Google+

We Recommend

64 comments

  • FriedBeans - November 19, 2011 12:06 p.m.

    Don't understand why you played it with a classic controller and didn't play it using pointer controls. Pointer controls > dual sticks. I loved GoldenEye on the Wii because of this. Played more GoldenEye multiplayer than any other FPS this generation.
  • JonnyJon - November 19, 2011 11:39 a.m.

    You guys! Don't you see? the gamesradar staff just loves posting about MW3 and BF3 because they like to watch us fight and complain and whine and..... fight! Theyre playin us like we play the very games we fight about. That being said.... MW3 rules!
  • PretzelJones - November 19, 2011 11:28 a.m.

    These numbers don't mean anything. Of course there were more hours logged on launch day. A lot more copies we're sold of MW3 than BF3. And of course people spent more time on launch day with MW3 than BF3, because people have been playing MW3 since 2007 when MW1 was released. But BF3 was a new style of gameplay that has a higher learning curve. I'd like to see a month later numbers. I know the two days after the launch of MW3 the BF3 servers we're empty. But now they are swamped and sometimes I can't even log on. How many of those first day MW3 players came back to BF3??? I'd like to see those numbers.
  • therawski - November 19, 2011 10:20 a.m.

    IMO (Multiplayer only) I think Battlefield 3 is the better game, but you really need to have everyone in your squad on mic to do well. Modern Warfare 3 just has a large following. I play what my friends want to play that night, but I'm more excited to play Battlefield because it's a newer experience, Modern Warfare hasn't really evolved. I enjoy both when they work.
  • spideralex90 - November 19, 2011 10:18 a.m.

    I got 48 hours logged in BF3, and 0 in MW3. BF3 with a few friends is far more interesting than MW will ever be.
  • Fox_Mulder - November 19, 2011 9:33 a.m.

    LOL I love this article and I read another one recently that many non-gamers can't tell the difference between the two. As for the games themselves.... I think the reason for this is because you jump into a game of COD, you instantly know what to do and you go about your business killing peoples whether you be a noob or a veteran. In Battlefield, the learning curve is MUCH curvier under every circumstance. So because Battlefield is the thinking man's shooter, doesn't provide INSTANT satisfaction and the matches are usually about 30 minutes longer than the longest COD matches, it isn't as well loved by these fabled "masses" or "99%" I keep hearing so much about.
  • PretzelJones - November 19, 2011 11:31 a.m.

    I'll disagree with your instant satisfaction comment. I prefer BF3 multiplayer to MW3 but I get more instant satisfaction from BF3 because I am able to stay on the battlefield (no pun intended) for longer than 3 seconds and can do more for my team than just kill opposing players. I feel there is much more instant satisfaction from BF3 so long as you play the class you choose correctly.
  • Kuro - November 19, 2011 7:54 a.m.

    Hey.. I played Battlefield 3 for 8 hours straight the launch night. Slept for about five.. and then another 8 of playtime. I've clocked in right about 5 hours in MW3 since it's release. As far as those two are concerned? Battlefield is my true love.. But I'm cheating on it with Skyrim right now. ;D Just don't tell anyone.
  • Balaska - November 19, 2011 5:51 a.m.

    "EA has a powerful opportunity to take things further next year" Dear Lord NO! Yearly BF updates? Does Dennis Fong not understand BF? I look forward to what ever expansion packs come out (fingers crossed for Vietnam) But I shall still be playing BF3 in 3 years time. Can the same be said for the current CoD?
  • TheZigMan - November 19, 2011 2:58 a.m.

    and I guarantee more hours were logged in skyrim. Despite not selling as many copies as MW3, it is undoubtable that more time is spent per a player than MW3. My friend put in easily 50 hours so far this week
  • TheInvincibleDragon - November 19, 2011 8:29 p.m.

    Lol. I can attest to that, also. One of my friends logged over 40 hours in 3 days alone.
  • CitizenWolfie - November 19, 2011 2:43 a.m.

    There is probably less Battlefield 3 playtime because all the so called "Hardcore BF fans" were too busy carpet bombing each and every MW3 forum and review with "MW2.5 Sucks" and other such bullshit instead of, y'know, playing the game they supposedly love so much. These are the same people who moan about CoD players being sheep while at the same time joining the "Baaaaaa"ttlefield choir. Chess and Draughts are played on the same board, doesn't mean they're the same game. One's all about long, drawn out matches where every piece is important whereas the other is more fast-paced, easier to pick up and play and the playing pieces are slightly expendable.
  • Dandalf - November 19, 2011 5:45 a.m.

    Moaning about people who moan, on the internet, about computer games. Not that you're indicative of most MW fans, just pointing something out.
  • CitizenWolfie - November 20, 2011 9:26 a.m.

    @dandalf - I'm a fan of both games and can appreciate them both for what they are. Just seems a bit pointless when there are fully grown adults trying to justify one purchase by criticizing the other. People moan about too many kids playing CoD but at least they're enjoying it instead of hounding message boards to say how much better they think it is than Battlefield or vice-versa. Believe me, I love a good rant as much as anyone and besides pornography, anger is what fuels the Internet. I'm just sick of the same bullshit coming from both sides on every MW/BF article. I could probably do a list of the top 5 most cliched fanboy comments from both sides Ive seen that many lately. Nobody is more elite than anyone else just because they bought one mainstream title over another but a lot of people seem to think otherwise.
  • MetroidPrimeRib - November 18, 2011 11:25 p.m.

    They both suck. But I guess in the eyes of the media there is only one genre: Tacticool Military Style FPS
  • D0CCON - November 18, 2011 11:11 p.m.

    From Gamesradar's Modern Warfare 3's Opening Week Sets Entertainment Industry Records article "both games ended up doing very well, even with all of the bickering. Odds are this will be the last time you have to hear about the rivalry that took up much of 2011... until Modern Warfare 4 and Battlefield 4 are announced, anyway." So why do you keep bringing it up?
  • MidianGTX - November 18, 2011 9:01 p.m.

    This really says nothing. We knew all along that MW3 would sell more. You can't possibly determine which game is "better" with these stats, otherwise we'd all be playing freakin' FarmVille instead of posting on here. Here's another one, a simple vote this time: https://www.playfire.com/a/blog/bf3-vs-mw3-vote-competition-results-and-winners-announced Battlefield 3: 72,390 votes Modern Wafare 3: 49,852 votes
  • Redeater - November 18, 2011 8:15 p.m.

    You COD and BF3 fanboys really need to shut the fuck up. Instead of complaining why don't you revel in the fact that you have 2 high rated games to play??
  • Ironarm - November 18, 2011 8:20 p.m.

    But if they did that then no one would complain. Isn't that what the internet was built for? Complaining?

Showing 21-40 of 64 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000

OR…

Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.