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. Nov 8, 2011
    7
    Battlefield 3 is unfortunately a mixed bag. The multiplayer is as expected, fantastic, addictive, and intense. While TDM can be kind of fun for some quick killing, the star of the show is conquest, and to a lesser extent, rush. Compared to the open ended multiplayer maps, the single player is an immediately stale and linear affair, only having Battlefield in name. The only thing reallyBattlefield 3 is unfortunately a mixed bag. The multiplayer is as expected, fantastic, addictive, and intense. While TDM can be kind of fun for some quick killing, the star of the show is conquest, and to a lesser extent, rush. Compared to the open ended multiplayer maps, the single player is an immediately stale and linear affair, only having Battlefield in name. The only thing really keeping it afloat are the great graphics and sound to make it a lively experience. The story is throwaway, and some of the levels (most notably the jet level) end up disappointing. You hop in a jet expecting to fly around, but ends up being an on rails shooter. Many periods with little game interaction. It was not all bad though, the tank level was cool, as well as other exciting moments, but they fail to dispel the stale aura the whole thing has. Also, why no jet practice outside of hopping on a server, and praying you don't get shot down while you figure out how to fly the damn thing? With something with such a steep learning curve, you'd think they'd add someway to practice this. Expand
  2. Aug 22, 2013
    7
    Honestly, it'd be a pretty solid stretch to say that this game lived up to the ridiculous amount of hype that it received prior to its release, let alone living up to its name as a Battlefield sequel. I tried to review this game with as little bias as possible since I was an absolutely huge fan of Battlefield: Bad Company 2. While not exactly a direct sequel to Battlefield: Bad Company 2,Honestly, it'd be a pretty solid stretch to say that this game lived up to the ridiculous amount of hype that it received prior to its release, let alone living up to its name as a Battlefield sequel. I tried to review this game with as little bias as possible since I was an absolutely huge fan of Battlefield: Bad Company 2. While not exactly a direct sequel to Battlefield: Bad Company 2, using that as an excuse for why the game manages to fold in on itself in so many facets of gameplay is just stupid. To start, the single player campaign probably tops off as the new worst Battlefield campaign that I have ever played. If you've ever read my harsh review of Battlefield: Bad Company 2's single player, imagine that, but somehow setting an even lower bar. Maybe it's just difficult to make an interesting and entertaining single player campaign in military shooters and I just don't realize that. Regardless of the reason, calling the Battlefield 3 campaign atrocious would be an understatement, believe it or not. The campaign reeks of generic firefights and oozes with cliché on-rails sequences that fall under the "been-there, done that" category that the Call of Duty games have become known for. I would even make an exception if these on-rails sequences were any good, but the majority of them are uninspired and lack that "wow" factor that at least Call of Duty's sequences possess. In summary, you should not be buying Battlefield 3 for the offline aspect. Throughout all of the experiences of Battlefield 3, it seems as if DICE will shamelessly rip off anything COD-esque in an attempt to rally more fans to their cause. Because of this, Battlefield has lost a number of crucial elements that make a Battlefield game a Battlefield game, and I'm not just referring to the campaign, but I'll get to that. Battlefield 3 also introduces new cooperative missions that can be played with a buddy but as is the trend, is nothing more than a hodgepodge of ripped off missions from Modern Warfare's Spec Ops. They're only worthy of your time because they unlock new weapons to be used in the online multiplayer, which is always a good thing. Obviously, the online multiplayer is the meat and potatoes of the game, and fortunately for the most part, it manages to provide a solid experience. The sound effects still blow my mind with how incredibly realistic and intense a firefight on a Battlefield game can be. Running through a seemingly-deserted building with bullets whizzing past your head, gunfire echoing throughout, and the roar of helicopters and jets in a dogfight above can be intoxicating. Its moments like these that allows Battlefield 3 to really shine and create that certain addiction that can be had. The controls are as solid as a shooter can get and the weapons all feel impactful and exciting to use. However, despite these positives, there's a laundry list of flaws that the online possesses. One of which is the fact that players can now go prone, which another feature stolen from Call of Duty. The prone mechanic allows players to camp even easier now and with such huge maps, it can be difficult to pinpoint that guy that just keeps sniping at you from underneath a bush. The mechanic has no place in this style of multiplayer and simply results in tarnishing the experience. It seems as if the entire online caters to lesser-skilled players. Map designs this time around seem to encourage camping and the refusal to pursue objectives during game modes such as my favorite, Rush, is rampant. Vehicle hording