So I've been playing the BF3 demo. It's the first BF game I've ever played and I'm finally starting to understand the argument between these two games. In one instance, with BF, you have what feels like a "combat sim". Or the closest thing since the old Ghost Recon days. Everything feels true to life. The sounds (amazing sounds, IMO; sounded like audio from a combat correspondence video), the bullet damage, the scale of maps, the absolute emphasis for camping, etc. I don't know what it's like with vehicles but all the typical descriptions of the game make sense now. This game definitely demands more commmunication, more camping, more tactical recon/report/support/attack type of coordination. Again, it feels like a combat sim.
I've liked the game so far. But afterward, I slipped COD back in the tray and couldn't believe the difference. For me, COD is just more intense, more visceral. It plays soooo much faster. I also forgot how much I love killstreaks. Those really give you a sense of momentum. And perks? Now I appreciate those even more. Perks seems to give you more versatility. You can play a map very differently based on what perks you have--never mind your loadouts.
Oh, and I think I hate BF3's aim-down-sight mechanic. Or rather, I hate how the recoil is so strong that I can't even focus my fire for more than two bursts. Is that realistic? Sure. But is it fun? Not for me.
In the end, I'm definitely a COD guy. But the BF3 demo was a unique experience, a nice change of pace, and I'll pick it up later next year. Just to cleanse the COD palette, at least. Good game, just not my style. Your thoughts?