390°
7.5

Destructoid: Battlefield 3 Review

For the past few years, Electronic Arts has desperately been attempting to gain a leading share of the first-person shooter market. Games like Medal of Honor and Crysis 2 have been selected as champions to take down Activision and its Call of Duty franchise, but they've never been considered serious threats.

Battlefield 3 represents EA's first real chance at carving out a competing niche. With its huge marketing budget, gorgeous visuals, and an army of fans ready to argue in its honor, this is a game with some serious muscle behind it.

Read Full Story >>
destructoid.com
Aussiegamer4718d ago

Jim sterling, hahahahahah.

I still think he is just trolling us.

Organization XII4718d ago (Edited 4718d ago )

I'm not sure how can you take someone's reviews seriously when he gives Kirby a perfect 10/10.

http://www.destructoid.com/...

Ratchet & Clank: All 4 One - 4/10

http://www.destructoid.com/...

Jim Sterling's either a bit too opinionated or a plain out troll.

@Eldorado and you can't deny that Killzone 3 wasn't on par of its predecessor(in other words it sucked). It only had good console visuals - that's all!

ElDorado4718d ago

He gave Killzone 3 a perfect 10.

DasBunker4718d ago

i think the KZ3 review was only for the lulz and to freak people out cuz they were not expecting that

MostJadedGamer4718d ago

Actually that is the reason you can take his reviews seriously. He is the only reviewer I know that actually gives his honest opinion on games, and don't just give games high scores or low scores because everybody else is doing it. Every other professional reviwer I know of just trys to conform to the crowd.

Optical_Matrix4718d ago

He gave Killzone 3 a 10/10. I'm a big Killzone fan, but Killzone 3 shouldn't have released this year. It didn't feel like a significant step compared to Killzone 2. It's as if Sony wanted it out in February 2011 just to bolster the exclusive line up. The multiplayer barely felt any more robust than Killzone 2. It was more like an 8/10. it was a great game, but thats about it. Nothing special in my opinion. Here's hoping Killzone 4 is feature/content rich.

I refuse to read BF3 reviews as well. Too much hype and controversy surrounding the game for me to take any reviews seriously. I loved the Beta, so that's all I need to confirm my purchase (which will arrive at my door tomorrow, 2 days before the UK launch..so please).

ReservoirDog3164718d ago

What do you mean Killzone 3 sucked!? Besides a slow start, it was honestly one of the most entertaining games I played this year. And I was very skeptical about it since it didn't seem to set the world on fire like Killzone 2. The singleplayer changed it up so much that you can just never get bored and the story didn't take itself so seriously.

I highly disagree with you and somewhat agree with Sterling.

And Jim Sterling is just the way he is but he gives his reasons why he gives those scores. He doesn't just say I didn't like it just cause, he gives his reasons. Whether they're as big of an issue as he makes it out to be is up to your tastes but he's his own man. And he uses the entire 10 point scale.

Having said that, the link to his review is dead.

evrfighter4718d ago

if I remember correctly he gave witcher 2 a 5 or 6. That was the last time I visited destructoid

BlindGuardian4718d ago

I'm about two thirds of the single player and I can confirm everything he wrote about it is truth

I don't have a problem with playing another short, corridor single player FPS but something about this one feels off, it's too uninspired, too bland, too much "been there done that" feeling, it has big environments but if you try to move a few steps away from the path you'll get the dreaded "leaving playable area" countdown, most of the stuff you shoot at that's not enemies doesn't react (bottles or civilians), there's an endless mission on an air fighter that mostly plays itself, when big battle take place you can't see anything, you don't know where are the guys shooting at you, and you'll get kill long before you spot them

and the graphics on the 360 are nothing especial, far from Killzone 3 and Crysis 2

Venjense4718d ago

How can you give a game with shit SP more than an 8/10. Why bother making it all, may as well just create more maps and game modes and make it MP only.

VvKILLAGOOSEvV4718d ago

Looks like Jimbo didn't play Team Deathmatch, I swear I run into more enemy players in that mode than I do in CoD...Not joking it's insane.

rjdofu4718d ago

So... Jim Sterling strikes again!

Lucky UC3 has successfully evaded him LOL.

Clarence4717d ago

KZ3 was a let down. I was excited for awhile but that faded after 2weeks. guerrilla games drop the ball.

Christopher4717d ago

In the world of video game reviewers, Jim Sterling is a big wildcard. Sometimes, you never know what her's going to do or say, just don't go in with any set expectations.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 4717d ago
chidori6664718d ago

"Jim sterling, hahahahahah. "

Jim Sterling gave an accurate review of a game and make valid points, so please stfu ,people have diferent opinions you troll.

Aussiegamer4718d ago

Good for you champ.

1. take a joke.

2. get a life.

Anon19744717d ago

I clicked the link. I saw who did the review. I moved on.

