|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 6:36:58 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 6:36:58 GMT -6
anyone else pick this up yet? game is 10x better than any, yes ANY, COD has ever been or ever will be.
COD=NCAA for war games.
If you want the same game that you bought in fall of 2007/2008/2009/2010, then COD is your game. If you want a game that has evolved over time and has actually gotten better, buy BF3.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 7:48:43 GMT -6
Post by trucker on Nov 1, 2011 7:48:43 GMT -6
looking at getting it.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 8:43:34 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 8:43:34 GMT -6
well judging off your sig, you'll have fun dominating with tanks/jets/choppers/vehicles.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 9:05:29 GMT -6
Post by BigJangaLang on Nov 1, 2011 9:05:29 GMT -6
Psh, gimme a break. The MWs evolve every time they come out. Battlefield blows.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 9:13:16 GMT -6
Post by BigJangaLang on Nov 1, 2011 9:13:16 GMT -6
And personally I don't feel like fighting in tanks/choppers/Jets all the time is all that fun first of all. Unless its a special bonus or something. Modern warefare does it right.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 9:39:06 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 9:39:06 GMT -6
clearly you've played both games and can make accurate judments off both of them.
I said you CAN dominated in vehicles, you don't have to. In fact, many people dominate when they don't use vehicles.
And what has COD done since they started in 2007? Same party system, same guns/unlock system, gay ass kill streaks (aside from the nuke--that was legit), maps are wayyyyy smaller/worse than BF3, team deathmatch is the primary game mode (not even close compared to rush or conquest on BF), everyone yells on the mic cuz it's completely open (you talk to your squad and your squad only on BF), it's primarily 8 on 8 (BF is 12 on 12)...need I say more?
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 9:40:58 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 9:40:58 GMT -6
oh yea, plust you get to be certain classes on BF which adds 100x as much fun as COD does. You can have a squad of 4 guys where 1 guys a medic, 1 guys a sniper, 1 guy is a supply guy and 1 guy is an engineer. You 4 can literally win the game if you play right.
guarantee I convert Dwill to BF...he will see the light and eventually, you will too.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 9:43:37 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 9:43:37 GMT -6
Oh and there is no gay ass specializations like there are on COD--I mean, really, you can jump off the top of a 4 story building and hit the ground running? You can somehow not be on the radar even though you're shooting someone? (BF also has a spotting system which helps call out guys if you can't describe their exact location) You can knife from like 15 feet away and kill someone? I could go on and on and on...COD is for 10 year olds. BF is for the big boys.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 10:05:19 GMT -6
Post by BigJangaLang on Nov 1, 2011 10:05:19 GMT -6
Yeah CAN, which means the other 23 guys CAN too and it's not that fun shooting at a guy in a fighter Jet when you're holding an RPD. And who wants to be a medic or an engineer lol you're making my case that much more justified.
Black ops was incredge last year with the addition of "Sticks and Stones", and "One in the Chamber" (I forget the other 2) addition to the game. Personally One in the Chamber was the most fun game set up I've ever experienced. Riveting.
Smaller maps aren't neccasarrily worse maps. It just depends on the quality. I sometimes have a hell of a lot more fun on the smaller maps then the bigger ones because more strategy is involved in some cases.
Stroke me, stroke me.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 10:18:31 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 10:18:31 GMT -6
lol, why would you even consider shooting a jet down with a machine gun? if you think that's the way to go, you're dumber than i thought. it's called pull out a tagger, hit the plane, pull out your rocket launcher and boom--game over for that pilot. Plus, they aren't overpowering. Planes and Choppers really only fight other planes and choppers. And tanks can easily be destroyed by anti tank mines or a well palced RPG.
Black Ops was terrible. That game wore off within 2 months of buying it. Why? Because it was the exact same as MW2 which was the exact same as the WWII one which was the exact same as MW1. Those game modes were boring at best.
