BF3 still in the top 10 on NPD - proof that gamers demand quality FPS

[QUOTE="MBirdy88"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

Sprinting isn't fast enough.

How can I use vehicles when they gone? And I can't spawn in them because they are always full.

I have played Walking Field, look at my gamertag in my sig I used to own Walking Company 2. Sold it for a PSN card and bought COD map packs instead, far better value and fun.

ShadowMoses900

I have plenty of attention span, in COD I often stay bunkered in one area and just kill people that come by, if I had no attention span I wouldn't be able to win.

In terms of skill I bet I could own your ass in COD online, if we both played Walking Field we would have to on seperate teams because there is no free for all (Walking Field has hardly any features) and we would probably never find each other because the maps are too big.

I don't see the quality in Walking Field 3. The campaings in Walking Field games are jokes, I couldn't even finish Walking Company 2 campaign.

The mulitplayer is not that great either, the maps are too large which makes it very hard to find people to kill, the highest kill rate I got in a match was 6, that's right I only came across 6 peole the entire time. What did I do with the rest of the time? Why just walk around of course.

It takes too long to get to the objectives, by the time you do the match is basically over or you get killed and have to walk ALL the way back. Don't bother with vehicles because people hog them and won't share, and it takes FOREVER for a new vehcile to spawn.

The game is just an overrated waste of money, there is no way in hell Walking Field is better than COD.

ShadowMoses900

Try playing BF3 PC, those issues don't apply.

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]COD in top 10, casual trash. BF in top 10, gamers demanding quality. LOL!LegatoSkyheart

COD is more casual than Battlefield.

In Battlefield you can revive people, give people ammo and work together as a team to defeat the other Team.

Call of Duty really is just a run and gun game, no tatics involved.

There a lot of games that come to mind when the word qualtiy is mentioned.

Battlefield 3 ain't one of them.

I don't see the quality in Walking Field 3. ShadowMoses900

[QUOTE="MBirdy88"][QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

Sprinting isn't fast enough.

How can I use vehicles when they gone? And I can't spawn in them because they are always full.

I have played Walking Field, look at my gamertag in my sig I used to own Walking Company 2. Sold it for a PSN card and bought COD map packs instead, far better value and fun.

ShadowMoses900

I have plenty of attention span, in COD I often stay bunkered in one area and just kill people that come by, if I had no attention span I wouldn't be able to win.

In terms of skill I bet I could own your ass in COD online, if we both played Walking Field we would have to on seperate teams because there is no free for all (Walking Field has hardly any features) and we would probably never find each other because the maps are too big.

:lol: Classic

I don't see the quality in Walking Field 3. The campaings in Walking Field games are jokes, I couldn't even finish Walking Company 2 campaign.

The mulitplayer is not that great either, the maps are too large which makes it very hard to find people to kill, the highest kill rate I got in a match was 6, that's right I only came across 6 peole the entire time. What did I do with the rest of the time? Why just walk around of course.

It takes too long to get to the objectives, by the time you do the match is basically over or you get killed and have to walk ALL the way back. Don't bother with vehicles because people hog them and won't share, and it takes FOREVER for a new vehcile to spawn.

The game is just an overrated waste of money, there is no way in hell Walking Field is better than COD.

ShadowMoses900

And everytime you say this I will bring up the facts that you suck at the game and don't even own it

I have plenty of attention span, in COD I often stay bunkered in one area and just kill people that come by, if I had no attention span I wouldn't be able to win.

In terms of skill I bet I could own your ass in COD online, if we both played Walking Field we would have to on seperate teams because there is no free for all (Walking Field has hardly any features) and we would probably never find each other because the maps are too big.

ShadowMoses900

Battlefield has modes that is centered on that.

I believe that mode is Rush.

If you have the attention span to Camp in a Run and Gun game, you can Camp by a Base and actually help your team win.

Just because a game doesn't spell teamplay out to you doesn't mean it's not involved.

COD has this tactics mechanic known as shooting. And that's generally enough.
Your teammates help you by shooting people. There is just as many tactics in that, if not more, than simply pressing a button when your teammate knifes you repeatedly.
Not to say that BF doesn't have the shooting, but to say that CoD doesn't have tactics or skill because it doesn't have clear class roles is just stupid. It's a multiplayer game, of course it has tactics, if it didn't then you'd be making a mint slapping kids on the pro circuit. But you're not.

