Battlefield 3 or COD MW3?

First topic message reminder :

Just wondering if anyone's been playing the Battlefield 3 beta, what they think of it, what format that was and if you're gonna be buying the full release.

Bonjourno!

People who know me will know that I like my computer games that remind me of Monzas favourite driver, Fernando Alonso.

Battlefield 3 reminds us of Lewis Hamilton. It was lucky to get as far as it has due to a rivalry with Cod, it has proven to be a one hit wonder and it crashes lots.

MW3 on the other hand is a multi award winning game that seems to have no bounds to it's potential. It is the most respected and everybody who knows anything about gaming wants it! Some people have gone as far to say that it is the 'most complete game in the Market.' Just like Fernando Alonso is the 'most complete driver on the grid!'

Yes, Call of Duty MW3 is like the great Fernando Alonso of the gaming world!

Forza the greatest game ever MW3!

Forza Alonso!

Mate, you're as funny as a miscarriage.

Alessandro Ciambella wrote:Bonjourno!

People who know me will know that I like my computer games that remind me of Monzas favourite driver, Fernando Alonso.

Battlefield 3 reminds us of Lewis Hamilton. It was lucky to get as far as it has due to a rivalry with Cod, it has proven to be a one hit wonder and it crashes lots.

MW3 on the other hand is a multi award winning game that seems to have no bounds to it's potential. It is the most respected and everybody who knows anything about gaming wants it! Some people have gone as far to say that it is the 'most complete game in the Market.' Just like Fernando Alonso is the 'most complete driver on the grid!'

Yes, Call of Duty MW3 is like the great Fernando Alonso of the gaming world!

Forza the greatest game ever MW3!

Forza Alonso!

r u for real?

He's a WUM.

yh i thought so lol

Can't see why people moan and say "Oh MW3 is just the same as MW2". Of course it is, if they change it a great deal then people go off it completely that why games are only tweaked on a year by year basis.

It's the same with games like FIFA, it is just the same as the last FIFA but with slight tweaks and people still go out in their masses and buy it.

BF3 is just what Pro is to FIFA, some people prefer the other, some people don't mind both but just don't expect a game to have a radical overhaul when it's sales suggest how successful it is.

blaineyboy wrote:Can't see why people moan and say "Oh MW3 is just the same as MW2". Of course it is, if they change it a great deal then people go off it completely that why games are only tweaked on a year by year basis.

It's the same with games like FIFA, it is just the same as the last FIFA but with slight tweaks and people still go out in their masses and buy it.

BF3 is just what Pro is to FIFA, some people prefer the other, some people don't mind both but just don't expect a game to have a radical overhaul when it's sales suggest how successful it is.

The point I think people are trying to make is that if like some you've played CoD4, CoD5, MW2 and Black Ops-or even just two or three of these-then MW3 isn't significantly different to warrant spending another forty-five quid on it. CoD5 was sub-standard, and MW2 bored me after just one prestige.

blaineyboy wrote:Can't see why people moan and say "Oh MW3 is just the same as MW2". Of course it is, if they change it a great deal then people go off it completely that why games are only tweaked on a year by year basis.

It's the same with games like FIFA, it is just the same as the last FIFA but with slight tweaks and people still go out in their masses and buy it.

BF3 is just what Pro is to FIFA, some people prefer the other, some people don't mind both but just don't expect a game to have a radical overhaul when it's sales suggest how successful it is.

I don't disagree that what you've said is how things are currently within the gaming industry and in many ways I can understand why your massive companies keep this trend going, rather it's the sad case that its become an accepted standard that's so depressing. Just because that's how things are doesn't make how things are right, though its certainly not a issue with developers its the consumer who keeps such a treadmill going. Much about those who endless complain about the horror's of Gold Farmers when its only a successful industry due to the consumers/drones who keep it going.

There's also the fact most of these franchises just live of the original concept rather than quality of the generic next installment in the series, it's a perpetrated cycle that's reinforced not just by the marketing of the publisher but by reviewers to scared to go against the norm and consumers of the same ilk which is often the result of a sheep mentality mode.

Dass wrote:

blaineyboy wrote:Can't see why people moan and say "Oh MW3 is just the same as MW2". Of course it is, if they change it a great deal then people go off it completely that why games are only tweaked on a year by year basis.

It's the same with games like FIFA, it is just the same as the last FIFA but with slight tweaks and people still go out in their masses and buy it.

