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. NightMareXXX
    May 26, 2012
    10
    A game that requires great skill, hard to master but very catchy and enjoyable to try. The graphics are outstanding as well as the environment sounds, guns SFX's and why not, the acting in the single player was decent too!
    While the single player seemed to be a little of a side feature of the package, I think that Battlefield 3 did the job in the Multiplayer. Battlefield 3 is my game of    A game that requires great skill, hard to master but very catchy and enjoyable to try. The graphics are outstanding as well as the environment sounds, guns SFX's and why not, the acting in the single player was decent too!
    While the single player seemed to be a little of a side feature of the package, I think that Battlefield 3 did the job in the Multiplayer. Battlefield 3 is my game of the year; simply worth every penny.    … Expand
  2. ChronoJase
    May 25, 2012
    10
    Singleplayer was alright, but Battlefield never really had singleplayers other than BFBC and 2. The graphics are amazing, realistic destruction and simply awesome. The graphics like the sun glare, which is a neat add on. The multiplayer is the champion here, great maps, guns. This is sort of the game that requires teamwork to win.
  3. ayeballkid
    May 24, 2012
    5
    This game would be a 9 in my book but EA has resold the servers and you can no longer play on official servers running a dedicated game mode (rush) on all maps...super frustrating. Tons of hackers, amazing graphics, brilliant concept, great level design, great sound, play the game 100 different ways, did I mention the terrible back end and awful customer service, thanks EA for ruiningThis game would be a 9 in my book but EA has resold the servers and you can no longer play on official servers running a dedicated game mode (rush) on all maps...super frustrating. Tons of hackers, amazing graphics, brilliant concept, great level design, great sound, play the game 100 different ways, did I mention the terrible back end and awful customer service, thanks EA for ruining Dice's beautiful project.… Expand
  4. xMin
    May 22, 2012
    6
    BF3 would be better if it hadn't got Single player !
  5. Kirjakukka
    May 21, 2012
    9
    Great game.

    Graphics are really nice - you just need a little better PC than average to run it without any problems and with good FPS. The multiplayer is awesome. You just need to really jump into the battlefield, see and especially HEAR what is going on around you. Most of the people playing are not usually up-to-date that what is going on around them. Making the game very annoying for    Great game.

    Graphics are really nice - you just need a little better PC than average to run it without any problems and with good FPS.

    The multiplayer is awesome. You just need to really jump into the battlefield, see and especially HEAR what is going on around you. Most of the people playing are not usually up-to-date that what is going on around them. Making the game very annoying for the rest of the players (or rest of the team).

    Singleplayer was good as well, tho the AI wasn't so good etc., but the graphics and sounds were awesome as well goes the storyline.

    There are still some bugs in the game (like the MASS and bad syncs in 3th and first person when shooting with silencers) and I hope those and everything else of those bugs will be fixed in the patches. So far it has been slow, but they've got stuff done anyhow....    … Expand
  6. IdiotTroll
    May 20, 2012
    10
    Omg! Such a gooooooooood game! It is so perfect because it is perfect! I love it and not mw3 because it is so goood! Buy it it is sooo god! Gewd game bro!
  7. MagicHAT
    May 20, 2012
    0
    Cowboys-Rednecks-Evil Russians-Evil Muslims-Good Guys American Army-Hollywood story is so bad image that this game radiates is just sickening you can see this in movies in music Mtv... where is the art?
  8. wingsoverithaca
    May 20, 2012
    5
    Huge BF fan. But I uninstalled this game a month ago since it wasn't being played. Pros: graphics, vehicles, some improvements on bc2 (revives, MCOM charges have to be disarmed even at 0 tickets)

    Cons: HORRIBLE MAP DESIGN, PLAYER DROPOFF, needs more destruction, NETCODE (client-side hit detection), patches break more than fix, battlelog + origin, guns are bland, classes are imbalanced,    Huge BF fan. But I uninstalled this game a month ago since it wasn't being played. Pros: graphics, vehicles, some improvements on bc2 (revives, MCOM charges have to be disarmed even at 0 tickets)

    Cons: HORRIBLE MAP DESIGN, PLAYER DROPOFF, needs more destruction, NETCODE (client-side hit detection), patches break more than fix, battlelog + origin, guns are bland, classes are imbalanced, too many laser designations (needs more AT4), BUGS    … Expand
  9. 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
  10. TIZ
    May 18, 2012
    9
    Not very long or that special single player but otherwise a good corny movie like single player experience. Fun co-op, amazing multiplayer, crazy graphics and awesome animations
  11. 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
  12. 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
  13. 410MaXiMuS
    May 10, 2012
    10
    Battlefield vet here... been around since Battlefield 1942 and have played every single Battlefield since then, including the Bad Company series. Battlefield 3 is is simply amazing, 10 / 10. The fact that this game has 587 negative reviews is no surprise though.... this is a thinking mans shooter. This is not a run-n-gun cooridor shooter like COD. This game throws you into massiveBattlefield vet here... been around since Battlefield 1942 and have played every single Battlefield since then, including the Bad Company series. Battlefield 3 is is simply amazing, 10 / 10. The fact that this game has 587 negative reviews is no surprise though.... this is a thinking mans shooter. This is not a run-n-gun cooridor shooter like COD. This game throws you into massive environments and leaves it up to you to decide how to help your team win. You have to move from cover to cover and you have to work with your team.… Expand
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. oboehobo
    May 8, 2012
    9
    Since it's launch in October I had been playing this game on the PS3. While that was fun and all, the entire time I had looked at the maps in wonder of what they could be with 48 more players and extra flags to capture. Finally at long last I have gotten a reasonable graphics card to play this game on PC, and boy was it worth the wait. I play on Medium, and the graphics are justSince it's launch in October I had been playing this game on the PS3. While that was fun and all, the entire time I had looked at the maps in wonder of what they could be with 48 more players and extra flags to capture. Finally at long last I have gotten a reasonable graphics card to play this game on PC, and boy was it worth the wait. I play on Medium, and the graphics are just stunning. The Coma-Rose for giving commands and asking for help is fantastic. I love the I can ask for help, say thanks when someone helps me out, or deny an order that sounds like suicide. It really helps add to the authenticity of the game. The 64 player matches on the largest maps like Caspian Border, Operation Firestorm, and the Karkand Maps, is some of the most intense and fun experiences I've had in a Multiplayer game. Working a in a squad with pros is an experience I just haven't and can not have in other multiplayer shooters, so great job DICE.
    Obviously the campaign is the same as it is on the console, but hey, it looks and runs better. I'm enjoying going through it again. It's no Call of Duty 4 or Halo: Combat Evolved, but the story is alright and it does have some pretty awesome moments. Sound and graphics (Like I said I run on Medium) are crazy good. I play in 1920x1080 and it is just incredible. Eventually I will be getting a second of my video card (GTX 280) and a quad core with a new mother board, and then I'll be able to see this game in high. I'm looking forward to it. The environments are just beautiful, whether its an endless desert with burning oil, the peak of a mountain, the Streets and Subway tunnels of France, or masterfully detailed and wartorn cities of the Mideast, this game will blow you away.
    Origin wasn't a hassle for me, and the browser launcher seems to be working fine. I have been able to connect to my friends fairly easily. The only feature I don't use is the Origin/Browser voice chat. My friends and I stick to Skype in case we are playing different games. This is a great game. I personally think It is well worth the sale price. Karkand will run you and extra $15, but BF3 is constantly on sale through Origin, Amazon and the like. If you are looking for a great game aimed at teamwork or just an awesome shooter, this is a game worth looking for. If you are currently playing this game on console, in due time you may want to upgrade your computer, it really is worth it. The only thing that kept this game from a 10/10 is some minor bugs, slightly lazy writing in the campaign, and it is kinda poorly optimized for older video cards like mine (it took me a while to find the perfect settings to make this game smooth).    … Expand
  17. fukeaintheass
    May 8, 2012
    5
    Couldn't wait to play it as im a massive BF2 fan. But it was a complete let down. The game wasn't even finished prior to release and is the MOST buggy game i've EVER played. Many people bought the game and simply cant play it as it just wont work. To add injury to insult the game gets constant "maintenance", in other words its unplayable for hours at a time. This time affects players inCouldn't wait to play it as im a massive BF2 fan. But it was a complete let down. The game wasn't even finished prior to release and is the MOST buggy game i've EVER played. Many people bought the game and simply cant play it as it just wont work. To add injury to insult the game gets constant "maintenance", in other words its unplayable for hours at a time. This time affects players in Australia and surrounding area's as it is timed to not effect EU and US playtime. While this game is enjoyable to play, the numerous problems have pushed many to vow never to buy EA/DICE products, i cant blame them as the sheer frustration of wanting to play it but not being able to tests your patience. Origin is not worth pissing on even if it was on fire.
    P.S Singleplayer is crap, its all about the multiplayer.    … Expand
  18. gvazdas
    May 6, 2012
    8
    For the purposes of buying this game, I will not be rating the singleplayer part of the game because it would ruin the whole reason for this game.
    In a few words: the singleplayer is terrible. Skip it and don't play it. Go straight for the co-op/multiplayer.
    The multiplayer is really fun. There's something you start the game for. New weapons, customizations and maps make this fun. Find a    For the purposes of buying this game, I will not be rating the singleplayer part of the game because it would ruin the whole reason for this game.
    In a few words: the singleplayer is terrible. Skip it and don't play it. Go straight for the co-op/multiplayer.
    The multiplayer is really fun. There's something you start the game for. New weapons, customizations and maps make this fun. Find a few friends, create a platoon and rock out. The graphics are astonishingly beautiful even on low-end PCs who can't run the game on higher than very low graphics.    … Expand
  19. NerV-0-sol
    May 5, 2012
    7
    Game gives much fun and looks really good, but I think BF2 was better in terms of strategy, team play, responsibility of the players, and there was traditional game menu (launching through a web browser is really irritating).
  20. JeremyEr10
    May 4, 2012
    8
    Battlefield set the standards on how large scale multiplayer games are handled.
    Unfortunately, the game has degraded in terms of gameplay for the sake of eye popping graphics.
    However, Battlefield 3 is still a game worth trying due to its still addictive and action packed Multiplayer.

