Which do you think is going to be better? Call of Duty MW3 or Battlefield 3?

I'm sorry to say I highly doubt the problems of previous Call of Duties will ever be solved. The developers have not come up with a good idea since the release of Call of Duty 4. All MW3 has over BF3 is it will run smoother, 60FPS, and it'll sell more because... well because it's Call of Duty and nothing else. Co-op I think will also be more fun.

Battlefields developers on the other hand, have put far more effort into creating this game. They created a brand new game engine just for BF3 which has much better lighting, shading, and particle effects. The environment effects the way a weapon sounds (for example fire a gun outside and it sounds one way, fire the same gun in a small room and you will hear the gunshots echo). Battlefield has over 50 guns, each can have up to 3 different attachments and over 25 vehicles, which are also customizable. The reason Battlefield runs slower is to save memory because console systems cannot handle the volume of information in a common game of 12v12 players and maps as large as the ones in the game compared to Call of Duty's 6v6 and rather small maps. The sound quality is amazing. The bass from my sub in my living room knocked pictures over on my coffee table. You don't just hear the sounds of the game, you can feel them. Its not uncommon to be being shot at and then you hear a bullet ricochet off something next to you. Destructability is also something Call of Duty has never even touched. In call of duty all you can do to change the map is maybe break some windows and blow up cars. In battlefield, you can break windows, blow up cars, destroy buildings, push objects around with your person, make craters in the ground, ect. BF3 is beast.

I think it is very sad that MW3 will sell more, given it follows the same retarded story line as MW2, has the same engine as MW1 and the same unrealistic gameplay as any previous Call of Duty. The developers and EA deserve so much more than those pigs at Activision. You decide which is better.

For the kind of playing I like to do, I think I will prefer Battlefield 3. What it has over Modern Warfare 3 is variety. If you get tired of running around and shooting (like in Call of Duty), jump in a plane or tank and have fun that way. I have no doubt that MW3 will be a great game, but I have a feeling that I'll be playing Battlefield 3 for much longer.

I have high hopes for MW3, but I got impatient and bought Battlefield 3. It was irritating a first as it's suprisingly different to COD, but now I love the game modes, the realism, the destructible environments and the huge range of guns. I think MW3 will have to be pretty amazing to top it

well the really there alot of mw3 fanboys, but for me battlefield 3, i have play mw2 black ops and shi7 happens in that games, some time i kill a chopper gunner with 1 tomahawk do you belive that, well i like cod to but bf3 is way better, is more realistic, better graphics and sound, mw3 is just same stuff well is go to be a mw2 same stuff but is cool, so go for it, mw3 and bf3 have their fanboys and those guys go to said that the one they play is a lot better any ways you can not said nothing cause mw3 is not out yet so you are a mw3 fanboy, bf3 is out and it prove that is very good game maybe mw3 go to beat bf3 in campain, but in online mode never.

Is this even a legit question..?

MW3 all the way..

It has been acclaimed the most anticipated game of the decade. And a campaign sequel to the awesome story behind MW2.

go COD or go home.

MW3 will outsell Battlefield 3, that's for sure.

I will try to be as unbiased as possible.

Multiplayer:

Modern Warfare 3:

Modern warfare 3's multiplayer is based on having fun rather than being realistic. It is in an arcade style so not many tactics are needed when playing. Generally, you can play with little communication with team mates and still have fun. In MW3, you can jump straight into a match, pick up a gun and start playing from the get go. The learning curve is very small. However, for players who like to work to win games rather than primarily focusing on getting kills this game may be frustrating. Also, many people who play the game suffer from lag at times as they game (unlike BF3) lacks online dedicated servers and many people argue that the game series has not changed over the years. Expansion packs are over priced, and many COD players are from a younger background making it very likely that you will be put into a lobby with a whining 12 year old child.

However, CODs main advantage over other FPS's is its simplicity. You are able to quickly get into a game, pick up a gun and start running and gunning. Many other Online shooters struggle to get into matches as fast as COD and require players to "think" instead of run and gun.

Battlefield 3:

Battlefield is in many ways a military simulator. So if you want a very realistic experience than Battlefield will not disappoint. BF3 opposed to cod requires players to work together ,rather than having players be lone wolves, to win matches. Players in BF3 will usually almost always play to the objective. If you have a well organized team with lots of communication you'll find BF3 very entertaining and satisfying. However, when not having a team of good players battlefield seems very frustrating, challenging and boring. Also, match making does not work as smoothly as COD and you'll find many server problems and peak times. BF3 also lacks the pure fun factor, meaning you can not just "goof around" on battlefield like you can on COD for fun. The learning curve is steep so you will find yourself very bored and frustrated when first playing the game as it is not nearly as simple as COD to pick up and learn. But once you have mastered it, you will find the experience to be more rewarding. This combined with the hardly-lagging EA dedicated servers, in game vecihiles,destructibilityy of the environment, wide range of unlockables and great map design will keep you entertained once you master the basics.

Winner of Gameplay: MW3. This is simply because it is easier to learn and can be played for purely fun and because this is the point of games many people will find MW3's gameplay more exciting and fast paced.

Graphics:

No explanation needed, Winner hands down of Graphics: Battlefield.

COD graphics are never of good quality, although they are average Battlefield graphics are state of the art. Almost no other FPS compares to the graphics of BF3 aside from Crysis and Killzone.

Storyline:

MW3:

Because the MW3 game is not out yet, I cannot 100% confirm it is going to be good but I can speculate by looking at the previous MW storylines. In the story mode you will find many different types of missions. You will be in many different locations across the globe. If you have played previous Modern Warfare storylines you will be very familiar with the characters who have differentpersonalitiess and are very memorable. Although the storymode gameplay can getrepetitivee the plot line is largely intense and can be exciting.

BF3:

Unlike the COD series, Battlefield games do not focus on their story lines as much. Although you will find some parts of the interesting and unique, on the whole Battlefield is very linear and involves tedious tasks such as quick time events. What can I say really? Battlefield games are always more about their multiplayer.

Winner of Story line: MW3, mainly because of having more memorable events with better characters and intensity.

Winner Overall: MW3 (winning 2-1 over Battlefield). These reasons I have given explain why the COD series is still the FPS king after all these years. But I do strongly recommend at least trying Battlefield for being such as beautiful and strategic game.

MW3

MW3

dont trust someones opinion, trust yours, i think you should try open betas and demos first...i did and it prevented me from wasting $60 on a bad game(play a demo first)