User Score
7.5

Generally favorable reviews- based on 2223 Ratings

User score distribution:
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
  1. Oct 25, 2011
    7
    The user reviews posted are highly biased from a fanboy perspective. 10 from the BF fanboys, and 1 from the Cod chaps. Neither score is representitive of the games quality.

    If you intend on buying BF3 for the campaign, I strongly suggest that you rent instead as it is an uninspired standard shooter from start to finish (which isn't very long). Multiplayer is where it is at. BF3 is
    The user reviews posted are highly biased from a fanboy perspective. 10 from the BF fanboys, and 1 from the Cod chaps. Neither score is representitive of the games quality.

    If you intend on buying BF3 for the campaign, I strongly suggest that you rent instead as it is an uninspired standard shooter from start to finish (which isn't very long). Multiplayer is where it is at. BF3 is certainly worth a look for its MP component, and there is a lot of fun to be had here. From my perspective, if you didn't enjoy Bad Company 2, then you aren't going to be won over by this instalment, but for the best part, it is worth a look. The weapons feel tight and punchy, the vehicles feel very distinct, and the graphics are some of the best avaiable on consoles. Unfortunately as a console game, BF3 fails to deliver its true potential, as the limit of 24 players on such huge maps really does limit the game from delivering the full on scale of war that it should. The pace is certainly a lot slower than that of COD games, and there is far less class customisation. Over all, BF3 is a fun, but lacking experience which only supports the fact that we need a new generation of console to provide the 64 players that games like Battlefield really deserve.
    Expand
  2. Oct 25, 2011
    6
    This game had a chance to be amazing but the single player bogged it down. Multiplayer is the same Battlefield we know of, but since nothing really new and amazing was added it gets downed a point. The single player is what really lowered the score. It sucks.
  3. Oct 26, 2011
    5
    The Good. Great multiplayer modes (when servers aren't down)
    The Bad. The campaign is forgettable and annoyingly cliche at times, they have oddly placed button mashing during action sequences that are completely out of place, graphics are overdone to an extent where they look poor, and many glitches are sprinkled throughout the game play that are often frustrating enough to distract you
    The Good. Great multiplayer modes (when servers aren't down)
    The Bad. The campaign is forgettable and annoyingly cliche at times, they have oddly placed button mashing during action sequences that are completely out of place, graphics are overdone to an extent where they look poor, and many glitches are sprinkled throughout the game play that are often frustrating enough to distract you from the game play.
    Expand
  4. Oct 25, 2011
    5
    Feels like a cheap MW knockoff. The controls aren't as smooth as MW. Parts of the campaign are really boring. Technical issues up the wazoo. Been a great disappointment.
    Buy it in the bargain bin.
  5. Feb 9, 2013
    7
