Akvod said:
richardhutnik said:
Akvod said:
So... essentially your big pull in for MW3/BF3 is single player and co-op, huh? *shrug* Battlefield isn't really that type of game in the first place, so your question isn't a matter of if Battlfield 3 will be "new", but "different". While Battlefield 3 is offering co-op and a good single player, almost nobody is buying it primarily for that.
The reason why most people are buying Battlefield 3 is because of the multiplayer, and the different gameplay style of it. I can flesh out my post more, and talk about the player count, and the class based gameplay of it, but it doesn't seem like you're interested in things like that.
|
Ok, got it. The product is more of a refinement of the Modern FPS genre (modern here is also referring to time period). So, for me, it sounds like a miss. And yes, I do love the Frostbite engine. Me, the essential element is multiplayer split screen local. If I can get 4 players split screen and hoard mode for MW3, I would definitely consider that. As of now, I feel I am pretty much set for things.
|
"Modern" is a setting, not a genre. Battlefield 3 is simply a refinement of Battlefield, of competitive FPS multiplayer.
I really don't see why you're looking at MW3 for split scren action though. Wouldn't a game like L4D2 be much better? Or are you tired of it already?
|
I added that as a clarification, because saying "Modern FPS" implies now a certain game style, consisting of being able to carry only two weapons you can fire, and regenerative health.
For myself, it was a case of wanting to have split screen in a Hoard mode, preferably with 4 players. I have L4D2. The idea is to have an FPS that is a bit arcade like where it never ends, but keeps getting harder and harder. L4D2 is a game where you play through a campaign. The ideal would be 4 player split screen, so Hoard mode could be played with 4 players at same time local.