SilentNegotiator4717d ago

It's a perfectly legitimate review. The SP is crap and plenty of resources went into it. They could have used those resources to make a more robust MP, but they didn't. And the MP isn't exactly perfect. Having ANYTHING be fought over like it were the sole objective, like tanks, is poor balancing. If there were a decent counter-balance and other options, one thing wouldn't nearly assure victory. Rocket launchers tend to dominate in small areas. Goofy co-op structure with a forced helicopter stage. The terrain is often too noisy to get a good aim on someone. Battlelog over-complicates everything.

There are times I totally disagree with Jim Sterling, (like when he claimed LBP2 lacked re-playability) but Jim hit the nail on the head and drove it in on one swing on this one. Too many things in BF3 have been forgiven to fandom.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 4717d ago
Lovable4718d ago

"and an army of fans ready to argue in its honor"

Hahahahaha..that was a good one.

DasBunker4718d ago

reviewer doesnt know how to play the game

"run for a very long time across a huge open space, then bump into a tank and die."

"Tanks are sluggish and alienate one from the atmosphere of the match, while airborne transport is a nightmare to use"

gamingdroid4718d ago

That is actually how I felt playing BC2 minus the tank. Usually it was snipers. BF3 beta was even worse when it came to snipers.

DasBunker4718d ago

"run for a very long time across a huge open space, then bump into a tank and die."

run? why not ride an ATV, another vehicle or spawn on a squadmate? also most of the time tanks are spottable from a fairly distant... learn to sneak around, flank etc..

"Tanks are sluggish and alienate one from the atmosphere of the match, while airborne transport is a nightmare to use"

this is a balance and even a bit of realism thing... air vehicles would be harder to take down if they were easy to pilot..

"snipers"

this isnt call of duty where youre on the undercover of precious walls into safeness.. avoid running like a headless chicken on open field

gamingdroid4718d ago (Edited 4718d ago )

***avoid running like a headless chicken on open field***

LOL... Open field is all there was, unless you are planning to camp as well!

Son_Lee4718d ago

People bash on this guy because he actually isn't afraid to use the entire review scale. 7.5, when using the ENTIRE scale, is still a very good score. Sure, the game may not be for everyone or do anything new, but it has many redeeming qualities that one can't deny. I wish people could see that the review scale is more than just 7-10.

Jacks_Medulla4718d ago

The way I look at it, the review scale for video games is similar to the grading system of American schools. 10-9 is equivalent to an A, 8.9-8 a B, 7.9-7 a C, etc. Review scores make more sense, to me, when viewed this way; everything below a 6 is just varying in how terrible it is.
As for Sterling, I stopped trusting his reviews once he gave Assassins Creed 2 a 4.5; I don't even enjoy the Assassins Creed games, but I'll admit they deserve scores much Higher than a 4.5. Even if the score was based on the "full scale", a 4.5 is still below average.

Rage_S904718d ago

This was actually a really well written review. People should read it first before saying olololololol jim sterling.

radphil4718d ago (Edited 4718d ago )

"People bash on this guy because he actually isn't afraid to use the entire review scale. 7.5, when using the ENTIRE scale"

I would be on the side to agree with it, except that he doesn't admit to some of his bias, when you see him giving Return to Dreamland a perfect 10, bad mouth and made a false generalization of the PC crowd because of a closed mind to piracy(he basically stated it's all the PC Community's fault for piracy), and among other things. From the way he does things, his word just doesn't seem to hold much weight anymore given with how he tends to speak without too much thought.

He can write some long pieces, but 1/2 the time you just question him.

Also just for reference, he gave Payday a 7.5 also, and after having both, BF3 has a much higher quality standard.

girlwithturn4718d ago

Biggest PR doesn't changing quality of simple military shooter.

GameZenith4718d ago

Who cares what reviewers say.

One person's opinion does not equal the true quality of a game.

BF3 is still an superior game to MW3. Why?

- Better Graphics
- Next Gen Engine
- Multiplayer that requires team play and less lone wolf
- 64 Players
- The Use of Vehicles which changes the landscape of the battlefield
- Destruction which changes the landscape of the battlefield

JeffGUNZ4717d ago

other then the engine, you described BFBC2.

That's the problem. It's so much like BC2 that it feels underwhelming.

Show all comments (71)
130°

Electronic Arts CEO: AI Is "At the Very Core of Our Business"

Today EA hosted its Investors Day, and Chief Executive Officer Andrew Wilson talked about the company's dedication to generative AI.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
Chocoburger7d ago

He's so excited to layoff more employees for FAKE STUPIDITY computer programing to replace them.

Hopefully EA takes a nosedive just like Ubisoft is currently doing. Lack of money is the only thing that can hurt them and possibly change them.

DarXyde6d ago

Knowing EA, I think they're more likely to sell their games cheaper or make Access the only way to play their titles than change course. They seem committed to destroying their labour force.

And the sad part here is that the proof of concept is there, where games can be made using AI.

I hate to say it, but those working in the gaming industry might be cooked. And unfortunately, I'm doubting most people will care as long as they get games they want. EA would absolutely dangle Dead Space 4 or a new Burnout in front of us, developed with AI. I wouldn't take it, but I think most fans would.

CantThinkOfAUsername6d ago

If AI does a better job then yeah why not? Though, I have massive doubts it will. If developers aren't willing to put effort in their games then they shouldn't be surprised that they're replaceable.