is as strong as ever, with many players simply waiting around for certain vehicles to respawn. DICE has also made it much more difficult this time around to destroy vehicles, with tanks being able to absorb 5 or so RPG rounds for exploding. Not to mention that you can only choose 1 of 3 types of anti-vehicle rocket launchers, making it even more challenging to down that pesky kid constantly flying around in an assault chopper. Camping as also been made significantly easier due to certain new additions in equipment. In an attempt to nickel and dime in the way that COD's Elite system does, DICE allows players to "rent" servers for a fee and alter the rules and settings to their liking. This would be totally fine if not for the fact that when joining games, you are thrown into one of these altered lobbies 99% of the time. In fact, I have not played a DICE server in weeks. You can "favorite" certain servers and rejoin later but it seems like every time that I attempt to rejoin a server, there's never anybody in it. Buying the online DLC gives players cheap and unbalanced weapons, which definitely hurts the experience as well. Overall, the Battlefield experience online is alive and well. While I still have a blast with it (occasionally), it's difficult for me to whole-heartedly recommend a game that seems to cater directly to players who insist on camping. However, if you're a Battlefield fan, it'd still be hard to go wrong with a purchase. Expand
  3. Feb 7, 2013
    7
    Summing this game up is difficult, as part of it is glorious while the other parts are frankly disappointing. Firstly the most disappointing aspect was EA marketing campaign, they embarrassed themselves with some churlish war of words with Activision over a series EA foolishly copied in it's single player and co-op modes. I wouldn't mind if EA had a more innovative single player to tauntSumming this game up is difficult, as part of it is glorious while the other parts are frankly disappointing. Firstly the most disappointing aspect was EA marketing campaign, they embarrassed themselves with some churlish war of words with Activision over a series EA foolishly copied in it's single player and co-op modes. I wouldn't mind if EA had a more innovative single player to taunt Activision with, but alas both the single/co-op modes were pathetic COD clones, even down to the imperialistic Western tones. However the mulitplayer is where Battlefield has and will always excel at, truly the best multiplayer experience I've had since UT2004 and GOW1. The various modes, free dlc if you have the limited edition, steep but highly enjoyable learning curves makes this multiplayer game of legendary status. BUT EA once again sought greed by inserting the money making rent a server, thus leaving many p***ed as endless players got booted from matches for no reason, or games ended early due to hosts being spoilt brats. Thankfully EA restored the DICE servers due to fan anger, however that cheeky move along with the inferior COD clone single/co-op modes makes the overall package a seven! Expand
  4. Oct 25, 2011
    7
    First of all, let me start by saying that I like this game. I enjoy the COD franchise as well, but for different reasons. With that in mind, this game was a slight let down. I did not set my sights very high after the beta. Though I know DICE has a good track record for fixing problems with their games, I also know it usually takes them a while to do it, usually about when interest in itFirst of all, let me start by saying that I like this game. I enjoy the COD franchise as well, but for different reasons. With that in mind, this game was a slight let down. I did not set my sights very high after the beta. Though I know DICE has a good track record for fixing problems with their games, I also know it usually takes them a while to do it, usually about when interest in it begins to wane because of the problems they took too long to fix. I didn't expect any great upgrade to the graphics from the beta, as there is only so much computing power in an XBOX 360, so I have no real complaint about them. They look pretty decent, better than Black Ops, in my opinion but there are some issues with framerate bogging down at times in intensive areas.

    I would certainly not recommend this game if you are looking for a thoroughly engrossing and long campaign mode, as you will not find it here. The voice acting and visuals are quite stunning, but the story is contrived and rather short. I think it took me about 4 hours on a medium difficulty setting. But really, who buys this kind of game for the campaign mode anyway.

    Multiplayer ...I don't want to use the word 'shines' but it is still quite engaging and fun. I find myself enjoying it more than I have most Call of Duty games at first, at any rate. The maps are well-designed, massive and quite nice to look at. I have not run into many technical issues. I have had little problems connecting to games, and I have only been disconnected once in several hours of play. The problem with the console version is this: It should feel like a battlefield. It doesn't. The limited server size makes it feel much closer to other FPS's. I am sure the PC version is amazing with 32 people on your team, trying to do stuff. But that is the biggest reason it falls short, in my opinion. It should feel like a full-scale war on these massive maps, but it just doesn't. It feels more like an objective based COD match than it should.

