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

Modern Warfare 3 Versus Battlefield 3 Garbage Thread

I'm already enjoying MW3 more. MUCH better SP, better co op by some margin and great MP(for now). What I absolutely hate about BF3 is a fucking screen tearing. I never played 360 game with more screen tearing, so distracting. MW3 is better product, no doubt about that.
 
Stallion Free said:
You can do the same with MW1 - MW2 and BC2 - BF3.
Click to expand...

The building recycling in BF3 is pretty sad. Hilarious to enter a building/scaffold/trailer for the "first time" and know exactly where the exactly where everything is.
 
[Nintex] said:
Imagine if the Dark Knight Rises used scenes from Batman Begins and The Dark Knight...
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the Internet would still praise it as the greatest achievement in human film making ever.
 
[Nintex] said:
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 is a recycled mess. Copy & paste design, the only thing they changed between now and COD4 graphically is the lighting and some models. It's a fucking disgrace really.
Click to expand...

Hey hey hey, cool it there! At least the MW3 guys now run looking like they just dropped a load in their pants. THAT'S INNOVATION!
 
DarkChild said:
I'm already enjoying MW3 more. MUCH better SP, better co op by some margin and great MP(for now). What I absolutely hate about BF3 is a fucking screen tearing. I never played 360 game with more screen tearing, so distracting. MW3 is better product, no doubt about that.
Click to expand...

Sure, if you think BF3 and MW3 were meant to be competitors in that sense on console. But if you put them side by side on a capable PC, your opinion would flip immediately. Not that I disagree with you, because I don't. But the target audience makes a difference here.
 
GrizzNKev said:
Sure, if you think BF3 and MW3 were meant to be competitors in that sense on console. But if you put them side by side on a capable PC, your opinion would flip immediately. Not that I disagree with you, because I don't. But the target audience makes a difference here.
Click to expand...
Exactly. Than again, I played every BF from 1942 and I always enjoyed COD games more. I like fast paced combat much more than big one like in BF.
 
I had fun with MW1 and 2 and I have no doubt 3 has a good single player but...I already play BF3 online and that takes up too much of my time already. I simply wouldn't have time for MW3 so it would be a waste of $$. This won't drop in price for a while though...MW2 was still $50 last week used at gamestop
 
How could I have missed this hilarious thread? Glad to see all the usual suspects are here :)
 
I'm actually impressed by how much of the screen-tearing on 360 (only console version I've played) has been toned down. It's actually not that bad. If MW3 had maps this size with drivable vehicles, helos, jets, destruction and better graphics...it'd be met with the same hurdle of getting it to run good on 360. Easy to get 60fps with the COD engine and what it's not doing.
 
I love IGN's review for Modern Warfare 3 cause it was forced to be written to have a side-by-side comparison with Battlefield 3, while making sure BF3 looks like shit with less buffer words.


Z2ztP.jpg
 
carfo said:
I had fun with MW1 and 2 and I have no doubt 3 has a good single player but...I already play BF3 online and that takes up too much of my time already. I simply wouldn't have time for MW3 so it would be a waste of $$. This won't drop in price for a while though...MW2 was still $50 last week used at gamestop
Click to expand...
If you read between the lines, the reviews gave MW3 great ratings because of its multiplayer features: specs ops and the two other mp ones.
 
Metalmurphy said:
You can?

I certainly don't remember any, specially since all the destruction is now handled differently.
Click to expand...
You can do it with just about any sequel on the same or a similar engine. Assets are reused between games, that is a fact.


GrizzNKev said:
Sure, if you think BF3 and MW3 were meant to be competitors in that sense on console. But if you put them side by side on a capable PC, your opinion would flip immediately. Not that I disagree with you, because I don't. But the target audience makes a difference here.
Click to expand...
Playing on PC doesn't fix BF3's singleplayer being shit.
 
Stallion Free said:
You can do it with just about any sequel on the same or a similar engine. Assets are reused between games, that is a fact.



