BF3 or MW3

  • Thread starter Thread starter DDD4175
  • 72 comments
  • 4,974 views

What should I get?

  • BF3

    Votes: 42 79.2%

  • MW3

    Votes: 11 20.8%
  • Total voters
    53
DDD4175

DDD4175

Messages
71
Messages
DDD4175
Story wise: Since BF3 looks :censored:ing gorgeous, i'm planning on getting it, before I do though should I get BF1/2 to follow the story? Or is it not worth it to get BF1/2 for the story? Or there isn't any?
Gameplay wise: I have never played any BF, ever. but I've followed CoD since CoD:MW and all I get is same old animations... Stupid...
Graphics wise: Pssh. No need to talk about it... Stupid Activision too lazy to change Graphic engines...

So what should I get for better War game experience, The one that really packs a punch

(I have a 46" LED Samsung Series 6 TV with a Bangin Home theatre!)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Battlefield bad company is completely different to BF3. Bad company was a seperate story. So you dont really need to get them.

As for comparing BF to COD, Bf will give you a more realistic experience as COD is just arcade type for kids lol but thats my opinion.
 
Neither,

ARMA 3...

(wont be out for a while yet though)
 
If your only buying them for the single player then I would suggest just renting both of them. Multiplayer however my vote goes to BF3. MW3 looks to be nothing more than a map pack, and because i own all the other COD's ive burnt myself out on them. They've also became too easy as they pretty much all play the same way. Battlefield 3 is something new too me and i just love the large maps, vehicles and that the smarter player (teams) will win the round.
 
Silent7Sniper7
Battlefield bad company is completely different to BF3. Bad company was a seperate story. So you dont really need to get them.

As for comparing BF to COD, Bf will give you a more realistic experience as COD is just arcade type for kids lol but thats my opinion.
Click to expand...

I agree with CoD being an arcade type.
Yeh I would probably get BF3
 
mika haka
If your only buying them for the single player then I would suggest just renting both of them. Multiplayer however my vote goes to BF3. MW3 looks to be nothing more than a map pack, and because i own all the other COD's ive burnt myself out on them. They've also became too easy as they pretty much all play the same way. Battlefield 3 is something new too me and i just love the large maps, vehicles and that the smarter player (teams) will win the round.
Click to expand...

Yeh I just saw a video with a really large map
 
I voted for MW3 because CoD is more fun in my opinion. If you want realistic graphics go outside :P lol. Fun gameplay > good graphics. Not like there's anything bad with MW graphics anyway.

I agree to some extent with the 'MW3 is just MW2 with an expansion pack' but apart from some key flaws, the game was fun as heck to play, and MW3 fixes these key flaws, and then gives you extra things to play with, so win win! Just showing MW some love in this thread lol.

Tbh it's down to what YOU prefer, fast action packed gameplay, or slower, more realistic gameplay. When I played BFBC2 I thought it was ok, but not really my cuppa really. Download the BF3 beta and see if you like it!
 
As far as multiplayer goes... If youre a lone wolf and like to run&gun in really fast paced action... MW3... If you like teamwork and using your head to beat the enemy with a little more laid back pace and vehicles... BF3. For the singleplayer campaign I still think MW has the upper hand... Battlefield only recently started doing single player campaigns IIRC...
 
Having epic fun playing the BF3 Online Beta! 👍

The really great part about BF3 and in general games with classes, you have so much more ways of playing it.
If you're tired of running around and shooting people, become a medic and follow some players around and heal them. Or become a sniper and try to get silently deep into enemy territory to provide a more tactical spawn point.
And when infantry fails, jump into a chopper, a tank, a buggy or get your own jet fighter and start doing barrel rolls in the sky.

With MW3 you ONLY get points for kills pretty much.
 
TP1
With MW3 you ONLY get points for kills pretty much.
Click to expand...
I'm going to have to jump in here and correct you - IW have changed how MW3 killstreaks work and you now get points for capping flags and planting/defusing bombs. :)
 
Is this the first thread? Can't be.

Anyway, I'm one of 2 that chose for MW3 because I like a more fast paced team deathmatch action.
The games in MW2 were a tad short but I think 15 minutes per game is a max for me.
 
Before anyone strikes me down, this is a serious question because I'm not that well informed about BF3.

But how much difference is there in online gameplay between BF2 and BF3? Except for single player.
 
Blitz187
As far as multiplayer goes... If youre a lone wolf and like to run&gun in really fast paced action... MW3... If you like teamwork and using your head to beat the enemy with a little more laid back pace and vehicles... BF3. For the singleplayer campaign I still think MW has the upper hand... Battlefield only recently started doing single player campaigns IIRC...
Click to expand...

Y'see, having spent couple of years with a regular gang on MW2 it is very rewarding if you're in a team. If there's 2/3 of us only on then we struggle, get 6 and we'll rarely lose.

That's something BF3 won't do, talking between squads, which is annoying. Or at least BC2 didn't and I've heard it's same again. There may not be any direct rewards like Spotting Bonus, but there are rewards in the form of winning!

I have no idea what I'll end up buying. I was very underwhelmed by the BF3 beta. Sure it's not bad, but it just feels a bit lacking in finesse of control/shooting. Whereas MW has always been quite direct, which is how it should be. Just felt I was swaying all the time in the beta. No pre-order, just wait and see what people think of the full version.

