View Single Post
  #19  
Old 04-02-2012, 09:41 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMovie View Post
I agree and disagree with this at the same time. I haven't played MW3 yet. But I have yet to play a first person shooter as intense as the first Modern Warfare. Every COD since has sucked, but IMO no FPS has surpassed what the first MW was.

I've played BF3 and it's by far the best FPS I've played in a long time. But for a console game it lacks the intensity. The maps are too big for the amount of players.

24 players is nothing compared to the 64 player matches on the PC. MW 1 was a much better console FPS for it's time than BF3 is for consoles now.

MW1 was the most innovative FPS of it's time.

My problem with BF3 on console is the size of maps compared to the small amount of players.

Every once in awhile I'll be in an excellent match. It'll be very intense, and everybody works together as a team and does what they're supposed to. 9 times out of 10 however, I'm put in useless matches where a third of the team is off in some random corner of the map screwing around, or being selfish and not going for objectives.

Me and a friend of mine who play the game properly, always find ourselves as being the ONLY people on the team that actually attempt to take objectives. If we don't do anything, then nothing gets done and our team loses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMovie View Post
I'm put in useless matches where a third of the team is off in some random corner of the map screwing around, or being selfish and not going for objectives.

Me and a friend of mine who play the game properly, always find ourselves as being the ONLY people on the team that actually attempt to take objectives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMovie View Post
always find ourselves as being the ONLY people on the team
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeMovie View Post
ONLY
thank god for your supremacy then man. Dunno what they'd do without you.
Reply With Quote