Battlefield 3 is a fantastic multiplayer game, but the single player campaign has received some negative criticism. Adam Sessler had similar feelings, so he decided to turn that subject into this week's Soapbox. Can a beautiful, incredibly designed game rest on its multiplayer alone? Or do you need an epic war campaign to whet your appetite for destruction?
I think just about everyone can agree with what Adam said.
I think BF3 could have easily been multiplayer only. While I enjoyed certain bits of the campaign, none were mind blowingly amazing. It was just pretty lol Multiplayer on the other hand...best FPS multiplayer on consoles in my opinion.
WOW! I'm amazed how people are actually judging BF3 from the single player campaign. Frankly I'm amazed people thought that the SP will be any good. It's Battlefield people. Who the hell buys this game for the SP. Who ever buys this game for the SP needs to have himself/herself committed.
Ohh Sess...I used to have so much respect for you but frankly I think you are starting to show signs of loosing your touch. Maybe it's because all the good people left G4 and you find yourself surrounded by idiots. LEAVE G4.
fools buying BF3 for the SP is like buying a Corvette for the trunk space... just stupid.... it's mostly alot of CoD fanboys that are focusing on the SP aspect as to have something negative to focus on.. how about focusing on what this game does better than ANYONE.. anyone meaning anyone.... any FPS out there... noone can compare to BF3's multiplayer aspect...period..
The SP is a nice ride, don't bash it!
The MP is simply the most awesome FPS online ever!