Battlefiled 3 vs Call Of Duty Mw 3

**Larity2056** · 07-20-2012

These kinda threads starting to get me frustrated, let's say BF3 slow placed action but high realism. MW3 fast placed action (Arcade game) you can't compare this with Battlefield 3.

**day-out** · 07-21-2012

Originally Posted by DreamMaker

I was thinking why Mw3 was a succesful because graphics and rest can`t even comapare to anything in Battlefiled 2:B.C .

what do you mean the graphics of mw3 are shit and dont compare to battlefield 3 in anyway.

---------- Post added at 02:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:02 PM ----------

Originally Posted by Noovaa

That's like thinking walking is the fastest way to travel because you never heard of a car.

the title spelt battlefield wrong thats what he is saying.

**HW$%yh5eh5ea5heheh5** · 07-21-2012

Never liked any COD game in the slightest. I loved BF3 though.

**Orobos** · 07-22-2012

I hate COD, and I hated BF3.

Discuss.

**hiphippie** · 07-24-2012

CoD and Battlefield both have contexts in which they can be enjoyed.

I don't want to play a 1 hour 30 minute long TDM game on the same map in BF3 because that gets repetitive and if I only have 2 or 3 hours to play.
Spawn, move out, shoot, cover, shoot, cover, get killed when I'm overwhelmed or surprised.

You can get into the action so much faster with CoD and matches are usually about 10 or 20 minutes, but it can take a while to get into the hyper-speed pace of CoD.

I'd play CoD if I wanted to get the most out of my time because leaving halfway into a BF3 match seems to not give any XP or ribbons sometimes, whereas leaving halfway into a MW3 match gives the XP earned, but counts as a loss.

Battlefield - if you have an hour or more.
Call of Duty - if you have an hour or less.

Blowing up buildings and shooting through holes in fences is fun, but if I might have to leave halfway through, I'd rather play CoD and deal with the small maps and unbreakable buildings and get in a match or two along with any XP I have earned if I have to leave halfway in.

Honestly, why are we having this discussion on a Battlefield forum section where the obvious answer is going to be, "BATTLEFIELD ANY DAY OVER COD!!"?.

**porrat** · 07-26-2012

bf3 is a wargamne simulation bullshit EA missed a big think
in bf3 u can reloade guns LMG with some 10-20 kg running and the magazines are pretty heavy but they can run and do it at the same time rly realistic.
bf3 is awsome and detailed while mw3 fun and full of noobs campers like in bf3

**hiphippie** · 07-26-2012

Please, if you're going to post a reply, at least read the last page of what other people have written so you don't post the same "BF3: awesome and realistic and blue and shining sun. MW3: full of noobs and campers and grey and bad graphics"

Not that you aren't entitled to say what you feel, but is it really necessary to repeat what just about every other new person to this thread has said?

**notagoodusername12** · 07-27-2012

I'd like to make my own comparison of the two. Care or not, here I go

Score is high = better.

Campers, who is worse?
They both have campers. You can argue BF3 needs them because of realism, but it's a video game. Camping is dumb just don't do it. Camp a little then push ahead, I can live with that.

Score: BF3: .5 MW3: 0

Graphics, which is better?
BF3 by a mile, can't even compare them really.

Score: BF3: 1.5 MW3: 0

Map sizes, are they fitting for the game?
Both games have maps that fit their play-styles. To say one is better just because of size is ridiculous and unnecessary. Some people like a smaller game while some like a bigger game.

Score: BF3: 2.5 MW3: 1

Online community, helpful or not?
Judging by the way certain members of the "BF3 is great, MW3 sucks" community on this site and youtube alone act (I can't play BF3 right now or I'd play a little before posting) the BF3 community is not better than the jerks on MW3.

Score: BF3: 3.5 MW3: 2

Singleplayer, which is better?
I actually found the BF3 singleplayer FAR more engaging than the MW3 singleplayer, which never really roped me in at all. Just wish it was longer.

Score: BF3: 4.5 MW3: 2

Overall Multiplayer Experience, which was more fun excluding anything that is just icing on the cake?
I'm going to exclude both MW3 perks, and killstreaks, as well as the vehicles and gun sounds of BF3. Both are very good in their own right, but I don't feel deserve to give points to a game because they are more filler than anything else in a First Person Shooter.
Ahem, anyway...I prefer MW3's multiplayer. I tried everything I could think of in BF3, even downright camping, and in three days I had only made it two levels. I played over the weekend, so I had the whole day to play; and I did.
However it does have fun aspects, and if I ever get better at BF3 multiplayer I will definitely change my perspective. Right now, MW3 is victorious.

Score: BF3: 4.5 MW3: 3

Overall age level of gamers, what have I noticed and does it ever matter?
Personally, as far as I am concerned age DOES NOT MATTER. Who gives a flying pig if someone's testicles have not dropped, if you can play the game well, you are alright in my books.
If I was to compare, BF3 would win ONLY because no one ever talks! It's like freaking high school in there everyone has their little clique and doesn't bother to say anything to anyone.

Score (if you give half a fecal matter about age) BF3: 5 MW: 3

Teamwork, which online community is better in this respect?
Personally, I think neither shows any sort of effort when it comes to teamwork! So I am giving MW3 the point, because it's based more on the single player's score rather than the whole. And while I would LOVE to get into BF3, I'm not going to randomly fav jerks on BF3 just to enjoy the game.

Score: BF3: 5 MW3: 4

So, as you can see, by my score BF3 wins but by a hair. I would compare the originality of the product but have not played any other Battlefield titles so cannot. However to be honest if you like the game what the heck does that matter?

**Swampnuts** · 07-28-2012

As much as I hate to say it, BF:3 blows CODMW3 out of the water.. I've been a die-hard COD fan ever since the original came out, bought every game they ever made.. It just doesn't compete..

**tellreded** · 07-28-2012

personally, i think of them both as GTA4 and Saints row 3 lol. SR3 is more cartoony and fast paced like cod. GTA is better graphics, more realistic, and bigger.