PDA

View Full Version : Battlefield 3 vs. Modern Warfare 3


Teddiursa of the Sky
07-15-2011, 11:06 PM
Alright. Let's all face it. When it comes to popular video games, it is a clash between the titans. Call of Duty has been around since 2000, building up a massive fanbase ever since Call of Duty 2, it seems anybody who is a fan of the FPS genre has the newest addition to the Call of Duty line of releases. Call of Duty 4 was the game of the year, and got a 10/10 from Gamespot. With fans joining the ranks, it seems little could stop this monstrosity. Even with the poorly rated Treyarc-made Call of Duty Black Ops, the franchise managed to surpass any game in the amount of sales and pre-orders. However, it seems Infinity Ward and Treyarc's tyrannical rule has come to an end.

With Battlefield 3's announce in early 2010, the game boasts many new aspects. To cover the origin of Battlefield, it takes a slightly different road than Call of Duty. Being released in 2002, the first Battlefield game was Battlefield 1943. The game built a small but loyal fanbase. The game progressed through the years, making a moderately large and loyal fanbase. The game series is said to have never made horrible mistakes in the gameplay. The only badly rated Battlefield game was the Battlefield Bad Company I title. However, Bad Company II made a comeback, smashing down Call of Duty Modern Warfare 2 with a full point, getting a 9/10 from Gamespot, and leaving Modern Warfare 2 to pick up its 8 shattered points. Never had this been done by a Battlefield game.

However, the Bad Company series was only a spinoff, and when people hear Battlefield, they picture Bad Company 3. However, that is not the case. While Bad Company had smaller maps, Battlefield had massive maps, with helicopters and fighter jets strafing troops down below and shooting each other down in blazes of light.

Battlefield 3 brings back these features, with so much more. New customization, new and improved character classes, new maps, and... an entirely new and powerful engine. The game runs on the astonishingly amazing, power guzzling, giving-birth-to-God-worthy, Frostbite 2.0 engine. Frostbite 1.0 had simple walls being knocked down, and occasionally you'd see a building fall down, but as I said, that was only occasionally. Frostbite 2.0 allows entire facades of buildings fall on the fighting troops down below, crushing them with a loud smash. Entire curbs crumble from artillery strikes.

This begs to ask, how will Call of Duty fair? Call of Duty is no longer made by Treyarc or Infinity Ward. Two new companies are designing it under the umbrella of Activision. Raven Software and Sledgehammer Studios. It is brilliant to see some new faces in there... or is it? The gaming engine, for starters, has not changed ONE BIT. Ever since Call of Duty 4, the game has been running on the same engine that is heavily based off of the Unreal 3 engine. While it was pretty by technological standards five years ago, that is no longer the case. The game's graphics look astonishingly... how should I put this... dull? It looks like every other game now, and it has for years now. Yet, its arcade-style shooting lets players enjoy the small moments here and there, despite the massive amounts of cheap tricks. "Camping" and "n00b tubing" are still there, and God knows what they are doing with the Killstreaks.

So, with very little gameplay changing for Call of Duty, what is changing for Battlefield 3?

Yes, pretty pretty graphics. But what does that mean? As we have seen with many games in the past, gameplay is the thing that counts, right? Well, it seems DICE thought of that too. There are now only 4 classes in Battlefield 3, unlike the whopping 7 different ones in Battlefield 2.

Assault - "Imma rush em', mom!" Okay, but do be a dear and... heal your teammates!? The assault class has now been combined with the Medic class. "Oh no!" says the skeptic gamer. However, that is not the case. Originally, the Medic was equipped with light machine guns, you know, m249 SAWs which made the medic slightly overpowering with their ability to heal themselves and others. The Assault can now heal and revive their downed teammates, and run around on the front lines. Don't want to waste a slot for the medic equipment? Want to pack a little extra punch? In it for just the kills? You can remove the medical equipment and equip your trust grenade launcher, shotgun attachment, or what have you.

