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 zolfe
Zolfe

262

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Zolfe

very nice by-line. Since I think highly of GB's intelligence,

let's imagine some non-GB raging kid seeing the 4 stars, pull out his flaming pitchfork, then sees the "best version of multiplayer Battlefield yet." and puts it back down.

Or, on the cynical side, the kid will ask "why so low?"

Avatar image for legalbagel
LegalBagel

1955

Forum Posts

1590

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 7

Edited By LegalBagel

I can see why they felt required to make a single player campaign, as it's hard to charge $60 for a multiplayer only game. But given that they're charging $60 and pushing the SP, and it turns out to be half-assed and basically a bad version of the Modern Warfare campaigns, then I can't see why everyone's giving it amazing scores. Great review Dave.

Avatar image for gunslingernz
gunslingerNZ

2010

Forum Posts

300

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By gunslingerNZ

@Slaker117 said:

I don't know Dave, those QTEs seemed pretty great to me.

Did he really just give that rat the finger, that's some Duke-esque silliness right there...

Avatar image for president_barackbar
President_Barackbar

3648

Forum Posts

853

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@Deathpooky said:

I can see why they felt required to make a single player campaign, as it's hard to charge $60 for a multiplayer only game. But given that they're charging $60 and pushing the SP, and it turns out to be half-assed and basically a bad version of the Modern Warfare campaigns, then I can't see why everyone's giving it amazing scores. Great review Dave.

I wonder though if its actually BAD or just the style of campaign in these kinds of games is so stale at this point. How people feel about the SP in MW3 will confirm or destroy my theory.

Avatar image for sooty
Sooty

8193

Forum Posts

306

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

Edited By Sooty

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?

Avatar image for prestonhedges
prestonhedges

1961

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By prestonhedges

@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.

Avatar image for chilibean_3
chilibean_3

2406

Forum Posts

324

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By chilibean_3

@President_Barackbar: No. It's bad. Tedious, boring, buggy and a poor and uninteresting story. It's just not fun at all. With the exception of the jet sequence. Jets are awesome!

The multiplayer is amazing though. It probably would have been best just to not do the single player or co-op. But I know they really couldn't.

Avatar image for legalbagel
LegalBagel

1955

Forum Posts

1590

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 7

Edited By LegalBagel

@President_Barackbar said:

@Deathpooky said:

I can see why they felt required to make a single player campaign, as it's hard to charge $60 for a multiplayer only game. But given that they're charging $60 and pushing the SP, and it turns out to be half-assed and basically a bad version of the Modern Warfare campaigns, then I can't see why everyone's giving it amazing scores. Great review Dave.

I wonder though if its actually BAD or just the style of campaign in these kinds of games is so stale at this point. How people feel about the SP in MW3 will confirm or destroy my theory.

Very true. I've been avoiding the BF3/MW3 modern shooter hype trains for that reason. Though sounds like a combination of lack of polish and lack of originality killed the BF3 campaign. I imagine MW3 will have more polish, but still be stale - we'll see if that's enough.

Avatar image for virtua_ben
virtua_ben

146

Forum Posts

1653

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 6

Edited By virtua_ben

BF3 is, as of right now, no fun for me on the PC. It was a nightmare trying to get the game to work with origin, and now, the game lags like hell. Ugh, so far I'm disappointed.

Avatar image for jazz_lafayette
Jazz_Lafayette

3897

Forum Posts

844

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 14

Edited By Jazz_Lafayette

Dave just reviewed one of the massive holiday releases BECAUSE FUCK YOU, SQUARES.

Avatar image for beforet
beforet

3534

Forum Posts

47

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 2

Edited By beforet

Huh, I hadn't realized Battlefield 3 was made by a small indie developer in the Ukraine.

Avatar image for napalm
napalm

9227

Forum Posts

162

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By napalm

@project343 said:

@Vorbis said:

It's a shame to see a bad campaign dragging it down, the need to have singleplayer content continues to confuse me.

Shadowrun released earlier this generation. It was multiplayer-only. With about the same number of multiplayer maps, and the same number of game modes. It snagged a wealth of negative reviews (a 66 on Metacritic) for this fact alone. I'd argue that the multiplayer is quite spectacular, but reviewers mostly only cited the lack of content as the game's weakest aspect.

It's essentially a catch-22. I'm over modern military shooters, so I don't really care either way when it comes to Battlefield 3.

Avatar image for bigsmoke77
bigsmoke77

853

Forum Posts

44

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By bigsmoke77

Thanks for taking the time and writing the review Dave. I was very disappointed in EA and how they treated Jeff but not giving him a chance to review the game.  They should have had some confidence in their game and let him play it before release.

