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. anderson211
    Jan 29, 2012
    6
    I love everything about how this game should play. Masterful multiplayer, perfect for the 4 of us friends to enjoy together, fantastic maps/weapons/vehicles, and the best graphics to date in gaming. If I could play it all day long with friends, I probably would. But I can't. Punkbuster took me out of BF3 all this week after a known security flaw was finally abused. The awful OriginI love everything about how this game should play. Masterful multiplayer, perfect for the 4 of us friends to enjoy together, fantastic maps/weapons/vehicles, and the best graphics to date in gaming. If I could play it all day long with friends, I probably would. But I can't. Punkbuster took me out of BF3 all this week after a known security flaw was finally abused. The awful Origin web-based Steam-wannabe launching platform boots me from whatever server I'm in about once per hour. The game freezes and crashes about once per two hours, separate from Origin. The amount of deaths sustained in any 4 hour marathon play session from bugs, glitches, and most notably from hackers requires constant effort to find an enjoyable server. Nothing from EA, Dice, or punkbuster has removed the massive amount of cheating on PC play. Just look at the leaderboards Origin gives you. None are legit.

    This game was going to be absolutely huge upon release. Everyone knew that. EA was going to make a fortune on this game no matter what, and their preference to take extra net income over spending a few million bucks to make this game work is very obvious. Steam anti cheat has worked properly for many years, as has their delivery system and platform. EA elected not to use that system this time around, obviously to make even more money. The cash grab that is Origin is fine, if it works properly!!! It doesn't. At all. When the gaming community hands you a billion dollars of our money, we shouldn't have to deal with such issues. We should all be talking about balancing issues, new items, new maps, how to further improve such a great release, but the only thing the BF3 forum produces is complaints of stability, complaints about hacking, complaints about bugs, etc. We are far beyond the initial release kinks that every massive selling game will endure. EA's traditional business model of spamming out a game with a higher number behind the title to make more money on the franchise continues, and I won't be suckered into buying another unless I read how stable and flawless the game is 3-6 months after release.    … Expand
  2. Jadzwing
    Nov 26, 2011
    6
    Excellent realistic gun sounds, very good, realistic graphic, destruction, and thats end of good things in the game. Singleplayer is trying very hard tell story very similar to Modern Warfare series! There's like in CoD "difficult choice" and "big end with killing super bad character". I like end's like this, but why similiar end is in Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, Call of Duty 6: ModernExcellent realistic gun sounds, very good, realistic graphic, destruction, and thats end of good things in the game. Singleplayer is trying very hard tell story very similar to Modern Warfare series! There's like in CoD "difficult choice" and "big end with killing super bad character". I like end's like this, but why similiar end is in Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare, Call of Duty 6: Modern Warfare 2 and Call of Duty 8: Modern Warfare 3?
    Multiplayer is very good, destruction is amazing, and showing a real war. Sounds are great too but there's break with them, there's a lot of bugs... Nice 6 for very bad single, and bugged multi.    … Expand
  3. Freki
    Nov 4, 2011
    5
    I could spend this space writing about how great the game looks, how well it sounds, how fun it can be and all that - and I probable should as that is usually what people want to hear in a review be they gamers, publishers or developers..
    But quite honestly what I feel like writing about is all the frustration I'm left with after having finished the campaign... A game is not supposed to    I could spend this space writing about how great the game looks, how well it sounds, how fun it can be and all that - and I probable should as that is usually what people want to hear in a review be they gamers, publishers or developers..
    But quite honestly what I feel like writing about is all the frustration I'm left with after having finished the campaign... A game is not supposed to ship in such a state - you are not supposed to have a browser window open to find solutions to the game breaking bugs, you are no supposed to give up playing the multiplayer game because you can't play for more than a few minutes before it crashes..

    Dice have created a really beautiful game that serious gamers should play, but they should wait as it's certainly not finished yet - it's no secret PC gamers are getting the short end of the stick in this console era, but dear Dice and EA - I think most of us would much rather have waited for the finished game in December than be given an unfinished Beta in October..