Overlord93

my Point is that COD tatics and teamwork isn't needed, one person can carry the entire team and win. Battlefield? You can't do that. You HAVE to HAVE team work. The ENTIRE TEAM has to work to win, not just one person.

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

I don't see the quality in Walking Field 3. The campaings in Walking Field games are jokes, I couldn't even finish Walking Company 2 campaign.

The mulitplayer is not that great either, the maps are too large which makes it very hard to find people to kill, the highest kill rate I got in a match was 6, that's right I only came across 6 peole the entire time. What did I do with the rest of the time? Why just walk around of course.

It takes too long to get to the objectives, by the time you do the match is basically over or you get killed and have to walk ALL the way back. Don't bother with vehicles because people hog them and won't share, and it takes FOREVER for a new vehcile to spawn.

The game is just an overrated waste of money, there is no way in hell Walking Field is better than COD.

seanmcloughlin

And everytime you say this I will bring up the facts that you suck at the game and don't even own it

I used to own Walking Company 2, check my gamertag in my sig, I have trophies for it. Lol SeanMcmuffins got owned again. Like I told Rocker, he is the Joker and you are Harley Quin and I am Batman. I always win bro.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

I don't see the quality in Walking Field 3. The campaings in Walking Field games are jokes, I couldn't even finish Walking Company 2 campaign.

The mulitplayer is not that great either, the maps are too large which makes it very hard to find people to kill, the highest kill rate I got in a match was 6, that's right I only came across 6 peole the entire time. What did I do with the rest of the time? Why just walk around of course.

It takes too long to get to the objectives, by the time you do the match is basically over or you get killed and have to walk ALL the way back. Don't bother with vehicles because people hog them and won't share, and it takes FOREVER for a new vehcile to spawn.

The game is just an overrated waste of money, there is no way in hell Walking Field is better than COD.

ShadowMoses900

And everytime you say this I will bring up the facts that you suck at the game and don't even own it

I used to own Walking Company 2, check my gamertag in my sig, I have trophies for it. Lol SeanMcmuffins got owned again. Like I told Rocker, he is the Joker and you are Harley Quin and I am Batman. I always win bro.

doesn't mean you were good at it.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

I don't see the quality in Walking Field 3. The campaings in Walking Field games are jokes, I couldn't even finish Walking Company 2 campaign.

The mulitplayer is not that great either, the maps are too large which makes it very hard to find people to kill, the highest kill rate I got in a match was 6, that's right I only came across 6 peole the entire time. What did I do with the rest of the time? Why just walk around of course.

It takes too long to get to the objectives, by the time you do the match is basically over or you get killed and have to walk ALL the way back. Don't bother with vehicles because people hog them and won't share, and it takes FOREVER for a new vehcile to spawn.

The game is just an overrated waste of money, there is no way in hell Walking Field is better than COD.

ShadowMoses900

And everytime you say this I will bring up the facts that you suck at the game and don't even own it

I used to own Walking Company 2, check my gamertag in my sig, I have trophies for it. Lol SeanMcmuffins got owned again. Like I told Rocker, he is the Joker and you are Harley Quin and I am Batman. I always win bro.

Until you sold it in a strop because you were getting owned :lol:

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

And everytime you say this I will bring up the facts that you suck at the game and don't even own it

LegatoSkyheart

I used to own Walking Company 2, check my gamertag in my sig, I have trophies for it. Lol SeanMcmuffins got owned again. Like I told Rocker, he is the Joker and you are Harley Quin and I am Batman. I always win bro.

doesn't mean you were good at it.

Doesn't matter if I was good at it or not. The fact is that I found the game to be a boring, overrated waste of money. I'm only good at a smalle few online games anyway: COD, Uncharted, Killzone, and RDR.

The last game I mentioned I have not played online for a long time so I probably suck at that now to. I am good at co-op online games though like Resident Evil.