Playing on PC doesn't fix BF3's singleplayer being shit.
Click to expand...
But it's basically the same SP that COD has had for YEARS. It's just the MP that is the biggest difference and that's where COD can't touch BF. That's a fact. No need for debate. You can't debate facts anyhow. Because they are, in fact, facts.
 
shagg_187 said:
I love IGN's review for Modern Warfare 3 cause it was forced to be written to have a side-by-side comparison with Battlefield 3, while making sure BF3 looks like shit with less buffer words.


Z2ztP.jpg
Click to expand...
When has CoD always run at 60fps on consoles? The game fluctuates quite a bit last time I checked.
 
Stallion Free said:
You can do it with just about any sequel on the same or a similar engine. Assets are reused between games, that is a fact.
Click to expand...

"Assets" is pretty general. A footstep sound file is an asset... But I was talking about an entire building.


I don't remember seeing any reused building.



Maybe the building under construction on Tehran Highway that just has the foundations, but even that one I'm not sure it's the same.
 
Stallion Free said:
You can do it with just about any sequel on the same or a similar engine. Assets are reused between games, that is a fact.



Playing on PC doesn't fix BF3's singleplayer being shit.
Click to expand...

At what point did I mention the SP? I was responding specifically to a statement about screen tearing, performance, and graphical presentation. Do you disagree in that aspect as well?
 
SirButterstick said:
Hey hey hey, cool it there! At least the MW3 guys now run looking like they just dropped a load in their pants. THAT'S INNOVATION!
Click to expand...

Wait, there's a new running animation in MW3? This makes it almost worth it to buy it in my opinion. God, the old running animation looked fantastically ridiculous.
 
Majanew said:
But it's basically the same SP that COD has had for YEARS.
Click to expand...

There's a huge difference in quality even they are similar in structure.

BF is like a shitty version of a COD campaign. It is significantly less fun than Black Ops and nowhere close to MW1 or 2.

Obviously anyone tired of a heavily scripted campaign based on set-pieces won't enjoy any of them, but there is room for significant variation in quality within that framework.
 
Majanew said:
But it's basically the same SP that COD has had for YEARS. It's just the MP that is the biggest difference and that's where COD can't touch BF. That's a fact. No need for debate. You can't debate facts anyhow. Because they are, in fact, facts.
Click to expand...

These people would disagree.

photo-2.JPG
 
jdmonmou said:
These people would disagree.

photo-2.JPG
Click to expand...
The same could be said about the millions who bought a Wii over PS3 or 360. The masses like simple and easy. CoD is just that, anyone can jump in and do ok. They know this based off the impressions I got from their noob/veteran commercial. Doesn't mean it's better though, just more appealing.
 
I watched some MW3 multiplayer streaming before the official US release yesterday and literally wasn't sure for a while if I was watching MW3 or if the streamer was prepping for MW3 by playing MW2. That's been my biggest gripe about the MW series. They've found their formula and are sticking to it so closely that each new release feels like a map pack for the original with minor tweaks. I played a ton of COD4 but didn't bother with the sequels because, well, I already played a ton of COD4. I'm not one of those people who can sink thousands of hours into the same game without getting bored.

The Battlefield series completely revamps the game mechanics with each release (and even the expansion packs). They always start off super buggy as a result, but that's something I can live with in exchange for a fresh gameplay experience.
 
ultron87 said:
There's a huge difference in quality even they are similar in structure.

BF is like a shitty version of a COD campaign. It is significantly less fun than Black Ops and nowhere close to MW1 or 2.

Obviously anyone tired of a heavily scripted campaign based on set-pieces won't enjoy any of them, but there is room for significant variation in quality within that framework.
Click to expand...

Both suck.
 
jonremedy said:
Wait, there's a new running animation in MW3? This makes it almost worth it to buy it in my opinion. God, the old running animation looked fantastically ridiculous.
Click to expand...

In point of fact the new running animations are keyed into game balance.

