MW3 vs BF3 (Poll)

I personally like Battlefield 3 so far. MW3 looks just like MW2. But some people think the opposite. I just like vehicles and destructibility alot too. I can't really see anything COD MW# has over its competitor.

I haven't played them yet,but I'm voting for MW3.

I prefer that franchise.

My guess is BF3 will be voted 10:1 to MW3 in this poll.

Oh and BF3 for me.

This poll is like beating a dead horse, pointless. 90%+ of the votes will go to BF3.

BF3 FTW! BF3 FTW!

For the umpteenth time.

This poll is like beating a dead horse, pointless. 90%+ of the votes will go to BF3.

TheEpicGoat

Well since I enjoyed MW 2 and BC 2 with their different styles of gameplay, I imagine I'll get both MW3 and BF3. However, if forced to choose, it will be MW3 for me simply because I personally give its style of gameplay an edge over the big battle feel of BF games and also the fact that most of the guys I know that play FPS on XBL play CoD games! Both games will be great Imo and I predict both score 9.0-9.5.

My guess is BF3 will be voted 10:1 to MW3 in this poll.

Oh and BF3 for me.

DroidPhysX

BF3 for me.

BF3 MP will actually take skill, not twitch, like MW3. No lame perks and killstreaks either.

I'll pick up MW3 for the SP.

One is the prime example of everything that is wrong with this industry today.

The other is made by DICE. I vote for that one.

One is the prime example of everything that is wrong with this industry today.

The other is made by DICE. I vote for that one.

DarkLink77

Indeed.

The only correct option in the poll is the first one.

Modern Warfare 3. Battlefield is just too big for my taste. Call of Duty has also proven that it has a remarkably good campaign as opposed to Battlefield. NerubianWeaver

What? You mean a straight corridor with no room for experimentation, stupid AI, and frustrating grenade spamming, also, respawning enemies. NO DESTRUCTABILITY? And how is it too big? Next thing your gonna complain "BF3 is just too good, who does dICE think they are?".

[QUOTE="DroidPhysX"]

My guess is BF3 will be voted 10:1 to MW3 in this poll.

Oh and BF3 for me.

viper-kid

Your right sir, popularity=quality, what are we? In high school?

Bf3.

Well, I'll go with Modern Warfare 3, simply because while Battlefield 3 looks like it will push the genre forward more, Modern Warfare 3 just looks more fun, and that's what matters to me.charizard1605

See I genuinely don't understand that logic, BO, MW2 and WAW are all the same in terms of gameplay, and while that gameplay WAS fun, how can you not be bored? Battlefield 3 looks a little different, much more advanced, and has more tactical gameplay (At the very least the Multiplayer will be Tactical) COD has become a twitchy shooting gallery to me. It lacks the substance of BF. Plus, how can you not love the epicly awesome sound effect quality of the new BF Games?

BF3, simply because of all the vehicles.

Getting both

MW3, i find COD more fun then BF

I've always preferred BF classes and gameplay to COD.

Battlefield 3 for everything.

BF3 has some pretty slick looking videos so far but they are all for PC. That said, I need to see some proof that BF3 will be that much better than Bad Company 2 was for console. The console version of BF3 is already gimped to 24 player online and limited maps, plus the graphics probably aren't dramatically improved from Bad Company 2. Bad Company, to me, had a bad progression system, terrible hit detection, far too few game modes, and was way too slow in terms of combat (spent too much time trying to get into a battle). How is the console BF3 going to improve on this? I wouldn't mind playing for PC but I'm not sure about console.

Infinity Ward games have always had super tight controls, silky smooth 60FPS gameplay, a huge variety of game modes, tons of maps, lots of weapons, and lots of good modes outside of the main multiplayer such as spec ops and now the new survival mode. With destructibility added in this game should be really interesting. The Infinity Ward games have also always added a lot of multiplayer challenges, rewards, callsigns, and emblems that keep playing the games interesting. If BF3 can add a good progression system, more multiplayer modes, and better hit detection then I may be picking up a copy of both games this holiday.

I feel like I've seen this thread before :roll:

Both :P

BF3 has some pretty slick looking videos so far but they are all for PC. That said, I need to see some proof that BF3 will be that much better than Bad Company 2 was for console. The console version of BF3 is already gimped to 24 player online and limited maps, plus the graphics probably aren't dramatically improved from Bad Company 2. Bad Company, to me, had a bad progression system, terrible hit detection, far too few game modes, and was way too slow in terms of combat (spent too much time trying to get into a battle). How is the console BF3 going to improve on this? I wouldn't mind playing for PC but I'm not sure about console.

Infinity Ward games have always had super tight controls, silky smooth 60FPS gameplay, a huge variety of game modes, tons of maps, lots of weapons, and lots of good modes outside of the main multiplayer such as spec ops and now the new survival mode. With destructibility added in this game should be really interesting. The Infinity Ward games have also always added a lot of multiplayer challenges, rewards, callsigns, and emblems that keep playing the games interesting. If BF3 can add a good progression system, more multiplayer modes, and better hit detection then I may be picking up a copy of both games this holiday.

