Battlefield 3

 PC
User Score
7.6

Generally favorable reviews- based on 5642 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4,003 out of 5642
  2. Mixed: 872 out of 5642
  3. Negative: 767 out of 5642
Buy Now
Buy on

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
view
per page
  1. Fastpoose
    Nov 11, 2011
    4
    I have had this game since release, and have spent easily over 45 hours in forums and tweaking my brand new BEAST of a pc, and I still get a RANDOM CRASH FREEZE every 2-10mins, that needs a HARD reset! When this game is patched and 99% of the bugs are crushed, this will be a 10/10 game. At present it's way to buggy and not yet worth the price of admission, it's a massive disappointmentI have had this game since release, and have spent easily over 45 hours in forums and tweaking my brand new BEAST of a pc, and I still get a RANDOM CRASH FREEZE every 2-10mins, that needs a HARD reset! When this game is patched and 99% of the bugs are crushed, this will be a 10/10 game. At present it's way to buggy and not yet worth the price of admission, it's a massive disappointment to not be able to play this properly on release with an amazing machine (and yes I have updated the drivers thanks EA/DICE...!!… Expand
  2. Bobic
    Nov 8, 2011
    4
    I'm sure that this game was made with the best intentions in mind. The singleplayer looks tight and well made, the multiplayer looks to be the best this year, and the graphics are fantastic. Why, then, did I rate this game so badly? It is, simply, unplayable. Due to bugs still left in the game 2 weeks after release and after beta, the game requires over 2GB vram to be playable at all (thisI'm sure that this game was made with the best intentions in mind. The singleplayer looks tight and well made, the multiplayer looks to be the best this year, and the graphics are fantastic. Why, then, did I rate this game so badly? It is, simply, unplayable. Due to bugs still left in the game 2 weeks after release and after beta, the game requires over 2GB vram to be playable at all (this is not mentioned in the recommended settings, which ask for a paltry 1GB), and without it, the will play smoothly for a few minutes before utilizing all the ram in the computer at once. Leaving a bug in that makes the game unplayable for so long makes me more than a little mad, and so, I am forced to dock more than a few points.… Expand
  3. noobr
    Nov 2, 2011
    4
    Rush maps make bad conquest maps and conquest maps make bad rush maps, sums the game up. There are no real stand out great maps, and the maps designed for other game mods are down right horrible. The destruction and general atmosphere of combat feel like a downgrade from BC2, with bullets to shells not penetrating obstacles that should be trivial and the lighting is just down right ugly.Rush maps make bad conquest maps and conquest maps make bad rush maps, sums the game up. There are no real stand out great maps, and the maps designed for other game mods are down right horrible. The destruction and general atmosphere of combat feel like a downgrade from BC2, with bullets to shells not penetrating obstacles that should be trivial and the lighting is just down right ugly. Infantry combat is well done, vehicles and aircraft are an embarrassment to Dice. All in all a waste of £40.… Expand
  4. darkballz_pl
    Nov 29, 2011
    4
    Game itself is an great looking and typical multiplayer, so don't expect any epic storyline in singleplayer - it's rather lazy tutorial. CoD's influence isn't the worst thing in this game, however it's absolutely not my taste. The annoyance is Battlelog, which makes me run internet browser to log in. What an brilliant idea... Seriously., whats next ? Will we have to run Windows MediaGame itself is an great looking and typical multiplayer, so don't expect any epic storyline in singleplayer - it's rather lazy tutorial. CoD's influence isn't the worst thing in this game, however it's absolutely not my taste. The annoyance is Battlelog, which makes me run internet browser to log in. What an brilliant idea... Seriously., whats next ? Will we have to run Windows Media Player in background to hear the sound and music in game ? Thats why i was so "generous" and gave it 4.… Expand
  5. Powderkeg40
    Oct 26, 2011
    4
    Visually this game is a 10 but the game play is a step backwards. 99% of people buy Battlefield for the multi-player so I won't even bother with the fail that is single player. Commander? Gone
    Squads remain in the game but are limited to 4 players and all the functionality from before is simply gone. Want to play with 1 or multiple other friends, on the same team, in the same squad?    Visually this game is a 10 but the game play is a step backwards. 99% of people buy Battlefield for the multi-player so I won't even bother with the fail that is single player. Commander? Gone
    Squads remain in the game but are limited to 4 players and all the functionality from before is simply gone. Want to play with 1 or multiple other friends, on the same team, in the same squad? Good luck with that. You can't join the squad of your choice. You can't join a friends squad and they can't join you. You must rely on luck to get in the same squad. In its current state BF3 seems to be designed for the MW2 crowd and they lost their identity in the process.
    To top it off you have to launch the game through a 3rd party web browser. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot is that all about?
    BF3 has potential but they need to fix the teamwork features of the game. Every previous battlefield title surpasses BF3 in the team play department.    … Expand
  6. Flowone
    Jan 13, 2012
    4
    I regret buying this game. First off you should know that this game launches on a 3rd party website. A website not a game, a website that keeps track of all your progress. I bought this game, expecting to play a Battlefield game, yeah didn't happen. All you get is a sad singleplayer experience with a completely unfair, unbalance multiplayer. Where 90% you are outmatch simply because theI regret buying this game. First off you should know that this game launches on a 3rd party website. A website not a game, a website that keeps track of all your progress. I bought this game, expecting to play a Battlefield game, yeah didn't happen. All you get is a sad singleplayer experience with a completely unfair, unbalance multiplayer. Where 90% you are outmatch simply because the opposite player has more equipment than you. There is so much customization that it completely destroys balance. Out of all the Battlefield games I've played, no, out of all the FPS multiplayers I've played this has to be the biggest pile of ridiculous I've been on. Where with previous Battlefield games destruction was a staple in the Battlefield diet it's now just a simple appetizer offering barely any destruction. With the ridiculous amount of customization, limited destruction, and huge maps where it would take hours to actually find any action you are left with just the spawn screen due to the incisive problem of camping. You thought it was bad in *insert game* you have no idea how bad it is in this game. You're expected to find someone prone on the ground in a bush on a map the size of Texas and only after you had to run 3 mile to a place just to get killed, sent back to GO, do not collect $200. Some people may argue "Oh you're not playing it right, be patient, don't leave your base", I bought this game for the action element in a First Person Shooter not a First Person Hide and Seek in a bush for 2 hours. Players on other FPS don't nearly camp this hard, not even in Modern Warfare! Save yourself the trouble and DO NOT waste your money on this game! There are plenty other brand new games coming out and if you were thinking about getting rid of Bad Company 2, DON'T!!! Bad Company 2's multiplayer game-play is 100x better than Battlefield 3.… Expand
  7. Falrinth
    Mar 19, 2013
    4
    Looks beautiful, but gameplay is not very well thought trough. It allows teams with squads supported by voice communication and superior unlocks simply steamroll the team with random players. No effective autobalancing, no voice chat for the random team... simply turns them into sheep for slaughter for the sake of several people's fun. Also cheap fun... cause winning against team whoLooks beautiful, but gameplay is not very well thought trough. It allows teams with squads supported by voice communication and superior unlocks simply steamroll the team with random players. No effective autobalancing, no voice chat for the random team... simply turns them into sheep for slaughter for the sake of several people's fun. Also cheap fun... cause winning against team who struggle to do even smallest of cooperation is hardly fun... its as fun as winning tennis match against blindfolded opponent. Also the overnerfs of stuff in this game making it only cosmetic (like the new plane AC130 or something like that... overnerfed main gun is as strong as throwing pebbles from very far on the vertical move on moving targets instead of making the plance a monster above battlefield even if only for a while now and then; or the snipers halogens mounted on scopes). But the poor autobalancing is the main thing that kills the game for any non-hardcore player that is playing with "clan".… Expand
  8. Moonstrider
    Apr 11, 2012
    4
    A game with great potential, but clearly done in a hurry just to be launched before CoD:MW3. To be honest, this is the best shooting experience I've ever had in a computer game, BUT... the game is haunted by bad decisions, bugs/glitches, balance problems and other rushed stuff. Maps are simply horrible; they decided to abandon the huge maps we've seen in previous Battlefield titles, andA game with great potential, but clearly done in a hurry just to be launched before CoD:MW3. To be honest, this is the best shooting experience I've ever had in a computer game, BUT... the game is haunted by bad decisions, bugs/glitches, balance problems and other rushed stuff. Maps are simply horrible; they decided to abandon the huge maps we've seen in previous Battlefield titles, and now we have close-quarters levels with a terrible design, worse than the ones seen in the Call of Duty series (see Operation Metro if you don't believe me). There is no VoIP, destruction is worse than in Bad Company 2, hit detection fails (you get shot even after entering cover), patches are rare and, until now, have only made the game's balance worse, specially for the vehicles, which have been nerfed to oblivion. And, of course, your character will suicide many times for absolutely no reason. I can't tell you to stay away from this game because it is, indeed, a really nice experience (if you have the Back to Karkand expansion, because the original maps are terrible and the next DLCs will take months to be launched), but seeing what Battlefield 3 is, and the huge potential it has, I must say it's a complete fail, and the developers don't seem to care about fixing the game. As for the Singleplayer/Co-op game modes, well... they're just horrible. Campaign is totally linear and the story isn't good at all. Co-op levels are few, short, and you can't communicate with your teammate; yes that's right, there's absolutely no chat system on the Co-op mode, you can't communicate by VoIP, nor by typing.… Expand
  9. AaronAction
    Nov 11, 2011
    4
    Not better than Call of duty at all. In ways the game is a rip off from previous titles like MAG. People are always so quickly to bash COD, but realisticly COD has much more maps, content and fun factor than any BattleField game. Don't waste your money on this game.
  10. Zanadar
    Oct 25, 2011
    4
    Look, I know this is a multiplayer game. I do. I understand that the singleplayer is little more than an extended tutorial. Did an hour of multiplayer and it was really great. But you put the crappy singleplayer in there as well, so I'm damn well going to address it. It sucks. I mean really, the lack of effort is glaring. Let's start with story. Ok, so we all know the story this entireLook, I know this is a multiplayer game. I do. I understand that the singleplayer is little more than an extended tutorial. Did an hour of multiplayer and it was really great. But you put the crappy singleplayer in there as well, so I'm damn well going to address it. It sucks. I mean really, the lack of effort is glaring. Let's start with story. Ok, so we all know the story this entire genre of games has. Story. Singular. The only thing that ever changes is if it's nazis, russians or terrorists. What's even worse is, it's told as a flashback within a retrospective. This method is not avanguard. It's not clever. It's not artistic. It's a bad idea, and it always was. Now, remember how in Bad Company 2 you usually had multiple avenues of approach? You could take the buildings on either side of the street just go for a frontal assault or clear that sawmill in any sequence you wanted, or in the desert mission pick which part to do first? Yeah, Bad Company 2 was linear. But it made an effort to pretend it wasn't. This game? Corridor shooter. I mean quite literally. I tried flanking constantly, every single time I was told "Leaving battlefield" and given a timer. Every time. The game is a sequence of corridors leading to slightly larger shooting galleries in which you're given no option how to approach the situation. You do it exactly in the one place the designer meant you to and that's. Then, enemies. Oh God this part is terrible. The enemies are inexcusable. First of all, all the terrorists are one guy. No, seriously. Every last one of them. The same model. Exactly the same. No difference. In two shooting galleries one after the other I stood crouched next to their spawn point and for a full minute each it went like this: Two identical clones enter. I shoot them both. Reload. Two identical clones enter. Repeat. This for a full minute each time. And most of the game is like this. So yeah, I'm sorry but if you didn't want people to judge this game on the singleplayer you should have stuck with the multiplayer, which is actually really good btw.… Expand
  11. Poerisija
    Oct 30, 2011
    4
    Pretty much disappointed in all the nonsense of tossing silly medikits around, sniper scope glares and brighter-than-sun flashlights. Also, the game is ugly. It's hiding it all behind a mass of light effects and bloom and hdr. Gameplay is nothing to write home about - it's BFBC2.5. Single player sucked balls, that's enough said.
  12. psyph3r
    Oct 30, 2011
    4
    Firstly, let me tell you that this game is awesome. The graphics, animations and sound are top notch.
    The campaign is mediocre but then if you bought BF3 for the SP, there's something wrong with you.
    Now the reason for the low score is that the game is totally unplayable. Sure there are some people who haven't had a single problem , you are the lucky ones and I envy you but there are 10    Firstly, let me tell you that this game is awesome. The graphics, animations and sound are top notch.
    The campaign is mediocre but then if you bought BF3 for the SP, there's something wrong with you.
    Now the reason for the low score is that the game is totally unplayable. Sure there are some people who haven't had a single problem , you are the lucky ones and I envy you but there are 10 more people for 1 of you who are not able to play the game for more than 5 minutes. The game crashes with a stuttering sound after 5 mins into a MP session. The stuttering on this game is unimaginable on certain high end cards as well. When i pay $60 to play a game i don't expect to spend 10 hours finding a solution to a problem running the game. Kudos to DIce and EA for not porting this from the consoles but your ignorance to customer grievances on Battlelog has to be brought to the forefront.
    You had an amazing game in your hands and you messed it up. Stay away from this title , atleast on the PC until these issues are rectified.    … Expand
  13. Cr4zy
    Oct 25, 2011
    4
    What could have been a great game seriously let down by the developers. Multiple issues that were reported from the alpha through the beta by many still exist. With bugs and glitches that were also not present previously. It honestly feels like a half finished game. Things that they should have known people hated from bf:bc2 completely ignored.
    The lack of basic things, no team balance, no    What could have been a great game seriously let down by the developers. Multiple issues that were reported from the alpha through the beta by many still exist. With bugs and glitches that were also not present previously. It honestly feels like a half finished game. Things that they should have known people hated from bf:bc2 completely ignored.
    The lack of basic things, no team balance, no option to select the squad you want. half complete features, for example commorose, missing simple things like requesting ammo or health, but even the options there can't be heard by your team so it is pointless.
    Game isn't built to be a battlefield any more, took too many ideas from cod. Now its suck in the middle doing a worse job then both and nothing better then either.
    That's just the MP, the SP is linear, boring and so heavily scripted, you can't do anything the game doesn't want.
    A hefty patch is the only thing that will fix this, thoroughly underwhelming and a massive disappointment.    … Expand
  14. TheEN4cer
    Oct 25, 2011
    4
    The overall experience with this game is average, it could have been FANTASTIC, if DICE had not copied other shooters in the market, to me this game is just a mix of Bad Company 2, Medal Of Honor, Call Of Dutty and Battlefield 2, all together in a nicer engine, that looks great butt not as great as they made you believe in all those nice trailers...
    The annoying battlelog combined with the    The overall experience with this game is average, it could have been FANTASTIC, if DICE had not copied other shooters in the market, to me this game is just a mix of Bad Company 2, Medal Of Honor, Call Of Dutty and Battlefield 2, all together in a nicer engine, that looks great butt not as great as they made you believe in all those nice trailers...
    The annoying battlelog combined with the unnecessary origin spyware app do not help either.    … Expand
  15. Crismodin
    Oct 25, 2011
    4
    If you were expecting a classic great menu system for the game good luck because there isn't one and the real disappointing thing about BF3 is you are forced to run the game through EA's Origin - Not standalone and not through STEAM - EA really dropped the ball on forcing all of its customers to run this through a beta version of a E-Game hosting service... Not to mention the menu-systemIf you were expecting a classic great menu system for the game good luck because there isn't one and the real disappointing thing about BF3 is you are forced to run the game through EA's Origin - Not standalone and not through STEAM - EA really dropped the ball on forcing all of its customers to run this through a beta version of a E-Game hosting service... Not to mention the menu-system for the game is all based online which makes you feel like you really got ripped off because it looks cheap trust me the only thing nice about it is Battlelog which is kinda cool but it's EA's way of saying here run Origin or Don't play the game.

