Top
170°

MW3 vs. BF3: Why Are They Even Being Compared?

MMGN writes: Why comparisons are unnecessary comes down to how the games are actually molded: any criticisms of 'COD', as the Call of Duty series is so widely referred to, seem to be directed at aspects that actually make the series so appealing, such as the easy nature of unlocking weapons and perks, and the fast pacing of matches. Criticising an arcade shooter for being reliant on fast upgrades and individualistic proficiency is essentially calling out a game for playing to its strengths, which doesn't make sense.

Read Full Story >>
ps3.mmgn.com
The story is too old to be commented.
Neko6082224d ago

Cus it wouldn't be gaming if fanboys didn't have something to make them feel better about themselves.

darthv722224d ago

EA vs Activision thing.

Tony Hawk vs Skate
Guitar Hero vs Rock Band
COD vs Battlefield

I guess EA is glad they have the NFL license otherwise Activision would likely challenge Madden with something similar.

Hufandpuf2224d ago

TH vs Skate - Skate won
Guitar Hero vs RB - RB won
COD vs BF - Ongoing

iamnsuperman2224d ago

Because journalist love controversy. What's bigger than two hardcore fanboys having their games compared.

Too me they are two different games (multiplayer wise). BF3 tried to CODify the single player and it didn't work. They can be compared but its multiplayer component is vastly different offering different forms of gameplay that appeal to different people

V0LT2224d ago

COD vs BF has became like console wars......

MysticStrummer2224d ago

"Criticising an arcade shooter for being reliant on fast upgrades and individualistic proficiency is essentially calling out a game for playing to its strengths, which doesn't make sense." Unless you hate that kind of game.

3GenGames2224d ago

They're being compared because BF3 is how a publisher and developer should go about their series, with improvements, adding stuff, and making good games. While Activision has tried just to appeal to more people screwing their core base of fans and ruining the game.

Guitar Hero and Tony Hawk still haven't taught Activision anything at all as you can see by how Activision handles its IP's. Call of Duty is just another tool for Activision to suck money from their "fans" (Now-a-days called hipsters) like ticks. And they're doing it well. Battlefield players are the only ones that have ever been big enough in numbers to let them know that. And they are. And the truth hurts, get over it.

kennyboy2224d ago

adding stuff? like what im still trying to understand what makes you think more has been added to battlefield 3 from its past games than mw3 from its past

3GenGames2224d ago (Edited 2224d ago )

Incredible new amounts of destruction, a whole new realistic game engine on Frostbite 2, tons of vehicles with more each game, tons of HUGE maps. I mean, you're looking at this from BF2->BF3, right? I hope so! Because that's how it goes. BFBC1->2 just had a vastly improved destruction for buildings and controls and vehicle balancing. And not to mention it has a $15 DLC pack that's actually worth it with a new game mode and extra maps on top with even new vehicles! That per game, even only from BFBC1->BFBC2 is more than COD still in the last 5 games, let alone BF2 to BF3. That leap is insane.

kennyboy2224d ago

so by what your saying then i can see how the minds of battlefield fans and call of duty haters think, thats why you all say theres nothing new in call of duty games cause you have a horrible standard of what you call new cause if that means new to you and you still believe call of duty has nothing new then that lies the problem with the voiced internet minority saying mw3 is the "same" or isnt "innovating" lol now i got it

Dude4202223d ago (Edited 2223d ago )

This pretty much sums up Activision's strategy.

http://www.youtube.com/watc...

death2smoochie2223d ago (Edited 2223d ago )

MW3 is not innovating at all from MW2. Tell us how it is Kennyboy? Please enlighten us with the KINGS ENGLISH.

MW3 recycles maps beyond scope. Use same assets more than most games. Same kill streaks. Same graphics...Yes graphics should not matter, however when the game looks like a 2007 game lock stock and barrel and this is 2011, there is a problem. You cannot fathom this?

BF3 gets slammed for its single player campaign, YET MW3 story is not that great either and is only 4+ hours long and is hailed as the next coming for FPS games in this genre.

If you look at the jump from MW2-MW3, it is essentially one large expensive $60+ expansion pack.

There have been some brave sites recently that went into detail stating this and showing this. If you played both MW2 and MW3 it is plain as rain that the two games have not changed much at all...and not just in the graphics department and physics.

Now take a look at the jump from BF2-BF3.
The difference is huge. Scale is many times larger. Destruction is on a entire new level. More vehicles. More features.
That is what most people are discussing.

Activision is regulating COD to the same levels of it other IP's...
Recycle them over and over again until it dies out...

MW3 is one fun game...but it is dated in many ways. If that makes you pissed...so sad to bad.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 2223d ago
Show all comments (16)