    Battlefield 3 is a superb multiplayer shooter let down by a shockingly bad campaign. The singleplayer campaign throws you into the role of a U.S Marine, with a generic plot concerning nuclear weapons, not to mention highly restrictive and linear environments that completely deny exploration. Many segments of the campaign force you to engage in tiresome tasks such as waiting for team-matesBattlefield 3 is a superb multiplayer shooter let down by a shockingly bad campaign. The singleplayer campaign throws you into the role of a U.S Marine, with a generic plot concerning nuclear weapons, not to mention highly restrictive and linear environments that completely deny exploration. Many segments of the campaign force you to engage in tiresome tasks such as waiting for team-mates to open doors while you stand idly with your weapon lowered. I expected vast, giant battles that encouraged the player to experiment in large maps with huge varieties of weapons and vehicles. Not a messy linear, poorly written generic war shooter. Fortunately, the multiplayer experience is polished with love and care, with enough guns, customisation and ranking systems to keep the hardened MMS veteran in the game for some time. The maps are also quite good, with the giant battles I was expecting in the campaign (more so if you purchase some of the DLC packs). The graphics are also quite good, but keep in mind that you need an Xbox 360 Hard Drive to enjoy decent textures; if not, your visual experience will suffer. overall, a decent game marred by an extremely sub-standard campaign. Expand
  6. Nov 13, 2011
    7
    Finished the campaign, played the co-op and multiplayer too! Now honestly, I really don't see much difference in gameplay at all from BF2/BC. I mean obviously there is new graphics and jets but the core gameplay is the same, weapons are pretty much the same too. I really don't get all the people who say "OMFG BF3 is LIKE TOTALLY DIFFERENT FROM PREVIOUS VeRSIONS", please don't be aFinished the campaign, played the co-op and multiplayer too! Now honestly, I really don't see much difference in gameplay at all from BF2/BC. I mean obviously there is new graphics and jets but the core gameplay is the same, weapons are pretty much the same too. I really don't get all the people who say "OMFG BF3 is LIKE TOTALLY DIFFERENT FROM PREVIOUS VeRSIONS", please don't be a hypocrite to COD. The campaign i found while some parts of it was good, it was ultimately short and i found it to be a copy in Black Ops Campaign. Why? Same type of interrogation, then they both somehow find out where the hell the bomb/evil villain is... Seriously... don't just copy BF3. Next onto Co-op, it's really nothing special. I liked it, but once you've done it on hard, then there is really no point in doing it again, unless you really want to unlock every weapon for multiplayer. And even then all you do is grind the last mission for points... Now onto the multiplayer :) I absolutely love the ground vehicles! The flying vehicles however are alot different. When you start out on the game you CANNNOT KILL the flying vehicles. You have to unlock the engineer to a degree in order to even shoot things out of the sky without having to run to the AA guns, in that time smart pilots would have shot the crap out of you... (Engineers get a RPG/bazooka for tanks quickly so no problems there). Also having a max party of 4 (your squad) is severely limiting when you want to play with more mates. Even if you're in the same squad when you want to join, YOU WILL GET PUT ON DIFFERENT TEAMS! How the hell does that work? The servers/bugs seriously need sorting out. I'd love to put a 7.5 as thats what i really think the game is. You have to judge the whole game on everything! Not just the multiplayer which is very good. Expand
  7. Nov 12, 2011
    7
    Unfortunately it seems we are doomed to see an infinite number of fps flood the market and most of them are the same as the next this is only better than CoD because its different it has a new feel to it.
  8. Nov 16, 2011
    7
    Let me get started by saying that I play both the COD series and the Battlefield Series and I am proud of what both have offered. Since this is about BF3 I will try and limit my thoughts to this game except where a comparison is valid.

