GameSpy writes: "As the newest chapter in the traditionally multiplayer-focused (to put it mildly) Battlefield series, Battlefield: Bad Company has some enormous shoes to fill. And while Battlefield 2: Modern Combat received middling reviews, in some ways it puts even more pressure on Bad Company to really turn it out on the consoles. Consequently, nailing the multiplayer is essential for Bad Company to succeed. During a special multiplayer session last Friday, we clashed with developers along with fellow gaming editors in order to test out the new console-focused approach to the classic Battlefield formula.
During the first hour or so of the event, we were relegated to the decidedly developer-free side of the battle, fighting next to other game journalists that had yet to spend much time with Bad Company outside of the single-player campaign. Our collective lack of skill showed, and initial impressions of Bad Company were grim at best... let's face it, when you're constantly fleeing the withering fusillade of serious pros, it can be nearly impossible to figure out how to play the game itself, let alone comprehend the delicate interplay between classes and fire team composition. Top it off with the fact that game journalists are an awfully quiet bunch when under the gun and Bad Company seemed like a daunting and complicated mess of random deaths resulting from a stacked deck."
-Great variation in classes and abilities
-Destructible terrain factors into tactics
-Lots to explore
-Still some performance issues
-Deep combat could elude noobies
-Reason for death not always obvious