    Do not underestimate this game, it has potential.
  21. Zyromkiru
    May 4, 2012
    9
    Definitely the step into the future with how shooters should be although this game does have a lot of unbalanced weapons and bugs. I will most likely buy the next game when it comes out if it is like this one. The sniping in this game is by far my favorite of any game.
  22. Prantare
    May 2, 2012
    10
    Great game ^_^ couldn't play it because of BattleLog bugs in the beginning but now that it works it is quite nice. Would enjoy an even more hardcore mod though (with more realism).

    Biggest problem as I see it is all the perks that experienced players has, making it even harder for newcomers.
  23. Broxigar
    Apr 27, 2012
    0
    More of the same, nothing but FPS garbage. This genre has single handedly destroyed gaming and turned the entire industry into one that favors "safe" shallow gameplay with good graphics instead of games that are actually enjoyable.
  24. deolic
    Apr 26, 2012
    9
    Best FPS. Overall a very good game. Although the single player mode does not stand on the highest level this ulti is really amazing. A large number of weapons and vehicles cause large variations of the game, and all this complemented by a large map. Some may bother smaller maps in enclosed spaces, because this really is not there, but it will be DLC Close Quarters. I heartily recommend allBest FPS. Overall a very good game. Although the single player mode does not stand on the highest level this ulti is really amazing. A large number of weapons and vehicles cause large variations of the game, and all this complemented by a large map. Some may bother smaller maps in enclosed spaces, because this really is not there, but it will be DLC Close Quarters. I heartily recommend all admirers of first-person shooter games because they really worth it.… Expand
  25. 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
  26. MetalTrancer
    Apr 24, 2012
    10
    I think, Battlefield 3 is the best game in the style of action. At least for me. EA Games have shown that they are able and know how to create high-quality games
  27. heAd3r
    Apr 22, 2012
    6
    Im a big fan of battlefield since battlefield 2 also played this for over 4 years without a break, so i was looking forward for battlefield 3 for a long time, but as I first got the beta and later the game i was first excited but after after 3 or 4 weeks I was sure it's just not what it could have been, sadly it's just a new mainstream title, don't get me wrong it is still a greatIm a big fan of battlefield since battlefield 2 also played this for over 4 years without a break, so i was looking forward for battlefield 3 for a long time, but as I first got the beta and later the game i was first excited but after after 3 or 4 weeks I was sure it's just not what it could have been, sadly it's just a new mainstream title, don't get me wrong it is still a great multiplayer experience but not a real battlefield!… Expand
  28. the-epikninja
    Apr 22, 2012
    9
    The singleplayer campaign was horrifying! but at least the multiplayer shows some promise. The game is very polished but lacking developer attention after release. Battlefield 3 was laggy and sometimes unplayable due to frequent amount of crashing. But in the end, they patched most of the troubles and it's worth every penny! 9/10 -the-epikninja
  29. BvsDark
    Apr 21, 2012
    10
    Great game, plenty of weapons, and patches and fixes are being developed, I really enjoyed when vehicles start to beep, this games is like bf2 but even more real! big thanks ti JICE and EA!
  30. 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.
  31. Coeco
    Apr 18, 2012
    0
    The beta was fun even with no destruction and the occasional floor-glitching but once it hit release, it was unplayable with a dozen different kinds of connectivity issues hitting you at the same time along with overall huge amounts of lag and delay.

    Something that Is not welcome in a FPS so I asked for a refund on the same day I bought it. That was 6 months ago. I've now been ignored by    The beta was fun even with no destruction and the occasional floor-glitching but once it hit release, it was unplayable with a dozen different kinds of connectivity issues hitting you at the same time along with overall huge amounts of lag and delay.

    Something that Is not welcome in a FPS so I asked for a refund on the same day I bought it. That was 6 months ago. I've now been ignored by their support over 4 separate times with no hope of seeing my money. Thanks EA.    … Expand
  32. JvJ
    Apr 16, 2012
    9
    The perfect multiplayer game. I'm a BF2 and BF2142 player and I love this new BF. The singleplayer is good but not as good as the multiplayer. Hundreds of unlocks, giant maps, ... Just buy it =)
  33. Ebayers
    Apr 15, 2012
    8
    A good game with a pointless singleplayer (the battlefield series is really multiplayer content only). Little reason to stick at it however as maps become repetative. Only reason not 10/10 is that I think vehical play could be better, more on a par with battlefield 2. Attack choppers are suppost to be OP which is why nearly every millitary in the world uses them, in battlefield 3 they areA good game with a pointless singleplayer (the battlefield series is really multiplayer content only). Little reason to stick at it however as maps become repetative. Only reason not 10/10 is that I think vehical play could be better, more on a par with battlefield 2. Attack choppers are suppost to be OP which is why nearly every millitary in the world uses them, in battlefield 3 they are strangly crap. The vehical unlocks system means that all vehicals only become good after several hours of play which is a bit pointless.… Expand
  34. Eclipsers
    Apr 15, 2012
    2
    Downgraded Battlefield 2. This game was to be continued where Battlefield 2 ended. However, this game was truly great in the alpha. There was no blue layer, it was more yellow/brownish saturation which everyone loved, but DICE thought it was a good idea to make it more consolized than it already is.
    The suppression was balanced and most of the guns were close in terms of balance. Now when    Downgraded Battlefield 2. This game was to be continued where Battlefield 2 ended. However, this game was truly great in the alpha. There was no blue layer, it was more yellow/brownish saturation which everyone loved, but DICE thought it was a good idea to make it more consolized than it already is.
    The suppression was balanced and most of the guns were close in terms of balance. Now when this new patch released, the entire game went to a horrible direction. It makes no sense whatsoever to introduce bullet spread during suppression.

    To Summarize: DICE really went to hell.    … Expand
  35. metalmechanic
    Apr 13, 2012
    5
    Battlefield 3 is what I would call a functional shooter if it was called something else I would probably rate at a solid 6. The fact that it is part of the Battlefield franchise and was built up to be a return to its roots is where most of the problems stem from. First lets look at what the game from outside the Battlefield universe. It comes out the great with very nice looking graphics.Battlefield 3 is what I would call a functional shooter if it was called something else I would probably rate at a solid 6. The fact that it is part of the Battlefield franchise and was built up to be a return to its roots is where most of the problems stem from. First lets look at what the game from outside the Battlefield universe. It comes out the great with very nice looking graphics. Although lots of things seem to be way overdone, such as the almost mirror surface of the aircraft carriers. Why are they so shiny? The sun is overwhelmingly bright at times. Other than some bad art direction the game has some very good graphics. Destruction, I've always been kind of torn between how much there should be in a multi-player experience. To much breaks the flow of the maps and to little can be very limiting. The base maps have it just about right. Some obstacles can be removed while mostly keeping the flow of the map as it was intended. The level design on over half the maps make it very clear that this was a multi platform launch, and that they have very different player numbers. All the city maps are extremely over crowded at 64 players, and the larger air maps seemingly have all the flags clustered in the center of the the playable area. This tells me that the hype during the development cycle built as PC first only went as far as the engine and did not effect level design very much. The games biggest downfall though is its net code. How such a high profile game can have such poor hit detection is laughable. Depending on your ping and that of the player shooting at you, a person can find them self dying up to a few seconds after reaching cover. Players often register kills before they fire a shot from your view. Players might also find that after being revived there gun will have almost a full magazine despite the fact that on their end they unloaded over half a clip into the opposing player. This is without a doubt one of the more frustrating things about the game.

