Something went wrong. Try again later

Giant Bomb Review

196 Comments

Battlefield 3 Review

4
  • PC
  • PS3

A short, derivative campaign does little to get in the way of the best version of multiplayer Battlefield yet.

It took more than five years for the Battlefield franchise to move from 2 to 3, but that's not to say there haven't been plenty of other battlefields to visit in that time. Giant mechs, cartoonish heroes, and comedic misfits have all gotten their chance to duke it out in traditional, download-only, and free-to-play versions of the series. For good or bad, almost all of them operated on the belief that the Battlefield you knew needed to be changed in some fundamental way. Battlefield 3 instead feels like a return to the series' roots, with most of the effort put on the large-scale multiplayer action and impressive visuals that made the series popular in the first place. And that's totally OK, because Battlefield done this well is still a total blast to play.

You'll spend a decent portion of the campaign in bad QTEs.
You'll spend a decent portion of the campaign in bad QTEs.

That's not saying Battlefield 3 doesn't make any mis-steps of its own. A mediocre, me-too single-player mode feels overly serious and almost feels bolted onto the side of another, better multiplayer game. It doesn't help that the six-hour campaign plays like a direct reaction to the popularity of the Modern Warfare series, emulating that game's tone and pacing. Heavily scripted sequences are the focus here, and you'll spend a good bit of your time unable to do much but watch the game play itself. This happens in both a number of on-rails levels and a disturbing number of Quick Time Events that often begin and end with the press of a single button. The QTEs happen so often that when even a rat in a sewer pipe triggers the mechanic, you'll begin to wonder if the developers at DICE were purposefully making fun of themselves.

The actual plot involves a small group of American and Russian soldiers trying to prevent nuclear attacks by a group of terrorists called the People's Liberation Resistance and a man named Solomon. The events unfold through a series of globe-trotting flashbacks as the main character, Staff Sergeant Henry Blackburn, is interrogated by a good-cop-bad-cop intelligence duo after the fact somewhere in New York. The writing is easy to follow, but the high drama and always-on-the-go pacing feels a little tired when compared to its modern military peers. It doesn't help that Battlefield 3's campaign very much wants you to go where it wants you to go, providing warnings anytime you stray too far off course. This can be annoying when you think a side street might offer a better flanking position or when you try to get the jump on enemies before the scripted sequences begin. Still, the action flows fast throughout and introduces you to the weapons and vehicles you'll encounter in the hectic multiplayer modes.

Taking off from a carrier is one of the campaign's biggest thrills.
Taking off from a carrier is one of the campaign's biggest thrills.

What Battlefield 3's main campaign does well is show off the game's beautiful, varied level design and set pieces. You'll fight through city streets, jungles, corridors, deserts, open skies, and office buildings with very little motive other than for DICE to show off how impressive its Frostbite 2.0 engine is. Early in the game you'll walk out onto the deck of an aircraft carrier in choppy seas and seconds later move seamlessly into a cloud-filled sky as a jet pilot. It's gorgeous stuff and feels like a noticeable step forward in terms of graphical realism on both the console and the PC. Of particular note are the lighting, rain, and fog effects, which give these environments a real sense of depth. Your surroundings are lit up with the addition of realistic flashlights that not only pick up the dense air around you, but can be used quite effectively to blind your assailants. You'll also find streetlights and lamps that, depending upon the angle, can either hurt or help you. Combined with the engine's destructible environments, this provides an ever-changing landscape that play a little differently depending on how the battles continue.

This sense of realism transfers over to the multiplayer maps, which are inspired by the campaign but seem grander because of their immense scale and the removal of invisible walls. Previous Battlefield level design always felt a little sparse to me, letting fast vehicles do much of the work to hide the often empty areas between contested zones. By contrast, Battlefield 3 feels saturated with minute detail. You'll find giant radio antennas that peak out of hilly outcroppings and crowded Parisian streets that run parallel to rushing waterways, to mention just two examples. One map called Damavand Peak even features a thrilling base-jumping portion where the attacking team skydives off a cliff into the opposing team's stronghold. You'll find yourself waiting until the last possible moment in a 10-second freefall to deploy your parachute before enemy players shoot you down. That feeling of naked vulnerability is a constant throughout the multiplayer, and the brief relief of cover and shade becomes your chief strategy as you try to outposition your opponents. You'll also lose visibility if the sun is low and in front of you. At night, the opposing team's flashlights are either a dead giveaway from afar, or a deadly strategy up close.

The multiplayer modes themselves are nothing terribly new, and are instead refinements and tweaks of the previous games in the series. While most players will jump straight into Conquest mode with its 64-player (or 24-player for consoles) point-to-point action, the attack-and-defend Rush mode from Bad Company returns and feels the most improved. Teams can no longer destroy stations with brute force and must now physically place charges when outside vehicles. That gives the mode the tension it previously lacked, and provides for longer firefights where the defenders have just a bit of an advantage. Small changes like this abound and are mostly for the better. Battlefield commanders are gone, making the game more squad-oriented and easier to grasp. That's good, because most players will only bring one or two buddies into their matches and just want to be able spawn and support each other without having to worry about completing objectives.

The four-class system has also received a bit of a makeover in a few key ways. The medic has merged with the assault class and can now deploy health packs. Sniper-based scouts have to deal with scope sway, and will give of glint from their scope if they sit in a position for too long. While that glint does help identify campers, the large areas of engagement still tend to reward patient players who attack from cover. The addition of secondary scoring and bonuses for spotting enemies helps with obscure enemies, and gives players a real incentive to keep their teammates aware of incoming or obscured attackers. With these tools, a group of even two voice-chatting opponents can really dominate the battle if they work together and provide spotting for each other.

The smoke effects really stand out in the desert maps.
The smoke effects really stand out in the desert maps.

Vehicles are still a big part of the large battles, and you'll normally spend about half your time cruising in a tank, boat, plane, helicopter, or whatever else spawns near your base. Tanks can now be disabled, which gives you a few quick moments to exit before certain doom. That doesn't always do you much good, since you're most certainly in bigger trouble by the time your tank explodes, but it beats the instant deaths that were so common in the previous games. I won't lie, I still find the helicopter and jet mechanics a tad tricky, especially when using a mouse, but this seems more a fault of my own as my teammates were more than willing to take the driver's seat as I took over the guns. You can also unlock abilities for your vehicles similar to the way you unlock accessories and weapons for your base soldier class.

Outside the team-based multiplayer, two-player co-op provides a third mode of play for those willing to take on missions with a friend, and I'd highly recommend you communicate with mics if you want to get through these quickly. The co-op missions are substantially harder than the campaign mode and usually require some level of teamwork to get things done. There are six scripted missions that unlock in order and usually require multiple playthroughs to learn the scripted events. The "Drop Um Like Liquid" level seems to suffer from this the most, where you have to snipe several targets with a buddy extremely quickly before hostages are killed. Since the spotting mechanic will often target two enemies when grouped together instead of one, you and your teammate might get confused on who's attacking who. With no checkpoints, that means patient gamers will need to replay the 15-or-so-minute levels a few times to learn exactly when certain scripting triggers are going to happen. Other than the repetition, the co-op levels are pretty exciting and provide a much better experience than the campaign missions they support.

In addition to the PC, I played through the campaign on the PS3 version, and it seemed to be a smooth experience that mostly mirrored the high quality and visuals of my beefier home PC. The console version does come with a slight bit of pop-in for the larger levels, but is certainly still a looker. The difference between the versions then mostly lies in the online and social networking Battlelog service that the PC version requires to play. Although your console and PC soldiers will both display stats and info on Battlelog similar to something like Bungie.net, the PC version actually does its matchmaking, party management and voice control through the browser itself. I went into Battlelog worried and a little confused at this different approach, but after a half dozen hours of online play I'm now convinced it's an altogether better way to manage your game sessions. Although I did have some problems importing my friends list from other services, once I got Battlelog running it was pretty seamless to start up games with friends and chat with buddies. The best advantage to the system is that you spend less time looking at connection screens and can instead peruse your own stats and snoop on other platoon members between games.

Battlefield 3 is exactly what Battlefield fans most likely wanted: a chaotic, gorgeous multiplayer game with small, but important tweaks to what already worked in past games. That it includes a short, somewhat mediocre solo campaign and some hit-or-miss co-op action does not detract from the fact that, online, this is the best Battlefield game yet. The PC version's online matchmaking tools are way ahead of the curve and a good example of how to do social networking in video games the right way. For those who didn't enjoy Battlefield before, the extra features likely won't be enough to bring you over, but those who just want to play a much-improved Battlefield--mixed-up, crazy, "I can't believe that just happened" Battlefield -- should feel right at home.

