CS:GO vs BF3:CQ

[B-Riz]

Any objective thoughts?

I have not played enough of CS:GO to add anything at this point.

EDIT: Title Fixed!

 

[Clinkster]

BF3 is a typical run and gun shooter, the Call of Duty inspiration is clearly there. It adds better guns physics and graphics, but is nowhere near being a true successor to BF2.

CS:GO feels and plays like older CS games, but with a bunch of small nitpicky differences that turn off a lot of veteran players. Bear in mind, Valve shows a lot of promise to update this game to improve on, hopefully making it viable for the competitive scene in the future.

 

[micrometers]

I'm wondering this too.

Like, does CS still have the stupid run with knife and then switch to rifle when engaging mechanic?

BF3 looks like it's better.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8sHfdYHu3cc

Also I like the mirror's edge inspired perspective. It's like they put the camera box inside of the character model so you see the camera shake with movement.

 

[Dankk]

They're two entirely different games.

CS:GO is a small-scale infantry FPS with older shooting mechanics and tactical play. BF3 is a large-scale AAA military FPS with vehicles and modern features like ADS and sprinting, along with an unlock system. What else do you want to know?

 

[micrometers]

They're two entirely different games.

CS:GO is a small-scale infantry FPS with older shooting mechanics and tactical play. BF3 is a large-scale AAA military FPS with vehicles and modern features like ADS and sprinting, along with an unlock system. What else do you want to know?

I don't think that's quite true though. I mean, BF3 can be large scale, but there also likely exist small CS-style maps that focus entirely on gunplay.

 

[gorcorps]

Other than having guns there's no similarities.

 

[Dankk]

I don't think that's quite true though. I mean, BF3 can be large scale, but there also likely exist small CS-style maps that focus entirely on gunplay.

There are, but no one in their right mind would play BF for small close-quarters combat. That's not what BF is about at all. I'm pretty sure EA did that just to appeal to the CoD kiddies.

 

[micrometers]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6tsOxjWSOs

looks similar to me.

 

[dlock13]

They're two entirely different games.

CS:GO is a small-scale infantry FPS with older shooting mechanics and tactical play. BF3 is a large-scale AAA military FPS with vehicles and modern features like ADS and sprinting, along with an unlock system. What else do you want to know?

This pretty much sums it up.

CS:GO is CS:S is CS 1.6. You have to earn money via kills/wins to purchase new weapons. There are no upgrades. There's not 1200412 weapons. There are no perks, no modifications, no vehicles.

CS:GO is a tactical game. It's more along the lines of terrorists took over a building/area and the police are called in to take them out.

In BF3, you're in an all out war except with unlocks to new guns and achievements/medals.

That's it.

One is Tact. The other is War.

Tact vs. War.

Which will you choose!

(Uncle Sam supports this message.)

 

[micrometers]

This pretty much sums it up.

CS:GO is CS:S is CS 1.6. You have to earn money via kills/wins to purchase new weapons. There are no upgrades. There's not 1200412 weapons. There are no perks, no modifications, no vehicles.

CS:GO is a tactical game. It's more along the lines of terrorists took over a building/area and the police are called in to take them out.

In BF3, you're in an all out war except with unlocks to new guns and achievements/medals.

That's it.

One is Tact. The other is War.

Tact vs. War.

Which will you choose!

(Uncle Sam supports this message.)

I'm actually more interested in the gunplay, as it would be pretty trivial to create a CS-esque match style. I suspect that what makes CS CS really is the "perma-death" that you suffer through in each match.

otherwise, I suspect that the guns and aiming is very similar between the two games.

 

[dlock13]

I'm actually more interested in the gunplay, as it would be pretty trivial to create a CS-esque match style. I suspect that what makes CS CS really is the "perma-death" that you suffer through in each match.

I don't believe the gun play is similar in the slightest. I believe in all the BF series, they're very lenient when it comes to accuracy and power. I feel as though it always takes more shots/clips in BF3 than CS. I might be in the minority there, but I've been playing both games since 1942/CS 1.3 so I know a thing or two about the differences.

CS is definitely defined by tactics and the perma-death you describe. You are FORCED to play slow and patient or else suffer a death and have to sit out a round where as in BF games, you get 10-30 seconds to respawn. It's not a major difference, but it's just sucky when you die in a game of CS out of no where and the round hasn't even really started yet... or a team mate kills you in spawn and you have to wait till next round.

