BF3 or MW3???

since they are not out yet I don't know witch is better but, I think BF3 will be better because call of duty is too main stream like it's mostly a bunch of little kids who play it and don't appreciated the game's that are developed better, plus BF3 will have 100000 times better graphics. so all in all BF3 9/10 stars since its not out ATM i cant say 10/10 I don't know what its like yet. and 6/10 for mw3 it has great controls and MP, everything flows great but the story mode is always way too short and its way too over rated.

 

Played the BETA of BF3 and wasnt impressed, buggy as hell, they wont fix all that in what a month?

CoD will be a let down as per usual....

So i think neither are going to be great and worthy of appreciation

 

MW3 atw.

 

Personaly, I don't rate a game by going online. I rate it on the Campaign. The Campaign is basicly what the game is about. Most of the oniline maps take place in a Campaign level. So far, Call of Duty has a VERY good Campaign. As for BF3, as Mission said, Its quite buggy and probaly won't be fixed anytime soon. Right now I'm getting MW3 for sure. I'm probaly getting BF3 to though, So... I'll get back to you on this.


Gummy! <3

 

I have to admit,
I would be a lot more hyped of BF3 if they had vehicles in the BETA which they dont which straight away put me in a bad mood as i was expecting to cruise around in a cheeky jet for a while

 

i absolutely loved BF2 so i know i am going to love BF3
and i dont like the call of duty series (except for good'ol COD:MW)

 

mw3 will be mw2 without stopping power and oneman army,
$60 for 3 hour campaign, patches that shouldve been in mw2 and a map pack,
so yeah Battlefield 3

 

that would have been bad,
as it IS already super buggy, imagine buggy jets errywhere,
oh god the horror,

 

You realize that the BF3 (BF3, by the way, is Battlefield 3, not Battlefield: Bad Company 3) beta is two months old, and a large majority of bugs are already fixed, right?

Also, why does everyone all of a sudden have only $60 to spend? I'm getting both.

 

BF3 =/= BF:BC3. Bad Company is a seperate, spin off series also made by DICE. This game is a direct sequel to Battlefield 2, which was released a good while back. I can't remember if it predates Bad Company 1. I think it might have.

 

i only have played BF3 beta and it was pretty good but of what i have learned of mw3, about its new features makes me like it more so i vote MW3

 

lol new features you make me laugh

 

*throws a pie at gman*

 

I have played MW2 and Black Ops and I have played both Battlefield 2, BF: Bad Company 2 and the BF3 Beta. Here is my two cents.

First of all I'm just going to say this; I have $180 to spend for this gaming season, 60 goes to Batman Arkham City, 60 goes to AC: Revelations. 60 of it could be EA's, or Activision's.

If you want a direct comparison between the games, then you know nothing about FPS games. No two games compare to each other (from different series and occasionally from the same series.) Battlefield is more open, with destructible environments, and larger games. (Meaning players in games then Cod). There are vehicles, and in my opinion, the level up/upgrade system is a heck of a lot better in Battlefield 3 beta then MW2. On the other hand, COD, is focused on "gun on gun" combat. The reason I say this is because there are killstreaks such as the AC130 or the Chopper Gunner from Black Ops.

There are many factors to take into account when playing the games;

Map Size:
Call of Duty is going for smaller maps whilst BF3 is going for Larger maps. Think of it like this, if there was a mall that was the main part of the map, in Cod, you would probably not be able to leave the mall, or have fenced off areas leading you from one side to the other.
Battlefield would have the entire block, where the mall is and possibly even more.
The reason this is important, is because in COD, they are focusing on making the maps smaller because people like the short range. I.e in Bl.Ops, if Summit, Firing Range, or Nuketown, you are almost certain to play on those maps.
In Battlefield, there are many players in one match so if you were to have 12v12 on Nuketown... well things wouldn't be very fun. So the maps are a lot larger.

Players online:
In Cod, there is a large amount of players that sound 10 years old and say "Oh yeah I'm the best at this game, my KD will be 20 this game" and they suck But in Battlefield, it seems to me, (from my experience with the series) that the players who play this are older. Heck in the BF3 beta there isn't even a mute button (or if there is I can't find one).

Realistic/Simplicity.
Lets face the facts, COD is the most unrealistic FPS game that claims to be realistic. If you run behind a metal box in real life, and I have some C4, there is no way the box will not be blown to bits. But thats cod for you, its unrealistic but simple.
In Battlefield, you have a camper in the top floor of a building, well that won't be much of a problem, just C4 it down and watch the camper die. BF3 will be a million times more realistic than MW3.

The controls however, I find that cod has easily won. In Battlefield, the controls, which do follow the same in video games, I find to be a lot more complicated than Cod's. (What I mean by the same as videogames, X for reload, Y for switching to your secondary.) Cod's controls I find to be a lot simpler to use. There are 2 reasons to use your D-Pad, to get your kill streak up, or to use an under-barrel attachment. In BF3, I'm still having a bit of trouble to get used to the D-pad (but I didn't play BF for a long time, I was playing cod. :3)

Graphics:
In my opinion, some call of duty maps could be very nice but BF takes the cake.

Unlocking system:
Cod MW3: You will unlock perks, and guns at certain levels. Attachments and gun proficiencies are unlocked by using the gun and levelling it up. (Idk how though)
BF3: You have 4 classes, with different guns, and levels. When you get a kill, you get your 100 points in 3 places, the gun's level (unlocking attachments), the class level, (unlocking new guns or other stuff) and your overall level (unlocking various different things). When you level up your gun, you get an attachment added to the gun, this is done in game and you get the attachments in game. When you level up a class, you get your unlock but you can't use it in game. When you rank up, you get it after the game but it goes towards the next game. I.e. the 1st rank gives you longer sprinting time.
In my opinion, Black Ops did the best unlocking system since you could choose want you want to a certain point.
------

As to which one I will be buying, Activision will be getting my money.
The reasons why:
1)I don't play single player much, so that part of the game doesn't affect me that much. If it did, I'd be more inclined to BF3 because I loved the BF:BC 1 and 2's campaign.
2) I like the perk system, it gives you a certain strategical element to the game that Battlefield doesn't have. (But Battlefield has a lot more strategy involved let me warn you.
3) I like small maps, and I like 6 v 6. The mini map in the Cod series in a million times more useful than the one in Battlefield as well. If you see where your team mates are, you know your opponents are going to spawn at the other side of the map.
4) I don't really care about the vehicles. Nuff sid.
5) I am looking forwards to Spec Ops. I like playing zombies and Battlefield doesn't have this element.

I might pick up BF eventually but I'm going (already did) preorder MW3 because I just like the Cod series more than BF. And one might say "Cod hasn't added anything new to the game since Cod 4." Yes they haven't but it is still an enjoyable game for most people including myself.

Anyways, I hoped this helped you decide on what game you want to get.