http://www.video-game-forums.com/conten … eview.html
"Another thing is Kill-streaks... in which this game once again has a lack of."
"Another thing is Kill-streaks... in which this game once again has a lack of."
" BF3 Review
Similar to Bad Company 2, more hype than anything else..
First off , I'd like to give props to Dice's advertising / marketing department for creating one of the most dramatic, over-the-top promos , trailers ,commercials , and other marketing material all for just a mediocre shooting game that will most likely die-off after a couple months....similar to their previous games. Kind of reminds me of dealing with cheap car salesmen.
From an early glance, it'll be hard to see this game having any strong sticking power to rival the reigning top dog out there. ( name left blank )
The single player campaign is good, but almost seems like a rushed product. The chapters seem to be all over the place, so if you're looking for any kind of story you could forgetaboutit... Also, somewhat annoying is how you die out of the blue sometimes while no-one is in sight. (even in sniper range) Almost appears to be a glitch. Length wise there are 12 chapters / levels. But don't let that fool you, they are short chapters. And only 6 levels in co-op mode. It's strange how after all these years they still aren't able to implement a full-fledged co-op mode for the entire campaign.
There's no question about the graphics, audio, & lighting elements, it is the best looking Shooter game to date and almost awe inspiring on a high-end PC... the vehicles, explosions, destructible objects do look better than ever with the Frostbite 2 engine. But giving an old car a new paint job doesn't always cut it...
Multiplayer still feels sluggish & monumental as with it's previous installments... Unless your style of play primarily favors hanging back & sniping on large open maps...or getting easy kills with vehicles.
Customization is much more thorough, and there are an enormous amount of unlockables , awards , upgrades, etc. The weapon / equipment list is also immense.
Vehicle & Solider Specializations ( perks ) are a nice addition, but almost seem like a ripoff of another popular game.
The PC version supports a whopping 64 people online in MP matches compared to only 24 with the consoles. (360 / PS3)
We have always emphasized over the years what primarily lures the mainstream crowd in is quick combat, short maps with a lot of action going on. Primary example : other MP shooter games currently out there in which the 'small maps' always get voted for over the others.. Another thing is Kill-streaks... in which this game once again has a lack of. As much as some say they hate them , it's still what brings in the 'horde' of gamers....in terms of excitement & re-playability. Maybe after this game slowly dies out, they'll eventually catch on.
Why all the criticism ? I personally feel nothing was drastically changed in terms of 'gameplay' with the Battlefield franchise....which is the MOST important factor for shooter fans. If anything this should be called Bad Company 3.
It's something about Battlefield games that just doesn't feel full-fledged and uniform. Even when running & turning in multiplayer games, movement doesn't feel 'instant' like in other Shooters. There tends to be a bit of frame-rate lag, even when your Lookspeed is all the way up. Minorly sluggish might be a better term.
With that being said, the Battlefield die-hards will still defend & indulge in the game. But the fact of the matter is, the mainstream will still be lured elsewhere. (game name left blank...again)
Not giving game reviewers the opportunity to review the game...until a day before Release is a bit suspect & unprofessional as well. But of course in their opinion they say the delay was due to 'perfecting the game'. what.....eva.
Overall grade is a 76 out of a 100 due to having similar type of gameplay to previous versions of Bad Company along with a lack of originality. Adding more unlocks & customization = not originality. Adding Specializations (perks) = also not originality. If the review was solely based off of graphics , it would be close to a 100. But sadly, that's not the case.
Grade C"
I agree in some .... after playing MOH multi ... I was really worried ( for those that haven't played the multi of MOH, it has to be one of the worse multi experiences out there )
picked it up at midnite last nite ..... and by a few hours after getting home there was already people that had beaten the single player
oh and I want the motherfukn drum roll
Similar to Bad Company 2, more hype than anything else..
First off , I'd like to give props to Dice's advertising / marketing department for creating one of the most dramatic, over-the-top promos , trailers ,commercials , and other marketing material all for just a mediocre shooting game that will most likely die-off after a couple months....similar to their previous games. Kind of reminds me of dealing with cheap car salesmen.