Avatar image for ruthloose
RuthLoose

909

Forum Posts

5

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By RuthLoose

@MasturbatingestBear said:

@Chadster said:

Did Jeff have to hand the review off to Dave because he's gone this week? Sure would like to see just what the hell went wrong that made it one of Jeff's "bottom five review experiences".

What do you mean? He talked about all the crap. The fact that it was nigh impossible to get a review copy and such.

Also glad Dave reviewed this. Not because I care about the score because I don't play battlefield. But this should shut up the people that thought Jeff would review it low for some reason because people don't get how reviews work.

This.

Avatar image for blaineblaine
BlaineBlaine

607

Forum Posts

6766

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 2

Edited By BlaineBlaine

Snide tells you like it fucking is. I love the fact that a AAA game-o-the-year game isn't automatically assigned to one of the standard 4. I respect Dave's opinion and I'm glad this is how we're rollin'.

Avatar image for mrhammeh
MrHammeh

210

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By MrHammeh

A well written and fair review Dave, thanks.

Avatar image for weggles
WEGGLES

737

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

Edited By WEGGLES

@gladspooky: Times have changed. Multiplayer is a big deal... bigger deal than single player to many games (probably most FPS gamers too.) To say a game like Battlefield 3 deserves 2 stars because the singleplayer wasn't very good is absurd.

Avatar image for lemmycaution217
Lemmycaution217

1808

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By Lemmycaution217

Hardcore Dave knows what's up.

Avatar image for infinitegeass
InfiniteGeass

2150

Forum Posts

446

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

Edited By InfiniteGeass

Can love bloom on the battlefield?

Avatar image for wickedsc3
wickedsc3

1044

Forum Posts

51

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By wickedsc3

Good review Dave. Personally I think I'll just pop BFBC2 in when I need some BF. It don't sound like the "homerun" they needed for me to pick this up.

Avatar image for deactivated-5efa8ebc3319a
deactivated-5efa8ebc3319a

167

Forum Posts

4

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Good to see someone other than Jeff do a review for a shooter. Nothing against him but it's good to get different viewpoints on specific genres every once in a while.

Avatar image for ssully
SSully

5753

Forum Posts

315

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 3

Edited By SSully

Great review Dave. It is good to hear you played a console and PC version. I feel that is something that lacks in a lot of high profile reviews like this.

Avatar image for skytylz
Skytylz

4156

Forum Posts

9

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Edited By Skytylz

I went to metacritic hoping we'd be the low score, unfortunately Sterling already undercut us.

Avatar image for mormonwarrior
MormonWarrior

2945

Forum Posts

577

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 21

Edited By MormonWarrior

@gunslingerNZ said:

@Slaker117 said:

I don't know Dave, those QTEs seemed pretty great to me.

Did he really just give that rat the finger, that's some Duke-esque silliness right there...

That may be the single dumbest thing I've ever seen in a game ever. I mean, especially how it takes itself seriously.

This game is definitely not for me. I hardly ever play FPS games unless they have a campaign worth playing. Those Modern Warfare games were awesome, but I don't want another one since I straight-up never play the two I have. I'm totally indifferent to how good this or MW3 turn out.

Avatar image for shagge
ShaggE

9562

Forum Posts

15

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By ShaggE

4 out of 5? WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!! The collapse of the games industry! The end of the internet! New albums from Limp Bizkit! Anarchy as far as the eye can see!

Avatar image for lordofultima
lordofultima

6592

Forum Posts

25303

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 9

Edited By lordofultima

@ShaggE said:

4 out of 5? WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!! The collapse of the games industry! The end of the internet! New albums from Limp Bizkit! Anarchy as far as the eye can see!

There is a new album from Limp Bizkit, and it is probably their best album. Hate to break it to ya.

Avatar image for pr1mus
pr1mus

4158

Forum Posts

1018

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 4

Edited By pr1mus

@ShaggE said:

New albums from Limp Bizkit!

Now why did you have to say something that horrible? :(

Avatar image for n7
N7

4159

Forum Posts

23

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 2

Edited By N7
@InfiniteGeass: It rained the day I was born.
 
But really, great review by Dave! Exactly what a review should be!
Avatar image for thehumandove
TheHumanDove

2520

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By TheHumanDove

Snider swoops in for the kill. Awesome review

Avatar image for zippedbinders
Zippedbinders

1198

Forum Posts

258

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 14

Edited By Zippedbinders

I'm very happy to see Dave reviewing a game, let alone such a big release. Heck, I was expecting a non-review like Red Dead because Jeff wasn't able to get to this one on time. Instead we get a Dave review, so yay! The words back up the score, which feels really fair. As someone who never plays multiplayer shooters (outside of TF2), I hadn't given BF3 any consideration, but seeing how bananas the 64 player MP is on PC, I'm going to give this a shot after a few price drops.