Note: You are now able to choose, when you are downed, if you can be revived or not. This could be pesky if you are downed in the middle of a road. You'd get shot immediately after being revived.

Scout - "I'm a sniper! I'm a sniper!" No, you are not a sniper. The closest thing you can be to a sniper is a Scout. Your objective is not only to take down key enemies at long distances, you are also to spot the enemies and give feedback so your entire team knows what is coming their way. However, in BFBC2, there was a problem with the sniping system. Quick scope time, no scope sway, and powerful bolt-action rifles made the sniper an overpowered class. The Scout was originally the "noob tube" of Battlefield 3. Well, this has changed. Camp in one spot too long, the lens glare from your sniper scope gives away your position. This makes you have to move constantly and find new areas to snipe from. Tired of quick scope rushers? Sway and slower scope times have been implementing. This has successfully balanced said class.

Engineer - "Oh no! A tank! What ever shall I-!" what tank? The Engineer, equipped with a powerful sub-machine gun, anti-tank equipment, and the know-how to fix a tank on the battlefield, the Engineer is a must-have for anyone planning on tackling an enemy armored vehicle. The Engineer plays a vital role, repairing vehicles and taking down large targets. Throwing down explosives to blow a whole in the wall, or taking down an entire enemy base. That is what the Engineer is good at.

NEW* Support - "We are outnumbered! Suppressing fire!" Oh, I can do that with my bigass gun. The Support class is a new addition and the finale of the classes. The Support class is able to replenish the ammunition of his teammates, as well as carrying down a... You guessed it, a Light Machine Gun. DICE has added the "Suppressing Fire" bonus and effect. When a player is under this effect, sight becomes blurred, movement is slowed, and accuracy is reduced. This is very lifelike to what said effect is actually like.

With this, you'd think the game would not have a single player, right? That is where you are dead wrong. DICE is working into making a game with a truly wonderful and immersive story.

Never worry about vehicles being too powerful. DICE has always managed to keep vehicles very well balanced in the games.

NEW* Squad leaders have been put back into Battlefield. This is a good and bad thing. DICE has made it so players can only spawn on their squad leaders if they want to spawn directly into the combat. This is bad because many strategies depended on managing to spawn on any teammate. However, this also solves the problem of shooting at an enemy, and then watching 5 more enemies crawling out of his ass. It is still, somehow, a balanced and very good decision made by DICE. Can they do anything wrong?

Call of Duty may very well die with the new release. We never know though, maybe the two new companies will surprise us with a game that manages to beat Call of Duty 4. However, with many CoD fans already switching over to BF, it is a very grim time for Call of Duty diehards.

Operative
07-15-2011, 11:16 PM
EA got the jump start on a release date by moving BF3 in front of MW3 by a month. Not many people buy new released titles every month, especially of the same genre.
While many CoD fans are looking forward to BF3 coming out, very few will be leaving CoD.

I'm probably going to buy both games during opening week because of the really good teasers we got but to be honest, Infinity Ward doesn't support their games and I wasn't that much of a fan of any Battlefield. They seemed too slow paced for me so hopefully this will change it up for me.

Teddiursa of the Sky
07-15-2011, 11:22 PM
EA got the jump start on a release date by moving BF3 in front of MW3 by a month. Not many people buy new released titles every month, especially of the same genre.
While many CoD fans are looking forward to BF3 coming out, very few will be leaving CoD.

I'm probably going to buy both games during opening week because of the really good teasers we got but to be honest, Infinity Ward doesn't support their games and I wasn't that much of a fan of any Battlefield. They seemed too slow paced for me so hopefully this will change it up for me.

BF 3 preorders already outnumber Call of Duty preorders by over half. While we still have a few months to go, it is looking dire for the CoD series, and since CoD has not brought anything to the table, and Black Ops was such a massive faliure, Call of Duty has dug itself in a massive hole.