    Anywhoo, when it works it looks and plays awesomely - so do pick it up, just do yourself a favor and wait until the first couple patches are out as it will save you a lot of frustration..    … Expand
  4. Tkwz
    Oct 31, 2011
    6
    This game is great and would deserve at least 8/10, most likely 9/10. So why 6/10? Because this game is UNFINISHED, plenty of bugs from beta are still in final version and the ONLY reason for this is... they wanted to get a pre-CoD premiere. Well screw you, maybe we get bugged games all the time right now, but that doesn't mean it's what WE the gamers want. We want to buy game, a comp toThis game is great and would deserve at least 8/10, most likely 9/10. So why 6/10? Because this game is UNFINISHED, plenty of bugs from beta are still in final version and the ONLY reason for this is... they wanted to get a pre-CoD premiere. Well screw you, maybe we get bugged games all the time right now, but that doesn't mean it's what WE the gamers want. We want to buy game, a comp to it's spec and play it and have fun, not tu realise we need to wait for patch for who knows how long. So 6/10, learn something for the future.… Expand
  5. Chapy
    Nov 5, 2011
    6
    I have a confession to make, seriously. The day BF3 was released I came on here and posted my user review as a 10. Here's the thing, after you play 20+ hours of BF3, it's simply a lie to yourself if you rate it a perfect 10. BF3 has many patches to go before it (hopefully) approaches perfection. I joined the BF series with BF2, a **** masterpiece. I'm still a huge BF3 fan and will stillI have a confession to make, seriously. The day BF3 was released I came on here and posted my user review as a 10. Here's the thing, after you play 20+ hours of BF3, it's simply a lie to yourself if you rate it a perfect 10. BF3 has many patches to go before it (hopefully) approaches perfection. I joined the BF series with BF2, a **** masterpiece. I'm still a huge BF3 fan and will still play because even with its faults, the moments of brilliance are not easily matched by any other competitive FPS. But the faults are (seriously now) SOME-OF-THE-MOST-INFURIATING-FUN-KILLING-EXPERIENCE-RUINING faults I've ever witnessed. You must understand the degree of game experience ruined by several very specific design flaws and bugs. 1) Dying behind cover. This happens. In fact it happens every time you're capable of experiencing it, which is when you're running into cover. I don't mean cardboard box cover here boys and girls, I mean you've rounded a concrete building, you've jumped over a cement barrier, you've dodged into an alleyway, yet you take fire and DIE 5 to 10 feet behind impenetrable cover. This anomaly has nothing at all to do with cover, it has to do with BF3â… Expand
  6. Astro_Zombie
    Oct 25, 2011
    5
    I joined metacritic solely for the purpose of writing this review and hopefully saving some people the frustration EA has caused me. I've been a long time battlefield fan and couldn't wait for this game to hit store shelves. Critics seem to rave about it and people who are wowed over by pretty visuals seem to love it. I on the other hand have had more frustrations with this game andI joined metacritic solely for the purpose of writing this review and hopefully saving some people the frustration EA has caused me. I've been a long time battlefield fan and couldn't wait for this game to hit store shelves. Critics seem to rave about it and people who are wowed over by pretty visuals seem to love it. I on the other hand have had more frustrations with this game and EA's piss pore attempt at an online distribution site than I think I have ever had in all my time PC gaming. The game crashes, battlelog is an absolute joke right now, errors left and right, and glitches out the ass. Not to mention the swarm of hackers already flooding the servers. As of right now I have played maybe 20 minutes of the game and could honestly care less about it. Maybe EA will fix these problems (which were also present in the beta, funny absolutely none of it was addressed upon release). As of right now though I have had no fun with BF3. But hey, they got my money like they wanted and the game looks great on my PC so I guess thats a plus.

    Personally, I'm going right back to BC2 and plan on leaving this in the dust until EA does something about Origin and the many bugs plaguing this game right now. Maybe a good game in the future but I wish I would have passed for now.    … Expand
  7. Ranmauzo
    Oct 25, 2011
    5
    Terrible, inexcusable single-player. Crappy multiplayer netcode. Another proof that FPS games are considered an excuse for mediocrity because terrible CoD kiddies will pay for it no matter how crappy. All these 10 ratings might as well be ignored, the single player is so terrible every review should be brought down at least 4 points.
  8. Travie
    Oct 25, 2011
    5
    First off, I have to say that the multiplayer is actually quite good in many ways, and many of the beta bugs were fixed. Now, for the bad... many weren't. Sometimes animations don't load properly and you will see some members of your team just hang there floating from point A to point B, other times after you land a kill the enemy will just stay there in ready position. I only encounteredFirst off, I have to say that the multiplayer is actually quite good in many ways, and many of the beta bugs were fixed. Now, for the bad... many weren't. Sometimes animations don't load properly and you will see some members of your team just hang there floating from point A to point B, other times after you land a kill the enemy will just stay there in ready position. I only encountered those bugs maybe twice each in 3 hours of gameplay, but it was still quite annoying. Then I have to mention the singleplayer. It was candidly... awful. QTEs every few minutes of gameplay, enemies spawned in two at a time from spawn points that were clearly in view, voice acting that was sub par. I know most people don't play Battlefield for the singleplayer, but every single other Battlefield game had a GREAT singleplayer experience attached, making it all the more disappointing.

