Skip navigation
Up to Discussions in Off Topic

FORUMS_

3631 Views     14 Replies
3631 Views 13 Replies Latest reply: Oct 8, 2012 9:36 AM by otisman666 RSS Branched to a new discussion.
Gh0sted76 Novice 215 posts since
Aug 22, 2012

Black Ops 2 and Call of Duty Still Better Than Medal of Honor/Battlefield

Posted by Gh0sted76 on Oct 5, 2012 2:51 PM

Just got done playing a few rounds of the new Medal of Honor beta today and it is the same dissapointment Battlefield 3 was. Shotty graphics and sketchy gameplay will never beat COD! I had high hopes for Medal of Honor, not that I would ever replace COD but just to mix it up but COD has way tighter controls and graphics! Just my thoughts, COD is still king!

3631 Views      Tags: of, honor, medal
  • nicedrewishfela Master 8,558 posts since
    Sep 2, 2011
    Currently Being Moderated
    nicedrewishfela     Oct 5, 2012 3:00 PM (in response to Gh0sted76)

    I will probably download the Beta this weekend. I enjoyed BF3, to an extent. It got old pretty fast.

     

    CoD has always been and continues to be the smoothest playing, most replayable game out there. Other franchises are starting to catch up, especially with the many fiascos surrounding MW3, but it is still the best out there. I am hoping that BO 2 really stands out andbrings it back to the forefront and restores the credibility of the series.

  • vims1990 Master 7,536 posts since
    Aug 13, 2011
    Currently Being Moderated
    vims1990     Oct 5, 2012 3:23 PM (in response to Gh0sted76)

    The Frostbite 2 engine used for BF3 & MOH Warfighter works & plays better on PC due to it's 60 fps capability compared to the 30 fps you get on console.

     

    I'm not a fan of BF3 on console but it's an absolute blast on PC.

  • LibertyPrime Calculating status... 7 posts since
    Oct 5, 2012
    Currently Being Moderated
    LibertyPrime     Oct 5, 2012 5:42 PM (in response to Gh0sted76)

    Here we go again... Call of Duty does not have better graphics if you compare the two games, but graphics is not what matters it is really the gameplay. When it comes gameplay, the games are way different when you think about it. Call of Duty is way more focused on quick run and gun gameplay which seems to always be the same, and is kinda true, don't deny it. Games like Medal of Honor, BF3, and Team Fortress 2 are more focused on team gameplay and when you are working with your team, the experience is bound to be unique everytime as you will probably use different tactics, which are more broad than Call of Duty due to once again, the team play. Just because they are first person shooters does not mean they can be compared. Different games have different focuses on gameplay. You can't just call gameplay sketchy because you aren't used to it, the fun part is adapting to different games and learning how to play them, not just saying they suck because they are different. Give team based games more of a chance, they can be just as fun as your favorite, Call of Duty.

    • Gh0sted76 Novice 215 posts since
      Aug 22, 2012
      Currently Being Moderated
      Gh0sted76     Oct 7, 2012 3:15 PM (in response to LibertyPrime)

      Frostbite 2 makes me feel like I'm playing on my PS1. Call of Duty is far superior. It really is too bad too, I was looking forward to Medal of Honor. 60 fps makes all the difference in the world! Gears of War has a much better engine.

      • vims1990 Master 7,536 posts since
        Aug 13, 2011
        Currently Being Moderated
        vims1990     Oct 7, 2012 7:15 PM (in response to Gh0sted76)

        Gh0sted76 wrote:

         

        Frostbite 2 makes me feel like I'm playing on my PS1. Call of Duty is far superior. It really is too bad too, I was looking forward to Medal of Honor. 60 fps makes all the difference in the world! Gears of War has a much better engine.

         

        Regardless of how MOH Warfighter or BF3 plays on the "dinosaur" consoles, it will be leaps ahead of the IW Engine once the new consoles come out (which isn't too far away) & will be able to play at 60fps.

         

        Despite COD's smoother engine, it is showing it's age compared to the Frostbite 2.0, CryEngine 3 & the Unreal Engine 3.5.

        The only thing that COD had got to show off is the 60fps but it won't last long specifically for consoles.

         

        Don't get me wrong. Black Ops 2 doesn't look too bad considering the game is using an improved Black Ops engine however the engine will need a huge upgrade once the new gen of consoles comes out.

         

        I can't give my thoughts about the beta but I've known for months that the game will run almost the same as BF3 on consoles.

  • Foxhound-Pro GlobalModerator 3,090 posts since
    Jul 23, 2012
    Currently Being Moderated
    Foxhound-Pro     Oct 5, 2012 6:34 PM (in response to Gh0sted76)

    Thread moved. - Our game vs. their game is not considered on topic.

  • CylonNumber6 Apprentice 606 posts since
    Sep 12, 2012
    Currently Being Moderated
    CylonNumber6     Oct 7, 2012 3:37 PM (in response to Gh0sted76)

    The MOH Warfighter Beta is pretty fun so far.

     

    Sure you have people that camp right under the Blackhawk spawns for easy, and annoying kills, but I like it.

  • triiviium- Master 2,854 posts since
    Sep 4, 2011
    Currently Being Moderated
    triiviium-     Oct 7, 2012 8:19 PM (in response to Gh0sted76)

    Out of all FPS games I have played COD just always seems to have the most natural un nauseating run. There graphics have always been way different from any other game and they just dont look stupid.

    • Gh0sted76 Novice 215 posts since
      Aug 22, 2012
      Currently Being Moderated
      Gh0sted76     Oct 7, 2012 10:13 PM (in response to triiviium-)

      I have to agree, CoD has the best graphics and the best gameplay. No other shooter can come close to the tight controls CoD has. I can't wait for next year's CoD release on the new consoles! Gonna be sick! (that is if IW gets it's act together).

  • T-boss Expert 1,647 posts since
    May 30, 2012
    Currently Being Moderated
    T-boss     Oct 8, 2012 4:15 AM (in response to Gh0sted76)

    COD has best grapchis? no.

     

    sure it probly has the best running engine overall. BF3 engine is supposed to feel more relestic, but i think they need to improve in other areas more, id like an longer lasting normal TDM mode and a vehical only mode in that game.

     

    never played MOH.

     

    i dont think IW is making MW4, someone else got that torch if i remember right.

  • Deathly_rYaN Novice 131 posts since
    May 5, 2012
    Currently Being Moderated
    Deathly_rYaN     Oct 8, 2012 8:54 AM (in response to Gh0sted76)

    None of them are better than the other. Battlefield is made to be tactial and use strategies on large battlefields and CoD is close quarter combat in small maps

    • otisman666 Master 9,127 posts since
      Aug 3, 2011
      Currently Being Moderated
      otisman666     Oct 8, 2012 9:36 AM (in response to Deathly_rYaN)

      I kind of liked the MOH BETA.  Did about 6 hours on it and got used to some of the mechanics again.  I think the game and graphics are good, it's the details that will ultimately kill this game. 

       

      First map design:  The map in the BETA was pretty crummy.  I don't recall the developers, but man they didn't learn from the last guys.  If the rest of the maps are like this, I don't see this game lasting too long.  Just a bad layout and spawns are once again an issue.

       

      Weapon designs were pretty good IMO.

       

      But why, oh why can I never play with my intended party in these games?  That's the only thing that COD has on these games.  If I want to run a party of 6-8+ players I can do so, with little to no problems.  Why won't these EA / Battlefield clones ever do this?  Honestly this was the nail in coffin for this game, at least for me (well that and I just started playing Boarderlands II, which will probably take me up to the Gaylo release.

Bookmarked By (0)