Operative
07-16-2011, 12:54 AM
BF 3 preorders already outnumber Call of Duty preorders by over half. While we still have a few months to go, it is looking dire for the CoD series, and since CoD has not brought anything to the table, and Black Ops was such a massive faliure, Call of Duty has dug itself in a massive hole.

I don't lump together Call of Duty as a whole. I separate it between Infinity Ward and Treyarch. I haven't liked any previous Call of Duty games other than Black Ops. It wasn't actually a massive failure, there were only really complaints about quickscoping being 'gone' (which it isn't) and butthurt kids wanting to nerf everything in the game. Treyarch supported their games while IW takes the money they make and runs. And as for the BF3 outnumbering the MW3 preorders, that's completely false. link (http://www.vgchartz.com/preorders.php)

Woodchuck
07-16-2011, 06:40 AM
Unless Modern Warfare 3 more closely resembles CoD4 than MW2, I have absolutely no desire to play it. I've been kind of burned out on shooters lately, but if I was going to go out and buy one this year, it'd definitely be BF3, if for no other reason than to marvel at that kickass lighting engine that DICE has come up with.

But yeah, I have a feeling that Skyrim will be taking up most of my gaming time in the later part of this year anyway, so I don't really care about the shooter genre all that much.

Teddiursa of the Sky
07-16-2011, 01:00 PM
I don't lump together Call of Duty as a whole. I separate it between Infinity Ward and Treyarch. I haven't liked any previous Call of Duty games other than Black Ops. It wasn't actually a massive failure, there were only really complaints about quickscoping being 'gone' (which it isn't) and butthurt kids wanting to nerf everything in the game. Treyarch supported their games while IW takes the money they make and runs. And as for the BF3 outnumbering the MW3 preorders, that's completely false. link (http://www.vgchartz.com/preorders.php)

It was not completely false. Last time I checked (about 3 weeks ago), it was far different.

And yes, Black Ops was a total failure, and Treyarc knew that. I can give you links to plenty of official gaming sites and channels to prove that. Such as Machinima, GamerSpawn, TGN, RoosterTeeth, etc. have all recognized the Black Ops failure. Modern Warfare 2 was much, much better. Even then though, there were major gripes about MW2. The constant rain of UAV guided rockets and other killstreaks, the constant camping sprees, overpowered weapons, quick scoping. It was a mess even then. Not to even get started on perks.

Most professional and amateur gamers alike agree that Call of Duty has been going down hill relatively steeply since Call of Duty 4. The only reason it sells so well is because it is a Call of Duty game. It is supposed to be great, however many gamers are starting to catch on to its extreme repetitiveness and lack ingenuity.

Daughter of Mew
07-17-2011, 08:12 AM
I agree that Call of Duty has been going downhill. I'm not a fan of Black Ops, and the last time I went on CoD4 it was hacked really badly. Everybody has teleport mods and wallhack. >.<

While I'm kind of expecting MW3 to be decent, what with the new developer having a "Youtube famous" community director, I'm probably going to end up buying Battlefield 3 before MW3. I won't get either when they're released, I'll wait a while for the prices to drop a little or until preowned ones start to appear. I'll probably end up getting both, although I'm starting to lose interest in gaming in general. Too many screaming kids and racist idiots nowadays. *unfortunately plays Xbox*

I hope BF3 sells better than MW3. Activision need to get off their money-driven high horse and start caring about what the fans actually want. Things started going downhill for them with MW2.

Teddiursa of the Sky
07-18-2011, 10:04 PM
I agree that Call of Duty has been going downhill. I'm not a fan of Black Ops, and the last time I went on CoD4 it was hacked really badly. Everybody has teleport mods and wallhack. >.<

While I'm kind of expecting MW3 to be decent, what with the new developer having a "Youtube famous" community director, I'm probably going to end up buying Battlefield 3 before MW3. I won't get either when they're released, I'll wait a while for the prices to drop a little or until preowned ones start to appear. I'll probably end up getting both, although I'm starting to lose interest in gaming in general. Too many screaming kids and racist idiots nowadays. *unfortunately plays Xbox*

I hope BF3 sells better than MW3. Activision need to get off their money-driven high horse and start caring about what the fans actually want. Things started going downhill for them with MW2.

