Battlefield 3 Premium Edition Launched
Now available for $59.99.
Battlefield 3
Players: 1 Offline player, 32(64-PC) Players Online
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Genres: First-person Shooter
Publisher: Electronic Arts
Genres: First-person Shooter
Release Date: October 25, 2011
Developer: EA Digital Illusions CE
MSRP: $59.99
Developer: EA Digital Illusions CE
MSRP: $59.99
Battlefield 3 leaps ahead of its time with the power of Frostbite™ 2, the next instalment of DICE's cutting-edge game engine. This state-of-the-art technology is the foundation on which Battlefield 3 is built, delivering enhanced visual quality, a grand sense of scale, massive destruction, dynamic audio and incredibly lifelike character animations. As bullets whiz by, walls crumble, and explosions throw you to the ground, the battlefield feels more alive and interactive than ever before. In Battlefield 3, players step into the role of the elite U.S. Marines where they will experience heart-pounding missions across diverse locations including Paris, Tehran and New York.
Battlefield 3 First Impressions
Posted By Hopewithinchaos about 1 year, 7 months ago
Modern warfare on an open battlefield. Count me in.
Battlefield 3 Video Review - ZGR
Is Battlefield 3 the next best shooter? Daniel from ZGR gives you his thoughts!
Battlefield 3 Review (PC)
In one of the only examples ever where Frostbite sends Johnny somewhere he'd wind up getting sand in his crotch, his charged task of reviewing Battlefield 3 is now complete. By reading it, you'll be taking part in the initial stages of "Operation Sugar Pants!"
Sage Reviews: Battlefield 3
Battlefield may have beaten Call of Duty to the punch, but does that mean it's any good?
EA Confirms Fixes to Battlefield 3 Bugs After Blackout Threats
EA showcases over 200 planned fixes to Battlefield 3′s multiplayer, right after the threat of a blackout from its userbase.
First Look at Battlefield 3 "Back to Karkand" Vehicles
A STOVL fighter jet, a desert buggy, an APC, and a… bulldozer?
Battlefield 3 Angry Review
Angry Joe gives the final word on Battlefield 3. How much does it improve upon
Sage Reviews: Battlefield 3
Battlefield may have beaten Call of Duty to the punch, but does that mean it’s any good?
Angry Joe Plays Battlefield 3
Angry Joe and Johnny M. of Blistered Thumbs tackle BF3′s Cooperative missions together while discussing this highly anticipated FPS heavyweight!
Battlefield 3 Review (PC)
In one of the only examples ever where Frostbite sends Johnny somewhere he’d wind up getting sand in his crotch, his charged task of reviewing Battlefield 3 is now complete. By reading it, you’ll be taking part in the initial stages of “Operation Sugar Pants!”
Battlefield 3 Video Review - ZGR
Is Battlefield 3 the next best shooter? Daniel from ZGR gives you his thoughts!
EA Confirms Fixes to Battlefield 3 Bugs After Blackout Threats
EA showcases over 200 planned fixes to Battlefield 3′s multiplayer, right after the threat of a blackout from its userbase.
First Look at Battlefield 3 "Back to Karkand" Vehicles
A STOVL fighter jet, a desert buggy, an APC, and a… bulldozer?
Battlefield 3 Angry Review
Angry Joe gives the final word on Battlefield 3. How much does it improve upon
Sage Reviews: Battlefield 3
Battlefield may have beaten Call of Duty to the punch, but does that mean it’s any good?
Angry Joe Plays Battlefield 3
Angry Joe and Johnny M. of Blistered Thumbs tackle BF3′s Cooperative missions together while discussing this highly anticipated FPS heavyweight!
Battlefield 3 Review (PC)
In one of the only examples ever where Frostbite sends Johnny somewhere he’d wind up getting sand in his crotch, his charged task of reviewing Battlefield 3 is now complete. By reading it, you’ll be taking part in the initial stages of “Operation Sugar Pants!”
Battlefield 3 Video Review - ZGR
Is Battlefield 3 the next best shooter? Daniel from ZGR gives you his thoughts!