    This is an OK game as it sits for the time being but yet it deserves a 40% rating due to several issues right now - First being that EA has released a game that has many graphical, gameplay, multiplayer, map, vehicle issues for instance green-flickers and being able to glitch through maps on multiplayer its nowhere near as smooth as it was shown in the previews that im sure everyone has seen. Granted it is a new game but the vehicle issues and the unrealistic nature of Battlefield 3 due to vehicles not producing realistic amounts of destruction and damage really hurt this titles reputation.

    To best describe Battlefield 3 would be a cross between Homefront and Modern Warfare 2 - Homefront being due to the graphical and sketchy gameplay and Modern Warfare 2 due to BF3 trying to cut in on some profits from MW3 which currently sits at a total loss to people who have bought this game (and yes I bought the limited edition BF3). I bought 2x EVGA GTX-580 SC cards specifically for this game and yet the texture draws and polished look this game should have isn't there and not to mention the annoying lag on multiplayer games that are supposedly low-ping.

    It has potential to be an awesome game but as it sits currently I wouldn't invest in it until it at least drops $20-30 or they fix hundreds of bugs and errors. Well that's all I have to say hope you found this somewhat useful.    … Expand
  16. Velsuan
    Oct 30, 2011
    4
    The first thing this game is doing well, it's the multiplayers mode. No doubt about that, that's an incredible experience, a satisfying one, especially in a squad with well known friends! And the good part of the review ends here. The rest of the game is a big letdown compared to Bad Company 2... EA is here to make money, offering a game that improve nothing, as they do with the sportsThe first thing this game is doing well, it's the multiplayers mode. No doubt about that, that's an incredible experience, a satisfying one, especially in a squad with well known friends! And the good part of the review ends here. The rest of the game is a big letdown compared to Bad Company 2... EA is here to make money, offering a game that improve nothing, as they do with the sports franchises. The campaign is a non inspired copy of COD Black Ops, with bad writing and bad acting. As fas as I'm concerned, the Vietnam expansion of the second game on the row was the pinnacle of the BF experience. Don't lose money and time on Battlefield 3, persist with BC2 and/or wait for MW3. BC3 is a frustrating experience.… Expand
  17. basstaverns
    Oct 30, 2011
    4
    What an utterly disappointing campaign. Total rip off of CoD, and after that huge marketing campaign to lead us to believe that it would be awesome. Take the plane mission for example - it looks fantastic, I've got a GTX570 and settings on high+, but the gameplay? Push either 1, 2, 3 or x when told to and that's it. It's like a smartphone app for toddlers. The whole thing is an utterWhat an utterly disappointing campaign. Total rip off of CoD, and after that huge marketing campaign to lead us to believe that it would be awesome. Take the plane mission for example - it looks fantastic, I've got a GTX570 and settings on high+, but the gameplay? Push either 1, 2, 3 or x when told to and that's it. It's like a smartphone app for toddlers. The whole thing is an utter embarrassment for Dice. In the word of Jonny Rotten: "Every get the feeling you've been cheated?"… Expand
  18. TheShooter
    Oct 30, 2011
    4
    I'm really disappointed from Battlefield 3. I'ts too CoD like. The MP is unbalanced, the Game **** up every 10 Minutes, on my High End Gaming Rig btw. The Single-player is too Short, and the AI is stupid. The Gameplay is not BF anymore, its not balanced. Where is the Commander? Where are all the great things from BF2 !? And the Sniper is useless in BF3, because after a time the scope isI'm really disappointed from Battlefield 3. I'ts too CoD like. The MP is unbalanced, the Game **** up every 10 Minutes, on my High End Gaming Rig btw. The Single-player is too Short, and the AI is stupid. The Gameplay is not BF anymore, its not balanced. Where is the Commander? Where are all the great things from BF2 !? And the Sniper is useless in BF3, because after a time the scope is reflecting the Sun to the Enemys, so the Sniper is easy to spot. A Crappy Game..... The CoD Hype has won, and killed BF...… Expand
  19. Lac3dHit
    Oct 30, 2011
    4
    BF3 created so much frustration for me that I just had Origin give me a refund. The online battlelog and server browser is beyond annoying. One simple rule of "keep it simple" was completely ignored to force this new platform on customers. The game itself isn't horrible but in my opinion it's not the best Battle Field. I don't expect a new game to play completely like another version butBF3 created so much frustration for me that I just had Origin give me a refund. The online battlelog and server browser is beyond annoying. One simple rule of "keep it simple" was completely ignored to force this new platform on customers. The game itself isn't horrible but in my opinion it's not the best Battle Field. I don't expect a new game to play completely like another version but the mechanics feel dumbed down and the air vehicles are lackluster. The recon class was changed for the worse, and over all I'm not a fan of a lot of the map designs or load outs. I'm not a Modern Warfare fan boy trying to write a bad review, I just think this game has implemented some very poor choices.… Expand
  20. BigDragon
    Nov 1, 2011
    4
    Battlefield 3 is a gorgeous and smooth multiplayer FPS that is fun to play if you have tons of time to devote to it and have been playing since launch day. I feel sorry for anyone who hasn't started playing yet or who will receive this game as a gift later this year since they are in for an experience equivalent to hazing.

    Battlefield 3 is deliberately abusive to new or below-average    Battlefield 3 is a gorgeous and smooth multiplayer FPS that is fun to play if you have tons of time to devote to it and have been playing since launch day. I feel sorry for anyone who hasn't started playing yet or who will receive this game as a gift later this year since they are in for an experience equivalent to hazing.

    Battlefield 3 is deliberately abusive to new or below-average skill players. Yes, there are weapons to unlock like previous Battlefield games. Unfortunately, DICE has taken a good thing to the extreme this time around. Did you know you can unlock faster firing speed for vehicles, faster reloads for vehicles, better body armor against explosives, faster sprinting, bipods that make your aim steady, and more? If you haven't started playing by now your enemy has all of these advantages. If you haven't started playing yet you don't have these advantages and will be constantly dominated by players who do have these advantages.

    Unfortunately, there is no way to avoid this immediate disadvantage. You must fight through ever-increasingly difficult odds just to try and rank up to the level of your opponents. By the time you get there they will scored so many points against you that the problem of imbalance will persist. This is not a game that features a level playing field. It goes out of its way to make it imbalanced whether you drive a vehicle or hoof it on foot. Even the vehicles have features that must be unlocked. Enjoy being a sitting duck in an armored vehicle as the enemy pelts you with a faster firing speed and missile that you haven't unlocked.

    I could add some commentary about maps in this game. I could add commentary about weapons and vehicles. None of that really matters when the core gameplay mechanics are this badly imbalanced. None of the game's content or performance matters when you join a multiplayer server and find that even your allies sprint right by, demand you let them drive a vehicle because it doesn't have unlockable offensive and defensive capabilities when you drive, or your friends refuse to play on your team because you're too far behind them in terms of unlocks and ranks.

    I cannot advocate for a game in which gives players advantages over each other. Weapon unlocks were a nice way to add diversity to the game. Giving players advantages the same way they unlock new content is absolutely brutal. This is not a game of skill or an objective-based team game -- it is purely about who can unlock the most content the fastest.    … Expand
  21. chasehigh
    Nov 1, 2011
    4
    SP was predictable boring and short. Graphics are great but thats mostly because of the horrible blinding lights. I wish there was a mp unlock for tinted goggles. Also this game is geared for hardcore players and hardcore players only. If your not a seasoned battlefield veteran prepared to get anal raped hardcore. It doesnt matter if you are good a video games you will still get crushedSP was predictable boring and short. Graphics are great but thats mostly because of the horrible blinding lights. I wish there was a mp unlock for tinted goggles. Also this game is geared for hardcore players and hardcore players only. If your not a seasoned battlefield veteran prepared to get anal raped hardcore. It doesnt matter if you are good a video games you will still get crushed into the ground if you haven't been playing the battlefield series. If your a gay casual gamer and like it up the butt than you will surely love the ass rape that is battlefield 3, otherwise I would stay away.… Expand
  22. vicious537
    Nov 1, 2011
    4
    This game is great...when multilayer works. The origin launcher is dumb and web interface is even worse. When I join games it works only about half the time, sometimes i get a illegal operation or it just freezes. They have turned this game into a console first pc second title which is messed up because it started on PC.
  23. slarson
    Nov 2, 2011
    4
    As somebody who played BF1942 for 3 years, then BF2, then BFBC1 and 2, BF3 seems like a step in the reverse direction. The pace seems slow which is unlike a Battlefield game, and besides the pretty graphics BF3 actually seems like it has worse gameplay than BF2. Definitely not what I've been waiting years for. And to think that DICE scrapped subsequent DLCs for BFBC2 to work on BF3.As somebody who played BF1942 for 3 years, then BF2, then BFBC1 and 2, BF3 seems like a step in the reverse direction. The pace seems slow which is unlike a Battlefield game, and besides the pretty graphics BF3 actually seems like it has worse gameplay than BF2. Definitely not what I've been waiting years for. And to think that DICE scrapped subsequent DLCs for BFBC2 to work on BF3. It's a pity, it could have been a great game. That coupled with EA's crappy connectivity client, which makes using Gamespy in the old days a joy compared to what they've presented for 2011, makes the experience very disappointing.

