This Week in the Mercury

I, Anonymous

Columns

I, Anonymous

Two Shakes and a Tug


A Swimmin' Affair

Music

A Swimmin' Affair

Blue Cranes Practice Group Therapy



Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Battlefield 3 Vs. Modern Warfare 3: A Largely Pointless Comparison

Posted by Earnest "Nex" Cavalli on Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 7:30 PM

mw3bf3_6.jpg

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.

You're welcome.

Comments (2)

Showing 1-2 of 2

 
Subscribe to this thread:
Showing 1-2 of 2

Comments are closed.

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC

115 SW Ash St. Suite 600
Portland, OR 97204

Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Production Guidelines | Terms of Use | Takedown Policy