    BF3 is a powerful game that allows huge maps and tactical game play. You have to know that when you play this game you are better off working as a squad
    Let me get started by saying that I play both the COD series and the Battlefield Series and I am proud of what both have offered. Since this is about BF3 I will try and limit my thoughts to this game except where a comparison is valid.

    BF3 is a powerful game that allows huge maps and tactical game play. You have to know that when you play this game you are better off working as a squad then just running and gunning like an arcade game. Buildings actually break apart and collapse. The campaign is slightly short on delivering based on the hype. Don't get me wrong, I like the series but I just hoped for more in the campaign considering it has its own disc for Campaign. The multiplayer has been plagued with lag and rubber banding problems since release. There have been squad issues with parties trying to play together and various other issues. This brings my score down. EA says they have fixed most of it but I have not seen a huge improvement. The quality of play once you are in the maps and playing is quite high. You have to allow for bullet drop and try to lead people with your shots. No other game does that. The class leveling and player leveling being separate is nice but can be daunting to get to the next level. Feels like an eternity. The BF3 graphics are better then COD in so many ways. The lighting, details, shading and all that goes with graphics is superb. You cannot ask for a more graphically pleasing environment. Since I have only played those two games from this genre I cannot compare the graphics to other games.

    If you are looking for a FPS game this holiday season I would pick BF3 over COD. Again, don't get me wrong but this is a better choice for multiple reasons. I am sure that I will get heat from all the dedicated fan boys of each game and that is fine. Again, I play both series. I like both series. However, I will tell that MW3 fell very short for me this time. So without a doubt I would choose BF3. However, if your a player that can't play tactical and it is all about your stats and kill-death ratio, go to COD and play MW3. I am sure you are a better fit for that franchise.
    Expand
  9. Jan 1, 2012
    7
    Im a fan of both cod and bf and it's ridiculous that all these fanboys of both games are bringing there scores down. Now let's get to the game. I already gave the game a point off because IMO the single player wasn't that good. For the multiplayer, it's usually fun, but it's gets boring because the maps were obviously designed for 64 players on PC, not 24 on xbox and ps3. I do like theIm a fan of both cod and bf and it's ridiculous that all these fanboys of both games are bringing there scores down. Now let's get to the game. I already gave the game a point off because IMO the single player wasn't that good. For the multiplayer, it's usually fun, but it's gets boring because the maps were obviously designed for 64 players on PC, not 24 on xbox and ps3. I do like the variety of vehicles in this game, it somewhat makes up for the large maps, but some are smaller and have more action and those are the ones I play on like operation metro, when Im in for some jets or tanking I'll go with caspian border or another large map. Another downfall is, there is literally only 2 game modes (Conquest and rush) compared to mw3's like 20. Which in turn leads to the game eventually getting boring and not fun to play. I honestly think this game deserves a 7 and while it can be fun at times, it lacks the action of mw3. I think mw3 is slightly better IMO, maybe because the fast paced action just suits me better or I have just been a more of a cod guy than a BF. If you loved bc2 then you will probably like this game, however if your used to cod you may or may not. That is my honest review. Don't listen to the fanboys. Expand
  10. Nov 24, 2012
    7
    Amazing multiplayer with stunning graphics! (If you have HD) This game steps it up a notch compared to most first person shooters. Audio is great, weapons are diverse, maps are huge and aesthetic, teamwork is a necessity to win a game. Not everything is good about this game though. The campaign was very disappointing. Worst story I have ever experienced in a video game. The main themeAmazing multiplayer with stunning graphics! (If you have HD) This game steps it up a notch compared to most first person shooters. Audio is great, weapons are diverse, maps are huge and aesthetic, teamwork is a necessity to win a game. Not everything is good about this game though. The campaign was very disappointing. Worst story I have ever experienced in a video game. The main theme is also ruined. The theme used to have real instruments, but now it sounds like techno and fart sounds. The destructibility is not as good as it used to be from Bad Company 2. It also seems like you can't mute people who are either kids, or are playing music into their mics. Overall, the game is good/great. Expand
  11. Apr 13, 2020
    7
    Played on XBOX 360.
    Gameplay: GREAT.
    Story: GOOD.
    Graphic: GREAT.
    Music/Sound: GOOD.
    Dialogue/Voice Acting: GOOD.
  12. Dec 31, 2011
    6
    The multiplayer may be some of the coolest modern combat you'll experience on a console. It's absolutely glorious, and worth the price for that alone. Unfortunately, the single player campaign is the same heavily scripted Call of Duty-ish trash I've come to loathe from FPS games. In some cases it's even worse, descending into button mashing quicktime events and rail shooters. For aThe multiplayer may be some of the coolest modern combat you'll experience on a console. It's absolutely glorious, and worth the price for that alone. Unfortunately, the single player campaign is the same heavily scripted Call of Duty-ish trash I've come to loathe from FPS games. In some cases it's even worse, descending into button mashing quicktime events and rail shooters. For a game that proves it has so much versatility and complexity on the multiplayer side, it's a huge disappointment not to have more freedom on the single player end. Expand
  13. Nov 9, 2011
    7
    Good Campaign but sincerely needs to show a new user how the hell to use the vehicles ie. Training Mode for dumb blind people with 1 arm.