    I guess I'll move to other games and check back in a month or two to see if they've managed to fix the experience at all.    … Expand
  24. Ironkidz
    Nov 5, 2011
    4
    Before anything, let me say... BATTLELOG AND ORIGIN ARE HORRENDOUS!!! I cannot begin to explain how badly I wanted this game to be a blockbuster. How badly I wanted to play it through my Thanksgiving holiday. How badly I wanted to eat up every last bit of its great gameplay and graphics. But seriously, it was like a good looking Medal of Honor remake. I am talking some of the WORST AI andBefore anything, let me say... BATTLELOG AND ORIGIN ARE HORRENDOUS!!! I cannot begin to explain how badly I wanted this game to be a blockbuster. How badly I wanted to play it through my Thanksgiving holiday. How badly I wanted to eat up every last bit of its great gameplay and graphics. But seriously, it was like a good looking Medal of Honor remake. I am talking some of the WORST AI and gameplay in single player to date. If you hated Red River or Medal of Honor, you will equally hate the single player in this game. Just sad. Also, it is buggy, glitched, and very linear. I waited so long for this game, got it asap, and I would just as quickly return it if I could. It breaks my heart.… Expand
  25. bmxjumperc
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    The singleplayer is unfinished (has a lot of bugs) wait for a year after release hopefully this game will have a patch. I've seen NPCs shooting without the gun geometry in their hands, NPCs walking through metal fences, the worst problem is that your squad NPCs takes cover in the exact perfect place that you need to take cover to progress through the scene and you can't move them (they'reThe singleplayer is unfinished (has a lot of bugs) wait for a year after release hopefully this game will have a patch. I've seen NPCs shooting without the gun geometry in their hands, NPCs walking through metal fences, the worst problem is that your squad NPCs takes cover in the exact perfect place that you need to take cover to progress through the scene and you can't move them (they're pieces of brick video geomotry) even worse whenever they have a path to follow they don't go around you they just push your avatar out of the way, it's the most embarrassing video game story to follow I've ever seen in a game of this generation with all of the spectacular visuals going on around you you can't navigate around your squad and they can't navigate around you. When you see your squad member running right at you then just continue the running animation right in your face as your avatar pushes out of the way you'll know what I mean.

    On the other hand if battlefield war is what you want then the multiplayer is inexplicabaly incredible, the best capture the flag that you can get right on your computer. Nothing like Battlefield: Bad Company 2 it has a completely different flowy feel to it. There's nothing like seeing a squad run across a road you're guarding waiting for cover from your squad knowing they're real people on the other side of the computer and if they see you it's completely unpredictable what any of them might do.    … Expand
  26. BombatPlayer
    Nov 9, 2011
    4
    This game has been rushed and butched. They lowered the treshold for casual player and now it no longer feels like a true BF2 sequel. More like BC3, but worst... A lot of bugs and glitches. Their mouse input code is flawed. This is pretty bad for a FPS. The art direction is really annoying: High contrast everywhere and blue tint. Lack of colours. DICE lied to their customers about manyThis game has been rushed and butched. They lowered the treshold for casual player and now it no longer feels like a true BF2 sequel. More like BC3, but worst... A lot of bugs and glitches. Their mouse input code is flawed. This is pretty bad for a FPS. The art direction is really annoying: High contrast everywhere and blue tint. Lack of colours. DICE lied to their customers about many things. They dont care anymore, they just pretend to care. They made a game to make money by reaching COD community but they lost their roots by doing that. VERY sad... R.I.P. Battlefield series.… Expand
  27. Durazell
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    Unfortunately EA DICE is not able to deliver all of the many promises made by marketing. From a technical perspective this look like an unfinished game. The singleplayer campaign suffers from basic technical issues where story progression is impossible as certain criteria has not been fulfilled. In multiplayer, that is supposed to be the games one strength, the pervasive technicalUnfortunately EA DICE is not able to deliver all of the many promises made by marketing. From a technical perspective this look like an unfinished game. The singleplayer campaign suffers from basic technical issues where story progression is impossible as certain criteria has not been fulfilled. In multiplayer, that is supposed to be the games one strength, the pervasive technical deficiencies is even more obvious. Mainly clipping is a issue where you can be shoot because from you point of view you are in cover, while you opponent has an unobstructed view for a kill. If you are new to the first person military shooters there are other more balanced games available.… Expand
  28. Huega12
    Nov 10, 2011
    4
    All may be upsets with the fact that the single-player was not up to par with most campaigns in other games but Battlefield has and always will be a multiplayer I recommend this game to everyone, it's the best shooter of the year,graphics, beautiful enviroments, excellent and realistic sound effects. And a really superb, fun, action packed and strategy based gameplay with really goodAll may be upsets with the fact that the single-player was not up to par with most campaigns in other games but Battlefield has and always will be a multiplayer I recommend this game to everyone, it's the best shooter of the year,graphics, beautiful enviroments, excellent and realistic sound effects. And a really superb, fun, action packed and strategy based gameplay with really good single player and co-op modes and just an awesome multiplayer mode with so much freedom of choice and tons of unlockables.
    Grat game    … Expand
  29. Verdan
    Apr 9, 2012
    4
    I played this game trought in singleplayer. I also tested out Multiplayer. Let´s go over basics. This game has awesome graphics and overall layout over. It´s pure eye candy and lovely in that. Why such low rating? Well singleplayer started out amazing...Sick start that caught attention...Sadly that´s it. Another "terrorists has the nuke" game. II played this game trought in singleplayer. I also tested out Multiplayer. Let´s go over basics. This game has awesome graphics and overall layout over. It´s pure eye candy and lovely in that. Why such low rating? Well singleplayer started out amazing...Sick start that caught attention...Sadly that´s it. Another "terrorists has the nuke" game. I choose normal difficulty and most of the time i got myself killed. Quess that is the reality of war, you are stupid and die...It was boring. Overall campaing left me bored and i quited it couple of times before finishing. Like bad company 2, most of it just repeated itself over and over. Multiplayer wise game is awesome, sadly i dont enjoy that type of gameplay. It´s awesome, but not for me. Was some solid action for couple of hours, but that´s it.… Expand
  30. polpolmax
    Nov 15, 2011
    4
    Dissapointing short single player mode , so the graphic i expected better.
    Nice climatic multiplayer mode. I thing the things reach limits are to small.I would like to play longer to ecomplish a target. Very hard to fly jets. Very easy to destroy a tank with bazooka .
    Why soldiers survive hit in chest with dragunow ?
  31. bigbramble
    Nov 21, 2011
    4
    Where are the bots? Where is the 4+player coop?

    I feel I need to write this view as a big group of gamers are being ignored in relation to this game and many other FPS games. COOP gamers that want to play as a team against the computer. I greatly enjoyed playing the other games in the franchise, particularly 1942 and Vietnam as I would play the vs bot modes with my friends for many    Where are the bots? Where is the 4+player coop?

    I feel I need to write this view as a big group of gamers are being ignored in relation to this game and many other FPS games. COOP gamers that want to play as a team against the computer.

    I greatly enjoyed playing the other games in the franchise, particularly 1942 and Vietnam as I would play the vs bot modes with my friends for many hours. This latest version has a pretty dreadful 2 player only coop mode and no bot mode like the other games had. I find this disappointing. I admit I am not the best player in the world, nor the worst but I find the player vs player modes too frustrating on this game and get fed up of being killed without even seeing where the shot came from.

    EA if you want to see what consumer base you are missing out on having as customers, look at world of warcraft for example. It is a game with both player vs computer and player vs player modes. Which is more popular? Player vs computer.

    This is made all the more frustrating by the fact this game looks incredible, sounds incredible, has great vehicles and weapons. Unless I am willing to partake in the steepest learning curve ever and get repeatedly destroyed by some 'uber' 13 year old I am basically unable to take advantage of this.

    This makes this game the most frustrating currently in existence.    … Expand
  32. infinityxgamer
    Nov 22, 2011
    4
    I was really looking foward to this game, but it kinda disappointed me. It is an OK game but apart from the graphics, there wasn't very much that convinced me to keep playing.
  33. guitargeek
    Dec 2, 2011
    4
    I'd like to start saying i wish there was a satisfaction guarantee return policy for this game. I'd definitely use it. Someone in game referred to it as 'a piece of s#!t rolled in glitter'. Pretty harsh, but once you get past how good the game looks, BFBC2 was a much better game. Better maps, mostly better weapons, and sniper class has taken a fall with scope glint, no magnum ammo, and theI'd like to start saying i wish there was a satisfaction guarantee return policy for this game. I'd definitely use it. Someone in game referred to it as 'a piece of s#!t rolled in glitter'. Pretty harsh, but once you get past how good the game looks, BFBC2 was a much better game. Better maps, mostly better weapons, and sniper class has taken a fall with scope glint, no magnum ammo, and the new bullet drop animation can be a nuisance to tell where the bullet is hitting. The game has frequent issues such as 'stopped working' which i've noticed has been an issue for some people since launch, yet all they offer in response is 'google chrome's fault, or x-fire's fault'. Essentially what could have been a great game is still fairly beta quality, presumably due to trying to release before MW3. While this move may have worked for sales of this game, it will hurt long time followers of the battlefield series who, at this point, want nothing more to do with them.… Expand
  34. SilreV
    Dec 3, 2011
    4
    the game started with a lot of potential and I loved it at first. (I solely point my arrows on the multiplayer) everything seemed balanced, I needed to find my place in the chaos.

    but once I found my place in the chaos I found al those little things that bugged me. 1. jets are practically indestructible when there isnt A) a anti air vehicle present B) another good pilot c) a **** load of    the game started with a lot of potential and I loved it at first. (I solely point my arrows on the multiplayer) everything seemed balanced, I needed to find my place in the chaos.

    but once I found my place in the chaos I found al those little things that bugged me. 1. jets are practically indestructible when there isnt A) a anti air vehicle present B) another good pilot c) a **** load of engineers with stingers.
    2. engineers should be nerfed or make all classes engineers. the reason I say this is that they can kill everything. they can equip mines and rockets. there carbines are insane. they are what you say one man army's
    3. recons are raped in this game, I played recon in BC2 and its a difficult class to play I loved the snipes across the map considering the bullet drop and determing the path the player would walk. the mortar was a game turner. what we get now is the soflam only usefull when there is a engineer with a stinger. and is paying attention. and that is the problem with this multiplayer game, they expect it to be teambased combat. but it isnt most of the players are lonewolfs. one can blame the players. I blame the developer for creating a environment which allows this. I am still a fan of minus points. are you being a dickhead and you want to kill a lot of ppl instead of getting to the target you get a penalty. that is what I call realistic. in the army they arent happy with triggerhappy nutsacks.

    last thing I have to say is that the so called destruction in this game is at a minimum, remember in bc2 where you can level almost a whole map.. that isnt in bf3 and that was for me such a let down. if there was lots of destruction in this game I could live with my earlier made points. but the lack of it , I cant play it anymore it gets on my nerves more then I enjoy it. back to BC2 I say.    … Expand
  35. Enormo
    Dec 23, 2011
    4
    First let me say that I'm a huge fan of the Battlefield series. I didn't buy BF3 to stomp it. I'm also not giving up on the game just yet. But there are some gameplay dynamics that really have me frustrated.

    1.) Weapon upgrades make it a frustrating grind for new players. The weapons for new players are so inferior that they don't really stand a chance against the better    First let me say that I'm a huge fan of the Battlefield series. I didn't buy BF3 to stomp it. I'm also not giving up on the game just yet. But there are some gameplay dynamics that really have me frustrated.

    1.) Weapon upgrades make it a frustrating grind for new players. The weapons for new players are so inferior that they don't really stand a chance against the better weaponry/accessories... let alone better weaponry/accessories wielded by someone with 100 hrs more playing time than you. BF2 BC had it right. There should be an incremental jump between default and unlocked weapons... better weapons should help you go from 10 -12 to 12-10. Not 4-14 to 14-4.

    It makes tactics worthless because it takes 2-3 times longer to kill players with better weaponry. So even when you shoot them from the side or back, they have time to turn around and waste you no problem.

    2.) Terrain physics. At first I was all for how it's difficult to see enemy players on the terrain compared to BF2 BC. Seemed way more realistic and tactical. Unfortunately, the ability to hide encourages lots of camping. Players are invisible in shadows and completely disappear in foliage. For a lot of players it means bush league tactics. Maybe this is my video card setup but I don't think so.

    3.) Maps. The maps are super detailed. But the abundance of nooks encourage camping. The unbalanced weapons for new players compounds this like crazy.

    4.) Mini map on hard core. This is also another killer of tactical game play. Why should you be smart about out tactical positioning when you can just look at the minimap and see where opponents pop up? Granted, I have access to the mini map too. I could use it. But I don't want to because it takes me out of the gameplay experience. In the past BFs I liked the fact that I could rank high because I played a smart game. Now the game just feels like a dumbed down run around like a chicken with your head cut off spray fest.