    Lastly Origin. Any game that forces you to use third party software for all gameplay immediately gets a a negative mark, but Origin is one of the worst offenders that I've seen. It collects personal information about your hard drive and what games you have installs, what you play, and how long you play it. In systems like steam this is a non-issue, because steam doesn't collect and use this information, but EA does not have that moral hangup. If not for Origin this would be a solid 7/10, if not for the bad singleplayer 8.5/10.    … Expand
  9. PessimisticMan
    Feb 1, 2014
    5
    The strength of this game is based almost only on the multiplayer. The story is not worth remembering.
    PROS:
    +The multiplayer is very well balanced. +Amazingly wide variety of weapon customization. +The maps are pretty good. I'm not a fan of the large maps, but a lot of people are. +You got a lot of say of the track of the game (multiplayer) by just playing. Everyone has the pressure    The strength of this game is based almost only on the multiplayer. The story is not worth remembering.
    PROS:
    +The multiplayer is very well balanced.
    +Amazingly wide variety of weapon customization.
    +The maps are pretty good. I'm not a fan of the large maps, but a lot of people are.
    +You got a lot of say of the track of the game (multiplayer) by just playing. Everyone has the pressure of making or breaking the game.
    +There are glitches. "Isn't that a bad thing?" you may ask. No, because it is hilarious!
    CONS:
    -The story sucks. I don't need to into detail, it's just bad.
    -The multiplayer isn't noob friendly. If you're new to FPS, get a CoD game with bots for practice.
    -The planes and tanks in the multiplayer are more of an annoyance then anything.
    -Web-based game, because EA hates their fans or something.
    -EA
    I don't know. Do like multiplayer? Get it. If you want a game with value, don't.    … Expand
  10. JohnR
    Apr 20, 2012
    5
    I have re-reviewed BF3 after having played it extensively over a long period. The battle-log interface, and so many elements of the game play are just plain irritating. BF Bad Company 2 is much more fun, and the interface is simple and well laid out. It is a better game than BF3.
  11. Lemmiwinks
    Nov 3, 2011
    7
    I really wanted to give a higher score but i cannot ignore the glaring issues. Graphics, multiplayer and gameplay are out of this world 9/10, COD will not touch it. Singleplayer is terrible though, it may look pretty but it is just sooo boring, nothing really happens. Next time think up a better storyline or scrap it, i know it is more about multiplayer but my cat could have done a betterI really wanted to give a higher score but i cannot ignore the glaring issues. Graphics, multiplayer and gameplay are out of this world 9/10, COD will not touch it. Singleplayer is terrible though, it may look pretty but it is just sooo boring, nothing really happens. Next time think up a better storyline or scrap it, i know it is more about multiplayer but my cat could have done a better job.

    Key binding! why allow me to bind my own keys but then during all quick time events make me use the original ones! Too many quick time events too. Still buggy, my comrades got stuck at one point(they continued to shoot at a wall when all enemies were dead), i carried on and eventually it fixed itself. Kept crashing on the last level due to key bindings. walked over invisible rocks. final fight, first time around my enemy was invisible! Multiplayer is excellent, shame about using origin and the browser as it can be very slow. Its such a shame as this game could have been awesome, instead its just good. They probably could have stolen a few COD fans if they had included a couple of smaller maps.    … Expand
  12. MellerYeller
    Nov 8, 2011
    7
    I wish I could give this game a higher score than 7 but unfortunately I have quite a few issues with it. First of all, half the maps are tiny and aren't open at all. They basically are just linked chokepoints which is not the BF style. These maps can work for Rush but they're a mess on Conquest. Second, Battlelog is crap in its current state. It randomly stops working all the time and I'veI wish I could give this game a higher score than 7 but unfortunately I have quite a few issues with it. First of all, half the maps are tiny and aren't open at all. They basically are just linked chokepoints which is not the BF style. These maps can work for Rush but they're a mess on Conquest. Second, Battlelog is crap in its current state. It randomly stops working all the time and I've gotten countless errors from it. Still, to get a 7, I have enjoyed my time with the game. The other half of the maps are really good and there's tons of gameplay options with all the new unlocks and whatnot. Gameplay is still solid in general but don't even both with the campaign as it's even worse than BC2's.… Expand
  13. ACESsiggy
    Jan 25, 2012
    7
    Pretty interesting game to play. I really enjoyed a shake-up to the constant barrage of expansion packs from the Moder Warfare saga. Single player was very interesting and action packed. It is pretty heavy on my PC and my video card defenitely kicks into overdrive playing it. Multiplayer I didnt enjoy too much. The game requires you to install Origin to play and install a add-on to yourPretty interesting game to play. I really enjoyed a shake-up to the constant barrage of expansion packs from the Moder Warfare saga. Single player was very interesting and action packed. It is pretty heavy on my PC and my video card defenitely kicks into overdrive playing it. Multiplayer I didnt enjoy too much. The game requires you to install Origin to play and install a add-on to your webbrowser. I think it's pretty dumb that you need to open origin then just to click the play button in an internet browser page once more. Basically extra steps for nothing just to get into multiplayer. On top of that the initial load time (first time entering a match) it takes at least 3-5 minutes to load. After that load time is minimal.