It depends on quality, you're right. And BF3 has far more quality maps than COD has ever had. Plus, on top of the maps being bigger/better, everything is destructible. Every wall can be blown up, buildings can be brought down, it's just freaking amazing.
And please, strategy in a COD game? Everyone runs around like a chicken with their head cut off or camps like a bitch with claymores and starts racking up the kill streaks (lol, which is all I ever did and dominated like 80% of the games I played).
Stroke Craig, stoke Craig.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 10:46:50 GMT -6
Post by BigJangaLang on Nov 1, 2011 10:46:50 GMT -6
I don't want to hit the plane. I want to murk bitches on the ground. Not hit goose and ice man coming down from the heavens.
One in the Chamber was awesome on black ops. Get over it. You love zombies as well. MW series is better as a whole and improved each year.
Killstreaks are what make fighting games a blast. I could play all day trying to get a certain kill streak. It's motivation.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 10:49:30 GMT -6
Post by BigJangaLang on Nov 1, 2011 10:49:30 GMT -6
So what's your strategy in BF, not get hit by fighter Jet shooting 4 machine guns at your ass? Oh wait they're not that powerful (real life). Lol
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 11:04:07 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 11:04:07 GMT -6
lol, i mention that you CAN use jets and you're making them out to be like the freaking predator against human beings not named arnold. jets shoot down jets. they can spot shit from the sky. they can rain down some random ass bullets and are hard as hell to control--where did you get shoot 4 machine guns? (and jets are definietely one of the most powerful vehicles in real life, so IDK where you're getting that from). the fact that you have the option is what makes this game that much better. last time i checked, you can't control anything outside of a saturn ion on COD. I'd honestly say 99% of the game is fought on the ground. so if you still want to kill people that way, go right ahead. Name one thing that COD has not just improved, but made significantly better. Seriously, it's like NCAA--yea, the game may have made some little changes here and there, but nothing is really different from MW1, yet you (and I--and like 4 million other people) have spent $60 a year to get the same game...It's about time ppl stop throwing money down the toilet and buy the better game. Killstreaks (outside of the nuke) are gay as hell. The lower level ones are useful like UAV and whatnot, but after that, they are all way too overpowered cuz you have jets hovering over everyone murking anything that moves (wait, isn't that why you're saying BF isn't as good? )
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 11:15:21 GMT -6
Post by BigJangaLang on Nov 1, 2011 11:15:21 GMT -6
Why change what works? America agrees with me, not you. Killstreaks are awesome, they reward talent. COD adds little things every year that enhance gameplay, and obviously....it works.
The graphics get better each year on MW games. And I know for a fact like dialogue on COD is much better then in BF. Can't beat Ice cube dropping truf all ova da place. Lol
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 12:23:52 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 12:23:52 GMT -6
you say you know for a fact things about BF but have never played it...great argument when you're basing everything off of something you've never played.
killstreaks reward people that don't die--definitely not the same as talent. I was the poster child of this...was I good at COD? sure. But I was great because all you needed was a good spot and you were set for a minimum of a 5 kill streak every game. Stay in the same spot on BF and you get a mortar strike on your dome, a c4 attached to the wall on the opposite side, an rpg to the wall you're by, a tank barreling through like herschel walker, etc....what can you do on COD? pray that someone is laggy enough to get by. cool.
And the graphics have been the exact same every year. As for dialogue, really? you're gonna bring up dialogue? that's like saying NCAA is better than Madden cuz Erin Andrews brings in the injury news. completely irrelevant.
tuh to the third degree my friend.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 12:41:33 GMT -6
Post by BigJangaLang on Nov 1, 2011 12:41:33 GMT -6
I've watched atleast 10 trailers and can read reviews on battle field. It's not hard.
The Erin Andrews reference is completely irrelevant. I get stoked when somebody tells me to take ppl out. Erin Andrews is annoying and only eye candy to the casual person.
Killstreaks reward ppl that don't die AND kill numerous amounts of ppl. So basically if you have the high ground on somebody you're saying you should have to move even though you're in better position then them? That's stupid. Think about actual warefare. Are people actually moving all around a given place? No, not unless they are surrounding them. BF looks and sounds unrealistic and dumb.