    Now if we step back into the Battlefield universe, we find a whole new list of problems mostly coming from empty promises from the marketing department. The claim of largest maps we have ever created: False. The claim that they waited making a true squeal to BF2 until the could do it right and do the original justice:False. That the game play in general would be much more like BF2 than BC2: False. Let me start by saying just how poor the flight model is in this game. After stating they would be much like Battlefield 2 and not just the hover craft of the Bad Company series. I was very disappointed to find that the choppers still cannot do flips or rolls, and even worse the jets can do a back flip but for some reason cannot do a front flip. Jets become disabled at half health and must be landed to be repaired, a mechanic that simply leads to everyone bailing as soon as they start to get hit. Bringing unlocks to the vehicle side was another huge mistake. Players should not be forced to unlock basic equipment. Inexperienced players should not be further handicapped against veteran pilots. Flares and Air to Air missiles should be standard equipment. Same goes for smoke and coaxial machine guns for tanks and Smoke and Guided missile for APC's. Vehicles as a whole feel as if they are an after thought. No maps feature every vehicle type. Air maps exclude APC's with the standard cannon and instead just simply have the AA variant. Now lets quickly hit on Back to Karkand Expansion. This is a fine example of new mechanics breaking the flow of old map design. Take Sharqi Peninsula for example. By the end of the battle the area around the surveillance area has been reduced to a open field. Snipers have rode their MAV's to roof tops that are other wise unreachable turning the open area a instant killzone for any poor soul dumb enough to try and venture across to the next flag. Gulf of Oman was reduced to a fight over the large construction area for snipers and Laser spammers. Karkand itself flows much slower than before due to the fact that areas to camp in have increased by an astronomical amount due to all the building being open on multiple levels, add to that the previously mentioned MAV riding snipers and its not even the same map as before. They also excluded the Factory flag for some reason. The map that holds the most true to its old form is Wake island. A formula that is hard to get wrong. Although for some time it was reduced to Laser/javaline tag on the pilots. With the infantry getting revenge for years of abuse from the pilots of BF2. In closing as the word count is running low. Battlefield 3 as a whole is a shell of what it could have been, with the game feeling rushed and unfinished. The poor netcode and flaws in map design over shadow some very nice graphics and Amazing sound. If you are hardcore fan of the classic Battlefield titles 1942-2142 steer clear of this game. Its but a shadow of the series former glory. Thanks EA!    … Expand
  36. 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
  37. Lennon
    Apr 11, 2012
    8
    Love it, put nearly 200 hours into this game now, its not perfect, and I really wish DICE had put commander mode in again, but its still a great fun game to play with friends.
  38. mishka1939
    Apr 10, 2012
    10
    Great game, beautiful, new, and one that cares about its buyers(so far). Unbelievable game...been playing it for about 5 hours now and it's wonderful. The multiplayer is bigger and better than all the previous BF games. The shooting mechanics are top notch and the map design exquisite. Pick the game up!
  39. 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
  40. Lechero29
    Apr 6, 2012
    6
    Battlefield 3 is just one of those games that although i am okay with people going nuts about it, I just do not understand why. There are definitely some good things about it, such as the fantastic presentation, great sound effects, and a nice multiplayer to boot, but it also has its flaws. For one, the story is utter nonsense, and it just like a tutorial rather than an actual campaign.Battlefield 3 is just one of those games that although i am okay with people going nuts about it, I just do not understand why. There are definitely some good things about it, such as the fantastic presentation, great sound effects, and a nice multiplayer to boot, but it also has its flaws. For one, the story is utter nonsense, and it just like a tutorial rather than an actual campaign. Also, this is a bit nit-picky, but the console versions offer no split-screen, which was very dissapointing for me. All in all, I do not find the game very appealing, but then again, I am not a fan of shooters anyway.… Expand
  41. fiRsTcLAiMs
    Apr 5, 2012
    10
    i just finished making an account on metacritic just to type a fair review of this game. first i must say is, this game is ages away from modern warfare 3. im not sure how the game was before they fixed all the bugs because i just bought it like a week ago. but my computer runs it on max settings at 60 fps with no problem whatsoever and the gameplay is incredibly realistic. i was one ofi just finished making an account on metacritic just to type a fair review of this game. first i must say is, this game is ages away from modern warfare 3. im not sure how the game was before they fixed all the bugs because i just bought it like a week ago. but my computer runs it on max settings at 60 fps with no problem whatsoever and the gameplay is incredibly realistic. i was one of the people complaining badly about this game when the beta was out and thought there was no fixing this game. i hated origin and all. but after really checking the origin page out, i see is actually a great idea. im actually on queu for a match right now while i type this and when i can get in, it will just launch on its own. meaning i can do whatever i want with my computer instead of trying over and over to get into a server. i honestly dont see any flaws on this game other than the characters voices when you ask for back up and medic ext. i got this game on ebay for 25 dollars and just because i was so hesistant to try it based on what the beta showed me. but as the game is now, is well worth 60dollars and dice did an excellent job. this is coming from a bf2 fan also. i played all the call of duties and felt it was for kids and i end up selling it back to gamestop a few weeks after buying them. battlefield in the other hand is a mans game and bf3 has no competition right now in my eyes. try this game and i guarantee you wont regret your purchase. just make sure your computer can handle it. im maxing the game out right now at 40-60fps with a alienware m17x r3. i7 2.4ghz(3.5 turbo boost) 4gb 1600mhz ram. gtx 580m. 7200rpm hardrive.… Expand
  42. jungicider
    Apr 3, 2012
    10
    this is a fantastic game for the pc. the graphics are awesome and the multiplayer will get you hooked for months and even years to come. blowing jeeps across caspian border will never end. singleplayer is not that good however, and i just think of it as a tutorial on multiplayer.
  43. Souri
    Apr 2, 2012
    10
    0 points becouse no commander mode? u guys are so great critics lololololololololololololol dem är da best multiplayer ghaim eva meid juu fykken nerdös FITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR0 points becouse no commander mode? u guys are so great critics lololololololololololololol dem är da best multiplayer ghaim eva meid juu fykken nerdös FITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWERFITTA FOR POWER… Expand
  44. Panther117
    Mar 30, 2012
    9
    BATTLEFIELD 3.
    Winner of over 60 game industry awards.
    â
  45. wood431
    Mar 29, 2012
    6
    Disappointment. Mediocre. These are two words that respresent the entire game. I have played the Battlefield series since 2005, and the game that this is meant to be a sequel to. Where do I start? I upgraded my PC expecting a fairly similar game (I thought Bad Company mechanics stayed in Bad Company), and have been consistently disappointed by both the execution and post-release attitudeDisappointment. Mediocre. These are two words that respresent the entire game. I have played the Battlefield series since 2005, and the game that this is meant to be a sequel to. Where do I start? I upgraded my PC expecting a fairly similar game (I thought Bad Company mechanics stayed in Bad Company), and have been consistently disappointed by both the execution and post-release attitude of the dev team. The singleplayer is generic and pointless, but this is Battlefield. So, once you navigate battlelog (no gripes) and past the 720p loading screens (lazy console port) you get to the game. The UI is simply pasted from console. The gameplay is also generic (low TTK, awful client-side hit detection) and the vehicles feel like an addition, rather than the core of the game. The maps are large, but the flags are cluttered (Operation Firestorm). The small meatgrinder maps are a clear example of the type of console audience EA are trying to appeal to. I have playerd 140 hours online to reach this conclusion, and I am by no means a bad player. These are simple truths. In addition, it has taken the dev team 6 months (ish) to patch the game to what it should have been at release (and STILL not implementing VOIP) and they have alienated their core community. Lazy, rushed and disappointed. Another franchise ruined by the cash-cow FPS genre. The rating of 6 is generous.… Expand
  46. east_stand
    Mar 27, 2012
    0
    Untill you bring us back the previous way to play the game is COMPLETELY useless!!! Guys don't let you be blackmailed by the game dev. Simply because the wake-up one day and thought:"Oh, lets make some more money, from the gamers!!!" Great game, ruined by its creators!!! TRAGIC!!!
  47. jokerz1979
    Mar 27, 2012
    0
    This should have been the best FPS ever. Single player is average, but I only bought this game for the multiplayer. And at first it met expectations, plenty of unlockables the steep learning curve I love it gives a real sense of satisfaction, rare in games today. HOWEVER this game was far from finished before release and full of bugs. Where to start issues range from niggly-not being ableThis should have been the best FPS ever. Single player is average, but I only bought this game for the multiplayer. And at first it met expectations, plenty of unlockables the steep learning curve I love it gives a real sense of satisfaction, rare in games today. HOWEVER this game was far from finished before release and full of bugs. Where to start issues range from niggly-not being able to join a online game as a squad with friends, crashes plenty too, Annoying-lag and hit detection.. To damn RAGING the game became unplayable due to glitching - spawning WITHOUT a gun. This is the worst experience of gaming in my life. I am not alone, the battlelog forums are crammed with complaints and can only advise not to touch this game. Shame. one word review-BROKEN I personally feel DICE have taken a big dump on their customers heads and an apology/explanation is long over due.… Expand
  48. Paranoia
    Mar 26, 2012
    9
    Nice pure graphics with amazing gameplay, what else do you want ? it is the best shooter i ever played and if you are a fan of action shooters you have to play this game
  49. grandusalenius
    Mar 25, 2012
    10
    This is a first person shooter game with an amazing online component. It has several game modes, like team death match, conquest (Flag Capture) and Rush (Detonate some specific targets). It has a lot of weapons and gadgets to unlock. This game is on the elite club in the graphic department. On the negative side, chat quality is awful, you will need to use a third party software for chatThis is a first person shooter game with an amazing online component. It has several game modes, like team death match, conquest (Flag Capture) and Rush (Detonate some specific targets). It has a lot of weapons and gadgets to unlock. This game is on the elite club in the graphic department. On the negative side, chat quality is awful, you will need to use a third party software for chat (like teamspeak..or skype) and the game occasionally can lost the audio in the middle of the battle. Also, there is a substantial number of cheaters playing this game (especially on the PC version), so try to stay in protected servers. Anyway, the PC version of this game is the superior version: up to 64 players can play together in a match, and vehicles are more in here than in the consoles (PS3 and Xbox) version. You don't need a super computer to play this, a $500-600$ (or even cheaper) PC with at least a $90 video card can play this game on medium settings with a descent frame rate.… Expand
  50. Puji
    Mar 24, 2012
    0
    I was always a heavy DICE fan, right since the early days and before with Codename Eagle. But I've been saddened to see them let themselves go, and turn away from creating new, exciting, original and inspired content, and instead have got on the "if it sells, then milk it" bandwagon. Yes, Battlefield 3 will sell, and BF4 and BF5~ will sell, but this game lacks all the love and soul ofI was always a heavy DICE fan, right since the early days and before with Codename Eagle. But I've been saddened to see them let themselves go, and turn away from creating new, exciting, original and inspired content, and instead have got on the "if it sells, then milk it" bandwagon. Yes, Battlefield 3 will sell, and BF4 and BF5~ will sell, but this game lacks all the love and soul of its predecessors, and if I were a DICE developer, I would try to remember why I started making games in the first place.

