MW3 vs BF3 - my thoughts.

Franko wrote:

Soundtrack should be on its own.... not with sound.

"sound"track.
And even if it was on its own, it would still be a tie cause MW3 is going to have a better sound producer.

Universe wrote:

Franko wrote:

Soundtrack should be on its own.... not with sound.

"sound"track.
And even if it was on its own, it would still be a tie cause MW3 is going to have a better sound producer.

Sound track and sound effects are two TOTALLY different things, they should be in separate categories.

BUMP.
I made edits and added "controls" and MW3 is winning now.

Universe wrote:

BUMP.
I made edits and added "controls" and MW3 is winning now.

hate to break it to ya, but BF controls better.

Universe wrote:

BUMP.
I made edits and added "controls" and MW3 is winning now.

Universe wrote:

Controls:
CoD is like butter, BF is like a rock.

I swear to god you better be trolling.

DukeNukem34 wrote:

Universe wrote:

BUMP.
I made edits and added "controls" and MW3 is winning now.

hate to break it to ya, but BF controls better.

You gotta be shitting me. BF is solid but it can be so clunky but CoD is fluent.

Universe wrote:

DukeNukem34 wrote:

Universe wrote:

BUMP.
I made edits and added "controls" and MW3 is winning now.

hate to break it to ya, but BF controls better.

You gotta be shitting me. BF is solid but it can be so clunky but CoD is fluent.

Bf clunky? LMFAO

chobo500 wrote:

Universe wrote:

BUMP.
I made edits and added "controls" and MW3 is winning now.

Universe wrote:

Controls:
CoD is like butter, BF is like a rock.

I swear to god you better be trolling.

How am I trolling?

Universe wrote:

chobo500 wrote:

Universe wrote:

BUMP.
I made edits and added "controls" and MW3 is winning now.

Universe wrote:

Controls:
CoD is like butter, BF is like a rock.

I swear to god you better be trolling.

How am I trolling?

Battlefield Controls are not terrible. They are actually some of the best controls I have ever used.

chobo500 wrote:

Universe wrote:

chobo500 wrote:

Universe wrote:

BUMP.
I made edits and added "controls" and MW3 is winning now.

Universe wrote:

Controls:
CoD is like butter, BF is like a rock.

I swear to god you better be trolling.

How am I trolling?

Battlefield Controls are not terrible. They are actually some of the best controls I have ever used.

I never meant they were terrible. When I said like a rock, I meant clunky at times. CoD is consistent and fluent. In Battlefield, the environment is the main focus, rather than in CoD, the player is the main focus, which is why the controls are better.

chobo500 wrote:

Universe wrote:

chobo500 wrote:

Universe wrote:

BUMP.
I made edits and added "controls" and MW3 is winning now.

Universe wrote:

Controls:
CoD is like butter, BF is like a rock.

I swear to god you better be trolling.

How am I trolling?

Battlefield Controls are not terrible. They are actually some of the best controls I have ever used.

this.

BF controls are great; COD controls are amazing.

Alanski wrote:

BF controls are great; COD controls are amazing.

I set them so they are the same thing, this whole argument is stupid

CoD controls better, it's more fluid, a lot of that has to do with being 60fps. I'm not saying BF controls are bad, they just feel "slower" and less responsive to me.

Im still not getting crap games like MW3. Im quite frankly ashamed for buying MW2.

This entire arguement is just pure


We all know that Cod has better and more fluent controls in most peoples eyes, so I don't see the point of having this arguement...

This all comes down to input lag.

COD runs at 60 FPS,

BF runs at 30 FPS,

The apparent lowest possible latency for 60 FPS is 50 milliseconds and for 30 FPS is 100 milliseconds.

Dam_Noir wrote:

This all comes down to input lag.

COD runs at 60 FPS,

BF runs at 30 FPS,

The apparent lowest possible latency for 60 FPS is 50 milliseconds and for 30 FPS is 100 milliseconds.

:what:

BF3 runs at 30fps (on console) haahhaahha WELFARE FAGGIT


you welfare folk seem to think your consoles are the limit :nyan:

Mikenuge wrote:

Dam_Noir wrote:

This all comes down to input lag.

COD runs at 60 FPS,

BF runs at 30 FPS,

The apparent lowest possible latency for 60 FPS is 50 milliseconds and for 30 FPS is 100 milliseconds.

:what:

BF3 runs at 30fps (on console) haahhaahha WELFARE FAGGIT

Faggot*

Teehee! ^_^

Mikenuge wrote:

Dam_Noir wrote:

This all comes down to input lag.

COD runs at 60 FPS,

BF runs at 30 FPS,

The apparent lowest possible latency for 60 FPS is 50 milliseconds and for 30 FPS is 100 milliseconds.

:what:

BF3 runs at 30fps (on console) haahhaahha WELFARE FAGGIT


you welfare folk seem to think your consoles are the limit :nyan:

Not really. I was explaining why people on here think COD's controls are more responsive than BF's. And guess what dick head, most people on here who were making those points are console gamers so what's your fucking problem with me addressing that issue?

Besides how the fuck can S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl be my favourite game if I was a 'Welfare Faggot' as you call it?

Get your facts straight next time you little southern Cunt.

Oh snap!

Franko wrote:

Dam_Noir wrote:

Mikenuge wrote:

Dam_Noir wrote:

This all comes down to input lag.

COD runs at 60 FPS,

BF runs at 30 FPS,

The apparent lowest possible latency for 60 FPS is 50 milliseconds and for 30 FPS is 100 milliseconds.

:what:

BF3 runs at 30fps (on console) haahhaahha WELFARE FAGGIT


you welfare folk seem to think your consoles are the limit :nyan:

Not really. I was explaining why people on here think COD's controls are more responsive than BF's. And guess what dick head, most people on here who were making those points are console gamers so what's your fucking problem with me addressing that issue?

Besides how the fuck can S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl be my favourite game if I was a 'Welfare Faggot' as you call it?

Get your facts straight next time you little southern Cunt.

:lolguy:

Franko's post was pointless...