Modern Warfare 3 vs Battlefield 3 – Part Two

Okay, another week and it’s time for the second part of this review. The supposed main focus of both of these games where the time is meant to be spent and where you get your money’s worth – Multiplayer. Let’s look at the conclusion of the battle between Battlefield 3 and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3.

Battlefield 3 – Multiplayer

Remember all the complaints I had with the campaign? They’re gone. There’s no AI to deal with, no forced plot to care about – Battlefield 3 does what it does best in terms of gameplay, and makes a grand-scale multiplayer. For the time I got to play it, it was fun – I only played one full game at a time, I haven’t got the attention span to sit/stand there for more than one game, which can last between thirty minutes usually, to the rare hour game.

Despite the inherent problem with trusting strangers on the internet being helpful in team-based games, the teamwork aspect doesn’t suck, with the capability of teaming up in a squad and spawning with your buddies to go kill things working miraculously. While you die just as easily in multi as you do in single, the big plus is that so does your enemy. You get no bonuses for camping on a hill, the main way to be a credit to your team is to go capture points, giving your team a much nicer tactical advantage.

The maps are huge – no really, they are massive, and that sense of scale is needed when the game gives you flying vehicles to rain doom and hellfire from above your enemies. The twiddle your thumbs aspect of the single player vehicle segments is gone and you get to mess around in the tanks and planes. The restrictions are gone, and Battlefield 3 can shine. If there is another Battlefield, get rid of the single player – it does you no favours.

Modern Warfare 3 – Multiplayer

It’s like a strange inversion where what made the Battlefield 3 multiplayer good… has made the multiplayer Modern Warfare 3 damn near insufferable. I don’t say this lightly, but the multiplayer in CoD has always struck me as an elitist club, where a select few are deemed worthy enough to enjoy it whereas the rest of us peasants are meant to deal with the lag issues that still existed last time I played.

The power-gaming mentality where all use only one weapon and one weapon only is something I encountered within two of my first games. The Type 95, the entire team was carrying a Type 95 – one burst, no matter where it hit – dead. Maybe if I sneak up on them- dead. And all the MLG mic spammers sum up my main issue with this game. If you fail to have one certain set-up, or do one particular style, then you will get chewed out loudly, with a variety of lovely insults hurled at you.

The game has superpowered guns as well as a rather camp-heavy regime – I came across a group of friends on the whole team and they moved not an inch, the rest of us all agreed to get out and leave them to it. If we stayed still too, they would have just stayed there, with their Type 95’s, watching the door. That is not fun, that is the opposite of fun, that is anti-fun. It’s a small, camp-encouraging, elite club-filled arena, and not one I’ll be visiting unless rather drunk.

Conclusion

Whereas initially, Modern Warfare 3 dominated the singleplayer, Battlefield came from nowhere to take the crown for longest life between the two. While they were grounded in realism and a shabby plot, they got to shine and this highlights the necessity of being unable to ignore polishing one aspect of your game.

While MW3 has the better campaign, when it comes to longetivity it falls flat, unless you are one of the priorly mentioned MLG types. If I sound bitter, then I am – a community would be one that encouraged budding players to learn and adapt, rather than get fish-slapped with giant no’s when they don’t do one specific gun, perks and camoflauge. Yes, I got chewed out on the colour of my bloody gun. Goodbye CoD community, I’mma go with the Battlefield 3 crowd, winner of this heavyweight clash – there’s a good game in there somewhere in there, but I’ve not got the patience to dig it out. I’m going back to Steelport for funsies and wonderment

 

Battlefield 3 Multiplayer: 8.0

out of 10

Modern Warfare 3 Multiplayer: 3.0

out of 10

Pros:

Battlefield 3                                                                                                                                 Modern Warfare 3

– Team based gameplay blends well                                                                                     – Quick games means no major time investment in one round

– Long games cause an ending of satisfaction

– Not much of min-maxing in weaponry

– AIRPLANES

Cons:

– Time feels wasted if you have to quit half-way through                                                     – Elitist Community

– Airplanes stolen as soon as they spawn in                                                                                – Lag Issues still prevailant

–  Camping encouraged

 

One thought on “Modern Warfare 3 vs Battlefield 3 – Part Two”

Leave a Reply