    5.) Net code. I'm tired of shooting others 4 or 5 times and then dying when it seems like they shot me once. Or dying when I'm on the other side of an impenetrable barrier.

    6.) At medium or long distance, BF2 BC rewards controlled bursts of fire. It really made the game play feel tight/smart. BF3 rewards going full auto all the time... especially with the upgraded weaponry where there is little to no recoil. This makes the game (namely HC mode) feel way less tactical. It cheapens it.

    6.) Overall, the gameplay feels out of control compared to BF2 BC. It doesn't feel like a team mounting an attack on another team. Its a bunch of individuals running around on full auto killing other individuals with inferior weaponry. I know BF2 BC had it's flaws, but what it did as a whole was to create a sense of narrative in a battle. You could feel the eb an flow of the battles and because of that it often encouraged players to fight strategically even if they weren't intending to play as a team.

    I would go back to BF2 BC if there new maps released on a semi-regular basis. As it is, the same old maps are growing old. Maybe it's time to pull some old FPS's out of the bin and see what they offer as far as smart tactical game play.    … Expand
  36. Shinigami_UA
    Dec 5, 2011
    4
    Firstly, single player. In one word: BORING. Lots of scenes, fluid movements, lots of talking but it doesn't want you to play any further. Been there, seen it.
    Next, multiplayer. Firstly, the main problem. Client-side hit register. If your enemy hits you on their screen, you die regardless of your actual position on your screen. This, basically, defeats the whole purpose of having    Firstly, single player. In one word: BORING. Lots of scenes, fluid movements, lots of talking but it doesn't want you to play any further. Been there, seen it.
    Next, multiplayer. Firstly, the main problem. Client-side hit register. If your enemy hits you on their screen, you die regardless of your actual position on your screen. This, basically, defeats the whole purpose of having dedicated servers - your ping doesn't matter, if they killed you a while ago but you only saw it now because of THEIR large ping, its your problem. Its the reason I stopped playing COD:MW2 (p2p multiplayer, client-side hit register), its the reason I didn't buy COD:MW3 (same p2p). Its the reason I'm trying to get a refund on BF3 now.
    Other things to mention about MP: huge but empty maps, multi-layered buildings that prevent you from seeing the outside (its too bright), tanks that are nearly indestructible to infantry (3 rockets to kill it in hardcore - you'll just die), planes that have no purpose other than fighting other planes (they can't capture points, can't deliver more than 1 player to a point).
    Hardcore is no longer hardcore. You don't get infinite health, but the minimap is ALWAYS on, minimap spotting lights you up as soon as you fire a gun, killcam (which reveals your position) is almost always shown, sniper scope glare makes it easy to find the sniper no matter how good their cover is. And best of all - the most powerful sniper rifle still doesn't kill with 1 bullet. Even assault rifle HEADSHOT won't kill them with 1 hit. What kind of hardcore mode is this?
    Class balance is simply awful. Medic gets it all: infinite health with medkit, 100 points per revive (same as a kill), grenade launcher (replaces medkit), assault rifles (!). Support now has only light machine guns and... ammo packs! And thats it! As a result support is now least popular class, in many cases there is no one to ask for ammo. Recon is same good old sniper, engineer is same good old rocket launcher guy.
    Weapon balancing is simple: the more you progress, the better the gun. Surely you can hit and even kill with anything, but F2000+IRNV = undefeated. Add ability to put a silenver and 3rd attachment to it and you'll know it simply defeats the purpose of tactical gameplay. You can just rambo it all. In BFBC2 we couldn't rambo 24/7 because best gun was in the hands of support and medkit was in the hands of medic, and you could only find cover when being shot at by a sniper - hard to tell where they were. But at least they didn't kill you with client-side hit register (you could run into cover and it did prevent you from being hit).
    I am amused at people who are able to play this game for 100s of hours. I'm trying to get a refund to buy something else.    … Expand
  37. TheTacoShack
    Dec 6, 2011
    4
    I feel this game was quite a disappointment on many levels... I think you should just stick with Bad Company 2. Might be worth a $20 buy later down the road.
  38. Lionhearted
    Feb 3, 2012
    4
    Awesome game, untrustworthy mechanics.

    I love the realism, options, progression and over all feel of the mechanics and delivery are spot on. I won't play the game again. I don't trust the servers or developers to offer fair gameplay. Hackers, cheaters and severely unbalanced gameplay make this game a fairly self defeating experience. If EA delivered trustable hack proof servers, which    Awesome game, untrustworthy mechanics.

    I love the realism, options, progression and over all feel of the mechanics and delivery are spot on.

    I won't play the game again.

    I don't trust the servers or developers to offer fair gameplay.
    Hackers, cheaters and severely unbalanced gameplay make this game a fairly self defeating experience.

    If EA delivered trustable hack proof servers, which they never will.

    I could definitely be coaxed back to playing.    … Expand
  39. LoadedWeapon
    Feb 16, 2012
    4
    I'm sad by this game, huge battlefield 2 fan, and reading the glow, I get the feeling allot of people have not played BF2. The graphics are great. the single player is scripted CoD stuffs. and multiplayer is basic. and here is the issue I have, Battlefield 2 MP was GREAT, and Battlefield 1942 MP was GREAT! Where's commander mode? or being spec opps putting sack charges on enemyI'm sad by this game, huge battlefield 2 fan, and reading the glow, I get the feeling allot of people have not played BF2. The graphics are great. the single player is scripted CoD stuffs. and multiplayer is basic. and here is the issue I have, Battlefield 2 MP was GREAT, and Battlefield 1942 MP was GREAT! Where's commander mode? or being spec opps putting sack charges on enemy artilaryand sacoms etc. I won't even go into the awesomeness of driving aircraft carriers in 1942, will DICE ever be able to return to those days? looking like a strong no. I hope one day someone will bring a proper battlefield to those of us that started with the franchise. perhaps a mod?… Expand
  40. Jraptor
    May 19, 2012
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It is always saddening when a game over-hypes itself. Not only will it be impossible to live up to the expectations, but the workforce will also have to try to create this "perfect" game. This is exactly the life style of Battlefield 3. Between the flame wars they started with Activision, and EA quickly becoming more and more greedy, the idea of a perfect game was much more fantasy than reality. Now, with that said: the gameplay is mildly solid, the maps are fairly good, and the weapons are far more diverse than ever. However, the game's multiplayer itself is not at all solid. The game boasts several animation glitches, very poor servers, and the same amount of overpowered weapons as the Call of Duty series. In addition, the destructibility of the maps are nowhere near the usual amount for a Battlefield game. Bad co. 2, the prequel if you do not know, had the ability to obliterate entire buildings with explosives, crush walls with tanks, and destroy several walls with vehicle guns. In this game, all buildings will remain standing magically. While I can understand this from some perspectives, this adds more problems then it solves. Campers are now a problem in Battlefield, the battlefield becomes stoic and unchanging, and hiding from vehicles is easily possible. Now, when it comes to story, as interestingly told as it is, it's still the same thing as every single modern game just rehashed and labeled "Battlefield 3." Here it is: Soldier goes to some war-torn place, gets evacuated, enemies steal a nuke, there's a betrayal, one nuke goes off, other is sent to NYC, you chase it, defeat the person who stole it, and walk away as the only survivor... The end. See? The same story as almost every single FPS game. It gets boring.

    While the game is fun for a while, on PC, that is, it gets boring, stoic, and less than fun. Unless the price goes down immensely soon, or it comes to steam, I would highly not recommend it.    … Expand
  41. anonlike
    Jul 7, 2012
    4
    This is a perfect example of a good franchise made casual. I was a big fan of the battlefield series. starting from battlefield 1942. It is clear EA has a tight grip on DICE. A month after release I might had given this a 8/10. Fanboyism makes blind. But after a while I started realizing they have made the franchise utter sh*t by simplifying the game they obviously attracted a new userThis is a perfect example of a good franchise made casual. I was a big fan of the battlefield series. starting from battlefield 1942. It is clear EA has a tight grip on DICE. A month after release I might had given this a 8/10. Fanboyism makes blind. But after a while I started realizing they have made the franchise utter sh*t by simplifying the game they obviously attracted a new user base. and by that I mean a bunch of casual COD kiddies. This doesn't Make anything better. I DICE even still had some of it's PC fanbase after battlefield: Bad Company. they have certainly lost it now. Also with EA's glorious DLC plan they have certainly stept in COD's footsteps. $15 for a couple of maps. With BC2 vietnam DLC they actually gave us a whole new experience. But the (upcomming) DLC's from BF3 are just ridiculous... It could have been in the original game. But no the allmighty EA had decided otherwise. DICE has literally sold their soul to EA. Lastly the Premium. as if the franchise hadn't copied enough of COD allready, EA wanted their own "Elite" service. It contains all the DLC that's going to be available, Ok that's pretty nice. But then they also have queue jumping. premiums get priority in queues over non premiums. So many knives in our backs, I can't keep track of it. I've literally waited a half hour in a queue to get on my favorite server because I got pushed back the whole time by premiums. This is just so mean to everybody who bought the game. And wait there is more! double xp weeks!! (have I said casual allready?) . everything that Battlefield once was, is now lost. the franchise might have 2 more succesfull titles with their new fanbase. But then it's over. EA will throw DICE in the garbage bin, just like they did with Pandemic.… Expand
  42. Back2Real
    Oct 27, 2013
    4
    If you enjoy playing with 63 snipers per game, you should buy this game.

    Snipers are extremely overpowered, and no one plays anything else than sniper.
  43. Remlap
    Oct 2, 2012
    4
    Battlefield 3 was supposed to be the
    game of the century. It was supposed to bring
    with it the best graphics and the best story of any first person shooter in recent history, but it didn't. Electronic Art's Digital Illusions CE (EA- DICE) has long led the sector in realism, drawing you into the war, evoking emotions previously reserved for games scripted almost as much as movies. In    Battlefield 3 was supposed to be the
    game of the century. It was supposed to bring
    with it the best graphics and the best story of
    any first person shooter in recent history, but it
    didn't. Electronic Art's Digital Illusions CE (EA-
    DICE) has long led the sector in realism, drawing you into the war, evoking emotions previously reserved for games scripted almost as much as movies. In Battlefield 3's campaign mode, however, the gameplay is slow, predictable and doesn't make you feel as though you are making a difference. The multiplayer game is sculpted so carefully that it would be concievable to forget that it was pre-made at all.
    The multiplayer game is incredibly chaotic, often trancending the constraints of a traditional video game, with small actions radically changing the simulated world and rendering some strategies and equipment useless, while simultaneously granting opportunities people using others. Many items in the maps are destructible, so a well placed RPG can destroy almost any sniper nest, an accutate pistol shot can destroy a helicopter, and a exellently piloted helicopter can take on a small army. Boats, Planes, Anti-Aircraft Guns, Helicopters, Tanks, JAVELIN missiles, and hundreds of guns are ready for use, a well put together social interface (BattleLog) allow for infinite combinations, and the scoring system favors teamwork over kamikaze raids.
    Battlefield 3 brings with it many annoyances, and thousands of quirks. The beautiful graphics and chaotic multiplayer almost outweigh the lack of a decent campaign mode, but alas this game fits into the category filled with thousands of games made for quick and easy fun, lacking challenge, and full of cliched elements. Battlefield 3 was expected to be the next iteration of the interesting and innovative game-play of the previous Battlefield games, not the repetitive and annoying habits of cheap action books, movies and games. The wow factor of the graphics can almost overcome the problems, but DICE has grown weary of the fight, and has decided that one botched campaign cannot possibly cause them to lose their grip on the gaming battlefield.    … Expand
  44. sofgrant
    Dec 5, 2012
    4
    Battlefield 3, for me was a huge waste of time. Sure the graphics were pretty, but the single player was an utter bore and a shadow of a familiar plot line. The plot line reeks of "we couldn't really be bothered". As for the multiplayer, I purchased the Limited Edition and found I could not activate back to Karkland. When I tried to get it activated they never bothered to do anything aboutBattlefield 3, for me was a huge waste of time. Sure the graphics were pretty, but the single player was an utter bore and a shadow of a familiar plot line. The plot line reeks of "we couldn't really be bothered". As for the multiplayer, I purchased the Limited Edition and found I could not activate back to Karkland. When I tried to get it activated they never bothered to do anything about it despite contacting them about the issue. Furthermore, the comments about how great the multiplayer is are a fantasy cooked up in the minds of those craving another battlefield title. Battlefield 1942 was amazing and innovative on release, Battlefield 3 is another same old, same old with the added ability to fly planes and drive tanks. While entertaining at times, I'd hardly call it 'original'. It really was nothing special for me and has further disinterested me in the first person shooters that are spewing out of the publishers these days.… Expand
  45. Marsu1
    Dec 17, 2012
    4
    I preordered this game hoping to get teamwork. It felt balanced to me and I played this happily with my friends. Then DICE started patching this game and it has gotten worse ever since. They claim that they fix stuff that they dont fix. Sometimes Í fall from 2 meters and die, other times I can jump from the third story and survive. Then they did the complete overhaul making everyI preordered this game hoping to get teamwork. It felt balanced to me and I played this happily with my friends. Then DICE started patching this game and it has gotten worse ever since. They claim that they fix stuff that they dont fix. Sometimes Í fall from 2 meters and die, other times I can jump from the third story and survive. Then they did the complete overhaul making every weapon behave differently than I had gotten used to. The release of Premium made me quit playing all together after playing about 400 hours. DICE screwed me over by telling me it was developed for the PC first, even though it was not. It does not have ingame VOIP, no dedicated servers, and no moddability. Last I heard they where going to release a patch to remove the blue tint, but they canceled it. If the game would have been developed for the PC it would have been the best BF to date, and I would probably still play it.… Expand
  46. OTipsey
    Jan 13, 2013
    4
    I want to like this game, I really do, but there is ONE thing that keeps that from happening: I can not play it on my computer because I use an Intel HD graphics card. It says it can run at around a medium-high setting, but it lags horribly, even with the graphics settings as low as they can be. Sure, most games don't recognize the card, but they still run very well when I adjust theI want to like this game, I really do, but there is ONE thing that keeps that from happening: I can not play it on my computer because I use an Intel HD graphics card. It says it can run at around a medium-high setting, but it lags horribly, even with the graphics settings as low as they can be. Sure, most games don't recognize the card, but they still run very well when I adjust the settings to what the card can do. The last time a game lagged like this it was because of dust getting on the card. You could have a card+processor that can run Total War: Shogun 2, but if it's Intel, you will have 3 FPS on low settings. While looking at the ground.… Expand
  47. BlimeyOmega
    Feb 16, 2013
    4
    Great graphics. However, this game isn't as great as its the earlier battlefield series. The game was changed many ways to attract COD players. Teamwork is missing. Simply a huge letdown for battllefield fans.
  48. glinkot
    Mar 7, 2013
    4
    This game can deliver some great moments particularly in multiplayer. Graphics are fantastic also. The thing that lets it down is the client side collision detection, which makes things a lot more of a lottery than they should be. Ducking behind a wall only to die afterwards just creates a sense of dissatisfaction that is hard to work with.
  49. Ndi
    May 6, 2013
    4
    When I first picked up BF3, I was pretty amazed. Dynamic campaign, starts off strong, with a few linear stuff to show off, the throws you into jet, tank, on foot, plenty of weapons, and with a decent framerate. Wow, I thought, where have you been all my life?