BF3 is just what Pro is to FIFA, some people prefer the other, some people don't mind both but just don't expect a game to have a radical overhaul when it's sales suggest how successful it is.

I don't disagree that what you've said is how things are currently within the gaming industry and in many ways I can understand why your massive companies keep this trend going, rather it's the sad case that its become an accepted standard that's so depressing. Just because that's how things are doesn't make how things are right, though its certainly not a issue with developers its the consumer who keeps such a treadmill going. Much about those who endless complain about the horror's of Gold Farmers when its only a successful industry due to the consumers/drones who keep it going.

There's also the fact most of these franchises just live of the original concept rather than quality of the generic next installment in the series, it's a perpetrated cycle that's reinforced not just by the marketing of the publisher but by reviewers to scared to go against the norm and consumers of the same ilk which is often the result of a sheep mentality mode.

Whilst this is true Dass what are they meant to do? Stop making COD games? Completely revolutionise them and change it and take a huge risk? There hands are a bit tied with the massive amount of money these type of games generate.

Personally if I was them Alex I'd keep churning them out as per normal, companies like EA need such games to keep them going on a day to day basis. My main thrust was to say that just because that's how things are doesn't make the right, plus the over inflated hype/review scores are often based on a original idea rather than the merits of future endeavours.

In the end its not the developers who are the problem for the current poor state of the gaming industry and it never will be. It's the consumer.

Dass wrote:Personally if I was them Alex I'd keep churning them out as per normal, companies like EA need such games to keep them going on a day to day basis. My main thrust was to say that just because that's how things are doesn't make the right, plus the over inflated hype/review scores are often based on a original idea rather than the merits of future endeavours.

In the end its not the developers who are the problem for the current poor state of the gaming industry and it never will be. It's the consumer.

Got to remember that pretty much 80% of people who play such games are pretty casual gamers, I would consider myself a much more hardcore gamer. The fact is these are simple but fun games that swallow up the casual gamers needs and some of the hardcore ones too, to say it's the consumers fault is a bit critical in my opinion. But I completely see where you are coming from, however I would think that most don't share that view, mainly because people like the game and if they like the game you can't really blame them for rating it high or hyping it up even if the next installment is virtually a recreation of the last with a couple of different guns maybe a different mode and some other maps, they do so because they like it. Due to the fact they like it.... There's not really a fault, if you catch my drift.

Also I wouldn't say the state of the gaming industry is poor, it's just that it's a lot more popular with the n00bies coming onto the scene and gaming becoming more mainstream, so there are more mainstream type games, however there are still plenty of good titles coming out I would say.

It's the same mentality on the consumers' behalf as when people buy whichever X-Factor dross is released as a Christmas single simply because that's what they've had spoon-fed to them. Sad thing is, a lot of decent games fall by the wayside because there are too many people who know no better than to buy the latest CoD rehash. There's a reason their advertising budget is so high, y'know...

MW3 apparently shifted more units in the first 24 hours than BF3 did in it's first week. I find that a bit depressing. A lot of people (kids usually) are turned off from Battlefield because it's not as simple as 'run and gun'.
I'm not saying that simply to be snobbish either-I've genuinely noticed that some people will turn their nose up at the prospect of having to play as a certain class and in a certain way.

Sadly I can't forget the 80% in whatever category name you wish to put them, it's hard to miss when the lack of depth in a large section of games is there to show it.

I'm not disputing that these games should exist or that the games market should close itself of these type of players in a rather snobbish manner. I just worry when this side of the industry starts to ride rough shod over all else and the average consumer is fed a cycle of booming advertisement and review scores not worth the paper they are written on to buy the next franchise game whether it deserves the purchase or not.

To abuse the consumer of these game types is never my intention or make their choices seem derivative but it still doesn't detract from the notion that it's the consumer who drives what the developers do and not the reverse. You only have to see it in the revamps of older games with multiple hints systems or this undying fascination with making nearly everything a FPS.

There's a few good titles coming out but its a far cry from maybe ten years ago in my eyes. Just take the next big game Uncharted which will garner ridiculous reviews, hype and sales numbers based on the fact it looks pretty and is easy to complete. There's very little adventure depth, puzzles or thought needed in the game at all. It's a linear experience running from one fight scenario to the next with nice looking visuals to distract you while your running to your next fight. It's 15 years later and the game it's considered to be the next evolution of still kicks it's ass in nearly every department barring pretty visuals.