And for the record I rarely ever camp. Running around is more fun as it is.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 12:56:18 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 12:56:18 GMT -6
lol watching a trailer and playing the game aren't even comparable; neither is reading a review. Last time I checked, NCAA get's high 8's/low 9's every time a new version comes out and they all fail to live up to expecation.
And no, I'm not saying if you have the high ground you should have to move. In real life (since you keep bringing it up) you can call in a mortar strike and that person is dead before they know it. On COD you have to get a gay kill streak in order to call in that mortar; meanwhile, that person prolly has a double digit kill streak and the game is over. comprende?
As for what the general population prefers, when does that tell the which "idea" is better? Last time I checked, Obama won the popular vote. By your theory, since he had the popular vote (like COD has more players), he is a better candidate than anyone else.
Tuh again my friend....tuh again.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 12:56:29 GMT -6
Post by starshaw on Nov 1, 2011 12:56:29 GMT -6
I will defintly be getting MW3 on Nov 8th(release day), Jang we shall go bitch slap some little mouthy british punks(I always run into them) and bring Vtech or whoever else gets it with us.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 12:57:31 GMT -6
Post by trucker on Nov 1, 2011 12:57:31 GMT -6
Well soon and very soon BF3 is coming to my house and CODooDOO Black opps will be a coaster for my drink.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 13:09:40 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 13:09:40 GMT -6
Well soon and very soon BF3 is coming to my house and CODooDOO Black opps will be a coaster for my drink. Go ahead and trade that bitch in...for whatever reason, you can go get like $20 for that p.o.s.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 13:10:51 GMT -6
Post by BigJangaLang on Nov 1, 2011 13:10:51 GMT -6
Don't buy into Eberrys propaganda Jim. You're not that gullible. Starshaw for sure. Lol yeah, you can call in a mortar strike. Apparently radios are a dime a dozen in BF. Every company has its own radio man in real warefare. Apparently dying then respawning is a good remedy to call in a mortar strike. Aka rewarding terribleness by making it easier for bad players. Real sweet.
Name a past president that hasn't had the popular vote 13 months before an election over the opposite parties candidates?
Biggest tuhhhhhhhhh ever.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 13:19:23 GMT -6
Post by Rolle on Nov 1, 2011 13:19:23 GMT -6
The reason they dont changed the CODs is because if it aint broke, dont fix it, each game breaks the last versions record for copies sold...i dont know much about BF3, but i know enough about COD to know i dont wanna change games...hell i still play MW2 almost every day. Starshaw, ill take you up on the smashing those british fucks in the face when MW3 comes out
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 13:24:47 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 13:24:47 GMT -6
Name a past president that hasn't had the popular vote 13 months before an election over the opposite parties candidates? Biggest tuhhhhhhhhh ever. how about the president before? good example dumbass.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 13:29:17 GMT -6
Post by BigJangaLang on Nov 1, 2011 13:29:17 GMT -6
George W wasn't up for reelection. Sorry let me rephrase my statemate. Name a president up for re-election that hasn't been in the lead 13 months before voting began over an opposing parties candidates. Show me.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 13:37:51 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 13:37:51 GMT -6
that's the problem rolle--they havent had anyone to challenge their supremacy when it comes to war games. Now, MW was revolutionary when it came out. Probably one of the most ground breaking games ever to be released. However, IW/Treyarch (or whatever the hell it's called now) is simply riding the huge tsunami-like wave of success that first game (OVER 4 YEARS AGO) had.
BF on the other hand continues to improve each and every version. Did it suck like 3 versions ago? yea, it did. But they consistently get better each and every version and have finally taken over COD as best war game available. It's sad that just because COD is immensely popular, people continue to buy it when there is another available game that is significantly better.