    Overall glad to see Modern Warfare having some competition on the market finally.    … Expand
  14. goatranced
    Jan 24, 2012
    7
    Overall I think this is a pretty good game. I've been playing it for a about a month now and it still seems to have many items for me to unlock. BEWARE though the multiplayer is full of cheaters and hackers that apparently remain one step ahead of countermeasures. It's not uncommon for these players to go 50 plus kills with 1 or 2 deaths. A good admin server with voting removal canOverall I think this is a pretty good game. I've been playing it for a about a month now and it still seems to have many items for me to unlock. BEWARE though the multiplayer is full of cheaters and hackers that apparently remain one step ahead of countermeasures. It's not uncommon for these players to go 50 plus kills with 1 or 2 deaths. A good admin server with voting removal can help immensely but usually unless you have some cheaters on your team too it can totally distort the outcome of the game before they are removed and many slide under the radar anyway.… Expand
  15. reFUTCHable
    Jun 10, 2012
    5
    Ok, so this review is late but i believe it needs to be said. Although this is not related to the actual game design, this is part of the game experience. Team stacking and hacking are the only things you'll run into in the multiplayer side of the game. DICE should remove the 'swap team' button as all the so called 'good players' often use that to their advantage and you'll see a largeOk, so this review is late but i believe it needs to be said. Although this is not related to the actual game design, this is part of the game experience. Team stacking and hacking are the only things you'll run into in the multiplayer side of the game. DICE should remove the 'swap team' button as all the so called 'good players' often use that to their advantage and you'll see a large amount of servers with constant baserape. This is just my impression of the game and after 100+ hours of gameplay I took a minor hiatus only to return and find battlefield premium. Now i have no problem with the notion of pay once get all dlcs, but to prioritise queuing for premium members is just a tad unfair to the rest of us. Thank you EA, for reminding me how little regard you have of your customers. I'll be enjoying all the free DLC's ive gotten from the Witcher 2.… Expand
  16. Jon2011
    Jul 29, 2012
    5
    This is not a BF game, but this rating isn't about how good of a sequel it is.
    Gunplay is mediocre at best, suppression ruins the gunplay.
    Vehicles are crippled by disabling at 50%, makes them no fun to use. Health regeneration on vehicles and infantry. Squad perks make ammo almost useless. 3D spotting makes everything easy mode. Gun customization is neat, but overdone. Vehicle    This is not a BF game, but this rating isn't about how good of a sequel it is.
    Gunplay is mediocre at best, suppression ruins the gunplay.
    Vehicles are crippled by disabling at 50%, makes them no fun to use.
    Health regeneration on vehicles and infantry.
    Squad perks make ammo almost useless.
    3D spotting makes everything easy mode.
    Gun customization is neat, but overdone.
    Vehicle perks make the vehicle game even more dull.
    No VOIP for squads to communicate.
    Maps are too small for 64 players. (all maps except Gulf of Oman)
    Origin and battlelog are required to play, no way to launch game through desktop.
    No mod tools.
    Too much emphasis on unlocking stuff, less emphasis on actual fun.
    Great view distance!    … Expand
  17. Ranisz
    Oct 31, 2011
    7
    Nice but little bit disappointing. It is really hard to avoid comparisons to previous Battlefield 2 and Bad Company 2. I'll start with good things - graphics and sound are just amazing, The Battlefield is there, all around. Frostbite shows its claw at every step. Maps are enormous and it is the very first time I've seen maps like that. At this point I would give 10 but... lets start toNice but little bit disappointing. It is really hard to avoid comparisons to previous Battlefield 2 and Bad Company 2. I'll start with good things - graphics and sound are just amazing, The Battlefield is there, all around. Frostbite shows its claw at every step. Maps are enormous and it is the very first time I've seen maps like that. At this point I would give 10 but... lets start to deduct - The Battlelog - biggest -1 I can give, I still don't get why do I need to have browser open during playing a video game. Battlelog would be just fine without need to have it open all the time. -1 for game play, for me BC2 was perfectly balanced in terms of size of maps and allowed players, I know it is really nice to have a sightseeing tour on the Caspian Border but sometimes it takes few minutes to get to the fight. Final -1 unlock system, completely broken, unlocking scopes per each rifle?! It means once I get new weapon unlocked I must start scoring with it from scratch to bring it to a usable level... Strange and far too complex for me... To put everything together - I will keep playing both BF3 and BC2, each of them for different reasons. Both games physics is close enough to provide smooth shift between them.… Expand
  18. hooner
    Jul 13, 2012
    5
    This is a challenging game, and I really want to like it, but I uninstalled and wont go back. Just my opinion, but some maps are way too big, and others are way to small, some are just horrible (metro and Seine crossing). Unless you are going to play as a team you'll get nailed all the time and worst of all Origin and all the **** software you have to install just killed this for me. EAThis is a challenging game, and I really want to like it, but I uninstalled and wont go back. Just my opinion, but some maps are way too big, and others are way to small, some are just horrible (metro and Seine crossing). Unless you are going to play as a team you'll get nailed all the time and worst of all Origin and all the **** software you have to install just killed this for me. EA are forcing you to let them monitor your internet usage, and then go sell the data for £££.… Expand
  19. HaMSt3rBoT
    Nov 1, 2011
    7
    First of all, EA, GET YOUR ORIGIN'S GRUBBY, RANK, UNWASHED MITTS OFF MY DETAILS. No? Deleted.