    Battlefield 3 is formulaic, gives the player no control over what they want to do, repeatedly puts you through ridiculous scripted events where your only goal is to "HIT E NOT TO DIE".

    The SinglePlayer campaign is also ridiculously short. I started and finished it within the space of maybe 4 hours.

    This is not a Battlefield game. Don't be mistaken by the title. This is a CoD clone. If you really love the way CoD is going, then you'll like this. If you want something that makes you feel alive to play it, look somewhere else.

    I beseech you, DICE, next time scrap the SP campaign, and replace it with the AI version of multiplayer, as you had in BF1942 and others.    … Expand
  51. Reaper11186
    Mar 20, 2012
    2
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This game bothers me so bad! I am one of the most die-hard fans of modern war games out there but this game was just a major disappointment... I think the lowest point is the part where you are forced to take part in an air assault that begins with a 15 minute uninterruptable cutscene where you are forced to perform mundane manuevers. This is then followed with a level that is unexciting and annoying at the same time. Really you mean I can't control the plane? Just fire flares when I'm shot at and try in vain to shoot other planes down even though I can't aim at them. Stupid! The ground combat is fun and I think the portion involving tanks is great, until they have you get out of the tank to do someone else's job. This is just dumb because in real life a tanker would not get out to blow up mines while the rest of the army stays safely behind him. I know this is supposed to be a heroic story but come on....

    I know that the multiplayer is where this game is supposed to shine but it just doesn't do it for me. I am annoyed that they still use a health bar that doesn't regenerate. I understand the need to be different but that sure seems like an outdated way to do things. Especially for a top of the line game like Battlefield. There are not enough people out there with team spirit to allow me to believe that when I"m hurt a medic is going to come along and heal me. I played this game for like 3 days and don't think I was once healed by a medic when I was close to death. I found that it was just easier to run off and die and just try to respawn closer to the objective. Played the campaign once and played the online for like 3 days. Now the game is on a shelf collecting dust and it will stay there for a long long time.    … Expand
  52. November
    Mar 20, 2012
    10
    Najlepszy multiplayer wszech czasów ( jak na razie), wspaniaÅ
  53. DarkRiver
    Mar 20, 2012
    5
    I'm no gaming expert but I know instinctively when a game feels like a chore than engaging experience.

    I did not bother playing the single-player because this is not even what this game is about right? Bad Company 2 was the first Battlefield game I owned - I've played games that were tactical like ARMA and played arcade games like COD so I know what works and what doesn't. Let's just put    I'm no gaming expert but I know instinctively when a game feels like a chore than engaging experience.

    I did not bother playing the single-player because this is not even what this game is about right?
    Bad Company 2 was the first Battlefield game I owned - I've played games that were tactical like ARMA and played arcade games like COD so I know what works and what doesn't.

    Let's just put it this way. I played Bad Company 2 for 2 years solid - every day every game was fun even if you lost. Intense matches resulted from players using a combination of helping their fellow team mates and scrumming against the other side. I played Battlefield 3 for 2 weeks and put it away. This game is a **** boring flashy piece of **** Oh I have played it with the updates alright - didn't make a hellaovadifference.

    I would have to first say is - Seriously what is the **** up with the "Paid Reviews". Majority are all 90% - Did they even **** play the damn game!!? - this is BULL**** this game is not fun.

    The delicate balance of Tactical and Arcade (Fun) has been sorely lost on the developers of this game.

    You can not be tactical in this game because getting from one place to another without being seen is not easy. Prone command gets used to be more annoying than tactical. Squad mates don't stay together for some reason and i don't think it has to do with being in different cities from another. Rush is now pointless - the game is so disadvantages based on the TERRIBLE MAP DESIGN that the defense has a huge advantage. Pistols don't do anything unless your using the G17 (a OP automatic pistol that only kills because it fires 20 bullets in 4 seconds). Every new weapon makes no difference and gives you no advantage in different scenarios. They destroyed the awesomeness of the AN-94. Jets do what? Nothing - the Laser bombs suck because you can't see the enemy planes when your in those modes to be able to defend yourself so apart from having fun destroying planes you are completely useless to 95% of your team who are on the ground.

    The Graphics are nothing special - but more annoyingly I can't even run this game on all High settings with my Radeon 6950 ($400NZ Video Card) and a Six Core CPU. Lag lag and more lag. And more bull****. of course. but anyways graphic glitches include throwing grenades which "look rediculous" when you throw them. When you drop a med kit its a **** hassle to watch because it's not "smooth". It's got some rickity look to it - I don't know but it looks **** annoying to me. BC2 dropping a med kit it would bounce and move around - but it looked and felt good to do it. Not to mention...oh christ I can't believe I have to explain this but....it's now March of 2012 and they STILL HAVEN'T FIXED THE **** PARACHUTE BUTTON. YEP 6 months later. Seriously - don't even bother to jump off a 2 story building or jump out of heli at 10m because it just "won't" open.

    Sound Design is horrible. Seriously this game may sound "realistic" but as a Sound Engineer myself "Realistic" means leaving every frequency flat no matter if it sounds **** Doesn't work here. Gun sounds have no body and the super high frequency's pierce my ears and make me want to vomit. But wait, You can't change the volume of the FX individually can you because the Audio menu has only "Volume and Speaker Type" - Christ... *Clap Clap* Dice.

    And what the hell is up with the "Setting". Seriously are DICE completely insensitive about the international community. The Iraq and Afghanistan Wars were started almost 10 years ago. What they had no other ideas other than to make ANOTHER game situated in the Middle East? I mean come on. Iran? Geez DICE you really want to piss a "certain" people off don't you. I know this isn't a big deal but seriously Kids and Young adults aren't going to learn anything by placing a game in a Country that two super powers in different regions threaten to attack on a weekly basis. Anyways

    This game sucks. Seriously. I'm playing BC2 again because I realized that realism does not make fun especially when *you* as a player can make NO impact on a game at all. Skill does not matter in this game. Nope. Might as well crawl everywhere because Running just makes you target practice for the other snipers 500m away.

    This game has no soul - it's all FLASH no BANG!

    Waiting for Bad Company 3 or Battlefield 2143    … Expand
  54. WLF67
    Mar 19, 2012
    9
    As a pc gamer it simply makes more use of my pc than any other game. If you judge it by the single-player, you may as well judge a book by it's title. It's a game where if you invest time to learn the maps, it will reward. There are so many things to do in this game besides shooting. If you get bored, put C4 on a jeep and drive into a tank. Use your stealth/suppressors to sneak up and killAs a pc gamer it simply makes more use of my pc than any other game. If you judge it by the single-player, you may as well judge a book by it's title. It's a game where if you invest time to learn the maps, it will reward. There are so many things to do in this game besides shooting. If you get bored, put C4 on a jeep and drive into a tank. Use your stealth/suppressors to sneak up and kill with repair torch. Grab a jet, helicopter or tank. I just can't compare it to any other game including COD games and/or dlc.… Expand
  55. DaGleese
    Mar 18, 2012
    0
    Everything that Kislen said +1, apart from i think after this event i WILL be boycotting EA and DICE games, this was their last chance to redeem themselves.

    The netcode is absolutely terrible, and i class the game as unplayably broken. The game is now 6 months old since official release, and still in this poor state. I would employ anybody reading this who also suffers form this    Everything that Kislen said +1, apart from i think after this event i WILL be boycotting EA and DICE games, this was their last chance to redeem themselves.

    The netcode is absolutely terrible, and i class the game as unplayably broken. The game is now 6 months old since official release, and still in this poor state.

    I would employ anybody reading this who also suffers form this appalling netcode issue to write their own zero-score review... who knows it may actually push DICE to fix the damn client side hitreg.

    Unfortunatly as it stands the game has very favourable reviews, and i was suckered into believeing them on here, as i understand it, not everybody is suffering from the netcode issues, but enough people are for it to warrant some serious attention from DICE.

    But i know from playing for the last 2 months that even if the netcode is fixed, the game is still very boring at heart, it looks good, but thats about it, once you know the maps and have unlocked about 3 guns with each class, you have seen it all really.

    If i were to write a list of things that need to change in this game to make it worth even a $20 price tag it would look like this: LIST OF THINGS THAT NEEDS TO CHANGE; EVERYTHING! Origin client sucks... battlelog sucks..... glitchy hoping over walls not working 50% of time sucks..... getting stuck joging on the spot because a slightly large pebble is at your feet sucks..... glitchy knife not working 50% of time sucks..... really horrible gun recoil sucks....... overpowered vehicles sucks...... unfair net play due to high pingers gaining an advantage sucks...... downgrade in environment destructibility from BC2 sucks...... bland weapon unlocks sucks..... repetitively bland unlocks sucks....... unlocks just suck anyway...... mouse lag in jets sucks..... 99% of players being campers sucks...... no sniper cap sucks.... suppression sucks...... All the things mentioned are issues you will experience all the time in every single server you play on... The game is just bad... Avoid it if you still can, and if you bought it and are having any of the issues, don't forget to rate it negatively, and help warn others unfortunate enough to even be contemplating purchasing this CON of a game.

