Battlefield 3: Slow gameplay or more realistic balance than MW3

By Daniel Chubb - Aug 11, 2011

The first person shooter crown is worth a lot of money to the winning side, with Battlefield 3 and Modern Warfare 3 being the two biggest contenders. Both of these franchises have their dedicated fan base and will do well from these people alone, but what game will gain market share in 2011/2012?

Currently rumors and released video show that this year BF3 will be the most upgraded, in terms of graphics but this will not be enough alone to capture the hearts of the elusive gamer. We’ve seen many players stand by their favorite title and give reasons as to why, and this leads us to the claims that Battlefield 3 will have slower gameplay or is this a more realistic balance than MW3?

The majority of Call of Duty gamers will admit that BF3 is likely to feature better graphics than MW3, but the idea of playing with slower gameplay is just not for them, although from personal experience it’s hard to see that many of these people have ever played a Battlefield game to make an informed choice. We’ll get some hands on time with Battlefield 3 at Euro Gamer this year, but our expectations will be an enhanced version of BF2, which already had a good balance of gameplay and realism but was lacking in some of COD’s online features in our opinion.

We believe that BF3 will improve the speed of the game but keep the gameplay feeling more like a real war zone than running around all the time in more of an arcade style, known in the Call of Duty games. If you could play BF2 by flying a helicopter and killing ground troops, then as you take incoming jump out, deploy a parachute and while floating down take out other players, tanks with an RPG, and then takeover a tank of your own…imagine what BF3 will be like including the Frostbite 2.0 engine?

This view will still be countered by the Call of Duty player who likes fast paced action that is in your face action, who will also be happy with the same graphics in a game that has proved itself in sales charts. The same people see a solid formula designed by devs that’s working, and ask why change it?

Do you prefer the running and gunning of Call of Duty and think BF3 will be slow and boring? Or do you laugh at these claims knowing that BF3 is likely to be extreme action that feels like you’re actually in a real war zone?

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter or Google Plus.

Also See: BF3 End Game on Xbox 360 needs monster update

  • Christeezay

    are you sure its not because the game is good in itself, there arent other games like it. complain all you want but its done good because its a generally good game. you cant cop out and say its a loyal fanbase cuz world at war sucked and a whole lotta people didnt play. i own both battlefield and CoD and find campers to exist in both games equally, in CoD they corner camp and in battlefield they all sit way off with recon kits

  • Noah Dawson

     First Im a COD fan, but I hated Black Ops. My main problem with battlefield is the storyline. Yes I said storyline, If I buy a game I want the whole game to be awesome. Battlefield has the most annoying storyline. It’s very rushed and the characters are constantly making dumb comments throughout. Instead of feeling like a more serious  shooter like MW2 and MW1 it feels more like a cartoon low scale version of the two. Almost like wanting to play Mortal Kombat and instead your stuck with Smash Brothers.

  • Desmonddas

    All you guys saying battle field is realistic. If it had a no respawn gamemode i would stop playing cod for good.

    How does dieing 50times in a match sound realistic? one life per round, thats real life and you can only get that from cod search and destroy

    • RonaldMcdonald

      good point, but 1 life per round is still un realistic. I would like a game mode like CoD’s Search and Destroy but alsow a Battlefield version. Maybe a large epic battle with many players and 1 life, 1 round. Last men standing win.

  • Gazzygui

    Call of Duty, fast paced… Please, if you want to see fast paced look at Quake3:arena or the slower UT series, growing up on fast paced games, lets you see that Cod isn’t fast at all, I hate when people say “oh  but Cod is fast” it’s boringly generic, and will probably be full of people with names like “Xx_ShArPsH00T3R_xX” if that’s the case let the massive fan boys stay on either side, as no good will come.

    as for battlefield being slow paced, it really wasn’t when i played the alpha, sure some things were missing, and others annoying (3D spotting) but it has potential to be a brilliant successor to Battlefield 2. AKA Grenades every-fucking-where.

    If i want a good run & gun game i’ll play the UT and Quake series.