    But then it started to show how much they really put into it. It's a bad port. Controls revert to defaults mid game, in    When I first picked up BF3, I was pretty amazed. Dynamic campaign, starts off strong, with a few linear stuff to show off, the throws you into jet, tank, on foot, plenty of weapons, and with a decent framerate. Wow, I thought, where have you been all my life?

    But then it started to show how much they really put into it. It's a bad port. Controls revert to defaults mid game, in cutscenes, in quick time events. I HATE quick events. HATE!!! When I mapped my keys to arrows, right shift, right control and mouse and you ask me to quickly press "E", I am going to miss it. Again. And again, And again.

    Here's the thing. If you make me mash the keyboard in anger, you are not a fun game. Period. I don't care you threw in a SP just to make a dent. If you wouldn't have, I would never have picked it up. I want single player to see the game, then, if all is right, I go on multiplayer. And SP is a disappointment. Unfinished story, annoying characters, tons of names, what is this? I died 4 times in the story. Who am I? Why am I fighting? Am I Miller? Jim? Bob? Jim-Bob? I'm Jim-Bob, aren't I? Dear God, I'm Jim-Bob.

    The Russian guy said to shoot the other guy and all I thought was "Ok. Who's he?" Then other people start screaming. "Go left". Who are they? Seriously, I need a notepad to keep up. Also, they give bad advice. I died doing what they said. Also, what is this "left mission area" stuff? You sent me to flank and the side of the road is off-limits? What am I, 7 again? I'm not allowed to the end of the driveway?

    By the last mission, I died 3 times. In the last mission, I died maybe 20 times. Poor scripting, poor controls, someone simply could not be bothered to finish it.

    And I don't agree that you are a multiplayer game so I should eat the SP and shut up. You used that as a selling point and now it sucks. If you serve me a nice steak with moldy potatoes, I'm sending it back. I don't care the steak is the selling point.

    I guess multiplayer is OK,which is why it gets a "barely" score. 8 for the MP, 5 for the SP, and a big fat zero for not taking the time to make sure CONTROLS WORK in a game.

    Seriously, game has been out a year and a half. I STILL have to go to the forums to find a way to pass a 4 hour campaign. Can anything be any more of a middle finger to me giving you my money?    … Expand
  50. Sam3336
    Sep 30, 2016
    4
    Battlefield 3 campaign doesn't compare to battlefield 4 campaign, The multiplayer may be good but....
    I found the campaign just plain boring, the story was poor and the weapons are no way near as good as battlefield 4.
    The optimization is fantastic and graphics are supreme for its days!
    I only recommend this for the pvp not campaign
  51. kndr
    May 23, 2021
    4
    Nice destruction physics and big open areas. There is also blue filter which somehow fits the game.

    But other than those it is meh.
  52. Suprizer
    Apr 22, 2023
    4
    really sadly this game shows its age... Back when first releised this might be great but now near unplayable everything is better at 4. Story was nice tho had some great moments.
  53. Demandmore
    Nov 4, 2011
    3
    Battlefield Bad Company 2 was a better game in every respect, that's all you need to know, how can you take such a big step backwards? It's even buggier than BC 2, one can only wonder if it was Dice or EA who's responsible for making this game a mess. The game industry is taking everything that's bad about Hollywood and incorporating it.
  54. Ian277
    May 17, 2012
    3
    I Played it and enjoyed it for a while. the patches made it difficult to master and now it has gotten to the point where the patches have made the game... suck. i know it sounds dumb but it seems wall glitches and all sorts of fun things plague the game since the patches. it is basically a glorified MW3. i dont like COD either. it use to be fun and rewarded good players but i cant doI Played it and enjoyed it for a while. the patches made it difficult to master and now it has gotten to the point where the patches have made the game... suck. i know it sounds dumb but it seems wall glitches and all sorts of fun things plague the game since the patches. it is basically a glorified MW3. i dont like COD either. it use to be fun and rewarded good players but i cant do anything. some guns are awfully OPand stupid. the game is very unrealistic as well. i dont care if you can blow things up it is not realistic. now many light machine guns and assault rifles can out shoot a sniper at great distance so sniping is **** dumb to do. I cant get anywhere with people with light machine guns shooting through walls if i am moving. so i dont play anymore. **** THIS GAME. it was fun but still i hate it now.… Expand
  55. GottFaust
    Oct 25, 2011
    3
    Let me preface this by saying that the multiplayer (which is why people buy battlefield games) is amazing. It's better in every way than it's predecessors. The graphics are phenomenal and it runs quite well on a modern PC. The controls are tight, responsive, and make sense. Granted the singleplayer leaves a lot to be desired but, then again, this is a battlefield game. You have to expectLet me preface this by saying that the multiplayer (which is why people buy battlefield games) is amazing. It's better in every way than it's predecessors. The graphics are phenomenal and it runs quite well on a modern PC. The controls are tight, responsive, and make sense. Granted the singleplayer leaves a lot to be desired but, then again, this is a battlefield game. You have to expect sub-par single-player experiences in battlefield games. Why did I give this game a 3 after praising it so highly? Origin. Origin is probably the worst idea to ever come out of the cesspool of bad ideas called EA. It's laggy. It's buggy. It's slow. It crashes more than RAGE did on an ATI card at launch. It's in no way, shape, or form user friendly. It records and sends entirely too much personal information to EA. Worst of all: all EA games released on the PC from this point will only be available on this utter pile of garbage. Sorry DICE, you've lost a long time customer by agreeing to use this sorry excuse for an "online platform."… Expand
  56. Avoh
    Nov 5, 2011
    3
    The Good: Gun Customization, Vehicles, Graphics, Soldier Camo, Individual/Squad Perks, Suppression System (decreases your accuracy/vision when being shot at), Squad System (minor bugs in it)

    The Bad: Hit Detection (major game breaker, no fix yet), Weapon balancing (example: assault rifles beat sniper rifles), Random Game Crashes (no fix yet), Destruction System is decent, but not fully    The Good: Gun Customization, Vehicles, Graphics, Soldier Camo, Individual/Squad Perks, Suppression System (decreases your accuracy/vision when being shot at), Squad System (minor bugs in it)

    The Bad: Hit Detection (major game breaker, no fix yet), Weapon balancing (example: assault rifles beat sniper rifles), Random Game Crashes (no fix yet), Destruction System is decent, but not fully implemented yet (wtf, beta part 2?), Map redesigning required (alot of "meat grinder" areas on maps), bad community, user-interface needs a redesign, Vehicle Perk/Unlock rebalance, Server stability needs improvement, more co-op missions needed (only 6 right now)    … Expand
  57. Kordesh
    Oct 29, 2011
    3
    What could have been an otherwise great FPS has been utterly marred by the road to its release and the marketing wrapper that it has been smothered with. The game itself looks/sounds fantastic and is fun, if not a bit samey (though the single player may as well not have been there as its more of a movie/tutorial than anything). That being said, what users were forced to endure because ofWhat could have been an otherwise great FPS has been utterly marred by the road to its release and the marketing wrapper that it has been smothered with. The game itself looks/sounds fantastic and is fun, if not a bit samey (though the single player may as well not have been there as its more of a movie/tutorial than anything). That being said, what users were forced to endure because of EA's bullheadedness is unacceptable. Between the privacy concerns and the the fact that EA has decided to use their publisher clout to strongarm their failed and rebranded EA Store into relevancy by forcing it on everyone by making big name titles like this require it, is just short of a direct attack on the sensibilities of the gaming community. I only wish the gaming community was united enough to send a message to these people and let them know this is not competition, this is leveraging power to remove choice, and that between removing our options and not having the decency to ask us to opt in, rather opting to invade our privacy, this whole scenario has been egregiously NOT OK.… Expand
  58. Emiraly
    Oct 26, 2011
    3
    The game's single-player is more linear, glitcher and worse than any CoD game, which is saying ALOT. Being a hardcore fan of BF2, BF2142, and BFP4F, I found the multi-player extremely unsatisfying with less UI features than 5-6 year old videogames, EA Origin, missing classes, really mediocre MoH 2010 gunplay, and glitched vehicle combat. I uninstalled it after 10 hours in Open Beta and theThe game's single-player is more linear, glitcher and worse than any CoD game, which is saying ALOT. Being a hardcore fan of BF2, BF2142, and BFP4F, I found the multi-player extremely unsatisfying with less UI features than 5-6 year old videogames, EA Origin, missing classes, really mediocre MoH 2010 gunplay, and glitched vehicle combat. I uninstalled it after 10 hours in Open Beta and the full game is just as disappointing. [[[Whats sad is EA forced reviewers not to release negative reviews until after the game's release week.]]]… Expand
  59. holodoc
    Sep 15, 2013
    3
    Making a lengthy comment about what exactly sucks in this game would be a pure waste of time so I will make it short. Battlefield 3 is all about visuals and forgetting the most important thing in an FPS game netcode and hit detection. Sure, other online FPS games have their share of problems when it comes to hit detection but never in my twenty five years of gaming have I seen such poorMaking a lengthy comment about what exactly sucks in this game would be a pure waste of time so I will make it short. Battlefield 3 is all about visuals and forgetting the most important thing in an FPS game netcode and hit detection. Sure, other online FPS games have their share of problems when it comes to hit detection but never in my twenty five years of gaming have I seen such poor implementation of it. You will get one-shotted by a shotgun from 100+ meters away which is a huge stretch even for buck ammo and loose a chest to chest fire fight with an MG against a 9mm gun. You will also experience sudden deaths even a second or two after you've reached safe cover because the client-side hit detection system does a poor job of synchronizing what happens on both players sides the one that is shooting and the one that takes cover. How can anyone expect to play a fast action game like an FPS when what I am seeing is not what the other guy sees?

    If it wasn't for this huge problem Battlefield 3 would probably get a score around 8/10 or even 9/10 but when you screw up such an important thing like hit detection in a game that is primarily meant to be played in multiplayer... Well.. 3/10 for me.    … Expand
  60. vochaisl
    Oct 29, 2011
    3
    The 3 points go to the amazing singleplayer and multiplayer combined with stunning graphics. The -7 points go to EA's invasive Origin where it scans, mines absolutely every data possible.

