1801

Just had an awesome run with the light tank on Grand Bazaar.
30 kills, 2 deaths and I capped all 4 points constantly (5th was in the middle so I couldn’t reach it) and achieved about 15 ribbons in that one match.

Off course, the next round when the sides changed, the whole enemy team was gunning for me :(

1802

Having finished the campaign now I thought it was the most painfully awful piece of crap I can remember. I just finished Rage, which might have been seen as a bit over-linear, but this was something else. It’s much much worse than the BC2 campaign for example. The contrast between advancing through the forest post-ambush and advancing through other forests in say Crysis or Crysis Warhead was just laughable.

MP: 9/10 SP: 1/10

1803

So put them together, 1/10 + 9/10 = 10/10! Amazing!

1804

Funny, and sad, because it’s the best coop mission of the six.

1805

I’m only a part way through the campaign and I’m feeling the same way. The multiplayer is great but it’s the same tried and true experience of previous battlefield games. There’s not a lot of new content here. I might of well have loaded up Bad company 2 etc

So far this is one of the worst games of the year. Though I’m willing to be convinced otherwise. Is there a reason I should continue to grind my way to unlock yet again a claymore or defib unit?

1806

One of the worst games of the year? Are you high?

1807

Man, now it seems to be crashing after 5 minutes or so. Shoddy release.

H.

1808

I would love to live in a world in which Battlefield 3 was one of the worst games of the year. What nonsense.

1809

Great multiplayer, worst game.

Good post, idiot.

1810

I do think they were trying a bit too hard to ape Call of Duty in the campaign, what with all the quicktime events and 24 style Jack Bauer nonsense.

That said, it was less ridiculous than the “not even plausible as a comic book” campaign of Modern Warfare 2, or the crazy tinfoil hat history crap in Black Ops. (Maybe I am misremembering, but Modern Warfare 1 had a more reasonable story, did it not? I don’t remember thinking “this is fuggin ridiculous” at any point in that game, whereas I couldn’t stop thinking that while playing COD2 and CODBLOPS.)

From that perspective, I would be willing to say the more sandbox-y and less linear campaign of Bad Company 2 was superior. I also found the humor in Bad Company 2 more appealing than games that take themselves too seriously. I mean, War Is Serious Business.

But c’mon… I put maybe 6 hours into SP and 240+ into MP for Bad Company 2. So from that perspective, the single player is 2.5% of the experience! As long as it wasn’t actively boring me (and it didn’t) … who cares?

(also, kudos for the co-op missions which are quite fun.)

1811

Actually I think the more “realistic” approach of BF3 made it much harder to swallow than the MW games’ Michael Bay stories. BF3 was like watching a TV movie of a third-rate Tom Clancy book. The framing sequences were totally nonsensical, and only work if the Marines don’t debrief their men or keep any kind of paperwork at all on the events and results of missions.

The greatest crime, of course, is that none of it takes advantage of what makes Battlefield Battlefield. The tank level comes the closest, but overall it’s just aping Call of Duty without ever approaching the level of spectacle that COD reaches about three times per level. Huge step backwards from Bad Company 2, which, as you say, had characters you like and funny dialogue to carry it in the slow sections. Battlefield 3 has no characters of note that I can recall.

1812

I agree the single player is rubbish. I agree the multiplayer isn’t a big step forward compared to the previous games in the series.

I’m still going to put 100 hours into the multiplayer. The Battlefield formula is multiplayer shooter heaven. Theres lots of room for teamwork, but it also works dropping into a team full of randoms. So good.

Tony

1813

Just finished the single player campaign. Mostly inane. Standard rail shooter for the most part. As bad as it was though, it was better than MW2 and Black Ops…

I cringe at how bad the MW3 single player will surely be.

1814

I appreciate the “you so crazy!” or insulting remarks for not liking a videogame.

Shooters in 2011:
Bulletstorm
Killzone 3
Homefront
Crysis 2
Brink
Fear 3
Operation flashpoint
Red faction: 4
Bodycount
Call of Juarez 3
Resistance 3
Gears 3
Nuclear dawn
Rage
Hei$t
BF: 3

Of these I have played the ones in bold.