    • Anonymous

      Did you not play any of the Bad Company series ? Cause i’ve seen alot of comments going “OMG I hate that god damn 3D spotting it’s ridiculus” It’s been around for a while and its not going away lol nobody had a problem with it in Bad Company 2 apart from COD enthusiasts and new players starting now.And I if you play Quake why the hell are you on a BF3vsMW3 comments???

  • Anonymous

    Im sorry but COD players stick with COD and Battlefield Player stick with BF3. I dont care how good either game is or if they’re trying to intergrate smaller maps into BF3.COD players stay away!!!! the BF community doesnt want u.If you cant work in a team, arm an M-com or SPOT players don’t bother I don’t wanna keep going into a match and playing with COD newbies who now think they’ve got what it takes to play BF. And i dont think i’m the only one!!!!!!This is happening on all FPS games,people play COD and play other games exactly the same with not tactics either running and gunning or Sniping.Come October all we’ll get is a bunch of campers in the recon class trying to raise they’re frickin K/D ratio instead of completing objectives even if that means dying for your team or reviving players so your Team/Squad can win the game.Im fine if you wanna play both just remember BF is not COD you have to play different and you’re actually are rewarded for working as a team not a lone wolf.

    • bfcodhalo

      Actually i play CoD. I enjoy cod and i CAN play Battlfield. I enjoy spotting people, doesnt harm me if i cant kill them my teamates pick up the kill, i get points for it too. Not all CoD players are noobs at battlefield. And Battlefield already had many camping Recon. I camp as a recon. But i do my job as i spot and get kills.

    • bfcodhalo

      Actually i play CoD. I enjoy cod and i CAN play Battlfield. I enjoy spotting people, doesnt harm me if i cant kill them my teamates pick up the kill, i get points for it too. Not all CoD players are noobs at battlefield. And Battlefield already had many camping Recon. I camp as a recon. But i do my job as i spot and get kills.

  • Snakefang88

    Slow paced in Battlefield 3? Hop in a jet and that’ll get you where you wanna go faster. 

  • YouWack

    I hear a lot of people saying that cod games are all the same year after year. Well, hell no it’s not. Mw3 will have all new multiplayer maps, new story line, new game modes, weapons, perk and much more. Basically making mw3 a brand new game. Graphic doesn’t matter, it’s all about gameplay. if the game plays good way change it. I bet that bf3 while have a great success at first but many people will start to get bored a switch right to mw3. BF3 has boring foggy graphics, while cod games have sharp and clear graphic’s. At the end of the day it takes a longer period time for cod games to get boring then bf3 games.

    • Guest

      storyline hasn’t changed (same one from MW2)
      and many people are still playing battlefield 2 and it was released  2005
      Almost 100% of people i know have said that they got bored of COD

    • WHOareYOU

      Battlefield graphics are better for me atleast. I dont think ill go out into a war zone and see “sharp and clear graphics”. I admit Battlefield may get boring sometimes, but only on consoles. Battlefield is best on PC. You get the full experience with the full maps-almost doubled in size-and 3 or more times players per team in multiplayer.
      I dont see why consoles can’t have big maps and many people. MAG had it with 256 players a few years back.

  • Ryan

    First off, I own and enjoy most CoD games (own everything since 2, don’t necessarily like them all: ahem, World-at-War, ahem), and I also own and enjoy both of the Bad Company games (more of a spin-off than true “Battlefield,” but the style of play is comparable). Yes, I favor one franchise over the other and I do agree that BF3 looks like it has far superior graphics, but which one I play on a given day really depends on my mood. If I want the fast-paced run-n-gun, I’ll pop in a CoD; if I want to take a more methodical think-before-you-act approach, I’ll play BC. My choice is based on my spur-of-the-moment playstyle. It just happens that I tend to be in a “go-go-go” mood more often than not, and so lean towards CoD because I’ll do well there. The point is, I enjoy both and, come this fall, I’ll buy both, but I’ll buy CoD first because it’s the one that, historically, I enjoy more. The “better” game is really in the eye of the beholder.

