PS3Home: "This title raises the bar for the FPS multiplayer, by several notches (just don’t expect the same from the campaign and you’ll be fine)."
"If you are primarily a multiplayer-focused gamer, Battlefield 3 is an incredible achievement and certainly a title that you shouldn’t miss out on." That's a lie, provided PS3 version doesn't allow players to communicate while playing due to a bug. "Reviews" like that (or rather a few sentences put together) from mediocre blogs help publishers and devs to sell broken products, literarly cheating and stealing from gamers.
Seems like every game that comes out lately have problems in them. That's what patches are for. - Uncharted 3 - MW3 - Skyrim - Deus EX HR - Gears of War 3 - FIFA 12 - BF3 - Batman AC Maybe some other games I missed. All the games above released patches (or about to) to fix their product. Devs make the games, but publishers set the release date, so sometimes these games aren't perfect. Tired of buying a flawed product? Don't buy it day one. I've put in over 150 hrs on BF3, and if you're not playing with your friends, mics are useless anyway. People don't seem to use mics...actually most of the community don't even know how to play. Support players don't drop ammo, Assault don't drop med kits, people don't spot vehicles or the enemy in general, and a ton of other stuff that helps the team out.
Devs do release patches. Uncharted has had 3 so far and it's been released almost a week after BF3. No patch for BF after a whole month. Why did I pay release price for that game? I could have waited for a patch and then spent my money. Playing alone is out of my preference and the game promises team work and chat on the cover.
I don't understand why people slam the single player campaign. I nearly didn't buy BF3 because of reviews like this, especially since I buy games primarily for the single player campaign as I don't have enough time to devote to online matches. I was surprised and impressed by the quality of the single player campaign and actually found it to be a better experience than its current competitors. What mainly pushed it up was the far superior sound of gunfire, weapons exchange and ambient sounds as well as a fitting musical score. The graphics are pretty good too. The improved destructibility added to the whole immersion in the experience and the pacing was good. I didn't feel rushed in the same way I was in the Roller coaster ride that was CODMW3. I really hope EA sticks to its guns and continues to improve its current formula.
aesthetics are nice and all, but it really comes down to how well the plot and design is. For BF3, it was only mediocre, but the environments and everything helped to an extent.
I think the plot and design was better in BF3 than MW3 but to each his/her own. MW3 was waaay too out there, plotwise, especially when you consider how MW2 started that plot out and basically handed it to MW3 to wrap up. If the plot was stretched over 2 more games then maybe it would do it some justice as they would have fleshed it out properly but as it was now, it was too rushed! I kept feeling rushed with no time to take in the different missions.
@gmwps3 I agree, I was watching my brother play it and every mission seemed like a Do it or the world blows up kind of mentality. All I heard was yelling lol. It seemed like they tried to cram every possible idea into the game but it didn't mesh well.
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.