    Now as much as people are raving on about the graphics, there are some nice touches, but all in all, it's rather gimmicky, light flares lighting up nothing but the immobile transparent predefined collection of splatters on your face to enthrall your eyeholes. High res textures are nice, some    First of all, EA, GET YOUR ORIGIN'S GRUBBY, RANK, UNWASHED MITTS OFF MY DETAILS. No? Deleted.

    Now as much as people are raving on about the graphics, there are some nice touches, but all in all, it's rather gimmicky, light flares lighting up nothing but the immobile transparent predefined collection of splatters on your face to enthrall your eyeholes. High res textures are nice, some rather clever shortcuts that still look flashy without sacrificing performance, but you'll need to be liberal with performance if you want to steal any thunder from the likes of Crysis 1, which I still consider the graphics overlord (I'm a whore for eyecandy), or to perform a jump in visuals as it did for it's time.
    What DOES steal the show for me, I have to say, is the audio. Excellent backdrop noises, distanced action, indoor echoes, footsteps that actually sound like what you're maneuvering on, and gunfire around you that makes you bloody well hope it's not coming towards you as you dive for your flimsy brick and mortar cover. Top notch job here.

    Singleplayer is a major downer, as it's a rather dramatic story with some decent acting added that ultimately culminates in something utterly forgettable and lifeless. Crummy plot told in an entirely unartistic, uninnovative and tardy prequel format, and the closest deviation towards something remotely hinted to as a twist is shooting your own CO. Though I have to say, I'm happy you don't trundle along with the mobility of a stocked dairy freezer chest as BF:BC2's protagonists did. Though there was talk of a Vanilla milkshake in there somewhere.

    Multiplayer on the other hand is a little bit more of a dusty gem. The Battlelog interface is a bloody dealbreaker, since you have to quit and reconnect to change server, (OR IF YOUR NVIDIA DRIVER STOPS RESPONDING, which seems to be a clock frequency issue... Tut tut, DICE.) but even with their stubborn refusal to add an ingame server browser, what was wrong with running an interface from that abomination called Origin that we were forced to have on our PC's in the first place? Why have ANOTHER middleman?
    But all in all, past all the **** the multiplayer handles well, the weapons are responsive and do what they're expected to do, and your thunderthighs prepare you for miles of endless sprinting which speeds things up a bit. It's really fun and the unlocks are varied and satisfying enough to give you incentive to keep going.

    Just one thing... SPAWNING. OH GOOD LORD THE SPAWNING.

    In short, if you have either consoles (which I usually don't consider for any FPS at all, but Battlelog really makes exceptions here), consider yourself a multiplayer buff, and enjoy a massively open battlefield with some serious distanced fighting (on foot anyhow) and exquisite audio, buy. PC, beware of that hive of scum and villany known as ORIGIN and Battlelog.
    I've uninstalled it in the hopes that DICE will prefer to host it on a different service or standalone, though chances of that are tentatively slim.

    However, HALT CRIMINAL SCUM! It's off to Skyrim!    … Expand
  20. SittinginBasket
    Oct 23, 2012
    7
    After spending much time on this game, and re-evaluating it after playing more than 150 hours, the game is pretty decent overall. The campaign, although relatively linear and not as well done as it could have been, is still quite fun to play. There are some great moments, but the entire campaign is let down by the less than stellar shooting-gallery feel.