From an early glance, it'll be hard to see this game having any strong sticking power to rival the reigning top dog out there. ( name left blank )
The single player campaign is good, but almost seems like a rushed product. The chapters seem to be all over the place, so if you're looking for any kind of story you could forgetaboutit... Also, somewhat annoying is how you die out of the blue sometimes while no-one is in sight. (even in sniper range) Almost appears to be a glitch. Length wise there are 12 chapters / levels. But don't let that fool you, they are short chapters. And only 6 levels in co-op mode. It's strange how after all these years they still aren't able to implement a full-fledged co-op mode for the entire campaign.
There's no question about the graphics, audio, & lighting elements, it is the best looking Shooter game to date and almost awe inspiring on a high-end PC... the vehicles, explosions, destructible objects do look better than ever with the Frostbite 2 engine. But giving an old car a new paint job doesn't always cut it...
Multiplayer still feels sluggish & monumental as with it's previous installments... Unless your style of play primarily favors hanging back & sniping on large open maps...or getting easy kills with vehicles.
Customization is much more thorough, and there are an enormous amount of unlockables , awards , upgrades, etc. The weapon / equipment list is also immense.
Vehicle & Solider Specializations ( perks ) are a nice addition, but almost seem like a ripoff of another popular game.
The PC version supports a whopping 64 people online in MP matches compared to only 24 with the consoles. (360 / PS3)
We have always emphasized over the years what primarily lures the mainstream crowd in is quick combat, short maps with a lot of action going on. Primary example : other MP shooter games currently out there in which the 'small maps' always get voted for over the others.. Another thing is Kill-streaks... in which this game once again has a lack of. As much as some say they hate them , it's still what brings in the 'horde' of gamers....in terms of excitement & re-playability. Maybe after this game slowly dies out, they'll eventually catch on.
Why all the criticism ? I personally feel nothing was drastically changed in terms of 'gameplay' with the Battlefield franchise....which is the MOST important factor for shooter fans. If anything this should be called Bad Company 3.
It's something about Battlefield games that just doesn't feel full-fledged and uniform. Even when running & turning in multiplayer games, movement doesn't feel 'instant' like in other Shooters. There tends to be a bit of frame-rate lag, even when your Lookspeed is all the way up. Minorly sluggish might be a better term.
With that being said, the Battlefield die-hards will still defend & indulge in the game. But the fact of the matter is, the mainstream will still be lured elsewhere. (game name left blank...again)
Not giving game reviewers the opportunity to review the game...until a day before Release is a bit suspect & unprofessional as well. But of course in their opinion they say the delay was due to 'perfecting the game'. what.....eva.
Overall grade is a 76 out of a 100 due to having similar type of gameplay to previous versions of Bad Company along with a lack of originality. Adding more unlocks & customization = not originality. Adding Specializations (perks) = also not originality. If the review was solely based off of graphics , it would be close to a 100. But sadly, that's not the case.
Grade C"
I agree in some .... after playing MOH multi ... I was really worried ( for those that haven't played the multi of MOH, it has to be one of the worse multi experiences out there )
picked it up at midnite last nite ..... and by a few hours after getting home there was already people that had beaten the single player
oh and I want the motherfukn drum roll
I hope you selected that quote as a joke right?RTHKI wrote:
http://www.video-game-forums.com/content/123-bf3-review-battlefield-3-review.html
"Another thing is Kill-streaks... in which this game once again has a lack of."
sounds about right
That guy tells it how it is, but like everybody in the comments is saying, he seems to be biased towards CoD
This is Bad Company 3 with a Battlefield 3 label on it.
Good thing I enjoyed Bad Company 2 enough to not completely hate Battlefield 3.
Good thing I enjoyed Bad Company 2 enough to not completely hate Battlefield 3.
oh god that guy is so full of itSEREMAKER wrote:
" BF3 Review
Similar to Bad Company 2, more hype than anything else..
