So, I've been looking at the trailers and comments. Everyone seems to say that MW3 will be a turd and the contrary for BF3. I just want peoples justifications on why that is.
For the most part, they don't seem to want to take into consideration the changes that have been made and i"m not going to lie, but MW3 looks like the most change they've had in a very long time. Hell, even BF3 took some steps back, why can't I destroy MOST of the buildings/walls,etc in a level? It's one of the features everyone keeps bragging about. From the 2 maps I've played so far,( caspian and metro on pc) the destruction was quite underwhelming.
Personally, I can't even compare the two games. MW3 for me is that quick, fast paced, arcady game(quickscoping anyone?). While BF3 is a slower paced, more strategic and longer type of game. Keep in mind that I'm talking about both the multiplayer and Campaign.
With that said, I'll be getting BF3 for PC and MW3 for ps3, both games look very fun and I don't believe they even have the same thing going for them besides being an FPS with modern guns.
How do you guys think they compare?
0 comments:
Post a Comment