Battlefield 3 Review (PC)
Posted By Johnny Maloney about 1 year, 6 months ago
Battlefield 3 Review (PC)
Battlefield 1942 marked a turning point for my online gaming. Not in the sense that I started to play online with larger groups of people on larger maps, rather that I continued to play online with the same small group of people and just discovered there were more ways to arse around in Battlefield 1942 than in your regular first person shooter. “A first person shooter that lets me fly a twin engine bomber over enemy lines just so I can jump out, wreck the plane, and get shot in the face on my way down? That sounds like a great way to spend a hundred hours!” As the saying goes, that was then and this is now, and Battlefield has had more than just a few incarnations of actual wars, future wars, and the scaaaaaaaary wars that could be happening RIGHT NOW!! Perhaps not that scary, but everybody’s been giving me grief about not getting in the Halloween spirit. Battlefield 3 now marks Electronic Arts’ latest entry into the series, with the lofty goal of toppling “the (apparently) most anticipated game ever” of Modern Warfare off whatever decadent throne it now sits atop.
| PROS | It’s gorgeous, it sounds amazing, its variety, FROSTBITE 2! |
| CONS | Short campaign, some weird AI paths, PC specific functionality problems |
| WTF?! | I swear I’ve seen THAT guy in Transformers. |
He’s been in 24, CSI and Bones as well.
No, seriously… I’ve seen that guy in Transformers. What’s even stranger, is that he’s also going to be in Modern Warfare 3 – what a racket! There’s even a fighter pilot that bears a strange resemblance to Michael J. Fox. That’s all immaterial however, we’re here to talk about the game.
Battlefield 3 is a game about shooting people with a variety of weapons. Got that? Good. Roll credits!
Now that’s out of the way, let’s dig out the core. Describing the gameplay of Battlefield 3 in detail is a fairly pointless affair, because if you’ve played any other multiplayer Battlefield game, you’ve played something quite similar to this. That’s not necessarily a bad thing in itself, but it pretty much primes you for what you can expect: conquest, rush, and a variety of deathmatch options in a variety of climate regions, with vehicles, a cavalcade of unlockable items, awards, badges, dogtags to collect, perks, and so on. A change or two has been made, such as the amalgamation of the medic class into the assault class, starting you out with medic packs and unlocking defibrillator paddles in what I think was the first rank advancement. PC players too are witness to the return of jets, as well as the 64 player conquest maps which can get pretty hectic (so long as you’re not walking everywhere).
Even if you did decide to walk everywhere, aesthetes would certainly enjoy themselves most of the time. Right out of the gate, it’s pretty obvious that this is one of, if not the, best looking game to hit the market this year. Previously I had awarded that honor to CD Projekt Red’s The Witcher 2, but some of the sprawling outdoor areas throw my admiration for it and other open world army games like ARMA II under the truck, run it over several times, and rub broken glass in its face, all before I remember that I loved ARMA II as a game before I could make her pretty. (I still love you baby… we’re a team, you an’ me!) While good looking however, Battlefield 3 does adhere to a strange habit games appear to be taking these days, in that it’s not necessarily trying to look more realistic, rather than how people perceive war as “realistic” through pop culture. The strangest example of this here to me is the grit and dust on the screen that in any real situation would likely cause a horrible conjunctivitis infection doesn’t seem to bother anybody. It’s still an impressive graphic effect, obviously taken from camera effects in movies and TV, but I screw my eyes up in confusion sometimes, wondering why it’s there.
I do believe somebody should have taken that left turn at Albequerque.
These excellent visuals are brilliantly punctuated by immaculate sound design. The distant snap sounds of guns change incrementally the closer you get to them, echoes ringing in valleys pour through the speakers, and the delays between firing noises and the sounds of rounds striking your cover as the dull hum of an unfriendly motor whirrs closer to your desperate position strike phenomenal reactionary responses. Even conversations carried out in the campaign bounce off environments impeccably, with the small touches of chairs squeaking, or papers shuffling. I wouldn’t be surprised to learn that many of the cutscenes were filmed, and then animated over in a rotoscoping-like fashion.
