You've gotta be kidding. Well, let's start at the beginning. When you judge how the games are composed, I mean GFX, textures, engines, etc.. Battlefield excels. When you talk about those who play... Battlefield has always had more mature and serious players. When you talk about how you should play, like intelligently, tactically, or rushing into a cluster of claymores... Battlefield requires you to play intelligently and as a team. Now, the advantages of COD is it can be simpler, and it has a much larger player base.
You must know, though, that the games immerse you in two very different experiences. The game director of MW3 a while back, actually played BF3 and he loved it. He said that point I just mentioned. The two games are very different.
In my overall opinion, though, BF3 will be much, much, much, much much more enjoyable than MW3.
---------- Post added at 12:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:19 PM ----------
Originally posted by HowsMyDROPSHOT
well if you like a high frames per second id go for cod (60fps) bf3 (30fps)
if you are looking for flowers that are painted on the floor get bf3
if you are looking for a great game MW3!!
Well if you like millions of prepubescent boys screaming into your ear, go for COD.
If you are looking for unrealistic game mechanics, and textures used back in 1999, get MW3.
If you are looking for an immersive game experience get BF3.