What would you rate BF3 and MW3 out of 10

I rate Battlefield 3 a 3/10

I rate MW3 a 10/10

MW3:-10000/10 Liek omg liek ever1buyzzzthiscrappzzz rwah rwah.

BF3:100/10.Leave it to dice to innovate the market and not trying to follow into COD's steps.

Battlefield: 1.5. 1 point for the nice graphics and a half a point because I pity the developers who have to live with the fact that they created such an abomination.

Modern Warfare 3: 10. One of the freshest gems of this console generation.

Battlefield: 1.5. 1 point for the nice graphics and a half a point because I pity the developers who have to live with the fact that they created such an abomination.

Modern Warfare 3: 10. One of the freshest gems of this console generation.

GreySeal9

Freshest gems? are you sure about that?

Modern Warfare 3: 10. One of the freshest gems of this console generation.GreySeal9

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Battlefield: 1.5. 1 point for the nice graphics and a half a point because I pity the developers who have to live with the fact that they created such an abomination.

Modern Warfare 3: 10. One of the freshest gems of this console generation.

jwn25

Freshest gems? are you sure about that?

Absolutely. TBH, I don't think I've ever seen such innovation in an FPS since the original Half-Life.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]Modern Warfare 3: 10. One of the freshest gems of this console generation.khoofia_pika

It absolutely was fresh, which is impressive considering how oversaturated the FPS genre is. Activision is one of the few publishers that still cares about originality and not just milking a franchise 'till the teet is dry. I mean, it may look like the same ol' COD on the surface, but once you look deeper, you'll find a very fresh experience.

[QUOTE="jwn25"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Battlefield: 1.5. 1 point for the nice graphics and a half a point because I pity the developers who have to live with the fact that they created such an abomination.

Modern Warfare 3: 10. One of the freshest gems of this console generation.

GreySeal9

Freshest gems? are you sure about that?

Absolutely. TBH, I don't think I've ever seen such innovation in an FPS since the original Half-Life.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="jwn25"]

Freshest gems? are you sure about that?

jwn25

Absolutely. TBH, I don't think I've ever seen such innovation in an FPS since the original Half-Life.

It's just hella cinematic. And it has tons of innovative explosions. Like I said to that other guy, you gotta look deeper.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="jwn25"]

Freshest gems? are you sure about that?

jwn25

Absolutely. TBH, I don't think I've ever seen such innovation in an FPS since the original Half-Life.

MW3 = (see signature) 6/10 BF3 = haven't played it.SaltyMeatballs

After all the hard work that Infinity Ward put into MW3, I'm rather offended that you've given it such a low score.

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]MW3 = (see signature) 6/10 BF3 = haven't played it.GreySeal9

After all the hard work that Infinity Ward put into MW3, I'm rather offended that you've given it such a low score.

[QUOTE="khoofia_pika"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]Modern Warfare 3: 10. One of the freshest gems of this console generation.GreySeal9

It absolutely was fresh, which is impressive considering how oversaturated the FPS genre is. Activision is one of the few publishers that still cares about originality and not just milking a franchise 'till the teet is dry. I mean, it may look like the same ol' COD on the surface, but once you look deeper, you'll find a very fresh experience.

You have to be trolling :lol:

If not i feel sorry for you :(

Also battlefield 3 i would give a solid 9 and MW3 a 7.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]MW3 = (see signature) 6/10 BF3 = haven't played it.SaltyMeatballs

After all the hard work that Infinity Ward put into MW3, I'm rather offended that you've given it such a low score.

You have found it. You just don't realize it yet. Go play it again and make sure you're in a good mood. The mood you're in when you play it can affect your score.

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

[QUOTE="khoofia_pika"] I loved MW3 and I more or less agree with your score, but no way in hell was MW3 "fresh".dawso0n

It absolutely was fresh, which is impressive considering how oversaturated the FPS genre is. Activision is one of the few publishers that still cares about originality and not just milking a franchise 'till the teet is dry. I mean, it may look like the same ol' COD on the surface, but once you look deeper, you'll find a very fresh experience.

You have to be trolling :lol:

If not i feel sorry for you :(

Also battlefield 3 i would give a solid 9 and MW3 a 7.

No need to feel sorry for me. I have an eye for freshness that other people on this forum simply don't possess.

[QUOTE="jwn25"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

Absolutely. TBH, I don't think I've ever seen such innovation in an FPS since the original Half-Life.

GreySeal9

It's just hella cinematic. And it has tons of innovative explosions. Like I said to that other guy, you gotta look deeper.

innovative explosions?? ROFL

lol, I love you GreySealLonelynight

I love you and all the Asian girls in your sig/avy.

Battlefield 3: 9/10 Game is great! Its just bettor on the pc.

MW3 8.5/10 Same game, still fun.

Both 6/10

MW3 = 5/10

BF3 = 8/10

Battlefield 3 = 7/10 (Fun Game, Weak Campaign, Lacks Polish)

MW3 = 9/10 (More Fun that BF3, Better Campaign, Polished Package)

:? Guess everyone's sarcasm detector is broken...Oil_rope_bombs

I give

MW3 a 8.3657542261 out of 10

and

BF3 a 8.3657542262 out of 10


hooray for meaningless numbers !

[QUOTE="dawso0n"]

[QUOTE="GreySeal9"]

It absolutely was fresh, which is impressive considering how oversaturated the FPS genre is. Activision is one of the few publishers that still cares about originality and not just milking a franchise 'till the teet is dry. I mean, it may look like the same ol' COD on the surface, but once you look deeper, you'll find a very fresh experience.

