Battlefield 3 vs. Modern Warfare 3: In Your Own Words

What are people saying about two of the biggest first-person shooters of the year?

The battle between Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3 has arguably been one of the most contentious in recent memory and has sparked heated discussions as to which military-style first-person shooter is better than the other. We jumped into the comments for the video reviews of Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3 to find out which words and descriptors you, our GameSpot readers, used most frequently in response to either game. The results are displayed below in the word clouds with Battlefield 3 on the left and Modern Warfare 3 on the right.

Click the image for the full-sized version.

Got a news tip or want to contact us directly? Email news@gamespot.com

Did you enjoy this article?

Sign In to Upvote

503 comments
Jmaster211
Jmaster211

@GamerNerdTalk lol, I totally agree. Although Deus Ex was more of an RPG, I feel it was more fun than both of these games. No offense to big COD and BF3 fans.

GamerNerdTalk
GamerNerdTalk

Is this FPS of the year then I would say Deus Ex: Human Revolution.... However looks like I can't pick that for some reason, thus I choose..... Call of Field: Battle-Warfare 3

Dexodrill
Dexodrill

Im shocked, I love BF3 and cant beleave ppl compare. BF3 is a Massive War game aka Tanks planes ect And yet MW3 Is almost all foot-based isn't it? Now I say BF3 Takes the cake as BF3 for me is a 9.5 and MW3 is a 7, And don't hate me CoD fans but the Graphics and Gameplay look and Feel just like the ones before, And BF3 Feels alot better then BF2 and certainly Hits Alot Higher in Graphics and Over all Fun. Don't hate Im just saying my own thing, You have yours, I have Mine.

Robotman170
Robotman170

@babamaal I think u got that the wrong way round BF3=epic action mw3=havent i played this game before

tomclancyhaha
tomclancyhaha

Modern Warfare 3 was a disappointment, except for its Special ops which was the boss! but Battlefield's campaign and multiplayer beat MW3 in any way. Battlefield 3 was new, enjoyed fantastic graphics and visuals and its campaign was like watching a movie like Die Hard 4 but some missions in Modern Warfare 3 reminded me of fast forwarding Charlie Chaplin films, like that mission in which you chase a car in Paris and its graphics were really nothing new. Modern Warfare 3: 8.5, Battlefield 3: 9.0 (however I used to hail MW3 before they were released... I'm glad I kept this a secret, wait, was that loud?)

Karikma
Karikma

I don't agree that BF3 is BF 2.5 but i do agree that MW3 is MW 2.5 even to saying they should have released it as $30 xpac. Dice put alot of work into making thier title and i believe they deserve the title of King of FPS this year round. MW on the hand, is developed by multiple companies and has had years + a bottomless budget from revenues to improve thier game engine and mechanics but they decided to be lazy and bring out a title that is virtually identical to MW2. Still at times BF feels like and expanded version of Socom 4 due to the lack of truly diverse maps and character skins, but thats nothing a couple snow and jungle maps couldnt fix. MW is like a pair of old shoes you can slip on and feel comfortable with once you master it and that appeal has me playing it occasionally, yet the crown still goes to battlefield 3.

iamcj007
iamcj007

@to_all_people_whining_about_COD_engine: You think Activision doesn't have enough money to build an engine of Frost-bite quality.... Think Again...They keep this engine because for the well optimized single player and fast paced Multiplayer for which COD is known for.... BF3 is known for More tactical approach.... and frostbite does their job... SO when BF3 tried to do a COD Job in SP... it got sucky...

akuya32
akuya32

Both games are a better version of their last hit. BF3 is a BFBC 2.5 and MW3 is a MW2.5. With that said, I think both games are great games. I think sound and visuals go to BF3 hands down. I think gameplay and the addiction factor goes to MW3. I enjoy and play both games, but I do tend to play MW3 a little more cause its a little faster pace and addicting. The winner is me cause I get to enjoy both titles when I choose.

mojado602
mojado602

bf3 is a better game. mw3 they took a step back because its no mw2.

sarsajjadiyan
sarsajjadiyan

when the story in bf3 is su&/in' , It means the singleplayer or campaign mode is not good enough. It's the biggest weakness bros. and the graphicals in mw3 are su&/in' , they should modernize their games. WUSIC

babamaal
babamaal

Can we compare NFS with Forza??? Of course not and that won't make any sense. In similar case both games are different to each other.This hype was created by social media and Girls.

babamaal
babamaal

Skyrim is ripped off of Red dead Redemption set in old century and just replaced adventure items with old inventory. fanboys can argue on this fact for eternal but won't accept the truth.

babamaal
babamaal

MW3 is for Men BF3 is for Girls. No fight please.

