I think we're all losing sight of what matters. This whole Battlefield 3 vs. Modern Warfare 3 mess has gotten ugly fast and to be honest, I think we're all avoiding the crux of the issue.
Now, I could've sworn that our industry was about entertainment. If that remains true, we should be looking at the potential fun factor of upcoming games, right? Quality is always a consideration but then again, most productions that suffer from low-quality elements aren't any fun. And if we focus on that little three-letter word, I'm wondering if most of the arguments wouldn't disappear… We should probably refocus.
Who cares which one is better than the other? Who cares which one sells more? And why is it suddenly EA vs. Activision? Call of Duty has become a popular scapegoat but is it really accurate to assume that MW3 will be a bad game? If we look at it from a logical standpoint, will shooter fans be disappointed with either BF3 or MW3? Granted, they may like one more than the other, but what are the chances that either title disappoints? Those who despise the genre won't like these games, but that's never going to change. Personal preferences do exist.
At the end of the day, I sincerely doubt that either title in question will be a dud. I like a good shooter every now and then and while I have my problems with certain franchises (like CoD), I generally enjoy myself when reviewing such games. Can't we just put aside the bickering and accept that Activision and EA will probably put forth great games this fall? They may not be for everyone and I don't agree that MW3 should be the biggest title of the year, but I'm willing to bet I'll have fun. With both.