    The 'game' gets a zero from me, and i usually believe that no game in the world deserves 0 points, however this is an exception for me, because of the false promises that EA and DICE fed the pc community; (the very people that funded their earlier games, and put them where they are today)
    EA announced that the pc version would recieve special attention vs it's console counter parts, that was complete BS! yeah, we get 64 player servers..... that's all... and it's a shame we can't even enjoy those 64 player matches with such bad netcode..... The truth is that EA are just a money hungry corporation, and really don't care about your experience in their games, they have my money now for bf3.. and they don't give a damn about my (or any other customer's) problems, i would give this game a minus figure if i could, and for the experience i've had playing this POS, I don't think i'd even play it if i was getting paid to.... it's just not worth risking my mental health    … Expand
  56. Hokrollo
    Mar 18, 2012
    8
    Had huge expectations for this game, however got very disappointed. First, the bugs, they almost ruined all the anticipation for me. But after 4 months of waiting, it seems I can finally play the game without big bugs. Now the graphics are really nice, actually "too nice". And what I mean with this is the eye candy, it's simply looking too realistic. But yes, what should be bad about this?Had huge expectations for this game, however got very disappointed. First, the bugs, they almost ruined all the anticipation for me. But after 4 months of waiting, it seems I can finally play the game without big bugs. Now the graphics are really nice, actually "too nice". And what I mean with this is the eye candy, it's simply looking too realistic. But yes, what should be bad about this? Well first, the sunlight. It's shinning in your eyes constantly, making it really difficult to adept into a conformable state. As well DICE (the developers) have included these extremely annoying flashlights, that, I suppose, should be used to look around in dark places. But no, they're used to rather blind everyone, even your teammates. As well we got the fact that everything is gliding into a state of completely similarity, where you're about to be unable to see what an enemy looks like. However don't misunderstand me, the graphics are really great, probably the best I've ever seen. Another great issue is the promoting of teamwork. Even in the small mapped BC2 (Battlefield Bad Company 2), it was nice to work with your squad. However, even through BF3 got a lot larger maps, teamwork is nonexistent. Not just because the majority of the players in the game are communicative vice almost retarded, but simply because it isn't promoted by the game. Everyone is just supposed to grab a plane or a chopper or what ever vehicle they can find, and go their own way. This makes up a game that looks like COD with vehicles, where everybody shoot at everybody, I actually wonder why there's no FFA (Free For All) game mode. The maps are not differentiated at all. They're all large maps, where you have to run a hell of a distance (300+ yards for every base), if you did not reach to get a vehicle in the start. The B2K (Back To Karkand) expansion pack's maps helps a bit here, but costs you 20 US dollars just a month after the release of the original game. Interface vice, the customization of your characters are simply horrible. In BC2 you could see the rates of the weapons, and define what you needed for your suits. However in BF3 that is simply a lot more difficult. Realistic again, that you get the specification of the bullets, but we're not all (ex)marines here, so please simplify it a bit, and just give us some specs of the weapons that we can understand. But overall not a bad game, but a big disappointing one from DICE, who else in my eyes have been the gods of game developing. They with this release made a lot of new things, also a lot of good things. But they just didn't test them through properly, and this means a disappointment for the many fans of the Battlefield series.… Expand
  57. sinadoom
    Mar 18, 2012
    9
    If you focus on just the game and ignore Origin, Battlefield 3 is quite simply a masterpiece. Although not as revolutionary as Call of Duty 4, it's still an important game in the evolution of First-person shooters. The controls on both console and PC are fluid, responsive, engaging and have a plethora of options. The game has no real technical issues itself and very little improvements canIf you focus on just the game and ignore Origin, Battlefield 3 is quite simply a masterpiece. Although not as revolutionary as Call of Duty 4, it's still an important game in the evolution of First-person shooters. The controls on both console and PC are fluid, responsive, engaging and have a plethora of options. The game has no real technical issues itself and very little improvements can be made to multiplayer, general gameplay, video etc. The Origin platform is the only criticism I have of Battlefield 3, which isn't even a criticism of the game, but the corporation who owns the franchise. Multiplayerwise, there is no arguement. If you want vast battlefields, large maps and vehicles, you can't get that anywhere else. Similarly, you can get objective-based gameplay in close quarters too, even with no vehicles just gun on gun. Team Deathmatch is finally here, along with squad deathmatch. Battlefield 3's multiplayer brings you unparalleled realism without making the game boring. It's simulation but is balanced, appealing, rewarding, accessible to most players and most of all- FUN! If you watch top plays, you don't see the variety and creativity in skill, style and epicness anywhere else. Call of Duty's tricks have been exhausted by the community, but Battlefield 3 isn't an arcade trick-shooting simulator, but an actual Battlefield which isn't for hardcore simulation fans of America's Army. As for single player, the critics do under-rate it slightly. Yes, it's a cliche with little additions. But it is very well focused and scripted to feel intense and realistic. Hardest difficulty does its job- makes you play it as if you were there in real life. The two Dima missions are some of the best action you'll find in a video game- they are so badass because you're actually playing in one of those epic Russian Hollywood style sequences. Gone are the crazy antics of the Bad Company crew and in is the Modern Warfare inspired gameplay but unlike CoD4, this is a Battlefield and not an arcade shooter. It's still linear, but in a good way. Of course, the campaign is far from being anywhere near as good as Call of Duty 4's even by today's standards, but the gameplay, controls and the incredible Frostbite 2 game engine make the campaign feel very polished and engaging. No matter how uninspiring it may be, the game engine and controls make it feel more different than it actually is. The buildings and rooftops have taken some inspiration from the Mirror's Edge styling department at DICE, which is a good thing. It's also a joy to see that they've worked so hard on making the controls fluid and made good use of the updated engine. Remember the CoD4 days when firing a gun felt like firing a gun? Well Battlefield 3 kind of brings that new feeling back. It's nice to see that Battlefield 3 has taken sensible and revolutionary ideas from Call of Duty but evolved them and put their own twist on it. One thing I have to comment on is that the graphics aren't as jaw-dropping as you'd expect even on Ultra, with very little difference between Ultra and High. Co-Op is short, with only 6 missions at around 10 minutes each. There's a good mix here with action-focused gameplay, but nothing particularly interesting or new. Battlefield 3 doesn't make new additions to the franchise or the genre in co-op, campaign or multiplayer. What it does is incroporate generations of good ideas into a neat game engine, with almost flawless results. The game itself has very few problems and the multiplayer offers a complete Battlefield experience which is accessible to newcomers but will please hardcore fans too. In terms of quantity other shooters offer more unique game modes multiplayer-wise. However, the variety of being able to choose between large-scale warfare with vehicles and close infantry battles makes Battlefield 3 a commendable package. Just make sure you're prepared to pay a hefty price for the hardware to run it. Overall, this game's greatest achievements are found in the impressively modern-looking (and demanding!) game engine and most of all, the controls. Few, if none other games make movement flow as well as Battlefield 3.… Expand
  58. FanthCcP
    Mar 18, 2012
    10
    A true sequel to DICE's Battlefield 2 - People may be upset with the fact that the single-player was not up to par with most campaigns in other games (and in my opinion, it was) - but Battlefield has and always will be a multiplayer game and for people to rate this game down simply because the single player wasn't as good as they hoped is moronic and ignorant. I recommend this game toA true sequel to DICE's Battlefield 2 - People may be upset with the fact that the single-player was not up to par with most campaigns in other games (and in my opinion, it was) - but Battlefield has and always will be a multiplayer game and for people to rate this game down simply because the single player wasn't as good as they hoped is moronic and ignorant. I recommend this game to everyone, it's the best shooter of the year and may be even GOTY. Hoorah!… Expand
  59. 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
  60. Desert_Eagle465
    Mar 15, 2012
    10
    The Best FPS GAME I EVER PLAYED IN MY LIFE!
    HD DESTRCTION.
    TANKS
    JEEPS
    JETS
    HELICOPTERS

    BIG AND SMALL MAPS!

    listen to me. BUY THIS GAME U WILL SO **** LOVE IT
  61. Badderz93
    Mar 11, 2012
    10
    Out of nowhere Battlefield 3 came to shake up it's competitors, and it did just that. This has been the long awaited return of the original Battlefield series and it came back with a bang, Whilst it may lack an amazing blockbuster singleplayer like its rival, it allows players to become farmiliar with the game before heading online where the true magic happens. What makes this game uniqueOut of nowhere Battlefield 3 came to shake up it's competitors, and it did just that. This has been the long awaited return of the original Battlefield series and it came back with a bang, Whilst it may lack an amazing blockbuster singleplayer like its rival, it allows players to become farmiliar with the game before heading online where the true magic happens. What makes this game unique is it's use of detail, from destroying buildings, to knifing, to watching ambient scenery, it can have pause moments and you will want to come back for more. What I originally saw from a Brothers in Arms demo video, the use of 1st person acting became a reality, being able to see your own character climb over obsticals gives the player a better sense of immersion and really adds to the level of detail the developers wanted to give players. This game also boasts extremely large maps, weapons and attatchments, and state of the art graphics which can be a bit of a challenge for the older systems, so be warned. The DLC content is also detailed, as for the frist time I've ever seen on a mainstream game, weapons! which really gives the game more life, and the upcoming DLC will see that for many more months to come, I think Dice realised they don't have to release a game EVERY YEAR to win over its audience, a single come back has already done that. I cannot say this enough, but teamwork is a must in this game, rambo just dont cut it and you'll be 6 feet under before you know it. Sure there's a few bugs here and there but Dice are already on top of the situation and a large patch is on its way. An amazing game, and i cant wait for the dlc. To the battlefield!… Expand
  62. KouDy
    Mar 11, 2012
    9
    Battlefield 3 is good modern successor to previous episodes. Team work is needed for the multiplayer a lot otherwise you will likely find yoursefl dying often. But when you have your buddies to cover you the games is pushed to the whole new level. Lots of machinery to drive just like the old days.

    Single player is weaker spot of the game in my opinion. I found story rather not interesting    Battlefield 3 is good modern successor to previous episodes. Team work is needed for the multiplayer a lot otherwise you will likely find yoursefl dying often. But when you have your buddies to cover you the games is pushed to the whole new level. Lots of machinery to drive just like the old days.

