BATTLEFIELD 3 in Off Topic

Page: 1 2
ID:120525
 
Oct 27 2011, 6:19 pm (Edited on Oct 27 2011, 6:58 pm)

Poll: Yes, or no?

Yes 60% (12)
No 40% (8)

Login to vote.

Modern Warfare 3 comes out in around 2 weeks, but I have nothing to play between now and then. Thinking of picking up Battlefield 3.

Note - this is for Xbox 360

Also if anyone has Battlefield 3 already, let me know how it is! :)
#1 Oct 27 2011, 6:21 pm
i clikd no becas it was good idea
#2 Oct 27 2011, 6:52 pm
Battlefield 3 > MW3

BF3 is at least branching out compared to CoD being the same BS for the past ~4-5 games. Just my opinion, though.
#3 Oct 27 2011, 7:13 pm
Do not buy a Battlefield game for a console, it's a complete waste of money. It will look really bad, all the maps will feel empty because there will be so few players, and you wont be able to mod it later.
#4 Oct 27 2011, 7:18 pm
SuperAntx wrote:
Do not buy a Battlefield game for a console, it's a complete waste of money. It will look really bad, all the maps will feel empty because there will be so few players, and you wont be able to mod it later.

I have it for the PS3 and it's perfectly fine. It's not veryy often that a match is "empty" and look bad? Bullshit. It looks better than any console game I've played! Don't compare PC and console as far as visual appearance goes because PC will always look better as consoles are running on ~4 year old technology by now.
#5 Oct 27 2011, 7:21 pm
SuperAntx wrote:
Do not buy a Battlefield game for a console, it's a complete waste of money. It will look really bad, all the maps will feel empty because there will be so few players, and you wont be able to mod it later.

#6 Oct 27 2011, 7:22 pm
SuperAntx wrote:
Do not buy a Battlefield game for a console, it's a complete waste of money. It will look really bad, all the maps will feel empty because there will be so few players, and you wont be able to mod it later.

YEAH LETS POST LEGITIMATE ADVICE THAT WILL PROBABLY JUST GO OVER THIS GOOBER'S HEAD BECAUSE WE'RE MATURE PEOPLE NOW
#7 Oct 27 2011, 7:23 pm
SuperAntx wrote:
Do not buy a Battlefield game for a console, it's a complete waste of money. It will look really bad, all the maps will feel empty because there will be so few players, and you wont be able to mod it later.

#8 Oct 27 2011, 7:24 pm
O.O

PC it is then?
#9 Oct 28 2011, 4:40 am
Battlefield 3 is Modern Warfare 2. It's garbage. MAG is way better than any of the titles. I hate Call of Duty (it takes no skill to kill for real), but I'd rather play Modern Warfare 3 than this pile of crap.
#10 Oct 28 2011, 5:00 am
Branks wrote:
Battlefield 3 is Modern Warfare 2. It's garbage. MAG is way better than any of the titles. I hate Call of Duty (it takes no skill to kill for real), but I'd rather play Modern Warfare 3 than this pile of crap.

This is the opinion of a dipshit who's never played a Battlefield game. Battlefield actually doesn't play anything like a Call of Duty game, they only share visuals because they're both modern military shooters.
#11 Oct 28 2011, 7:15 am
Battlefield is an amazing game. Don't listen to any one who says its shit because they obviously don't know a good game if it slapped them in the face. I got it for the PC and it is amazing but I have played the 360 version. Granted it is no where need the beauty of the PC version it still is great since they have the texture packs. You need to have a lot of space on your hard drive ready for bf3 but, let me tell you it is totally worth. In all of my days playing fps never have I had so much fun playing BF3 than any other shooter. BF3 is a game that is really worth the $60 price tag.
#12 Oct 28 2011, 7:21 am
if you get the PC this is the craziness that you can expect to see.



-This was recorded by someone in the platoon that I am in of us playing on Operation Metro. It is totally different from the beta.
#13 Oct 28 2011, 9:27 am
SuperAntx wrote:
Branks wrote:
Battlefield 3 is Modern Warfare 2. It's garbage. MAG is way better than any of the titles. I hate Call of Duty (it takes no skill to kill for real), but I'd rather play Modern Warfare 3 than this pile of crap.

This is the opinion of a dipshit who's never played a Battlefield game. Battlefield actually doesn't play anything like a Call of Duty game, they only share visuals because they're both modern military shooters.

Might wanna dry your panties. I own Battlefield 1942 & Battlefield 2. Played them for years. The new one isn't anything like them, and yes, it does play like Call of Duty. I gathered that opinion by beta testing for a month.
#14 Oct 28 2011, 9:44 am
Again that was the beta. The retail is 1000X times better than the beta
#15 Oct 28 2011, 9:50 am
Also, it is nothing like Call Of Duty:

"Yes, this was mentioned earlier, but there should be a little more emphasis on this. Call of Duty‘s shooter experience is more geared toward the players who enjoy constant action. If you think about it, the average lifespan of a player (excluding players like Sandy Ravage) can be just under 60 seconds or so. Not to discount that CoD is capable of tactical play, but if you’re running around the areas where people usually frequent, gun fights are bound to happen 90% of the time. Map size has a lot to do with this.

When playing Battlefield 3, there are often times where enemies may not be encountered for quite a while, and you might want to just sprint toward the action as soon as possible. The problem with that kind of approach is if you die, then you have to start all over from far away (or maybe not, if you spawn on a squad member), resulting in you wanting to get all the way back to the action because you might be mad you were killed. Then you die again. The cycle repeats and then, all of a sudden, your team is out of tickets (if you’re attacking).

Being patient is one of the tenants of playing Battlefield games, the sooner you get used to it, the sooner you can excel. Players shouldn’t be worried about their K/D ratio and more focused on supporting the team and helping contribute to overall victory."
#16 Oct 28 2011, 10:01 am
Anyone know the PC requirements for Battlefield 3?
#17 Oct 28 2011, 7:01 pm
Branks wrote:
I own Battlefield 1942 & Battlefield 2. Played them for years. The new one isn't anything like them, and yes, it does play like Call of Duty. I gathered that opinion by beta testing for a month.

Time =/= Knowledge
You could own them for twenty years and still have no idea what you're talking about.

CoD is more about the minute to minute action, it's a very fast paced action game where your kill/death ratio is probably your most important statistic. Battlefield games are just what they're advertized as, a battlefield simulation. Lone wolfing it around worrying about your kill/death ratio wont help out your team very much. It's all about teamwork and coordination while random jets and helicopters crash into the ground in fiery bits.

MAG attempts to pull off what Battlefield does, but fails on map design and spawning. The spawning in Battlefield 3 is set up in a way which allows you to get into the action very quickly. You can spawn in vehicles, on top of your squad leader, etc. MAG on the other hand is all about spawning you in a spot far from the action and forcing you to hoof it across the map. A good chunk of your experience will simply be running from Point A to Point B with little to no confrontation.

All three are entirely different experiences and you've got to be one dumb motherfucker to think they're the same thing.
#18 Oct 28 2011, 8:04 pm
Exactly. I couldn't put it in better words myself.
#19 Oct 29 2011, 6:04 am
It depends on your style of gameplay. I personally dislike both games, since I'm not a big modern military game person. I enjoyed Killzone 3 so goddamn much.

But for a game to pass the time, I'd get a couple budget games. I enjoyed RAGE a lot, but the ending wasn't worth it.
Page: 1 2