8/10
Battlefield 3 Video Review - ZGR
Is Battlefield 3 the next best shooter? Daniel from ZGR gives you his thoughts! Battlefield 3 Review (PC)
In one of the only examples ever where Frostbite sends Johnny somewhere he'd wind up getting sand in his crotch, his charged task of reviewing Battlefield 3 is now complete. By reading it, you'll be taking part in the initial stages of "Operation Sugar Pants!" Sage Reviews: Battlefield 3
Battlefield may have beaten Call of Duty to the punch, but does that mean it's any good?-
November 07, 2011 at 12:08am
It seems like Modern/Near-Future war shooters are now like WW2 shooters in how there are so damn many of em.
As for this game, I definitely liked it, despite its annoyances like the Battlelog issue and if a server has a bad latency rate, its unplayable due to the player keep back-stepping while you move and shots will miss even if up close on the target. With that, the MP is pretty good and I like the feeling of the sniper class.
The campaign definitely ain’t worth writing home about, I’m probably willing to say its slightly better than the MW2 and BO campaigns, but nothing I’m going to play twice (though I could say that even to the great campaigns, guess the momentum of the first playrthrough just can’t be captured again.) For the most part, I think its worth the score it got, still got plenty more games to play this year though.
-
October 31, 2011 at 02:18am
(About the video review:)
Judging a Battlefield game by it’s singleplayer is like judging Yoda by his size. Sense it makes not. -
October 28, 2011 at 04:03pm
Personally, Battlelog is a non-issue. It doesn’t hamper my experience, it has some nice features, and it works great to get me into a game. I’ve seen people go totally negative on it and I don’t think that is fair at all. You get into games much quicker than you would an ingame browser and generally everything works as it should. Some things can be a tad iffy, but when I hear people say that Battlelog is the reason they won’t get BF3, I laugh at how they are missing out on a game for a simply ridiculous reason.
A great review though as I would pretty much agree with this. While the singleplayer is competent, it doesn’t really do anything new and is way too familiar to what Black Ops did last year, though with abit more realism than that, but still an idea already used. I actually don’t know why they have those cutscenes there as to me, it seems like they could’ve almost removed the flashback stuff entirely and not hurt the game, though I still am a few levels from completion.
The multiplayer is top notch though. It does MANY things better than Bad Company 2, though people who played that will still be familiar with the game, same for BF2 veterans, though it’s very much an amalgam of both series. This game is gonna keep me hooked for a long time, especially with consistent expansion packs over the next 6 months, starting with Back to Karkand in December.
-
October 28, 2011 at 05:03pm
Might be just that it screwed up in the beta most of the time (1 out of 5 attempts to join a game succeeded for me, this is not counting when I got in and was immediately kicked or lagged out for whatever reason), but I got fairly irritated by it and I have no intention of going through that again.
Also the fact that you have to actually start a game to change your settings, then in case of some graphics settings leave and start another one if you actually intend to play with those settings is ridiculous. -
October 28, 2011 at 07:50pm
Well that was because of Beta. I haven’t had any issues with Battlelog since Beta and it all seems to work just fine, though of course it’s hardly perfect. The settings thing again, isn’t an issue, that your kinda trying to make it out to be. Even if the game had an ingame menu instead and you are able to change your settings, you would have to restart your game anyways if the settings said so, so I’m not really seeing the problem here. And really, how often is a person changing his settings? You do it once till you get it running right, if it isn’t already doing so, and then you never touch them again.
-
October 28, 2011 at 03:32pm
It amazes me how these companies can continue to produce these straight-faced, military themed shooters and how people can keep buying them up like hot-cakes. I know it’s old hat to hate on shooters right now, but I still don’t get it. How can people NOT get bored of this stuff? I can only hope that soon enough shooters will go the way of the JRPG when people get tired of playing through the same old archetypes with a fresh coat of paint and the releases will become farther and fewer between. Maybe the next gaming trend will appeal to me more.
Saying it out loud, that does sound a bit selfish, but oh well. I doubt it will happen anytime soon, anyway.
-
October 28, 2011 at 05:51pm
I originally hadn’t intended to buy this, but because of a reviewing schedule snafu, it got dropped in my lap. I do agree with you that the military shooter has been played out, and I don’t nearly enjoy them as much as I do other genres these days. That said, I felt like it would be unfair to review BF3 against a backdrop of other genres of games. It’s almost as if the “war fps” has become a genre independent of the fps altogether. I wouldn’t recommend people buy it until there was a price drop, but then as time goes on and I see more and more $60 titles from companies like Ubisoft, Activision and EA, I’m feeling I have to draw a hard line in the sand.