    Somewhat dissapointed with the fighter jet scene whereby I wasn't given the keys to a joyride!
  14. Oct 27, 2011
    7
    All Fan boy junk put aside. This is a solid game that is well worth the $40 from my amazon preorder. It knocks the pants off any other shooter of its kind except halo, COD, Gears. That said its a blast to play huge map battles bring a ton of fun for you and some buddies. The single player campaign is fun and extremely impressive graphically and they nailed the sounds. The story is aAll Fan boy junk put aside. This is a solid game that is well worth the $40 from my amazon preorder. It knocks the pants off any other shooter of its kind except halo, COD, Gears. That said its a blast to play huge map battles bring a ton of fun for you and some buddies. The single player campaign is fun and extremely impressive graphically and they nailed the sounds. The story is a complete mesh of the last 3 COD games. Regardless of this there are still some epic moments such as the sniper mission which I have been waiting a long time for something this detailed. There is a ton of LAG/Frame rate issues though. And whats with the 1.5GB update to get your graphics up to speed? The Code to play online is also a joke and provided much frustration on my 360. Top that off with week user interface that feels like a PC game. Then the Server went down for a brief period, so I hopped over to the SEPERATE DISK campaign and it starts repeating the opening scene on a loop of about 10 seconds? Whats that all about. The game just feels rushed. Far too many little issues considering they put 100 Million into advertising. Half that money shouldve stayed in game development. My score wouldve been a 9 if they issues had been resolved before launch. Im just disappointed in DICE for not smoothing it out more. It is such a solid platform, especially after a BETA. These issues should have been fixed. Well worth buying if you want to kill a week before MW3. Expand
  15. Jan 4, 2012
    5
    wow bf3 has got a lower score in the critics than mw3. bf however has a campaign of **** its dull. but its short which makes me give a 3 the only good thing was the graphics in the campaign but the multi player is fun because u can use the gadgets which are great to use overall it is in the middle for me
  16. Nov 8, 2011
    7
    A solid and intense shooter, but lacks the massive scale of the previous game. Obviously the engine just wouldnt allow it, which is really disappointing. Im hoping updates and map packs will develop this game more into the experience people expected
  17. Oct 27, 2011
    7
    Not a bad game just underwhelmed. The graphics are not that great, hard to see enemies sometimes. Alot of spawn killings and collision detection if off some of the time. laggy multiplayer, it is a good time filler untill MW3 comes out.
  18. Nov 8, 2011
    6
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The multiplayer is great. Perhaps a bit chaotic, but still fun. It's no the same of COD, but its difference makes it enjoyable. So relative high marks go to the multiplayer. The loss in points comes from the single player campaign. It's short, a few hours short. With the Co-op potion, you gain another hour or so depending on difficulty, but I was promised an extensive Campaign and it fell short. There are also a half dozen quicktime interactions that seem plastered on. They're clunky and the button pressing doesn't correspond with on screen action in the dynamic rewarding fashion of comparable FPS's. Further, the vehicle portions we confining and not as enjoyable as promised. The fighter portion, you don't even have the opportunity to fly. You fire missiles and do a watered down lasing segment that's no where near as enjoyable as COD's AC130 missions. The tank missions, save the final segement through the city, lacks character. There are highlights, such as the beginning mission and the sniper mission, but these cannot eclipse the nonsense turns in the plot. For the FPS that boasts closeness with reality, there are some things that are unforgivable. One is committing an act of war on Russia by attacking a division of Russian troops with an underequipt and weaker force. The second is an American soldier murdering his CO to help a Russian he met seconds before. It's just nutty. And for that, not the multiplayer in any way, the score is much lower than it should have been. Expand
  19. Nov 2, 2011
    7
