Modern Warfare 3.

[jwinslow]

I have Xbox Live but have never used it before and I do not intend to invest in a headset so I can talk to people over the game.

Do you have the cheap headset with the game? That's all I use. You can pick one up for a few bucks on ebay. Now I would only recommend this if you have friends you enjoy playing with, or want to play with us. I never use my mic with strangers.

This weekend I'm looking to pick up a new game and I've decided on trying out either MW3 or BF3.

I have "0" experience in either one would consider myself intermediate (at best) in FPS games.

I'm seeking a serious recommendation - which should I choose?

Battlefield hands down.


BF is based on teamwork and variety. If you do not work as a team you will almost always lose to a squad that does, even if you are much more talented than they are.

You are given jet fighters, helicopters, tanks, jeeps to use with your 4 classes: assault (medic), engineer (RPG & repair), support (ammo) & recon (sniper).

It is essential that you work together to win maps. Unlike MW3, all elements of this game have counter punches. While a tank can be devastating, a couple of users can take it down quickly, and 4-5 players can take 1 tank guy down instantly. However, bringing 1-2 engineers along is crucial, so they can repair the back of the tank while firing and taking fire on the front side. They can hold up for awhile this way with proper teamwork. This is where other supporting classes come into play. Sometimes they are well protected from fire on the backside of the tank, meaning you need to get a user to drop mortar rounds on them.

Naturally the medics are a huge team aid, dropping med packs and reviving "mostly dead" players (it takes about 10 seconds for a player to die after the kill screen pops up).

Snipers can lend long range support and also provide great aid in a few areas, either with motion detectors (stationary), a spawn beacon or a SOFLAM (laser designator for instant lock for ground or air missiles).

Same with tanks or aircraft. Each can get missile lock on the opponent, which will then allow the guided missile on choppers, tanks, jets or even shoulder-mounted missiles to instantly lock on to the opponent. This is huge because someone fighting 1v1 against a jet usually can't lock on again soon enough, giving the targeted bogey time to recharge his flares to combat your missiles. Working together you can take down a dominant chopper quickly. Nothing is more fun than watching a tank round blow up a chopper that you've been fighting with for awhile in the air.

Engineers can also repair some helicopters in the air.

BF leaderboards are based on points, not kills. Sometimes your best user in a map will only have 1-2 kills, but he did so much to support the team, capture objectives or spot/wound opponents that he is the most valuable player.

I'm interested in enjoying myself, not getting "pwn3d"

Then don't buy MW games. They build it for that experience.

Then to make matters worse, they reward a dominant player with even more absurd dominance as a perk for kill streaks, calling in air strikes, unmanned drones, helicopters, etc. So one player can sit back and snipe and then keep piling up the kills.

 

[jwinslow]

They did make BF3 a bit more like COD in terms of firefights, but the teamwork & supporting classes are still much more balanced.

Also, do not play the demo. It is the worst map by far and a horrible demonstration of the gameplay. It has no vehicles (only map like that) and supporting classes are not very relevant. Medics help some but for the most part it is just a straight up firefight with little balance at all.

 

[jwinslow]

If you do buy BF3 and don't have a compelling reason (gift card, trade in credit) to get it elsewhere, please use this BP referral link to help us out (normal Amazon site, they just give us 7% to help support the server and our fearless leader's health issues):

$40 - http://www.amazon.com/s/?tag=buckey...s=battlefield&Submit.x=0&Submit.y=0&Submit=Go

Note: it comes with all of the new maps, but does not have the Back to Karkand expansion pack, which came with pre-orders. That costs $15 in Xbox dollars. You don't need this to play, but most of us play these maps regularly.

Here's a breakdown on the expansion pack:
http://kotaku.com/5865610/should-you-buy-battlefield-3s-back-to-karkand-yes

 

[Bucknut24]

Haven't played BF3, but all I know is MW3 suuucckkkssss

 

[jwinslow]

How are the campaign modes in each game? Which is a longer game and has more depth to the story?

From all reports here, MW3's campaign was short and underwhelming.

I found BF3 to be pretty short, and the first 1/3 to 1/2 was a pretty weak plot. It became passable later in the storyline, but none of them were particularly good. You're buying both games for the multiplayer.


It is nothing like Bad Company games, which have very entertaining campaign modes. The single player story is usually solid, but moreso the characters are pretty funny with their banter, which continues beyond cut scenes into regular gameplay.


Note: Battlefield is a lot more intense than the Bad Company series. Battlefield is much more of a simulation, realistic battle. It's not truly realistic like America's Army or Tom Clancy games (where a bullet or two ends you), but it's much more intense than the free wheeling, arcade style fun of bad company games.

 

[Bucknut24]

compared to the other two, MW3 was very short...I love the storyline to the MW series, but the gameplay is awful, baddies continue to respwan til you get to a certain point, they never run out of ammo, you think you're hiding in a good spot til you magically get hit....

