120°
Submitted by TheNightNinja 1407d ago | review

Battlefield 3 [Review] | ShogunGamer.com

Casey White wrote: "Battlefield has always been a series focused on co-operative team play, massive battles encompassing land, sea, and air as well as a showcase of a variety of different military vehicles. The 'third' instalment of the series doesn't diverge from the tried and true formula, but does make some much-needed tweaks to the over-all gameplay to advance the series into the modern generation of FPS titles and beyond." (Battlefield 3, PC) 8/10

NuclearDuke  +   1407d ago
Glad to see more honest reviews taking a look into Co-Op & Singleplayer as a part of the game.

Unlike every other major site doing a "Singleplayer has never been a true Battlefield component, so we don't review this and give it a 9.5".
PotatoClock  +   1407d ago
We know that Battlefield has never focused on SP.
It almost seems a shame that they have tacked on the SP campaign instead of standing by what they used to do and just had bots for a SP game.

But I can't help but not like COD's SP either.
Reviewers give COD('s) 10s and everything and say, "oh the campaign was so action-packed"
but to me the campaign is just the same as a pop-corn hollywood movie. As predictable as the last.

Sure they do it well in that style, but in reality I think its just as easy to do that with what DICE have done with BF3's SP.

DICE have improved BF, albeit just in the multiplayer, so much in the last few years.
COD just seems to of.....not done as much.
Just left it with a couple of updates or slight changes to perks.
And maybe just CUE'd more explosions in.

I think it'd be a crime if MW3 is consistently scored higher in reviews than BF3 just because of the SP.
NuclearDuke  +   1407d ago
Reviewers has to look from the userbase side aswell. Call of Duty is the most played Multiplayer game aswell as the most purchased one. Obviously, with such a massive crowd, three to four times bigger than Battlefield 3, it's unreasonable not to put a higher score on Modern Warfares multiplayer.

People may think Call of Duty does not improve much, yet I find Modern Warfare 2 completely different in play and graphcis than Modern Warfare and I will probably think the same with Modern Warfare 3 to Modern Warfare 2. Sledgehammer's CEO even said that textures received a great improvement and I expect this to be seen greatly on PC.

I will honestly admit that Battlefield 2 felt much better playing than any Call of Duty game, but since Battefield 2, no BF games has looked even remotely close to reaching Call of Duty in quality, nor in plain fun-to-play. Battlefield 3 has been overhyped, clearly - seeing all the major complaints from A-Z and the fact that the Battlefield community feels some need to complain on Call of Duty all over the internet before even playing the game has shown me that the Xbox kids probably are more mature and reasonable than the "adult-community" BF3 seems to be so proud of.

There has been too much focus on Modern Warfare 2 and it's lack of updates, anti-cheat and several other complaints that is unacceptable as a customer. Infinity Ward was split apart after the launch of the game due to the lawsuit between Vince Zampella & Jason West vs. Activision, which was the only reason that the game wasn't treated as much as other Call of Duty titles. The game, on paper, had it all right. Even though I play on PC, the Matchmaking IW.NET was pure genious if you wished public games. If the Matchmaking using IW.NET was set on dedicated servers, I couldn't have been more happy. Playing the game as it is created, rather than CoD4 modding ruining the game. as we can see today.
PotatoClock  +   1407d ago
"Reviewers has to look from the userbase side aswell. Call of Duty is the most played Multiplayer game aswell as the most purchased one. Obviously, with such a massive crowd, three to four times bigger than Battlefield 3, it's unreasonable not to put a higher score on Modern Warfares multiplayer. "

.....You do know your've just contradicted what your've been saying 'bout honest reviews?

So your've just said that you don't mind reviewers giving any COD game a 10, not because its a perfect game that deserves a 10, but because its got more people buying it?

I tend to think of reviews reviewing the game...not the popularity of the game.

BTW, you can only know a games quality by acutally 'playing it'.
Not just looking at people saying they've got major problems and thinking, "it must be BAD!" Especially when they happen to be only one out of many thousands with that problem.

Surely you'd know that with any other game launch...

You should try playing BF3.

