-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Modern Warfare 3 Versus Battlefield 3 Garbage Thread
- Thread starter Nirolak
- Start date
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
It is part of the product that we will be paying for.bigben85 said:
Foliorum Viridum
Banned
I've enjoyed the SP of MW/2 as much as I have the MP.
Just because lots of people discount it doesn't mean they're not good. They just appeal to certain people.
Just because lots of people discount it doesn't mean they're not good. They just appeal to certain people.
bigben85 said:
I agree, I (and I'm sure most judging by personal experience) don't care about SP in these games as much as the MP which is the real draw of them. Most of these "modern warfare" shooters have shit campaigns. BF3 just had one slopped in there probably due to it being on consoles and they think they need it to compete, and CoD's SP judging by MW2 onward, along with what we've seen thus far, is going to be more hollywood yet again, further detracting from the sets that made older CoD's SP relevant, you know, were you feel many times actually in a believable battle with it's intensity and such?
I wish DICE didn't cave in and go with a SP, and instead put said efforts into the MP more. I don't think the SP is going to lessen the MP's experience, it's just I would have rather they put more maps, guns, or modes in the MP instead maybe.
Now, if BF3's SP is like the quality of the older CoD games where the SP didn't blow, then I'll eat my hat and welcome the SP experience. I already know MW3's will be a lost cause.
Insane Metal
Gold Member
Broadbandito
Member
Insane Metal said:
hahahahahahaha
mickcenary
Member
Man. Every single CoD campaign has sucked balls. It is and forever will be a game that only translates well to MP; its shooting mechanics simply just aren't satisfying enough.
That being said, BC2's campaign was mega lame, too, but comparing BF3 to MW3... It's like comparing next-gen to last-gen, respectively. The gun-play in BC2 also trounces that of any CoD game, with Killzone 2/3 reigning supreme in that department; things may change with the release of B3, however.
I honestly think that you're a bit slow in the head if you enjoy a CoD campaign. FPS campaigns in general are becoming very moribund, though.
That being said, BC2's campaign was mega lame, too, but comparing BF3 to MW3... It's like comparing next-gen to last-gen, respectively. The gun-play in BC2 also trounces that of any CoD game, with Killzone 2/3 reigning supreme in that department; things may change with the release of B3, however.
I honestly think that you're a bit slow in the head if you enjoy a CoD campaign. FPS campaigns in general are becoming very moribund, though.
GillianSeed79
Member
nvmd already posted
So now single player in COD is important?
Bullshit.
99% of COD players don't finish the campaign, and 100% of reviewers gloss over it to claim "Lets dive into the multiplayer! The REAL reason you bought the game." Etc.
Bad Company 2's story ran over every single cliche COD story ever made.
/thread
/opens thread
BC2's online was more entertaining and dynamic(COD you can still hide from RPG's in tin huts) than COD's will ever be. BF3 has already on a specification level, trumped COD's entire franchise in terms of gameplay/visuals. COD will be the game of choice for the mountain dew drinking 14 year old who are all begging their parents to pay for the Elite mode. Which is fine, but the game is rubbish, as a game.
/thread
Bullshit.
99% of COD players don't finish the campaign, and 100% of reviewers gloss over it to claim "Lets dive into the multiplayer! The REAL reason you bought the game." Etc.
Bad Company 2's story ran over every single cliche COD story ever made.
/thread
/opens thread
BC2's online was more entertaining and dynamic(COD you can still hide from RPG's in tin huts) than COD's will ever be. BF3 has already on a specification level, trumped COD's entire franchise in terms of gameplay/visuals. COD will be the game of choice for the mountain dew drinking 14 year old who are all begging their parents to pay for the Elite mode. Which is fine, but the game is rubbish, as a game.
/thread
I love how many BF3 fans have to insult MW3 to have their game look better, instead of just pointing out the better aspects of their favorite title.
In the other hand, most MW3 fans just don't care. They will get the title and will get to play it with tons of other people. Deal with it...
In the other hand, most MW3 fans just don't care. They will get the title and will get to play it with tons of other people. Deal with it...
If you think WM3 looks exactly the same, I guess we can't do nothing about it. Except perhaps you getting your eyes fixed.gl0w said:Sorry, but My game is already looking better and better... And we all know that by just looking at the gameplay trailers. MW3 just looks the same. Nothing new. That old engine still running. So? Why bothering about it.
The game might not be BF3-level graphics (it definitely isn't nor tries to), but it looks better than MW2 (and obviously better than Black Ops too).