It makes you wanna break your controller

 

[morbitzerker]

From all reports here, MW3's campaign was short and underwhelming.

I found BF3 to be pretty short, and the first 1/3 to 1/2 was a pretty weak plot. It became passable later in the storyline, but none of them were particularly good. You're buying both games for the multiplayer.


It is nothing like Bad Company games, which have very entertaining campaign modes. The single player story is usually solid, but moreso the characters are pretty funny with their banter, which continues beyond cut scenes into regular gameplay.


Note: Battlefield is a lot more intense than the Bad Company series. Battlefield is much more of a simulation, realistic battle. It's not truly realistic like America's Army or Tom Clancy games (where a bullet or two ends you), but it's much more intense than the free wheeling, arcade style fun of bad company games.

compared to the other two, MW3 was very short...I love the storyline to the MW series, but the gameplay is awful, baddies continue to respwan til you get to a certain point, they never run out of ammo, you think you're hiding in a good spot til you magically get hit....

It makes you wanna break your controller

My IMO, I know a knock on the BF3 campaign was that it was short, and I'm sure if you sat down and knocked it out in a day or two it seemed that way. What I did was play one or two missions at a time and went between that and the multiplayer. By playing this way I found the campaign entertaining and fun. I spaced it out over a time span which allowed me to remember the plot but not consume it all at one time, made it much more entertaining and personally, I found the BF3 campaign epic as fuck, especially the later Russian Spec Op mission.

 

[morbitzerker]

This weekend I'm looking to pick up a new game and I've decided on trying out either MW3 or BF3.

I have "0" experience in either one would consider myself intermediate (at best) in FPS games.
I have Xbox Live but have never used it before and I do not intend to invest in a headset so I can talk to people over the game.

I'm seeking a serious recommendation - which should I choose?

I'm interested in enjoying myself, not getting "pwn3d"

My IMO, don't even consider MW3. Buy BF3. I played a lot of Black Ops and MW2, but none of MW3. From everything I've seen and read, as well as my 3 days of BF3 play, get BF3.

 

[BlufftonBuckeye]

I play both extensively.

I absolutely hated the single player campaign in BF3, just sucked total ass. It's basically one set piece after another, not at all worth your time.

MW3's campaign was "better" simply because it was the conclusion (ish) of a story that started in the original MW, which was nice. However, by itself it is not a good campaign. Honestly, the campaigns for both games were clearly put on the back burner, with good reason. The multiplayer is what makes them both.

BF3 is a more well rounded experience, with sniper/assault/engineer classes all being well balanced and enjoyable. The maps are huge, games long (at least by FPS standards) with matches running 15 minutes easily, usually longer. My biggest gripe is the unlock system that benefits the best players by giving them the best attachments/guns etc. Not that I think they did something "wrong", I just don't like that you make it extremely difficult on new players to get involved when everyone is running around with blinged out weapons/kits.

BF3 is a bit slower paced, more of a sit down and play for a couple hours experience. There is a lot of running around, strategy isn't required but is extremely beneficial, and the visuals are great.

In contrast, MW3 is much more of a "party" game, one that is a blast with friends. Smaller maps, faster games. A round can be 10 minutes, and rarely goes longer. This game is more arcade than simulation.

For me, it all depends on the situation. I play BF3 with my brother and we have a great time, but if your playing alone it can get a little slow/boring, especially if you're in a bad lobby with campy recon players. That isn't the norm, however. If you have a group that plays, such as the BP one, playing BF3 is great. If you want something that you can sit down and crank out matches, play MW3.

Apples and oranges, at the end of the day.

EDIT: Forgot to mention, "Survival" mode is hella fun with a friend. Think Gears of War Horde mode, with terrorists. Friend and I burnt up many hours over break on that mode.

 

[BigWoof31]

Thanks for the help! Everyone certainly is opinionated on these games and I appreciate it.

Sounds like no matter which one I pick, it is encouraged to play a few rounds of the campaign before jumping into multiplayer mode.

Seeing as I might only be playing 2-3 hours a week (at max) is it still a worthy investment to get BF3?

Discussions like this make me think it might be in my best interested to get Goldeneye on the 360 or even team fortress!

 

[Wells4Heisman]

Thanks for the help! Everyone certainly is opinionated on these games and I appreciate it.

Sounds like no matter which one I pick, it is encouraged to play a few rounds of the campaign before jumping into multiplayer mode.

Seeing as I might only be playing 2-3 hours a week (at max) is it still a worthy investment to get BF3?

Discussions like this make me think it might be in my best interested to get Goldeneye on the 360 or even team fortress!

I'd still recommend BF3.

 

[TooTall]

Thanks for the help! Everyone certainly is opinionated on these games and I appreciate it.

Sounds like no matter which one I pick, it is encouraged to play a few rounds of the campaign before jumping into multiplayer mode.

Seeing as I might only be playing 2-3 hours a week (at max) is it still a worthy investment to get BF3?