I'm sure your've not been playing COD just for the story. Have a go and see for yourself why more reviewers give this game perfect scores.
The multiplayer is unbelievable.
You have to play it to comprehend it, not just snob it and keep to what you know.
#1.1.2 (Edited 1407d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
WWE4Eva2666  +   1407d ago
mw3 ftw :)
Adolph Fitler  +   1407d ago
I thought this would get better scores than this after all the videos hitting the web, & hype surrounding it....I really thought it would be something else, & outdo the COD series at it's own game, as well as still have it's own BF uniqueness.
The problem for EA & Dice with this series & trying to beat out COD, is that they are 2 different types of games....COD prides itself on ultra, ultra, smooth playability/controllability & narrow corridoory, can't stray off the path gameplay, combined with what has become this series bread & butter in the online with smaller, tighter maps that are tailor made for run'n'gun gameplay & it has the perks & such that add to this more simplistic gameplay approach.

BF:MC on the other hand has bigger more open levels & even though the campaigns have traditionally been very similar to what COD offers (I'm talking about the BF games that have been on PS3 & 360 specifically), they are very much COD-esque in there single player offerings, only COD in the past games, has offered the more fun, refined & polished single player experience, & then when you come to the online is where the 2 series differ greatly.

BF's online component is more the opposite of COD's run'n'gun stylings...you will have very limited success if you run into BF with the same approach as you'd take going into a game of MW, WAW or BO's. So, if Dice/EA wanted to interupt COD's online userbase, they would have had to of taken the elements that makes COD sell & fun online, & not only replicate them, but do it with style & vigour, making it more fun, better graphically & just all over better production values all across the board.
They haven't tapped into Activisions fanbase at all with past offerings, & this new one looks no different.

As I said, I really thought this would be many times better than both previous vsn's, only with tighter, sharper, faster, more responsive gameplay......then I downloaded the PS3 beta & fired it up, and realized...........this shit is exactly the same as the last one. It is great, if you like it & I didn't mind it with the 1st 2, as they were different, but for me, it got boring really fast & after limited online shennaniggens on pt 2, I was sick of it & traded it.
Now they make a new one, & brag, COD bash, & hype themselves up the wazoo with this game, & then you play it & think, WOW, they are selling this as a new game, when it could have been d/lble content (just like the COD series as well, really)....I mean, if they wanted to steal COD's sales & fanbase, then they had to steal COD's gameplay & selling points....like the fast, fluid, 60fps gameplay & controls, but nope, instead they stuck with slower, sloppier controls tacked straight on from BF:BC, they failed to offer more multiplayer diversity, as they should have had the modes that keep the BF fans happy, & then had deathmatches, Team DM's & other more COD-esque type online games, & the list goes on.
Adolph Fitler  +   1407d ago
Basically, the only thing BF3, & all the games in this series has done better than COD, as well as most all other fps's, is the awesome weapon & explosion sounds, they truly are spectacular & the standout feature of this series...If they could make the gameplay & fun level of the game on par with the quality the sound fx exude, then this game would bury all other fps's......but as is, they just did a run of the mill, straight up clone of there past 2 offerings, which killed the series for me (& millions of other COD players).
I seriously like MOH's online component better than this, so as Dice made that part of that game, there is no valid reason that they couldn't have done a great (more COD) DM & TDM online mode with specific maps for these modes, then the larger tradional BF maps for that online element.
LividAss   1407d ago | Spam

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
Remember
New stories
20°

Don't Starve: Giant Edition - Xbox Enthusiast

6m ago - Don't Starve: Giant Edition is available now on Xbox One. Luke Lohr over at Xbox Enthusiast prais... | Xbox One
30°

The Worst Metal Gear Story Ever Told & How It Predicted the Rest of the Series

7m ago - Den of Geek looks back at the worst Metal Gear story ever told and how it predicted the future of... | GameCube
Ad

Win a Pro-Painted Ghorgon!

Now - Turbo Tape Games is pleased to announce a contest for an exclusive Ghorgon miniature hand-painted by Dave Taylor! | Promoted post
20°

Bandai Namco Will Look At More Tales Of Series PC Ports In The Future

7m ago - Tales Of Zestiria is the first main entry of the series to get released on PC. After this release... | PC
40°

Are Microtransactions Killing the Gaming Business?

8m ago - Micro transactions are increasingly common; Bidness Etc questions their impact on the gaming indu... | Xbox 360
30°

PS3 System Software Update 4.76 Released: More Stability for Sony's Old-Gen Console

9m ago - Sony Computer Entertainment just made a new update available for the PS3, numbered 4.76. The patc... | PS3