Battlefield 3 vs. Modern Warfare 3

--Quickly typed this up, excuse errors. Didn't proof-read.--

It wasn't much of a battle before this year, but with Modern Warfare 3 and Battlefield 3 being released less than a month apart from each other this Fall, it's really started to heat up. But which franchise is better? 


If you ask me, it's a short argument. As with most disputes between two things, it's a matter of personal preference. For that reason, it's hard to really say which is better - especially since the two games really do differ quite a bit. 

Similarities first, they're obviously both modern war-time FPSs - that's essentially where the similarities end. If you've played both of these games, they play completely differently. Battlefield makes teamwork a necessity, while in Call of Duty, you can hop in a match of Team Deathmatch by yourself, play without a headset, and do quite well. If you aren't in a good, communicative squad on Battlefield, you can bet your @@@ is going to be had more often than not. 

It's not to say Call of Duty doesn't require tactical skill, because it does, but in comparison to Battlefield, it's not even close. Call of Duty's maps are minuscule when sided against Battlefield's, and in most game modes, allow for 12 players tops, while in Battlefield 3, you can have 12 per team. While Call of Duty has more gametypes that require objectives to be completed online, it's more of a challenge, and feels much more rewarding in Battlefield for the most part, for that reason. 

It may be stupid of me to say, considering I prefer Call of Duty to Battlefield, but it's just the truth. Battlefield is a much more cerebral game overall than Call of Duty. As you've probably read elsewhere, Call of Duty caters more to the casual player, while hardcore players will tend to maybe prefer Battlefield. It's not to say there's only one way to go - there are plenty of people that play and enjoy both games. 

In short, again, it's about personal preference. These two franchises are really quite different, and there just aren't that many similarities between the two. Tend to play alone? Go for Call of Duty. Like communicating and teamwork? Battlefield. Either way you go, you'll more than likely have a good time.

 

Discussion Info


Last updated July 3, 2018 Views 0 Applies to:

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.

I agree with everything you said except to me, I like them both the same.

Have you seen the MW3 multiplayer ? It looks 10 years old. Anyone who buys MW3 will most likely be sorry for doing it. Microsoft backed the wrong game this time.

COD campaign cool,i like!COD mp same old,same old.BF3 campaign cool,BF3 mp,best MP ever made!

It doesn't matter to me because I will play both, like I always have.

[quote user="BADNOMAD"]

Have you seen the MW3 multiplayer ? It looks 10 years old. Anyone who buys MW3 will most likely be sorry for doing it. Microsoft backed the wrong game this time.

[/quote]

I respectfully disagree. The graphics for MW3 look pretty damn good imo. It's the rest of the game I'm worried about, but it wouldn't be the first time I've felt sorry for buying a game.

Battlefield 3 is better when it comes to technological prowess and fun, while call of duty is a game that is good at what it offers on existing foundations. Everyone knows which game is pushing the limit, we just don't care because we will all pick the game we like already and have the most fun playing. In my case its bf3.

I dont think anyone will feel sorry for buying CoD. Lets be honest here, Cod and BF are arguably the two most anticipated and loved games on the xbox. As much as people (and I many times) gripe and say how overplayed and bad cod is, no other games (shooters) stack up to it.

.

We just have these absurd expectations but the game cant live up to it. Personally I am looking forward to BF more, but when I need a shooter to play, I know I can always count on Cod and BF for a solid gaming experience.

I saw a bit of MW3 MP today,and apart from some differences like the point based rewards system instead of just killstreaks(like MOH already did)and some other stuff,it looked very similar to MW2/BLOPS nothing different really.Graphics nothing special at all.Not anything like BF3 imo.Same old COD really.COD fans won't be dissapointed cos its what they like and thats cool.For me BF3 is gonna be new and different and much improved.I'm not really that excited about MW3.Will prob rent or pick it up cheap later for the campaign,Won't spend too much time on it though and won't touch the MP.

I'm getting both because both of these games are completely different....MW3 because I like to get killstreaks and own noobs and trashtalk; BF3 because I like a challenge and teamwork....only problem I have is going to be finding time to play  because im deployed right now and real gunfights are way more exciting then any video game

COD multiplayer game engine is ancient history.  It was nothing more then  map packs after COD4.  Also its been on the decline at a fast rate after COD4.  Besides a COD game every year got stale for me fast and expensive and lacked replay value.  Also the COD community isn't that appealing to me.  Tons of little squeak box kids jingling there cookies in there milk glass.

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.

* Please try a lower page number.

* Please enter only numbers.