Displaying 1–20 of 111
OK... NO... NO.. NOOOOOOOOOO stupid fanboys, no one buys battlefield for its single player, but it was included in the package and EA hyped it up to be magnificent and well lets face it it was the opposite so ofcourse xplay had to mark it down for that.. what do you expect. Its a major part of the game(or atleast was meant to be) that was not very good... so how do you expect them to give it a perfect score? God man. I own battlefield 3 and i absolutely adore it, way better multiplayer than COD... really fun. But i agree with adam 100%. EA's marketing plan was centred around a glorious single player campaign, but when it came down to it it was just dull and un-inspiring.
In the case of single player modes i believe that MW3 has a much better campign, but like many other campiagns even MW3's story is getting dull, for example(SPOILER ALERT) in MW2 basically everyone on the Task Force dies and in MW3 basically everyone on the Delta Squad dies, also there is one person they are planning on killing but on one of the last missions there is a plot twist, and you get about two more missions before you acutually kill your main target, and there are many other similarities. Even though COD has much better single player modes then Battlefield, i think Battlefield 3 dominates in the online expierience, because of thier destroyable cover, use of vehicles, realism compared to other FPS, and there contrast of maps( example: huge ellaborate maps to small building filled maps) and that is the reason i usaully play 10x more Battlefield multiplayer compared to COD. I understand that not everyone could play Battlefield 3 over COD because of various reasons, but if you have never played a Battlefield game and are looking to try their games i highly recommend you to, because they are a ton of fun
The people that get so worked up about review scores are so odd to me, don't they have a life, can't they think for themselves? If XPlay gave Skyrim a 2/5 I would still play it, and not get all emotional over it. LOL At any rate, I was looking forward to the Single player in BF 3 and now that it's a well know mass-opinion that it's not very good I'll be skipping the game, too many other great games to play.
Nobody buys these games for the singleplayer anyway. Still, I was surprised in Modern Warfare 2 how varied and fun the levels were. You could see an economizing of resources as the same level assets were reused for single and multiplayer and the game was short but that didn't bother me. It also was a game that convinced me scripted events can be worthwhile and have a place in modern games. Games like Halo 3, Gears of War and the first Crysis felt dull at times because the combat could be fun but there was nothing engaging in the story. They're like junk food compared to a game like Bloodlines which you remember and replay. Also, I like the new location / camera set-up of the show (haven't watched in awhile). I dunno if you got a new camera or it's in better focus but the Sessler model looks like it has a higher poly count.
Glitchy game... very glitchy game.
adam is that desperate loser from beavis and butthead. he was beavis.
I think the "over-the-top" factor has a lot to do with things. As new FPS's come out we instinctively, and I think reasonably, expect for the bar to be raised every time. Games deliver on that expectation, but what we are rewarded with is a campaign that is so exciting it is unrealistic and unbelievable, at least for some. I'm speaking as a military veteran, and obviously I don't expect video games to be realistic, but at the same time it's kind of sad how the CoD campaign has turned into one huge Michael Bay action scene. That said, I think what Battlefield (and Medal of Honor) was trying to give gamers was something that came closer to reality, and since most of the gaming populace wants the volume on 11 the whole time they are turned off by the more reasonable campaign. I will say that I find enjoyment in all the mainstream FPS's, the over-the-top ones and the more realistic ones, because they all have something to offer. Also multiplayer seems to be what really matters anyway.
Adam, if you are on twitter, you are basically asking crazy stalkers to send you hateful comments. o.O'
ok, first off, did ANYBODY buy BF3 for it's single player?, I wouldn't have even been mad if it hadn't had any single player, I picked it up for the MP, 64 player awesomeness. And being honest, since when have COD campaigns been any good?, maybe MW was ok, filled with as many plot holes as the bullets you fire through the storyline, but whatever, but come on, they are all scripted, linear, uninteractive campaigns, even the difficulty levels are ludicrous, so given this review, I hope they review COD likewise if they have a lackluster campaign, and well the MP is just a map pack to 2007's MW, C: Peace
TLDR version:Idiots are going to hate, the review was probably accurate, & we're all aware that the missing point was due to the single-player campaign.-------------------Don't worry about the idiots that are raging against you for not giving BF3 a 5/5. Those of us with a brain and an attention span long enough to actually watch/read the reviews you guys do understand what you were trying to say. As someone who's played both BF & COD franchises, I agree that BF's single-player experiences are a bit lackluster compared to COD, although I haven't had a chance to experience this latest iteration's campaign yet, your description of it is exactly in line with how I've been predicting it based on past experiences.With that being said, BF has always been the king of massive online shooters & this looks like the best one yet.
I thought all the haters were going to leave the site after the first time Adam upset the masses.
I'll play the MW campaign, but I hate MW multiplayer.
Really...is anyone surprised that the campaign was about as good as Medal of Honor's?...wait a minute
it's true, I found the BF3 campaign boring to watch and boring to play. NOthing like the Multiplayer, true COD has a real good blood pumping campaign same with the Multiplayer. I think that's why people love COD more cause they make both sides of the game awesome. at least to people who like it, people who hate it especially the raging angry BF3 fanboys.On the other hand that Multiplayer of BF3 is so groundfreakingly awesome can't get over it
Personally, I don't pay too much attention to the "final" score. I actually read/listen to what the reviewer has written/said and make an assumption on whether the game would be something I would enjoy playing. If they threw out the grading system all together, I would'nt lose any sleep. That would force the public to actually read and hopefully comprehend the pros/cons the reviewer is trying to make, instead of just skipping to the final score and bashing the reviewer without even giving the reviewers opinions proper consideration.
keep on trucking, adam. i haven't played bf3 yet, but i didn't expect much from the singleplayer to begin with. The bad company games have good ones because of the funny characters, but a serious, realistic warstory will never be too interesting anymore because that aspect of war has been played out time and time again. cod is successful singleplayer-wise because that over the top action hasn't gotten old. Bad company 2 did disappoint me because it did lose a lot of the humor and the lighthearted tone of the first.
adam sucks more munkey balls than g4 and g4 sucks a lot of munkey balls!
http://battlelog.battlefield.c om/bf3/forum/threadview/283265 4347728425512/ worst review done by g4tv on xplay on bf3..
battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/ forum/threadview/2832654347728 425512/ you should take look my topic..
what a poor review what they did on xplay.. http://battlelog.battlefield.c om/bf3/forum/threadview/283265 4347728425512/last/#post_28326 54347728546728
Posted: January 31, 2013
5,507 Views | 01:36
Posted: October 22, 2012
9,538 Views | 03:11
Posted: October 18, 2012
11,916 Views | 02:00
Posted: September 11, 2012
4,398 Views | 05:03
Posted: September 5, 2012
6,791 Views | 05:05
© 2012 G4 Media, LLC. All rights reserved.