    Now the major part of the    After spending much time on this game, and re-evaluating it after playing more than 150 hours, the game is pretty decent overall. The campaign, although relatively linear and not as well done as it could have been, is still quite fun to play. There are some great moments, but the entire campaign is let down by the less than stellar shooting-gallery feel.

    Now the major part of the game, the multiplayer. The gameplay is great, but one thing that really kicked me in the ass is the Battlelog system. What it basically decides to do with stat-saving is not save your stats when you get extremely good stats, and when you play poorly and get bad stats, it saves that for you, and in the end your stats get screwed to oblivion because the system decided not to save the stats of half your games. It essentially destroys the experience by giving you nothing when you put effort into playing the game, and sucker-punches you when you don't, and instead of feeling fulfilled when a round is completed, you are left sitting there, crossing your fingers and hoping that it saves your stats from that round. Thanks a lot, Battlelog.    … Expand
  21. Nirkbirk
    May 9, 2012
    6
    Well, first off, the Singleplayer sucks, so I'm not even going to bother talking about that or including it in the review score. This is a multiplayer game at heart. Secondly, the Co-Op is terrible unless you're with someone you know and have VoIP with them, cause they couldn't even be bothered to include the multiplayer text chat in it, making a successful game through public matchmakingWell, first off, the Singleplayer sucks, so I'm not even going to bother talking about that or including it in the review score. This is a multiplayer game at heart. Secondly, the Co-Op is terrible unless you're with someone you know and have VoIP with them, cause they couldn't even be bothered to include the multiplayer text chat in it, making a successful game through public matchmaking nigh on impossible. That leaves the Multiplayer. It's good, but even nearly 8 months after release, it's still riddled with bugs and exploits. Expect random connection drops, copious amount of lag, and crashes. That said, the game - in essence - is pretty fun, but it's the lack of effort on the part of the developers to make the game robust that drops the score in my opinion. There's also the completely unnecessary origin platform, which does, quite frankly, **** all besides increase the time it takes to get into a game, and if its servers are down for maintenance or whatever (occurred twice in the 5 days that I've been playing) you cannot log in to origin, or, if you're already on battlelog, join any server. Another thing that really annoys me is Battlelog - why they couldn't have just put it inside the game client is beyond me, as to switch to another server, you have to first quit the game, then find a server in battlelog, then run up the game, which in all takes 2-3 minutes, whereas on bad company 2 or BF2, you could be back in a game in under a minute. There's currently a poll on Battlelog (DICE's **** excuse for a server browser/stat tracker) asking what users are most excited for: some of the 'DLC' (glorified map packs) or the next patch. The next patch is winning by a long way, which goes to show how fed up people are of playing a game that isn't actually finished and to a standard at which it's easy to enjoy. When it does work, it's really fun, especially if you get into a squad that works together, and the unlocking system is pretty fun too, rewarding you for using certain weapons a lot.
    All in all, could've been fantastic, but seems rushed and not up to DICE's standard. It's certainly not worth the £40 Origin is asking for, and the B2K DLC is probably only worth £5. I only bought this game because Origin gave me a £10 off voucher, and to be honest, I'd rather have just taken the £10.    … Expand
  22. LittleMeow
    Nov 6, 2011
    7
    It's just plain not ready to come out. They released the beta way too late, and didn't have enough time to fix any problems. This game will be better after it gets patched a few times, so until then I definitely recommend waiting. It definitely has potential to be fun, but right now, it's just completely frustrating.
  23. NinjaPepeprs
    Oct 27, 2011
    7
    A good buy. The single-player is enjoyable although it does lack originality. The multiplayer is chaotic and frustrating but still worth playing, especially if you are a die hard FPS fan. This game would be much higher rated if it's selection screen wasn't web browser based and actually had its own dedicated in game pages. As well as this the screen selection looks cheap and tastelesslyA good buy. The single-player is enjoyable although it does lack originality. The multiplayer is chaotic and frustrating but still worth playing, especially if you are a die hard FPS fan. This game would be much higher rated if it's selection screen wasn't web browser based and actually had its own dedicated in game pages. As well as this the screen selection looks cheap and tastelessly done and is riddled with bugs. In summary the games lackluster single player, a frustrating but fun multiplayer and a buggy, cheap, tasteless loading screen will leave you wanting for more. Despite this in its essence the game is still really enjoyable, you should wait for it to come down in price or wait for them to make improvements before buying it. 7/10.… Expand
  24. V3smic
    Oct 26, 2011
    7
    The multiplier interface being out of game is less than desirable. Until this game is more stable and the web interface is able to work quicker and more consistently, I can hardly recommend the game to anyone for 60 dollars. That being said, once in the game it is absolutely beautiful and plays very well. This game has great potential once some patches are able to address the previouslyThe multiplier interface being out of game is less than desirable. Until this game is more stable and the web interface is able to work quicker and more consistently, I can hardly recommend the game to anyone for 60 dollars. That being said, once in the game it is absolutely beautiful and plays very well. This game has great potential once some patches are able to address the previously mentioned issues.… Expand
  25. C4K3
    Dec 13, 2011
    5
    Gameplay is severely lacking. Instead of the feeling of huge maps in battlefield 2, it's as if they've tried to combine BF2 with CoD, which has just failed quite spectacularly. Battlefield isn't suppose to give fast-paced action, it's suppose to give the feeling of a large battlefield, where you spend time trying to get to that perfect spot. Where you hide from the tank/helicopter goingGameplay is severely lacking. Instead of the feeling of huge maps in battlefield 2, it's as if they've tried to combine BF2 with CoD, which has just failed quite spectacularly. Battlefield isn't suppose to give fast-paced action, it's suppose to give the feeling of a large battlefield, where you spend time trying to get to that perfect spot. Where you hide from the tank/helicopter going past you. Where you can snipe somebody from far away. This game gives absolutely nothing of this. Then there are all the balance and spawnkilling issues, but it would take too long to get into them.