It goes without saying that if you’re sick and tired of war fps games, then BF3 does *not* deserve an 8. But if we were all to review games on whether or not they tread familiar ground, it’d be a much crueller profession indeed. Judging from your comment, you’d do well to save your money… it doesn’t do anything new or groundbreaking.
-
October 28, 2011 at 11:28pm
I asked this question to someone else a few weeks ago who said pretty much the same thing (and they never answered me). How would you change shooters to be more original and “not Boring”
I will be honest, I don’t buy shooters for the campaign, bought BF3 on 360 and havnt even used the campaign disc. Its all about the multiplayer and while the general mechanics of shooters remains the same, it is the new maps, weapons, gadgets etc that change the overall experience. Plus upgrades to the game engine and graphics play a part too. that is just my opinion though, and I am generally curious about your opinion.
-
October 29, 2011 at 03:14am
People like what they like I suppose.
I’m still not bored with zombie games for example.
Funny enough, unlike King Walrus, I pretty much only buy shooters like these for the campaign, which is why you’ll never see me buying them at launch, I gotten all the recent CoD games for under 20 bucks each. I just don’t care about competitive MP, it’s just not for me.
It just seems to bring out the worst in people, I don’t buy games to get online just to be insulted by racist 12 year olds.
-
October 30, 2011 at 01:10am
don’t worry man, battlefield doesn’t have any kids playing it and no body really mic spams either
-
October 30, 2011 at 01:14am
yeah, but what about other genres like fantasy RPG’s, there are mostly the same, especially the free to play ones. oh, and how about racing games, most of them are all the same right? just like shooters?
-
October 30, 2011 at 12:58pm
First of all, we’re not talking about online games here at all, that’s a whole different animal entirely. Anyway, look what happened to the JRPG. Same goes for racing games. They’re not nearly as popular or frequently produced as they once were. When the innovation and creativity stopped, so did the sales. You’ll notice that a lot of modern racing games also have a somewhat creative hook to help sell them. Sports games are obviously a bit different because people have more of a real world investment in what they represent, which allows the producers to be lazy. Fantasy WRPG still aren’t as released nearly as frequently as military shooters and tend to have more variety or creative ideas. I mean, I could easily tell the difference between Skyrim, Witcher 2, Fable. Not so much the case for BF3 and MWF and any other generic military shooter I can think of. I’m aware that all genres are guilty of this, but the military shooter is the only sub-genre I can think of that can garner such great sales while doing so little to innovate. Space marines are getting pretty fuckin’ old too. The only “shooters” that interest me are the ones that aren’t just shooters anymore. They’ve mixed themselves in with other genres (like Bioshock, deadspace, uncharted, Deus ex, Mass Effect etc. ) and attempted to actually do something different. Besides, to imply it’s okay for shooters to do it because other genres are guilty of the same is a tu quoque fallacy.
-
October 31, 2011 at 05:56am
I am in full agreement with you, in all honesty… I don’t pimp ARMA II because I get paid to, I write about it because it supercedes my military-shooter desire by measures I cannot express.
The videogame industry is becoming more and more like the movie industry. The lowest common denominator is becoming increasingly more lucrative. Bad games DO get made, and they get made frequently for the risk/reward return. When gamers become tired of pretending to be people who demonstrate their skill (the unlock system is now ALL about making gamers feel better about their level of skill) in environments that are “realistic” we’ll see a change.
I wonder about Michael Bay movies similarly.I would also counsel you to edit your litany of games that “actually do something different,” including Bioshock and Deus Ex.
EDIT: upon re-reading, that last bit reads a bit bitchy. I apologize for my tone, I do believe I’ve been a little distracted and stressed lately. Mea culpa.
-
October 28, 2011 at 01:16pm
I absolutely hate punkbuster. Back when I was playing a lot of PR I swear that stupid little application caused hours of grief because it doesn’t update properly, and even though I’ve opened all of the pertinent ports in my firewall to allow it to do its thing, it still would randomly boot me off of servers, not allow me to connect at all, and generally be unpleasant.
