NowGamer: Sledgehammer dev responds to MW3 or BF3 debate.
The only thing MW3 has got on BF3 is 60 Frames Per Second and possibly Spec Ops ( because that looks rather fun). Other than that - its BF3 all the way for me.
Don't forget split-screen and more modes. If there is one thing I love about COD, it's the variety of modes. They better deliver on new modes. MW3 needs to redo everything IMO, the impact and intensity of the game is all gone. I love my S&D and that's something I can't get in Battlefield, but the value of that mode and the intensity and competition I felt in COD4 just isn't there anymore. BTW, this is old! Bowling has already noted these reasons and now websites like NowGamer are asking basic questions and getting recycled answers to post as news.
even 60 FPS is nothing to me since im playing on PC and going to have those ((almighty)) 60 FPS by this PR guy's standards
Its called Rush. S&D for BF.
have they fixed the camper problem on MW3...what no? thats a real surprise 4 COD games and still no solution smh real nice guys
I'll be shooting for more than 60fps. If it plays like alpha did I'll be hovering around 70-80fps I'm considering adding another 6970 should the bf3 benchmarks justify going crossfire. would like to sit around 100fps as that's why I bought this 3d monitor.
lil titan, seriously. Have you never played BF. Theres just as many campers. Anytime ive played theres a ton of campers.
MW3 Dev: "Why Modern Warfare 3 Is Better Than Battlefield 3...." because you are delusional, keep your noobish and higly aim assisted fps while i will fly my jet, ambush vehicles and play on 64 player maps.
Armyntt i never said there wasn't a camping problem on BF, but the fact is you can blow up where they are. If there in a building or hiding in bushes one grenade, RPG or mortar strike ends that spot. only problem when camping is a big issue is when players base rape. so what was that about camping in BF?
@lil Titan You are saying that camping can be overcome in BF. It can also be overcome in COD. Throw a flash grenade, throw a stun grenade, call in a UAV, use motion sensor, throw a grenade, use a killstreak, etc There are numerous ways to deal with campers in COD as well
-Alpha not really its real easy to shoot blindly when someone throws a flash or stun. 9 times out of ten especially when the person is in a real cramp place the camper will win. most kill streaks only work if your outside if i can remember its been a long time since ive played COD. im just staying there is a somewhat a permanent way to deal with campers on BF where you can destroy the spot where as COD is very unbalanced. and im not saying destruction makes the game better but it does. but look at resistance where not every thing is destructible there is somewhat balanced way to deal with campers. and im not even going to mention boosters on that game its incredible what lengths these people are willing to go. in only saw a booster once on BF and it was really cheating and dont know how the hell this guy got over or near 15,000 points in one game. i dont care if the other person is a medic and keeps bringing the person back there is no way to get that in one conquest game with out cheating some how
wow all he can say is 60fps for shame COD for shame
Yeah, and chances are it won't even be at 720p. None of the Call of Duty games are even 720p on 360.
In other news -Ronald McDonald says Burger King's burgers taste worse than his and won't even run on PS3 hardware.
LMAO Where in the hell did you pull that one out from? *slow clap* lol++
This is your shortest comment, yet! :D
mastiffchild You just made me smile first time all day my freind bubbles to you. Wait i prefer burger king' you get more for your money XL BACKON DOUBLE COMMING RIGHT UP" AND LARGE FRIES. OH AND LARGE COKE. OH AND" na its ok ill get a Big mac. sorry we stopped doing the toy's ohh mom!
Couldn't agree more, This is dumb. Thats like those sites saying bad about said console, like a Sony site, saying Nintendo or Microsoft suck...no shit. overall, its just a petty thing to do.
OMG looks at those graphics :O !!!! /s
300 or so FPS on BLOPS bro. PC eats IT ALL
I play both BCBF2 and CoDBO avidly. I love them both to death for their strengths and weaknesses as EQUALS. So beware, my basis for the MW3 and BF3 fan-war is -- wait for it -- unbiased. Shocking, huh? @-Alpha: BF3 will have co-op campaign, as well as a large variety of modes including regular Team Deathmatch (not SQTDM) to appease the CoD lovers, larger more realistic "battlefields", not to mention vehicular combat or destruction. It will be fucking awesome, there is no question about it. @padz1: MW3 does have more going for it than just 60FPS and spec ops--it's bringing back quick-scoping and adding ranked qs lobbies (finally), we've got the perks we've always wanted minus last stand and commando, flak jacket seems to be nerfed back to blast shield and the killstreaks don't seem nearly as annoying as Black Ops or MW2--as the more potent ones require more than 10 little kills to acquire and don't look like major spawn-camper tools. I just hope we can use bottom attachments with red dot--it pisses me off that I can't have a grip with a scope at the same time. And if Infinity Ward is designing these maps, praise the lord, since their maps aren't as easy to spawn camp on.
