Battlefield 3 may be landing a pre-emptive strike when it launchesnext week, but FPS giant Modern Warfare is just on the horizon. Shooting from the hip, we predict which shooter will come out on top, both commercially and among critics.
Peter: It’s impossible to tell: MW3 gets its ratings because the franchise is so strong and the games are so well pieced together but there hasn’t been a truly exceptional one since the first MW. BF3 has a great heritage to call on but it will feel new to many reviewers due to the length of time since BF2 so it might review a little more favourably on average because it’s not MW, if you see what I mean?
If Battlefield 3 gets anywhere close to MW3’s sales figures, it will be a massive success for EA. I don’t really think that critical response matters all that much in this instance but for what it’s worth, I think both will rate quite highly. Either way, as soon as it launches we don’t have to keep looking at the same piece of BF3 key art plastered everywhere for advertising, I’ll feel like a winner!
Kris: I think this is far too close to call. They both seem to have pretty significant pushes behind them, but neither of these pushes seems to actually focus on the gameplay that much. They’ve given out a lot of info about the story aspects and both have been running down their list of multiplayer features, but I don’t think I really know enough about how they actually play to give a considered opinion on who will come out ahead.
Personally I could take or leave either really. I used to be a pretty big Battlefield 2 fan, but Battlefield 3 certainly doesn’t feel like the natural evolution from that game. As for Call of Duty I enjoyed Black Ops a lot more than Modern Warfare 2, and I haven’t even played Modern Warfare, so it doesn’t really feel like I’m that invested in the game or how the story ties up.
Jim: If asked the same question a few months back I would have said Battlefield 3 without flinching. Ultra-realistic environments and sound work coupled with the trademark Battlefield multiplayer gameplay, on paper, should be an instant recipe for success but if first impressions of the game are to be believed, the single player portion may spoil the overall package somewhat.
The original Modern Warfare was my first online console shooter, Treyarch’s following instalment in the Call of Duty franchise, World at War, still being one my top 5 multiplayer experiences of all time. However, since MW2 the novelty has worn off and I find myself being alienated from the franchise. On one hand I’m getting tired of the copy-past formula, but on the flipside I’m having a hard time enjoying the new gameplay features implemented by either of the series’ developers.
Call of Duty, Modern Warfare especially, carries a title that is associated with unmissable online experiences, even for casual and non-gamers. As much as I want Battlefield 3 to climb to the top, to force Infinity Ward and Treyarch to try something different in the face of competition, Call of Duty will triumph on name alone where sales are concerned.
Aran: This one will be tight. Battlefield 3 has surpassed 2 million pre orders and 8 million tried the beta, including me. I’ve been a fan of Battlefield’s approach to the FPS genre over Call of Duty. However, I can see the 2 games sharing the spoils when it comes to review scores. Commercially though the winner will be MW3 purely because the fanbase is so huge.
bacon_nuts
About next gen, it’s a pickle. Xbox need to upgrade, but I feel Sony don’t yet.. but they’ll have to if xbox do, otherwise xbox will get the drop on them again… I also don’t want to upgrade just for new graphics, yeah, it’d be lovely if they look nicer, but it’s not necessary. Not being a technical person, i get a bit confused, but people seem to complain about the PS3’s RAM a lot, maybe that’d be nice if it was upgraded, but we don’t need a new console for that. A second slim is therefore all i can suggest. eh?
I’m also a little confused by N’s decision with the Wii U, it looks good now, but then won’t it just be outdated immediately by the other two consoles if they update..? I don’t understand Nintendo’s motives.
Jakster123x
I agree, we definitely need more RAM, too, and a better browser please, for the love of God.
colmshan1990
More RAM would be useless unless every console had more RAM, as Sony wouldn’t want a situation where a launch PS3 couldn’t play Uncharted 4 could they?
They’d either splinter the user base or find the RAM a waste.
More any hardware performance spec changes, a brand new console would be needed.
Jakster123x
I agree on the Next Gen arguement that graphics are getting to the point where they’re so good that we are just going to take great graphics for granted. I think for Sony the PS4 is more about really getting the network up to XBL standards – Party Chat, better in game XMB and just smoother network as a whole.
My only problem with the PS3 is how slow it can be to load up the in game XMB or to let me use the Store. This just needs to be tightened up, give the graphics a little overhaul and you’re done.