I mainly go into a game for the single player content and then move on the multiplayer content. If the multiplayer content really sucks me in I can put roughly 20 or so hours into it before moving on to a new game.

On the whole BF:3 single player content has been boring. The multiplayer stuff is great but geared toward players who will put 100+ hours into. Thus the game doles out new toys mechanics at an almost “MMO” level of pacing. Making that carrot on a stick too far away for a player like me.

Thus, leaving me (after experiancing the content on the whole) kind of dissatified. If the game had been marketed as a multiplayer only (brink style) I probably would be feeling different because I loved brink.

As it stands I have enjoyed most (not all) of those game enbolden above more then BF:3. Don’t get me wrong I don’t hate the game just because I used that word “worst”. I didn’t say the game sucks or it’s a piece of shit. I was trying to be critical in a way that reflected my feelings on the game. Still it was probably a dumb thing to write in a forum post.

1815

BF3 single player may be crap but it’s a multiplayer game and probably the best release this year of that type of game.

No way would I buy BF3 for the single player part, 99% of reviews has said it stinks so it’s not like it’s not clear how poor it is.

1816

Yeah - it seems like you were misled by marketing - BF games have always been about the Multiplayer. Heck, Bf2 didn’t even HAVE a single player part.

edit for pedants: Yes, you could play with bots, but I hardly call that a single player part.

1817

I don’t think the SP stinks any more than the SP in COD:MW2 or COD:BLOPS which sold eleventy billion fucking copies, so apparently someone likes this linear shooter quicktime spectacle bullshit.

Although, the more I think about this, the more the sandbox-ish campaign of BF2:BC shines. I actually played through that twice, once on hard, because it was fun in that “I can try a slightly different strategy here and see what happens this time” way.

The multiplayer stuff is great but geared toward players who will put 100+ hours into.

I have put in 24 hours so far and I have every significant unlock you’d possibly want in all 4 classes. You could trivially unlock the most important gadget in each class in an hour of play per, so 4 hours is I think a more realistic estimation of how much time you need to spend playing to get going in multiplayer.

1818

I don’t think the SP stinks any more than the SP in COD:MW2 or COD:BLOPS which sold eleventy billion fucking copies, so apparently someone likes this linear shooter quicktime spectacle bullshit.

Although, the more I think about this, the more the sandbox-ish campaign of BF2:BC shines. I actually played through that twice, once on hard, because it was fun in that “I can try a slightly different strategy here and see what happens this time” way.

The multiplayer stuff is great but geared toward players who will put 100+ hours into.

I have put in 24 hours so far and I have every significant unlock you’d possibly want in all 4 classes. You could trivially unlock the most important gadget in each class in an hour of play per, so 4 hours is I think a more realistic estimation of how much time you need to spend playing to get going in multiplayer.

1819

The utter lack of spectacle is pretty much what makes it inferior to the COD campaigns. I enjoy the COD campaigns for the most part (bored to death by BLOPS’ campaign), and BF3 was light years behind even COD2’s. If you’re going to try to out COD COD, you better be ready to get crazy, and BF3 doesn’t even get mildly disturbed. So by the numbers and dull. And I’m still pissed that there’s no way to fly the planes outside of a multi match to practice. At least the helicopters have a co-op mission for that.

1820

I finally have a chance to play Battlefield 3.

Thoughts on the single-player campaign:

  • It takes way to long to fire up the game because I have to click on Origin, then the Battle log browser, then the Campaign.
  • Changing the key bindings is a pain in the ass, especially when trying to remove a bound key during the game.
  • Stationary NPCs have huge collision boxes
  • After the earthquake, in the destroyed area I’m trying to flee, it sounds like there are dozens of screeching cats all around me.
  • The dirt on the goggles is very annoying
  • The QTE fight was not very interactive (Hit E again and again and again)
  • The pilot Hawkins rail shooter part felt like more of a non-interactive cinematic that would make Hideo Kojima proud.