Shooter747
Shooter747

MW3 for fast pace action and offers gamer varieties to be the best of them all BF3 for slower team oriented calculative objective focus game play

Saamic
Saamic

@dnvick I completely agree Battlefield 3 is a more realistic war simulation shooter that incorperates classes with certain abilities, team cooperation, vehicles, along with more realistic interactive enviroments and physics Modern Warfare 3 is just a more arcade spin-off on a war simulation shooter that has only on-foot combat with some arcade like mechanics like instantaneously killing someone with the brief swipe of a knife and certain perks, killstreaks, less realistic physics, and smaller enviroments designed for face-paced combat.

Saamic
Saamic

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

dnvick
dnvick

BF3=great realistic military shooter MW3= great arcade military shooter

asapco
asapco

I love both games, but MW3 lacked the innovation to win my money this time around. Sorry

asapco
asapco

I love both series, but MW3 lacked the innovation this time around to grab my money. Sorry.

shahramyari
shahramyari

mw3 is the king!!!!!! graphic details and textures on objects such as guns.cloths of soldiers are amazingly high.in addition excitement of firing from AC130 in the air and using VULCAN MINIGUN make me crazzzyyyy.tnxxx infinity ward.

nemesi609
nemesi609

i dont like this comparison, its kind of ironic, but ultimately serves no purpose. just doesnt do it for me.

dioroq
dioroq

Wait... why was "original" in mw3? I mean, it's prety much the same as mw2...

Skrilla_XS
Skrilla_XS

But seriously, fun factor=Battlefield, competition=MW3

Skrilla_XS
Skrilla_XS

[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

stewart8smith
stewart8smith

Single player BF3 looks better but does not play better. Multiplayer BF3 is better although for sheer running and gunning MW3 takes it. In operations MW3 is far better with survival and numerous missions. Really Battlefield you get because the large scale multiplayer is great fun but MW3 is competitive multiplayer at its best. :)

firedrakes
firedrakes

yeah single player for bf3 was sad. look good thu. mw3 single player finish a story. now multi player for it mostly the same. which is not a bad thing if . it was not 60 bucks and each dlc is 15 bucks a pop

santinegrete
santinegrete

@Alexe14 Even if that's true you have to check out how much the number of players decreased after the launch of this two games, almost 50%. Not being able to complete an horde matchmaking makes me a sad panda :(

santinegrete
santinegrete

The most enjoyable campaign of the military shooters of this year is in Homefront... the only thing I care. @alexLmx6 Yeah, somethings wrong, with my wallet.

ax_prime_basic
ax_prime_basic

I am both more impressed and more disappointed with BF3 than with MW3. The campaign in BF3 is a let-down, because when it's not dull it's frustrating. The only truly standout moments in BF3's campaign usually rely on the lovely graphics, and that's not good game design. MW3's campaign may be loud and dumb but at least there's some excitement to get caught up in. Conversely, BF3's multiplayer is a constant source of cinematic joy, because the graphics actually work in conjunction with the gameplay to enhance tension and excitement, while the open maps, vehicles, and large player count make it an unscripted sandbox of calculated mayhem. You won't be able to play for an hour without something random and awe-inspiring happening. MW3 is a safe game on a much more even keel. The campaign is over the top fun, and the multiplayer is the same tight twitch-based game we've come to know and love over the years. Spec-Ops mode is also solid, making the game a really well-rounded package. I like to play both, but while one game played it safe, the other one significantly upped the ante this year, and that's BF3. The single player is a failure, but the multiplayer is mind-blowing... easily worth the price of admission all on its own. When at its finest, BF3 makes MW3 look like a game of pac-man. Not that there's anything wrong with pac-man. But then again it's like Metal Gear vs. Splinter Cell. Though they are technically in the same genre, their approach couldn't be more different.