You'd actually get a better deal preordering BF3. If you preorder it, you get the new map pack, "Back to Karkand" at no additional cost. (60 euro)

And, as we have seen with Call of Duty games, they hardly ever drop in price. Call of Duty 4 is still 50 euro here.

Stardy
07-19-2011, 04:13 AM
They're two completely different games, only similar in the fact that they're war shooters. Difference is Battlefield wants to pander to the more "hardcore and edgy" of the genre and gain Call of Duty level fame, while Call of Duty wants to pander to everybody for more sales, which they continue to get anyway so they don't need to be worried about much, if anything at all.

It really isn't fair to compare the two in the slightest, and this whole fanboy war about which one is better, more sales and whatever else they're going on about is stupid. And I don't even like Call of Duty in the slightest and hyped for Battlefield 3 so much.

Teddiursa of the Sky
07-19-2011, 11:36 AM
They're two completely different games, only similar in the fact that they're war shooters. Difference is Battlefield wants to pander to the more "hardcore and edgy" of the genre and gain Call of Duty level fame, while Call of Duty wants to pander to everybody for more sales, which they continue to get anyway so they don't need to be worried about much, if anything at all.

It really isn't fair to compare the two in the slightest, and this whole fanboy war about which one is better, more sales and whatever else they're going on about is stupid. And I don't even like Call of Duty in the slightest and hyped for Battlefield 3 so much.

No, it is completely fair. What wouldn't be fair is comparing Halo and Call of Duty.

Stardy
07-19-2011, 05:02 PM
No, it is completely fair. What wouldn't be fair is comparing Halo and Call of Duty.
I fail to see how it's fair in the slightest. Both are upcoming multiplatform war shooters (their only similarity), that play completely different to the other (one hosts giant team battles set on lush plains, the other is Call of Duty), and the idea that people are choosing one or the other instead of enjoying the actual games is incredibly stupid. Maybe I'm not hardcore of enough gamer to choose one or the other and participate in fanboy wars, who knows, but to me, an average FPS fan, it's an incredibly stupid war that shouldn't even be happening and instead, people should be hyped about how fun the games look, hyped for the storylines the game will include, hyped for the idea of playing with their friends on the games, etc., rather than choose to go after the other fanbase and talk about how their game will be better with no guarentees about anything.

Halo and Call of Duty doesn't even make sense. No idea why people do that.

Teddiursa of the Sky
07-19-2011, 08:10 PM
I fail to see how it's fair in the slightest. Both are upcoming multiplatform war shooters (their only similarity), that play completely different to the other (one hosts giant team battles set on lush plains, the other is Call of Duty), and the idea that people are choosing one or the other instead of enjoying the actual games is incredibly stupid. Maybe I'm not hardcore of enough gamer to choose one or the other and participate in fanboy wars, who knows, but to me, an average FPS fan, it's an incredibly stupid war that shouldn't even be happening and instead, people should be hyped about how fun the games look, hyped for the storylines the game will include, hyped for the idea of playing with their friends on the games, etc., rather than choose to go after the other fanbase and talk about how their game will be better with no guarentees about anything.

Halo and Call of Duty doesn't even make sense. No idea why people do that.

I am not a fanboy. I was once a heavy supporter and fan of Call of Duty.


You fail to see the actual differences in the games. Call of Duty is an arcade-style shooter. Battlefield tries to be more realistic. However, it is definitely fair to compare the two, since they both attempt to do the same thing. Obtain or hold the number one shooter position.

IGN compared Call of Duty Black Ops to Halo: Reach during their video review, and IGN is professional.

Some people are not graced with enough time or money to purchase both, so they would have to choose 1 over the other. Plus, if one of the games is horrible enough, why buy it in the first place?

