Pachter: Battlefield 3 doesn’t stand a chance against next Call of Duty
But it could sell “25 - 35% more copies than the last version” if it’s good
Analyst: "Battlefield 3 doesn’t stand a chance against next Call of Duty"
Pachter: Battlefield 3 doesn’t stand a chance against next Call of Duty
But it could sell “25 - 35% more copies than the last version” if it’s good
I have not touched any new cod games.
Bad company 2 was so awesome. I am already sold on bf3
Not really the same type of game to be honest. Sure they're both FPS but they cater for different types of gameplay. For me COD caters more to the "Let's have a few quick 5 min rounds" people and BF more the "Let's go to war for 30 min at a time" type of people.
These days I'm falling more into the COD side since it has less issues at the beginning (with the obvious exception of BLOPS), but I'll give BF3 a go when it comes out.
BC2 had no issues in the beginning except for lack of servers.
T A N S T A A F L
.... and hit reg. But they (Dice) have always had that in the beginning. Patches sort it out relatively quickly.Originally Posted by czc
My money Is on Battlefield 3. No doubt about it
My ignore list: growing too fast to keep updating.
I gotta agree with Mr. Rif there, I had no issues with BFBC2. If you want to play a game with absolutely f***all hitreg, go jam some CS Source online and then we can talk about hitreg
BFBC2 has been nothing but pleasurable from the get-go. Screw COD and it's buggy bs that took a month to fix.
Up yours Bobby, have a nice life and enjoy your next 5 COD games, because I surely won't be doing so.
Had a bad day? Also, I'm assuming that you disagree with me........?I gotta agree with Mr. Rif there, I had no issues with BFBC2. If you want to play a game with absolutely f***all hitreg, go jam some CS Source online and then we can talk about hitreg
BFBC2 has been nothing but pleasurable from the get-go. Screw COD and it's buggy bs that took a month to fix.
Up yours Bobby, have a nice life and enjoy your next 5 COD games, because I surely won't be doing so.
Anyways, I enjoyed the BF series, hell BF1942 was the first game I jammed online. Had to haul my PC to my friends place every weekend just to play it. I even got provincial colours for BF2 at the first MSSA meet. I just didn't like BFBC2, is that so wrong of me? I didn't enjoy playing MW1 but when MW2 came out I played it non-stop. I stuck with BLOPS all the way through the hard times in the beginning and now it's all right. I played BFBC2 for about 10 hours and after discovering that I couldn't hit the broadside of a barn while aiming down the sights but manage to kill guys half across the map just aiming from the hip...... I decided to go back to MW2. If I didn't have anything else to fall back on I probably would've stuck with it, which is why I stuck with BLOPS.... there was nothing else for me to fall back on.
Case in point, I haven't touched BLOPS now that Homefront is out.
As for CS, I never played it so I can't make any comment there but I have heard the horror stories. But there's a franchise that needs a reboot badly.
Noooit bru! That was directed at Bobby Koprick, wasn't raging at you at all, promise. Lol, a bit of a misunderstanding there, my bad!
Mr. Rif being czc, just to clear that up as well
You're kidding right?Battlefield 3 vs. CoD 8 - whose side are you on?
COD has it's place. No wait. COD had it's place, but unless they actually do some fucking effort and build/use a new engine, then the next COD has no hope. And the truly shocking thing is you would think that having used the same engine and code so many times over, they could sort shit out already!
COD is fun for quick run and gunning, but it quickly wears off. There is no strategy involved. It becomes too repetitive. I mean simply look at the ranking. 15 prestige levels. And for what? A gold gun? Yeah, that is the epitomy of all that is cool! The 15 levels of the same thing over and over and over and over and over show just how shallow a game COD really is.
Now I know it's not fair to compare the BF games to COD, because they are not really the same type of game. But I still feel COD lacks depth in terms of achieving something. COD has 15 levels of achievements, but it's the same ones each time with a stupid camo or inconsequential reawrd after each level. BF on the other hand has 50 rank levels, but heaps of other rewards. Go look at the old BF2. TO get to the rank of Lieutenant General, you needed 1440 hours. HOURS!! That is 60 days of playing non-stop! And then there were the flight badges, chopper badges, armour and transport badges which needed 150 hours for the choppers and planes, 400 for armour and 75 for transport. Never mind the multitude of other awards you could aim for.
So for something that requires a little more brain power and maybe a dash of maturity, I am firmly in the Battlefield 3 camp!
Posting Permissions