    Single player is weaker spot of the game in my opinion. I found story rather not interesting or even boring sometimes.

    All in all Battlefield series was always about multiplayer so 9 is well deserved. The game came out fairly polished without major game breaking features.    … Expand
  63. Fede-lasse
    Mar 11, 2012
    5
    It's fun, but it has flaws. For instance: levels, ranked servers, no custom hosting, no voice chat, badly placed chat box, and almost unhearable voice commands. Levels and ranked servers make sure that once you reach the top levels, the game likely starts to become boring, and ranked servers mean that all servers are rented and hosted for some sort of payment. If you want to (legally) hostIt's fun, but it has flaws. For instance: levels, ranked servers, no custom hosting, no voice chat, badly placed chat box, and almost unhearable voice commands. Levels and ranked servers make sure that once you reach the top levels, the game likely starts to become boring, and ranked servers mean that all servers are rented and hosted for some sort of payment. If you want to (legally) host a small server (for free) with just your friends, you're screwed. No voice chat and nearly invisible text chat means almost no communication at all in the game. So the game all in all is a strangers-game. You don't know the people you join, and communicating with them is impossible. There are no bots to balance out the servers, either. Even if there were, I can imagine they'd be pretty **** like the ones in RO2.

    I'll note BF3 for its very good graphics and nice dynamic sound range, however, and the thus far okay-working matchmaking.    … Expand
  64. QuiterRaga
    Mar 8, 2012
    7
    Decent game.Not as good as everyone claims though.You currently have a tton of fanboys on boths sides of these war FPS games that need to cry out on metacritic beacuse of a dislike for a certain franchise instead of rating the game on how they see fit.
  65. Ideclarewar901
    Mar 7, 2012
    8
    Alright, Battlefield 3.. I commented COD MW3, now it's your turn! What to say.. well, therefore i am NOT any fanboy of any games. Alright.. Battlefield 3 was the first Battlefield i ever played, and i have to say it did not dissapoint me. Very good graphics, Frostbite engine 2 was pretty nice. I preferred Crysis's Cryengine 3, but that is just an opinion. For the gameplay, it feels veryAlright, Battlefield 3.. I commented COD MW3, now it's your turn! What to say.. well, therefore i am NOT any fanboy of any games. Alright.. Battlefield 3 was the first Battlefield i ever played, and i have to say it did not dissapoint me. Very good graphics, Frostbite engine 2 was pretty nice. I preferred Crysis's Cryengine 3, but that is just an opinion. For the gameplay, it feels very realistic. When you crouch, you actually do the movement of crouching, not like MW3. YOu jump from high? You do the movement of hitting the ground. The campaign was short, but very good. The Multiplayer is where this game has it's potential at highnest strenght. Very good gameplay, the UI is crappy though, but that again is an opinion. So overall, i do not give this a 10, because the campaign is short, the Multiplayer UI is disgusting. But totally a better game than the Money Machine MW3. Please, do not get tricked, and buy Battlefield 3. Also waiting on Medal of Honor: Warfighter. Worth your 59,99$ ! The developpers actually made a game worth to spend time on. Thanks for staying true EA! The same with Crysis! EA (Crytek also) But thanks for staying true to your fans!… Expand
  66. F_U_Wannabes
    Mar 7, 2012
    6
    the single player its pretty and lets not deny it but pretty graphics and animations doesn't takes away how linear and small and boring the single player campaign is. but for how is veteran of battlefield knows that battlefield was designed for sole multiplayer.

    this game had all to be the FPS of the decade, the new engine, graphics, animations, the whole features and everything else, but    the single player its pretty and lets not deny it but pretty graphics and animations doesn't takes away how linear and small and boring the single player campaign is. but for how is veteran of battlefield knows that battlefield was designed for sole multiplayer.

    this game had all to be the FPS of the decade, the new engine, graphics, animations, the whole features and everything else, but the maps are the worst in the whole franchise, the netcode is again ignored by being horribly failing. the release version had issues but most technical, balance have been fairly adjusted post open beta and it quite felt good and weapons and classes cleary offered each a different feeling and even weapons each had their own up's and down's making each weapon requiring their own playstyle but.......

    all the technical issues still own (lag,punkbuster, ea servers giving you **** rubberband,netcode,and the list goes on) and still ignored, meanwhile we assist the nerfing and content made into the lowest generic and worthless possible way making this game a generic shooter where wich gun or class doesn't matter anymore. lets be clear this game is the prettiest fps of ever but on many ways currently stands below bad company 2.

    the new maps package are great and maps looks awesome but the balance between both teams are terrible and DICE keeps being sttuborn by refusing making possible play as normal conquest/conquest 64 on this maps.    … Expand
  67. Psychoticspell
    Mar 7, 2012
    9
    It lacks some good sides of previous battlefield installments but grants you an experience with a lot of fun. It was very buggy when its released, DICE fixed the game with last two patches completely (minor bugs remaining). Being co-operative or not is up to the players. You can create parties and join your friend's game. There is good balance between various weapons.

    The game has amazing    It lacks some good sides of previous battlefield installments but grants you an experience with a lot of fun. It was very buggy when its released, DICE fixed the game with last two patches completely (minor bugs remaining). Being co-operative or not is up to the players. You can create parties and join your friend's game. There is good balance between various weapons.

    The game has amazing visuals and very nice engine and maybe the best sounds I ve ever heard. The weapon en environmental sound effecst are just like in reality. After hours of play, when you go outside , you realize how bf3 mimics the real environmental acoustic effects.

    Great game shortly.    … Expand
  68. 017
    Mar 6, 2012
    5
    This game, despite how great the gameplay actually is, suffers from a lot of issues. A number of which are because DICE doesn't test their own patches and updates thoroughly, as well as the fact that EA rushed their development. Dedicated server stability is an issue to this day, as well as client stability. The game is great, besides the single player, but I, and a lot of other people,This game, despite how great the gameplay actually is, suffers from a lot of issues. A number of which are because DICE doesn't test their own patches and updates thoroughly, as well as the fact that EA rushed their development. Dedicated server stability is an issue to this day, as well as client stability. The game is great, besides the single player, but I, and a lot of other people, don't enjoy playing when there's nearly always a game-crashing bug that's going to appear. I also had my own dedicated server for a bit, and sadly, they made it impossible to get traffic to stay on our servers due to the complete lack of care to ensure the systems were stable when released. (How else does Karkand come out and they include a bug that crashes an entire server, easily?)

    Server and client issues aside, there is also the fact that the single player is a god-awful setup of super-linear COD style "shoot down an alley at infinitely respawning goons" type gameplay. Apparently whoever was in charge of the single player has no idea what battlefield is known for, because anyone with a brain would have made the gameplay the opposite of linear. perhaps if the single player had used the series' strength as a tactical shooter instead of trying to pretend to be call of duty in the single player, it might have been more remarkable. Instead, we got an awful linear, very **** single player. Which is really too bad.    … Expand
  69. newtee2
    Mar 6, 2012
    7
    I don't feel like writing a long review so here you go : +Great graphics +Same ol' Battlefield formula +SP is a great tech demo +Great audio -Rushed -Doesn't feel like a true BF2 sequel -SP was lame and typical -Many technical issues
  70. ZootMan
    Mar 3, 2012
    5
    Note: This is only a review for the single player offering......so with that said, it's uh...a BIT rough. And by a bit rough I mean offensively bad scripted sections that will be instant death for any non-psychic player. Bad Company 2 was so good, that I had hopes for this narrative arc. I absolutely loved a few set pieces, including the excellent dog fighting section. The game looksNote: This is only a review for the single player offering......so with that said, it's uh...a BIT rough. And by a bit rough I mean offensively bad scripted sections that will be instant death for any non-psychic player. Bad Company 2 was so good, that I had hopes for this narrative arc. I absolutely loved a few set pieces, including the excellent dog fighting section. The game looks amazing, runs very well considering the visual fidelity and...it's quite sad because none of it matters when you take a dump all over it.… Expand
  71. Psyentist
    Mar 3, 2012
    5
    What a neat CoD Mod! now to get back to BC2...

    But seriously... what did they do to my beloved Battlefield. Campaign is a linear, confusing snooze fest. "who am i killing all these soldiers for?" i ask myself.. " wait, how did we get into this attack chopper?" is the next question.. then followed by hmmm "ok im going to do some laundry or something"... I later return to try some    What a neat CoD Mod! now to get back to BC2...

    But seriously... what did they do to my beloved Battlefield. Campaign is a linear, confusing snooze fest. "who am i killing all these soldiers for?" i ask myself.. " wait, how did we get into this attack chopper?" is the next question.. then followed by hmmm "ok im going to do some laundry or something"... I later return to try some Multiplayer. 64 person server.. sweet! I stand around watching my teammates base-raping and mortar spamming the enemies spawn point.. wtf.. BORING...

    Where the hell are my unlocks? what am i working towards? I am overcome by a desire to go work on my next gold star with my M-14 Mod 0 on some HC Conquest in BC2.

    I just dropped 60 bucks on this and I'm already bored? Needs more focus on UNLOCKS, TEAM INTERACTIONS, INTERACTIVE CAMPAIGN.