Los Havros
On all accounts, yes!
Los Havros
Interesting. I honestly don’t know what is going to happen for the next gen consoles. Xbox 360 is long in the tooth simply because it uses DVD tech for its games discs, but the PS3 still has a lot to give. Microsoft risks coming out in 2013/2014 with a very expensive console (much like Sony did with the PS3 in 2006/2007) and all as Sony needs to do is drop the price of the PS3 on Xbox Next’s launch.
With the global economy as it is, great games still coming forth on current gen consoles, I just wonder is there really the appetite for the leap on to next gen?
wirralsman
Have to say, I think that Microsoft need to bring out a new console, it is definitely at it’s limits. Sony can afford more time, but they will obviously not want to give MS a head start, so as soon as we see a new Xbox, we are going to have to see a new PlayStation. Unless Sony want to sit out the next generation and come back for the one after?
kivi95
I really want the the next gen to come soon!! Not because of better graphics but what we always see in the consoles is NEW IPS. Just look at this year,so many sequels at 3….
Oh and I will easly buy a PSV, It’s a great price. I mean a Iphone cost twice as much as a PSV.
SilverCider
From a technical standpoint new consoles arriving in a couple of years is perfectly reasonable. However like quite a few have mentioned, I can’t quite see what generational leap they will bring apart from storage, performance and network upgrades.
In my opinion there should be a standard for a minimum level of quality for the next generation of games – if possible – to likes of Full HD rendering at 60 fps. Now obviously this would have to come from both the hardware and the games developer, but if it was implemented then I would be happy to say there was a next-gen ‘leap’
gazzagb
Whilst I have no problems with this gen’s graphics, I think its the actual hardware performance that needs upgrading. Just using a good engine can make a massive difference (just look at the graphical differences between Sniper Ghost Warrior 1 & 2), but the PS3 isn’t powerful enough for what it should be able to do. Should the XMB take ~10secs to load mid-game? No. Should the internet browser crash constantly? No. Should we be able to have cross game chat and other features of the like? Yes.
Regarding the release of the next gen, Sony really need to make sure they release almost simultaneously as the competition. I can see myself weighing up between which one comes out first, and the price of it. If say, the new xbox comes out 12months before the PS4, and is £100 cheaper, I can’t see myself waiting for the PS4.
The Lone Steven
I can see MS annoucing the next Xbox next year as it’s been nearly 8-10 years since it has released and the DVD format that it uses is starting to struggle to contain the mutliplat games.(Judging from the recent releases of some games). But i can’t see Sony annoucing the PS4 any time soon as in my opinion it still has a bit of juice left in it.
I personally prefer BF as it’s balanced in it’s MP and is the only game that i will get for it’s MP. Plus i like to kill my mates and TSAers with a helicopter or tank. :) I played COD MW and i found it to be boring within 20 minutes IMHO. I can see myself getting BF3. But it will be interesting to see how the two giants of FPS fair in the sales. Although i’ll probably get Skyrim if i manage to somehow get a job by then.
I’m still undecided about the PSV as there are a few games that i want on the PSP but for some reason, PSV is not BC with it along with the PS1 games. Which is an odd choice to make as it has everything that is required to play the PS1 games. O-o I’ll probably wait for the reviews and a year to see how it fairs just in case it turns out like the 3DS(during the first few months and i think it is slowly gaining momentum) or even worse, the PSPGo.
tactical20
I’d happily buy a PS4, so long as it played PS3 games.
MuggleMind
I suspect MS wouldn’t have needed to update so fast if they had backed Toshiba’s HD disk format. I’m very much of the opinion that, had they done that, sony would have lost that format war, as more and more 360 games would have used it.
With regard to what to expect, I think both need to up the RAM in their consoles considerably. Graphics probably don’t need too much improving currently, as games like Uncharted show.
I have noticed that children tend to play the COD games, but have no interest in the BF series, but this is partly due to their peers. My grandsons (with considered parental acceptance) both play Black Ops, but won’t ususally touch BFBC2. Why? Because all their friends play Black Ops. When none of their friends are online, the oldest *might* consider playing BFBC2 if I am. They are not too happy that I have pre-ordered BF3, but not MW3!
As for the PSV, I have already persuaded my wife that it will be the perfect delayed birthday/christmas present… so day 1 for me. :D