Rolle (& starshaw for that matter), would you buy EA NCAA every year if some developer had the chance to make their version better? For the first couple of years, yes. But after the initial phase of figuring stuff out, that other developer could easily overtake EA's version of NCAA. The same thing has happened with COD. Yea, they paved the way with Modern Warfare, but they've had practically the same game ever since then. BF took their lead and then made it better. Trust me, I wouldn't be writing pages worth of posts if I didn't believe that.
And you say you've never played BF either, so you're gonna stick with COD? Ok, well I've never owned my own car or house, but using my parents has been going pretty well--maybe I'll just do that the rest of my life.
Try BF and you'll like it way more than COD. Ship the beans on that one.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 13:45:22 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 13:45:22 GMT -6
George W wasn't up for reelection. Sorry let me rephrase my statemate. Name a president up for re-election that hasn't been in the lead 13 months before voting began over an opposing parties candidates. Show me. I never said anything about the lead going into the election with 13 months to go--where the hell did you get that? You said that since COD is more popular it must be better. Well guess what, Obama was more popular, does that mean he's better than McCain? The majority of Germans thought that ridding the world of Jews was a good idea too, so does that mean it was the right idea? No. Just because a majority of people prefer one thing over another doesn't mean it is the right/better thing. Come on man!
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 13:50:31 GMT -6
Post by BigJangaLang on Nov 1, 2011 13:50:31 GMT -6
Rolle...Reasons why you should take everything Eberry says on this topic with a grain of salt: He's never satisfied. If something even remotely looks comparable or maybe better in some cases to the naked eye he's jumping on it. MW3 has a 60 frames-per-second rate where as BF has 30. The reaction timing is better, the aiming in activision COD games are flawless. Battles technology in there graphics is sweet but most analyst think MW3 overall looks un-fucking-real.
MW3's presentation is better. There dialogue is better. And they are predicted to still out sell Battlefield by a margin of 2:1.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 14:05:16 GMT -6
Post by Rolle on Nov 1, 2011 14:05:16 GMT -6
that's the problem rolle--they havent had anyone to challenge their supremacy when it comes to war games. Now, MW was revolutionary when it came out. Probably one of the most ground breaking games ever to be released. However, IW/Treyarch (or whatever the hell it's called now) is simply riding the huge tsunami-like wave of success that first game (OVER 4 YEARS AGO) had. BF on the other hand continues to improve each and every version. Did it suck like 3 versions ago? yea, it did. But they consistently get better each and every version and have finally taken over COD as best war game available. It's sad that just because COD is immensely popular, people continue to buy it when there is another available game that is significantly better. Rolle (& starshaw for that matter), would you buy EA NCAA every year if some developer had the chance to make their version better? For the first couple of years, yes. But after the initial phase of figuring stuff out, that other developer could easily overtake EA's version of NCAA. The same thing has happened with COD. Yea, they paved the way with Modern Warfare, but they've had practically the same game ever since then. BF took their lead and then made it better. Trust me, I wouldn't be writing pages worth of posts if I didn't believe that. And you say you've never played BF either, so you're gonna stick with COD? Ok, well I've never owned my own car or house, but using my parents has been going pretty well--maybe I'll just do that the rest of my life. Try BF and you'll like it way more than COD. Ship the beans on that one. Hard to compare a video game to a living situation, nice try...i appreciate the input on BF3 being better than modern warfare, but like i said, i like the setup, the structure and all my friends play modern warfare, wouldnt make much sense to switch if im satisfied with the product i buy every year
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 14:09:57 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 14:09:57 GMT -6
lol, back to the presentation, the dialogue and sales figures...wow, clearly you are retarded.
it's always about gameplay numnuts--and BFBC2 outdid Black Ops (despite being almost 8 months older) and BF3 will be doing the same to MW3.
|
|
|
BF3
Nov 1, 2011 14:15:03 GMT -6
Post by Eberry on Nov 1, 2011 14:15:03 GMT -6
The aiming in activision COD games are flawless. Oh, you mean the ones where it's better to shoot people in the feet than the chest? yea, those sure are flawless.
|
|