I've played both games for many years. And I would have to say, from my perspective, Battlefield wins it. It fun and challenging and has more to offer. Call of Duty is easier, you can pick up the controller and in about an hour of game play, you can be as good as somebody with a 1 year experience.

I don't understand how people can say that all the people who "suck" at cod play Battlefield. They're 'bad' so therefore they turn to Battlefield? Which in my opinion is a more challenging game? Excuse me for saying this, but Call of Duty is too easy now. Always has been, always will. As an example, I stopped playing Cod for 2 months, then hopped back on with a friend for the hell of it, and had a k/d over 2.5 the very first match. PS, my k/d is over 2.4 on each console so don't even try to bash it. Then it got boring again. Also, people have become so blind to the fact that it has become completely monetized to the point that it's not even fun anymore. With Map Packs and now this Call of Duty Elite bullshit, which mind you is simply a Call of Duty glorified gamebattles website. Yeah, 50 bucks to look at my stats which I could just do in-game? Bullshit. So, go ahead, play MW3. I might even play it myself, I won't deny that. But BF3 will soon take the reigns. After each one releases, people will see.

I agree with what you are saying, but I am just scared that BF3 will end too quickly, with it having no prestige options. MW3 has prestige options, and 20 DLC packs to keep people playing. I do think that the people running MW3 are taking money from us though. You can pre-order BF3 Limited Edition for just over £35, but MW3 cost £40-£45 to pre-order the normal version. Then on top of that, they are giving people the option to pay another £35 to get a small membership (although that does give you 20 map packs).

20 mappacks!!!! you mad ?

the all have maximum of 5

any way you get Bf things for free

let us get down the facts
Mw3 = Lag and hacks , oh yeah lets not forget map design as said in first page
Lag as in if no one plays in your region (same as me currently with mw2) you will have lag
hacks cause the game loads off the host which if by anychance he have hacks in his patch well the game is ruined

BF = less lag and no hacks (console version , pc is always hacked no matter what same as cod)
less lag cause of DS
no hacks for the same reason

'bout the graphics BF rocks
'bout gameplay i think BF3 feels a little heavy but more realistic so its not bad nor good (as in realistic you cant do 1080 noscope across map unless your using aimbot on pc/or me)
'bout FPS mw3 rocks @ 60FPS and BF3 @ 30FPS you cant notice the different if you're using an HDTV with high refresh rate (any hdtv with 300$+)
but one more thing in BF3 side or mw3 side as it depends : BF is HD 1280x704 and mw3 is 1024x600 which is SD and blackops is 500 in ps3 and 600 @ xbox

all in all if you want cod get xbox if you want BF get any console or ps3 its perfect for all

Yeah, there is no denying that Call of Duty is constantly supplied with DLC. They do a great job of keeping people interested in playing. Battlefield 3 however, is going to need step it up with DLC and pump out it's own stuff in order to keep the community alive. They have the Back to Karkand Expansion Pack, but it's going to take more than that, surely. But I think DICE and EA are capable of doing so.

1st. i think this is in the wrong section. 2nd, they are both good games (in my opinion). So, yeah i will be getting mw3 and BF3 ...

---------- Post added at 04:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:28 PM ----------


is it just me ... but , i dont think you've ever played mw3... plus mw3 online so if i was you i would keep your statements to yourself, thank you.

Imo battlefield is better but cod is more fun as in the modes it has like spec ops and stuff those were fun but bf3 has jets i go with bf3 :lol:

Mw2 online is the same as Mw3 online just different guns and maps
so i won't keep it to myself as people should know