I like how they can't really talk about the game at all, instead it's "OUR GAME IS BETTER BECAUSE IT RUNS AT 60 FPS ON CONSOLES"
What do you expect panda that's all they got on it.I was expecting them to say our game looks better than BF3 to really Lmfao only moronic kids think MW3 looks better than BF3 xDD.
Well i can make a square block move on screen on consoles at 60fps but that doesnt mean its a great game lol.
EA Replies with: "You've got every reason to be nervous. Last year Activision had a 90 share in the shooter category. This year, Battlefield 3 is going to take you down to 60 or 70. At that rate, you'll be out of the category in 2-3 years. If you don't believe me, go to the store and try to buy a copy of Guitar Hero or Tony Hawk." http://uk.xbox360.ign.com/a... P.S. your avatar ftw Pandamobile =D
Ohhh man. That last line was absolute sweet ownage.
I agree with you. Activision always does this. They have a really popular game for 5 6 years, and then it falls off the map. Because they always do the same thing. They make a game and release the same game over and over and over, with minor tweaks here and there. Same thing will happen with COD. History has a way of repeating it self. I also think they are some of the laziest developers none to man. Maybe if they would try to do new things with there games, but ehhh whats the point if you're making so much money! Gamers are the real losers here!
Damn I didn't even know they said that. Might as well have just squatted over Kotick's face.
He never said it was better than Battlefield. I hate bullshit articles like this that just take quotes out of context. He took a slight dig at battlefield at battlefield playing up 60 fps? 95 % percent shooters on the market all run at 30 or below - strictly talking consoles. The only other top tier game that I can think of right now that runs at a constant 60 would be RAGE, which isn't even competing with CoD the same way EA is with Activision. EA have been talking a lot of crap lately with the latest outburst from them being from a one; Mr.Brown. They need to mellow out and let their game do the talking. I'm no Fanboy and will be buying both games. Both very Different styles, but still very fun in their own unique ways. Shit tossing isn't good for the industry, it only ends in disappointment.
I am sorry for ya man. You will be buying both games. Which both are kinda of the same game over and over! At least BF3 is trying to make strides to improve their game. COD developers don't care. And release the same game year after year. I will be buying BF3 but only cause i want to run it on my pc and see the amazing graphics. I am sure the story won't be to great. And i am a story gamer. On topic, i think the article is funny. "Charters that people have loved for the past 6 years." LOL i can't think of one character in call of duty that i have ever cared about. Can't even think of a part of the story were i went o man that is cool. Nobody cares about call of duty story. Mainly cause there isn't one even worth mentioning. Let alone a character that anybody cares about!
@ cooperdnizzle Have you ever cared for any of the characters in the Bad Company series? :L
Nope Breakneckspeed, i have never cared for any of the characters in bad Company either. And i have played everyone of them. Neither of these games off anything in story or charter departments. Like i said i will only get BF3 cause they have done a lot with the graphics and looks like it may have a fun factor and something new to it. COD looks like the same game, and stopped being fun 3 years ago.
I agree, he was just talking about their advantages not necessarily saying anything about BF3, unless that is the only shooter that run at 30fps. I suppose if you are so attached to any one game that when somebody says anything positive about their product, you take that to mean a dig against your preferred one I can see that ... but then we have another term for people like you. It's called fanbois. http://arstechnica.com/scie...
60FPS also affects how games control. It's a huge part of FPS tradition. The faster the game, the more responsive it tends to be. When a game is coded at 30FPS it's because they've barely managed to fit all that quality and aesthetic beauty onto consoles for our enjoyment. While this is a good aspect, and I know it will be for BF3 since it's made by DICE--but games like Crysis 2 don't tend to run well because the hardware simply isn't there, or it wasn't coded down enough. CoD relies heavily on 60FPS to appeal to its almost on-rails-like shooting, fast action-paced nature. You're right, they shouldn't basically be saying "OUR GAME IS BETTER BECAUSE IT RUNS AT 60FPS ON CONSOLES." They should be saying "OUR GAME IS BETTER BECAUSE IT RUNS AND PLAYS FASTER THAN OUR COMPETITORS." Though, I'll agree it isn't "better," I'll probably have just as much fun playing BF3 (if not more) as I do playing MW3. We'll have to wait until the beta for BF3 next month to see what all the fuss is all about firsthand, now won't we? :)
Damn right mw3 its going to be better than BF3
You left /s off your comment.
yep sub-hd half assed engine ftw!
its not......played this game only the name was call of duty 4 modern warfare, except you changed the 4 to a 3 and moved it to after the MW, must have been a lot of hard work
Lmfao to funny bub+.
that seemed to be a SP experience comment then a MP comment. i buy BF for the MP, not the SP.
Saving for a new gaming PC to play BF3, but at this rate I probably won't get enough until December..
i hope their sake this XP event is something special all we have been hearing is 60 frames per second and nothing else
im hyped for bf3 cod has gotten boring after mw. I use to play cod 1 and 2 on the pc. now when I load up I just get bored yet I still go back to bf2 all the time.
BF3 - Nex-Gen game for current platforms. MW3 - 2007 Graphics. Thats Sucks. and nothing new.
conclusion: BF3 > MW3 :D
60FPS for me on PC
Would kill for a decent PC :(
Don't know, real war vs running around a map shooting. I think real is alittle bit more fun, because at least we can blow up buildings in BF3. I'm getting both, so I won't miss out on anything.
Reality makes games worse! But the thing is BF is awesome and COD could be a great arcade game but fails hard :(
I didn't know people thought about characters when they thought about Modern Warfare but ok.
All it has is local multiplayer.
LOL Are you serious ? This is dumb topic ... why? 1. this is not same type of game 2. MW3 there is not graphic progress from previous MW BF3 there is ofc progress from BC2 3. Did you see even videos 1080p quality from games ? - MW 3 good - BF3 o my god ... pls upgrade real life with that graphic
60 Frames in my a$$, BF3 has a Jet. A jet is a whole other story.
as if frames matter... the gameplay of bf3 takes it, and 30 fps looks gr8 on consoles... this kid who made this post is a moron, and should be banned from even looking at bf3 gameplay footage lol
sorry but it isnt... move along troll
Sounds like completive tension to me lol!
When you're using an old, rehashed engine that has been used since MW2 (and most likely MW1) you better be able to achieve 60FPS on consoles. You'd be a pretty piss poor developer otherwise... ; )
I was reading this today in my GI and it managed to shake a chuckle out of me seeing COD having only one bullet in their chamber but seriously I hope next generation that developers would just shut up and let the game speak for themselves. Every time, I hear one company insulting another this video comes to mind and the arguments between them has the same result in the the end....
Battlefield 3 looks great - MW3 Survival looks fun. I'm not going to be choosing between one and the other. I'm getting both. Best of both worlds..?
how can a copy and paste job beat anything?
wanna hear a joke? read the title..
My thoughts exactly.
All I needed to read was the title: How MW3 is better than BF3 by: MW3 developer No shit he's gonna say his game is better...
Real talk, Call of Duty has an opportunity to be a great continuing franchise, they just never really update the engine and make it different. When I first say MW3 I was supervised how much it looked like MW2. I know I'm a sucker for getting COD anyways, but I will definitely get BF3 first and if I do get MW3, I'm sure I'd play BF3 more.
Pretty lame arguments for why one is better than the other. Anyway, I'm very upset that Spec Ops is only a two person mode; seems like a step backwards to me. Also, since when was the story in any MW game compelling? The only character I've found remotely interesting was Captain Price and that's because he had a BAMF mustache.
mw3 is 1024x600p on consoles!! ewwwwww! by default, bf3 with 720p, way better graphics, and a more team based, skillbased online wins who cares if mw3 is 60 frames, no other console games are, why do they waste resources on something obviously most console games do not even notice, they mights be able to get their outdated quake 3 engine to run at actual 720p if the stopped wasting resources on 60fps!
Did you know that... Uncharted 3 uses the same engine as Uncharted 2? How can they release the same game every time?!?!?! OH NO! Developers should make a new game engine every year. People need to understand... Infinity Ward has an engine that WORKS and it works WELL. It also has that unmistakable Call of Duty look and feel (60fps and all). If they went ahead and changed all of that, fans would outrage! Remember when Coke changed their soda formula to make it "better" and people ended up hating it? Coke was forced to go back to Coke Classic to please people again. I sure hope Call of Duty doesn't try to go "new-coke" on us. By the way... you may not realize it but, most sequels on this generation use the same engine as the predecessor. It would be silly to expect a company to re-do their game engine for no reason.
This is NOTHING like coke. That is a food, we like it because of the way it tastes, not looks. And we judge CoD by looks. I understand were your coming from but when they use the same engine, over and over an over and over an Blah blah blah... It gets a little stale. They will tweak it yes, but at the end of the day its still the same engine. You have to look pretty hard to see any improments they made. Thing with Battlefield 3 is that you dont have to look where they made improvments, becuase everything you see is new Im gonna ge MW3 eventually, but not anytime soon.