After watching some footage of the campaign my head began to melt. Why is there lens flare present? Are we seeing the game through a head mounted camera or something? I thought we we supposed to be seeing the game through the character's eyes. Or am I missing something? I've played zero of the single player so perhaps there is a story conceit for it. The marketing material all has had a digital distortion style to it, so maybe there is a story conceit for it. But as far as I know the single player is shown as flashbacks and we are shown this via the first person perspective of the character's eyes and not through any type of camera lens. Our eyes can also produce flares, but not the kind seen in BF3, at least my eyes have never experienced this type.
I was fine with the lens flare in ME2 since the visuals weren't being presented through the character's eyes. For all we know ME2 was a sci-fi TV series and had a floating robot cameraman behind Shepard the whole time.
Is the visual flair worth more than keeping to the reality of the presented material? Or is the lens flare appropriate in the context of the story? I remember my friends bitching about the lens flair in Star Trek, but at least one could argue that we were seeing the film through a camera and not eyeballs, even if the flares were digitally added I'll try to not think about it when playing, but its hard not to think about it when its as prominent as it is BF3.
Is DICE going for something more with this? Are we supposed to be a seeing the game in more of a film context, that we are not creating the scene, we are watching it? Or does it just look awesome and therefore who gives a shit.