I personally will go with MW3, but I will give BF3 a try too. Just from what I heard BF2 on consoles wasn't the best experience out there, and I don't have the money to upgrade my computer right now (I only use it to do 3D and 2D stuff, and it works fine enough for that.. I can also play games like Portal 2 without issues, but I guess BF3 will be much more demanding).
BF3 will be watered down to be Bad Company 3 at the end of the day so I have no real hope in it being a real battlefield game. Its par for the course with EA this generation to fuck over good things after any slight good will they had (Mirrors Edge 1) didnt pay off. Lots of tears will be shed when BF3 comes out and the levels are linear and the game design is Bad Company inspired.
I'm more excited for MW3 as I have no idea whether it will even be good. You got 3 devs working on that damn thing. Who the fuck knows anymore. Maybe Raven software will snap out of their mediocre daze and summon the talent and inspiration of their games from yesteryear and make MW3 something spectacular.
Thats why Im excited for MW3. I have no idea what to expect.
I'm more excited for MW3 as I have no idea whether it will even be good. You got 3 devs working on that damn thing. Who the fuck knows anymore. Maybe Raven software will snap out of their mediocre daze and summon the talent and inspiration of their games from yesteryear and make MW3 something spectacular.
Thats why Im excited for MW3. I have no idea what to expect.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
How can you be so sure about BF3 when they've barely showed anything on the MP? And why would you be expecting a dramatic change from MW3 when all the precedents and current gameplay footage suggest that it will be similar to its predecessors? It doesn't make any sense to me.Deadbeat said:
Deadbeat said:
Dont you find BF 3 exciting? There's a camper behind the door? Blow up the door and walls up and kill the camper. Another camper on top of the rooftop? Blow up the supports of the building to bring it down.
Why I prefer BF or BFBC's MP more than MW's , is choice and ways to take out targets without hitting them directly.
Anton Sugar
Member
Deadbeat said:
I'm sorry, what? Watered down how? By using PC as lead platform? By making the biggest maps they've ever made in the Battlefield series? By having 64 players? By taking a ton of influence from BF2142 and BF2? You can't make a statement like that without at least trying to explain yourself.
And you have no idea what to expect from...Modern Warfare 3? Unless they change the formula that's gotten them millions upon millions of fans, you probably know what to expect. I'm most curious about the changes they said they'd make to reinforce teamplay, but I'm really not expecting much, if any, changes to the formula.
With three developers making it, that makes it more exciting? In most circles, having three different studios work on a project equals disaster. Now, I doubt Activision will blow it with MW3 and I'm sure MW3 will be a "good" game.
But what crazy logic.
mickcenary
Member
BF looks and feels better than MW. 'Nuff said.
And you are not excited to see what happens because....Mr. Snrub said:
if the maps are made around console limitations, who really cares about 64 players? It will be the same linear strips of map just with more players. I want big battles like bf2. What makes you think EA is going to change thier mind this generation and actually give 2 shits about the pc platform and its franchises? They have dont nothing this gen but hurt pc gaming.MuseManMike said:
Have you completely forgot this past 5 years?Animator said:
LiquidMetal14
hide your water-based mammals
Oh my, don't ever post this banter again. Holy mother. I am a more casual bystander in this and see much more value in BF but hey, the unexpected is CoD's middle name!Deadbeat said:
Anton Sugar
Member
Deadbeat said:
The only excitement about something like that would be like watching a train about to fall off a cliff. Why the hell would ANYONE be excited about a gain that could potentially be all over the place in terms of design?
The maps are scaleable--they've already said this. They've only shown Rush because they're smart and know that rush=instant action, which is better when you only have 10-20 minutes to play on a show floor.
I really don't know why you're dismissing BF3 because you're worried it will be dumbed down/"more of the same" because of consoles, but you're excited about MW3. You realize the irony, right?
I was baffled by your post at first but pondered these two statements and I'm able to understand what you mean. The only modes in BF3 so far are Rush, Conquest and TDM. All we've been shown for multiplayer is Rush, a mode that jets won't even be in. We've seen nothing of Conquest or what the maps will be like aside from the Return to Karkand maps. How do we know Digital Illusions still has the capability of making Conquest maps tailored for 64-players? What if it's like BC2 and the Conquest maps are just expanded Rush maps? 64-players and PC lead is nice but nothing is pointing to BF3 being a true successor to BF2.Deadbeat said:
On the other hand, MW3 is being developed by multiple studios. They could go back to the same shit as MW2, sure, but they could be doing something completely new now that the original leads have left for Respawn. I'm not excited for MW3 though.