 

[Dankk]

I'm actually more interested in the gunplay, as it would be pretty trivial to create a CS-esque match style. I suspect that what makes CS CS really is the "perma-death" that you suffer through in each match.

otherwise, I suspect that the guns and aiming is very similar between the two games.

The gunplay, as dlock13 says, is very different. CS:GO requires precision aiming with lightning-fast reaction times. Gun recoil and spread is much more prominent, and familiarizing yourself with a weapon typically involves memorizing the pattern of where bullets land.

BF3 has iron sights, generous hit-boxes, hit-markers, regenerating health, and spongier enemies.

(I'm not saying BF3 is a bad game, because I actually enjoy it quite a bit. Just saying, again, they're very different.)

 

[Markbnj]

There are, but no one in their right mind would play BF for small close-quarters combat. That's not what BF is about at all. I'm pretty sure EA did that just to appeal to the CoD kiddies.

And yet people do exactly that because the large maps are just playgrounds for pilots. I agree with the poster who said BF3 is not a true successor to BF2. It's more like BFBC2 grown up a little. But then, BF2 was not a true successor to BFV or BF1942. Damn progress!

 

[gorcorps]

otherwise, I suspect that the guns and aiming is very similar between the two games.

You'd be wrong

BF is aim down sights focused like COD. CS is hip fire only apart from scopes.

BF is large enough to where in many times you're just shooting at the body. CS is very close quarters with heavy locational damage focus (headshots are king).

 

[Sidekicknichola]

Let me re-phrase your questions for you -

Apples or Oranges - Any objective thoughts?

 

[B-Riz]

To elaborate; I have played a lot of CS 1.6 and CS:S (ages ago) and BF3.

I was wondering who has played CS:GO AND BF3 on the regular and if CS:GO retains its magic.

Also, a lead designer for BF3:CQ was inspired by CS; so I was wondering, objectively, if it was comparable to CS:GO on small scale encounters.

 

[Childs]

To elaborate; I have played a lot of CS 1.6 and CS:S (ages ago) and BF3.

I was wondering who has played CS:GO AND BF3 on the regular and if CS:GO retains its magic.

Also, a lead designer for BF3:CQ was inspired by CS; so I was wondering, objectively, if it was comparable to CS:GO on small scale encounters.

No, more like COD. Although COD has a CS rip off mode called Search and Destroy.

 

[B-Riz]

No, more like COD. Although COD has a CS rip off mode called Search and Destroy.

So BF3:CQ more like COD?

CS:GO still good like the older ones?

 

[Dankk]

So BF3:CQ more like COD?

CS:GO still good like the older ones?

Yes.

BF3:CQ is more like CoD because they both have ADS, sprint, hitmarkers, and regenerating health, with minimal tact.

Meanwhile, CS:GO retains the formula of it's predecessors.

 

[micrometers]

The gunplay, as dlock13 says, is very different. CS:GO requires precision aiming with lightning-fast reaction times. Gun recoil and spread is much more prominent, and familiarizing yourself with a weapon typically involves memorizing the pattern of where bullets land.

BF3 has iron sights, generous hit-boxes, hit-markers, regenerating health, and spongier enemies.

(I'm not saying BF3 is a bad game, because I actually enjoy it quite a bit. Just saying, again, they're very different.)

recoil and spread are important. hitbox is obv also important.

iron sights though are an improvement over arbitrary crosshairs.

regenerating health + fast respawn do make it different.

 

[B-Riz]

I'm really trying to want to pick up CS:GO for old times sake, but BF3 has spoiled me with variety and super awesome graphics...

 

[AMDZen]

All CS is greater than all BF

Even though I haven't played much of CS:GO yet, its not the weekend yet and I haven't had any time. I plan on playing some Saturday for sure

 

[micrometers]

It's a shame more games don't implement CS-style guns.

Just point-auto kill really is no fun and makes the game MMO-like. In most console shooter games at least that's what so much gunplay feels like.

 

[Grooveriding]

CS is much more challenging in using your guns and learning how to control them compared to BF3. BF3 is a highly varied FPS with a big focus on vehicles and strongly objective based gameplay when played on maps 'true' to its pedigree. Guns are a lot more forgiving and much easier to use in BF3 compared to CS.

Depends what you want.

 

[power_hour]

No prone, No Sale. Game does look decent tho. Oh well.