    Overall, I feel it is an enjoyable experience and I enjoy playing it. I hope to one day find a squad that communicates and actually tries to accomplish something, but I won't hold my breath right now, heh. As a note, the reason I compare certain aspects to COD is not because I am a fan of the COD series. I use it as a reference as that is BF3's closest competition. There is my opinion of the game, take it for what it's worth to you, it is just an opinion.
    Expand
  5. Nov 10, 2011
    7
    graphics are a bit rubbish. lag in multiplayerr is shocking - it is 2011 after all. mw3 lag is non existent, although black ops was a lag fest.

    single player is so frustrating, u shoot a baddie, clumsy freindly ai runs in front of u all the time, ten u get a no freindly fire message. single player is not worth it. multiplayer is brilliant with one exception. frame rate is rubbish. 30fps
    graphics are a bit rubbish. lag in multiplayerr is shocking - it is 2011 after all. mw3 lag is non existent, although black ops was a lag fest.

    single player is so frustrating, u shoot a baddie, clumsy freindly ai runs in front of u all the time, ten u get a no freindly fire message. single player is not worth it.

    multiplayer is brilliant with one exception. frame rate is rubbish. 30fps looks like bf2. mw3 akes this look amateurish. but saying that, battles are more strategic and fun in bf3 than mw3 which is too fast.
    Expand
  6. 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
  7. Feb 21, 2012
    7
    First of all, I prefer Battlefield to Call of Duty. I haven't even tested Modern Warfare 3 so I can't compare this game to it but I know that Battlefield 3 fits better to me. But the game isn't in my honest opinion that awesome as many seems to say. No, this is not the best FPS ever but no, this is neither the worst. The game is actually decent. Multiplayer is excellent at the best. It'sFirst of all, I prefer Battlefield to Call of Duty. I haven't even tested Modern Warfare 3 so I can't compare this game to it but I know that Battlefield 3 fits better to me. But the game isn't in my honest opinion that awesome as many seems to say. No, this is not the best FPS ever but no, this is neither the worst. The game is actually decent. Multiplayer is excellent at the best. It's hard to describe the positive sides of the multiplayer. All I can say that when you can form a good four-man-squad you'll get a ton of fun. Vehicles are lovely as always- Negative side is easier. Some of the maps are boring and at least one of the is just bad. Operation Metro map is something I despise. It's a long pipe and it doesn't fit in the game. The menus are complicated but most of all, dying is annoying. Yes, I understand that dying is part of the game and that's not really what I'm aiming for. The point is that when you die you have to watch almost forever that kill cam(word I learned from CoD omg). It's not even a killcam as it doesn't show the kill. It just shows the killer running around the map. The time you're waiting for respawning could've been used for changing kits and weapons. Oh and you still can't leave the server between rounds.

    Singleplayer and co-op. I probably shouldn't talk about them as Battlefield series have always been a multiplayer franchise. But because they're part of the game, they're part of the review. Let's just say that the campaign is just well dry. There's really nothing to grip. I don't know if the player is supposed to care about the characters but at least I didn't. The campaign consists of series of random missions and honestly, sometimes I didn't even understand how they were part of the game. It's like DICE tried to squeeze everything into the campaign. Though I admit that the jet mission was kinda cool even though it was pointless. Co-Op wasn't that interesting either. Haven't been able to complete it actually since my buddy got tired of it too. Good thing is that you can play co-op with random people.

    All in all, Battlefield 3 is a decent game. It's nothing extraordinary but a Battlefield fan should definitely at least give it a try.
