• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Modern Warfare 3 Versus Battlefield 3 Garbage Thread

LiquidMetal14 said:
No shit. Who cares really? MW3 is like the Wii. We know there is game but it's outclassed by the lesser selling BF3 (PS3/360). PC oversees this all.
Click to expand...
What about.. that's your opinion?. Where does BF3 exactly outclass MW3 besides the visuals on PC?.
 
Mik2121 said:
What about.. that's your opinion?. Where does BF3 exactly outclass MW3 besides the visuals on PC?.
Click to expand...
Gameplay looks better and has more options and bigger maps? I want to see MW3 do some of this stuff. It's outclassed. I don't care about it selling more when BF3 looks to be the better game.
 
shagg_187 said:
They just showed PS3 co-op footage and it looked great. Watchu talking about, Willis?
Click to expand...

I agree, the co-op looked amazing, but we're talking 24 players here with jets n shit :\

Surely EA must have a playable build to show us?
 
LiquidMetal14 said:
Gameplay looks better and has more options and bigger maps? I want to see MW3 do some of this stuff. It's outclassed. I don't care about it selling more when BF3 looks to be the better game.
Click to expand...
Gameplay "looks" better? You sure about what you said?.

Because gameplay might feel or not better, but it can't look better. You won't know if it's better or not until you've played both.

As for bigger maps being a better thing.. then I guess True Crime Streets of LA outclasses any GTA, Saints Row, etc.. games because the map is larger, right?. Also Tribes 2 outclasses Quake and UT because the maps are larger, right?.

Eh.. you really convinced me right there.


SephCast said:
Until Activision stops hiding behind the CoD4 engine, I'll stick with BF3.
Click to expand...
You think MW3 uses the COD4 engine as it is, without improving on it? Because all the Epic games have been "hiding behind" the Unreal ( gamereleased in 1999) engine. It's been improved a hell of a lot, but it's the same engine.
 
CozMick said:
I agree, the co-op looked amazing, but we're talking 24 players here with jets n shit :\

Surely EA must have a playable build to show us?
Click to expand...

Activision don't show any MW3 PC gameplay because it's not the lead platform, go figure.
 
CozMick said:
Until EA stops hiding console multi player footage I'll stick with Modern Warfare 3
Click to expand...

I don't think they are "hiding" it, it's just a marketing ploy by EA and honestly a pretty brilliant one. How many console owners are going to see that footage and go ape shit, completely unaware of the fact that their console version supports a fraction of the players and looks pretty meh in comparison? Meanwhile IW showcases 360 footage, much more indicative of what their final product will look like. Has there even been any 360 footage shown for BF3? I don't remember seeing any. Maybe they are hiding that one.
 
Bumblebeetuna said:
I don't think they are "hiding" it, it's just a marketing ploy by EA and honestly a pretty brilliant one. How many console owners are going to see that footage and go ape shit, completely unaware of the fact that their console version supports a fraction of the players and looks pretty meh in comparison? Meanwhile IW showcases 360 footage, much more indicative of what their final product will look like. Has there even been any 360 footage shown for BF3? I don't remember seeing any. Maybe they are hiding that one.
Click to expand...
PC multiplayer footage right after the PS3 co-op footage really put things into perspective.
 
Mik2121 said:
You think MW3 uses the COD4 engine as it is, without improving on it? Because all the Epic games have been "hiding behind" the Unreal ( gamereleased in 1999) engine. It's been improved a hell of a lot, but it's the same engine.
Click to expand...

Are you saying the 1999 Unreal Engine::CoD4 Engine as 2008 UE3::MW3?

I'd say the jumps are a bit more significant.
 
SephCast said:
Are you saying the 1999 Unreal Engine::CoD4 Engine as 2008 UE3::MW3?

I'd say the jumps are a bit more significant.
Click to expand...
The jump is a bit more significant indeed, but it's the same engine and that's what you were saying. You could even say it about Gears of War and Gears of War 3. They are the same engine and the jump isn't as big (though it's big still, but the jump between COD4 and MW3 is pretty damn big as well).
 
Mik2121 said:
The jump is a bit more significant indeed, but it's the same engine and that's what you were saying. You could even say it about Gears of War and Gears of War 3. They are the same engine and the jump isn't as big (though it's big still, but the jump between COD4 and MW3 is pretty damn big as well).
Click to expand...

So my point is that:

CoD4 --> MW3 <<<<< BF:BC2 --> BF3

MW3 (IMO), in motion, still looks very similar to CoD4, while BF3 looks like a whole new beast.
 
Oh MW3, see what happens why you don't change game engines for 10 years?.

I bet you one hundred millllllllllllllion dollars IW's next MW game (after MW3) will be new tech.
 
looks awesome, still hate the jets, hope there is infantry only mode

edit: bah that was suposed to be put into the thread about the new trailer -.-
 
PaNaMa said:
Oh MW3, see what happens why you don't change game engines for 10 years?.

I bet you one hundred millllllllllllllion dollars IW's next MW game (after MW3) will be new tech.
Click to expand...
Why bother? Most COD players don't have a fucking clue what games are capable of looking like now.
 
