Who still prefers Black Ops > MW3

I do. MW3 is okay, but no zombies, not much customization, and less memorable maps all constribute to me disliking the game. However, MW3 did have it's PROs, like the killstreak where you control an RC helicopter and go around tagging people, new game modes like Drop Zone and Team Defender, and the pretty good Spec Ops survival. Anyways though whats you guy's opinion.

There should be a choice that says "Neither, I think it sucks because it sucks". Single-player that is horribly short and has a terrible story, and multiplayer that is full of cheaters/hackers/8 year olds swearing. Plus it takes no skill to be good, anyone can get the game and get 15 kills and 10 deaths no problem. Battlefield and Halo are much better.

I think that Black Ops is far superior to MW3. I just simply like the game better. I haven't played MW3 In quite a long time.

3rd choice sans hating it cause it's popular. I hate it cause it's bad. Same reason I hate pop music.

mw3>Blops. mw2>mw3. this is gameplay wise, not all the bells and whistle included.

I actually prefer Modern warfare 3 to black ops. They have improved the MP part of the game and I'm glad to see that the weapons now unlock at certain levels instead of buying them. The single player is better this time around but that may be me just prefering the MW story line that's been building up since call of duty 4

Modern Warfare 3 sucks.

Black Ops is a masterpiece of a game though.

I hate Call Of Duty but If I had to pick one Black ops...I could tell they tried to change up the series with all the new things and I think since COD 4 black ops is the only game that tried tobe good...not likeing the 3rd option...

You need to add a "Neither: I don't like the game because it isn't really that good."

Black Ops is better than MW3, just like MW was better than MW2, this series gets worse every year. The best one ever made is the first one.

Treyarch couldn't make balanced online gameplay if their lives depended on it. Not that Infinity Ward is much better.

BLOPS good fun zombies and alot of the maps you could run and gun That not the case in mw3 because of all the dam campers hiding all over place.It make the game feel slow paste and find i quit out of some games because of boredom.I like if cod went back to cod4 style gameplay.

IMO MW2 > MW3 >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BO.

Black Ops better: -introduced an economy system so weapons, killstreaks, attachments, and perks can be acquired early instead of having to grind -scaling assist damage points; in MW3 you get 20 points regardless of how much damage you did before someone else got the kill -more customization with face paints, reticles, reticle colors, camos, etc. -better maps because MW3 maps are too small and tucked in -better killstreak chains; it's ridiculous that MW3 requires 18 kills for the higher streaks; this encourages camping and other cheap tactics -in MW3, you can hear the other team on the headset; very stupid -Black Ops does not have cheap game ending MOAB -Black Ops has a bots training mode for noobs -Black Ops map selection in the lobby is better in that it gives you a third random choice, you can select previous map once, and ties result in random map; in MW3, ties ALWAYS result in the top map winning -Black Ops has a 24/7 small map lobby (Nuketown) -Black Ops has innovative game types like the gun game, wager matches, etc. -Black Ops has a better UI and menu layout IMO -Black Ops allows you to have a claymore AND grenades; MW3 only allows one or the other -MW3 pro perks are too easy to get because it only takes a bunch of grinding; Black Ops pro perks take more effort There's no denying that Black Ops innovated while MW3 is a cut and paste job from MW2.GalvatronType_R

Great list, but youre missing one thing (stars with a Z)

There should be a choice that says "Neither, I think it sucks because it sucks". Single-player that is horribly short and has a terrible story, and multiplayer that is full of cheaters/hackers/8 year olds swearing. Plus it takes no skill to be good, anyone can get the game and get 15 kills and 10 deaths no problem. Battlefield and Halo are much better.

bessy67

1) Single-player is only about 5% of a COD game, for a reason - to make a great multiplayer/survival experience

2) Multiplayer is extremely deep, and it's really not that easy to play. The game is strategic.

3) The 8-yr olds who cuss are mute-able, and usually make easy targets.

4) You can file a complaint or submit a negative player review if the person hacks.

5) What do you mean by cheaters? Quickscopers and all that? Those aren't cheaters, they're players who have practiced and practiced and gotten really great. So yeah, I think you're jealous

6) You didn't mention Zombies mode

If Black Ops didn't have second chance and they made all of the weapons viable it would have been better then COD4.

i play on wii..

blops does have more features and stuff..

BUT

my internet works better on the modern warfare games.... i usually come out on top on COD4 and MW3....but in blops and WaW people always beasted me..im 100% positive it has something to do with the internet...and the way they implement it in the games..

2) Multiplayer is extremely deep, and it's really not that easy to play. The game is strategic.

6) You didn't mention Zombies mode

3dfd

2) Pfft!!! I played Black Ops and had a 1.8 k/d ratio just from going off on my own in TDM. So there is no stragety involved and it is easy.

6) I didn't mention it because it is an extremely shallow attempt to cash in on the current wave-of-enemies mode craze. Gears of War and Halo do it so much better. Plus Spec Ops was 100X better than Zombies.