Stardy
07-19-2011, 09:36 PM
I am not a fanboy. I was once a heavy supporter and fan of Call of Duty.
Never said you were. Just said that fanboys bring it up all the time.

You fail to see the actual differences in the games. Call of Duty is an arcade-style shooter. Battlefield tries to be more realistic. However, it is definitely fair to compare the two, since they both attempt to do the same thing. Obtain or hold the number one shooter position.

Eh, they have the same goal. The goal is a good one, make the best game they possibly can. But rather than focus on praising their on series, people are taking this wayyyyy to far.

IGN compared Call of Duty Black Ops to Halo: Reach during their video review, and IGN is professional.

I know. I merely stated I don't get why people do that. You said it yourself, they're two completely different games.

Some people are not graced with enough time or money to purchase both, so they would have to choose 1 over the other. Plus, if one of the games is horrible enough, why buy it in the first place?
People should certainly choose one or the other if they only have enough for one. They shouldn't limit themselves to one, rule out getting the other one in the future and spend every day trying to get one over on the others fanbase, like Battlefield and Call of Duty fans have been doing, just to support their respective franchises in a silly war the online community has brought about. And if one of the games are horrible, I guess the other one won then.


All in all, still see it as pointless and completely overdone by the fans. If they've made the choice to pick one of the games over the others, that's fine. No reason to go all out and talk about how they're gonna kick the ass of another game though, that's only similarities are they're also trying to make a great game and it's another shooter based on war. Woah, with everything being this close together, they clearly must be put head to head, mano e mano, one on one, see which one is truely the greatest by the fanboys, with an answer never to actually be found.

Teddiursa of the Sky
07-19-2011, 09:43 PM
All in all, still see it as pointless and completely overdone by the fans. If they've made the choice to pick one of the games over the others, that's fine. No reason to go all out and talk about how they're gonna kick the ass of another game though, that's only similarities are they're also trying to make a great game and it's another shooter based on war. Woah, with everything being this close together, they clearly must be put head to head, mano e mano, one on one, see which one is truely the greatest by the fanboys, with an answer never to actually be found.

I don't. It is apparently as important to them as the presidential elections are to the people who actually give a crap about political parties anymore xD However, I do not have enough money for both, and since I am expecting Call of Duty not to deliver, I preoredered BF3. (I GET BACK TO KARKAND FOR FREE TOO! YEAH!)

And I know you didn't call me a fanboy, I was simply stating that since I sort of sound like one above.

Stardy
07-19-2011, 11:09 PM
I don't. It is apparently as important to them as the presidential elections are to the people who actually give a crap about political parties anymore xD However, I do not have enough money for both, and since I am expecting Call of Duty not to deliver, I preoredered BF3. (I GET BACK TO KARKAND FOR FREE TOO! YEAH!)

And I know you didn't call me a fanboy, I was simply stating that since I sort of sound like one above.

Yeah, they have went completely overboard with it and whatnot. At least the presidential elections are about the future of America. I guess. :p

I probably won't have enough for both as well, and probably will preorder Battlefield 3 as well. I'll get MW3 if I have money to spare I guess, but yeah, I've made my choice as well. Battlefield 3 Brofist.

Ah, fair enough then, I apologize for the misunderstanding. You didn't really come off as a fanboy to me though, but whatever. :tongue:

Teddiursa of the Sky
07-19-2011, 11:11 PM
Yeah, they have went completely overboard with it and whatnot. At least the presidential elections are about the future of America. I guess. :p

I probably won't have enough for both as well, and probably will preorder Battlefield 3 as well. I'll get MW3 if I have money to spare I guess, but yeah, I've made my choice as well. Battlefield 3 Brofist.

Ah, fair enough then, I apologize for the misunderstanding. You didn't really come off as a fanboy to me though, but whatever. :tongue:

Thanks! Yeah, I am just hyping BF3 because:

A) It is a good game!

B) It lacks the popularity CoD has (though that is starting to change).