    Expand
  8. Oct 31, 2011
    7
    I am a fan of the Battlefield series but this game does have some issues. First, the multiplayer servers SUCK! Finding a hardcore match or team deathmatch that allows you to play with your friends is nearly impossible. Second, in multiplayer the random respawn often places you in close quarters with enemy fighters resulting in your second death within a very short time frame. Now theI am a fan of the Battlefield series but this game does have some issues. First, the multiplayer servers SUCK! Finding a hardcore match or team deathmatch that allows you to play with your friends is nearly impossible. Second, in multiplayer the random respawn often places you in close quarters with enemy fighters resulting in your second death within a very short time frame. Now the positives: 1-The graphics an sounds are ASTOUNDING. The large maps and various classes allow you to play according to your style. You dont have to be a twitch COD player to rack up numerous kills in this game. Further, as you level the game continues to stay extremely balanced. Having problems with prone snipers? Level up support and get mortars. Having problems with run and gun? Be a sniper and prone out along the edge of the map. Like to gun but also be a party favorite? Be assault and heal your friends! Get killed a lot? Get in a tank and reek havoc! Getting killed by tanks? Be an engineer and nuke them with mines and rockets! The balance is amazing. Dont let the COD fanboys/girls dissuade you. IF EA fixes the servers the game will be shooter of the year! Expand
  9. May 11, 2012
    7
    I'm bumping my review up to an 7, because I'm kind of enjoying it now, but my complaints stay the same. The campaign is short and dull. There are still way to many glitches left over from a late beta. The trailers were obviously PC graphics, even though they denied it. The graphics on the 360 seems to be just barely better than Bad Company 2. Still pixely, still have to squint to look farI'm bumping my review up to an 7, because I'm kind of enjoying it now, but my complaints stay the same. The campaign is short and dull. There are still way to many glitches left over from a late beta. The trailers were obviously PC graphics, even though they denied it. The graphics on the 360 seems to be just barely better than Bad Company 2. Still pixely, still have to squint to look far away. MW2 looks better. Though is does feel like it controls a lot better... (Feels more like COD, but not quite) It still feels glitchy and erratic like Bad Company. I know that this is a different story and series than Bad Company, but it just feels like Bad Company 2.5, which isn't always a bad thing. The menus suck and are full of glitches. Joining a squad is glitchy as well. This game gets a 7, one higher than the last Battlefield. Expand
  10. 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
  11. Jan 6, 2012
    7
    Battlefield 3 lived up to my expectations for about 2 weeks, then I found myself done with it, even after the Back to Karkand expansion. As a Battlefield 2 veteran, I was hoping for a game that was Battlefield 2, with improvements and revolutionized Battlefield the series. It only delivered to the latter, and I can't say for the better, but for the new. In other words: If your new toBattlefield 3 lived up to my expectations for about 2 weeks, then I found myself done with it, even after the Back to Karkand expansion. As a Battlefield 2 veteran, I was hoping for a game that was Battlefield 2, with improvements and revolutionized Battlefield the series. It only delivered to the latter, and I can't say for the better, but for the new. In other words: If your new to the series, you may or may not enjoy this game; it depends if you give it a chance. But BF3 still suffers from BC2s biggest flaw... it's hell playing this by yourself, and zero to no fun. Expand
  12. 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!
  13. Nov 7, 2011
    7
    Battlefield 3, oh Battlefield 3. One of the most anticipated games of 2011, with the ultimate goal of killing the popular Call of Duty series. Did DICE achieve that goal? I don't think they did. Sure, the multiplayer is incredibly awesome and addicting, but the Campaign and Co-op just really ruin the overall game. I'm not even sure why DICE even bothered to waste their time with addingBattlefield 3, oh Battlefield 3. One of the most anticipated games of 2011, with the ultimate goal of killing the popular Call of Duty series. Did DICE achieve that goal? I don't think they did. Sure, the multiplayer is incredibly awesome and addicting, but the Campaign and Co-op just really ruin the overall game. I'm not even sure why DICE even bothered to waste their time with adding that stuff in, they're not story tellers. The Campaign is extremely boring, and is a chore to play. I don't even know if I'll ever finish it, because it's not even worth finishing. DICE's attempt at making an enjoyable Co-op experience failed. It's not quite as boring as the campaign, but still bad enough to make me not even complete the last two missions I haven't played yet. So by now you may be wondering why I didn't give this game a 1 or 2. The reason why is because 1.) The game is one of the best looking and sounding on a console. 2.) It's gameplay is super smooth and awesome. And 3.) The game's multiplayer is one of the best experiences I've played in a long, long time. It's definitely lived up to my expectations, and is the ONLY thing keeping this game afloat. I find it 10x more fun then Call of Duty's repetitive multiplayer. DICE couldn't of done a better job with it, and that is the sole reason why this game gets a positive score from me. If you're looking for a game with an incredible multiplayer, BUY THIS GAME. Just don't touch the second disk (Campaign). I hope this review helped those of you who are still thinking about buying this game. Expand
  14. 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
  15. Oct 25, 2011
    7
    Fails to hit its mark. 360 graphics are less compelling than PS3. While still visually impressive, the game lacks depth beyond the stats it collects. The story-line is dull and the game-play is not what I expected from a game this big. I often felt like the objectives were unclear. War felt (at times) slow. The people who gave this game a 10 have very low standards when there is a clearFails to hit its mark. 360 graphics are less compelling than PS3. While still visually impressive, the game lacks depth beyond the stats it collects. The story-line is dull and the game-play is not what I expected from a game this big. I often felt like the objectives were unclear. War felt (at times) slow. The people who gave this game a 10 have very low standards when there is a clear standard for FPS' in the industry - Call of Duty. Expand
  16. 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
  17. 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
  18. 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
  19. 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
  20. 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.