The bigger a weapon you're holding, the longer it takes you to get up to speed at full clip. Guys dashing out from behind cover will have slower acceleration if holding a bigger class of weapon.
 
I hear people say you've been buying the same game for years, especially in the MW3 review thread, but that's basically bollocks. COD/2 were great WW2 games, MW changed everything up, 2 took things to extreme. 3 is sat by me unplayed at the moment so I can't comment on how that changes things yet.

The games I feel like a mug for buying are the Treyarch ones. 3 was abysmal, WaW was decent but forgettable, Black Ops was a horrible experience.

When buying an IW game you're always going to get something new and exciting. It's the Treyarch games that have been so similar/underpar that has really stained the series. I don't care how tempted I am next year, I am NOT buying whatever CoD game is put out by Treyarch.
 
Foliorum Viridum said:
I hear people say you've been buying the same game for years, especially in the MW3 review thread, but that's basically bollocks. COD/2 were great WW2 games, MW changed everything up, 2 took things to extreme. 3 is sat by me unplayed at the moment so I can't comment on how that changes things yet.

The games I feel like a mug for buying are the Treyarch ones. 3 was abysmal, WaW was decent but forgettable, Black Ops was a horrible experience.

When commenting on IW you're always going to get something new and exciting. It's the Treyarch games that have been so similar/underpar that has really stained the series. I don't care how tempted I am next year, I am NOT buying whatever CoD game is put out by Treyarch.
Click to expand...
You won't be buying any more Call of Duty games after MW3.
 
Kaijima said:
In point of fact the new running animations are keyed into game balance.

The bigger a weapon you're holding, the longer it takes you to get up to speed at full clip. Guys dashing out from behind cover will have slower acceleration if holding a bigger class of weapon.
Click to expand...

It's funny how the bigger the weapon will change those things, yet has no impact on quickscoping abilities
 
Foliorum Viridum said:
I hear people say you've been buying the same game for years, especially in the MW3 review thread, but that's basically bollocks. COD/2 were great WW2 games, MW changed everything up, 2 took things to extreme. 3 is sat by me unplayed at the moment so I can't comment on how that changes things yet.

The games I feel like a mug for buying are the Treyarch ones. 3 was abysmal, WaW was decent but forgettable, Black Ops was a horrible experience.

When buying an IW game you're always going to get something new and exciting. It's the Treyarch games that have been so similar/underpar that has really stained the series. I don't care how tempted I am next year, I am NOT buying whatever CoD game is put out by Treyarch.
Click to expand...
That was the case, and why I appreciated IW games. But yeah, as the poster after you said, I won't be buying anymore IW games either if MW3 is an indication of anything. We got two Treyarchs now and nobody clever, smart and or risky enough at the helm to do what MW1 and MW2 did. The Madden-ing (TM) of another IP has been finalized.
 
Foliorum Viridum said:
I hear people say you've been buying the same game for years, especially in the MW3 review thread, but that's basically bollocks. COD/2 were great WW2 games, MW changed everything up, 2 took things to extreme. 3 is sat by me unplayed at the moment so I can't comment on how that changes things yet.

The games I feel like a mug for buying are the Treyarch ones. 3 was abysmal, WaW was decent but forgettable, Black Ops was a horrible experience.

When buying an IW game you're always going to get something new and exciting. It's the Treyarch games that have been so similar/underpar that has really stained the series. I don't care how tempted I am next year, I am NOT buying whatever CoD game is put out by Treyarch.
Click to expand...
Weird, I don't feel that way at all. For me the rankings regarding campaigns for the past four games go:

MW > W@W > Black Ops > MW2

And for MP:

MW > Black Ops > W@W > MW2

After MW2 I won't trust anything Infinity Ward touches unless it receives tons of positive feedback from GAF weeks after release.
 
So basically MW3's single player is 'less bad' then BF3's, and BF3's multi-player is 'more good' then MW3's.