As for the game, sounds good – but also sounds and seems a lot like BFBC2. I’m not sure jets & 64 player maps make it different enough for me to want to come back.. espescially since I played a ton of BFBC2. Not at $60.00 at any rate.
-
October 28, 2011 at 12:49pm
Battlelog. That’s why this is the first Battlefield title I’m going to skip.
-
October 30, 2011 at 01:06am
you can’t be serious? also, the reply system in blistered thumbs suck ASS
-
October 28, 2011 at 11:36am
I’m really enjoying this one. I can really see why people dislike Battlelog though. It can be a nuisance having to load Orgin, a Browser, just to click on the game, even for single player.
That said, I really do like the game. -
October 28, 2011 at 10:54am
Awesome I was hoping to see your review of this game, great as always.
And to the comment from Lowlander about Payday Id say that both games are great multiplayer games but are apples and oranges when compared, I think there is space to enjoy both games multiplayer separately but equally. -
October 28, 2011 at 11:02am
Oh certainly. But I’m fine with what I’ve got.
Or at least, I would be if more people were playing it. GET ON IT, GUYS!
No Posts
Battlefield 3 Angry Review
Angry Joe gives the final word on Battlefield 3. How much does it improve upon
Sage Reviews: Battlefield 3
Battlefield may have beaten Call of Duty to the punch, but does that mean it’s any good?
Battlefield 3 Video Review - ZGR
Is Battlefield 3 the next best shooter? Daniel from ZGR gives you his thoughts!
Three British Idiots Play Battlefield 3 Beta (Wez, Larry & Ian)
Wez, Larry and Ian glitch their way through the Battlefield 3 Beta in this very funny video!
Three British Idiots Play Battlefield 3 Beta (Wez, Larry & Ian)
Wez, Larry and Ian glitch their way through the Battlefield 3 Beta in this very funny video!
I loved Battlefield Bad Company 2, I thought the BF3 Beta was impressive. I had pre-ordered the game and was ready for the game to come out this month. Then boom “Online Pass” announced. So now, I have to shell out extra cash for each family member that wants to play this game online. I already pay for XBOX Live. What is EA’s (corporate’s) reasoning for this – “because servers cost money, and used games don’t make developers any money.” Well “corporate” no game sales make even less money. I have to agree with Angry Joe with this one, if we continue to let corporations add these additional fees onto games they will do so. I love my BF but this just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I plan to cancel my pre-order tomorrow.
What’s this, more than 2 colors? I’ve really been missing out. Consider me interested.
aww ya a new video
WHERE IS MY MUTE BUTTON?
Mh, I’ve played Battlefield 2 on PC a lot, and going prone was available…
At first, all playing the Beta did was make me miss playing Bad Company 2. Now though, I’ve gotten used to the “pacing” of the game, and the recoil on the weapons. My only really big gripes with the beta now are the texture deformation glitch (I’ve had a few teams camp underneath the A MCOM on the first part of their map and we can’t take it because they’re in the ground), and the lack of real matchmaking.
I understand both issues, but it really sucks that I wasn’t able to properly squad up with my friends. The most I could do was play on the same team as them, and that was decent at best. Looking forward to the retail version nonetheless.
I was disappointed to that the squad functions were lacking in the Beta, but they’ve come out to say that people will be able to create their own groups, join other groups, and make a group private so that friends can squad up with each other in the retail version. So, happy days
The falling through the map problem was due to issues they had with the terrain deformation in the game, which they said they’ve already fixed in the retail version. I know it was an extremely annoying glitch, when people would purposefully use them to shoot through the floor and take out unsuspecting people. It actually does seem server related at times though, cause terrain deformation is supposed to be turned off on the PC, but I’ll randomly get servers with it on once in awhile.
You accidentally had the classes a little wrong. It’s Assault, Engineer, Support, Recon. They took out medic to make the Assault class a better class, and then brought back the Support class from BF2 to fill in the removed medic class. The Assault Class is still using assault rifles, it just now has the defib and med pack. The Support class has the LMG’s, ammo packs, and all the hand explosives, such as C4, Claymores, and Mortars.