    NO, EA, this is not how you **** with the gamers!
  61. Phyber
    Oct 25, 2011
    3
    great graphics but its NOT what i excepted from a FROSTBITE 2 engine. single player is failure all the way. in my opinion game was developed too fast to fit just before next call of duty...
  62. FLAPJACKDAN
    Jun 4, 2013
    3
    Terribly linear single player, multiplayer horribly optimized and quick match making is awful, I would rather play the older BF series than this hunk of crap.
  63. Redmirage
    Oct 26, 2011
    3
    Lets just begin by stating that i joined metacritic just for this review. I have been waiting for this game for awhile and have been stoked just to play it. After playing the beta, i was severly disappointed. The glitches galoore made it insane and more frustrating then fun to play. I figured since it was a beta they would fix it, well they did fix some of the beta glitches, just not nearLets just begin by stating that i joined metacritic just for this review. I have been waiting for this game for awhile and have been stoked just to play it. After playing the beta, i was severly disappointed. The glitches galoore made it insane and more frustrating then fun to play. I figured since it was a beta they would fix it, well they did fix some of the beta glitches, just not near enough for a final copy. The multiplayer feels rushed at best and hardly seems to work. The game is fun when its not glitching and the servers aren't crashing (which happen about every hour for the xbox). I give this game such a low rating because of the hype and expectations that the critics and trailers it gave, it hardly lives up to expectations. I love battlefield more then call of duty, but i will definently be picking up CoD now and probably tossing this game off until they fix the issues, which with EA's poor community service skills, will take quite awhile.… Expand
  64. LenToward
    Nov 7, 2011
    3
    Hide in the bushes and snipe. Or leave the bushes and get sniped. Or maybe you can get blinded by a flashlight in broad daylight from 100ft away. Awesome.
  65. SniperControl
    Oct 28, 2011
    3
    I have been looking forward to this game for months, really excited as i am a big battlefield fan. Got the game this morning, took it home and then proceeded to spend nearly 3 hours trying to install it!!!!! I had heard Origin was a pile of steaming **** from countless other users but nothing prepared me for this. Cut a lony story short, i ended up downloading a crack which bypasses originI have been looking forward to this game for months, really excited as i am a big battlefield fan. Got the game this morning, took it home and then proceeded to spend nearly 3 hours trying to install it!!!!! I had heard Origin was a pile of steaming **** from countless other users but nothing prepared me for this. Cut a lony story short, i ended up downloading a crack which bypasses origin and battlelog compleatly. Only problem with that is i cant frickin go online, only single player is availible.
    Single player is a total joke to, my rig runs 2 GTX570s graphics cards in SLI (with new Nvidia driver) but the graphics are frickin awful, what is with that water droplet/dirt effect on screen during game play?? Another bug bear i have as well is the poor gamepad support, i have by PC rigged upto my 55" TV so i use a wireless 360 controller, now the game recognises that i have the controller attached and lets me play with it in game, however there are some parts in the game which i have to press a certain button at certain time, only problem is these buttons arent on the gamepad but rather on the mouse or keyboard!! What is the point of that?? After speninding 15 mins remapping the keys, i carry on playing the game only to be prompted with a instruction to press Z to go into the prone postion, having gone into prone by pressing a remapped button on the gamepad the message stayes on screen, during this time i am unable to pick up a RPG to blow up the hotel in the first level, only when i press Z on the keyboard am i allowed to pick up the RPG!!! Sloppy Dice sloppy. i am giving this game a low score purely because of origin and a very poor single player plus the points mentioned above. I refuse to have origin on my PC and am sure i will miss other EA games because of it, there loss not mine. If the game ever makes it's way to Steam i will be happy to reload it and give multiplayer a go. Rockstar tried a similar thing with GTA5 and Social Club and we all know how that eneded. For now the game has been uninstalled and will be heading back to the store for a refund. Cmon EA i love some of your stuff, but for the love of god, get rid of the mandatory use of origin and battlelog please!!!!    … Expand
  66. Relentless
    Oct 31, 2011
    3
    Amazing possibilities, but horribly let down by the poor execution. It appears they simply wanted to beat MW3 to market and pushed out a game much too early. The bugs that exist in the retail product mirror those of the beta. Save you money and wait for a few weeks. This experience has seriously tainted my love for the battlefield series. I will now try MW3 in the hopes that I won't haveAmazing possibilities, but horribly let down by the poor execution. It appears they simply wanted to beat MW3 to market and pushed out a game much too early. The bugs that exist in the retail product mirror those of the beta. Save you money and wait for a few weeks. This experience has seriously tainted my love for the battlefield series. I will now try MW3 in the hopes that I won't have to deal with this nonsense again.… Expand
  67. tbasht
    Oct 31, 2011
    3
    My biggest problem with the game is that the map design is really bad, it's obvious none of the maps were designed for 64 players, because every map packs players into a tiny area with 3-5 capture points and then funnels every player through unavoidable chokepoints filled with snipers and tanks and men running around with knives. They've removed all the tactical gameplay that madeMy biggest problem with the game is that the map design is really bad, it's obvious none of the maps were designed for 64 players, because every map packs players into a tiny area with 3-5 capture points and then funnels every player through unavoidable chokepoints filled with snipers and tanks and men running around with knives. They've removed all the tactical gameplay that made Battlefields 1942/2/2142 so great, the game turns into a mindless grind with no balance or thought. Some of the maps are better than others, but there are 4 or 5 out of the 9 that come with the game that are up with the worst from Bad Company 2, which was a sort of mini-console-Battlefield that Battlefield 3 wasn't supposed to be emulating. Like, two of the nine Battlefield 3 maps are literally linear underground tunnels. I was extremely disappointed that there isn't a single large-scale map up there with even the mid-sized maps from the old Battlefield games. If you look at the promo videos which pretty much all involve flying jets (which have no effect on the rest of the game by the way, they're in the game mostly for looks and bullet points I think) the maps look pretty large but all of the capture points are clustered in one tiny area which turns the game into another Call of Duty. They seem to have focused much more on adding a bunch of annoying leveling features, you start out with nothing and then have to grind your way up to get more gear, eventually you'll unlock weapons like an IR Scope that's basically a dev-endorsed wall-hack or gun addons that remove all of your recoil. There are some really huge oversights like air vehicles not starting out with countermeasures, which means as soon as you take off you'll be shot down by one of the 12 players on the other team wielding missile launchers, until you grind enough to unlock something to defend yourself. Nothing in this game is about being "fun", it's about being addictive and fulfilling a lot of soulless corporate metrics. Who cares if the game plays like crap, if you can compel players to grind out a bunch of silly awards? If you're reading this review 3 months from now, you should probably just avoid, because I suspect it will be really miserable to start out in this game once you're going up against teams of experienced players with leveled upped gear. I only tried single player for about 2 minutes, within that time I shot a few AK-47 wielding masked terrists and QTE'd a man to death and then QTE jumped from an exploding train, which is way too many QTE's for me. If you like games that try to look like action movies I think you'll really enjoy this one though. The only positives I can think of are that the graphics and sound are very nice. I'm still holding out hope there will be some sort of additional maps or expansion or something that fixes some of the problems, but I really doubt it based on what I've seen so far, Battlefield 3 has already sold like a hojillion copies so I do not think Electronic Arts gives a ****… Expand
  68. thecat
    Nov 4, 2011
    3
    People who are rating this game 8+ must be playing a different game than me. No one was more anxious for this game than me. After a year of hype and trailers I was really waiting for this. I've been playing BF2 constantly for the past year. I stopped buying MW after the mess that MW2 had become. infinity just rewraps the same bullsh*t add a fresh coat of paint and shoves it at you an callPeople who are rating this game 8+ must be playing a different game than me. No one was more anxious for this game than me. After a year of hype and trailers I was really waiting for this. I've been playing BF2 constantly for the past year. I stopped buying MW after the mess that MW2 had become. infinity just rewraps the same bullsh*t add a fresh coat of paint and shoves it at you an call it innovation. When BC2 came out it was like no other game. You could do and destroy anything!! You think you're gonna camp here for the whole game? WRONG, there's no wall behind you! Drive tanks, fly ATTACK helicopters, 4 wheelers, UAVs and turrents! You name it BC2 provided and then. BF3 was announced and we got word of all the wonders that would befall us in this game. And show the COD franchise how real developers and networks stand by their fanbase. I refer to all this is to emphasize how utterly disappointed I am in BF3. I realized from Beta that this is NOT the BF I knew and loved. This felt cheap. And EA chose the absolute worst map to allure players from COD as it was not displaying BF's to its truest. We all know of the annoying network outages and glitches that happened in the beta stage and EA assured us that what we were playing was not the final product so I shrugged it off. Now that the final game was released I hoped it would be the same as BF2, IT IS NOT. Those users saying the game play is the same WRONG. The game play is no where near as smooth as BF3 and that game could have been smoother. This game is a pretty mess. I will only be referring to Multilayer as Campaign got me so angry I had to take 2 xanax (I think I've made my point here).

    From a simple thing as the inability to walk over a tiny object on the ground to the daunting task of getting out of a room, this game has become what I hoped it wouldn't... COD with vehicles. EA if you cant do something right, dont bother doing it at all. How is it that you can shoot a person square dead in the head emptying TWO clips one from you main and the secondary after switching to you side arm and your opponent will have enough time to stop. turn. shoot you once and you are dead.? EA can you PLEASE explain this cause I am stumped. I have had folks massacre me on 0%. 0%!!!!! I was killed by a ghost y'all!!!! Why can't I cook a grenade?? Why is player mute either you mute the entire squad or none so if I have a team member that is actually benefiting to the team and a kid screaming at his mommy I have to deal with all of that or mute them all? HOW do I end up in an entirely different class when a new game starts? WHY the **** does it take to goddamn long to get up from prone!!??? WHY all the theatrics to knife someone??!!! You have to ensure NO ONE is around you if you're knifing someone cause the length of time it takes to do that crap will get you shot! I have to wonder if EA just focused all their energy into just making the game look pretty and sounding fantastic and just left out the heart of the game. Cause that is what I got from the store. So thanks EA, thanks for ruining a great game! And replacing it with cheap, marketing MESS! Xoxo!    … Expand
  69. Diswin
    Nov 6, 2011
    3
    Graphic is astonishing despite moderate system requirement. All other aspects of SP are plain, boring and inexcusably worthless. MP at a first glance is good, but not excellent.
  70. dkhartigan
    Mar 15, 2012
    3
    If you've played Battlefield 2 and/or 2142, and not just the Bad Company spinoff series, you will be dissapointed with the way the franchise is headed with Battlefield 3.
    The game is by no means made for the fanbase that helped DICE get big as a company, rather it has become a generic shooter without any teamplay features or depth.
    Singleplayer: ------------- The singleplayer campaign    If you've played Battlefield 2 and/or 2142, and not just the Bad Company spinoff series, you will be dissapointed with the way the franchise is headed with Battlefield 3.
    The game is by no means made for the fanbase that helped DICE get big as a company, rather it has become a generic shooter without any teamplay features or depth.


    Singleplayer:
    -------------

    The singleplayer campaign is one big ripoff of all earlier CoD campaigns, and even so it's lacking immersion.
    It's simply too linear and too restricted in it's gameplay, and you'll find yourself being a spectator while the game plays itself before you. At some point you'll complete an entire mission just by pressing space...

    I found the difficulty to scale alright, although the AI seemed quite clumsy, a fact that DICE has tried to correct by giving them aimbot. - They'll basically oneshot you from across the map with shotguns...


    Co-op:
    ------

    Is fun during the first playthrough, but get bland very quickly, as there is very few missions, and the ones that you get are very little creative, not to mention the fact that you'll have to grind them in order to unlock some weapons. - All in all this gamemode seems unfinished and should probably not have been in the game at all, coop can by no means be compared to the "specops" of CoD.



    Multiplayer:
    ------------

    This is where DICE/EA really went wrong, in my oppinion.
    Instead of taking the features that made the Battlefield series great, they've thrown 80% of the features out of the window and simplyfied the rest to uselessness. I'll list a few of the things that made the game fail, as far as I'm concerned:

    - Only way to play the game is to start it through Origin, EA's alternative to Steam, no biggie you might think, but you'll actually have to allow said program to scan not only the game folder, but your entire computer for who knows what reason. Also if you want to get the game listed in Steam, you'd end up having to start Steam which would then start Origin, which again would start Battlelog and only then you'd be able to start the game, that is if both Origin and Battlelog decides to work that is.