GreySeal9

You have to be trolling :lol:

If not i feel sorry for you :(

Also battlefield 3 i would give a solid 9 and MW3 a 7.

No need to feel sorry for me. I have an eye for freshness that other people on this forum simply don't possess.

Modern Warfare 3 - 8.0

Battlefield 3 - 7.5

Is this a joke thread or is MW3 actually good?.BigBoss255

Console gamers will give MW3 a higher score as BF3 isnt really that great on consoles ( just like MW3 isnt that great on any platform ) and because a great many of them are console fanboys, while PC gamers will rate BF3 higher because the PC version of BF3 is fairly decent. Personally i dont think either of them deserve the attention they get.

Battlefield 3- 8.5

MW3- 7.75

Medal of Honor- 8

Homefront- 8.5

MAG- 8.25

Socom 4-7

I actually wrote my reasons for the scores but I kept getting the error code. It would be nice it they would fix their damn message board.

I would rate them both a NA/10. Haven't played either.

MW 3: 10/10 Doesn't change anything which is good. Change is scary.

Battlefield 3: 1/10: It looks different. Dice screwed up big time.

Seems people would remember...anything that is socially accepted and looked at as "great" is disliked on these forums...MW3 is great,fun,and the single player is sweet..BF3 is awesome as well..Both different in their own rights.

Pc or console? Huge difference.

lol 'Dice screwed up big time'. F***ing dumbass, they screwed up all the way to the bank.

Anyway I'd score the games 8.5 and 8.5

Being the picky type as I am, I think I would score the games around this (and no this really is not trolling.

BF3: 7.0 (Its a fairly good BF game, but in all honesty despite all the tech, all the flash, its still a step back from BF2, they went the wrong way with htis one, and they should not have bothered with SP at all, The pacing often feels wrong, and the maps somehow comes off as shallow despite how much effort that has been put into them, sure the karkand maps are really good, but they ARE remakes and mostly from BF2, which itself tells a sad tale, BF3 does try to push some boundries tho, and for that it needs some recognision, especially in tech, with visual and sound. Gamewise? It feels a bit like a downscaled version of BF2, the lack of a commander is jarring attimes, as squads often run around like headless chickens, For a teamplay focused game, the lack of an overseer is a mig bisstep in my oppinion.).

MW3: 6.5 (Its MW, its basicly an expansionpack, there is not THAT much new content here to wattent its pricetag, while CoD4 was pretty refreshing this series has goone bsyond stale, and is pretty much the game version of a Michael Bay movie, lots of flash no substance. The MP part is as solid as it always had, but its not a hardcore game, and does not require skill, so comparing it to halo, CS, Quake and UT is pretty fail, this is the arena shooters version of training wheels. It does better on console then PC, console is where it shines, but it is nowhere near as innovative as people claim, all it really did was to throw instant rewards at players with short attentionspan. Good game, but only that. The shining part of the MW3 package is the Co-OP missions, which are pretty darn fun, and interresting, and for me the games saving grace.

[QUOTE="khoofia_pika"][QUOTE="GreySeal9"]Modern Warfare 3: 10. One of the freshest gems of this console generation.GreySeal9

It absolutely was fresh, which is impressive considering how oversaturated the FPS genre is. Activision is one of the few publishers that still cares about originality and not just milking a franchise 'till the teet is dry. I mean, it may look like the same ol' COD on the surface, but once you look deeper, you'll find a very fresh experience.

[QUOTE="BigBoss255"]Is this a joke thread or is MW3 actually good?.pelvist

Console gamers will give MW3 a higher score as BF3 isnt really that great on consoles ( just like MW3 isnt that great on any platform ) and because a great many of them are console fanboys, while PC gamers will rate BF3 higher because the PC version of BF3 is fairly decent. Personally i dont think either of them deserve the attention they get.

Though this is obviously a troll thread,

I'd give them both about a 7 I guess. I'm starting to get bored of FPS games that don't try to innovate and just have the goal of being prettier then the last game with a few additions.

BF3 is a 7, but I'd easily put at an 8 or 9 based on multiplayer alone, yet the co-op and campaign are so tacked on and terrible it ruins the whole package. Plus I think its a bit TOO buggy and feels rushed. As great as 64 player matches online are, DICE also made some balancing goofs in the maps and weapons that tick me off. Mostly though, I'm just angry the campaign was so terrible when I was so hyped for it.

MW3 I put at a 7 because though its fun and classic CoD fun, it doesn't do anything new. It offers a few new game modes and guns and stuff, but it feels like a big expansion to me, and while the campaign and co-op are pretty fun and co-op really does something new, I think the campaign's linearity and short length are starting to become really detrimental, while the co-op's 2 player limit is an odd choice for a survival style mode and the MP is.... well, more of the same, + Kill Confirmed and some changed streaks.

Overall, I think both game series need to make some changes in the coming sequels. The CoD games need an engine change, some PC love (mods, lean and dedicated servers), plus an update in campaign (longer + less linear, at least as open as CoD4), an update in co-op (just a change from 2 to 4 players would work), and a serious multiplayer update in new game modes, maps, gameplay mechanics, etc. Like Black Ops did for the series online, at least that much change.

BF4 could benefit from either removing campaign and co-op from the equation and being all big multiplayer instead of trying to go for the CoD audience, or they could at least devote an extra team or more of the budget on making a not terrible campaign and co-op. The original Bad Company game had a nice template to go off of, just give it a more serious (non cliched) story, with a set piece or two tossed in. As a big co-op fan it would be nice if they could make the campaign co-op, but a separate 4 player co-op mode would be nice too.