Battlefield 3 Review
- Thread starter Slycne
- Start date
Cue the PC Master Race calling the review "flawed", the article "pointless" and the reviewer "soulless" (seriously, every time someone mentions BF on consoles, the word "soulless" is guaranteed to show up, without fail.), with at least 2 more insults about anything else in 3...2...1...
Also: Actually having the audacity to mention the single player and using it as a criticism while the game doesn't have a perfect score.
Cue the comments of "Nobody plays this game for the single player, you're just nitpicking!" but put in a far less pleasant way in 5...4...3...2...
But in all seriousness, this was a good review.
Heh, that's tune brings back a lot of memories. Pretty awesome.
So basically, good multiplayer, bad singleplayer? Well, you can't get everything right.
Maybe if the game will go on sale someday, I'll get it. Not in a very good financial situation right now, so I'll have to stick with Team Fortress 2. Tho I'd love to fly around in choppers and jets.
So... yeah, that was a pretty good review.
So basically, good multiplayer, bad singleplayer? Well, you can't get everything right.
Maybe if the game will go on sale someday, I'll get it. Not in a very good financial situation right now, so I'll have to stick with Team Fortress 2. Tho I'd love to fly around in choppers and jets.
So... yeah, that was a pretty good review.
I don't see what people see in this game and really modern FPS's either. I'm terrible at them and nothing makes me want to get better which is what separates them from other multiplayer games, at Brotherhood I started out terrible but it never made me want to stop playing, sure the tutorial was terrible since so many gameplay aspects were not mentioned in it, but the gameplay was so great I learned them as I went along. When I played the BF3 Beta I didn't feel this, getting good at the game felt like all you had to do was practice constantly on the maps, find good hiding places, find ways to sneak around people etc. while it was only Operation Metro the vehicle section in the final game did not make me want it at all if the normal gameplay was as terrible as it is.
The other reason I dislike modern war shooters is that they're so bland, there's nothing they can bring new to the table other than features in previous games (BF3 suffers this especially), the stories have little possibility to be interesting as well and they tend to be overly-patriotic. The only way they are revered as "Good" is in the multiplayer, which again favors those who are good at FPS's and laughs at those who aren't.
The other reason I dislike modern war shooters is that they're so bland, there's nothing they can bring new to the table other than features in previous games (BF3 suffers this especially), the stories have little possibility to be interesting as well and they tend to be overly-patriotic. The only way they are revered as "Good" is in the multiplayer, which again favors those who are good at FPS's and laughs at those who aren't.
All I needed to hear was the "Skip it if you're looking for Single Player".
That, and the fact that a buddy of mine couldn't get it running for a day because of Origin... Very glad I avoided this one.
That, and the fact that a buddy of mine couldn't get it running for a day because of Origin... Very glad I avoided this one.
How cute you tried to claim that people should use that T word to play online....I dont need anyone else except me and my KD RATIO!
/sarcasm/
/sarcasm/
No, I thought the review was fair. I got enjoyment out of the SP, but it pales in comparison to the fun that can be had on the MP side of things. I think you're being needlessly preemptive.Mr. Omega said:
I played a lot of BF:BC2 and BF2 and I think that BF3 is a successful marriage of the two. I think there are design issues here and there with balance (IR scopes); the in-game menu interface quite frankly sucks ass and is inferior to previous iterations of the series -- at least on PC. Battlelog is functional, but needs some tweaking and there's some issues for PC gamers using Nvidia 500 series cards which are causing online disconnects at random intervals.
Visually, BF3 is stunning on the PC and performs very well on a range of systems. I feel that the visuals translate well for the consoles, all things considered. I still feel that Rage is the best looking FPS release this year because of the unique detailing and exceptional art directing, but BF3 certainly 'wows' visually.
He he same as more or less every other site "great, but skip SP"...
If it weren't for the QTE all the time in the SP it would been of A LOT better, not great but better...
This review is based on the 360 version of the game... Really o well.. I never play fps on consoles have trouble using the controls... or rather I suck a bit less with a keyboard and mouse...
(Is it only me that find it rather amusing that the "support class" mostly gets an MG and extra ammo for everyone else?... A MG is mostly a lot heavier than the standard assault rifle and you need (a lot) more bullets to it, but you carry around extra rounds for your buddies?...=D)
If it weren't for the QTE all the time in the SP it would been of A LOT better, not great but better...
This review is based on the 360 version of the game... Really o well.. I never play fps on consoles have trouble using the controls... or rather I suck a bit less with a keyboard and mouse...
(Is it only me that find it rather amusing that the "support class" mostly gets an MG and extra ammo for everyone else?... A MG is mostly a lot heavier than the standard assault rifle and you need (a lot) more bullets to it, but you carry around extra rounds for your buddies?...=D)
Maybe I'm missing something, but, the major character deaths I was really more pissed off, so when I had to do what your in trouble for, I got a sense of satisfaction.