    Now, this game would still be worthy of a green rating if you weren't forced into having to deal with glitches constantly. First there's the obvious one, the horrible game launcher forcing you to reload and unload the entire game every time you want to switch servers. Which incidentally also forces you to be in a game while setting your settings. Then there's the weird movement, they've tried making the game more smooth by adding animations and the sort for jumping over things. The problem is they've failed miserably, and it's not smooth at all.

    Then there are all the problems with EA, I've found ea support to be not only slow and unhelpful, but that they'll also directly lie to you about billing (yes, I've been billed twice on my single copy of BF3, and despite contacting support about this for the first time BEFORE the game was released, I have yet to receive any sort of refund at all) Of course this doesn't say anything about the actual game, it just shows that EA doesn't care about it's customers.    … Expand
  26. Lowzar
    Oct 28, 2011
    5
    A pretty average shooter by all accounts. Origin is just ridiculous, as is battlelog.
    Singleplay is short and pointless.
    Wait till it hits the bargain bin, I wish I did.
  27. DanielSun
    Oct 26, 2011
    7
    Overall, I would recommend the game. It is not my favourite at the moment but I will give it time and see what happens.

    First off, I wasn't impressed having to launch my game through a browser. This was mostly because it wouldn't launch. After hours of messing around, I isolated it to Internet Explorer 9. Probably one too many security boxes clicked. I had a gut feeling it was IE9    Overall, I would recommend the game. It is not my favourite at the moment but I will give it time and see what happens.

    First off, I wasn't impressed having to launch my game through a browser. This was mostly because it wouldn't launch. After hours of messing around, I isolated it to Internet Explorer 9. Probably one too many security boxes clicked. I had a gut feeling it was IE9 from previous experiences- the browser gets goofy on some sites. I opened it through Chrome and it worked. It's how I get around all of my IE9 issues.

    The game does look good. Enough said there. My GTX 580 SC @ 2560 x 1600 ultra graphics does a pretty good job. It did slow down during intense firefights in multiplayer once so far but to be fair maybe it was lag (gf was watching Netflix).

    I only touched the Single Player Campaign to get a feel of the game before having my ass handed to me online. From what I've played so far, the storyline is a FILE ---> SAVE AS from Black Ops.

    Now the reasons for the low score. I gave it enough to keep it positive because I don't feel it deserves anything less. This is all multi-player related.

    My biggest issue is the size of the maps. Even with 64 players, it's still too big. Too much area to cover, too much running. I thought I was playing ARMA for a minute. It's also a sniper's wet dream. Playing COD, I hated any open map because of the snipers. Some open area is fine. There is too much open area here. I loved a lot of the COD maps. Plenty of buildings for cover and ambush, escape from attack, track down campers and safely eliminate them, whatever. The best part was sneaking around and knifing snipers/campers/anyone really. If I start taking fire in BF3 going cover to cover, which is like a 20+ second sprint, don't bother. Respawn, start from the beginning and run another marathon across the map to where the action is.