    - With the Commander position out of the game, only the Squadleader would able to organise the team, but all that the role is given is giant bullseye on it's back; tools for giving orders and even a useable map are nonexistant in the game.

    - The game of course has vehicles, but they have been weakened to the extent that they are now little more than a quick "killstreak", and no longer an important tool that might help a team win.

    - The game is all about the fast paced closequarter action, and this would be fine had they finally gotten the hang of getting hit recognition to work, but alas this works as bad as in all earlier installments. - No VO-IP and an unfinished Commo-rose makes it next to impossible to communicate with your team, at least to the extent of making a tactical difference.

    - If you plan on playing with buddies you're in tough luck, as it is next to impossible to get all on the same team, let alone in the same squad.


    As mentioned the battlefield series is no longer for people who wants a casual war simulator, but is now more and more becoming a generic CoD clone. A fact that becomes more apparent with each DLC. If you're part of the Call of Duty fanbase this game is actually made for you, and as such you could very well consider this game, though in my oppinion youd probably still be better off with CoD, as they simply are better at what they do. And this pains me very much, the fact that had DICE continued to improve on the features that made them great, they could probably have made the best shooter of all time, but instead they decided to go for the casual crowd, and through them some easy money. The result of this is at best a mediocre game, that attempts too much but accomplishes too little.    … Expand
  71. SpaceNinja
    Jun 29, 2012
    3
    This game is 10 times better then COD thats why im giving it a score 3. The biggest thing in this game that bothers me is too much bloom in multiplayer and graphics arent really that good if you look very closely. There are no numbers for mouse sensitivity so i have to guess. No battlerecorder, battlelog is pain in the a**. Also hit detection is broken in multiplayer.
  72. ksimp84
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    As much fun and action packed as the smaller maps can be, trudging across a map the size of Nebraska, only to be picked off by a sniper, or shot by a seemingly INVINCIBLE helicopter just doesn't seem like an enjoyable multiplayer experience to me. Campaign = YAWN.
  73. kingamos
    Nov 10, 2011
    3
    pros: nice visuals. vehicles in mp are good

    cons: singleplayer is lifted almost directly form the mw series, mp battles are slow and only 5 maps? really?
  74. PC-EliTiST
    Jan 13, 2013
    3
    One year+ after release, ZERO true bugs have been fixed. This is one "AAA" game that hasn't provided any true support. They only provide "balance adjustments" which means, they play with numbers on a .txt file for half an hour with their coffee. Since the release, the entire team moved onto BF4 and fast-made DLCs. As a result, many people paid over 100$ on average. DICE's PR guy said,One year+ after release, ZERO true bugs have been fixed. This is one "AAA" game that hasn't provided any true support. They only provide "balance adjustments" which means, they play with numbers on a .txt file for half an hour with their coffee. Since the release, the entire team moved onto BF4 and fast-made DLCs. As a result, many people paid over 100$ on average. DICE's PR guy said, "this is business" but he meant between DICE and investors. He mentioned nothing about the customers who don't receive any support, but they do receive an unpolished product. Haven't the gamers had enough already? This is how gamers lost the "right" for a properly released game, long time ago. Now, we're gonna lose the right even for after-sale support. They just release games with hundreds of bugs and glitches, and nothing is going on! I won't even mention about the horrible Single Player part of the game. Generally unacceptable and hence the negative rating. I'm trying to objective and wish the best for us, the gamers. I didn't pay for "premium" cause I thought, that way I'd support their model.… Expand
  75. moomooman
    Nov 11, 2011
    3
    Despite playing on a PC that exceeds all requirements (I7 920, 8GB, 6870x2 2GB) I've had two weeks of stuttering graphics that rendered it unplayable. Solved that by manually configuring a pagefile and was able to play for enough time to be disapointed that there is less game here than BF2. Maps are smaller and less interesting, there are bugs everywhere. No VOIP, no ping informationDespite playing on a PC that exceeds all requirements (I7 920, 8GB, 6870x2 2GB) I've had two weeks of stuttering graphics that rendered it unplayable. Solved that by manually configuring a pagefile and was able to play for enough time to be disapointed that there is less game here than BF2. Maps are smaller and less interesting, there are bugs everywhere. No VOIP, no ping information available in game, no commander. cluttered screen, sniper shotguns! List goes on. Periodically its impossible to join a game due to "you have been disconnected from ea online". Strangely the beta ran fine for me... Overall its not even close to release quality. Last purchase I make from EA/Dice… Expand
  76. JimCorbett
    Feb 9, 2014
    3
    This is a review of the singleplayer and co-op only. Both modes are absolutely terrible. Coop is short and none of the missions are fun at all, to add to the pain they completely lack checkpoints and, like the main campaign, have quick time events. So, if you miss a quick time event at the end of a level, you have to start it all over again. The sniper mission is particularly bad. TheThis is a review of the singleplayer and co-op only. Both modes are absolutely terrible. Coop is short and none of the missions are fun at all, to add to the pain they completely lack checkpoints and, like the main campaign, have quick time events. So, if you miss a quick time event at the end of a level, you have to start it all over again. The sniper mission is particularly bad. The singleplayer story is contrived and nonsensical. I had no idea what was going on and honestly I didn't give a damn. None of the missions were any fun. Even the tank mission was quite boring. It's filled up scripted events and other CoD bull crap. I didn't bother playing the multiplayer since it's yet another modern themed shooter and I have way too many of those to begin with. Pass on this garbage.… Expand
  77. TheEighthDay
    Nov 14, 2011
    3
    Graphics are intense, sounds are intense but sadly the game lost most of its defining characteristics as a Battlefield game due to marketing influence. Almost every major change that differentiates this game from its predecessor was made to cater to the console market as well as to those who prefer the more fast paced gaming that usually resides there (as in Call of Duty). AutoGraphics are intense, sounds are intense but sadly the game lost most of its defining characteristics as a Battlefield game due to marketing influence. Almost every major change that differentiates this game from its predecessor was made to cater to the console market as well as to those who prefer the more fast paced gaming that usually resides there (as in Call of Duty). Auto regenerative health on both soldiers and vehicles, small squads with no real tactical capabilities all lead to a game where everyone is a one man army and who rarely coordinates their actions with the rest of the team. This is even more hindered by the fact that there isn't the same voice chat functionality that existed in Battlefield 2, in fact the game has no voice chat support at all on the PC.

    These glaring omissions of core teamwork related components has made a game that is far more like a sequel to Bad Company 2 (BC2), than Battlefield 2 (BF2). This is furthered by the inclusion of Rush mode a BC2 creation, smaller squad sizes (BF2 had 6 man squads, BC2 has 4 man squads) and auto-regenerative health (BC2 had this, BF2 did not).

    Other changes seem to cater directly to the console crowd, the heavier grind to unlock weapon attachments by making each weapon unlock separately, auto-regenerative vehicle health, no time out on engineer repairs (in both BC2 and BF2 there was a limit with a small cool down prior to being able to repair again), points awarded for doing little to nothing at all.

    The maps also are far more linear and restrictive than typical BF2 maps and the city environments some of the most restrictive with selective destruction and limited usable buildings.

    All of this coupled with the Origin and Battlelog requirements makes this game far less appealing than it should be and sadly is one that I returned.    … Expand
  78. iAGR
    Nov 16, 2011
    3
    Realism just doesn't seem to work for a game. It ruins all the fun, which is why I chose MW3 over BF3. MW3 is fun and fast-paced, and you'll play it a lot longer than you think. As for Battlefield 3, there's nothing to unlock. Basically the game remains on the same level from start to end. You start to feel frustrated along the game, because it feels like you're stuck and you're notRealism just doesn't seem to work for a game. It ruins all the fun, which is why I chose MW3 over BF3. MW3 is fun and fast-paced, and you'll play it a lot longer than you think. As for Battlefield 3, there's nothing to unlock. Basically the game remains on the same level from start to end. You start to feel frustrated along the game, because it feels like you're stuck and you're not reaching anything. You're not being rewarded. No titles, no emblems, nothing. It's boring.… Expand
  79. Wellbag
    May 16, 2012
    3
    Battlefield games used to be about using your skills, the vehicles and the environment to play a strategic way to finish of a round so that your team will get the victory. Now with Battlefield 3 that is thrown in the dumpster. Now Battlefield is about as strategic as a fish bowl animation. Bought the game at launch and it took almost 2 week before the game was playable during to the factBattlefield games used to be about using your skills, the vehicles and the environment to play a strategic way to finish of a round so that your team will get the victory. Now with Battlefield 3 that is thrown in the dumpster. Now Battlefield is about as strategic as a fish bowl animation. Bought the game at launch and it took almost 2 week before the game was playable during to the fact that you must have a online connection to play the game, Even the singleplayer mode yes. The multiplayer is almost Modern Warfareish with bigger maps and not that fun to play actually. +Graphics
    +Audio


    -No commander mode
    -Server issues from hell
    -No strategic gameplay elements
    -Horrible game balance between vehicles and infantery, yes it's more real but less fun because it takes a billion rockets to blow up a tank.
    -No battlerecorder even thou it's announced
    -Non interesting singleplayer.    … Expand
  80. pablol
    Jul 12, 2012
    3
    This game is not very good. I found it disappointing after bad company 2. Multiplayer maps are not interesting. As a newbie having to play against 500+ hour veterans is very frustrating.
  81. ABNMP
    Apr 24, 2012
    3
    After 400+ hours playing this is my 3rd and final review. I have 1200+ hours playing the excellent BFBC2, but this game does not compare. If you are looking for mindless multiplayer fun, then by all means pick this up. If you have a single competitive bone in your body skip it. Clans and hackers do very well. Casual players are simply ignored by the developers. They don't ban hackers. ManyAfter 400+ hours playing this is my 3rd and final review. I have 1200+ hours playing the excellent BFBC2, but this game does not compare. If you are looking for mindless multiplayer fun, then by all means pick this up. If you have a single competitive bone in your body skip it. Clans and hackers do very well. Casual players are simply ignored by the developers. They don't ban hackers. Many server admins are just plain ignorant on what a hacker looks like, and DICE doesn't give them any tools to catch them. If you want to play this title, wait another 18 months. New games will be out, hackers will leave due to boredom, and the patches might make it balanced in some regard.… Expand
  82. Avoryx
    Dec 13, 2011
    3
    This game is pretty, and has good sound.
    when you are in a squad of your friends it can be really fun online.
    The problems is the games story mode is really subpar. When you are alone online the multiplayer feels cold and isolating. Other then everyone running around the world feels lifeless. It feels like you are in a cold computer render world, instead of feeling like you are in a    This game is pretty, and has good sound.
    when you are in a squad of your friends it can be really fun online.
    The problems is the games story mode is really subpar.
    When you are alone online the multiplayer feels cold and isolating.
    Other then everyone running around the world feels lifeless.
    It feels like you are in a cold computer render world, instead of feeling like you are in a real world.
    The environments don't feel like places people ever functioned in.
    If you love online shooters, don't care about the story, and have a lot of friends online all the time to play with it can be great.
    But that is a HUGE "if"...    … Expand
  83. drastic
    Feb 20, 2012
    3
    Where to start? How about, don't waste your money? That will do.

    The Good: I may be able to sell it. The Bad: Where to start yet again? I get a feeling that many who had to pay for this game will brag it up as the loss of money due to owning a digital booger may drive them mad. I feel that's the case with BF3 and the only way I can see anyone thinking this game is great. I play paid for    Where to start? How about, don't waste your money? That will do.

    The Good: I may be able to sell it. The Bad: Where to start yet again?

