http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEtN43bmP18

just saying... the only thing mw3 can compete with is the campaign and co-op, but the real focus of the game is on the multiplayer and it just isn't as good as mw2.

Battlefield 3's campaign was decent, but uninteresting. The co-op is fun, but too short, but at the end of the day I'm hopping on multiplayer and battlefield 3 takes the crown by a long shot.

I have finished BF3 campaign but not of MW3 so I dont want to jump to conclusion but graphic was BF3 is better but the specs were too high that I played in medium settings and still was a bit laggy while MW3 I am playing on high.

I dont want to choose cuz both are good at their own place :)

BF3 is so much better than MW3. The latter is nothing more than a bunch of skins and maps, they havent changed the engine whatsoever! BF3 multiplayer is something thats been missing from alot of peoples lives since BF2. COD4 was good at filling the gap as was Halo 3 and a couple of rainbow 6 games but you'll see full servers on BF3 for the next 5 years and im pretty sure MW3 wont have that staying power.

You have a XboX so you should keep your mouth shut, Andrew :P

real gamers play the xbox ;-)

I also used to game on a PC for BF2 but i prefer a controller to keyboard and mouse.

> real gamers play the xbox ;-)

I hardly consider bending over for Microsoft as being a real gamer.

And xbox gamers, from all the forums ive seen, contain more fanboys, and more cry babies,
than PS2/PS3 and PC forums combined.

well lets look at a few facts, before we go flying off here.

1) MW3 sold more copies in the 5 day debut of itself, than any other game, book or movie
in history. 775 Million dollars in the 5 day debut, a fact im sure Blizzard are very happy with
(yes, for those that didnt know it, Activision are owned by Blizzard)

2) It has a larger fan base. even people that hate it, play it. People that dont like BF3, simply
dont play it.

3) The 'graphics' were slightly tweaked, but otherwise, it was a system that worked amazingly
well in MW2, and as the saying goes " if it aint broke..."

4) BF3 after the 5 day debut of MW3, went quickly into the offensive, and announced after
seeing MW3, they will be releasing BF4. That sort of ego is very quick to deflate it seems.

5) The fanboys: Ive played both. From a detached stance towards both. BF3 simply has
too much. Zero story, and a lot of cry babies in the multi-players. But they went overboard.
OMG! fly a plane! OMG! drive a tank! OMG! do this! OMG! do that!
MW3 simply said ' well shit, we've upgraded the Multi-player games to better suit a wider audience,
completed the 3 part story (which was awesome by the way) and we didnt change shit,
cause it worked in MW2.

It doesnt matter really whats better though, the statistics speak for themselves.
Always have, Always will. and a few fanboys with their bruised egos are not going
to alter whats a better game, and what isnt.

Sales do not justify a game's quality. The guy who created the "pet rock" made millions and it was just a rock.

People who hate it play it? I hate it and I certainly don't play it. People play it for the multiplayer. They play it because the other games die off. People want to stay on the bandwagon and follow the trend while older games die off and get raided by hackers (mw2).

Not upgrading the graphics was a poor excuse. The franchise was put into the hands of an inexperienced development group. They were given the tools, but they didn't know what to do with them. Same story as bethesda handing fallout to obsidian. They didn't screw with anything except for the map, the missions, and added a few changes and screwed it up.

The mw3 community is 100% more immature than the battlefield 3 community. I say 100% because you can't even talk to the opposing team in battlefield, therefore it's impossible to trash talk unless you send private messages which isn't worth the effort. I spent a great amount of time on both the battlefield 3 and call of duty forums and call of duty forums are always packed full of rage. Though BF3 has their ragers too, the call of duty community takes the cake for most immature community.

battlefield 3 isn't simplified mindless gun spraying which turns a lot of core gamers off. This is a generation that wants simplification and people don't want to be challenged. mw3 has little to no learning curve while battlefield 3 requires many hours of gameplay to adapt and people are scared of change. BF3 isn't as simple as spawning, shooting, dying, and repeating.

> BF3 isn't as simple as
> spawning, shooting, dying, and repeating.

yes it is.

assault roles:
they need to heal their team, revive their team, listen and look for requests to be healed and revived, make campers vulnerable with their frag launchers, provide cover for campers with smoke launchers

support roles:
they need to stock their team with ammo, make clearances and make campers vulnerable with c4, destroy enemy vehicles with c4, rig camping spots with c4 to prevent campers

engineer roles:
repair friendly vehicle which is absolutely crucial for a victory, stick with helicopters to repair their helis, plant mines on the ground to blow enemy vehicles, fire RPGs at vehicles to weaken or destroy.

sniper roles:
call out infantry, snipe base capturers and drivers, mark enemy vehicles so javelins can destroy the vehicles, mark all enemies that are a threat to nearby friendlies

tank roles:
destroy other tanks, humvees, and other ground vehicles. They can destroy air support when upgraded. They can take out ground troops and they are the most effective base capturers and defenders.

helicopter roles:
they need to take out air support, take ground troops to their destinations, take out tanks and other ground vehicles, they can take out ground troops and help capture bases.

scout roles:
they must take their troops to areas that need support. They must know how to fly to aim the gunners properly.

gunners:
must know when to deploy necessary flares, must communicate with the pilot, should be engineers to also provide repairs
you must communicate with the driver so they know where to go because they can't see nearly as much as you can. the gunner can spot mines more clearly and not warning the driver can lead to a big fail

and that is the beauty of battlefield 3. It's not just shooting, dying, and repeating. If you don't play the game right, then it's going to appear as a generic shooter, but you'll end up being a terrible player.

awesome, you just described Starcraft.

isn't a mindless and simplified game. That's a very big compliment towards battlefield 3

well if you like mindless and simplified...i prefer a bit of a challenge...ie: MW3.

Ok, here's the scores from the official PS3 mag;

CoD MW3: 87 (Thanks to the robust multiplayer, this game is mandatory for shooterfans, although Activision might want to start some renewal in the future)

BF3: 90 (The weapon masters from DICE offer a alternative for people who've grown tired of CoD. Best suited for the more tactical player and also technically superior)

Back in the day I played some WWII CoD's, didn't like it since I wasn't much of a shooterfan to begin with, but when I played a demo of BF1943 from the PSN store I got hooked and have bought BF2 and very soon will buy 3 as well.

it is a very, very small "bit"

I've played Modern Warfare (the list is kinda long for that one, we've had most of the CODs) but I won't play Battlefield.
We have both of the new ones. The guys like both of them, even though they are very different games.
I HATE watching Battlefield. I hated watching #2 and the 1945 or whatever it was, too. It's sooooo boring to watch. There's a dot on the horizon... oh nvm you're already dead. Blah.
COD is a lot more entertaining to watch. To play - well it ticks me off to no end, I swear worse than a sailor, but that's just me. My comment is for watching as a non-player.
I also gotta say something about the 'team effort' thing. MW3 goes better if you play as a team. Not everyone does. Lots just want the kills and ignore the objective. The POINT of the match is the objective. Ok, team death match doesn't count, but I mean the other ones. You work for the objective and you win and it's all good.
The guys last night were playing Battlefield and played with people who didn't do the objective so they lost. My guys kept trying, but the other team would take them out over and over whenever they got close. The rest of their team was sniping. That's the first time I've heard of that happening to them in all their games, so it's weird. Usually they work together.

Saw Battlefield 3 on sale at HMV yesterday, couldnt pass on it for just 29quid. Now that I have both, I can't wait until im home !

Skyrim is only £22 at the moment too! my missus just got me that for christmas i think.

You can all have your shitty war games I'll be playing Mario Kart 7 this christmas ^.^