[Meatex]

@system - i live in Seoul Korea and usually no deciated servers here
in japan you get a couple but they are either empty, full or still 200+ ping TT

It sucks they were too lazy to police elite for pc so we only get to compete with friends - but its free so meh

[ToRsupapower]

Originally Posted by FaDeMeatex

@system - i live in Seoul Korea and usually no deciated servers here
in japan you get a couple but they are either empty, full or still 200+ ping TT

It sucks they were too lazy to police elite for pc so we only get to compete with friends - but its free so meh

wow pc gets elite for free? or i didn't understand your post,

[iMSystem]

Yea i'm not saying P2P gaming is bad at all, but for the competitive side of things, you need a dedicated server

[ToRsupapower]

Originally Posted by System

Yea i'm not saying P2P gaming is bad at all, but for the competitive side of things, you need a dedicated server

it is helpful, but it's not that needed

Quick Comments

dippa:

it really is

[Meatex]

p2p allows more people to play
and for competitive - they use xbox so can't do dedis

Elite will be free for pc but won't have any of the stuff like tournaments with prizes and stuff and no global rankings with benefits cause that would mean they would actually have to do something about cheaters

[sRFullstop]

I don't like how they don't release MW games for Mac except for CoD4 T_T

[dippa]

p2p gaming allows for idiots to just click join and find a server

for people who actually care about making sure they get a good gaming experience, dedicated servers are essential

don't forget console games use dedicated servers as well - halo 3, gears of war 3 for example - its just not as important for consoles since the most fun they get to have with modding is chipping their console.

[Meatex]

@dippa
p2p also alows people like me to actually play... at all
and saying you need dedicated servers for best gaming experience is just propaganda
If you don't like the gameplay then play something else. only logical argument for dedicated servers would be allowing people to have and mod their own servers which and given that majority of dedis aren't modded at all that point is kinda moot

[Nobunaga]

I've played a bit of both so far, and here are my thoughts. Note that I am slightly biased towards the MW franchise simply because I've played since MW2, and BF3 was the first BF game that I didn't scoff off.

Single Player:
These games aren't really built for Single Player. I haven't finished the SP for BF3 yet, because I got stuck when a ladder glitched out and crashed my (I hate glitches). I finished the MW3 campaign in 5 hours on normal, in one sitting. There were no glitches, and I have to say that it was 5 hours of pure fun. It was rather short, but the story continues on where MW2 left off, and fills up some holes from MW1 as well.

Note that in BF3, auto-aim is on unless you play on the hardest difficulty (there is no other way to turn this off).

Multiplayer:
This is probably where my bias kicks in. I'm not a big fan of games where you drive around in cars and helicopters to blow people up. Sure, it's fun but for me, it shouldn't be such a central part of the game. BF3 treats this part of the game like a real battlefield; up to 64 players fighting in huge maps doing battle things. What this leads to though, is not huge shootouts but more "I didn't see you shoot me from a mile away so now I'm dead".

You level up and gain access to new weapons and perks, but these are limited by the class that you play. There are four classes, and they level up separately. This means that if you play the Assault class exclusively, you might get lots of perks and stuff for that class, but your other 3 classes will still be at level 1.

MW3 is different. The servers are smaller, and the game is much more fast paced. The game is limited to infantry vs infantry, with kill streaks letting you control the turret of an AC130 etc. I feel that the CoD series in this regard, has gotten it perfect. The maps are the right size, with the right amount of players that you will constantly be engaged in fighting.

As you level up, you will be able to get more guns, and more perks for your character. Unlike BF3 where you are limited by the class, in this you create your own class and loadouts. You also get to pick killstreaks, things that you get when you kill a specific number of players in a row without dying which will enhance your killing potential.

The big letdown at the moment for MW3 is the dedicated server issue. Yes, there is dedicated servers but I haven't found any in Australia yet, so I'm stuck playing on IWnet.

BF3 has dedicated servers, but you have to use origins. To put it in perspective, Origins is EA's version of Steam, but instead of opening up the game when you play it, it launches a website where you download a plugin to launch the game on your computer. EA much?

I have to mention that the graphics for BF3 are simply stunning. If graphics are your thing, BF3 isn't going to disappoint. However, I find the core gameplay of MW3 more appealing.

[dippa]

Originally Posted by FaDeMeatex

@dippa
p2p also alows people like me to actually play... at all
and saying you need dedicated servers for best gaming experience is just propaganda
If you don't like the gameplay then play something else. only logical argument for dedicated servers would be allowing people to have and mod their own servers which and given that majority of dedis aren't modded at all that point is kinda moot

sigh, where to start.

dedicated servers are valuable for more reasons than just mods. they make competitive gaming possible. unlike p2p servers, you can exercise a level of control over a dedicated server.

someone being an annoying prat? you can kick or ban him from the server permanently.

don't like certain maps? you don't have to have them in the playlist.

want to make sure you have the best possible ping? join a server that you get a good connection to, as opposed to getting thrown into a lobby with americans.

if you want to play some new maps, you can add them to the dedicated server whenever you like, instead of having to wait six months to pay activision $15 for four new maps, two of which will probably be ripped out of older COD's anyway.

if you can get internet in your country, then it's also possible to have dedicated servers in your country hosted by your ISP.

saying dedicated servers improve the gaming experience isn't "propaganda" - it's a statement backed up with experience and practicality.

Quick Comments

neon:

all true.