    I get a feeling that many who had to pay for this game will brag it up as the loss of money due to owning a digital booger may drive them mad. I feel that's the case with BF3 and the only way I can see anyone thinking this game is great. I play paid for and free games, I would not play BF3 even if it was free. Install the game, (plan on coffee) then download another 3.4 gigs? That's just to get the game up and running. When I saw the graphics, I nearly fell over. Looking back at Wolfenstein Enemy Territory, I do believe the graphics were comparable. This game is being run on great gaming computers, the graphics cards alone cost near 500 bucks, all quad cores, DDR3, etc... so it's not a performance lack, the graphics were simply laughable to me. When a player jumps over a wall, what's with the floppy legs?? Are they all Jeff Dunham recruits? It takes more time to get into battle than the time you get actually battling. The weapon effects are near zero, the blood looks like Jello forming, absolutely absurd. I've been gaming for a long time, longer than I care to admit, I was shocked to see anyone give this game a 10 but to each his own and hopefully some truly do get some enjoyment from this purchase. BTW, I tried to run over a stop sign, seems the stop signs are built better than the tanks in this game. Ah yes, the propane tanks, they won't burn leaves or paper but they will shatter cement. Shoot a launcher, watch the projectile disappear into oblivion, perhaps to start it's own life elsewhere far from this game. Aiming? A thing of the past, just point, shoot and hope, you will likely be better off for your troubles. COD MW2 was 10x this game and seems COD 3 will be as well. Enemy Territory Quake Wars was 10X better as well, but my list could go on for some time. Again, I could not play this game without laughing in bewilderment, thinking ridiculous thoughts of brainwashing conspiracies to explain the BF3 fanatical attention. That said, does anyone want to buy a very slightly and never again used BF3? No, I'm not kidding.    … Expand
  84. ReubenIsAGod
    Jun 1, 2014
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. My Rectum was bleeding after playing solid 70000000000000000 hours of BlattleFlied 3 and then my pengois got hard and i came,TITIES TITIES TITIES ASS ADD ****… Expand
  85. mrjoebraveheart
    Nov 9, 2012
    3
    After loading it 3x and spending hours on the phone trying to get to play and researching stuff, it finally played, and I was very impressed
  86. Fuub
    Jan 21, 2013
    3
    EA last purchase for me. They've completely killed the team play, cooperation and epic battles for which the battlefield series are known, and put great graphics for all the COD kids to be happy with. No commander? No general orders? No voice in-game? Cya EA.
  87. SammyBoyEmo
    Jun 23, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. After being disgusted with Bad Company 2. I was very dissapointed with Battlefield 3 and the way the Battlefield franchise is going. Just so you fanboys can flag this and leave here's a summary:

    +Good Graphics and Sounds
    +Co-op
    -Bad SP storyline
    -dull gameplay
    -Rent a Server
    -MP not staying true to the series
    -Overall Fanbase

    Let me say that the graphics are at it's best, though I had a problem running it on high, I was still immensly satisfied with the looks of the game. But good graphics don't make or break a game. The single player campaign is a bland storyline where you play as a marine in custody in New York as your main character. The story is flashbacks of his recent career as a marine with every generic thing we've seen in a Modern Military FPS: Nukes and Russians. The story of blackburn is really taken from Call of Duty: Black Ops and every major moment in the game is inspired from a Call of Duty Game.

    The Co-op was very enjoyable with a friend, though very short. Each mission requires much teamwork and strategy. You play through a series of 6 missions each requiring you do different things from different milliaries.

    The multiplayer was very dissapointing, many glitches and hackers can be found. Teamkillers and trollers are often always present. And when they aren't, you can often be expected to be spawn-killed and quickscoped. The health system is terrible. If you stand 100m away, you can spray a full clip into your enemy and he will survive. If you stand 50m from your enemy, we will die with 2 bullets to the legs. Very unrealistic and just flat out bad hit detection. Though weapon balancing is okay, many players will hide in front of walls so their legs can be hidden in the walls, very easy to solve but DICE doesn't have any attention to solve it.

    In conclusion, if you're a long time fan of the Battlefield Franchise, you will be very dissapointed with this game. DICE has made the game to attract casual audiences to attempt to make a "Call of Duty Killer" which is very dissapointing considering Battlefield was very good in it's own way before BC2.    … Expand
  88. p00d73
    Jan 25, 2014
    3
    Launching a game from a browser with special plugins is beyond ridiculous. First EA makes you install Origin because they refuse to use the way superior Steam, but then their own DRM doesn't seem enough so they have to add yet another DRM? Can't play when EA's servers act up again.

    Sabotaging your own modding community to sell more absurdly expensive and content-lacking DLCs is in poor    Launching a game from a browser with special plugins is beyond ridiculous. First EA makes you install Origin because they refuse to use the way superior Steam, but then their own DRM doesn't seem enough so they have to add yet another DRM? Can't play when EA's servers act up again.

    Sabotaging your own modding community to sell more absurdly expensive and content-lacking DLCs is in poor taste.

    Everything needs to be unlocked, casual gaming is incredibly boring.

    The campaign is mediocre at best. The storyline is absurd, the quick time events misplaced and annoying, the close combat is staged and the enemy doesn't seem to do anything else than run wave after wave in my sights. The dogfighting was repetitive and not exciting at all.

    Only good thing I can name are the sound effects, they are absolutely incredible. Most realistic gunshots I've heard in a game.

    All in all, they should have stopped at 2.    … Expand
  89. Broyax
    Apr 7, 2017
    3
    Le Frostbite est un moteur magnifique : un V12 Ferrari et qui de surcroît ne consomme pas outre-mesure. Sur une bécane moyenne, réglé sur automatique il envoit encore du bois. Très impressionnant.

    On attend donc qu'ils en fassent un jeu intéressant parce que ce clone de Call Of en plus grand est aussi bête que les produits Activision annuels avec sa: campagne scriptée stupide    Le Frostbite est un moteur magnifique : un V12 Ferrari et qui de surcroît ne consomme pas outre-mesure. Sur une bécane moyenne, réglé sur automatique il envoit encore du bois. Très impressionnant.

    On attend donc qu'ils en fassent un jeu intéressant parce que ce clone de Call Of en plus grand est aussi bête que les produits Activision annuels avec sa: campagne scriptée stupide ultra-courte et ennuyeuse.

    Quant au multi, je le trouve même en retrait : un bordel géant sans nom et l'interface sous forme de page web est une calamité à l'utilisation : lente et bugguée, mal foutue. 3 **** points donc pour le moteur.    … Expand
  90. Brumbek
    Oct 30, 2011
    2
    SP only review. Worst single player campaign I've played in ages. Homefront was more enjoyable... For starters, the auto-save system saves at the totally wrong times. Say you've got to climb four flights of stairs then kill enemies...instead of auto-saving before the enemies it saves at the bottom so you have to repeat the boring stair climbing. This happens everywhere. Next, say you haveSP only review. Worst single player campaign I've played in ages. Homefront was more enjoyable... For starters, the auto-save system saves at the totally wrong times. Say you've got to climb four flights of stairs then kill enemies...instead of auto-saving before the enemies it saves at the bottom so you have to repeat the boring stair climbing. This happens everywhere. Next, say you have to kill one RPG enemy...the game will spawn infinite hordes of enemies until you kill that one guy. Totally unrealistic. And like everyone else said, the game won't let you even open a door without some idiot NPC doing it for you. Horrible. This is a textbook example of how to ruin a SP campaign.… Expand
  91. Dankin
    Feb 17, 2012
    2
    the singleplayer have good graphics and gameplay.
    but the multiypalyer are just awful with full bugs and feel like World War 2 combat.
    vehicles and tanks not gives realism feeling and the physics are very not real...
    totally spend of 50 bucks
  92. gasperk
    Apr 13, 2013
    2
    At the moment this game has tons of cheaters everywhere. But this is not as big problems as the game itself. This game is imagine Call of Duty with vehicles.... Yes... This game is nothing more then that.
    Maps are total They are way too small. Bunnyhoppers everywhere. THis is NOT BATTLEFIELD.
    NO TACTICAL FIGHTING NOT TEAMWORK. Just like COD, brainless spraying and jumping    At the moment this game has tons of cheaters everywhere. But this is not as big problems as the game itself. This game is imagine Call of Duty with vehicles.... Yes... This game is nothing more then that.
    Maps are total They are way too small. Bunnyhoppers everywhere. THis is NOT BATTLEFIELD.
    NO TACTICAL FIGHTING NOT TEAMWORK. Just like COD, brainless spraying and jumping everywhere.

    The only positive thing i have to say about this game is the engine, graphics and sound. The rest is utter     … Expand
  93. fabAB912
    Oct 25, 2011
    2
    There was so much hype abt this game, I thought it was going to blow me away watching all the videos. Am not much into MP, prefer campaign mode. giving it a 2 for not being even half as good as I was expecting it to be.
  94. moifoi
    Nov 29, 2011
    2
    The game tried to hard to be realistic and gameplay should always come first. There's flashlights that blind your screen from across the map in broad daylight. The particle effects went so overboard the game is one big dust cloud most the time. The muzzle flash from enemies and infared both blind you, If you look face the direction where the sun is overhead you get blinded, and i thoughtThe game tried to hard to be realistic and gameplay should always come first. There's flashlights that blind your screen from across the map in broad daylight. The particle effects went so overboard the game is one big dust cloud most the time. The muzzle flash from enemies and infared both blind you, If you look face the direction where the sun is overhead you get blinded, and i thought they were wearing helmets and goggles.....

    The maps are too big and too much time is spent wandering around doing nothing, the maps are poorly designed and if they were designed better it would force ppl into conflict more often.

    The knife never works unless you press up against the player, it's like the guy has no arms.

    The biggest issue and what makes this the worst campfest around is you get killed in 2 shots by any gun and the red flash you get when being shot blinds your entire screen so reacting is taking out of the equation.    … Expand
  95. CollegeGamer
    Nov 11, 2011
    2
    For those who only play solo, save your money. It is not worth more than $7.00. I'm sure the multiplayer rocks, but the single is quick and boring. Both this and the new COD are not worth purchasing for solo.
  96. jkneuper
    Oct 25, 2011
    2
    It's a team based, squad focused, tactical shooter. The year of its release is 2011. It's on the platform that invented online multiplayer and pioneered real time voice chat. And you can't talk to your squad.

    How are you supposed to work as a team when you can't communicate? It's quite a shame really. The graphics are amazing, the gunplay feels good, the maps and objectives seem like    It's a team based, squad focused, tactical shooter. The year of its release is 2011. It's on the platform that invented online multiplayer and pioneered real time voice chat. And you can't talk to your squad.

    How are you supposed to work as a team when you can't communicate?

    It's quite a shame really. The graphics are amazing, the gunplay feels good, the maps and objectives seem like they could be fun. I'd probably rate the game an 8 or higher if it had this absolutely essential feature. But without communication, I might as well be playing a single player game with bots. I'm deeply disappointed.    … Expand
  97. bone333
    May 8, 2012
    2
    I feel somewhat like a cry baby, but this is the third EA game I bought in the last month and they ALL SUCK! This crashes regularly on my 3.16 GB Intel Duo w/ 4 GB ram and dual Nvidia Gforce 9800 GT. When it doesn't crash the single player campaign leaves you trapped in a hallway with no doors to open. It starts out great, don't get me wrong, but the crashing and bugs make the singleI feel somewhat like a cry baby, but this is the third EA game I bought in the last month and they ALL SUCK! This crashes regularly on my 3.16 GB Intel Duo w/ 4 GB ram and dual Nvidia Gforce 9800 GT. When it doesn't crash the single player campaign leaves you trapped in a hallway with no doors to open. It starts out great, don't get me wrong, but the crashing and bugs make the single player a class A turd. Friendlys drop dead for no reason. The sound cuts in and out. Save points are poorly designed. The person in charge of QA should be eviscerated. I'm done with EA. When is Valve coming out with something new?… Expand
  98. Watchinkaa
    Nov 3, 2011
    2
    This is the biggest dissapointment of the year so far. What could have been an amazing game turned out to be a crappy first person shooter that we've all seen before. I know battlefield is all about the multiplayer, but even that dissapoints. DICE has failed to deliver what they pronmised. But the graphics are good and all.
  99. deb0
    Sep 20, 2012
    2
    Too many bugs, cheating is rampant, weapons and vehicles are unrealistic. Most of the DLC is worthless, or content that should have been provided with the original version.
  100. kasper
    Oct 29, 2011
    2
    2 points for the anticipated game I have yet to get a taste of. Minus every other point for how broken Origin is. Releasing a game that is locked to a third party software like Origin, and then have the application so broken and unfinished is just unacceptable. Not to mention one of the worst and most useless support chatlines in the history of gaming.
prev
Page:

Awards & Rankings

8
#8 Best PC Game of 2011
6
#6 Most Discussed PC Game of 2011
5
#5 Most Shared PC Game of 2011

Critic Reviews

All reviews »
Metascore
89

Generally favorable reviews - based on 61 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 60 out of 61
  2. Mixed: 1 out of 61
  3. Negative: 0 out of 61
  1. Computer Games Online RO
    Mar 7, 2012
    86
    It's all a matter of taste, after all. They each provide a certain type of entertainment – when talking about Battlefield 3, it involves a bigger game, more open in its possibilities and more spectacular. But on a longer timeline, less frantic and with fewer Bruce Willis scenes than the mass appeal beast it set itself to dethrone.
    Read full review
  2. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Jan 20, 2012
    80
    No, Battlefield 3 is not the best game of today. But good looking – definitely. It also has an absolutely addictive multiplayer. Who needs more? [Dec 2011]
  3. PC PowerPlay
    Dec 4, 2011
    90
    Both a triumphant leap forward and a return to form for the Battlefield series. This is the best multiplayer shooter on PC. [Christmas 2011, p.58]
See all critic reviews »