    Honestly, I am a huge battlefield fan and I mean huge I love every game of the series I have but Battlefield 3 is an unfinished product that needs a lot of patching before I can call it a smooth experience. To start off with the campaign is good but very generic, honestly a very good copy of COD Black Ops' campaign which I didn't like. The campaign also has a good number of glitches in itHonestly, I am a huge battlefield fan and I mean huge I love every game of the series I have but Battlefield 3 is an unfinished product that needs a lot of patching before I can call it a smooth experience. To start off with the campaign is good but very generic, honestly a very good copy of COD Black Ops' campaign which I didn't like. The campaign also has a good number of glitches in it which can detract from the experience; overall I felt detached and found a few of the checkpoints to not even load and I had to restart the mission in order for the problem to be fixed. Multiplayer is amazing and in my opinion it is the best in the series and one of the only redeeming factor in the game; lots of unlocks, medals, camas, ribbons, and more. Multiplayer I feel and always will be the only reason you should buy a Battlefield game but all the other things like campaign and co-op are nice bonuses only problem with this just like co-op is the servers are absolutely terrible and connection is lost all the time and I can recall twice now were the servers were down for about 3 hours which is really aggravating .Co-op it is a nice experience and you can actually unlock guns for multiplayer in it which I felt was really cool; the co-op has six levels as of now. Overall I feel this is a worthy successor to BF2 but it has a lot of problems that can be renovated and if and when they are the game will shine in a better light but as of now the game feels unfinished although I still recommend that you pick it up given the chance. Expand
  20. Oct 30, 2011
    5
    The single player was just alright, like many seem to think. A few nice set pieces and nice visuals, but the AI was disappointing. As far as the multiplayer is concerned I appreciate the grand scale of the maps. I actually think the graphics are nice, considering their size and the action on screen. The sound effects really draw you in as well. But the maps are too big for the playerThe single player was just alright, like many seem to think. A few nice set pieces and nice visuals, but the AI was disappointing. As far as the multiplayer is concerned I appreciate the grand scale of the maps. I actually think the graphics are nice, considering their size and the action on screen. The sound effects really draw you in as well. But the maps are too big for the player count on the consoles. There are times when I have to travel too far to engage with enemies only to get sniped and start the process all over again which becomes very frustrating. There is a lack of flow to the game play, in my opinion. And although I have grown a little tired of the noob tubes and powerful explosives in Call of Duty, Explosives in BF3 seem so weak and not very useful. It is hard to put my finger on but I never seem to get a connection with any of the guns and there is a certain "clunkiness" to the feel of the game flow. I have yet to get into a "zone" like I have with Modern Warfare or even Halo. I was always more of a Call of Duty fan, but I was very excited about this game, especially with all of the hype leading up to release. And I do appreciate this game for what it offers as opposed to Modern Warfare. But I think I'm more of a fan of the more fast paced, instant action of MW, even with the dated game engine and lack of realism. Expand
  21. Nov 6, 2011
    7
    This is quite a poor effort from Dice / EA, a franchise low for Battlefield. I have been a battlefield fan since 2 and I thoroughly enjoyed 2142, Modern Combat and Bad Company series. Having said that, I admit that I prefer the fast paced, individualistic multiplayer of COD games. But I am not reviewing this game from the point of a COD fanboy, just some one who enjoys both series. I amThis is quite a poor effort from Dice / EA, a franchise low for Battlefield. I have been a battlefield fan since 2 and I thoroughly enjoyed 2142, Modern Combat and Bad Company series. Having said that, I admit that I prefer the fast paced, individualistic multiplayer of COD games. But I am not reviewing this game from the point of a COD fanboy, just some one who enjoys both series. I am also going to talk about the graphics everybody knows its a great looking game. Firstly, I must address the campaign, which is the most lifeless and linear modern war shooter I have ever played. If you expect ''battlefields'' look elsewhere as levels are progressed via a very restrictive follow the leader type design, there is no room for dynamic action or combat scenarios. The level openers and enders may have a few cool scripted sequences and set pieces, (none lasting longer than 10 seconds) but the actual gameplay is void of anything exciting and engaging. Speaking of set pieces, I feel this just doesn't compare to the way games like Uncharted and Gears of War incorporate set pieces into the gameplay. Its not just something to look at in the background, but there are entire 10 minute levels in those games that compete with the biggest most impressive set pieces seen in blockbuster movies. 4/10 for SP.