Dave Snider on Google+

196 Comments

Avatar image for selbie
selbie

2602

Forum Posts

6468

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By selbie

As good as Trackmania!?!?! WTF is this world coming to!!! This is a targedy!

....awesome review Dave.

Avatar image for krakn3dfx
Krakn3Dfx

2746

Forum Posts

101

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 3

Edited By Krakn3Dfx

To anyone who bought this game for the single player campaign: LOL

Good review, 4/5 is a good score, I would go 4.5/5, but I know that's not possible for the site. I haven't really played a Battlefield game since BF2, and BF3 just reminded me of how awesome that game was.

Although I think BF2 might still be the better game of the two.

Avatar image for chris_ihao
Chris_Ihao

103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Chris_Ihao

Strange how user reviews almost always end up at the same grade as a reviewer at a given site. Just an observation.

Nah, out with the 4 of 5 and in with maximum score of 5. I have barely touched the sp part yet, but even so I have to say that I'm extremely impressed with the final version of BF3 and its mp. Its extremely pretty with ALL settings on (yes, even HBAO), but even more interesting the game has so much good gameplay in it that its going to burst. Just unlocking misc stuff will give me fun for months to come, and most games only skim the surface in terms of delivering content compared to this one.

Its a five, yes it is!

Avatar image for vodun
Vodun

2403

Forum Posts

220

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Vodun

@gladspooky said:

@Vodun said:

@gladspooky said:

@Sooty said:

Good review, I dunno if the campaign should necessarily knock off a star if the multiplayer is this good but each to their own right?

In the old days it would have knocked off three stars.

So the multiplayer would've been worse "in the old days"? You're talking out your ass.

The fuck are you even talking about? Single player was more important in the old days. How do you even get to "the multiplayer would have been worse"? Christ. People can't read anymore.

If you were actually around back then, you would know how much talk there was about 1942 not having any SP at all. But the multiplayer was so good it was still considered an awesome game.

You want to go further back? Quake? Yeah, awesome single player...Unreal Tournament? Unless you go far enough back that multiplayer wasn't even a thing it's always been important to the reception of a game.

In other words, your ass: you're talking out of it.

Avatar image for deactivated-5eca34e37141a
deactivated-5eca34e37141a

218

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Great review. I'm glad that Dave did this review (and not Jeff).

Avatar image for csl316
csl316

17004

Forum Posts

765

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 10

Edited By csl316
@Moonshadow101 said:

FOUR STARS? That's exactly equivalent to an 8, which (as we've established) is a objectively wrong score to give. I haven't played the game yet, but you should probably be fired.

Yeah, dude.  I don't know who this "Dave" person is.  I'm guessing an intern, based on his icon.  Where the hell's Ben, he could teach this guy a thing or two.
 
 
(good review, Snide)
Avatar image for lacke
lacke

384

Forum Posts

56

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By lacke

I'm not saying that BF3 should have gotten 5/5 because I don't think it does but reading some of the comments here and Jeff made a comment about BF3 getting high scores despite it having a shitty singleplayer campaign.. Being a huge multiplayer fan, that kind of comment always agitate me.

Why can a great singleplayer get away with a shitty multiplayer or even no multiplayer modes?

Why can't a great multiplayer game get away with a shitty singleplayer or even no singleplayer modes?

Avatar image for alexrudz
alexrudz

68

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By alexrudz

Great Review!

Avatar image for nissanskyline
NissanSkyline

130

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By NissanSkyline

Thx for review! Cant agree more, the singleplayer was part of the game and pretty big.

Avatar image for ikwal
ikwal

245

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By ikwal

Somehow I feel like this game would have been better off being multiplayer only. The campaign isn't bad but compared to the multiplayer, which in my opinion is the best multiplayer experience on any platform I've played, it feels kind of flat. This is the first game in a while that I think you really have to play on PC to get the full experience.

Avatar image for cirdain
Cirdain

3796

Forum Posts

1645

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: -1

User Lists: 6

Edited By Cirdain

@Krakn3Dfx said:

To anyone who bought this game for the single player campaign: LOL

Good review, 4/5 is a good score, I would go 4.5/5, but I know that's not possible for the site. I haven't really played a Battlefield game since BF2, and BF3 just reminded me of how awesome that game was.