Chocoburger6d ago (Edited 6d ago )

Damn, a new Burnout, don't even bring that up. It hurts just to read those words.

The indie scene is massive theses days, but the big budget scene is mostly trash. I wouldn't mind to see these big publishers suffer or crumble away.

But that can only happen when the casual gamer stops buying yearly roster updates or whatever garbage is marketed to them on TV.

DarXyde6d ago

CantThinkOfAUsername,

I disagree. I don't believe the developers are at fault here. I would think those people don't like what EA is doing, but it's EA and they have tremendous power in the industry. Not everyone has the leadership qualities to peel off and form their own company. Add to the fact that falling out of grace with EA might just be an industry kiss of death. These people don't have any power, so I really don't agree with saying they're not willing to put in the effort.

thorstein6d ago

Now we just need to develop AI CEO and sell it to the board of trustees.

staticall6d ago

Hopefully, the only people who're going to be replaced by an AI are Andrew Wilson and his top management goons.

TheNamelessOne7d ago

And EA games aren't at the core of my purchases.

XiNatsuDragnel7d ago (Edited 7d ago )

Lmfao ea needs to do an ubisoft rn

ApocalypseShadow7d ago (Edited 7d ago )

Of course it is. EA has been lazy for years. Profiting for investors and themselves without putting in the work. Having AI write code or build graphics for them just makes them even more lazy.

I'd laugh if those same investors built "executive code" and got rid of EA's CEO and board of directors and replaced them with AI.

Show all comments (30)
120°

Next Battlefield Developers Are "Obsessed With Finding the Fun"

Today Electronic Arts hosted its Investors Day and its executives shared what's next for the Battlefield franchise.

Read Full Story >>
simulationdaily.com
1nsomniac7d ago

ohh god, here we go!

This is exactly why the gaming industry is failing. It's now an industry of suits "trying to find the fun".

...I'll help you out a little, If you're trying to find it, then it's not fun and neither are you. move on!

LucasRuinedChildhood7d ago (Edited 7d ago )

I disagree, tbh. I definitely wouldn't classify Vince Zampella as a soulless suit. It's kind of an acknowledgement that Battlefield fell off which is why they had to bring him in in the first place. He's probably the best shot EA has of making this franchise fun again.

From a software development perspective, what I read in the article of Zampella's approach of being able to easily playtest and iterate from early on in development is a good thing. That's likely a big part of why his COD games and Titanfall were so fun.

PapaBop6d ago

Calling Zampella a suit lol! People like Zampella are the half suits if you will, they bridge the gap between art and business. Suits don't care how fun a game is, they only care about profit margins.

Markdn6d ago

It's people like you that's ruining the gaming platform, negativity already before it's even dropped

Noskypeno6d ago

20 years ago, Bungie used to have the motto "making games we want to play", if the devs are having fun it's a good sign it's going to be an enjoyable experience. If the devs are worried about shareholders, quotas, fitting in with current trends and trying to make a small percentage of the population happy, it's not an encouraging sign.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 6d ago
gold_drake7d ago

if u need to "find the fun", thats a huge problem lol

Redgrave6d ago

This rings a bit like they might be looking for a good, long while

Relientk776d ago

Do they actually mean fun, or "surprise mechanics" and ways to monetize?

EazyC6d ago

Honestly, get them to sit down and play Bad Company 2 together.

If they can't see why that had the magic, they shouldn't be game developers.

Show all comments (13)
160°

EA CEO Dubs The Next Battlefield "One Of The Most Ambitious Projects In Our History"

The CEO of EA has iterated his massive ambitions about the next Battlefield entry in the new Q1 2025 financial results.

Inverno53d ago

Clicked to say exactly this. They set themselves up for disappointing failure.

Cacabunga52d ago

When i hear them say this sounds like they keep surpassing themselves… just backwards..

micro transactions, always online, no SP campaign.. everything that makes me🤮

RaidenBlack53d ago

It ain't Bad Company 3 ... so stop false-promising ... but make it current-gen only plz ... it'll be 2025 ffs

blacktiger53d ago

damn! I was about that dream thing

Chocoburger53d ago (Edited 53d ago )

More intentionally released broken games with micro-trash-actions, and of course fake apologies written by ChatGPT instead of doing it yourself because you don't give a crap if you sell people garbage for their hard earned money.

Ass.

Seth_hun53d ago

They are always saying this, with every title. :)

Bebedora53d ago

EA is the superior do not doubt them. They are Canadian,

Snookies1253d ago (Edited 53d ago )

Isn't that the whole point of having a "series" of games? Isn't the follow-up supposed to be inherently better or "more ambitious" than the previous entries? Unfortunately, this has not been the case for Battlefield in quite some time. I've still never even redeemed the free BF 2042 code I got a year and a half ago lol. Such a shame, used to be one of my favorite shooters back in the day.

Bebedora53d ago

You just need colurs and some rainbows. Anything will work. BF was killed once EA got their filthy paws over it, like the monkeys they are.

Show all comments (29)