A nice well rounded impression of the game. I loved the Beta, I’m up to Rank 40 right now, and even with the lag, I was able to put time into Caspian Border. And please don’t think I was ragging on Sean with the above stuff. Was simply explaining a few points abit better for folks
Over all this is another BF game with some changes. How ever that said whole EA’s Origin Software that comes with PC version is something unholy. Seems like EA dosen’t like from PC gamers becouse they feel like they have right to harvest your personal information.
Nice little preview. I eagerly await a full review.
One thing that Sean didn’t mention was how great the weapon balancing is. It is so good that it is almost not noticeable.
And I am so glad that I have a PS3 so I don’t have to install Origin on my PC. Seems like I am not the only ones that considers it like a form of herpes that infects your computer.
Did you see our video too? We had a few interesting “quirks” happen
Do NOT install EA’s Origin software. It is spyware that harvests your personal information for sale to third parties, at EA’s discretion. So unless you want them snooping through your hard drive, I suggest you pass on this game (at least on the PC) They will not let you play unless you install the spyware, there is no opt out option.
it is not spyware sens when you install you agree that origin may take your computer specs, it dose not however take any info of what you are doing or somthing like that it only takes your copmuter specs, now the fact that those spec grabing compnents still remain on your system after you have uninstalled origin i blame bad programing
I liked your overview of the game so far, and props for using Remo Baldi’s unofficial track “The Theater, The Dream, The Battlefield” in your video! However, I have one clarification: Prone was in Battlefields 1942, Vietnam, 2, and 2142. It’s something that console Battlefield fans might not have seen before, but it’s not brand new for BF3.
I’m glad the beta’s glitches haven’t been getting you down… players have been ragequitting their preorders by the thousands.
I just found out there are caspian border servers now (for PC) those have all the BF goodness that you can ask for: Tanks, Helicopters, Jetfighters, wide open map, 64 players
there are quite a few issues with BF3 calling it a beta is false this is not a beta it is a limited trail
but i got ALOT of issues with the stuff around BF3 first of all the ammout of stuff you need to install inorder to just play it is just annoying as all hell, battlelog sucks sens you need a webbrowser to run it and have a extention witch just takes away from the resouses, you can only see 100 server at any given time WTH,
inorder to change your game settings you need to go into a server and change it there but while you are changing your settings if you die you get thrown back into the respawn screen and you need to redo your settings again, all of this is sens of this stupid battlelog they force on ppl
again the game itself is really good for what it is but everything EA has force down this games throut sucks!
p.s why is battlefield 3′s anti-cheat in my auto startup msconfig? that is just wrong pnkbstra.exe can go to hell it slowed down my boot up alot
How was this not a Beta? It was a month and a half old build meant to stress test their servers and find bugs. How is that not like the definition of Beta? Also they’ve said that you’ll be able to edit settings while on the deploy screen in the retail version. Not sure what you mean by too many things to install also. Origin, BF3, and Battlelog? That really isn’t much lol Battlelog is actually a pretty nice thing when you realize it’s much quicker to get into servers through Battlelog than it is through an ingame browser.
how can you get any valuebal information from ppl playing a 1 and half month old build, there are so incredbly many changes that has happended sens that there is allmost impossible to get any real info from this and stress testing it also kinda thrown out sens they have prolly been messing around with the server code in that one and a half months
the thing is not really the installing part but you have 3 picese of software you need to keep uppdated inorder to play the game this can become quite annoying when it really isn’t needed
i might have been a bit to bashfull on battlelog, i think it would have been a good side thing like “let’s check out how many ppl are playing on my favorit server” but having it as your main server list just sucks it is worse than valves source engines server list witch i consider a minimum standard,.
and you still didn’t awnser my issues that it hogs resourses when you could making somthing that don’t and that it has a limit of 100 servers it can show
Even if it’s an old build, they still are able to get plenty of information. Server side, that it isn’t just Beta stuff, Battlelog and the Server stuff wer being updated during the Beta, proving that the Beta was being beneficial for them. As for not being able to do anything with an old build, that’s been proven wrong also. Sure they had fixes already for problems in the build, but they’ve posted information that with the Beta, they were able to find more bugs to fix and used it to get feedback from people playing the game. It’s not just a demo when they are actively fixing the retail release because of it.