GojiMaster

[QUOTE="GojiMaster"]

BF3 has some pretty slick looking videos so far but they are all for PC. That said, I need to see some proof that BF3 will be that much better than Bad Company 2 was for console. The console version of BF3 is already gimped to 24 player online and limited maps, plus the graphics probably aren't dramatically improved from Bad Company 2. Bad Company, to me, had a bad progression system, terrible hit detection, far too few game modes, and was way too slow in terms of combat (spent too much time trying to get into a battle). How is the console BF3 going to improve on this? I wouldn't mind playing for PC but I'm not sure about console.

Infinity Ward games have always had super tight controls, silky smooth 60FPS gameplay, a huge variety of game modes, tons of maps, lots of weapons, and lots of good modes outside of the main multiplayer such as spec ops and now the new survival mode. With destructibility added in this game should be really interesting. The Infinity Ward games have also always added a lot of multiplayer challenges, rewards, callsigns, and emblems that keep playing the games interesting. If BF3 can add a good progression system, more multiplayer modes, and better hit detection then I may be picking up a copy of both games this holiday.

mitu123

I will say that even though BF INVENTED UNLOCKS! BF2 had it in 2005, COD4 had it in 2007. Even though thats true, BC2's is definitely more drawn out and annoying. I can't heal people as the medic at first? Really? Then again, COD doesn't have ****specific abilities, so its a non-issue. But also, the guns in COD are all the same, Infinite range, no bullet drop, and all have little recoil. At least in BC2 there is variation between full auto AR's, The AUG is even different than the F2000, rare in a shooter.

My guess is BF3 will be voted 10:1 to MW3 in this poll.

Oh and BF3 for me.

DroidPhysX

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="GojiMaster"]

BF3 has some pretty slick looking videos so far but they are all for PC. That said, I need to see some proof that BF3 will be that much better than Bad Company 2 was for console. The console version of BF3 is already gimped to 24 player online and limited maps, plus the graphics probably aren't dramatically improved from Bad Company 2. Bad Company, to me, had a bad progression system, terrible hit detection, far too few game modes, and was way too slow in terms of combat (spent too much time trying to get into a battle). How is the console BF3 going to improve on this? I wouldn't mind playing for PC but I'm not sure about console.

Infinity Ward games have always had super tight controls, silky smooth 60FPS gameplay, a huge variety of game modes, tons of maps, lots of weapons, and lots of good modes outside of the main multiplayer such as spec ops and now the new survival mode. With destructibility added in this game should be really interesting. The Infinity Ward games have also always added a lot of multiplayer challenges, rewards, callsigns, and emblems that keep playing the games interesting. If BF3 can add a good progression system, more multiplayer modes, and better hit detection then I may be picking up a copy of both games this holiday.

NanosuitLover

I will say that even though BF INVENTED UNLOCKS! BF2 had it in 2005, COD4 had it in 2007. Even though thats true, BC2's is definitely more drawn out and annoying. I can't heal people as the medic at first? Really? Then again, COD doesn't have ****specific abilities, so its a non-issue. But also, the guns in COD are all the same, Infinite range, no bullet drop, and all have little recoil. At least in BC2 there is variation between full auto AR's, The AUG is even different than the F2000, rare in a shooter.

BF3! Just hope the maps aren't riduculously large without the amount of players to compensate.

BF3! Just hope the maps aren't riduculously large without the amount of players to compensate.

whitetiger3521

Yeah, BC2 had only 32 players, hopefully the maps will be more active with 64, I'm more worried about Snipers having REALLY long sightlines.

You have to be blind to say that MW3 looks better than BF3, let alone that MW3 actually looks good at all. It hardly even looks better than games at the start of this generation.

Not deciding on either until I have seen console MP for both

I don't own a single CoD game and I own Battlefield: Bad Company, Battlefield 1943, Battlefield: Bad Company 2, Battlefield: Bad Company 2 Onslaught, and Battlefield: Bad Company 2 Vietnam and I still say CoD.

I laughed when I saw the results.
BF3 for me. 8)
Also heard a rumour today of a MW3 beta.
It's crazy I know.

BF3 has some pretty slick looking videos so far but they are all for PC. That said, I need to see some proof that BF3 will be that much better than Bad Company 2 was for console. The console version of BF3 is already gimped to 24 player online and limited maps, plus the graphics probably aren't dramatically improved from Bad Company 2. Bad Company, to me, had a bad progression system, terrible hit detection, far too few game modes, and was way too slow in terms of combat (spent too much time trying to get into a battle). How is the console BF3 going to improve on this? I wouldn't mind playing for PC but I'm not sure about console.

GojiMaster

oh lok, yet another thread of bf3 vs mw3, there arent enough about it.

**insert generic 'oh it's this thread again' type of comment here**

is that really so fun at first time i see mw3 trailer i think is mw2.5.lool but bf3 is so better than mw3. bf3 the way

I laughed when I saw the results.
BF3 for me. 8)
Also heard a rumour today of a MW3 beta.
It's crazy I know.

fusionhunter

The only reason they would put out a MW3 beta is if they charged $20 to play it.