    Less focus on trying to be someone else's game.. Come on guys.. seriously..    … Expand
  72. ChoicestGames
    Mar 3, 2012
    9
    While the single-player campaign isn't terribly original, and there are the usual bugs that plague a Battlefield release, Battlefield 3 is simply the best multiplayer FPS on the market.
  73. ReBootEd
    Feb 29, 2012
    6
    A vast improvement over the previous train-wreck Battlefield 2, still is plagued with bugs and now suffers from a severe case of next-gen, DLC and eye-burning graphics which would be fantastic otherwise.
  74. Merkava357
    Feb 29, 2012
    8
    Battlefield 3 is a great game, but for quality graphics, sounds, and multiplayer ... but disappointed the history I'm not saying they are bad, but is very repetitive, always terrorism and the nuclear bomb, as in BC 2 I for one expected to change something.
  75. Kosheus
    Feb 28, 2012
    10
    Great game.
    Graphics, physics, gameplay (i mean multiplayer). Superb.
    All those technics, gadgets, weapons interaction on a medium to large-scale battlefield. Now it is possible. Awesome.
  76. Kyy38
    Feb 26, 2012
    9
    Battlefield 3.... Great game! This game has a few minor flaws sure, but other than that I'm very glad I purchased this game. The destruction properties adds a realism to the game and the campaign was amazing, non-stop action that kept me at the edge of my sit wondering what was going to happen next, what were you going to have to do to complete an objective! The campaign had a great endingBattlefield 3.... Great game! This game has a few minor flaws sure, but other than that I'm very glad I purchased this game. The destruction properties adds a realism to the game and the campaign was amazing, non-stop action that kept me at the edge of my sit wondering what was going to happen next, what were you going to have to do to complete an objective! The campaign had a great ending (Not going to spoil) and everything following up to the final mission did connect with the last mission. Sure the campaign was long, I actually wish it was a bit longer, but the campaign offered many adrenaline-pumping moments! One very frustrating flaw that has yet to be fixed in the campaign is a man you must, in stealth, "silence" him. The issue is when you try to slowly crouch up behind him you randomly die for no reason at all, but I got past it by quickly running and stabbing him as fast as I could, it worked. Multiplayer was pretty fun, but had a few bugs and very frustrating situations. Spawning is somewhat terrible on the more smaller maps where you either spawn in the middle of a firefight or multiple enemies spawn pretty much right on top of you. Snipers, now this is a more "personal" issue, I really want to snipe like the more support-like type where I would spot enemies, tell friendlies when to move up/stop etc., and take out enemies that are just tearing down my advancing team. Sure the first and second reasons are simple enough, but the third one, snipers suck. Not the realistic bullet drop, but the damage. I shoot a guy from let's say 100 yards (guess) square in the chest, he's still running. Again, this is a more "personal" issue I have. All-in-all this game is a must buy and I haven't even covered one-eighth of the pros of this game. I love the more realistic factor of destruction properties and bullet drop and I love the vehicles! When a jet flies over my head in the game going pretty damn fast I'm awe struck just by a realistic feeling.… Expand
  77. Crash129
    Feb 24, 2012
    9
    First the good things:
    - Unbelievable Sounds
    - Graphics are good, but not very good
    - Vehicles
    - Platoons (Clans)

    But this game has a few bugs... If EA/Dice fix them, it would be a better game
  78. Heleos
    Feb 21, 2012
    8
    I bought this game solely for the multi-player component so I can't speak to the single player campaign at all. The multi-player component of this game is amazing even though there is really nothing that new or innovative. If big maps and tactical game play is your style, you'll love this game. If run-&-gun is more your style you may be a bit disappointed. The vehicles are a blast,I bought this game solely for the multi-player component so I can't speak to the single player campaign at all. The multi-player component of this game is amazing even though there is really nothing that new or innovative. If big maps and tactical game play is your style, you'll love this game. If run-&-gun is more your style you may be a bit disappointed. The vehicles are a blast, with tanks being easy to control and aircrafter, rightfully having a much steep learning curve, gun play feels solid (although it doesn't feel like it has as much "oomph" as Modern Warfare 3.

    The absolute worst part of this game is the requirement of the Origin application and EA's involvement. The web interface for finding games is buggy and can be a real pain. Also the fact that you can't play this through steam is a big let down. If it wasn't for Origin and EA's involvement with this title it would easily be a 9 or 10. By far the most bang for my buck since I've dumped couple hundred hours into this game already.    … Expand
  79. Flastie
    Feb 21, 2012
    6
    I dont know,why is everybody happy about this game, but for me its mediocre shooter. Yes its fun and MP is great, but its borring sometimes. But its definitely better than CODMW3. At least devs punched graphic and details to the top and its definitely one of the best graphic of 2011. Not as MW3 with its "pre-Jesus" graphic engine. Also i dont like the story where every bad guys came fromI dont know,why is everybody happy about this game, but for me its mediocre shooter. Yes its fun and MP is great, but its borring sometimes. But its definitely better than CODMW3. At least devs punched graphic and details to the top and its definitely one of the best graphic of 2011. Not as MW3 with its "pre-Jesus" graphic engine. Also i dont like the story where every bad guys came from Russia or middle east. Especialy in those times where all hate, warcrimes and evils comming from USA and Israel. But this is the problem of all those "Modern warfare" games.… Expand
  80. 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
  81. Dethstar
    Feb 20, 2012
    9
    Now the bugs have gone (unless you blame EA for the problems many people have with AMD drivers etc). This is without doubt the best first person shooter ever made. It does have a few challenges, mainly due to hacking but EA have responded to this and are about to take decisive steps to address this. The graphics are arguably the best on the PC and it runs surprisingly well on even aNow the bugs have gone (unless you blame EA for the problems many people have with AMD drivers etc). This is without doubt the best first person shooter ever made. It does have a few challenges, mainly due to hacking but EA have responded to this and are about to take decisive steps to address this. The graphics are arguably the best on the PC and it runs surprisingly well on even a modest rig. Still some work to do around the UI and origin continues to be a problem but at least the game does provide compensations for having to install the spyware. I am igoring the single player completely here as it is not really very much fun at all.… Expand
  82. Kislen
    Feb 20, 2012
    0
    The player drop off on this game is saying something. I hadn't played in a month until today. EA sent out a questionnaire asking people why they quit playing.

    Their questions didn't have the option for 1. The game wasn't what I expected 2. Lack of communication with the player community and patches to fix bugs 3. Bad netcode. Instead, they had 1. The game is too easy 2. The game is    The player drop off on this game is saying something. I hadn't played in a month until today. EA sent out a questionnaire asking people why they quit playing.

    Their questions didn't have the option for

    1. The game wasn't what I expected
    2. Lack of communication with the player community and patches to fix bugs
    3. Bad netcode.


    Instead, they had

    1. The game is too easy
    2. The game is too hard
    3. I want more DLC

    Based on the upcoming patch, I think most people selected #2. Watering the game down more.

    I expected so much out of this game, but it ended up being a conglomeration of BF2, BC2, COD and MOH that didn't "NAIL IT" on anything except a great running graphics engine and the greatest number of promises not delivered in any game I have ever bought.

    As for netcode, most modern games use a hybrid server/client hit detection model that works quite well. There are even free to play games that have better net code than BF3, which is just appalling. Previous BF games were bad because they were server side only - with clients only having the option to increase or lower interpolation. With pure client-side netcode, you get seemingly random deaths, opponents that die extremely slowly, and all kinds of other annoying frustrations.

    I've waited for months for those patches to come, but I've realized some of them never will. They'll never update the net code to a better model. They'll never increase the destruction to make certain maps like Bazaar and Metro more fun and less explosive spammy. They'll never add in-game voice (another thing common in many F2P games from small companies) And they'll never address another greater issue with the heart of the game - the vehicles are lackluster in implementation and integration into the balance of the game. They'll feel like an afterthought that was just thrown in haphazardly. They made an infantry fighting game out of a large-scale war game. And even that is poor because of the bad netcode.

    Sure, some bug fixes have come along.. They fixed the bugs that were in the beta that they said were already fixed for the game launch. Like the laggy servers, falling through the world on metro, gadgets flat out not working...