Discussions like this make me think it might be in my best interested to get Goldeneye on the 360 or even team fortress!

It's going to take you a while to rank up if you only play a few hours a week. Best part about BF3 that MW3 doesn't offer is the fact that you can just perch up on a cliff somewhere and reign terror down on people with a sniper rifle. Or you can go the Engineer route and take out Tanks, LAV's (essentially a weaker tank), and aircrafts. I just feel there's SO much more substance to BF3.


Call of Duty, IMO, only seems to appeal to the younger crowds, which is kind of scary to think about considering young children should not be playing this game. Of course, that would make me a hypocrite since I was like 13ish when I played GTA 2.

 

[jwinslow]

It's going to take you a while to rank up if you only play a few hours a week. Best part about BF3 that MW3 doesn't offer is the fact that you can just perch up on a cliff somewhere and reign terror down on people with a sniper rifle. Or you can go the Engineer route and take out Tanks, LAV's (essentially a weakeruj tank), and aircrafts. I just feel there's SO much more substance to BF3.


Call of Duty, IMO, only seems to appeal to the younger crowds, which is kind of scary to think about considering young children should not be playing this game. Of course, that would make me a hypocrite since I was like 13ish when I played GTA 2.

But that sniper can be taken out easily by a team, while the 12 year old pwning you repeatedly with killstreak rewards can hide in the back of the map and ruin you with his remote control death machine


Rank up your engineer class and get the a91. Best gun in the game and good for newbie and veterans alike. Also easy to rank up by repairing vehicles

There are a few COD like elements but not enough to ruin the game.

 

[TooTall]

But that sniper can be taken out easily by a team, while the 12 year old pwning you repeatedly with killstreak rewards can hide in the back of the map and ruin you with his remote control death machine


Rank up your engineer class and get the a91. Best gun in the game and good for newbie and veterans alike. Also easy to rank up by repairing vehicles

There are a few COD like elements but not enough to ruin the game.

This. Plus the squad's in Battlefield are MUCH more fun. You can ACTUALLY help teammates out with Squad perks and what-not.

Like you said, the snipers aren't impossible to take out like they are in CoD, especially the 1337 (leet) pwn'ing, quick scoping douche bag crowd that always seems to follow CoD like a disease.

Another PLUS about Battlefield, you know what you are getting into when you go to join a game. You have the option to see what rank the players are currently in that specific game. A friend and I like to call the Generals with numbers below the rank symbol, "wizards"... I feel it's a fitting description to the way they like to play.

Granted, the aircraft's can be a real pain in the dick sometimes... But once you have a lot of the unlocks for the engineer class, it should be pretty easy to 1) take them down, or 2) get them away from you so you can continue to bring the fury with the snipes.

EDIT: Oh, and Jwins, was playing some regular Conquest with my buddy that we are always in a squad with... Needless to say, the tanks are USELESS in regular when trying to take out AT foot soldiers... I had one game (Damavand Peak) where I was in a tank, they were taking over A (our spawn side) and I had about 6-7 hit markers/assists from point blank range... All I could do was scratch my head. Very frustrating. But once that game was over, back to owning fools we went.

 

[BigWoof31]

Well my decision was made very easy for me on Friday - I went to the local Gamestop and they didn't have any BF3's - the closest available copy was in Ft. Thomas, KY or Eastgate Mall - not interested in that drive.
So I traded in two games and had an 11 dollar credit already, got MW3 on the cheap.

I have to say, I'm really enjoying it. Its probably because I didn't have anything to base it off of and haven't played the other games.
Got up to level 23 in one weekend and have almost maxed out my S-CARL assault rifle.

I'm still getting my ass kicked - my K/D ration is .387 or something horrible and I'm still learning the maps, but it's pretty fun and I've gotten better.


Things I've done that have improved my success.

1. My favorite game is "Groundwar" simply because the teams are bigger and it rotates between Domination, Kill Confirmed and Team Deathmatch. I've find someone who is at a much higher level than me and follow them. Working with them tends to have your back covered and you learn tactics from watching them move around.

2. Crouch and crawl are your friend.

3. Support packages boost your score and help you level up quicker (especially ballistic vest).

4. Sticking to the outside of the map and trying to flank the opponent is ideal for newbs like myself. When I first started playing, I ran right at where I thought the enemy would be and was mowed down.


Things I dislike:

1. Carrying a launcher slows me down and I hate getting sniped when I'm trying to launch a javelin missle.

2. I really don't have a good idea of why anyone would carry a sub machine gun as opposed to a launcher. They are less accurate and I don't see the advantage, other than helping you move faster.

3. No understanding why anyone would carry a shotgun either.

4. I want to edit my gamer tag - certain players the flags of where they are from (turkey, canada, greece) and they have ridiculous pictures but I have no idea how do it? My just shows my XBox Live ID and my Sgt title.

5. Dislike the level Baakara. Snipers paradise.