BF3 vs MW3

Joined
5 Aug 2006
Posts
11,508
Location
Derbyshire
Hey all.
I own BF3 and have played many of the older BF games.
I don't own MW3 but have played the older MW games (including the COD games that are not 'Modern Warfare' titles).

I have seen a few reviews and wondered which one is best.
I have put this in the PC section but I suppose it could just as easily be in the console section.

Try not to start throwing your handbags at each other, I don't want this to end up as arguementitive as a PS3 vs Xbox 360 thread :p.
 
IMO BF is more team orientated, your always going to loose if you try go lone wolf, with huge maps, vehicles and set classes, relating its self closer to sim than arcade.

I go lone wolf (well in a squad but ignore them) and can still come top of the round (rarely I must admit). I must say that it happens far less than on BC2 - Perhaps I am saying BF3 is more team orientated than BC2 but until I unlock some more stuff (starting weapons are crap) then I cannot fully comment.
 
I have BF3 limited edition and it is going to become extremely epic when the re-makes of the BF2 maps are released near Christmas.
Karkand and Sharqi Peninsula are/were epic. Gulf of Omen was meh. Wake Island was almost always crap as the US would never get a base (had the aircraft carrier as an uncap).

From what I have read so far it seems MW3 is just a tarted up MW2 (MW2 was very good though). BF3 has plenty of flaws but one thing it isn't is a polished up BC2 (and cetainly not BF2 as it looks really dated now!), it is an entirely new game.

The only MW I have played online is the first one. To be honest I find the MW series single player very involving and very good, the BF3 one isn't the best (only a few hours into it) and the BC2 one was naff.
 
Back
Top Bottom