And I don’t have a problem with resources. Origins is a very minimal program, just leaving Battlelog, which doesn’t add too much if your use to leaving open web pages while gaming (Of which you can just close Battlelog when you join a game), which just leaves Battlefield 3 running and that is just a game, which of course will be a resource hog.
And do you really need more than 100 servers showing at a time? All I do is search for servers, organize by ping, and then just find a good one that is open. I don’t see a reason to dig through a couple hundred or more servers. If this proved a problem, it is an easy fix with Battlelog. You can’t easily update an ingame browser.
I expected tanks! >____<
It cracks me up how both BF3 and MW3 have over 70% thumbs down. Lol. Its only because MW3 goes to BF3 and thumbs down, and vice versa.
Hurts to see that i share my favorite hobby (video gaming) with such a “mature” bunch.
Wait and they don’t go and give their own game a thumb up? Either that or your math doesn’t check out.
Battlefield has earned their thumbs down due to EA requiring invasive spyware to play it on PC.
I wanted to like the beta so much, i played it for hours and hours, but I really just could not get in to it. After i learned to ignore the thousands of glitches and pop-in, I was just disappointed at the direction the game seemed to be going in. This might just be due to the map, but the game felt waayyy more like call of duty and battlefield. The tight corridors, verticality, reliance on submachine guns and sniper rifles, it just wasn’t what I was expecting. I remember playing the bad company 2 beta a couple of years ago, and being completely blown away by the size of the map and huge scale of the battle. In this beta, I just felt like I was running and gunning in a dark subway and urban streets. I really hope some of the other maps are better, bigger, and feel like a battlefield game.
** call of duty than*** battlefield **
I would chalk it up to the map. I’d say its a bad choice to give players an impression of your game with. But since all the footage and screenshots promise vehicles (up to and including jetfighters) we can expect open maps.
It’s the map, Caspian Border (Which the console players get NO access to, and the servers hosting it for the PC to my knowledge have gone down) is a much more traditional big open map, mostly in a sparsely populated (Occasional outpost here and there) rural area with vehicles. It’s not that I HATE Operation Metro, it just seems like the most lack-luster map to start off with, I mean really it does remind me more of a CoD map than anything else (but even than it manages to be bigger and IMO better designed), mainly due to the fact that it does very little to show off the games main features.
I swear to god I think that they made the demo COD-ish on purpose. My theory (up there with UFO conspiracy being a conspiracy itself) is that EA wants to say “we are just like COD, but remember, in the final games you get vehicles”. That is the ONLY thing that I could think of.
DICE has already said there was a Max File Size for Xbox 360 Demo/Betas on Xbox’s marketplace. Thanks to that they had to pick one of their smallest maps and even take out some of the destruction on the 360 version just to stay under the file size limit. So then to be fair everyone had to play on the same small map.
The maps in the retail version will be a mix of small and large maps. Of what we know, Operation Metro and Grand Bazaar are smaller, infantry oriented maps, especially with the Rush gametype (Though Grand Bazaar gets stuff like tanks, no telling if Metro will get their tank back for the first area, like it was in Alpha). Then there is Caspian Border and Operation Firestorm, which are giant maps that rival the biggest seen in Bad Company 2, possibly being even bigger due to borders being stretched for jets, who can go out farther of the boundaries. If your on PC, Conquest 64 will show us some fantastically huge maps. A bit less so on console, but that is to be expected.
Aren’t the classes Assault (which includes medic equipment), Engineer, Support and Recon?
The first thing about the classes and class loadout that I noticed was that they match pretty much with the basic class loadouts in BF2142
Assault rifle and medical equipment
SMG, RPG and Repair equipment
Machinegun and Ammo supply
Sniper rifle (here it differs a little, as mobile spawns were not in your starting loadout, instead recons i think had claymore mine equivalents in 2142)
I liked it that way in 2142 and like it in BF3. The only gripes i have with the game so far are mostly due to it just being the beta: glitches, limited settings, the weird web browser based server selection in the PC version.