Offical Xbox Magazine Features Battlefield 3

[CptainCrunch]

This is the cover of Issue 77 of OXM:

These shots are from issue 76:

Even though many argue that the two games are seperate from each other and are different styles, it seems that everyone is ignoring that fact. What is your take on the CoD vs. Battlefield battle? Are these games actually two seperate games that can co-exist or is it because they are both FPS games that are similiar, there can be only one winner? Also, what determines a winner? I'm sure everyone is going to look at sales, but that is a very narrow scope to determine that. Will that matter in the end for either of these titles?

You can click on the images to enlarge.

Source

[Mtrooper]

I think the real "winner" in terms of game in the long run is the one that is fondly remembered, one that has endurance, and one that pushes technology or a genre along into the future. That is from a player and future perspective, but I'm sure in the short-term both EA and Activision will declare victory, one for innovation and the other towards sales.

[Stryker]

There both FPS's set in Modern settings, specially Urban environments. They both contain the same game modes, and stats features (except one is free and one is a rip-off.) Besides the fact that BF3 has vehicles, BF3 and COD are one in the same in terms of gameplay. BF3 DESTROYS the garbage that is COD! COD was a great PC game but now its dead. Now COD is a stable of 360 so there saying, "Wait, there two different games...COD is still good" and they can't be more wrong.

[Eagle101]

in my honest opinion they are two different games, Call of Duty is an arcade shooter centered on small maps and now a small player count, towards MW2 it became a console game, us the PC gamers got it as well, i own MW2, and recently started playing it again with my brother that way at least its some fun. i It has a quick level up system, its short lived, you rank up so quick that some people either A) go prestige B) play on w/out prestige C) leave the game its like this small dose of drug with a little lasting effect.

What i enjoyed about CoD (CoD4 mainly) was the amount of weaponry and customization, as well not to mention we had up to 64 player servers on CoD4, i still play on a 24/7 broadcast server with 50 players, its always full. so in general CoD is a fast paced arcade shooter, now its a fast paced arcade shooter (infinity ward) without dedi servers, server browser, and a small and i mean small player count. On the other hand Treyarch in which i believe their latest (Black Ops) was average/ above average shooter for me. At first the game was buggy but after several patches i actually took a liking to the game and started playing it madly. Treyarch at least tries to hear the PC community imho.

Now onto battlefield, i have been playing it since 1942 and know all the best mods out their like Desert Combat, Forgotten Hope, Point of Existence, Eve of Destruction. those were the days! but.. Battlefield is a completely different game to CoD. CoD has been majorly about TDM (team Deathmatch) most servers play on that, Battlefield is an objective based multiplayer only game (excluding Bad Company). we have been well acquainted with its most famous mode Conquest! capture flags and bleed the enemy's tickets. Squad based gameplay as well! you got your classes, medic, assault, engineer and the like very team oriented, another big point here is vehicles, jets, helos, tanks, jeeps its all out warfare, and the games session in Battlefield take a lot longer to finish than a meager 10 minutes per round in CoD. leveling up, i remember when BF2 came out and it was the first of the BF franchise to adopt a stats system, and God it took me a long time to level up, thus increasing the longevity of the game and with mods that certainly increased the lifeline of BF games. i heard people bought BF1942 just because of Desert Combat mod!

so in conclusion to this tldr (too long didnt read) i would have to say that these games are on a completely different level of gaming, you might compare counter strike to CoD and Planetside or homefront? to Battlefield. in any case i stand with Battlefield as it offers more, and its true to its fans which i love. i will probably pick up modern warfare 3 some time in the late future when its a bargain in GAME or Amazon or whatever. P.S. these views are solely mines, and from my opinion and point of view, i do however apologize if some of what i have said offended any of you fellow gamers. Eagle 101 - out.

[Eagle101]

wtf, i put paragraphs, i dont see no edit option, sorry guys! you can always tl dr :P

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Offical Xbox Magazine Features Battlefield 3

Sometimes if I use my phone to reply, it will do that.

Crunch

[cikame]

I like both games, but i'm looking forward to mw3 the most because of... hopefully... captain price and co. There are elements to those characters beyond straight soldiers which is what bf3 seems to be and i've seen that. Fitting bf3 onto consoles will be a lesser experience, how much so is to be determined but the majority are saying "play this on pc" to which i say no. I have a powerful pc, i spent hundreds of £'s making it what it is but i doubt i can run bf3 at an enjoyable degree unless their game engine is something special. All call of duty fans need to do is buy the disc, it'll run on mostly anything including consoles fully at 60fps. I am much more for slight upgrades than mindblowing graphics because there's no excuse in asking people to buy other things in order to buy and play your game.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Offical Xbox Magazine Features Battlefield 3

I like both games, but i'm looking forward to mw3 the most because of... hopefully... captain price and co. There are elements to those characters beyond straight soldiers which is what bf3 seems to be and i've seen that. Fitting bf3 onto consoles will be a lesser experience, how much so is to be determined but the majority are saying "play this on pc" to which i say no. I have a powerful pc, i spent hundreds of £'s making it what it is but i doubt i can run bf3 at an enjoyable degree unless their game engine is something special. All call of duty fans need to do is buy the disc, it'll run on mostly anything including consoles fully at 60fps. I am much more for slight upgrades than mindblowing graphics because there's no excuse in asking people to buy other things in order to buy and play your game.

So as a console gamer, does the 30fps make a difference? You are buying MW3 for the single player, so does it matter to you on the multiplayer?

Crunch

[jimykx]

If you really care about FPS, you choose cod because it is 60fps instead of 30? that makes no sense. if you really care about fps and an awesome game in general you grow some balls, get a pc and battlefield 3

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Offical Xbox Magazine Features Battlefield 3

LOL, Jimy, a little biased are we?

Crunch

[jimykx]

Re: Offical Xbox Magazine Features Battlefield 3

It's not just a little, it's pretty much full power biasing