    The multiplayer portion of the game is designed better and more faithful the to title. If you enjoyed Battlefield 2, you will feel right at home with this game, its very similar in design, modes and map design. The main new featured are jets, disabling vehicles which that the turrets will work even if the wheels wont, more sophisticated and realistic lighting and enhanced squad abilities. The main drawback however, are the maps, especially the larger ones, which are more barren,less vertical and feature less destruction, which means matches especially on conquest game modes are slower than usual. This means firefights are never quite as fun as they could be. Overall, its great but not much of a sequel to Battlefield 2 or even Bad Comany 2. 8/10 for MP.
    Expand
  22. Feb 19, 2012
    7
    With a beautiful campaign and decent MP, Battlefield 3 is one of the only remaining good FPS shooters.
  23. Nov 11, 2011
    7
    Yeah here's another over hyped game after playing Bad company 1,2 after seeing all the kool clips thinking o yeah lock and load here we go..To my sadness it's nothing like bad company you can't blow up doors and rain down mortar strikes to bring down buildings the destruction system was so tame..Frostbite bite 2 yeah right more like 0.0. There's no sandbox like bad company its either youYeah here's another over hyped game after playing Bad company 1,2 after seeing all the kool clips thinking o yeah lock and load here we go..To my sadness it's nothing like bad company you can't blow up doors and rain down mortar strikes to bring down buildings the destruction system was so tame..Frostbite bite 2 yeah right more like 0.0. There's no sandbox like bad company its either you follow or the whole game just sits and waits or you die for being out of the combat zone...It's just a game on rails really thought we got out this for next gen games..No sooner you get a good idea you go backwards and near the end really they must of ran out of time level design was like PS 1 big building plane open walls god really..The aircraft stuff was fun nice to see something different but really when you do a flyby use some realism you fly that friggin close you might as well sat in the captain chair on the carrier maybe some interaction from your character we all seem to be silent quite types...fun game but not worth the money for a new release maybe get it when it comes down in price... Expand
  24. Nov 1, 2011
    7
    Let me start by saying i didnt like any battlefield games before this at all as i found that it was too orientated on being a high level online and having alot of experience in shooters in the campaign. This time round i gave it a shot and to me i missed. Its not a bad game at all but it is defiently not a AAA game that all the professionals call it. I feel its a step down in a way as iLet me start by saying i didnt like any battlefield games before this at all as i found that it was too orientated on being a high level online and having alot of experience in shooters in the campaign. This time round i gave it a shot and to me i missed. Its not a bad game at all but it is defiently not a AAA game that all the professionals call it. I feel its a step down in a way as i did in fact find it enjoying in battlefield games to destroy the terrain and so much was promised yet not delivered. it is extemely hard to destory buildings unless you are in a tank and it takes frustratinly long to level up online, but now i have my fully kitted out medic class, im ready to go. the campaign is basically trying to copy cod in every perspective. its no longer a wide open map and great tactical attacks but more macho americans barking at you. Its very short like cod but the gamerscore total is easy to achieve. Online is almost immposible to play with friends i have found and i dont like i that you have different classes. Its a very frustrating game overall online but pretty fun. And if you think im a cod fanboy then i dont particularly like cod either, im most likely gonna give MW3 a 7/8. As a conclusion, wait till its cheap and then buy it because its not worth £45 Expand
  25. Nov 10, 2011
    7
    Great single player (even if the reviews say different) and ok multiplayer. The main problem facing battlefield is server issues, lack of multiplayer unlocks, and balance. Snipers are still OP and bad for team play. Mortars are a joke and ruin rush mode. After you player and rank up you really have nothing to look forward too. Ran into lots of crashing and rubber banding online, you alsoGreat single player (even if the reviews say different) and ok multiplayer. The main problem facing battlefield is server issues, lack of multiplayer unlocks, and balance. Snipers are still OP and bad for team play. Mortars are a joke and ruin rush mode. After you player and rank up you really have nothing to look forward too. Ran into lots of crashing and rubber banding online, you also can't leave games during intermission. The weapons feel nice though and the graphics are ok on console. Overall just doesnt live up to the hype I had for it. Expand