Doesn't matter if I was good at it or not. The fact is that I found the game to be a boring, overrated waste of money. I'm only good at a smalle few online games anyway: COD, Uncharted, Killzone, and RDR.

The last game I mentioned I have not played online for a long time so I probably suck at that now to. I am good at co-op online games though like Resident Evil.

ShadowMoses900

You thought Battlefield was boring, but not Killzone?

Excuse me, my brain needs reassembling.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

I don't see the quality in Walking Field 3. The campaings in Walking Field games are jokes, I couldn't even finish Walking Company 2 campaign.

The mulitplayer is not that great either, the maps are too large which makes it very hard to find people to kill, the highest kill rate I got in a match was 6, that's right I only came across 6 peole the entire time. What did I do with the rest of the time? Why just walk around of course.

It takes too long to get to the objectives, by the time you do the match is basically over or you get killed and have to walk ALL the way back. Don't bother with vehicles because people hog them and won't share, and it takes FOREVER for a new vehcile to spawn.

The game is just an overrated waste of money, there is no way in hell Walking Field is better than COD.

ShadowMoses900

And everytime you say this I will bring up the facts that you suck at the game and don't even own it

I used to own Walking Company 2, check my gamertag in my sig, I have trophies for it. Lol SeanMcmuffins got owned again. Like I told Rocker, he is the Joker and you are Harley Quin and I am Batman. I always win bro.

Complains about how bad BF3 is yet doesn't own it and "used to own" BC2 :roll: yeah you totally win "bro"

[QUOTE="WiiCubeM1"]

I don't care about the technical differences, COD and Battlefield are the same type of shooter.

Halo incorporates a free-roam aspect (as in jumping on top of structures instead of being forced to use ramps and ladders), which is different enough for me.

arto1223

What a tool.

On point, good for DICE. BF3 is a fantastic shooter and only second to BF2142 this gen.

Little do you suspect, I'm not actually hating on Battlefield 3.

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

Doesn't matter if I was good at it or not. The fact is that I found the game to be a boring, overrated waste of money. I'm only good at a smalle few online games anyway: COD, Uncharted, Killzone, and RDR.

The last game I mentioned I have not played online for a long time so I probably suck at that now to. I am good at co-op online games though like Resident Evil.

LegatoSkyheart

You thought Battlefield was boring, but not Killzone?

Excuse me, my brain needs reassembling.

It's called an opinion.

And KZ has better graphics than BF so it's more engaging.

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]COD in top 10, casual trash. BF in top 10, gamers demanding quality. LOL!Overlord93

COD is more casual than Battlefield.

In Battlefield you can revive people, give people ammo and work together as a team to defeat the other Team.

Call of Duty really is just a run and gun game, no tatics involved.

There is zero teamwork involved in CoD. They're built entirely around the idea of mindlessly running and gunning.

I believe BF3 is the greatest FPS MP game ever, the pinnacle of FPS MP competitive gaming.

nunovlopes

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

Doesn't matter if I was good at it or not. The fact is that I found the game to be a boring, overrated waste of money. I'm only good at a smalle few online games anyway: COD, Uncharted, Killzone, and RDR.

The last game I mentioned I have not played online for a long time so I probably suck at that now to. I am good at co-op online games though like Resident Evil.

ShadowMoses900

You thought Battlefield was boring, but not Killzone?

Excuse me, my brain needs reassembling.

It's called an opinion.

And KZ has better graphics than BF so it's more engaging.

[QUOTE="Overlord93"]

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

COD is more casual than Battlefield.

In Battlefield you can revive people, give people ammo and work together as a team to defeat the other Team.

Call of Duty really is just a run and gun game, no tatics involved.

Master_ShakeXXX

There is zero teamwork involved in CoD. They're built entirely around the idea of mindlessly running and gunning.

[QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]

[QUOTE="Overlord93"]Just because a game doesn't spell teamplay out to you doesn't mean it's not involved.
COD has this tactics mechanic known as shooting. And that's generally enough.
Your teammates help you by shooting people. There is just as many tactics in that, if not more, than simply pressing a button when your teammate knifes you repeatedly.
Not to say that BF doesn't have the shooting, but to say that CoD doesn't have tactics or skill because it doesn't have clear class roles is just stupid. It's a multiplayer game, of course it has tactics, if it didn't then you'd be making a mint slapping kids on the pro circuit. But you're not.

