Those who drive/hog vehicles in BF3 are 100 times more annoying than the noob tubers or corner campers in MW3. Ability to go prone?? Oh yeah, that hasn't been done before? Heck, even the environmental damaging took a step back from BFBC2 Imo!!! MW3 has nice visuals, fast, fluid gameplay, awesome maps(in general) and tons of game modes!!!ShoTTyMcNaDeS

What is it about MW3 that derpdaderpdatiddelytum?

Halo Anniversaryis better than both.

Oh and lolvga

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]lolvgaWickoSicko

Its the gaming equivalent of the MTV awards... It's a fluff piece. You can easily predict Halo 4 getting best MP next year because that's what the main demographic expects.

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

[QUOTE="MlauTheDaft"]

I believe a worthy parellel is the "workplace of the year" award in my country.

Basically it's a large scale interview endeavour to gauge where the happiest employees are.

Catch is that a company has to pay one of two fees, depending on it's size, to participate and as such, your prestigeous reward merely reflects that you had the happiest employees out of the companies, who felt the PR was worthwhile.

For reference, Mcdonalds took one of the awards this year in Denmark, how do you rate a McDonalds job on your top 10?

MlauTheDaft

Um... what?

Please give me some of what you are smoking, because it would let me make more sense of what you are saying.

It's called sense. I respect your MTV generational view of being swayed by what TV tells you, but you lack skeptisiscm and you seem far from the type of person to actually check your sources.

Its nice to know you think the judges were paid off because they had an opinion you don't agree with. That's nice, do you think the moon landing was faked too while we're at the retarded conspiracy theories phase?

If BF3 was voted the best shooter, I can see all haters here calling VGA the best show in the gaming industry. :lol: Or can I? :(WickoSicko

If BF3 was voted the best shooter, I can see all haters here calling VGA the best show in the gaming industry. :lol: Or can I? :(WickoSicko

If BF3 was voted the best shooter, I can see all haters here calling VGA the best show in the gaming industry. :lol: Or can I? :(WickoSicko

People would probably still get mad, not the BF fanboys of course, but the MW fanboys, the people who played and liked RAGE (wherever you are), and the people who consider Deus Ex and FPS and are shocked it wasn't even nominated.

Different opinions, for some people it needs to be the sole opinion. Of course SW wouldn't be as interesting if everyone agreed on everything and there was a factual, objective choice for a clear winner when the different technical aspects and various gameplay design decisions make it like 95% opinion.

[QUOTE="DrHousesCane"][QUOTE="kris9031998"] They gave Portal 2 best multiplayer. kris9031998

There is more to a game then length and replayability. Other factors like polish, fun, innovation, variety, etc. Those all come into factor. I wouldn't have picked Portal 2 myself, but its clear the judges must have freaking loved it, and admittedly it gets a lot of bonus points in the unique and pure fun category.

[QUOTE="kris9031998"][QUOTE="DrHousesCane"] Well deserved :cool:SPYDER0416

There is more to a game then length and replayability. Other factors like polish, fun, innovation, variety, etc. Those all come into factor. I wouldn't have picked Portal 2 myself, but its clear the judges must have freaking loved it, and admittedly it gets a lot of bonus points in the unique and pure fun category.

[QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]lolvgaWickoSicko

The Oscars are a pretegious show adored by pretty much everyone in the movie business, and by cinephiles, the VGAs are a low brow hour long advertisement popularity contest aimed at the MTV generation and is despised by pretty much everyone who has even an ounce of love for gaming. :roll:

The Witcher 2 didn't even get nominated for best RPG :|

[QUOTE="WickoSicko"][QUOTE="BrunoBRS"]lolvgaPeredith

The Oscars are a pretegious show adored by pretty much everyone in the movie business, and by cinephiles, the VGAs are a low brow hour long advertisement popularity contest aimed at the MTV generation and is despised by pretty much everyone who has even an ounce of love for gaming. :roll:

The Witcher 2 didn't even get nominated for best RPG :|

I don't know, the Oscars are pretty terrible.

Remember when they gave Shakespeare in Love Best Picture over frakking Saving Private Ryan?

What a snub.

VGA's demographic is obviously teens. The winner is no surprise, the nominees are laughable.

It's the same thing as Twilight winning the MTV awards.

This is the same VGA that didn't put Battlefield 3, Crysis 2, or The Witcher 2 on the best graphics list.Zero5000X

[QUOTE="SPYDER0416"]

[QUOTE="kris9031998"] Sorry, but as much as i love portal 2 (pre-ordered and helped with the early launch on steam), the multiplayer is not MOTY. I mean its fun and all, but short and the replayability is honestly pretty low.kris9031998

There is more to a game then length and replayability. Other factors like polish, fun, innovation, variety, etc. Those all come into factor. I wouldn't have picked Portal 2 myself, but its clear the judges must have freaking loved it, and admittedly it gets a lot of bonus points in the unique and pure fun category.