  26. Oct 26, 2011
    6
    RE-SUBMITTED AS I LEFT THE RATING AT 10!!!
    Very disappointed! That's the short version. I am a FPS addict and I had high hopes for BF3. I wasn't a fan of the last offering in the series, but good trailers gave me something to cling to. I played the multiplayer Beta and was unimpressed by the hit-and-miss servers, the overly bright sunlight and "detached" feel to the experience. It looks
    RE-SUBMITTED AS I LEFT THE RATING AT 10!!!
    Very disappointed! That's the short version. I am a FPS addict and I had high hopes for BF3. I wasn't a fan of the last offering in the series, but good trailers gave me something to cling to. I played the multiplayer Beta and was unimpressed by the hit-and-miss servers, the overly bright sunlight and "detached" feel to the experience. It looks like they fixed the brightness.... and little else. The multiplayer isn't a battle simulation or a full-on FPS, it is a combination of both, unfortunately not in a good way. There are glitches when using vehicles and inside buildings.
    Co-op campaign - I played this with a friend. You feel isolated, as though you are the only two soldiers in the world fighting an oncoming army whilst everybody watches.
    Single player campaign - The graphics range from excellent high-quality HD to cartoony, blocky and basic. To aid realism you have to peer through scratched glass and deal with 'lens flare'. Whilst this does add to the realistic feeling it ultimately makes for a frustrating game where your vision is obscured a lot of the time and you miss out on the action and enjoyment. In summary, I would say the game looks a little rushed (to beat the release of COD - MW3?). Graphics in places are really not up to the current standard for a top-of-the-range modern FPS. Having said that, it is better than some and would have looked better stacked against games from 3 years ago. I wish I had waited until January and picked up a cheap copy.
    Expand
  27. Oct 29, 2011
    6
    It has really impressive graphics though I've faced some shader bugs on Xbox360 for some levels, it something ignorable considering the high quality of the graphics in general; I have finished the game in single player mode and I have played it in the multiplayer too, sincerely, I didn't like it, I've gave a huge chance to change my opinion playing it for hours and hours but it didn't pay,It has really impressive graphics though I've faced some shader bugs on Xbox360 for some levels, it something ignorable considering the high quality of the graphics in general; I have finished the game in single player mode and I have played it in the multiplayer too, sincerely, I didn't like it, I've gave a huge chance to change my opinion playing it for hours and hours but it didn't pay, the weakest point for me is the gameplay which is really poor, you just cannot mastery it, weapons balance is ridiculous, timing is not good, signs and feedbacks are not clear and pollute your screen, as a FAN of Battlefield series, (I have all games of the serie), I feel particularly frustrated, is a pity. Sincerely, keep the same team working together for my two sequels and we will have THE GAME. Expand
  28. Oct 30, 2011
    6
    Speaking on the Campaign only: THE GOOD: Absolutely beautiful graphics throughout most of the game. Solid variety of weapons, all of which feel and sound great (you need a good sound system to fully appreciate the sound effects). THE AVERAGE: The AI is simple for a 'top-tier' game, most popping up with limited flanking etc. Decent mission variety; escort, vehicle, defend and other typicalSpeaking on the Campaign only: THE GOOD: Absolutely beautiful graphics throughout most of the game. Solid variety of weapons, all of which feel and sound great (you need a good sound system to fully appreciate the sound effects). THE AVERAGE: The AI is simple for a 'top-tier' game, most popping up with limited flanking etc. Decent mission variety; escort, vehicle, defend and other typical types. Great cinematic feel to the beginning of the flight mission, then a let down because you don't have control of the jet (just guns and missiles). THE BAD: The campaign is pretty lame as a whole. The story is garbage, basically a mirror image of the competition MW. You kill Russians and play as them in select missions; shameful rip off. Many of the missions are boring walk and shoots through uninspired environments. You spend one mission on the streets of Paris, but you are no where near any famous landmarks. Another you spend in a drab mall in the middle east.
    The campaign is worse than medal of honor and bad company 2. Very disappointing single player, but if your a multiplayer exclusive you'll probably be happy.
    Expand
  29. Oct 30, 2011
    7
    NOTE: You are not about to read a review full of the word "faggot" and there is absolutely no bias in franchises on my behalf. It's also written with proper grammar and spelling.