Because I still hope that Raven Software will have a swan song that isnt as mediocre as Singularity. If that means they make the best COD iteration so be it. Btw, how has bf3 not been proclaiming more of the same? It took 2 console releases for the games to finally get stuff a pc game had 6 years ago. You think thats progress?Mr. Snrub said:
Anton Sugar
Member
vidal said:
Ignoring BF3 here for a moment...why would they risk changing the formula for MW3? Even if there are innovations, you know Activision doesn't want it to stray too far. It's their holy grail.
Honestly, if I choose to play either game this year, I think for the first time I won't be booting up the SP at all. I'm done with scripted war shooters.
Killzone 3 was the last game I could stand to play that decides your direction and tactics for you, bets all its fun factor on shooting and taking cover, and forces you forward by respawning enemies. After finally grabbing a PC copy of Black Ops I can't even keep myself interested enough to go through the SP again.
It's not the concept of the scripted war shooter itself that I'm bored of, just the execution. No game has done it right or made it interesting since COD4. COD4 had some really well laid-out gunfights and characters you gave a shit about. No war FPS has had that since, and nothing tells me BF3 or MW3 will.
(To compare and contrast, I still enjoyed Crysis 2 a lot, which was still linear but also still felt like I was playing a game, not a stage play)
Killzone 3 was the last game I could stand to play that decides your direction and tactics for you, bets all its fun factor on shooting and taking cover, and forces you forward by respawning enemies. After finally grabbing a PC copy of Black Ops I can't even keep myself interested enough to go through the SP again.
It's not the concept of the scripted war shooter itself that I'm bored of, just the execution. No game has done it right or made it interesting since COD4. COD4 had some really well laid-out gunfights and characters you gave a shit about. No war FPS has had that since, and nothing tells me BF3 or MW3 will.
(To compare and contrast, I still enjoyed Crysis 2 a lot, which was still linear but also still felt like I was playing a game, not a stage play)
Anton Sugar
Member
Deadbeat said:
Welcome to this generation. You could say the same for the COD/MW series. I'm not happy at all with the dumbing down/restriction of options in a lot of games due to consoles. What possible progress or innovation could be made in MW3?
Anton Sugar
Member
Last good SP I played was Goldeneye Wii, though I hear Crysis 2 is great. Not expecting much from BF3 and even if it does have a great SP, I'll stick to MP as much as I can.
That's a completely valid point. Perhaps that will be the case. But they could change the formula. IW's got new leads and now they've got multiple developers making MW3 with them. I'm not saying they will but with more than just IW at the helm, I could understand why someone would say they're excited because they don't know what will be in MW3.Mr. Snrub said:
People seemed to have jumped the gun and assumed im saying MW3 is going to be the better game. I was not saying that or implying that. But we do know that EA wants BF3 to get the COD crowd. They are going to do everything they can to grab that audience. That means stupid tags in the middle of the screen reminding me of every knife I get or of every level I go up because Im too dumb to figure that out. +200 points right in the middle of the screen blocking my view. All these things that made up cod 4 and got people hooked and the juggernaut rolling, this is the stuff that BF3 will have. But thats just the tip of the iceberg. The focus on Rush, the "all platforms will be really close we promise", all these little mentions of things here and there that worry me a lot for this game. They kill hype fast. Because we have all seen this before. It has happened with every pc franchise this generation. It has nothing to do with herp derp consoles, its because of herp derp focus testers who have shitted up this generation so hard, that everything is now being ruing to cash grab at what is believed to be low hanging fruit.
Maybe im just really cynical about it, but it worries me greatly that this franchise is COD audience first. Why not just make a great game and build an audience like that? Thats how COD got so big to begin with. It wasnt another fucking halo clone.
Maybe im just really cynical about it, but it worries me greatly that this franchise is COD audience first. Why not just make a great game and build an audience like that? Thats how COD got so big to begin with. It wasnt another fucking halo clone.
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Why did Dice let themselves be bought by EA?
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
For me it all boils down to this: MW is almost guaranteed to have better hit detection and netcode.man/man said:
Maybe I'm being simplistic, but how can I prefer a game that is lacking such awesome features.
soundahfekz
Member
Insane Metal said:
Thanks man, I almost choked on my food!
Stallion Free
Cock Encumbered
Hit detection and netcode has always been shit in Battlefield games and excellent in all COD games featuring dedicated servers.man/man said:
