Battlefield 3 Will "Put a Huge Dent" in Modern Warfare 3

SPOnG: "The biggest scrap of the gaming year is nigh upon us - and DICE reckons that Battlefield 3 has the chops to take on Activision's Modern Warfare 3, with the power to "put a huge dent" in its rival's share of the massmarket."

The story is too old to be commented.
Septic2476d ago

Activision have a choice now. Either they let COD die a death in a similar vein to Tony Hawks and Guitar Hero or they could pull their fingers out of their backsides and make a decisive step to move the franchise along and develop it beyond mere re-hashes.

Battlefield 3's will catalyse the impending doom of the COD franchise but the thing is, Activision (or should I say Treyarch and IW) know this. They don't want the repeat of the above so the pressure will be on them to do something different.

Lets just hope that by moving the series along they won't just be content with merely setting the game in the future ala COD 2142 or COD Space Warfare etc.

zeksta2476d ago

Well.. Knowing Activision they're gonna still try to milk the series one last time before it dies, and frankly they're gonna screw it up, and when they do it'll be too late to re-gain the lost customers.

Tachyon_Nova2476d ago (Edited 2476d ago )

You guys who talk of Activision milking CoD realise that EA actually did just that to Medal of Honor back in the day? It went to ultra popular to nothing in a couple of years because the just chucked out a rubbish game every year. At least Call of Duty games are actually very good games, even if they arent exactly unique.

Anyway, I've been playing the Beta on PS3 over the last few days for BF3, and jesus that is the biggest mess I've played in a long time. What is the point of dedicated servers if they still lag that badly?

Also, nobody on PS3 has any skill at or knows how to play Battlfield. Just for some reference, my k/d on PC is 1.01 and on PS3 it is 1.5 even with the chronic lag (which I don't get on PC), and my win/loss on PC is 0.8 vs 2.2 on PS3.

stu8882476d ago

for me the servers didn't lag at all.

StanLee2476d ago (Edited 2476d ago )

Am I missing something here are are most in the gaming media dunces? There seems to be this perception that the gaming public is unfamiliar with the Battlefield franchise, they aren't. They've been 2 Battlefield Bad Company games this gen which have had some critical success and reasonably strong sales, while never becoming a true competitor to Call of Duty. The argument seems to be that Battlefield 3 is a true sequel to Battlefield 2 but to the mass gaming public, that isn't relevant. It's only relevant to Battlefield elitist who themselves think this game on consoles will be more Battlefield 2 than Bad Company 2. There is nothing in Battlefield 3 on consoles that truly distinguishes it from the Bad Company titles, so why would the millions who didn't choose the Bad Company titles over Call of Duty care now? Battlefield 3 will see an incremental increase in sales over Bad Company 2 but not enough to compete with Call of Duty.

Kenshin_BATT0USAI2476d ago

I gotta disagree with you big time. A lot of people are speaking of BF3 being some godlike game that destroys CoD. Judging from the beta, previews, screenshots etc. It's just a really good looking shooter. I'd say it's equally as good as CoD, but the major differences here are that CoD has a much bigger following, and CoD is much more familiar to the mass media, thus it'll achieve better sales(that'll likely top it's predecessor) and overall be better received.

We gotta face the facts BF3 is trying to beat CoD in it's own game, what Dice should have done was make BF3 stand out more as something unique that ISN'T an alternative to CoD.

Elwenil2476d ago

BF3 stand as something unique? Compared to CoD it is unique. Vehicles, aircraft, destruction, massive maps, etc. If you look at it just from the infantry standpoint, they are very similar, look at it from any other angle and they are drastically different in terms of strategy, gameplay and goals. Which is why people who feel CoD is lacking something or are tired of the same old thing will be coming over to BF3 to get something different.

Hufandpuf2476d ago

Most of the previews consist of single player and co op. Nobody cares about those. Multiplayer is what we want. The beta was sloppy, but judging from recent video of bf3 it was truly a beta.

Kenshin_BATT0USAI2476d ago


I can see where you're coming from. The thing is though, from personal experience it didn't FEEL any different from any other shooter when I played it. Albeit it's quite hard to get a different feel for pointing and shooting a gun lol

Anyways. It's great that BF3 has all that stuff, but it's just not cutting it. Limited destruction, and a lack of vehicles up to this point, and the doubtful inclusion of aircrafts is making it harder to see this game as anything unique at all. (ps. the SP aircraft is an on-rails thing, so for MP, I doubt they'll be any flying going on)

Elwenil2476d ago

That's sort of my point, there is so much more to do than just point a gun and run around. Tanks, APCs, mortars, ammo and health packs, defibrillator, light vehicles, transport and attack helos, anti-air, boats, and yes, jets, which are confirmed for all versions. Also, the destruction is not as limited as what people are making it out to be from the beta. The Metro map is just a poor example to experience it. Couple that with the buildings that are kept mostly intact for strategic reasons and the fact that things like grenade launchers don't seem to do as much damage as in BC2 and a lot of people are crying about the destruction. Still, compared to CoD, it's a lot of destruction since it doesn't have that feature.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2476d ago
Lazy_Sunday2476d ago (Edited 2476d ago )

The big problem is that the CoD audience isn't the audience you want playing BF3. It's also the audience that the majority wouldn't choose BF3 over MW3.

