Tweet
Battlefield 3 has been out for almost a week now. For many, that's ample time to experience just about everything the game has to offer. Sure, there are many unlocks that may take months of gameplay to earn, but the basic foundation of the game stays the same.
The focus of this review is on the multiplayer feature of Battlefield 3, and how BF3 compare's to its predecessor, Battlefield 2. First, lets keep in mind that this game is NOT called Battlefield Bad Company 3. And its not called Call of Duty or Modern Warfare. It is titled Battlefield 3. It is the successor to Battlefield 2.
Bad Company 2, although a fun game in of itself, was really a project released by DiCE to work on the Frostbite engine. It was not meant to be a squeal to BF2. DiCE took the knowledge they gathered from BFBC2 and applied it to the sequel.
So, after a week of playing BF3, I have many thoughts on this game. When it comes to bad news and good news, my momma always taught me to tell the bad news first, so that you end with the good news and on a good note. So, first the bad news about BF3
Maps: This is probably the biggest mistake DiCE has made. While the PC version of the game supports 64 players, most of the maps really are not. This really holds true for the urban maps, such as Operation Metro, Sienne Crossing, Grand Bazaar, and to an extent, Damavand Peak. These maps are glorified Infantry Only maps, with maybe 1-2 pieces of armor or 1 Little Bird helicopter. All of these maps have serious choke points when 32 players per side crowd onto it. Operation Metro is a very linear map, where all players are funneled through a subway system. Flanking opportunities are rare, but rockets are not! The same can be said for Damavand Peak. Sienne Crossing has turned into a mortar spamfest. On any given map, you will have 3+ players on each side sitting in their uncap and spamming the bridges and roads with unlimited mortars. This is like having unlimited non-stop artillery in BF2. NO FUN! Grand Bazaar, while fun with 16 players, is just a fragfest in the alley with 64 players.
Console port: I really believe that because this game was also made for the XBOX360 and PS3, the map designs were scaled down to accommodate. All the info coming up to the release of the game said that the PC maps will be bigger than the console maps. I have not played it on console, so maybe they are bigger on the PC. But they aren't that much bigger, because by BF2 standards, they are pretty small. And to be honest, I thought most BF2 maps were too small for jets.
Feel: Most of the time you are playing BF3, you really don't get the feeling that its a "Battlefield" game. The majority of the time, you're huffing it on foot, and looking for other infantry to kill. Hmmm, what does this sound like? Oh yea, Call of Duty. Yes, for most of the game, it does feel more like COD than it does BF3.
Interface: DiCE really messed up on several levels here. First is the HUGE chat window. Instead of putting server messages and people's constant whining at the top of the screen, or bottom or somewhere where it is not in the way, DiCE puts it in the middle of the screen. OK, OK, its not the middle, but its pretty darn close, and its HUGE!! So, if you're running and looking for enemies, and an enemy shows up to your right, you might not see him because the CHAT window is in the way. Then you see him. Too late, he saw you, because you're on his left, where the window isn't, and now you're dead. The cammo rose feature needs improvement, because right now, its pretty useless. Spotting is also flaky. Sometimes you will press Q to spot someone, and it will accidentally fire your gun giving your position away. Sometimes it doesn't spot at all. Jeeps don't have horns. There is no VOIP in game. You have to add people into your friends list outside of the game, then join a party, so that you can voice chat.
Some things never change: All that above being said, some things never change. In an effort to make sure that BF doesn't turn into a rocket fest, explosive weapons do very little realistic damage to infantry. I cannot count the number of times a rocket has exploded on the ground in front of a soldier, only for him to run through that explosion. This same explosion has just destroyed stone walls, and obliterated vehicles, and may have even caused buildings to topple. But it barely hurts a 200lb soldier. I really don't know the solution here, but it seems very odd.
Now to the Good News:
Graphics: This game is head and shoulders above BF2, as it should be. DirectX 11 really flexes its muscles in this game. Explosions look and sound better. Trees can finally be destroyed. No more iron leaves that take down jets like a ginsu knife! A lot of things can be destroyed, and at the end of maps, it truly does look like a battle took place. Since there is no more "fog of war", you can see as far and your monitor will allow you. You litterally can see a soldier from 1000m away. And if you're a good enough sniper, you can shoot him from there too.
Large Maps: The two large maps in the game, Caspian Border, and Operation Firestorm, are the only saving graces in this game so far. They are the only maps that give the game a Battlefield feel. Yes, both of them have clustered flags in the center of the map, and both of them are probably only half the size of an average BF2 map. But at least they have all the vehicles needed. Often, you can take a flag, a tank will spawn, and you have a tank brigade rolling into the next map. This can be a lot of fun.
Unlocks: Some of the unlocks you get can be a lot of fun. Hiding in your uncap and using your EOD BOT to drive around and kill people can give you many many giggles. Hiding mines in good locations gives the same effect. Some weapons you get as unlocks on the vehicles also improve game play.
Summary
Overall, on the maps that feel like Battlefield, the game can be a lot of fun. I find myself playing a lot of Caspian Border. I avoid the urban maps as much as possible. I also have found that if you don't have a lot of skill, like myself, getting points on 64 player maps is pretty darn hard. On the larger maps, I may average 800 points per round. That's pretty bad and makes it hard to level up. To get more points and rank, joining 16 or 24 player servers is more fun. The urban maps are more enjoyable at 8-12 people per side.