    It feels bad - having to rate the game the way that I am, but I absolutely feel like this is the way I have to do it. After months of waiting, telling all my Black Ops friends that Battlefield 3 was going to blow
    NOTE: You are not about to read a review full of the word "faggot" and there is absolutely no bias in franchises on my behalf. It's also written with proper grammar and spelling.

    It feels bad - having to rate the game the way that I am, but I absolutely feel like this is the way I have to do it. After months of waiting, telling all my Black Ops friends that Battlefield 3 was going to blow Call Of Duty out of the water and all that jazz - I feel disappointed and I'm happy that they didn't listen to me and throw down pre-orders before the reviews came out.

    Campaign Mode: Now, I have seen a lot of the Battlefield defenders out here stating that the single player shouldn't even be taken into account. Frankly, that's false on so many levels I don't even know where to begin.. but a wise man once said that any game with the single player option, should have a leg to stand on based on that single player option alone. Aside from pretty graphics, the campaign here is stock-standard - there isn't really a reason to touch it. It's the same old thing we've seen over and over again, and it's the kind of thing that goes straight into the bargain bin these days. But I would never fully condemn something without offering an alternative - so how about next time we see a campaign that is based on providing a story-based tutorial on tactics that should be used in the multiplayer game? Let's not mince words here, Battlefield IS a multiplayer experience first and foremost - but if you're not going to try and string out a decent story and drag it out over a trilogy or something of the sort - have SOME point to the thing.

    Multiplayer Mode: This is of course where the game was meant to shine, and for the most part it does - it works the way that it was designed... when the people do. Your experience is going to be severely based on who you are playing with, and this day and age it's just about as bad as ever. Let's be serious for a moment - if you think that your friends are always going to be around when you want to play - that's something that just isn't going to happen. I have around a dozen friends to play with and aside from the rare one day a week a good number of us getting together is a rarity.

    BUT, when it does work and you all communicate things CAN be beautiful. I won't even take into consideration the servers going down so much on release - and knowing EA and my experiences with all of the Battlefield games, they will be going down quite a bit - I've had some pretty good experience. But than again I have also came into situations where my team-mate has just driven around in circles inside mission critical equipment. It's infuriating, it takes you out of the game and it happens more often than I'd like to admit.

    The unlocks right now are the only thing keeping me going at a regular pace.. the terrain is beautiful and provides a good deal of cover but there is a lot of independent scenery that I am finding myself having to navigate around.. and poorly. I'm talking bits of small scenery on the ground that is slowing me down in ways that it really shouldn't.

    All in all - for everything bad, I am finding something good. It's just I feel that the good is going to wear off and the bad is going to stay. If you seriously can't stand the way COD handles multiplayer (and you are educated enough to see what changes they've made this year) AND you can only afford to buy one of these.. go with Battlefield, it's not what it was hyped to be but it's what you've come to know and love.
    Expand
  30. Nov 8, 2011
    6
    The single player campaign tries too hard to mimic the typical obnoxious unimaginative CoD: MW story lines. While certain parts were enjoyable other areas just made me regret of buying this game. Aside from it being a bad console port. DICE should just have focused on making a great multiplayer game.

    The multiplayer: It's filled with mix feelings. The servers are poorly maintained. The
    The single player campaign tries too hard to mimic the typical obnoxious unimaginative CoD: MW story lines. While certain parts were enjoyable other areas just made me regret of buying this game. Aside from it being a bad console port. DICE should just have focused on making a great multiplayer game.

    The multiplayer: It's filled with mix feelings. The servers are poorly maintained. The hit detection can be off at times if not rendered useless when you start shooting blanks at an enemy. Enjoy the destruction but it's no where near the BFBC 2 level of destruction. This game is not worth $60. Save yourself some money and buy the multiplayer for 20 bucks off some one and the EA vip pass for $10 dollars more.
    Expand
Metascore
84

Generally favorable reviews - based on 57 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 53 out of 57
  2. Negative: 0 out of 57
  1. Feb 25, 2012
    91
    If you're looking for a great single player campaign you're out of luck, rent BF3 or pick it up in the bargain bin. If you're looking for the best online multiplayer action then BF3 is your game hands down.
  2. Jan 24, 2012
    90
    While Battlefield 3 was aiming to be the biggest name this holiday season, and while it has made strides towards knocking off Modern Warfare 3, it misses the mark. That's not to say it is a bad game, it's a very good one, but the polish and excitement that is found on the Call of Duty series feels missing here. Still, there are much worse games you could end up with this holiday season, and the competition between the two series should heat up significantly in the next few years.
  3. Jan 3, 2012
    90
    This experience alone sums up what Battlefield 3 is about. It isn't a John Rambo run and gun shooter and it shouldn't really be compared to MW3 in terms of how you play it. For players to truly understand the Battlefield experience you need to embrace the teamwork by joining a squad and calling out your spotted enemies, as after all, sometimes you also need your back covered too.