Although I think BF2 might still be the better game of the two.

I would have gone for 3.9716514625748954621357465168777878546563213151151565454522424654426742154987987889132136922315474659852312836....../5

Avatar image for outerabiz
outerabiz

717

Forum Posts

16

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By outerabiz

@Impossibilium said:

As a PC dude I was expecting Dave to pick up on the things that are wrong with the PC version. Especially the completely broken key bindings which can render the game unplayable if you change specific ones and everything that's wrong with Battlelog.

You can't change kits, keys or audio and video settings without being logged into a live game because of the deficient browser which means you either die while trying to change settings or sit there wasting a player spot while a game is in progress. Not only that but if you change servers or the server disconnects you (especially with the Punkbuster bug) then the game quits back to your browser and the next server you play means you have to load up the entire game again. Every single time.

There is absolutely no reason that an HTML-based server and stat browser could not have been built into the game so you could access it after BF3 is running. Battlelog has EA marketing all over it. So instead you have a browser you can do nothing with except look at stats and servers and a game that will only launch you directly into a battle. Even if you just wanted to change your screen resolution or AA settings.

that.

That the game has no real client, is in no way a good thing

and is probably the most annoying part of this game other than origin.

Avatar image for nekroskop
Nekroskop

2830

Forum Posts

47

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Nekroskop

This is why I come to this site.

Avatar image for kasswara
Kasswara

180

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Kasswara

The reviewer is entitled to his opinion, however I don't think a whole star should be taken away from the game because of the single player mode, as the game's focal point is the multiplayer.

Avatar image for christoffer
Christoffer

2409

Forum Posts

58

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By Christoffer

@lacke said:

I'm not saying that BF3 should have gotten 5/5 because I don't think it does but reading some of the comments here and Jeff made a comment about BF3 getting high scores despite it having a shitty singleplayer campaign.. Being a huge multiplayer fan, that kind of comment always agitate me.

Why can a great singleplayer get away with a shitty multiplayer or even no multiplayer modes?

Why can't a great multiplayer game get away with a shitty singleplayer or even no singleplayer modes?

Great point. I asked myself this yesterday. For example, Brad's review of Dead Space 2 basically describes the multiplayer as mediocre. Yet, the game got the highest score.

I'm not saying Dave's review is incorrect. I haven't played BF3 so I don't have a clue. I just find this to be inconsistent and strange (Well, they are two different people. So maybe it's that).

Avatar image for rmanthorp
rmanthorp

4654

Forum Posts

3603

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 14

Edited By rmanthorp  Moderator

AS GOOD AS X

Fuck that noise man, great write up Dave I almost wish you didn't have to attach a score...

Avatar image for enigma777
Enigma777

6285

Forum Posts

696

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 8

Edited By Enigma777

With every passing review, I become more and more happy that I did not preorder this game. Maybe when it's $20...

Avatar image for cook66
Cook66

281

Forum Posts

1058

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Cook66

Excellent review, Dave. I would have liked to see a little more on the various PC problems though.

Oh and you're missing a space after a punctuation on paragraph 7: "class.Outside" Not that I'm nitpicking or anything. :P

Avatar image for bawlzinmotion
BawlZINmotion

704

Forum Posts

2025

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 1

Edited By BawlZINmotion

I'm glad someone else thinks Battlelog is rad. It needs a couple features, and changes to a couple others, but for a first attempt it's been pretty smooth and on the money. I think the campaign is a lot better than many give it credit for, it's just nothing new... at all. And I'm sure the quicktimes events pissed quite a few off, they seem to in most games. Co-op could have been so much more, maybe they'll add to it. I wish there was a training section so people could practice vehicle operation. Multiplayer is pretty much exactly what I wanted.

It's obvious from the single player campaign that Frostbite 2 can power some nice weather and light effects. Something I think is an asset under utilized in the multiplayer experience. Especially weather. I'm sure we'll see some of that down the line in DLC.

Avatar image for twolines
TwoLines

3406

Forum Posts

319

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By TwoLines

It's Battlefield, I don't care about SP. What Dave tolerated and I did not, is the whole web site integration. It's really annoying. Why would anyone do that? I can't set my visuals if I'm not in the game? What? So I agree that it is by no means perfect.