With this game still being young, I hope it can be improved. It is still fun to play, but not what I hoped it would be. I like the graphics and sound, but the gameplay is disappointing.
The focus of this review is on the multiplayer feature of Battlefield 3, and how BF3 compare's to its predecessor, Battlefield 2. First, lets keep in mind that this game is NOT called Battlefield Bad Company 3. And its not called Call of Duty or Modern Warfare. It is titled Battlefield 3. It is the successor to Battlefield 2.
Bad Company 2, although a fun game in of itself, was really a project released by DiCE to work on the Frostbite engine. It was not meant to be a squeal to BF2. DiCE took the knowledge they gathered from BFBC2 and applied it to the sequel.
So, after a week of playing BF3, I have many thoughts on this game. When it comes to bad news and good news, my momma always taught me to tell the bad news first, so that you end with the good news and on a good note. So, first the bad news about BF3
Maps: This is probably the biggest mistake DiCE has made. While the PC version of the game supports 64 players, most of the maps really are not. This really holds true for the urban maps, such as Operation Metro, Sienne Crossing, Grand Bazaar, and to an extent, Damavand Peak. These maps are glorified Infantry Only maps, with maybe 1-2 pieces of armor or 1 Little Bird helicopter. All of these maps have serious choke points when 32 players per side crowd onto it. Operation Metro is a very linear map, where all players are funneled through a subway system. Flanking opportunities are rare, but rockets are not! The same can be said for Damavand Peak. Sienne Crossing has turned into a mortar spamfest. On any given map, you will have 3+ players on each side sitting in their uncap and spamming the bridges and roads with unlimited mortars. This is like having unlimited non-stop artillery in BF2. NO FUN! Grand Bazaar, while fun with 16 players, is just a fragfest in the alley with 64 players.
Console port: I really believe that because this game was also made for the XBOX360 and PS3, the map designs were scaled down to accommodate. All the info coming up to the release of the game said that the PC maps will be bigger than the console maps. I have not played it on console, so maybe they are bigger on the PC. But they aren't that much bigger, because by BF2 standards, they are pretty small. And to be honest, I thought most BF2 maps were too small for jets.
Feel: Most of the time you are playing BF3, you really don't get the feeling that its a "Battlefield" game. The majority of the time, you're huffing it on foot, and looking for other infantry to kill. Hmmm, what does this sound like? Oh yea, Call of Duty. Yes, for most of the game, it does feel more like COD than it does BF3.
Interface: DiCE really messed up on several levels here. First is the HUGE chat window. Instead of putting server messages and people's constant whining at the top of the screen, or bottom or somewhere where it is not in the way, DiCE puts it in the middle of the screen. OK, OK, its not the middle, but its pretty darn close, and its HUGE!! So, if you're running and looking for enemies, and an enemy shows up to your right, you might not see him because the CHAT window is in the way. Then you see him. Too late, he saw you, because you're on his left, where the window isn't, and now you're dead. The cammo rose feature needs improvement, because right now, its pretty useless. Spotting is also flaky. Sometimes you will press Q to spot someone, and it will accidentally fire your gun giving your position away. Sometimes it doesn't spot at all. Jeeps don't have horns. There is no VOIP in game. You have to add people into your friends list outside of the game, then join a party, so that you can voice chat.
Some things never change: All that above being said, some things never change. In an effort to make sure that BF doesn't turn into a rocket fest, explosive weapons do very little realistic damage to infantry. I cannot count the number of times a rocket has exploded on the ground in front of a soldier, only for him to run through that explosion. This same explosion has just destroyed stone walls, and obliterated vehicles, and may have even caused buildings to topple. But it barely hurts a 200lb soldier. I really don't know the solution here, but it seems very odd.
Now to the Good News:
Graphics: This game is head and shoulders above BF2, as it should be. DirectX 11 really flexes its muscles in this game. Explosions look and sound better. Trees can finally be destroyed. No more iron leaves that take down jets like a ginsu knife! A lot of things can be destroyed, and at the end of maps, it truly does look like a battle took place. Since there is no more "fog of war", you can see as far and your monitor will allow you. You litterally can see a soldier from 1000m away. And if you're a good enough sniper, you can shoot him from there too.
Large Maps: The two large maps in the game, Caspian Border, and Operation Firestorm, are the only saving graces in this game so far. They are the only maps that give the game a Battlefield feel. Yes, both of them have clustered flags in the center of the map, and both of them are probably only half the size of an average BF2 map. But at least they have all the vehicles needed. Often, you can take a flag, a tank will spawn, and you have a tank brigade rolling into the next map. This can be a lot of fun.
Unlocks: Some of the unlocks you get can be a lot of fun. Hiding in your uncap and using your EOD BOT to drive around and kill people can give you many many giggles. Hiding mines in good locations gives the same effect. Some weapons you get as unlocks on the vehicles also improve game play.
Summary
Overall, on the maps that feel like Battlefield, the game can be a lot of fun. I find myself playing a lot of Caspian Border. I avoid the urban maps as much as possible. I also have found that if you don't have a lot of skill, like myself, getting points on 64 player maps is pretty darn hard. On the larger maps, I may average 800 points per round. That's pretty bad and makes it hard to level up. To get more points and rank, joining 16 or 24 player servers is more fun. The urban maps are more enjoyable at 8-12 people per side.
With this game still being young, I hope it can be improved. It is still fun to play, but not what I hoped it would be. I like the graphics and sound, but the gameplay is disappointing.
Comment