Overlord93

There is zero teamwork involved in CoD. They're built entirely around the idea of mindlessly running and gunning.

I will, when I actually run into a coordinated team. Fat chance of that happening in a CoD game where people only care about going for that next big killstreak and their KDR.

[QUOTE="Overlord93"][QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]

There is zero teamwork involved in CoD. They're built entirely around the idea of mindlessly running and gunning.

Master_ShakeXXX

I will, when I actually run into a coordinated team. Fat chance of that happening in a CoD game where people only care about going for that next big killstreak and their KDR.

[QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]

[QUOTE="Overlord93"]Just because a game doesn't spell teamplay out to you doesn't mean it's not involved.
COD has this tactics mechanic known as shooting. And that's generally enough.
Your teammates help you by shooting people. There is just as many tactics in that, if not more, than simply pressing a button when your teammate knifes you repeatedly.
Not to say that BF doesn't have the shooting, but to say that CoD doesn't have tactics or skill because it doesn't have clear class roles is just stupid. It's a multiplayer game, of course it has tactics, if it didn't then you'd be making a mint slapping kids on the pro circuit. But you're not.

Overlord93

There is zero teamwork involved in CoD. They're built entirely around the idea of mindlessly running and gunning.

cod and bf3 are both lame war fps games, 007 legends goldeneye bloodstone quantum of solace are better

[QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]

[QUOTE="Overlord93"]Just because a game doesn't spell teamplay out to you doesn't mean it's not involved.
COD has this tactics mechanic known as shooting. And that's generally enough.
Your teammates help you by shooting people. There is just as many tactics in that, if not more, than simply pressing a button when your teammate knifes you repeatedly.
Not to say that BF doesn't have the shooting, but to say that CoD doesn't have tactics or skill because it doesn't have clear class roles is just stupid. It's a multiplayer game, of course it has tactics, if it didn't then you'd be making a mint slapping kids on the pro circuit. But you're not.

Overlord93

There is zero teamwork involved in CoD. They're built entirely around the idea of mindlessly running and gunning.

[QUOTE="Overlord93"][QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]

There is zero teamwork involved in CoD. They're built entirely around the idea of mindlessly running and gunning.

MBirdy88

[QUOTE="Overlord93"][QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]

There is zero teamwork involved in CoD. They're built entirely around the idea of mindlessly running and gunning.

DarkLink77

Yah, I was going to say this.

It's just amazing how when someone's only real experience with multiplayer FPS games is CoD, and CoD-clones, they treat such glaring design flaws as great gameplay elements.

I wouldn't really call BF3 quality, I can see the rest of the series going down hill very quickly. It's still of a higer calibre than COD though.

[QUOTE="Jebus213"][QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]The maps are huge.nunovlopes

Having the bases far away from the flags is a good thing, it makes cornering the losing team into their base much more difficult. BC2 was a plague in this regard. It was insanely easy for the winning team to completely corner the losing team in their base, to the point where you simply couldn't leave your base. This is extremely annoying.

For example, Armored Shield suffers from this problem. It is a prime example of a big map, badly designed. The bases are too close to the flags, and it's easy for a team to corner the other team in their base.

And bigger maps are not automatically better. I personally prefer B2K to AK.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="nunovlopes"]

Having the bases far away from the flags is a good thing, it makes cornering the losing team into their base much more difficult. BC2 was a plague in this regard. It was insanely easy for the winning team to completely corner the losing team in their base, to the point where you simply couldn't leave your base. This is extremely annoying.

For example, Armored Shield suffers from this problem. It is a prime example of a big map, badly designed. The bases are too close to the flags, and it's easy for a team to corner the other team in their base.

And bigger maps are not automatically better. I personally prefer B2K to AK.

nunovlopes

It's still bad in BF3. Teams can totally dominate another and keep them at their base. Look at Caspian

Nope, not possible. The base is too far away. You can easily take a jeep and get out of the base unnoticed. Obviously a very good team against a very bad team will dominate and capture all the flags. But that's not the point. The point is you can leave your base and reach a flag. You'll die there because the other team is better but you had your chance. In BC2, many times you simply could not leave the base, AT ALL. Laguna Alta and Operation Hastings were notoriously bad in this department.