Concerning the image placement, I prefer images to the right side, as alternating them on the left for "balance" usually makes the text do some weird things and just makes it harder to read. Which, you know, is the point of a review. Not to look pretty.

Avatar image for av_gamer
AV_Gamer

2896

Forum Posts

17819

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 15

User Lists: 13

Edited By AV_Gamer

Good review, even though I thought the solo campaign was pretty good.

Avatar image for grilledcheez
grilledcheez

4071

Forum Posts

906

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 8

User Lists: 9

Edited By grilledcheez

Nice review Dave

Avatar image for shadowconqueror
ShadowConqueror

3413

Forum Posts

1275

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

Edited By ShadowConqueror

A review by Snide? Neat!

Avatar image for deactivated-5c7ea8553cb72
deactivated-5c7ea8553cb72

4753

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 0

Nice to see a Dave review for such a grand release. I won't be picking this up anytime soon.

Avatar image for mordeaniischaos
MordeaniisChaos

5904

Forum Posts

-1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 5

User Lists: 5

Edited By MordeaniisChaos

"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"

Except my biggest issue with vehicles in BF is that it's WAY too fuckin easy to bail out at the last second to avoid destruction. In fact, as a blanket statement, it's too easy to avoid death or prolong life in really jacked up ways. Ditching your heli, spawning a squadmate IN THE MIDDLE OF A FIREFIGHT, stuff like that.

Still, what I played of the BETA seemed pretty fun, and despite these disagreements with some of the balance of the series I'm really looking forward to it. I just want confirmation of the whole "hooah" bullshit being in the game or not before I decide to pick it up full price.

Avatar image for w0lfbl1tzers
W0lfbl1tzers

1791

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 4

Edited By W0lfbl1tzers

@Video_Game_King: You're a massive cunt.

Avatar image for kamikazecaterpillar
KamikazeCaterpillar

1160

Forum Posts

1705

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 11

Hell yeah Dave Snider review!

Avatar image for wsowen02
wsowen02

353

Forum Posts

20

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Edited By wsowen02

Dave review!

I demand a Bombcast appearance.

Avatar image for shagge
ShaggE

9562

Forum Posts

15

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Edited By ShaggE

@lordofultima said:

@ShaggE said:

4 out of 5? WE'RE ALL GOING TO DIE!!! The collapse of the games industry! The end of the internet! New albums from Limp Bizkit! Anarchy as far as the eye can see!

There is a new album from Limp Bizkit, and it is probably their best album. Hate to break it to ya.

I know, I just needed a more or less universally reviled band for the joke. I actually liked Significant Other and Results May Vary, even if I did still sigh heavily at Fred's gallivanting.

Avatar image for rsistnce
RsistncE

4498

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By RsistncE

Good review Dave. You took the time to play the game and write a professional review, can't ask for any more than that.

Avatar image for fentonalpha
fentonalpha

932

Forum Posts

8

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By fentonalpha

As short, frustrating and underwhelming as the SP campaign was it did have at least 3 moments where i was very impressed with the atmosphere it had generated. If it had taken the BFBC2 comical approach it may have been easier to swallow.

Avatar image for vodun
Vodun

2403

Forum Posts

220

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Vodun

@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.

Avatar image for sameeeeam
sameeeeam

2469

Forum Posts

687

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By sameeeeam

Dave review? Nice.

Avatar image for korwin
korwin

3919

Forum Posts

25

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Edited By korwin

Expected score is expected. Still my multi-player game of the year :D

The very idea of there being a campaign in a Battlefield game is still downright strange to me, imagine if ID release Quake 3 Arena: 2 and promoted it's robust single player... yeah.

Avatar image for prestonhedges
prestonhedges

1961

Forum Posts

42

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By prestonhedges

@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.

Avatar image for phished0ne
Phished0ne

2969

Forum Posts

1841

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 7

Edited By Phished0ne

Call me crazy but i loved the Single Player, i found the story a lot more compelling and semi-more realistic than some other offerings. The Multiplayer, though? hate it. Its everything i hated about the Modern Warfare series times 1 million.

Avatar image for impossibilium
Impossibilium

680

Forum Posts

108

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Impossibilium

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.

Avatar image for youngbuck
YoungBuck

207

Forum Posts

13

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By YoungBuck

Great review. I'm still on the fence between BF3 and MW3.

Avatar image for th3_james
Th3_James

2616

Forum Posts

27

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Edited By Th3_James

@KamikazeCaterpillar said:

Hell yeah Dave Snider review!
Avatar image for joey_ravn
JoeyRavn

5290

Forum Posts

792

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 3

Edited By JoeyRavn

@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.

That's not what he said. At all. He said that single player used to be waaaay more important some years ago. A bad SP campaign would bring down the score a lot more than nowadays, despite the multiplayer being top notch.