    This point is simple- you can't run over enemies with vehicles. I tried and looked stupid. I saw someone kill a teammate. Driving a vehicle at the time I was like hey, let's run this mofo over. Nope. Slammed into a wall and as I was trying to reverse and take off, buddy shot me dead. Went right through him. I even think he was surprised. Next point, COD wins for class customization. I loved building my character classes and choosing different ones depending on the job that needed to get done. Also, it doesn't appear BF3 has the options COD has (weapons, attachments, secondary weapons, perks, camo, etc.). You get some stuff here and there, but it seems limited. This isn't for sure, just how it looks at the moment. I like customization/options. Simple as that. BF3 may come through and surprise me- fingers crossed.

    BF3 is a much different game than COD. I do need to play it more to really appreciate it all. For me, the huge map thing might be what kills it for me. If I get picked off by snipers regularly in these opens maps, this game won't get touched again. For now, I will keep playing it and seeing how things go for me. For anyone still waiting to buy this game, I'd wait until after Modern Warfare 3 launches. The game might not be as pretty but if the multiplayer is better, who cares? I know I don't.    … Expand
  28. iplaygamesalot
    Dec 20, 2011
    7
    This game is pretty much your standard shooter but with the Battlefield staple of land, sea, and air vehicles. The visuals on PC are simply amazing, and the multiplayer gameplay can be extremely hectic. For example, I was cutting through an alley to an objective when a tank rotated its turret in my direction, shot, missed and hit the wall above me sending debris falling on top of me as aThis game is pretty much your standard shooter but with the Battlefield staple of land, sea, and air vehicles. The visuals on PC are simply amazing, and the multiplayer gameplay can be extremely hectic. For example, I was cutting through an alley to an objective when a tank rotated its turret in my direction, shot, missed and hit the wall above me sending debris falling on top of me as a helocopter was unloading rockets into the tank destroying it before my eyes. Then the helicopter crashed into the side of the building as i emerged from the alleyway only to be greeted by a hail of bullets among the debris and flames. Those are the moments in battlefield that make the game so addicting. And is why i will continue to play.… Expand
  29. RatingnHating
    Dec 24, 2011
    7
    Battlefield 3 is a good game but it has it's flaws. The singleplayer is a boring tutorial like experience with a very cliche plot. But that being said it's multiplayer is really were the game belongs. Multiplayer is a fun chaotic experience with pretty good graphics and destruction. But this is brought down by the numerous glitches that have yet to be patched, and the fact that usersBattlefield 3 is a good game but it has it's flaws. The singleplayer is a boring tutorial like experience with a very cliche plot. But that being said it's multiplayer is really were the game belongs. Multiplayer is a fun chaotic experience with pretty good graphics and destruction. But this is brought down by the numerous glitches that have yet to be patched, and the fact that users are forced to use Origin which is a slow system and also contains spyware. Then on top of that we have to launch the game from a browser so you cannot play anything without internet.… Expand
  30. FFStudios
    Aug 5, 2012
    6
    First, let's deny the existence of the single player, which I feel is one of the most blisteringly awful campaigns I've ever played through thanks to its boring story & characters and lack or direction. Origin is a bit of nuisance but I've decided to rate the game and not the software. Anyway, my first impressions of BF3's multiplayer were good; the weapons feel much tighter than BadFirst, let's deny the existence of the single player, which I feel is one of the most blisteringly awful campaigns I've ever played through thanks to its boring story & characters and lack or direction. Origin is a bit of nuisance but I've decided to rate the game and not the software. Anyway, my first impressions of BF3's multiplayer were good; the weapons feel much tighter than Bad Company 2 and the graphics are technically superb on ultra settings. I will also give credit to DICE for making a game which actually feels at home on the PC with optimised graphics and intuitive controls. Now to the negatives; despite the technical side of the graphics, they still carry that current-generation problem of being incredibly dull and colourless; I understand perhaps horror games might need it but games like Battlefield just don't benefit from it because everyone looks indistinguishable from one another against murky backgrounds. There's another thing, why are most of the environments either desert industrial or urban? Bad Company 2's lurid jungles were way more visually appealing than BF3's dull maps. Frostbite 2 might shine, but graphics will never be able to carry a game, I don't care how advanced your volumetric lighting is, the game should still be able to stand up without good graphics. All these problems would normally be quite small, but there is one massive problem I have with this game that just ended it for me; health amount. It may be acceptable in games like DayZ and ARMA that you die easily since they're both realistic simulations; but BF3 is not that sort of game. You can take about three hits before dying, making smaller fights not really a matter of who has the best aiming and skill as it is whoever spotted the other first. I'm sure BF3 will suit players who somehow like low HP and dull, samey maps, but for me Battlefield 3 was probably the most disappointing game of 2011.… Expand
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 »