Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

MW3 or Battlefield 3?


donkeyd

Recommended Posts

Which one is better and why?

Personally I dont think that MW3 can beat battlefield for the online gameplay. Its not instant gratification like MW3 but its the shiznit for the strategy and skill required to win. I also love that the KD ratio is a non-factor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

k/d ratio could be a nonfactor in cod but too many people use it as their gold standard already. it's also because 1 person is able to dominate an entire round. whereas 1 person can easily be avoided in bf3.

i tend to like battlefield because once the launch day twats leave for other games, it tends to level off from the dumbassery and generally gets better and more fun to play. whereas cod gets people asking for nerfs for certain weapons because so much of the game is on the guns. i.e. AK74uMAD?, famas, etc.

It's also because bf3 allows on-the-fly adjustment for what you carry. You die, you can change to adapt. not just classes you set before the match and get screwed for having because some guy is being a douche with a certain gun.

also no kill streaks. just vehicles that you need skill to control.

they really are apples and oranges though. totally different play styles required. it's just a matter of taste and preference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apples and oranges. Depends on what kind of FPS you like. COD is more of a run and gun twitch shooter. Battlefield is a game based around teamwork and strategy. Both are good at what they do. Also, Battlefield has bigger maps, vehicles and destructible environments. I prefer Battlefield myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't like either game much but if I had to choose I'd say MW3. In Battlefield the maps are too large and the spawn points are too far away. MW3 you spend most of your time actually doing something that is productive and fun. BF3 most time is wasted waiting to respawn or traveling to where the enemy is. Both take way too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apples and oranges. Depends on what kind of FPS you like. COD is more of a run and gun twitch shooter. Battlefield is a game based around teamwork and strategy. Both are good at what they do. Also, Battlefield has bigger maps, vehicles and destructible environments. I prefer Battlefield myself.

I'd agree with this. It's like comparing Burnout Paradise to Gran Turismo. I'll take Burnout Paradise any day of the week over GT, but that's because I like arcade racers and exploring towns in cars as opposed to driving in a circle and turning left for 48 hours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's funny that people think MW3 is instant gratification and BF3 isn't. What is the spawn wait time on BF3, like 5 seconds tops?

My point was that in BF3 it takes time and teamwork to win the game. (At least on Rush and Conquest.) Also the instant gratification in MW3 is greater because of killstreaks and smaller maps. I think in BF3 that the reward doesn't come as often but when it does it feels better making the game overall more fun. Also, I am so sick of the stupid sh*t in COD like spawn camping, having to unload an entire clip to kill someone and 5 year olds running around with overpowered weapons. Also, when there are 2 people playing under the same account i.e. dbo5001(2) it leads to an unfair advantage because the teammate can see where you are through the split screen. Im not saying COD is bad. Hell I played the the crap out of mw2 and black ops but MW3 is just disappointing. Its the same stuff with different maps. MW2.5

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • After the Chiefs game a 6'5 X would really help in the Red zone. I would also love to add Slayton in FA 
    • But again, you can restock a defense through free agency much easier than offensive skill positions. Spend all our cap space on defense, take a true elite prospect who also happens to fit a position of need in T-Mac, and then use the rest of our picks on defense. Again, every season there’s a smattering of great DL, LB, and DB options in free agency, a Top 10 WR never hits free agency, ever.  The only way you get one is through the draft or giving up 1st round picks in a trade for one. If he’s there when we’re on the clock, he has to be the pick, he’s just that good.  
    • It must be an early Christmas for JT O'Sullivan having Thielen back so he could put a coal in Thielen's stocking every chance he gets.  Honestly, the biggest surprise is not so much the anticipation. There were those moments here and there last year as well. It's that even that one positive quality he had seemingly vanished his first two games to where it looked like it was all but over, only for it to start coming back some until you get exclamation points all over this game film. And some of those throws were under a lot of duress, something I feel is something new. Finally, those deeper shots are starting to land. Not all of them, but enough that defenses may have to start respecting them. No guarantees whether this will end up as more of anomaly but I certainly hope it isn't. The Green Bay game was a sampler of what BY could be. Against KC, we got a meal. If we could start getting these meals regularly, we might actually have something to work with here.
×
×
  • Create New...