Lehsyrus (10-27-2012)
First of , why the hate ?... Second there are 10s of millions of PC users compared to Xbox and PS3. Graphs on any console can`t be better compared to a PCs . I don`t know how old you are or what you actually understand from hardware and how it works , but I can see that you speak with a sort of nonsense in your text. Graphs on MW3 beat graphs on BF3 (i.e. detail,response and etc) , response from the gun and style of multiplayer again the MW3 beats it , your weapon can actually shoot someone than rather shoot around him or somewhere in the air , you have a fast paced game and lots of modes. I just don`t see it how BF3 is better. And before you speak some nonsense again , I have both Xbox and PS3 and I know what is and what is not....
People say MW3 is a remake of MW2. Well, isn't Halo 1, 2, 3 and 4 a remake of each other? Its the same shit
It's boring much .
You're stupid. I didn't say the console has better graphics than PC. Your eyes must be bad because the environment, texture and detail is much better on BF3. Also BF3 is more realistic when it comes to gameplay and how weapons handle etc, instead of people running around with snipers and doing 360's off buildings you actually have a game that needs some actual skill to play and need to work as a team in order to win.
It's ok to get for free and play, I would never buy it.
BF3 uses DX11 visual occlusion lighting, which is much more detailed than MW3.
BF3 uses more polygons in each model giving them a more in-depth, rounded, and detailed look.
BF3 uses scripted animations rather than recorded video with altered animations in the bone rendering for the characters.
Both have high quality textures, that can't be used in a debate about the graphics, though what I will say is that the HDR on the weapons is significantly greater in BF3, which can easily be seen my a reflectivity comparison between both games in comparison to the light sources direction.
BF3 uses more particles in the ambient scenarios (IE: dust, fog, steam, smoke grenades, etc), whereas MW3 still uses lower particle rates and animated transparent textures blended together.
That video proves you wrong with visual, and audio comparison
---------- Post added at 05:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:45 PM ----------
No sir, each Halo game has introduced extreme differences in scenarios, graphics, gameplay, and mechanics. If you play Halo 1 and then play Halo 2 you won't be thinking "is this the same game?", rather you will be thinking "damn this is a good sequel, these new dual SMG's and the new gauss warthog are awesome! That helmet is legit! Holy crap map making IN-GAME???".
With the CoD franchise it went: "MW is amazing! So new and different from the other FPS games! Holy crap MW2 is great! The graphics are upgraded and these new game modes are awesome! The maps are just incredible! MW3? What? I could of sworn I was still playing MW2! The graphics look pretty much the same..it sounds just the same..and hey, didn't I see that map in MW2 but with a few different buildings?".
i loved mw3 until they started modifying all the guns and buffing/nerfing them. All the guns are overpowered and there are huge amounts of campers...
I think Black Ops 2 is the revival of cod
And at the end of the day, the millions of us COD players couldn't give two fucks. We enjoy the game, and I'll continue to enjoy the game.
Aslong as COD doesn't start looking like Minecraft I couldn't give any fucks about the graphics.
I look for a fast paced shooter that looks decent enough to play, and that turns out to be COD.
Velocity (10-28-2012)
I'd rather play BF3
Lehsyrus (10-27-2012)