Soooo it was posted today that Modern Warfare 3 made 1 BILLION.... but which is the better game between this or Battlefield 3? Battlefield hands down. Lets go ahead and break it down....
As gamers, we been playing Modern Lagfest running around in those hamster cages coming from Activision for a LONG time now.... you can only have so much fun doing the same thing over and over again (running on that little hamster wheel or navigating that hamster fortress) before it gets old... fast.... 4 years old at that. From the countless cardboard boxes we haven't been able to shoot through to that inch of head we see behind cover and can't hit it but they have no problems shooting you THROUGH the cover they're behind, I genuinely can't see how and why a lot of you aren't sick of Modern Warfare. On top of that, you can't convince me that Modern Warfare 3 is realistic, so stop it. You can't tell me I can jump off a 4 story building, live, and be able to sprint with no problem through a blown up chopper, dive, get up, and take out three people with a AK-74u (that has a ACOG scope, grenade launcher, and silencer...with pink camo might I add) a pistol, and a knife... THEN pull out a javelin and lock on a WALL and fire off a random shot in hopes that I kill someone...and reload that in less than 3 seconds. Modern Warfare also got you all so content with playing with absurd perks that you HAVE to have a special ability of some sort before you go into a fight (not saying Battlefield or any other game doesn't do the same, but for the sake of the point, we've all run into some complete and utterly CHEAP perks. Commando anyone? oh....) . Then comes the guns... in MW3 you're just building a super gun. I can really put a perk on my gun to reduce kick? Thats what a foregrip is for. I have to put yet another perk on my gun to have two attachments? Come on son... its nothing to put a red dot, silencer, grenade launcher, and laser sight on a M4A1 for the sake of realism, but they had to have some sort of balance, so I'll give that to them. The weapons don't even do the damage they're supposed to as well. A bolt action shot to your ankle and you die? If you die of serious bleeding and bleed out or something or get put on last stand off of leg shots then thats cool for "Modern Warfare", but no. I shoot someone from this line in the paragraph to the very beginning with a shotgun (semi or pump) and you manage to live?... point proven. Killstreaks... actually half balanced, but once a juggernaut touches the field I got to scream foul. The predator can't even take that many damn bullets and he's a alien. Overall, as much as I personally hate EA, I have to admit they're providing the superior product against what we've had all this time, regardless of sales.... and to the people that babble about the amount of money Modern Warfare makes, it doesn't excuse the fact that its a subpar game running on a tired system that we're TOO accustomed to.
Now for Battlefield... I still feel its the superior product of the two. It sounds GREAT, it handles well, and its balanced...until EA starts going into their whole tweak session they're infamous for. The damage each gun dealt at various ranges were pretty balanced until lately, but it could be just me (doubt it). You can find a gun and a class you're comfortable with, stick with it, and be rewarded for it with attachments and extra perks within that class. Be a dedicated medic, you get better assault gear. Be a dedicated sniper, you can finally get a DECENT sniper rifle. Give out ammo and lay down suppression fire as support? You'll have access to C4 and mortars later. The more you play the more relevant and rewarding the experience is unlike MW3 (the extra perks and things you get actively and passively play into it, and as you level up it will soon be spread across your squad). I say that because you can unlock this cool killstreak but if you can't get the kills for it, its closer to useless and you'd have access to it only on the luckiest of days (and I dare someone to say people can't get them because they "suck"). On top of that you run into more realistic situations in Battlefield. A person is laying down a lot of fire? Your vision gets blurry and you start shooting less accurately, and you won't just be able to run out there and quick scope them. You got to make a 774 meter headshot (or even a mid range headshot with any weapon)? You have to take into consideration the rifle you're using, distance, gravity, and that person's movements (Yes, its possible. I've done it). You want to knife someone? In 90% of the instances you have to sneak up on them to get the knife kill, which is so much more rewarding than MW3. Even Section 8 prejudice had the right concept with their knifing by incorporating fatalities, which is a far cry from *swipe* *instant kill*. You hide in a building or behind a wall? You better have a back up plan, because most of the buildings and walls in Battlefield are destructible, so that little building you like to camp out in can be subject to a lot of rocket fire or tank shells... oh and yes, the maps ARE bigger and incorporate vehicles - not like those hamster cages I was referring to earlier.
(sidenote: and backtracking a bit. Early Recon is by far the worst experience I had with this game. Its so bad that in order to get points, you'd have to play as recon with a shotgun or a smg just to get points so you can actually HAVE a good sniper rifle, which is a bolt action for this game, because the semi-auto snipes are the weakest, most inaccurate sniper rifles I've ever used in a game that I can remember right now, and I love sniping)
Now for the bad... flashlights, laser sights..... stop the friggin madness yo.... I have a infared scope on my gun how and why am I still being blinded by a flashlight? Second, why could... and WOULD you, as a sniper, put a laser sight or a flashlight on your sniper rifle? Why is that even a option? Third - 4 out of 5 times you would probably run into a team thats FILLED with people trying to play Battlefield like its Call of Duty. Stop... that... s#&%. Against a group of Battlefield veterans you basically the fish in the barrel.
Both games does have connection issues, and they both have a great sound score; however, the point I'm trying to make is, Battlefield is the better route to go. You looking for a change of pace in the FPS genre and something more teamwork oriented and is more rewarding? In my opinion, look no further.
No comments:
Post a Comment