I'm forever going to say the gaming industry is in a mire for as long as it stays this course, we are I feel in a sea (a very pretty looking one though) of mediocrity where games are concerned. There are some good games but most often that not they get lost or drowned out without ever really have a chance to shine.

I do wonder with some games such as Dragon Age would they sell just as well as some of the bigger franchise type games like an Uncharted if they had that kind of advertising budget? Sadly I get the feeling we will never find out, due to the very simple fact that the risks aren't being taken for such games that generally have a more hardcore following, and are scared that the more casuals won't buy the game because it's not a big blockbuster game with a huge name. Which to me is a major shame as them type of games generally speaking kick games like MW3's butt all day long.

In my opinion no, a game like Dragon Age even with such a marketing budget of a MW3 wouldn't sell much more. That particular game had a pretty decent budget in terms of marketing and the subsequent sequel had even more, much like its compatriot games in Mass Effect. While not on a MW level they were still extremely high for a game and in the upper heights with Bioware being one of EA's flag ship developers these days.

A game like Dragon Age just doesn't have the base market like a FPS game does, so I can't see it ever reaching those heights regardless. Though you only have to look at the sequels to this game and Mass Effect and see a sad desire by Bioware to tap into such a market by reshaping there games as needed.

There's no doubt advertising is almost as important as the game itself and that's why the budgets are as big and in many cases bigger than the development of said game. You only have to go back to the 90's to see this on a smaller scale with Doom and how it over shadowed a game which in many ways was it's superior in System Shock. What I consider to be the best RPG game to exist in Planescape Torment was a massive flop in regards sales due to being over shadowed by many due to the exposure that was given to other games around release.

There's certainly a element of developers sticking to the whats successful model and not taking chances due to going under, though there's plenty evidence of studios who have released excellent games only to go under due to poor sales (Troika Games spring to mind). So it's hard to blame the developers for not taking a chancy approach when the consumer is obviously demanding this singular approach over all else at least as far as financial measurement goes.

There's certainly a element of people buying games through being bombarded with information of how great the game is from various sources. Review scores are notoriously difficult to trust for a number of key reasons -receiving money from developers/publishers, just plan awful reviewers (Once saw a game being marked down significantly from a major reviewer as the game was to hardware intensive) or being to scared to upset the apple cart and risk their magazine receiving backlash with said develop/publish. Yet these are the sort of things people use to justify a games quality along with award trophies which aren't worth squat. Nearly every convention has an award and they are based again on popularity and mean about as much as the belts in boxing do today.

The saddest thing about all this is there's many genre's of gaming that have all but died out in a more mainstream sense.

A recent remark by Hideo Kojima when asked if he felt the shrunken market and derivative sequel/franchise games was down to developers under massive financial pressure.

"I think it's more consumer demand - right now, consumers are happy with what they have. First-person shooters sell like crazy, so there's not really a strong demand for anything else, and that's why original ideas stop being made."

Dass wrote:A recent remark by Hideo Kojima when asked if he felt the shrunken market and derivative sequel/franchise games was down to developers under massive financial pressure.

"I think it's more consumer demand - right now, consumers are happy with what they have. First-person shooters sell like crazy, so there's not really a strong demand for anything else, and that's why original ideas stop being made."

I'm not sold on Mr Kojima. He can say what he likes about why he thinks original titles are suffering, but after attempting to play through the turgid mess that was Metal Gear Solid 2 I'm afraid I'm gonna take anything he says with a sizeable pinch of salt.

Metal Gear Solid 2 was the second best in the franchise.

the server online for BF3 is horrible

KO-KING wrote:the server online for BF3 is horrible

but its online is better in genral tho

cherriesfan wrote:

KO-KING wrote:the server online for BF3 is horrible

but its online is better in genral tho

if you can get a game, yes

How on CoDs green earth is BF3 online generally better than MW3? Please, do explain.

Alessandro Ciambella wrote:How on CoDs green earth is BF3 online generally better than MW3? Please, do explain.

no 10 year olds calling you a faggot, less guys who camp in one place, buildings can be destoyed

few things that better in BF3, but not arguing BF3 > MW3 on the whole in anyway

one thing i like on MW3 is that having a deep voice generally puts me in a position of power in a loby

Alessandro Ciambella wrote:How on CoDs green earth is BF3 online generally better than MW3? Please, do explain.

balanced vichles,proper snipers, more weapon customisation, no overpowerd perks, bigger lobbys.