Battlefront3.net

Before the games come out(which is soon), lets have a nice little discussion on which you think is better and WHY. The only rule is that you need to back up your statement with logic. No "BF3 PWNS CUZ IT HAS BETTER GRAPHICS. Mw3 WILZ BE A FAIL." None of that. Ok?

I think both games are worth buying. In both games, I can manage team work. As long as you have communication, you can have some pretty awesome teamwork. Battlefield 3 however has the squad system that works similar to Bad Company 2, which is pretty nice being able to spawn on your teammates location. Call of Duty lacks that one thing, and can make it difficult to find your team.

Next, graphics in both games look pretty good. Battlefield 3 obviously has the edge with the very nice Frostbite 2, which was shown off from the beta. Modern Warfare 3 looks to be very similar to Modern Warfare 2, with a twist of graphical styles from Black Ops, so it looks a bit like both.

The gameplay is the biggest factor. I honestly think that Modern Warfare 3 will be a little more fun to play. The formula from Modern Warfare 2 seems to look intact. It is smooth and fast-paced, which is a thing many games lack. Battlefield 3 is obviously a little slower from the beta, which supposedly had a 'small' map, and it seemed you ran for about 30 seconds to a minute to get into the battle. Battlefield 3 also had A LOT of campers. I don't know if it was because it was an open beta, or if I just joined many bad matches, but it was VERY aggravating. Taking 30 seconds to see a lone enemy and get knifed from the back by a camper in the bushes(then repeat.) While Infinty Ward/SledgeHammer stated they are trying to prevent camping for Modern Warfare 3, but we will need to wait and see about that. Modern Warfare is also about fast paced action, which made everybody a bit on the edge of their seat trying to get that last kill.

The single player portions of the two games are both looking amazing. Modern Warfare 3 is to have another over-the-top story that feels like an action movie, while Battlefield 3 shows to be about a tactical squad and have vehicular battles.

I can go on, but I should end my rant and let you guys voice in.

I'll probably grab both of them.

But I've made a mental note to never give Bobby Kotick single cent of profit for any of Call of Duty's extra DLC or subscription junk.

I agree, Skyrim is the best.

Scott wrote:I agree, Skyrim is the best.

Yesterday, I was playing a lot of Bad Company 2 and Killzone 2, and realized they are better than Call of Duty. I will probably end up getting the first Bad Company and see if it still has online, and then sometime pick up Battlefield 3. I am still undecided about Modern Warfare 3. I may skip it so I can guarantee I can afford Twisted Metal

[rant]
There is nothing intelligent in MW3. Mostly what you do is find your victims, shoot em, end of game. You don't have to be an Einstein to win but it all comes down to the one who pulls the fastest trigger. Thus if you have fast reflexes and a great eye sight then you are guaranteed to be a pro at it. The graphics are still great even though it looks just like MW2 but this, in my opinion, is the most idiotic game I've ever seen. Leave it to the kids.

Battlefield 3 has a lot of gameplay elements, a lot. There is so much you can do in this game than just brainlessly shooting everywhere. What's better than flying an M1 Abrams over a ramp and crushing your helpless little foes under the treads? Or even better, blowing up the foundations of a building and again, crushing your helpless little foes inside it. This game can also become frustrating but it all depends on how smart or tactical you are. It's the realism and the vast number of possibilities which makes this game 'fun'. On the note for graphics, they are terribly perfect and nicer than MW3's.
[/rant]