Personally I thought both were a step down for the series but if I had to choose I'd say MW3.

[QUOTE="bessy67"]

There should be a choice that says "Neither, I think it sucks because it sucks". Single-player that is horribly short and has a terrible story, and multiplayer that is full of cheaters/hackers/8 year olds swearing. Plus it takes no skill to be good, anyone can get the game and get 15 kills and 10 deaths no problem. Battlefield and Halo are much better.

3dfd

2) Multiplayer is extremely deep, and it's really not that easy to play. The game is strategic.

Yea right...go tell it to somebody who doesn't know any better. COD's multiplayer has never required much strategy...

Yep. Black Ops is better than MW3.

[QUOTE="3dfd"]

2) Multiplayer is extremely deep, and it's really not that easy to play. The game is strategic.

6) You didn't mention Zombies mode

bessy67

2) Pfft!!! I played Black Ops and had a 1.8 k/d ratio just from going off on my own in TDM. So there is no stragety involved and it is easy.

6) I didn't mention it because it is an extremely shallow attempt to cash in on the current wave-of-enemies mode craze. Gears of War and Halo do it so much better. Plus Spec Ops was 100X better than Zombies.

First off I just want to say Gears of War and Halo's survival mode feel very cheap compared to Zombies. Zombies has Dedicated Zombies maps. Secondly Survival mode got really boring after about wave 20.

[QUOTE="bessy67"]

[QUOTE="3dfd"]

2) Multiplayer is extremely deep, and it's really not that easy to play. The game is strategic.

6) You didn't mention Zombies mode

HyperWarlock

2) Pfft!!! I played Black Ops and had a 1.8 k/d ratio just from going off on my own in TDM. So there is no stragety involved and it is easy.

6) I didn't mention it because it is an extremely shallow attempt to cash in on the current wave-of-enemies mode craze. Gears of War and Halo do it so much better. Plus Spec Ops was 100X better than Zombies.

First off I just want to say Gears of War and Halo's survival mode feel very cheap compared to Zombies. Zombies has Dedicated Zombies maps. Secondly Survival mode got really boring after about wave 20.

[QUOTE="HyperWarlock"]

[QUOTE="bessy67"]

2) Pfft!!! I played Black Ops and had a 1.8 k/d ratio just from going off on my own in TDM. So there is no stragety involved and it is easy.

6) I didn't mention it because it is an extremely shallow attempt to cash in on the current wave-of-enemies mode craze. Gears of War and Halo do it so much better. Plus Spec Ops was 100X better than Zombies.

chilly-chill

First off I just want to say Gears of War and Halo's survival mode feel very cheap compared to Zombies. Zombies has Dedicated Zombies maps. Secondly Survival mode got really boring after about wave 20.

Modern Warfare 3 is not quiet what i expected. I was way too excited.

I'll stick with Modern Warfare 2.

MW3 is better than BlackOps, (but not as good as MW2).

yea i prefer Black Ops.. the only other COD i had as much fun playing with friends was COD4

[QUOTE="bessy67"]

There should be a choice that says "Neither, I think it sucks because it sucks". Single-player that is horribly short and has a terrible story, and multiplayer that is full of cheaters/hackers/8 year olds swearing. Plus it takes no skill to be good, anyone can get the game and get 15 kills and 10 deaths no problem. Battlefield and Halo are much better.

3dfd

1) Single-player is only about 5% of a COD game, for a reason - to make a great multiplayer/survival experience

2) Multiplayer is extremely deep, and it's really not that easy to play. The game is strategic.

3) The 8-yr olds who cuss are mute-able, and usually make easy targets.

4) You can file a complaint or submit a negative player review if the person hacks.

5) What do you mean by cheaters? Quickscopers and all that? Those aren't cheaters, they're players who have practiced and practiced and gotten really great. So yeah, I think you're jealous

6) You didn't mention Zombies mode

1) games that cram a half assed single player into them are worse than those that cram a half assed multiplayer into them (for obvious reasons), that's basically what CoD does.

2)LOLWUT? did you play the last decent CoD game? even that was a piss take multiplayer wise, shipment? come on.

3) EXACTLY

4)doubtful it will get listened to.

5)cheaters as in the people that mod their controllers in order to fire faster than physically possible or use other methods. (quicscoping is lame but not cheating).

6)because it wasn't actually new, in fact I'd argue that CoD zombies was/is worse than what we did on Halo 2 (yeah halo 2).

and just as an FYI, I nearly traded in Battlefield 3 for MW3 this morning so I could play with my friends, upon hearing this they ALL IMMEDIATLY said:

"DON'T DO IT."

"IT'S NOT WORTH IT."

"IT'S ONLY GOOD FOR THIS SPEC OPS MODE."