I do really miss the humor of BF:BC1 though, it had by far the best story, Truckasaurus-rex made me so happy inside.
I'm posting this only out of the sheer amusement of finding it on youtube.
While I myself don't plan on getting BF3 - nor MW3, just throwing that out there to forestall the fanboys - I will say one somewhat unrelated thing about the review. I highly approve of the use of the original Battlefield 1942 theme, especially since BF3's theme music (thanks, YouTube!) is more like a remix taken too far. The bursts of static and other white noise ruin the entire thing for me, even if they're kind of in tune with the (very faint) melody that is prominent in BF1942.
Even if BF3's music is supposed to reflect the more modern war we see these days, just as the game should, 1942's theme always has a place in my heart.
[sub]I am the 1%.[/sub]
Even if BF3's music is supposed to reflect the more modern war we see these days, just as the game should, 1942's theme always has a place in my heart.
Even though I'm a PC gamer - I don't own a 360 or PS3 due to financial reasons - I treat console gamers with just as much respect as PC gamers. I don't believe in a master race: everyone is entitled to their own preferences and I respect that. More people should do the same, in my opinion: people have the right to make up their own minds and people with contradicting opinions shouldn't go and start shunning them because they play differently.Mr. Omega said:
[sub]I am the 1%.[/sub]
Well, anything you have on the consoles, you've got on the PC - which doesn't work the other way around. So yeah, using a console to review this game is not the best option.Mr. Omega said:
And I'm not just saying that as a Battlefield fanboi, there's a couple of BAD thing to say about the PC version. Like how for example, despite DICE marketing every map being playable in any mode and with any amount of players, trying to play a 64 player Conquest match of a map made for Rush - for example Operation Metro - is nothing short of a disaster as it ends up with 32 players on both sides being bunched up. Why? Simple math, Metro is designed to have about 3 approaches, which places about 10 people on each approach on both sides. Putting 10 people in one tiny space with flags close to each other, a relatively quick respawn timer and the ability to revive squad mates rather easily means they're gonna be there and not move for the whole match, every match.
On your second point, while I don't care about Escapist reviews and didn't even notice they had a score, the singleplayer is a problem in this review. Know why? Cause it took over the review. The reviewer spent most of the time talking about the singleplayer and only said "yeah, it's good and unstructured" about the multiplayer. There is so much more to be said about the multiplayer, which makes you wonder, why doesn't this have a 2 part review like most other shooters in the past?
As someone who has played and is still playing BF3, I can tell you that this review barely even touches on what the game is and doesn't provide nearly as much information as it should to anyone watching it to get a clearer picture of what they're getting - this review doesn't provide you with any more information about BF3's multiplayer (which I think we can agree is the main part of the game) than any retailer would with the description that's straight from DICE. But then again, I can't say that's too uncharacteristic for Escapist reviews.
edit: Oh and it doesn't say a word about the co-op, interestingly enough.
Very well said. Honestly, I just wish they wouldn't even bother with the campaign, would've preferred they either spent the extra resources on the multiplayer or just got it out a few months early.
But yea, the multiplayer really is excellent, though I do keep having some weird rubber-banding issues online. Dunno what that's about.
By word count, I actually spent more time talking about multiplayer than I did single player. Perhaps it merely feels like I focus on the singleplayer because I left it for last.Vrach said:
Certainly I could write another 1,000 words on BF3, like how there is no easy way to practice flying helicopters and jets (the older titles at least had bot matches) and that some upgrades really should have been unlocked at the start, but ultimately that doesn't encapsulate much of my thoughts on Battlefield 3. I don't necessarily think it's a great experience because of x, y, and z. It's the unique opportunities to play the game beyond just K
that makes it good, like stealing that tank as I mentioned. That simple theme drums up so many memories across this series, so I had to get it in there somewhere.CounterAttack said:
I enjoyed the single player. Not for the story, but for the killing and the odd frustrations(in my ability, it wasn't too easy) the only thing that really got me was the similarities in storytelling that I got last year from Black ops. it was way too similar for my liking. there was the odd frame rate drops at rather inopportune times but I survived. lets face it though, I don't play battlefield for the story though. the multiplayer is fantastic and has kept me engaged since I started playing. I had reservations after the beta, but I'm glad I bought the game. the multiplayer gameplay is virtually flawless. I have no complaints other than the odd "man I totally shot that dude in the face and he didn't die!!" which I would say is more my fault than the game. that being said, the game invites could use some work. stop pitting me and my squad against each other you bastards, we want to play together. we want to play in the same squad as well. all in all a solid game that fills my need to drive around in a tank and blow stuff up, running around shooting people in the face and knifing smarmy snipers. I just really enjoy the team aspect of the game, if I was all about being me first and killing is the only thing, I'd play COD. I'll always prefer a game where K/d ratios aren't as important as supporting your teammates. having a great team makes all the difference in the world in this game, and what makes it stand out. Another thing, don't ever let me get in a jet, I will only disappoint you.