Personally, I'd rather play a game that excells at it's good mode rather then one which tries to minimize the crapiness of it's bad one, since I'll be spending practically all my time playing the good mode anyway.
 
padlock said:
So basically MW3's single player is 'less bad' then BF3's, and BF3's multi-player is 'more good' then MW3's.

Personally, I'd rather play a game that excells at it's good mode rather then one which tries to minimize the crapiness of it's bad one, since I'll be spending practically all my time playing the good mode anyway.
Click to expand...
I don't think everyone is in agreement that BF3's multi-player is better than MW3's. In fact, I think that's really the major reason why this thread exists.

Not saying I disagree with you though. BF3 MP is 10 times more fun to me than any CoD I've played.
 
padlock said:
So basically MW3's single player is 'less bad' then BF3's, and BF3's multi-player is 'more good' then MW3's.

Personally, I'd rather play a game that excells at it's good mode rather then one which tries to minimize the crapiness of it's bad one, since I'll be spending practically all my time playing the good mode anyway.
Click to expand...
That really depends on who you ask.

The BF series and the CoD series are pretty much two different crowds. Trying to attract both to one game may work to some extent, but there will always be a fanbase (wouldn't even consider it a "hardcore" fanbase) that sticks around simply because of how different the two games are.
 
How does the movement in MW3 compare to BF3?

BF3 has perhaps the most fluid character movement and controls of any military FPS I've ever played. Your character's weight is palpable and the sense of momentum as you dive into prone or leap over objects is just fantastic. Feels so good just MOVING in the game.

Is MW3 worse or better than its predecessors in this regard? (Was not a big fan of MW2's rigid movement.)
 
Really have no desire to play any CoD games. I keep thinking to myself it should be strange. I was always a big CoD player.

Last one I bought was World at War. Just kinda died after that.

Now that I have flying a helicopter figured out in BF3 I see no reason to step backwards into CoD again.
 
Synless said:
The same could be said about the millions who bought a Wii over PS3 or 360. The masses like simple and easy. CoD is just that, anyone can jump in and do ok. They know this based off the impressions I got from their noob/veteran commercial. Doesn't mean it's better though, just more appealing.
Click to expand...

For a lot of people, Call of Duty isn't an easy multiplayer game. There are many people who get slaughtered, rage quit, and never pick it up again. It is easier to learn the mechanics of the game, but that doesn't necessarily make the game easier if you're going up against good competition. Also, if a game is easy to pick up and play then that is just plain good game design. Battlefield 3 is a good game but there is a disconnect with a lot of people in that there is a steeper learning curve and that you as a player can go the entire match without making a significant contribution to the outcome of the match. EA's best shot at competing with Call of Duty for the FPS crown will either be from future iterations of Medal of Honor or the next FPS game that Respawn comes out with.
 
Only with BF3 and MW3 releasing so close together that I learn that people actually care about the single player mode of FPS games. I always saved them for a time to play when servers were down or something like that and I didn't have anything better to do and wanted to farm achievements.
 
Also, just to put an end to this thread.

MW3 Metacritic: 90
BF3 Metacritic: 84

LOL

GG BF3, hope you enjoyed your short run.

GGGGGGG
 
I worked security at a local Gamestop for the launch last night. It was the biggest midnight crowd I have EVER seen at that store. I never thought anything would top the insanity that was Halo 3's launch. Last night did.

The monster known as Call of Duty is only getting bigger, people.
 
AnEternalEnigma said:
I worked security at a local Gamestop for the launch last night. It was the biggest midnight crowd I have EVER seen at that store. I never thought anything would top that night's Halo 3 insanity. Last night did.

CoD is only going to get bigger.
Click to expand...

I was in downtown San Francisco for Halo 3's launch and it wrapped around an entire city block.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Inside the Chaotic Development of Modern Warfare 3 - A Documentary
Analysis Trailer 
1
238
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
Rumor: Call of Duty Modern Warfare 4 reportedly being tested on PlayStation 4
2
73
184
PlayStaytion 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
665
EverydayBeast replied
Top Bottom