No one will probably even read this but I've been thinking a lot about CoD vs. BF recently and hey, NeoGaf should be the one place you can talk about this without bothering anyone so here goes. Here's my thoughts on all this.

I got into Call of Duty with Modern Warfare. I'd played the others before but I'd never played their multiplayer components. I got a good taste of MW1, and then MW2 came out and I played that endlessly for the next year. Was pumped for Black Ops. Hated it after a month or two of initially having fun, and dropped it for Bad Company 2. Recently I've been trying to get into Black Ops with different weapons setups. I've regained a bit of enjoyment by finally being able to post good K/D in team deathmatch thanks to some GAF loadout recommendations.

Obviously today's Gamescom MP footage from Battlefield 3 is really intense and looks like a blast - almost a religious experience! So much crap happening, such good graphics, and such a grand scale. You'd be a stone cold beast to not get excited about that!

And after spending a lot of time with both franchises I think that Battlefield is fundamentally the 'better' game in terms of realism, fairness, depth, graphics, sound, and so forth. At the same time, there's a sort of primal appeal to the ludicrously fast gunplay in Black Ops that's also pretty hard to deny. It's not as rewarding since even a big 30-5 game is just a 8 minute rush and is quickly forgotten, but when you're in the zone and racking up kills it's addictive.

I think that Black Ops was a huge step back from Modern Warfare 2 just because they narrowed the spectrum of viable combat options. Treyarch was trying to balance everything out, but they neutered the fun and the 60's setting nixed some of the more fun future-tech options. In Modern Warfare 2 people could dominate with a lot of different setups - knifing, sniping, shotties, assault rifles, smg classes, lmgs with FMJ or even weird combos like riot shield and C4. In Black Ops pretty much the only way to be competitive is with an assault rifle (preferably suppressed). It gets old.

So that said, I think Modern Warfare 3 has the chance to undo the restrictions that Black Ops imposed on the series (bring back heartbeat sensors, stacking streaks, secondary shotties, riot shields, machine pistols, EMPs, and all that shit, it added variety!) and be sort of a return to form after a serious misstep. Black Ops burned me enough that I'm not Day One on Modern Warfare 3 at all, though - I'll use my friends as guinea pigs. If the netcode and framerate is better, if the weapons all have their places and there's a bunch of different fun options, I'll buy it.

But Battlefield 3 is Day One for a few reasons. First, because they're doing a beta. I love that sort of transparency! If Modern Warfare 3 would let me see the game before expecting me to put most of a day's pay into it (I'm a student), then I would probably Day One it as well. Second, because I think ultimately Battlefield 3's slower pace is less frustrating and the focus on team gameplay, objectives, and longer match times is more rewarding. You can't beat that high of winning a 30-minute long rush match in the final seconds.
 
thetrin said:
Why bother? Most COD players don't have a fucking clue what games are capable of looking like now.
Click to expand...
Not really, I'm sure they're at least somewhat aware, but MW3 still looks amazing for a 60fps console game.

You guys need to not forget the reason CoD got so big in the first place. The twitchy, fast-paced, extremely responsive gameplay. BF3 won't have that. They do overlap a lot with their appeals, but MW3 is still going to be the best at what it does.
 
Genesis Knight said:
No one will probably even read this but I've been thinking a lot about CoD vs. BF recently and hey, NeoGaf should be the one place you can talk about this without bothering anyone so here goes. Here's my thoughts on all this.

I got into Call of Duty with Modern Warfare. I'd played the others before but I'd never played their multiplayer components. I got a good taste of MW1, and then MW2 came out and I played that endlessly for the next year. Was pumped for Black Ops. Hated it after a month or two of initially having fun, and dropped it for Bad Company 2. Recently I've been trying to get into Black Ops with different weapons setups. I've regained a bit of enjoyment by finally being able to post good K/D in team deathmatch thanks to some GAF loadout recommendations.

Obviously today's Gamescom MP footage from Battlefield 3 is really intense and looks like a blast - almost a religious experience! So much crap happening, such good graphics, and such a grand scale. You'd be a stone cold beast to not get excited about that!

And after spending a lot of time with both franchises I think that Battlefield is fundamentally the 'better' game in terms of realism, fairness, depth, graphics, sound, and so forth. At the same time, there's a sort of primal appeal to the ludicrously fast gunplay in Black Ops that's also pretty hard to deny. It's not as rewarding since even a big 30-5 game is just a 8 minute rush and is quickly forgotten, but when you're in the zone and racking up kills it's addictive.

I think that Black Ops was a huge step back from Modern Warfare 2 just because they narrowed the spectrum of viable combat options. Treyarch was trying to balance everything out, but they neutered the fun and the 60's setting nixed some of the more fun future-tech options. In Modern Warfare 2 people could dominate with a lot of different setups - knifing, sniping, shotties, assault rifles, smg classes, lmgs with FMJ or even weird combos like riot shield and C4. In Black Ops pretty much the only way to be competitive is with an assault rifle (preferably suppressed). It gets old.