StevenHoog
StevenHoog

Dumbass JamilAhmed1994 is very displeased...too bad he fails to mention WHICH GAME he is referring to, so...no help there, next time try to use some common sense and not be a little whiny baby. I have both and I love Battlefield 3 where your team supports eachother and the snipers are so far away the bullet drops and takes time to reach the target. MW3 is won by who keeps running and gunning faster with a better aim. Snipers die from perching and some guy running shoots you. If you stop running in MW3 you're dead. In BF3 there are jets and copters to fly and tanks and others to drive. MW3 you phone it in. in short BF3 strategy takes time; MW3 run run and gun....repeat.

JamilAhmed1994
JamilAhmed1994

@MdoRandoms A glitchy, unstable mess with an awful user interface is GotY, then?

echols85
echols85

I own both games, and I think they both offer something unique. You guys sound like a bunch of Team Edward vs Team Jacob Twilight choads, fighting over which one is better. Just playing right into their hands folks, just let it go. And for the record.....I PERSONALLY prefer CoD.

McNeelyJ39
McNeelyJ39

is it me or should they have removed some words like "deleted by community manager" or "comment deleted"?

JeyNyce
JeyNyce

I like the fact that in the MW3 they put Skyrim.

thribs
thribs

I didn't think the qraphics were that brilliant on Battlefield.

Alinooridinho
Alinooridinho

As An iranian guy,Cant tolerate things Showed on BF3.The only right thing about Tehran was Milad tower.

Kianagra
Kianagra

Every year we they put out so much Fps but none of them are compared to Syrim and the fun time you can get with it. And the best os that Skyrim only needs single. Bf and COD dont care about single only multiplayer.

DanteKilla
DanteKilla

@blabr70, it's not so much 'psychology' as it is arrogance, some people think their opinion is more superior than others and so they'll try and force their opinions down other peoples throats. As to this post from gamespot, you can see they didn't really think it through...they choose the most frequently used words in response to each game, but I imagine that many aren't about the game but from people arguing, for example in the battlefield description, 'modern' and 'duty' are used, now I'm not sure this is in describing BF......which leads me to believe that this entire post is faulty, eg-(not defending either game), the 'dissapointing' from BF may not have been in describing BF, but in arguing against someone defending mw; and vise-versa. If we don't know in what context these words are used then it's pretty pointless....

MamaLukuBuku
MamaLukuBuku

Each game plays completely different and has pros and cons. I myself am a CoD fan and prefer it over BF. BF always looks way more impressive graphics wise, but the mechanics, hit detection, and over use of vehicles brings the overall game play down, though the sniper mechanics in BF are far superior to the lackluster sniper mechanics in any CoD game. Then again I have been shot across a map with a shotgun before in BF. MW is fast paced, vehicle free (aside from kill streak rewards) and overall fun. Quick scoping and no scoping sniper kills are frustrating, the melee system is always constantly broken, and there is some slight hit detection issues that need addressing. But overall the upgrades made to MW3 are welcomed (for me the Specialist strike package is just beast!). BF3 is definitely slower paced and more strategy oriented as MW3 is just an all out brawl of fast paced action. Each style will cater to different gamers, and both sides really need to respect that.

thribs
thribs

BF is no near as good as COD. The checkpoints just ruined that game!

MrBBQ56
MrBBQ56

I like how "realistic" is one of the smallest words on MW3 :P

KingofgamersX
KingofgamersX

COD Sucks with Battlefield, not even near Game of the year

Roman-X
Roman-X

BF3 and MW3 are equally good Skyrim is best though :p

AiGeeEn1
AiGeeEn1

Battlefield 3 vs. Modern Warfare 3: In Your Own Words By: Staff, GameSpot - Posted on Nov 11, 2011 **Even Gamespot doesn't want to get INVOLVED..hence the "By: Staff (Author). LMAO..nothing like stirring up the "Flame" War eh Gamespot. Buncha "paid" Spineless Saps.

blabr70
blabr70

I hate all the fuss between Gamer A's stance of "Game A is so much better than Game B" and Gamer B's counterpoint of "Game B is so much better than Game A" I've played and completed the campaigns for both games along with a couple hours of multiplayer for each and while I see the value in the overall package MW3 brings, I find myself enjoying Battlefield much more. It's probably because I enjoy the bigger scale BF offers, plus the vehicles and gadgets can get pretty insane. But honestly, fighting over this is pointless. These Games are 1 and 1A. Both are great, but depending on what you like more, many will simply discredit the other in order to boost up their own choice. Simple Psychology.