  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. 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
  23. Nov 11, 2011
    7
    Beautiful...but boring. The short campaign mode that was anticipated to be one of the best shooter campaigns of all time just didn't have enough fuel to catch fire. The game itself if probably the most visually appealing and is a technical achievement in the graphics department, but overall it just doesn't pack enough "oomph." The multiplayer is solid, fun, and offers tons of unlocks forBeautiful...but boring. The short campaign mode that was anticipated to be one of the best shooter campaigns of all time just didn't have enough fuel to catch fire. The game itself if probably the most visually appealing and is a technical achievement in the graphics department, but overall it just doesn't pack enough "oomph." The multiplayer is solid, fun, and offers tons of unlocks for players to focus on. If you buy this game, buy it for the MP, not the SP...aka don't pay the full $60 for it. Also, if you have the opportunity, buy this on PC, so you can run it the way it deserves to be ran. Expand
  24. 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
  25. Nov 10, 2011
    7
    Battlefield 3 on overall is a decent shooter. It's Frostbite 2.0 engine runs great and the graphics are most impressive but the game lacks power of the campaign. Battlefield is a great game but the story is cliche. It may deliver good voice acting and good gameplay but not as interesting like other shooters. The multiplayer is the best of the package. There is going to be a large communityBattlefield 3 on overall is a decent shooter. It's Frostbite 2.0 engine runs great and the graphics are most impressive but the game lacks power of the campaign. Battlefield is a great game but the story is cliche. It may deliver good voice acting and good gameplay but not as interesting like other shooters. The multiplayer is the best of the package. There is going to be a large community evolving over it's multiplayer for quite a long time and the game plays well. The disappointment is the glitches that occur during the game and some missions in the single player are boring at times. The graphics though are Fantastic. The engine runs well with the sounds and visuals and is basically sometimes the reason why people buy this game. If you want a strong multiplayer then grab a copy, but if you want it for the single player experience then it is recommended to buy a game like Crysis 2 or Call of Duty because it lacks in entertainment. Expand
  26. 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.
  27. Nov 14, 2011
    7
    Having been very open minded about both this game and MW3. I've bought both games and racked up some hours on them. Neither seems to do much different from their predecessors, however isn't this what you would expect from a sequel?! My general conclusion over BF3 is that is has actually taken a step backward form BF2. Some serious updates are needed to sort out the clipping issues and aHaving been very open minded about both this game and MW3. I've bought both games and racked up some hours on them. Neither seems to do much different from their predecessors, however isn't this what you would expect from a sequel?! My general conclusion over BF3 is that is has actually taken a step backward form BF2. Some serious updates are needed to sort out the clipping issues and a few other big flaws. The overall feel of the game is fun and the epic maps are entertaining but there is just a distinct lack of satisfaction throughout the game. This is without going into the general uselessness of the planes until you have levelled them up, or the torches on everyones gun that will blind you in broad daylight if the enemy so much as looks in your general direction. I will be prepared to resubmit my opinion on this game after a few updates but until then I'm going to have to stick with the highly polished, action packed fun I get from MW3 and GoW3. MW may be a re-bake of an existing recipe but if it isn't broken, don't fix it, and straight out the box both MW and GoW deliver on every level. Expand
  28. 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
  29. Nov 20, 2011
    7
    Okay where to start. The campaign is average at best, but I don't play these games for the campaign. Multiplayer plays just like BF2 but there is now prone. Graphics are way overhyped for consoles, but from what I'm seeing online the PC graphics are extreme! I enjoy BF3 but I like playing MW3 more.
  30. Dec 7, 2011
    7
    This game has plenty of potential, but limits itself by having a poor leaderboard design (plenty of cheaters atop as well) and very few game modes. The graphics are average at best and the hit system is a bit flawed. Campaign mode is a dissapointment, but that is sadly expected at this point in this modern FPS age. The co-op mode is short on missions, but a blast to play. If you mustThis game has plenty of potential, but limits itself by having a poor leaderboard design (plenty of cheaters atop as well) and very few game modes. The graphics are average at best and the hit system is a bit flawed. Campaign mode is a dissapointment, but that is sadly expected at this point in this modern FPS age. The co-op mode is short on missions, but a blast to play. If you must choose one FPS this year go with Battlefield 3. 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.