Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General' started by BROSxXxDANIEL, Sep 9, 2011.
Let me know what you want more, MW3 or BF3!
BF3 is for nubcakes that want to camp points instead of kill wiggas.
LET THE INTERNET ARGUMENT BEGIN
Fuck MW3, I haven't enjoyed Call of Duty since World at War. I didn't even like that too much. [Zombie's where cool though]
I haven't played Battlefield BC2, however I loved 2 and 1942. So all hail BF3, bitches.
WaW was Treyarch, fuck Treyarch! MW is the pinnacle of CoD!
Battlefield 2 was the bomb!
I hate both for multi-player, but at least Battlefield 2's campaign was fun to play. CoD= Same exact shit again and again with updates that add nothing good or significant to the game. Not to mention the especially pointless shit they thought would work, like explosive RC cars. And you're not Gordon Freeman, so drop the crossbow. BF2= People using vehicles to tear down the spawn's walls, and just spam rounds into the spawn area. If BF3 fixes BF2's vehicle problem I would try multi-player, and I'll try the campaign if I get a chance to do so.
P.S. Firefox thinks that multi-player should be mulch-player.
RC cars - Treyarch. Please keep your game opinions on the actual GAME. (protip: Treyarch does not create MW, they created WaW and blops).
Also, BF has vehicles. There is NO way to balance vehicles, because they are SUPPOSED to be OP. So, the whole game becomes about who can get in a vehicle.
Vehicle's have alwayed been OP. Doesn't matter the game.
"Tank beats ghost, tank beats hunter, Tank beats everything!"
But ofcourse you could knock a tank out with a nicely placed grenade or C4 pack.
Very powerful, but very weak. Depends on how good you are.
Never played Blops, wasn't going to get it unless I heard good things about it.
WaW was only purchased because everyone else was playing it for some time.
Got MW1 and 2, I liked the campaigns, but I dislike SP games. [Excluding Oblivion and hopefully Skyrim.] MP didn't ammuse me because of it's repition and small maps.
Hence, BF is godlike compared, from my view.
I'd like to see a vehicle that isn't kill-able with a med-range weapon and boarding it in Halo 3 or Reach. And it's not just the vehicles, it's the fact that you can only spawn in one spot in BF2, and you can destroy walls to hit the spawn with anything you want to, you could even just spam it with snipers. And I didn't buy the newest CoD either, but all of my friends did, and I'm taking them to therapy for continued playing of it.
Well in Halo, the vehicles health is the same as your health. If it was not kill-able why would they put it in the game. However do you remember the Elephant's from Sandtrap in Halo 3. They couldn't be destroyed but anyone could kill you. "Hold RB to fli... wait how'd you do that!"
However, I don't enjoy comparing Halo to the CoD/BF games.
It's too cartoony to do that. Halo is one of the few FPS's I can put up with for long occasions.
If you think vehicles are OP, disable them and play a smaller map in bf3
Lol, the only time I'd call Halo "cartoony" is when the grunts say something like "Hey demon! They're all out of you at the jerk store!" in campaign. Otherwise, it's about as srs bsns as the others.
Modern Warfare 3 has a high probability of sucking le balls.
However, we will all give it a go because it's the right thing to do.
im getting both
Yes to sucking balls, no to me giving it a go. I avoided the last... thing that came out of the Call of Duty series, and will avoid this.
That awkward moment when even though the devs have screwed up vital parts of the game multiple times, CoD is still the only new-gen FPS that gets played competitively.
I concur with this statement as well as admit to doing the same thing.
I'm going to have to disagree with you on this one as you seem to have never heard of Half-life and Counter Strike.
AHEM MW3 IS THE BEST, AND