MW3 V.S BattleField3?

Which game do you think will be better???

personally, I HATE battlefield, so definitely mw3

Bf3.

mw3

Originally posted by Duckboii:

Bf3.

I’d go for BF3, as I’m more of a team player.

BF3 obviously, but Red Orchestra 2: Heroes of Stalingrad wins ’em both.

Crysis 2.

Originally posted by OMFGPwned:

Crysis 2.

Fail

I am going for Duke Nukem Forever.

Definitely BF3. CoD is running out of things they can add that stays true to the original series, while BF still can add new things to further improve and refine its flavor. Plus Battlefield 3 has the Frostbite engine and jets.

ima bf fanboy, so im gonna have to say mw3 (wtf) bf3

Well, according to EA: they have a superior engine, better game, bigger budget for advertisement and they are pretty sure they will beat cod with BF3. I’m not so sure about this but anyway i’m going with Bf3.

BF3 will thrash MW3.
I mean, seriously

id say bf3 because it has better graphics and is way better than mw3

Skyrim.

I don’t play much of either, more of a Halo man when it comes to big name FPS games.
But I’d have to say BF3. MW3 is like a generic FPS that’s easy to get into, but lacks a high amount of depth. It’s made to be easy for everyone to enjoy, and just play. BF3, while still sharing some of those attributes, happens to put more of a focus on in depth game play than MW3, and thus provides a more interesting experience, albeit a little more difficult.

Post it here as it is the right place for this question.

Ghost Recon?

Originally posted by Richard545:

Ghost Recon?

No.

Originally posted by Rocky91664:

id say bf3 because it has better graphics and is way better than mw3

Why would you bump this. You’re a horrible person.

MW3 is just another generic FPS modern shooter. Nothing new has been implemented apart from a few game modes. It’s also the only the CoD I dislike up to date.

BF3 is also another FPS modern shooter but although it has amazing graphics and online, it was still a ‘meh’ for me. I’ve honestly gotten so sick of modern shooters that no matter how good a modern FPS game plays I’ll still probably feel neutral to it as the sub-genre of Modern day shooters has been done way too many times.

Originally posted by MrG4G4:

ima bf fanboy, so im gonna have to say mw3 (wtf) bf3

Originally posted by TheLightningBolt:

Post it here as it is the right place for this question.

Battlefield has always been my kind of game, I have played most of the COD games from the first one on the xbox 360 but still much prefer Battlefield. As someone stated already it is much more of a team based game, not much skill is required to play Call of Duty, it reminds me of Halo Multiplayer – Whoever plulls the trigger first is going to win the gun fight… Which isn’t really a gun fight as it lasts less than 3 seconds. However when you are playing Battlefield, yes you take more than 2 bullets but in all honesty they have the whole “War” thing down to a T. You need a lot more patience, precision and perception. Just an all round better game in my opinion. Call of Duty is still playable when I am playing with friends though.

MW3 IS awesome, BF3 WAS awesome but after playing it for a couple days and the fact that it has a ONLINE-ONLY multiplayer, takes waaaay too long to unlock new stuff, servers are all sh*t/in China or America and has TOO MANY F-ING SNIPERS IN THE HILLS AND ANYWHERE ELSE, i disliked it. The campaign is pretty damn awesome and i might replay it again after a couple months of not playing the game in general, but that’s the only the only good thing about the game (except for the jets :D ) Where as MW3 has 15 presitges, easier to get guns and equipment, 80 levels, small-medium maps for hectic gameplay and alright sniping spots, a good campaign and has quickscoping (not that i really do it) which makes it better in basically every single way. MW3 > BF3 – Black Ops 2 > BF3/MW3 – MW2 (which is now crapish) > BF3 – BF3 is only better than NFS Underground 1 for PS2.