MW3 doesn't need to do much for me to buy it tbh. I still enjoy MW2, even with the hacking to death it's had since PSN went down. Get rid of teamkillers, better maps, better balance of guns is about it.
 
I'll be getting both. Modern Warfare is more arcade and fast paced, while Battlefield is a little more realistic, has a much slower pace and relies heavily on teamwork. Both look like great games and if I could choose only one I'd get the one most of my friends are getting. Both games are much more fun when you have your friends playing with you and Battlefield really requires good teamwork (which most random people you will meet online know nothing about it seems) to win matches but the experience is extremely rewarding when your little squad completely destroys the opposing team.

If you haven't done so yet, I suggest downloading the Battlefield 3 Beta and see how you like it. Sure there are some bugs here and there but the overall feel and gameplay will remain very similar in the final game.


Parker


Parker
 
BF3 or MW3? Neither of these two. I say: BMW M3.

On topic, I'd like to ask which one of these two games is the most user-friendly for a beginner like me?
 
lapierre4
BF3 or MW3? Neither of these two. I say: BMW M3.

On topic, I'd like to ask which one of these two games is the most user-friendly for a beginner like me?
Click to expand...

Lol, I don't know really, try your preference
 
get either both both good games both going to be fun I personally am looking forward to MW3 but I am also thinking of geting BF3
 
I pre-ordered BF3 for PC and I will prob pre-order it for PS3. I will at some point get MW3, but when the price goes down, I'm in no hurry to get that game
 
MindlessRiff
I voted for MW3 because CoD is more fun in my opinion. If you want realistic graphics go outside :P lol. Fun gameplay > good graphics. Not like there's anything bad with MW graphics anyway.

I agree to some extent with the 'MW3 is just MW2 with an expansion pack' but apart from some key flaws, the game was fun as heck to play, and MW3 fixes these key flaws, and then gives you extra things to play with, so win win! Just showing MW some love in this thread lol.

Tbh it's down to what YOU prefer, fast action packed gameplay, or slower, more realistic gameplay. When I played BFBC2 I thought it was ok, but not really my cuppa really. Download the BF3 beta and see if you like it!
Click to expand...


You honestly think that Battlefield is that much more popular on here because of graphics? How about, massive maps, tanks and helecopters and heavily teamwork objective based gameplay. Theres certaintly nothing slow about battlefield gameplay and it really isnt realistic.

I found MW2 was trying to be like counterstrike but wasnt as good, Battlefield has its own thing going on.
 
Get battlefield. Massive, open warfare. Huge maps, often packed with vehicles, and aircraft (jets!).

If you want some idea of what it's like then download the open beta for whatever console you own. In that you can play rush on an all new urban map. This has more urban scenery than before though, so it's very different to the previous battlefields, which had very few urban areas.
 
ryanb98
Get battlefield. Massive, open warfare. Huge maps, often packed with vehicles, and aircraft (jets!).

If you want some idea of what it's like then download the open beta for whatever console you own. In that you can play rush on an all new urban map. This has more urban scenery than before though, so it's very different to the previous battlefields, which had very few urban areas.
Click to expand...

BF2 had many urban maps.

To the OP: really depends on what you like. Im probably getting both. Sometimes i might want to play fast paced run n gun mw3. Or gawk at gorgeous graphics use vehicles and have major large scale battles and enjoy all this with teamwork with good friends.
 
Bigbazz
You honestly think that Battlefield is that much more popular on here because of graphics? How about, massive maps, tanks and helecopters and heavily teamwork objective based gameplay. Theres certaintly nothing slow about battlefield gameplay and it really isnt realistic.

I found MW2 was trying to be like counterstrike but wasnt as good, Battlefield has its own thing going on.
Click to expand...

I don't know what makes battlefield popular really I'll be honest, as I haven't played it much, but whenever I hear someone mention it graphics always pops up as an argument, which to me doesn't matter. Also I didn't necessarily say BF was slow exactly, or super realistic, I just said it was slower and more realistic in comparison to CoD.

IMO, battlefield is much more of a PC than a console game. You get more players and better graphics on PC (if it's good!).

Tbh I don't get all the 'CoD requires no teamwork' comment either. Sure you don't have to cooperate and can just run around. But if you come up against a good team, you WILL get stomped, no matter how good you are as an individual. CoD only gets a bad rep for this I guess because it's more popular and alot of 'kids' play it who run about trying to get a 360 quad headshot noscope game winner in S&D lol.
 
MindlessRiff
I don't know what makes battlefield popular really I'll be honest, as I haven't played it much, but whenever I hear someone mention it graphics always pops up as an argument, which to me doesn't matter. Also I didn't necessarily say BF was slow exactly, or super realistic, I just said it was slower and more realistic in comparison to CoD.

IMO, battlefield is much more of a PC than a console game. You get more players and better graphics on PC (if it's good!).

Tbh I don't get all the 'CoD requires no teamwork' comment either. Sure you don't have to cooperate and can just run around. But if you come up against a good team, you WILL get stomped, no matter how good you are as an individual. CoD only gets a bad rep for this I guess because it's more popular and alot of 'kids' play it who run about trying to get a 360 quad headshot noscope game winner in S&D lol.
Click to expand...


You just answered it yourself, in battlefield you HAVE to work as a team. COD games you can just run around in a circle and kill everyone.

BF is a game of chess, MW is a game of checkers
 

Latest Posts

Back