  • According to what can easily be seen on news sites, DICE themselves have stated that they’ve made games scalable. So if you want fast game play, you’ve got it with tighter maps and faster game types (rush). If you want, slower, strategic game play, you’ve got that too with a 64 player conquest including full armour and air accompaniment. There’s something for everyone in there. Not to mention superior graphics, sound, physics. The only real thing MW2.5, ahem, MW3 has over BF3 is the single player storyline, which is very good. BF3’s single player story will probably be weak and a token effort in comparison. But we all know where the majority of play goes on in these games, the multi player, where, and I’m sorry to say this CoD fans, MW3 will get stomped. MW3’s sales will more than likely trump BF3’s, but in this release IW and Activision will be riding off the franchises success rather than any actual merit in the game; there hasn’t been a good CoD game past number 4.

    • I wouldn’t dig a grave for BF3 campaign yet.  From what I understand they did give some attention to this area this time.

      • dig??? my recon squadie has some C4 charges if you need some assistance 

  • first off i want to say i think they are both great games. know i truly prefer bf3 over modern warfare 3. just like now were all i play is bf2 and medal of honor. i was in the alpha trail for bf3 and slow pace ummmm nope the game has changed in its entirety i will not go into details because i don’t want to spoil it for anybody and i don’t want to get into trouble. but lets say this its a whole new war and mw3 might really need to make some changes and fast.

  • Prashanth Ps3

    I always stick with Call of Duty when it comes to MP,love the intensity and pacing the gameplay packs!!

  • John

    If you want realism play Killzone! BF is NOT realistic just because its slow and has good graphics, but lacks weight. Killzone ticks all those boxes!

    • Black_ice1987

      Killzone is a sy-fy shooter though, lol. There’s nothing realistic about it. Great game though.

  • thx

    If it ain’t broke don’t fix it right?

    What about improving it?

    • Your name

      lol did you get that from one of the articles??

  • OperationPR


  • Gamer4Life

    Online tactical team/squad based vehicular action is more of my thing so BF3 has my vote & my money this year, & to be brutally honest it will probably keep me entertained until the next gen consoles arrive, it is gonna be that good/large in scale ie weapon & kit unlocks/awards/ribbons etc etc.  The Frostbite engine is extremely impressive & makes no game ever the same (destruction wise), award winning audio, co-op play this time, the single player campaign also has had more attention from Dice this time round to bring it on a par with COD’s usually excellent single player outings.  Both games will sell incredibly well & both sets of fans will be more than happy with their Autumn game offerings.  I for one & I’m sure I speak for the millions of gamers out there who just cant wait for Oct/Nov to get here any quicker!!!         

  • Tango 988

    COD is for the Impatient.

    • Billtot

      cod is for adhd. It’s simple, easy and the same thing year after year. If have yet to hit puberty in the mind or body, them COD is for you.

      For the life of me I can’t understand why any moderately intelligent mature human being would choose COD over Battlefield. It’s mind boggleing

      • antoineflemming

        maybe some people play both… ever figure that. Maybe some play COD for a quick arcade shooter experience and play BF for a more in-depth, team-based experience. Sometimes it’s not a matter of choosing between the two as opposed to different play-style choices. That’s all.

      • ;)

        Speaking of moderate intelligence, tell me, do you have any?

        “if have yet, boggleing”

        Stick to BF, in fact play any video game so long as you don’t leave your bedroom (parent’s basement?); you’re too much of a liability to society.

        • aws7

          You’re a troll.  You contributed absolutely nothing to the conversation; you only attacked a guy for no reason.  If you really want to talk about liabilities to society, become a public defender as an attourney and then prosecute people that are actually dangers to society.

          As to the REAL point of the comment section (to give your opinion on the different play-styles of Call of Duty or Battlefield) Battlefield is much slower than Call of Duty, which makes it a more realistic experience.  If warfare in the real world worked like it does in Call of Duty, then there would be people running around quickscoping and spraying bullets in the open with no value for the lives of their fellow soldiers or their own.

      • COD is for quick minded gamers with skill. all the people that are not good at COD move over to BF where things are slow and easier for you to understand and you don’t have to be a good player by yourself because it completely team based with no sense of individuality.

        • …whatta head… that is all (for lack of a better response)