Which do you prefer? Why? Will you continue to buy the next installments in each? What do you like? What do you hate? What system do you play on?

 

I own BF 3 and MW3 both on ps3. I love them both, and plan on buying the next in each series.

My thoughts:

Reasons to love cod: fast paced, instant gratification, customizable, small learning curve, leveling system, more gametypes, campaign, multiplayer, variety, killstreaks, maps, massive playerbase.

 

Reasons to hate cod: frustrating, whiny kids, hit detection, lag, same guns are prominent, quick scoper leets, maps, killstreaks, panic knifing, TRYHARD ACR, FAMAS

 

Reasons to love BF: realism, graphics, environment, vehicles, more mature players (usually), squads, knifing animation, ability to choose maps, leveling system, larger games, kits, tactical, objective based.

 

Your thoughts?

 

Reasons to hate BF: vehicles, random weird servers, no killstreaks, camping, less action in some cases, glitching, less nice, harder to handle recoil.

Battlefield is better for me cause I like vehicles and tactical play. it's also much more realistic [suppressive fire in itself is a lot of fun]. The maps are well designed, teamwork is heartwarming and it's just overall more fun.

 

yes I will continue to buy every battlefield expansion/sequel until EA inevitably ruins the series.

 

COD?

It's mildly fun when I'm drunk. That's it's only appeal to me.

There's no CoD vs Battlefield, they're not even for the same type of players.

I can't foresee this thread ending well.

 

I think they're both very fun in small doses.

Battlefield by a mile. There's more to do, the gameplay is better.

 

Don't get me wrong, I will sit and play Cod4 for hours, but since 4 each release has been the same game, reskinned with more annoying shit added, terrible franchise these days.

There's no CoD vs Battlefield, they're not even for the same type of players.

 

OK.

 

I can't foresee this thread ending well.

 

I think they're both very fun in small doses.

 

Why small doses? And if people stay mature, the thread will be fine.

 

And if people stay mature, the thread will be fine.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Battlefield for me. Vehicles added in the mix are a huge dynamic that CoD's killstreaks just can't live up to.

[hide]

And if people stay mature, the thread will be fine.

 

[/hide]

 

:thumbsup:

Been a while since I have seen you on Poor :)

I'll throw in my two cents.

 

I find that COD is an arcade shooter, and BF is a less arcade shooter. While both might have tactics I just find BF has more. It's not a massive difference, but enough to make BF more enjoyable.

 

Also, COD always felt like a 'loan wolf' game. Even if you was in a squad you rarely helped others out. It was always about yourself and K/D. I found BF more about teamwork and W/L. I always strived for 1.50+ K/D but if it fell below that it wasn't horrible. I always made sure my W/L was always more wins then losses and by a fair amount. If I had to switch classes to make sure our team would win, I would do it. Whatever it takes.

 

Maybe I am biased on the time I have played both games. COD MW2, second prestige, BO only got to level 44. On BFBC2, got to level 34(which I am very very proud of), and on BF3 got to level 45 if I am not mistaken. I just found BF to be more realistic...if that is even possible I don't know but that's how I feel about it.

 

So in short, I find BF more enjoyable. The realism the game adds with added tactics, the importance of teamwork, and vehicles just made the experience all the more enjoyable. I have moved on from my shooter days so it could be possible my argument could be thrown out, but I still think my thoughts are valid across the board.

I think Albel's analyses of the of two is very spot on. Modern Warfare was created at a time to compete against Halo 3, which it shares some of the same arcadeic similarities and reality probably only surpassed Halo as the number one online shooter because the main trilogy finished and all the games afterwards were in essence extension packs to 3. In a year from now, we'll probably be debating which is a better game, Halo 4 or Battlefield 4 ironically, since I don't imagine the Call of Duty franchise's success last much longer due to Infinity Ward's recent shake up.

I've not played BF 3 (played BFBC2 though), so I can't comment.

 

I play CoD once in a while. Games are approximately 10 minutes (usually less), Battlefield games are much longer. It's real easy to join a game and get a couple of kills, although the game has a wide spectrum of flaws.

 

So basically CoD is like the fast-food of video games - it's quick and easy, but hard to enjoy.