[Meatex]

Originally Posted by dippa

sigh, where to start.

dedicated servers are valuable for more reasons than just mods. they make competitive gaming possible. unlike p2p servers, you can exercise a level of control over a dedicated server.

someone being an annoying prat? you can kick or ban him from the server permanently.

don't like certain maps? you don't have to have them in the playlist.

want to make sure you have the best possible ping? join a server that you get a good connection to, as opposed to getting thrown into a lobby with americans.

if you want to play some new maps, you can add them to the dedicated server whenever you like, instead of having to wait six months to pay activision $15 for four new maps, two of which will probably be ripped out of older COD's anyway.

if you can get internet in your country, then it's also possible to have dedicated servers in your country hosted by your ISP.

saying dedicated servers improve the gaming experience isn't "propaganda" - it's a statement backed up with experience and practicality.

All the points you make assume you have the extra cash to put into renting a server AND assuming people play on it. Most people will play on ISP run servers which are not admin-ed at all usually and will most often just run standard. Not to mention ISP's in korea simply do not host game servers - the game dev/publishers have to do that
Your point about maps doesn't exist unless the dev team also release modding tools which most do not.
Also you can have custom games where you can choose banned weapons/mods/streaks maps etc. sooo

Playing with friends you can choose a server with mid range ping rather than one being high and the other being low. But in my case its still worse with the best ping servers in existence usually 200~250 ping average.

I get much better pings with p2p and thus much better gaming experience AND i don't have to pay monthly fee and hope others will be on the server regularly

[inFeZa]

I finally had the chance to play them both and i can sum up that

+ Show +

Battlefield 3 Is much better than MW3. MW3 feels more like an expansion pack to MW2, while BF3 Feels like a fresh new game, sure they both have some negitive aspects of the game, but i just feel that BF3 has a better experience as a game then shooting dying and respawning again ala MW3.

Oh and SC2 > them both. .

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Halo Reach > Battlefield 3 > Modern Warfare 3.



I may get Battlefield 3 at some point, but I miss the old style of games with weapons that spawn on the map. If only for this, and the fact that XP unlocks do not affect gameplay I gotta say that Reach is better than both.

[FSDarkNemesis]

Heya, is my computer that I bought with my sgd 1.2k good enough for MW3? Just to rehash:

Intel core i5 2500k. I tweaked it from 3.3 to 4.1 GHz.
8 Gb Pc 1600 MHz ddr3 RAM
NVidia Geforce GTX 550 ti (MSI Cyclone II)

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by UltimateDeep

Heya, is my computer that I bought with my sgd 1.2k good enough for MW3? Just to rehash:

Intel core i5 2500k. I tweaked it from 3.3 to 4.1 GHz.
8 Gb Pc 1600 MHz ddr3 RAM
NVidia Geforce GTX 550 ti (MSI Cyclone II)

Haha, that should be fine to run it on. Maybe not Ultra graphics, but close to. The only thing that would slow it down is the 550, and as far as I'm aware they're pretty good cards.

[Meatex]

it will likely run ultra - not sure about the vid card
i got less ram and cpu and an ATI 5850 and i run on ultra fine - very smooth

[FSDarkNemesis]

Gameplay's good so far!

You Tube

You Tube

- My first CoD MW3 video!

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by UltimateDeep

Gameplay's good so far!

- My first CoD MW3 video!

Haha, I like the claim in the comment of the video. :P

For $80 SGD or about US$ 65, definitely a better franchise than Battlefield.

Personally, as I stated before, Battlefield is leaps and bounds better than Call of Duty, but that's just personal opinion. Halo Reach being better than both is also personal opinion, though I believe I could successfully argue that Reach is the only one with any chance of being a competitive game.

Glad you're liking it, and good video.

EDIT: You do need to have the game sound down so we can hear you though.

[Nobunaga]

Originally Posted by Bugalugs McScruffin

Halo Reach being better than both is also personal opinion, though I believe I could successfully argue that Reach is the only one with any chance of being a competitive game.

Console FPS are lolsworthy at best!

dedicated servers are valuable for more reasons than just mods. they make competitive gaming possible. unlike p2p servers, you can exercise a level of control over a dedicated server.

You will also never have to see the "Host Migration" screen again.

[Bugalugs McScruffin]

Originally Posted by dippa

if you can get internet in your country, then it's also possible to have dedicated servers in your country hosted by your ISP.

dippa, I think you missed Meatex's point, though he did go a bit overboard as well.

Meatex's issue is the fact that he can not play on dedicated servers because there are none close enough to make it worth it. Yes, it is possible for dedicated servers to be hosted by his ISP, but this is currently not the case. I'm not sure what the state of the FPS scene is in Korea, but if it isn't big enough then ISPs aren't going to bother. P2P gives Meatex the option to play the game at all because he doesn't have access to dedicated servers with any sort of acceptable ping.

Also, sure for hardcore and competitive gamers, you get more control on a dedicated server, but the game is more than adequately playable using P2P. If the game is less popular you are more likely to get lobbies with crappy ping, but on the whole it works.

Basically I think it falls into two camps. If you just want to play the game, P2P is fine. If you want to play the game competitively, then dedicated servers all the way.

Originally Posted by Nobunaga

Console FPS are lolsworthy at best!

I guess that shows you the state of the FPS genre when the two legitimate competitive FPSs are a console title (Reach) and a 7 year old game (CS: Source). Let me know if I'm missing any, but Reach and CS: Source are better than CoD or BF by default as competitive games because they require no grind to unlock everything.