Battlefield 3 vs Call of Duty

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CraeSC111

I know right. I stopped buying CoD after Modern Warfare (With the exception of World at War because I loved the campaign). Didn't want to buy the other games for $50. I really only played the single player though because you have to pay for xbox live. Q_Q

---

Its weird, cause I have never spent $50 for any of my games, not even CoD. :3 This is why I love Trade-A-Game, take a few games in, get a few games back... for free. :D Or even if you wanna buy a good game without trading, they run for at lest 35 bucks tops.
But I do feel ya know the single player part though. No Xbox Live for me, yet.

Quote:

---

Anyway, for me new engine or not, Call of Duty will always be my FPS of choice and I'm always going to think better of it then any other shooter.

---

Whilst there was some minor points in your last post that i don't fully agree with im gonna ignore those for this statement.

I can completely respect the fact that you prefer CoD.
Same for me, Battlefield will be my FPS of choice. Our oppinions is because we obviously looks for different things in a shooter. :)

So i hope you will enjoy MW3. :)

Originally Posted by Jayhmmz
BF3 will be better than MW3 , because Activision and their respected developers have ran out of ideas on how to make Call of Duty look and feel fresh [support this], compared to the same thing over and over again, like what they've got into the habit of doing these days[support this]. EA DICE and the Battlefield series have managed to bring us countless mega-fun titles[support this. what makes it 'mega-fun?'], and most of them are significantly better than the last (gameplay and graphically)[support this], whilst still making it feel like a Battlefield game.

Quite simply put, Activision & Co. are lazy[support this], whereas EA DICE put a lot of effort and thought into each title that they bring us[support this]. The graphics are constantly improved upon in Battlefield, as well as the award winning sound effects[award winning? what awards?], and the mass tactical team-play in the Battlefield franchise is second to no game, in my opinion[I'm glad you said "in my opinion" here].

Conclusion: Activision do it purely for the money[support this], whereas EA DICE do it for the fans of the franchise[support this], as well as making their profit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeverDeefEated

Mind refining that answer?

---

you know, when I was reading it I already assumed what he was saying was his opinions... this is a gamer's thread not a research paper.. what else? did you what him to source it with APA too? ::-)

No Source it in MLA. Everything is in MLA these days....

I have a feeling that Battlefield will have the lead in this one. It's an all round better war game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Triton

I have a feeling that Battlefield will have the lead in this one. It's an all round better war game.

---

lead it in what? No matter how good the game is, CoD sales are going to be better. I'm 99% sure, just simply because it is a CoD title, that's how the world works.

Also I wouldn't say "all around better" the campaign for MW3 is going to be better, if one thing IW has down, it's definitely the campaign. The only thing in my mind that BF3 has a shot with is Multiplayer.

If they add a good campaign into BF 3 then it could compete with CoD's campaign. Their first attempt at it with Bad Company was pretty good. They could have always improved which is generally the case with Battlefield games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CraeSC111

If they add a good campaign into BF 3 then it could compete with CoD's campaign. Their first attempt at it with Bad Company was pretty good. They could have always improved which is generally the case with Battlefield games.

---

Battle Field 3 is normally known as online only game as people mentioned above, I don't see this campaign being any better than Bad Company's, Which in my opinion, Bad Company was a decent story line, had some humor in it which made it stand out from other War games. Bad Company 2 became more serious and the story wasn't really there for me to keep my attention. It was kind of dry and without the humor i ended up ignoring a lot of it. BF3 being a PC based game, I don't see them putting a huge amount of effort into it. 90% of the people buying it are probably getting it just for online.

Just posting for the polls:
Massive Poll: BF3 Vs MW3 The Results | Gaming News and Opinion at TheSixthAxis.com
MW3 vs BF3 (Poll) - GameSpot Forums - System Wars
BF3 or MW3

I don't think bf3 will outsell mw3, but I see them getting some good numbers.
I think both games will be great in their own ways, but I'm personally looking forward to bf3.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LemonRising

Just posting for the polls:
Massive Poll: BF3 Vs MW3 The Results | Gaming News and Opinion at TheSixthAxis.com
MW3 vs BF3 (Poll) - GameSpot Forums - System Wars
BF3 or MW3

I don't think bf3 will outsell mw3, but I see them getting some good numbers.
I think both games will be great in their own ways, but I'm personally looking forward to bf3.

---

the the thing about the polls is that since BF3 is mostly based around PC, they're going to get more votes. MW3 is more for consoles, not a lot of console gamers get on the PC and go vote for polls on websites.

Americas Pre-Order Chart - VGChartz

Those are the sales for pre-orders. Just the sales for xbox 360 MW3 alone is beating BF3 in 360, PS3 and PC by about 200,000 copies. Not to mention that BF3 is 2 weeks closer to release ( according to those charts ) then MW3 is.

I say for PC only, BF3 will outsell MW3 since BF3 is basically built for the PC. But for the consoles and all together it's going to be a land slide in sales.