But knocking a BF game just because the campaign is shitty is kind of silly. There are games that are amazing SP that have tacked on multiplayer modes that no one plays, and nobody cares. There are games without MP modes and that's okay, and suddenly the opposite is a problem. Even stranger, older Battlefield games had no campaign, and that was fine. If the game had no campaign, would it be better? Jeff's sudden confusion on the bombcast about why this game gets near perfect scores all around the internet was crazy. This is just plain weird, since the rest of the review is great, it's well written and well thought out.

Avatar image for twillfast
twillfast

597

Forum Posts

20

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

Edited By twillfast

I think rather than clocking a half dozen MP hours, I'll clock 10 or so.. I would write this exact review and give it 5/5, but I'm a multiplayer guy. Just proves scores don't really matter, the text does.

Avatar image for cincaid
Cincaid

3053

Forum Posts

23409

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 5

Edited By Cincaid

If it was Jeff who gave BF3 4 stars, people here would just brush it off as him being "jaded" and can't enjoy video games anymore. Go figure.

Avatar image for wuddel
Wuddel

2436

Forum Posts

1448

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Wuddel

@RockinKemosabe said:

Hardcore Dave speaks the truth.

QF even more T

Avatar image for deactivated-5eca34e37141a
deactivated-5eca34e37141a

218

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@rmanthorp said:

I almost wish you didn't have to attach a score...

I agree.

Avatar image for deactivated-5eca34e37141a
deactivated-5eca34e37141a

218

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@Chainblast said:

It's obvious from the single player campaign that Frostbite 2 can power some nice weather and light effects. Something I think is an asset under utilized in the multiplayer experience. Especially weather. I'm sure we'll see some of that down the line in DLC.

I've never really thought about that, weather effects in multiplayer would be awesome!

Avatar image for bollard
Bollard

8298

Forum Posts

118

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 12

Edited By Bollard

Great review Dave!

Also, calling it: MW3 - 4/5. I don't see any more FPS's getting 5 stars unless there's a really dramatic change in the genre.

Avatar image for deactivated-6050ef4074a17
deactivated-6050ef4074a17

3686

Forum Posts

15

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

A bit disappointed Jeff didn't review this. I realize it would've taken more time, but I was very eager to see Jeff's more in depth thoughts on the game as opposed to throwing it off to Dave for the sake of getting a review done quick for site traffic reasons.

Avatar image for fishmicmuffin
fishmicmuffin

1071

Forum Posts

702

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By fishmicmuffin
@Moonshadow101 said:

FOUR STARS? That's exactly equivalent to an 8, which (as we've established) is a objectively wrong score to give. I haven't played the game yet, but you should probably be fired.

SOMEONE GIVE THIS MAN A JOB! HE'S DROPPING KNOWLEDGE ON THE REST OF US
Avatar image for winternet
Winternet

8454

Forum Posts

2255

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By Winternet

@TwoLinessaid:

It's Battlefield, I don't care about SP. What Dave tolerated and I did not, is the whole web site integration. It's really annoying. Why would anyone do that? I can't set my visuals if I'm not in the game? What? So I agree that it is by no means perfect.

But knocking a BF game just because the campaign is shitty is kind of silly. There are games that are amazing SP that have tacked on multiplayer modes that no one plays, and nobody cares. There are games without MP modes and that's okay, and suddenly the opposite is a problem. Even stranger, older Battlefield games had no campaign, and that was fine. If the game had no campaign, would it be better? Jeff's sudden confusion on the bombcast about why this game gets near perfect scores all around the internet was crazy. This is just plain weird, since the rest of the review is great, it's well written and well thought out.

You do know that a 4-star means that BF3 is a good/great game, right?

Avatar image for will_m
will_m

385

Forum Posts

120

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By will_m

The whole flashback to random events in SP is a little overdone. I was really hoping for some regular ass conflicts as a soldier with no espionage or interrogation sequences.

Avatar image for neoultima
NeoUltima

233

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By NeoUltima

If this game had no single player at all it would have a higher metacritic score. Lulz

Avatar image for jayforone
jayforone

165

Forum Posts

15

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By jayforone

Love the Dave reviews with him stepping out of his comfort zone.