I think Albel's analyses of the of two is very spot on. Modern Warfare was created at a time to compete against Halo 3, which it shares some of the same arcadeic similarities and reality probably only surpassed Halo as the number one online shooter because the main trilogy finished and all the games afterwards were in essence extension packs to 3. In a year from now, we'll probably be debating which is a better game, Halo 4 or Battlefield 4 ironically, since I don't imagine the Call of Duty franchise's success last much longer due to Infinity Ward's recent shake up.

 

But then what will fans of PC FPSs have to argue over?

I think Albel's analyses of the of two is very spot on. Modern Warfare was created at a time to compete against Halo 3, which it shares some of the same arcadeic similarities and reality probably only surpassed Halo as the number one online shooter because the main trilogy finished and all the games afterwards were in essence extension packs to 3. In a year from now, we'll probably be debating which is a better game, Halo 4 or Battlefield 4 ironically, since I don't imagine the Call of Duty franchise's success last much longer due to Infinity Ward's recent shake up.

 

But then what will fans of PC FPSs have to argue over?

 

Battlefield 4 and/or CoD:mw4/BO3.

both are fun, can't really play either for too long these days without getting annoyed. I've gone from Bf3 constantly to Mw3 constantly, both games have terrible terrible downsides and horrible communities(the internet in general is a horrible community)

 

I suppose if I had to decide it would be BF3, had more fun with that game than any other pre the patch that changed everything. The suppressor/foregrip patch that changed the entire game upside down was the nail in the coffin for me regarding BF3.

both are fun, can't really play either for too long these days without getting annoyed. I've gone from Bf3 constantly to Mw3 constantly, both games have terrible terrible downsides and horrible communities(the internet in general is a horrible community)

 

I suppose if I had to decide it would be BF3, had more fun with that game than any other pre the patch that changed everything. The suppressor/foregrip patch that changed the entire game upside down was the nail in the coffin for me regarding BF3.

 

See that's a shame, because with a few hours of playing around with the attachments and guns again, you could have found a new favorite gun to enjoy. I had to give up my 12 star KH2002 which I was mad about, but my 3 star 93R got WAY better, so I switched to an AEK and it all worked out fine.

There was lots of things broken other than just attachments which made him stop playing.

both are fun, can't really play either for too long these days without getting annoyed. I've gone from Bf3 constantly to Mw3 constantly, both games have terrible terrible downsides and horrible communities(the internet in general is a horrible community)

 

I suppose if I had to decide it would be BF3, had more fun with that game than any other pre the patch that changed everything. The suppressor/foregrip patch that changed the entire game upside down was the nail in the coffin for me regarding BF3.

 

See that's a shame, because with a few hours of playing around with the attachments and guns again, you could have found a new favorite gun to enjoy. I had to give up my 12 star KH2002 which I was mad about, but my 3 star 93R got WAY better, so I switched to an AEK and it all worked out fine.

it had nothing to do with that actual portion of the update lol, I just knew the patch by calling it the foregrip/suppressor patch.

The appeal of BF games for me (all that I've played at least) is that you can be awful at shooting, but still contribute a lot to your team. In CoD, shooting is basically all you've got.

Grenade launcher attachment or a flashlight. Which one pisses off more people?

Probably the flashlight lol.

I decided when I first started playing to shoot anyone who happens to shine a flashlight in my eyes, and claim that I couldn't tell which team they were on.

Flashlight vs Noob Tube let's go. (Vids may contain foul language)

 

[hide=Battlefield 3 Flashlight]

Yup. Definitely the most realistic FPS ever.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bDd1iXqVCGI

 

I do believe I am unable to see much of anything with that light emitter casting its bright flash upon my eyes you female dog.[/hide]

[hide=Modern Warfare 3 Noob Tube]

The only way the XM25 can be useful is on Hardcore. Also this guy wins some matches using nothing but the grenade launcher and the XM25.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCFx-rAO6NA

 

This man is a homosexual maternal fornicator because he refuses to expel the correct projectiles upon me. Everyone tell the authorities that this man isn't playing fair.[/hide]

Battlefield realistic? huehuehuehue

Battlefield realistic? huehuehuehue

So realistic to the point where you can blind your own teammates.

I like the gameplay, teamwork, and overall game of battlefield more. However, I play COD at least three times as much...

Both are overhyped games that are getting worse every year.

Which is why I love making fun of this genre of games, and promote the opposite end of the competitive spectrum.

 

Pretty much the only good thing about CoD and BF is how easy it is to troll people.