[QUOTE="MBirdy88"][QUOTE="Overlord93"]Try saying that when a competetive team has you spawn locked and systematically farms you for gunships.Overlord93

[QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]

[QUOTE="Overlord93"]Just because a game doesn't spell teamplay out to you doesn't mean it's not involved.
COD has this tactics mechanic known as shooting. And that's generally enough.
Your teammates help you by shooting people. There is just as many tactics in that, if not more, than simply pressing a button when your teammate knifes you repeatedly.
Not to say that BF doesn't have the shooting, but to say that CoD doesn't have tactics or skill because it doesn't have clear class roles is just stupid. It's a multiplayer game, of course it has tactics, if it didn't then you'd be making a mint slapping kids on the pro circuit. But you're not.

Overlord93

There is zero teamwork involved in CoD. They're built entirely around the idea of mindlessly running and gunning.

[QUOTE="MBirdy88"][QUOTE="Overlord93"]*cough* metro *cough*Overlord93

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]COD in top 10, casual trash. BF in top 10, gamers demanding quality. LOL!LegatoSkyheart

COD is more casual than Battlefield.

In Battlefield you can revive people, give people ammo and work together as a team to defeat the other Team.

Call of Duty really is just a run and gun game, no tatics involved.

You can't revive people in Quake 3, can't give ammo either.

Still ten times more skillful than Battlefield 3

Massive LOL @ the people claiming and hating BF3 for being too CODish, but in the same breath, claim to love BC2. If any of the BF games somewhat mocked COD, it was BC2.

[QUOTE="Overlord93"][QUOTE="Master_ShakeXXX"]

There is zero teamwork involved in CoD. They're built entirely around the idea of mindlessly running and gunning.

mems_1224

Massive LOL @ the people claiming and hating BF3 for being too CODish, but in the same breath, claim to love BC2. If any of the BF games somewhat mocked COD, it was BC2.

ermacness

[QUOTE="ermacness"]

Massive LOL @ the people claiming and hating BF3 for being too CODish, but in the same breath, claim to love BC2. If any of the BF games somewhat mocked COD, it was BC2.

Jebus213

BF3 = CoD MW2, BO, MW3, BO2, etc...

Turdastic piles of underdeveloped garbage with too much money spent on advertising rather than ironing out the many issues with the game content.

Massive LOL @ the people claiming and hating BF3 for being too CODish, but in the same breath, claim to love BC2. If any of the BF games somewhat mocked COD, it was BC2.

ermacness

But Battlefield 3 is more like COD, than BC2.

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

[QUOTE="ShadowMoses900"]

Doesn't matter if I was good at it or not. The fact is that I found the game to be a boring, overrated waste of money. I'm only good at a smalle few online games anyway: COD, Uncharted, Killzone, and RDR.

The last game I mentioned I have not played online for a long time so I probably suck at that now to. I am good at co-op online games though like Resident Evil.

ShadowMoses900

You thought Battlefield was boring, but not Killzone?

Excuse me, my brain needs reassembling.

It's called an opinion.

And KZ has better graphics than BF so it's more engaging.

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

[QUOTE="SaltyMeatballs"]COD in top 10, casual trash. BF in top 10, gamers demanding quality. LOL!OB-47

COD is more casual than Battlefield.

In Battlefield you can revive people, give people ammo and work together as a team to defeat the other Team.

Call of Duty really is just a run and gun game, no tatics involved.

You can't revive people in Quake 3, can't give ammo either.

Still ten times more skillful than Battlefield 3

[QUOTE="OB-47"]

[QUOTE="LegatoSkyheart"]

COD is more casual than Battlefield.

In Battlefield you can revive people, give people ammo and work together as a team to defeat the other Team.

Call of Duty really is just a run and gun game, no tatics involved.

LegatoSkyheart

You can't revive people in Quake 3, can't give ammo either.

Still ten times more skillful than Battlefield 3

Mhm