First off , I'd like to give props to Dice's advertising / marketing department for creating one of the most dramatic, over-the-top promos , trailers ,commercials , and other marketing material all for just a mediocre shooting game that will most likely die-off after a couple months....similar to their previous games. Kind of reminds me of dealing with cheap car salesmen.
From an early glance, it'll be hard to see this game having any strong sticking power to rival the reigning top dog out there. ( name left blank )
The single player campaign is good, but almost seems like a rushed product. The chapters seem to be all over the place, so if you're looking for any kind of story you could forgetaboutit... Also, somewhat annoying is how you die out of the blue sometimes while no-one is in sight. (even in sniper range) Almost appears to be a glitch. Length wise there are 12 chapters / levels. But don't let that fool you, they are short chapters. And only 6 levels in co-op mode. It's strange how after all these years they still aren't able to implement a full-fledged co-op mode for the entire campaign.
There's no question about the graphics, audio, & lighting elements, it is the best looking Shooter game to date and almost awe inspiring on a high-end PC... the vehicles, explosions, destructible objects do look better than ever with the Frostbite 2 engine. But giving an old car a new paint job doesn't always cut it...
Multiplayer still feels sluggish & monumental as with it's previous installments... Unless your style of play primarily favors hanging back & sniping on large open maps...or getting easy kills with vehicles.
Customization is much more thorough, and there are an enormous amount of unlockables , awards , upgrades, etc. The weapon / equipment list is also immense.
Vehicle & Solider Specializations ( perks ) are a nice addition, but almost seem like a ripoff of another popular game.
The PC version supports a whopping 64 people online in MP matches compared to only 24 with the consoles. (360 / PS3)
We have always emphasized over the years what primarily lures the mainstream crowd in is quick combat, short maps with a lot of action going on. Primary example : other MP shooter games currently out there in which the 'small maps' always get voted for over the others.. Another thing is Kill-streaks... in which this game once again has a lack of. As much as some say they hate them , it's still what brings in the 'horde' of gamers....in terms of excitement & re-playability. Maybe after this game slowly dies out, they'll eventually catch on.
Why all the criticism ? I personally feel nothing was drastically changed in terms of 'gameplay' with the Battlefield franchise....which is the MOST important factor for shooter fans. If anything this should be called Bad Company 3.
It's something about Battlefield games that just doesn't feel full-fledged and uniform. Even when running & turning in multiplayer games, movement doesn't feel 'instant' like in other Shooters. There tends to be a bit of frame-rate lag, even when your Lookspeed is all the way up. Minorly sluggish might be a better term.
With that being said, the Battlefield die-hards will still defend & indulge in the game. But the fact of the matter is, the mainstream will still be lured elsewhere. (game name left blank...again)
Not giving game reviewers the opportunity to review the game...until a day before Release is a bit suspect & unprofessional as well. But of course in their opinion they say the delay was due to 'perfecting the game'. what.....eva.
Overall grade is a 76 out of a 100 due to having similar type of gameplay to previous versions of Bad Company along with a lack of originality. Adding more unlocks & customization = not originality. Adding Specializations (perks) = also not originality. If the review was solely based off of graphics , it would be close to a 100. But sadly, that's not the case.
Grade C"
I agree in some .... after playing MOH multi ... I was really worried ( for those that haven't played the multi of MOH, it has to be one of the worse multi experiences out there )
picked it up at midnite last nite ..... and by a few hours after getting home there was already people that had beaten the single player
oh and I want the motherfukn drum roll
First he bashes BF3 for ripping perks from COD, then he says that BF has a lack of killstreaks... not to mention he clearly just wants CoD, one might ask the question why he doesn't review call of duty instead and let other titles do their thing...
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
It's at this point I knew this guy had no fucking idea about anything battlefield related.that will most likely die-off after a couple months....similar to their previous games.
nerd baiting
"or getting easy kills with vehicles". Hmmm, kill streaks anyone?
yerp this guys a grade A dumbfuckAussieReaper wrote:
It's at this point I knew this guy had no fucking idea about anything battlefield related.that will most likely die-off after a couple months....similar to their previous games.
