BF3/MW3

They've been using the same engine for so long right now, that is such a lame excuse. The frostbite engine has been getting better and better each game.

We'll just have to wait and see.

To me, that guy seemed a little to hung up on the whole frames per second thing.

Why should it matter that it's running a 60 FPS?  That's not going to revolutionize anything if all they do every year is reruns of the same type of game.

i dont think the last two games had that great of MP. It was very unbalanced and the servers werent to great. not being able to talk to everyone on your team? wtf is that?

and the team killing..... that made me quit the game

idk why everyone is so excited for this one

[quote user="xS1LENTSCOPEx"]

i dont think the last two games had that great of MP. It was very unbalanced and the servers werent to great. not being able to talk to everyone on your team? wtf is that?

and the team killing..... that made me quit the game

idk why everyone is so excited for this one

Im going to assume you're talking about Battlefield.

What exactly is unbalanced about Battlefield? I've never called something out for being unbalanced unless it be a weapon that I feel is taking me out too quickly but Call Of Duty is also known for having those "go to" weapons.

I'll give you the servers weren't to great at first but like always the servers were ready to go in a few days like usual.

The whole talking to your team thing I'm not entirely sure why people argue this especially with the option of party chat. Also 12 people talking all at once about what's happening on the battlefield would be a little too much. I've had full rooms of Call Of Duty teams talking and theres no way I could handle double that, Also the new system they have with the Back button in BFBC2 works really well. To be honest though I guess I wouldn't mind the team broken up into 2 squads of 6, so you could talk to atleast half your team but of course that would ruin the squad system they have.

Team killing? Wouldn't know about that because I do not play Hardcore.


Although I'm a fan of both games, I have to say that BF3 is clearly on top when you compare these two right up next to eachother. Especially after seeing that MW3 demo at E3, yikes. I was bored just watching the video. The way I see it BF3 is taking a step forward while MW3 is going with the same old formula that they know will sell.  The only thing that bothered me about the article is how he went with the 60fps arguement, like really MW3 probably won't even have maps half the size of the maps that will be in BF3. Now put map size, building destruction and actually all kinds of enviroment destruction, and vehicles. Pfft I'd give up 60fps for all of that any day.

Then again you also don't have to compare these two and just enjoy both FPS titles.

Wow , he wasnt mixing his words or messing about was he ! I think we will just have to wait and see what happens when both games come out.

Battlefield bc2 just didn't have the same feel as bc1 did.. If bc2 is anything to go by battlefield 3 will be horrible..with broken servers from day 1 .. As per usual with bf games..

Saying that though mw3 will probably be hacked and broken within a month .. So either way it's lose lose

I think he forgot to mention Call of Duty on runs at full 60fps in the campaign and not in the multiplayer .... (Consoles)

I'm hoping they understand that the game will be packed Day 1 and not *** up the servers this time.