After the public response of the beta, the game sort of asked for the gun to kill itself. It's not accessible to the CoD crowd, and a lot of people didn't feel compelled to keep playing in the CoD crowd. It's slower combat, more walking, death penalties, and... did I mention death penalties? That's a huge gaming turn off, and though it may seem like it helps make deaths feel like mistakes you need to learn from--most people see them as obstacles that keep them from playing, which is one of the things that keeps people from playing these games--just look at Crysis 2.
The other issue is the slower framerate--most importantly though, is that the game is situated for the hardcore, and NOT BALANCED. If you're a noob, and you don't play CoD for two months, you'll be able to redeem yourself easily, since all the weapons and perks tend to be balanced enough for easy kills. If you're a noob in BF3, and you play two months after release, everyone else will have better armor, weapons, attachments and (what we can 'consider') perks than you if they are leveled. If that's not a way to shut down an entire audience, I don't know what is.

narutogameking2476d ago

Troll harder. You'll lose another bubble!

Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk were both niche/new genres. They only "died" when EA flooded the market with their clones(Skate, Rock Band).

So if Call of Duty ever "dies" it will take Battlefield with it. But that's not going to happen. People will always love FPS games. They've been around forever. There's tons of COD clones on the market and COD still continues to sell 20million+.

You enjoy Battlefield? Good for you. Go pick up BF3 this month. If you're waiting for Battlefield to take over you're going to be REALLY DISAPPOINTED.

Septic2476d ago

Lose another bubble? What like you did?

How on earth do you know I'm going to be disappointed when BF3 is out later this month? I played the beta on PC and Caspian Border and it was breathtaking.

Think before you type next time. Also, I do play COD MW2. Want to challenge me on it on the 360 if you want to insinuate that I'm a troll? I have a HD PVR so I can record the gameplay of you getting shot in the face by a Famas for all to see on here.

Go on kid. Accept the challenge. PM me your GT on the 360.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2476d ago
leogets2476d ago (Edited 2476d ago )

the guy above me needs to pull hes head out hes arse before the wind blows. ps3 users dont know how to play bf and have no skill? hahaha joke of the day. priiiiiiick .. as for the beta being a mess u clearly havnt done any homework on as and why the "beta" was up. failure my friend. ur a complete douche,kill death ratio isnt a thing on bf. its teamwork.u need to go back to cod immediatly.and as far as lag on the ps3 i didnt witness any. u may need to get ya internet sorted out too.

stu8882476d ago

If the beta is anything to go by, I don't think so! CoD fans will have played and thought, nope, actually I defo sticking with MW3...

Or they just get both which I think most will do.

Kenshin_BATT0USAI2476d ago

This is exactly how I felt after playing the beta. I mean the actual release could be a billion times better, but the bitter taste of the beta makes me not want to take that chance. Terrible marketing decision by EA.

ECM0NEY2476d ago

I would rather play BF3 beta with only 2 maps and all the bugs then play another CoD game.

davekaos2476d ago

How was it a terrible marketing decision???

They released the beta to find out what bugs the game had in multiplayer and come launch the game should be free of most bugs.

Imagine if there was no beta and they released it the way it was. People would be complaining left right and centre.

Also those who had the abilty to play on PC caspian border will tell you that the beta benefited the game, for example caspian border was unplayable at first on PC so they removed the servers hosting it, Then when they added the game again it was a hell of alot smoother and less glitchy.

You say terrible marketing decision, i say brilliant marketing decision.

Cant wait to see how many bugs cod has in its first few months

Kenshin_BATT0USAI2476d ago (Edited 2476d ago )

Well, from their own mouths they claimed that it was a very early build, i.e. a build they should have surpassed. What is the point of beta testing an old build other than to give players a taste of what's to come? It was a poor decision because the build was in fact extremely crappy, and it only served to make the game worse than it'll actually be.

Your argument stems on the idea that it's a recent build really, which it wasn't. If it was, seriously wtf are they doing? That is way too buggy for a month before release. Even for beta testing.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2476d ago
KionicWarlord2222476d ago

It`s hard to say bf3 is going to put a dent in call duty after blackops broke mw2`s sales. It sold over 20 million copies and 18 million map packs. All under a year.

Im sure bf3 will be a great game...but i doubt activison is worried about bf3.

Jdub895O2476d ago

i agree but........................... ............................... ............................... ........................

Jdub895O2476d ago

I have to admit though Black ops and mw2 were MUCH deeper than Bad Company 2 BUT which was a lot more fun? Sorry guys i played the Sh!t out of both games and bad company still is fun. Dont any of you AGREE?

Show all comments (30)
The story is too old to be commented.