    But it's really just been one huge let down. I can't say I'll be buying BF4 or BC3 or anything. I've learned my lesson that PR likes to make false promises and do anything to drum up hype. They flat out lie sometimes. I just don't know what to expect when I buy a game from EA. There's no assurance of quality. They don't realize that many are already boycotting them. I wouldn't say I'm boycotting them, it's more like someone who has burned their hand on a hot stove being cautious about touching it again.    … Expand
  83. MeltedHeretic
    Feb 17, 2012
    10
    Great graphics, scales amazingly with Nvidia's 2D surround (although during game launch there were some bugs that wouldn't let me play the game in surround, but those were quickly fixed), beautifully built maps. Battlefield 3 is the best first person shooter available. Well worth the 60 bucks.
  84. TheeDefiler
    Feb 17, 2012
    10
    Badass graphics, badass gameplay, badass audio, badass explosions, badass weapon physics, so on and so forth. This game is a gold rush compared to MW3, which in fact is just MW1 with a little better weapon designs, thats about it. The origin thing is stupid but that isnt what i am criticizing. It runs from a browser which has its ups and downs like you can customize some things outside ofBadass graphics, badass gameplay, badass audio, badass explosions, badass weapon physics, so on and so forth. This game is a gold rush compared to MW3, which in fact is just MW1 with a little better weapon designs, thats about it. The origin thing is stupid but that isnt what i am criticizing. It runs from a browser which has its ups and downs like you can customize some things outside of the game, and various other reasons. Battlelog really isnt that bad, the game still works no matter where it is booted from that is good enough for me.… Expand
  85. OpenSparviere
    Feb 17, 2012
    10
    The best FPS of 2011 year. Great graphics, maps and 64 players with planes, helikopters, tanks and much more! 64 players on one map. Call of Duty can only image about this :)
  86. 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
  87. KartoonHead
    Feb 17, 2012
    0
    Game simply doesn't work. Punkbuster kept kicking me until the game became unplayable. Lots of people have been experiencing the same thing and DICE refuse to/don't know how to fix it. It recently attempted to make me redownload 4GB of the game files for no reason, there hadn't even been an update released. After weeks of trying to get it to work I uninstalled the game and the terribleGame simply doesn't work. Punkbuster kept kicking me until the game became unplayable. Lots of people have been experiencing the same thing and DICE refuse to/don't know how to fix it. It recently attempted to make me redownload 4GB of the game files for no reason, there hadn't even been an update released. After weeks of trying to get it to work I uninstalled the game and the terrible Origin DRM that it came with. What an absolute waste of time and money. Also the online community is plagued by rude teenage fanboys who'll attack you at the very suggestion that the game isn't working, possibly on EA's payroll /shrug… Expand
  88. 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
  89. Not_Casual
    Feb 16, 2012
    7
    Overall very well done. It's only a few critical aspects that cripple this game. Such as the inability to practice in aircraft without having to hinder your team as you learn. The massive glare off of EVERYTHING is simply painful and Intolerable. II also find the class change menu to be scientifically designed to be difficult to use. also just doesn't feel right. Bad Company 2 wasOverall very well done. It's only a few critical aspects that cripple this game. Such as the inability to practice in aircraft without having to hinder your team as you learn. The massive glare off of EVERYTHING is simply painful and Intolerable. II also find the class change menu to be scientifically designed to be difficult to use. also just doesn't feel right. Bad Company 2 was defiantly better, faster, and much more fun.… Expand
  90. whitespider999
    Feb 16, 2012
    8
    This game has an average singleplayer campaign. It's good. It's pretty. It's nothing more than that. Do not purchase this for it's singleplayer. I do reccomend you play it, it's enjoyable enough. However as a singleplayer game alone it's a 6. However, this game is all about the online mode. And that is fantastic, however still not perfect. The problem I have with online is it's lack ofThis game has an average singleplayer campaign. It's good. It's pretty. It's nothing more than that. Do not purchase this for it's singleplayer. I do reccomend you play it, it's enjoyable enough. However as a singleplayer game alone it's a 6. However, this game is all about the online mode. And that is fantastic, however still not perfect. The problem I have with online is it's lack of evolution. A lot of things have been successfully tweaked, and it's been given more of a stat friendly modern day layering. However the core game has not been truly evolved. In this specific case, I don't mind that much. The deeper physics, mindblowing visuals, and immersion of a battlefield - are all higher than they have ever been. Combine that with longterm play viability due to an incredibly rewarding rewards system - and it's a harmony worth it's entry price and then some. Reccomended. I'd like to see battlefield evolve more however.… Expand
  91. Ritchie
    Feb 15, 2012
    1
    Graphics are great, sound fx are great. But the game have a lot of bugs and crash all the time. It is hard to find a good server with people playing and the battlelog system sucks. I paid 50% of the price and still dont worth the money.
    EA and DICE made a good scam with this game.
  92. awildseaking
    Feb 13, 2012
    0
    To me, as a Battlefield veteran, this isn't even a video game. If you look at any past game and compare it to BF3, you keep discovering the same statement over and over; there's nothing new. All BF3 does is remove features from older titles. BF3 doesn't have commanders, commander assets, large maps with more than 7 cap points, a more intricate squad command structure, more diversifiedTo me, as a Battlefield veteran, this isn't even a video game. If you look at any past game and compare it to BF3, you keep discovering the same statement over and over; there's nothing new. All BF3 does is remove features from older titles. BF3 doesn't have commanders, commander assets, large maps with more than 7 cap points, a more intricate squad command structure, more diversified classes, decent server tools, objective based gameplay, fucntional commorose, and options for veterans to play as we have been since 2002. As this is an objective review, opinions on decisions such as health regeneration, sound spotting, 4 player squads, etc are all irrelevant. What has BF3 contributed to Battlefield as a whole? There is nothing new about this game, just stripped down gameplay to appeal to console players and casuals alike.… Expand
  93. wizardtr
    Feb 13, 2012
    10
    Battlefield 3 is one of the best FPS games i have ever played.It's good looking,not alot of in-game bugs,good community and the Battlelog of course!.All the game needs is Steam.Everything else is perfect.Origin makes me not want to play.But i'll still give 10 because Origin is still Beta.
  94. gas
    Feb 12, 2012
    6
    Im not talking about single player as ofc its just some kind of mini tutorial and nothing more, and its not a problem, Battlefield is multiplayer for me.
    The game looks amazing and its overall what we were waiting for, but there is a real issue with the netcode, sadly no dev nowadays seems to understand that in a fps is more important the satisfaction of hitting ppl then the supa graphic    Im not talking about single player as ofc its just some kind of mini tutorial and nothing more, and its not a problem, Battlefield is multiplayer for me.
    The game looks amazing and its overall what we were waiting for, but there is a real issue with the netcode, sadly no dev nowadays seems to understand that in a fps is more important the satisfaction of hitting ppl then the supa graphic effects.
    Ofc in fast peace FPS games its normal sometimes some minor lag/netcode issue, but in BF2 this issue was a lot less present.
    Basically it ends to be a bit random when you engage an enemy directly, who is gonna die, and also can happen to see the enemy with 100% hp even if on screen you see you are hitting more then once.
    It can happen to shot 20 bullets into an enemy face and end killed one shot.
    As i just said those issues cant be totally absent from an fps, but they should be rare while in this BF3 they are basically the normal gameplay.
    This BF3 seems to me nearly the same as BFBC2 as netcode /latency normalization, but defo its a lot worse then BF2, where hitting someone was actually doing effective dmg 95% of times perfectly.    … Expand
  95. Ryanpal16
    Feb 11, 2012
    8
    Battlefield 3 is a great shooter. It has grade A graphics, realistic sound effects, and true-to-form large-scale multiplayer firefights that span acres of virtual land. The multiplayer offers many customization options and a wide array of guns that will keep many people busy for weeks on end. The singe player leaves much to be desired, however. The story is very bland, generic, and short.Battlefield 3 is a great shooter. It has grade A graphics, realistic sound effects, and true-to-form large-scale multiplayer firefights that span acres of virtual land. The multiplayer offers many customization options and a wide array of guns that will keep many people busy for weeks on end. The singe player leaves much to be desired, however. The story is very bland, generic, and short. It does many things better than other shooters out there, but nothing particularly innovative or special. It doesn't have to. I recommend this game to the shooter fans out there who want realism in their play.… Expand
  96. MojoSpriggs
    Feb 9, 2012
    8
    My review is simple. It is the all-time best FPS game that exists if you can put up with the awful installation (Using Origin) and the constant Battlelog + Origin + Windows 7 fight. Windows always minimizes my games at the most random times to inform me that my "Color Scheme should be changed". Origin, which needs to be restated every time i join a server. And Battlelog who had the worstMy review is simple. It is the all-time best FPS game that exists if you can put up with the awful installation (Using Origin) and the constant Battlelog + Origin + Windows 7 fight. Windows always minimizes my games at the most random times to inform me that my "Color Scheme should be changed". Origin, which needs to be restated every time i join a server. And Battlelog who had the worst Co-op invitation and messaging system ever made. Again, the best online FPS game. 8/10 due to Origin. Sorry EA, but it looks like you guys made the best game and did a last minute "oops" and plopped Battlelog and Origin into the game.… Expand
  97. MegaReviewing
    Feb 8, 2012
    10
    Top notch 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, make Battlefield 3 one of best first person shooters available in the market right now and makes it aTop notch 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, make Battlefield 3 one of best first person shooters available in the market right now and makes it a must buy for any fan of the FPS genre… Expand
  98. JazzCZ
    Feb 6, 2012
    10
    The game is great, Battlefield 3 is pumping me with energy to move on and on and on!
    Singleplayer isn't that much best, but uhm it's still better than MW3, which is a really bad bad game.
  99. namDa65
    Feb 5, 2012
    6
    Inferior to BF2 in many ways. The singleplayer campaign is simply terrible, and the co-op campaign takes an hour max on normal. Simply annoying. The game is fun for a couple hours in multiplayer, but then you realize much of the map isn't very destructible. The graphics are beautiful, which is the only reason I rate this game a 6. I got this game for free from a friend, if I paid 60$ forInferior to BF2 in many ways. The singleplayer campaign is simply terrible, and the co-op campaign takes an hour max on normal. Simply annoying. The game is fun for a couple hours in multiplayer, but then you realize much of the map isn't very destructible. The graphics are beautiful, which is the only reason I rate this game a 6. I got this game for free from a friend, if I paid 60$ for it I would be pissed.… Expand
  100. norfiend
    Feb 5, 2012
    2
    This game is nonsensical. Spawn, run, gun, die. Repeat ad nauseam. What is the point of having a "game" when there is no actual game - only interaction with an environment? An environment which is pretty cutting-edge with superb sound-effects, graphics and all, but surely you need more than that to make a game?

    I was foolish enough to buy this game because of the hype, and it's really sad    This game is nonsensical. Spawn, run, gun, die. Repeat ad nauseam. What is the point of having a "game" when there is no actual game - only interaction with an environment? An environment which is pretty cutting-edge with superb sound-effects, graphics and all, but surely you need more than that to make a game?

    I was foolish enough to buy this game because of the hype, and it's really sad to see the direction FPS-games are going these days. 20 years from now we'll be playing shooters with built in aimbots and pre-scriptet behaviour making it more like a movie - no game, skills or thinking, just mindless clicking and even more mindless players.    … Expand
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 »