Well I think the concept of Portal is innovative and unique, and considering no game has ever done two player portal based puzzle solving, that is pretty damn unique.

Personally I would have given best multiplayer to Battlefield 3, but I can see how some people would try to weigh the multiplayer of Portal 2 in as well. It was damned original I think, so it deserves recognition for doing that, even if you wouldn't consider it the "best".

Honestly though, the VGA's are still in that halfway zone between mainstream and trying to appease more hardcore gamers. It kind of fails for doing that, but hopefully the awards seem to be judged by game journalists instead of being a popularity contest.

MW3 > BF3 deal with it, it is the gamers choice n the internet votes have spoken. its pretty much the usa has spoken really. overall the better game.

Modern Warfare 3 is crowned the "Shooter of the Year" at Spike VGA -- the Oscars of the video games. Apparently, gamers like Modern Warfare 3 more. :)WickoSicko

More people bought MW3 so obviously it will get more votes

[QUOTE="WickoSicko"]Modern Warfare 3 is crowned the "Shooter of the Year" at Spike VGA -- the Oscars of the video games. Apparently, gamers like Modern Warfare 3 more. :)Cloud567kar

More people bought MW3 so obviously it will get more votes

Well,

1. The voting was done by a panel of judges, not the gaming public, for shooter of the year

2. If it was an internet voting thing, you really don't think the thousands of BF fanboys who downvoted MW3 wouldn't have ensured a landslide victory for BF3?

Also, does anyone else feel like there are more MW3 fanboys then normal? I'm used to BF3 fanboys clogging up the internet, though I guess these guyes are just excited at the win. Hooray?

MW3 looks, sounds, and plays like a game from 2007.Stringerboy

[QUOTE="Stringerboy"] MW3 looks, sounds, and plays like a game from 2007.Master_ShakeXXX

COD4 = 2007.

MW2, Black Ops, and MW3 all run off that engine and essentially look the same.

Therefore, MW3 = 2007.

[QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"][QUOTE="Stringerboy"] MW3 looks, sounds, and plays like a game from 2007.princeofshapeir

COD4 = 2007.

MW2, Black Ops, and MW3 all run off that engine and essentially look the same.

Therefore, MW3 = 2007.

Its not like they don't update the graphics or anything just because its on the same engine.

Max Payne 3 is using the same engine GTA IV was on, and GTA IV was meant to come out in 2007 too. Don't forget that the Source engine is freaking 7 years old and its still Valve's main Engine.

Though I have to admit, and engine change would be very necessary for the next IW CoD game if they want to stay fresh. As a bonus it would not only appease all the people complaining about the engine, but its not such a big change any stalwart anti change people would freak out. Its the best way to play it safe while actually improving.

[QUOTE="princeofshapeir"]

[QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"] Eh, I'd say more like a game from 2009. It still feels really outdated though, especially is the sound and physics department. Weapons have no recoil and sound like cap guns. It's pretty embarrassing... SPYDER0416

COD4 = 2007.

MW2, Black Ops, and MW3 all run off that engine and essentially look the same.

Therefore, MW3 = 2007.

Its not like they don't update the graphics or anything just because its on the same engine.

Max Payne 3 is using the same engine GTA IV was on, and GTA IV was meant to come out in 2007 too. Don't forget that the Source engine is freaking 7 years old and its still Valve's main Engine.

Though I have to admit, and engine change would be very necessary for the next IW CoD game if they want to stay fresh. As a bonus it would not only appease all the people complaining about the engine, but its not such a big change any stalwart anti change people would freak out. Its the best way to play it safe while actually improving.

Did anyone tell you that Activison was a sponser for the VGAs?? There's your answer.

This is the same VGA that didn't put Battlefield 3, Crysis 2, or The Witcher 2 on the best graphics list.Zero5000X

and gamespot gave best technical graphics a few years ago to Metal Gear Solid 4 over Crysis.... yet here you are.

You people really should educate yourselves.... the VGA's are chosen by the same people that we "trust" to review games... aka. "gaming journalists" and such.... the voting was not done by us gamers....

.... so it looks like MW3 is considered better overall.... oh well, back to SKYRIM & ZELDA, ta-ta!

I love it when OP's only reply to the easy posters, while the ones who are sharing legitimate answers or replys get ignored to no end.

So is the contest by Axe body spray where BF3 had the entire world on lock down with Internet users choices still a viable argument to what is better?