Probably on Activisions payroll
It's pretty obvious he is trolling to generate site traffic.Spearhead wrote:
yerp this guys a grade A dumbfuckAussieReaper wrote:
It's at this point I knew this guy had no fucking idea about anything battlefield related.that will most likely die-off after a couple months....similar to their previous games.
Probably on Activisions payroll
omg guys check out this terrible review!!1
The thing is though, it's generated negative feedback, sure you'll get a spike in traffic, but it won't last and people will resent you.
so he bashes it for trying to copy cod... only to complain that it doesn't copy cod.
cool
story
bro.
cool
story
bro.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
That reviewer is a massive douche.
If you want CoD, just buy the fucking game already.
I'd feel the same if someone were making comparatives to the latest CoD game and the BF franchise.
If you want CoD, just buy the fucking game already.
I'd feel the same if someone were making comparatives to the latest CoD game and the BF franchise.
this! i was reminiscing about it today.SEREMAKER wrote:
oh and I want the motherfukn drum roll
"people in ny have a general idea of how to drive. one of the pedals goes forward the other one prevents you from dying"
Small maps good? Kill streaks good? Idiot.
It seems like he played Battlefield expecting Call of Duty. He's entitled to his opinion but the fact that he considers it a fault that the maps weren't small closed affairs for quick fights "because that's what gamers like" clearly suggests that he has no idea about the popularity of the series. The Battlefield series has always been about sprawling open battlefields, the feeling of being a small part of a larger battle, of contributing to a larger war as part of a team. Kill streaks? Enclosed close-quarters action and twitch-based fighting? Please.
I suppose part of this is the fault of the marketing, the constant one-upmanship over Call of Duty leads people like this clueless self-appointed reviewer to believe Battlefield was trying to be Call of Duty.
This review has as much value as one about Call of Duty complaining that the maps are too enclosed and there aren't enough vehicles.
I suppose part of this is the fault of the marketing, the constant one-upmanship over Call of Duty leads people like this clueless self-appointed reviewer to believe Battlefield was trying to be Call of Duty.
This review has as much value as one about Call of Duty complaining that the maps are too enclosed and there aren't enough vehicles.
[Blinking eyes thing]
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
Steam: http://steamcommunity.com/id/tzyon
We should burn him alive for this.
Dies off in a couple of months? really?AussieReaper wrote:
It's pretty obvious he is trolling to generate site traffic.Spearhead wrote:
yerp this guys a grade A dumbfuckAussieReaper wrote:
It's at this point I knew this guy had no fucking idea about anything battlefield related.
Probably on Activisions payroll
omg guys check out this terrible review!!1
The thing is though, it's generated negative feedback, sure you'll get a spike in traffic, but it won't last and people will resent you.
this guy must snort adderall for breakfast
Oh no, not a lack of killstreaks...
Somehow I doubt that's what brought people into CoD. It was simply fun deathmatching.
Somehow I doubt that's what brought people into CoD. It was simply fun deathmatching.
^^ QFTSpearhead wrote:
yerp this guys a grade A dumbfuckAussieReaper wrote:
It's at this point I knew this guy had no fucking idea about anything battlefield related.that will most likely die-off after a couple months....similar to their previous games.
Probably on Activisions payroll
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
It's called battleFIELD for a reason. not enclosed death ring.
cybargs you clearly haven't played 90% of the maps in bf3.
libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual. http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/
waiting for my copy to arrive tomorrow. I thought caspian map was pretty wide open.Uzique wrote:
cybargs you clearly haven't played 90% of the maps in bf3.
They could stand to open up the areas around the targets a little bit more on rush on that map. Conquest was quite open.Cybargs wrote:
waiting for my copy to arrive tomorrow. I thought caspian map was pretty wide open.Uzique wrote:
cybargs you clearly haven't played 90% of the maps in bf3.