Msxbox-world takes a look at EA's latest military shooter and casts a somewhat critical eye over proceedings.
I wonder how they will score MW 3.
Who cares? This is a BF3 review and BF and COD arent really that similar in the way they approach a shooter. Anyways...... 6.5 is waaaaaaay to low for BF3. IMO.
What I think he means is that this is a rather shameless Microsoft fanboy site, and microsoft fanboys seem rather aligned with MW3 and against BF3, for obvious reasons. The review looks extremely biased under every point of view in fact.
by not even reading it you can tell this is a joke of a review.
I dunno, the review has lots of nice things to say about it then some little nitpicking things every now and again. I don't actually really think the score they gave it reflects the review they wrote.
I clicked on it and got about halfway through then quit reading. It's a BS review don't give them the hits they are begging for. I wish I hadn't.
lol they will give it a 9.5 for sure
Oh dear. As if the anti Sony and Nintendo articles this joke of a site churns out weren't enough already.
Worst review ever. A 6.5 is an absolute joke, especially when they give the game a 9 for longevity. Oh, its a terrible game, but you'll want to play it for a long, long time. What kind of crap is that? And only a 5 for gameplay?! Only a 7 for sound?! When it is getting universally praise for both from other sites. This reviewer should really find another job. He's no good at his current one.
Yeah, it's called opinion. Clearly he didn't like it but his opinion still matters as much as the rest. There's no need to dismiss it just because you don't like it.
Why are you taking this to heart? It's not like he insulted you personally.
or did he???? LOL. I kid I kid. Anyway, its a pro ms site guys lets not get all upset now. we know this site will give mw3 the higher grade. why? the mediazzz made xbox seem like a 360 shooter while battlefield is a PS3/PC shooter. YAY!!! Pick side bitches cause these guys did! YAY videogamezzz mediazzz!
If you're so good at it, write your own review.
"Yeah, it's called opinion. Clearly he didn't like it but his opinion still matters as much as the rest." So if I talked to a guy that HATED FPS games with a passion and that person said BF3/MW3 isn't worth it, it matters right? Let alone there was any consistency in the review.
"Yeah, it's called opinion. Clearly he didn't like it but his opinion still matters as much as the rest." Then it doesn't matter to me at all. The only opinion that matters to me is my own. 6.5 is a bit much though and frankly the sound in this game is impeccable. Maybe the reviewers ears are broken or there were two foxes mating outside.
Battlefield games always have the most amaazing sound in every aspect. Pinacle of what a FPS war game should sound like. That 7 is an insult to DICE.
"Worst review ever. A 6.5 is an absolute joke, especially when they give the game a 9 for longevity" How is that a joke. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a 6.5 game having a 9 longevity. You can put a lot of hours into a game without actually being sastifyed with it.
Should i even read this. I mean a 6/10? Really? This game is a 8/10 at the LEAST.
Exactly! Reviewers who mark their scores way down for the SP campaign just don't understand Battlefield. IT IS A MP GAME! The SP campaign is just a bonus that is there if you want it (or the servers are down). Anyone who buys a BF game for the SP is a fool. Sites that mark it way down for the SP are just as foolish. How can a game that you'll want to play for hundreds of hours only get a score of 6.5?
I agree 6/10 way to low but some other reviews giving a 9.5/10 are way to high. I think I would agree with 8/10 maybe 9/10 if the campaign was good. It's a good game just a little over hyped in my own opinion.
These are the most important reviews to read. Battlefield 3 has got tons of 8's it doesn't help you in anyway to read another one of those.
Sound got a 7 score? What the fuck? As good as the graphics are the sound is even better.
The sound is unbelievable.
wow... u really have outdone ur self msxbox! a 6.5? REALLY? at least a 8!
Its good some reviewers can actually think for itself, and not just atuomcailly give a game a 8 or higher because its a hyped up big name game.
ya but this game is really good, multiplayer is one of the best of all time and campaign is ok. i would give a 7 if battlefield 3 was only rated on campaign. but a 9 or 9.5 on multiplayer.
I think its one of the best games Ive played all year what a bullshit review
lol at the review.....7 for a sound is absurd. I think almost anyone who has played it wouldn't think it deserves any less than a 9. One of the best sounding games evar! Have not had any audio loss like they state were frequent. Also averaging their scores comes out to a 7.25, so idk how they got 6.5.
absurd, no way its less than 9
A 6.5 for BF3...MsXbox just had to be that one site... I give IMO BF3 a 9.5. its excellent and kicked BC2 off its throne of MP. My new favorite shooter is BF3! This review was poor attempt at a hit magnet..NEVER CLICK ON MSXBOXWORLD dont give em teh hits
What throne was bc2 on?
Of being the best multiplayer shooter in the hearts of many, including myself. That was until 10/25/2011.
It's the 360 version... No need to panic guys.
COD FANBOYS REVIEWING BTF3 WHAT WE CAN EXPECT...
I think it is a fair score since the single player is complete garbage.
"Yet even the audio has its issues. It's not uncommon for the it to cut out when playing." A prime example why reviews have taken a dive over the past few years. How do you take this review seriously when the person that wrote it did not? This review is filled with run-on sentences and comma splices. I'm not usually the type that points out grammatical errors, as I regularly make them while posting, but in a review.... Unacceptable. A simple round of proof reading would have solved all of the author's problems.
Seems fair. This title is really over-rated and should be an 8 tops.
I'm the person who wrote the review. To everyone saying I'm biased against BF3, I'm really not. I was actually a bit biased in favor of it pre-release because I like EA as a company more than Activision. Those arguing that the single player doesn't matter. Unless the paragraph explaining why got cut, I said pretty straight-forward why I considered it as heavily as I did. You might not agree why, but it's not like I was misleading with my review. I tried to make it as clear as possible. To those saying the score doesn't average out right, it's because I always balance the score in favor of gameplay above all other aspects. Sound got docked for cutting out during scripted events mainly, but also because there weren't aspects to the sound that made me go, "Oh holy crap! This is amazing!" Someone says the sound is better than I thought it was, I'm not really gonna argue because that's a matter of opinion. As for longevity, I usually base longevity primarily on how much playtime you can get out of the game. Thus the high score that got. Whether it's worth that time is a matter decided by the gameplay, after all. Just felt like explaining the review a bit for those who disagreed.
Considering all the problems with the game right now and the servers issues...this score is well deserved.
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.