With the release of EA's Battlefield 3 on October 25 and Activision's Modern Warfare 3 on November 8 (our review can be found here), gamers hoping to shoot ambiguously ethnic terrorists on PC, PS3 or Xbox 360 are at an impasse. Which game offers the best homicidal nationalism? Which has the most arterial spray when you decapitate an enemy with a .50 caliber round?
Which game is worth your $60?
Originally I had written up a point-by-point comparison of the two games before realizing that in the end the differences between the two are minute and mostly a matter of personal taste. Modern Warfare 3 looks slightly better, but Battlefield 3 is built on an engine that allows players to destroy whole structures with high explosives. Likewise, Activision's game has a more cinematic, thrilling singleplayer campaign, but EA's game offers a more expansive, feature-rich multiplayer experience.
In the end, it really doesn't matter which game you spend your $60 on. And for that matter, if you like one, you'll almost certainly like the other. Granted, that doesn't apply to anyone who is instinctively appalled by jingoistic, pro-American virtual gunplay, but those people wouldn't be reading this article anyway. On the off chance that they are however, here is a music video featuring adorable kittens that is as far from either of these games as humanly possible.
Get the best of the Mercury each week in your inbox!