There should be a choice that says "Neither, I think it sucks because it sucks". Single-player that is horribly short and has a terrible story, and multiplayer that is full of cheaters/hackers/8 year olds swearing. Plus it takes no skill to be good, anyone can get the game and get 15 kills and 10 deaths no problem. Battlefield and Halo are much better.

bessy67

holy ****

[QUOTE="bessy67"]

There should be a choice that says "Neither, I think it sucks because it sucks". Single-player that is horribly short and has a terrible story, and multiplayer that is full of cheaters/hackers/8 year olds swearing. Plus it takes no skill to be good, anyone can get the game and get 15 kills and 10 deaths no problem. Battlefield and Halo are much better.

3dfd

1) Single-player is only about 5% of a COD game, for a reason - to make a great multiplayer/survival experience

2) Multiplayer is extremely deep, and it's really not that easy to play. The game is strategic.

3) The 8-yr olds who cuss are mute-able, and usually make easy targets.

4) You can file a complaint or submit a negative player review if the person hacks.

5) What do you mean by cheaters? Quickscopers and all that? Those aren't cheaters, they're players who have practiced and practiced and gotten really great. So yeah, I think you're jealous

6) You didn't mention Zombies mode

1) 5%? so why do they bother adding it if it's so miniscule?

2) LOL. they give you some weapons, attachments and some silly perks then throw the same ranking system at you 10x over....

3) still riddled with them regardless. you don't mind that they're easy targets too? you must not like a challenge, I guess that's why you're playing COD, afterall.

4) you're better off not supporting crappy products like COD so then Activision/IW would actually put some effort into the game...which would probably include making it less exploitable

5) "you can file a complaint or submit a negative player review if the person hacks" he didn't say anything about quickscoping(which is a really lame way to play anyways) and he was lumping cheaters/hackers together with the 8-year-olds because they're all the same thing. and I don't think anyone is idiotic enough to be jealous over a casual-friendly game that puts emphasis on some silly little killstreaks.

You forgot the 4th option; I hate it because it sucks.

You can be great in multiplayer after like an hour and a half with the game, and there's no thought process necessary for you to succeed, which takes a lot out of it for me.

For me MW3 is better than Black ops because sniping is half way decent, but everything else is bad like the rest of the series.

I prefer CODBO by a mile. Whats funny is that I stopped playing it three or four months before CODMW3 came out, played that for a month, then went back to CODBO. I still play CODMW3 on occassion, when my friends are on, but it doesnt stay in the tray like past COD games did

I like MW3,but still prefers Black Ops.Better mp maps{Black Ops}.Better sp{MW3}.

I sold Black Ops 10 months after it was released. I sold MW3 a month after it was released (Got Saints Row: The Third with the trade-in). MW3 was the worst 30 dollars I spent in 2011.

So I guess I preferred Black Ops more. :P

This has been said many times but I will say it as well. I prefer BO over MW3. I already played MW3 a few years ago but it was called something else. I believe it was called MW2? MW3 is more or less a big DLC for MW2 with a different UI to get people to think that they actually a new game. I prefer BO because you had to actually had to get money to buy new guns. What I don't like is how you can just buy all the attachments right after you buy the gun. Every COD after 4 was a step back. 4 was simple and fun. MW2 should have just fixed the minor glitches, added some more guns, added some more maps, update the engine, and change around some of the perks.

My problem with the COD games after 4 are that they sponser camping. They added killstreaks which was cool and fun in 4 but then after that they changed what kind of streaks, and what they could do and it changed the game from shooting other players to trying to avoid the campers and then trying to avoid the killstreaks that run the map. I think BO did better because the Killstreaks weren't as bad as MW2 in some parts but still they were too much and ruined gameplay. I would play barebones but only 500 people play that game at a time and finding a game is impossible. MW3 is just as bad with killstreaks like crazy; they even give you the option of of being a juggernoob.

I love BF3 because the only way to get anywhere in that game is to actually be good. In order to get a gun you have to play that class and actually get kills. No killstreaks to mess up the gameplay. The only thing that I don't like is in conquest, and rush if you don't have a vehicle you will die. I only play SQD and it is the best multiplayer I have played since COD4.

Also there are cheaters in COD. People hack into the game all time making the leaderboards just stupid and pointless. (I never pay attention to leaderboards but if you look on them at the top seed their stats are all boched.) People find glitches all the time and use them. I can't remember if it was in BO or MW2 about the noob toob reloading and people would just run around using the noob toob with practically infinite ammo because they could replenish their ammo.

What do I prefer? BO. This doesn't by anyway mean that the game is good or the fact that I like it. Your poll is bias in the fact that you only like COD games and you think that people who don't like the game are ignorant when people who don't like the game simply don't like the or have good reason to not like the game. Side note the game takes no stradegy what so ever. You just run, shoot, die, repeat; or you could run, camp, die repeat. You pick out of the two.

I sold MW3 a month after it was released (Got Saints Row: The Third with the trade-in).

DJSAV_101

That mustve been great, Saints Row 3 was my favorite sandbox game of all time.

The ruined CoD when they powered up the kill streaks. Black OPs, MW2, MW3 were crap compared to CoD4. Went from a great shooter to a complete change in gameplay to a camp for killstreaks game. The game is built around killstreaks and they ruined it that way. For me anyways. I am sure it's good for others.