Top
130°

Hands-on with Battlefield 3 Multiplayer: This is the Core Experience - GameZone

GameZone's Ben PerLee talks about his hands on experience at a private hands-on of Battlefield 3's multiplayer. While he didn't love the co-op or single player, the multiplayer is the core of the game and it did not let him down.

Read Full Story >>
gamezone.com
Oculus Quest Giveaway! Click Here to Enter
The story is too old to be commented.
DemonStration2919d ago

Hype and fan chatter aside, I'm still really pumped for this game

TheSanchezDavid2919d ago

This, along with Modern Warfare 3, could be in a show called Games I Don't Give a Rat's Ass About.

EastBayPunk2919d ago

Do you often click on and take the time to comment on games you don't give a rat's ass about?

TheSanchezDavid2919d ago

I do, actually. I mean, wouldn't the fact that I did it here be indicative of that? =P

In all seriousness, though, and in keeping with the topic at hand, I was initially interested in Battlefield 3, but more so for the technical aspect of it rather than the actual gameplay.

Grimhammer002919d ago

I feel like bf3 will deliver a mp experience in 1-2 modes of greatness. The vehicles, and destruction will rock!

But as an overall full experience mw3 has my money. So many modes, new slight slant on team play means their will be those nights where it's about team play.

Like I said...overall value.

Grimhammer002919d ago

What's to disagree with? Cod series always has plentiful game modes & the new strike packages has a support class.

I'm not saying bf3 won't be amazing...I'm saying for my money (opinion), I want the game I'll get the most variety and infantry fun from.

I've never liked the controls of vehicles in bc2, and the maps are very large. Promotes sniping/camping. If the vehicles are all in use you gotta hope a squad mate is close to the action to spawn on. Many times in bc2 I had to run far to long to get into action.

But I enjoyed bc2. I just liked mw2 more. (before the hacks)

EastBayPunk2919d ago

I'm not gonna get into the whole MW3 vs BF3 thing... but there are so many more things that BF3 offers that MW3 or any other game just does not offer.. all the variables and options that vehicles and huge maps can offer are just so numerous it can't even be calculated.. I wont even go into the fact that COD puts out a cookie cutter game every year with some changes here and there.. NOTHING comes close to those "battlefield" moments that happen in DICE's games

Grimhammer002919d ago

All true.
However, mw3 is the first in the series to make drastic changes with strike packages and survival mode is already well documented as being a better "co-op" experience than bf3's co-op mode....going by many previews.

The same thing you like about bf3 having vehicles is why I don't appreciate bf3 as much as I know I should. In bc2 vehicles dominate gameplay....adding jets and many more variant tanks just cements this to me. Also, capture & hold & assault next capture & hold point....isn't my idea of diverse game play. Sure the mechanics of gameplay with vehicles & weapons will give this gameplay legs.....but without arcade ideas like 1 bullet or pistols only....it became boring to me in bc2.
As I understand it, bf3 has deathmatch too...that's not my favorite in COD either.

Again, both games are going to be awesome. But I prefer instant action arcade gunplay @ 60fps than I do vehicles, degradable cover.

Keep in mind that bf3 isn't realistic either....when was the last time a piece of masonry the size of a Buick breaking off of a wall DIDN'T kill a soldier?

EastBayPunk2918d ago

Yeah, it's all a matter of taste... COD is definitely better for the arcade type instant action kinda gameplay.. I prefer a more realistic teamwork based game.. i realize there are some unrealistic things in BF3.. but it is a video game after all.

Show all comments (12)