Avatar image for matoya
matoya

775

Forum Posts

1028

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By matoya

Its typical of this site to care more about the reviewer than the product

Avatar image for aonarach
Aonarach

18

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Aonarach

Fail the QTE with the rat. It's actually pretty funny and I'm sure it's why the stupid ass QTE for a rat was even in there.

Avatar image for bones360uk
bones360uk

40

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By bones360uk

best honest review i have read yet. good job

Avatar image for cptbedlam
CptBedlam

4612

Forum Posts

7

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By CptBedlam

There goes your early review copy for BF4, GB. EA is not amused. ;)

Great review, Dave!

Avatar image for emem
emem

2063

Forum Posts

13

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By emem

Didn't expect Dave to review it, but the score is as expected. Good review.

Avatar image for gs_dan
GS_Dan

1438

Forum Posts

68

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 1

Edited By GS_Dan

@Dany: Well to be fair, more people than ever have a decent internet connection. It seems like it would be a more suitable time to do that, if anything.

Avatar image for solidlife
solidlife

910

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By solidlife

To the people who keep saying why dock it for the single player are idiots. The reviewers job is to review the whole package, Not to be "oh its BF let me just not check out half of this game and only review the good part"

Avatar image for nudimon
NuDimon

184

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 7

Edited By NuDimon

It's sooooo gooooood!

Avatar image for thiemen
Thiemen

61

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Thiemen

fuck I wanted 5

Avatar image for nudimon
NuDimon

184

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 7

Edited By NuDimon
@Thiemen said:

fuck I wanted 5

Just pretend it's -1 for the co-op and singleplayer? :D
Avatar image for deactivated-5eca34e37141a
deactivated-5eca34e37141a

218

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

@solidlife said:

To the people who keep saying why dock it for the single player are idiots. The reviewers job is to review the whole package, Not to be "oh its BF let me just not check out half of this game and only review the good part"

What gives you the idea that the single player is half the game? Most people will play the single player once (5-6 hours) people spend hundreds of hours in the multiplayer.

Avatar image for twolines
TwoLines

3406

Forum Posts

319

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By TwoLines

@Winternet: I didn't even mention stars. I don't care about the score. I care about the critique, and the points that were made in the review. I don't agree with them, and I wanted to share my point of view.

Avatar image for swoxx
swoxx

3050

Forum Posts

468

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By swoxx

Good review.

I didn't mind the QTE's that much. And while the story is derivative, I still think the campaign was an awesome ride. With effects an graphics like that, whatever mediocre story is fine for me, cause god damn that's one of the most gorgeous adrenaline pumping rides in a FPS shooter I've ever had, if not the most.

Co-op does seem kind of boring though I haven't tried it out so.

Multiplayer, All I have to say there is....crap, must...play...now!!!

Avatar image for kalmis
kalmis

1745

Forum Posts

6127

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 115

User Lists: 6

Edited By kalmis

4 stars is good enough for me

Avatar image for winternet
Winternet

8454

Forum Posts

2255

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By Winternet

@TwoLines: You made it look like they were shitting on the game. BF3 is still great, but the SP is not. Do you think the shitty SP should have no bearing in the game review? It's a big part of the game.

Avatar image for assinass
AssInAss

3306

Forum Posts

2420

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

Edited By AssInAss

After the campaign left a sour taste in my mouth, I went to multiplayer. Then I completely forgot about it after base jumping in Damavand Peak:

Avatar image for deactivated-590b7522e5236
deactivated-590b7522e5236

1918

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Not surprising in the least. I find it funny that "hardcore" players of multi-player games look to these reviewers for final judgment on how good the game is, when they more likely than not have better insight (admittedly clouded by bias). I feel like most (not all) reviewers are dabblers and so their review is only accurate for a dabbler, this makes it hard for me to trust any review of a game i play ALOT because i don't know if they are coming from anywhere near the same direction as me. I'm not worried that this game deserved more than what it got, im worried that this game is worse than BFBC 2 and is only impressive because nobody played more than 5 hours of BC2's multiplayer.


anyway good review

Avatar image for bouke
Bouke

1400

Forum Posts

11

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 15

Edited By Bouke

Great review Dave! Was expecting this to get 4 stars since the quicklook. Anyway i bought the game for the multiplayer and that has been pretty awesome so far! The singleplayer in Bad Company 2 wasn´t that great either, but if you buy a Battlefield game for the singleplayer you are doing it wrong!