So that said, I think Modern Warfare 3 has the chance to undo the restrictions that Black Ops imposed on the series (bring back heartbeat sensors, stacking streaks, secondary shotties, riot shields, machine pistols, EMPs, and all that shit, it added variety!) and be sort of a return to form after a serious misstep. Black Ops burned me enough that I'm not Day One on Modern Warfare 3 at all, though - I'll use my friends as guinea pigs. If the netcode and framerate is better, if the weapons all have their places and there's a bunch of different fun options, I'll buy it.

But Battlefield 3 is Day One for a few reasons. First, because they're doing a beta. I love that sort of transparency! If Modern Warfare 3 would let me see the game before expecting me to put most of a day's pay into it (I'm a student), then I would probably Day One it as well. Second, because I think ultimately Battlefield 3's slower pace is less frustrating and the focus on team gameplay, objectives, and longer match times is more rewarding. You can't beat that high of winning a 30-minute long rush match in the final seconds.
Click to expand...



Much prefered BLOPs over MW2 largely because BLOPs felt more like MW1, which was more deliberate, less EXTREEMELOL.

Like you, I got fed up with BLOPs and moved to BC2 and loved it.
 
Mik2121 said:
Gameplay "looks" better? You sure about what you said?.

Because gameplay might feel or not better, but it can't look better. You won't know if it's better or not until you've played both.

As for bigger maps being a better thing.. then I guess True Crime Streets of LA outclasses any GTA, Saints Row, etc.. games because the map is larger, right?. Also Tribes 2 outclasses Quake and UT because the maps are larger, right?.

Eh.. you really convinced me right there.
Click to expand...

Stop talking.
 
I was never a big shooter guy really, but it looks like BF will blow MW out the water considering all of the latest footage.

The Caspian Border gameplay trailer was very exciting.
 
spekkeh said:
Because everyone knows graphics are the only thing that constitute an enjoyable game, I'm going to say CODLOL.
Click to expand...
The fact that people like you even think that the two games offer the same type of gameplay and are therefore fit for comparison is laughable enough.

Let's face it, the only tangible reason why BF3 is winning a lot of people over is because they simply prefer it's style of combat, not because it's inherently "better". And Mik2121 is spot on with that comparison; some people do prefer open warfare of Tribes to the claustrophobic nature of Quake and that those two games don't necessarily outclass each other. There's a place for both.
 
no idea how MW3 fans can continue liking the same crap.

You all are being duped fellas! Get out of the COD box and explore new concepts.

Had MW3 used PC as lead platform, things would be different.

There is a difference as to why BF3 will be better than MW3

BF3 in development for 4 years now? Not bothered by publishers to finish product at a given time frame.

MW3. Activision pushes COD franchise to come out with a product every year, at the behest of its shareholders.

I'll put money on DICE/EA on this one.
 
Stallion Free said:
MW3/COD will never do that stuff because they are Quake-style shooters. People play them for them for the tighter maps and the faster-pace.
Click to expand...

Never underestimate the power Activision has to drive a franchise straight into the ground by turning it into something it's not, and trying to do everything nobody wants.
 
1zz5nkp.jpg


lol.gif
 
IMACOMPUTA said:
Never underestimate the power Activision has to drive a franchise straight into the ground by turning it into something it's not, and trying to do everything nobody wants.
Click to expand...
Just the opposite, really. I'm willing to bet that CoD will play the same from now until the point that it stops selling. Acti will take it off the market before they adapted it to new market sensibilities.

I have a feeling that BF3 will review better but MW3 will still sell better.
 
SolidSnakex said:
I think that most would agree with that. The gaming media are in love with BF3.
Click to expand...

That will eventually bleed into BF sales. They did it for Halo and CoD. If BF gets enough attention, it could be the next big thing.
 
Do all the COD fans here at least acknowledge BF3 is a better game, putting personal preferences aside? Like, I can't fathom who would think the recent CoD games would be better than BF3.

Some people like the twitch based, arcadey feeling from CoD but they have to realize BF3 is a better designed and put together game....
 
Foliorum Viridum said:
And I don't want MW3 to be like BF3.

They're two completely different takes on the genre. I feel sorry for people who can't enjoy both.
Click to expand...


yea, but one take is inferior!
I can't enjoy COD's close quarter, schizophrenic combat and I've tried all of them
 
A27 Tawpgun said:
Do all the COD fans here at least acknowledge BF3 is a better game, putting personal preferences aside? Like, I can't fathom who would think the recent CoD games would be better than BF3.

Some people like the twitch based, arcadey feeling from CoD but they have to realize BF3 is a better designed and put together game....
Click to expand...
Neither is released yet. And MW3 is sounding better than 2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Inside the Chaotic Development of Modern Warfare 3 - A Documentary
Analysis Trailer 
1
222
EverydayBeast replied
You cannot play modern warfare 3 on PS5 physical disc.
23
2K
Calverz replied
Nioh 3 | Review Thread
2 3
100
2K
MagiusNecros replied
Resident Evil 3 reaches its highest concurrent player number on Steam in six years | Modern Warfare (2019) breaks its Steam player record
Business Deals Platform  2
73
598
EverydayBeast replied
According to CharlieIntel, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 releases in October
Rumor Event 
44
439
Deficit replied
Top Bottom