User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 4503 Ratings

User score distribution:

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 21, 2014
    This game was a 9.5/10, but that was is 2013. Only get this game if you want to play Conquest on the stock maps, there are hardly any servers actually running this game.
  2. Sep 23, 2014
    This game is horrible on PC and full of stupid bugs that do not make any kind of sense. I have never been so frustrated on any single player campaign on my life. I also have the game on my Xbox 360 and guess what, there are no bugs and even if the graphics are not so good on Xbox the playability and everything else works better console. I have heard a lot from PC gamers so I decided to test the game also on PC and what do I get?

    Here is small list why this game sucks on PC; Glitches that prevent you from opening door or some NPC can’t boost you over a wall because next waypoint does not trigger for some reason. NPCs can and will go through objects and leave you in locked room with no way out so you need to reset to last checkpoint in order to get out of the room. Enemy NPCs have sometimes aimbot directed only to you and none of them are shooting at other NPCs. Even the game interface sucks because you need to have a certain web browser installed that you can install a plugin to it so you can access EA website and you will have to create account or use your old one even to play single player. This kind of DRM is why I hate EA.

    At least on Xbox version you have a main menu and you can play single player without any kind of delays and stupid browser add-ons. Also on Xbox the multiplayer accessibility is much easier. This leaves me to wonder why PC players get second rate product compared to console players.

    There are only two things that PC version has that Xbox version lacks. Better graphics and ability to use keyboard and mouse that’s all.
  3. Aug 16, 2014
    I cannot seem to recall a worse single player experience, ever.
    It's a claustrophobic experience where you are denied any choices of your own. The entire game is like an cinematic scripted event.
    If you even at all think for yourself, you're punished. You're not allowed to explore the map, if you kill enemies in any other order than the script wanted you to, they'll respawn. If you try
    clearing a mission differently or walk ahead for the same destination, it won't work.

    This review does not include any opinions on multiplayer. But I'm guessing the game would have been better off as multiplayer only.
  4. Jun 13, 2014
    I seldom give a ugly 0 to any game indeed, but I have to give BF3 a 0 because I really can't start a game properly. Internet in Australia is metered, and I spent 21GB of data to download this game. Fair enough, I got it for free. I can't help my thrilling to start the game, and it opened a browser window? Battlelog? WTF? Oops looks like they think start the game with browser is cool, although I can't agree with them. I started to get annoyed when the game asks you to install a plugin for browser. And I can't start a game. The game simply crashed. I asked my friend they said it's pretty common and they encountered different error message so just try logging in for another some time. Alright alright fair enough fair enough. But the problem resisted. I tried searching for remedy for this issue, and they said battlefield 3 has some compatibility issue with operating systems whose system locale are not in English. I switched my "language in non-Unicode software" to English. Although it caused some troubles but so far so good, I logged into the game! Hooray! Then I tried to queue for multiplayer, and I got kicked for some "PunkBuster" issue? The game asked me to go to a site called evenbalance to update my PunkBuster, I bloodily just installed my copy today and you asked me to go to a site whose design is like in mid-90s and manually update this bloody malware-like stuff which was released on 2012? Fine, fine. Even it's like 10 steps to update this stuff I still proceeded with great effort and humblest patience, with several restarts and file-copying. And PunkBuster itself crashed constantly with a dialog with a lot of question marks which is totally unreadable. I just couldn't bear so I gave it up. Maybe if I didn't get it for free I'll try harder to tackle these problems. I am totally surprised for the amount of bugs it contains even it has already been released for 3 years, EA still hasn't fixed them. Although SimCity for which I paid $60 was a nightmare, BF3 seems has a reasonably higher critic score. But I spend like 3 hours trying to start playing but I can't. I didn't get this game for training my skills to find solutions to various bugs. Goodbye EA I wouldn't buy anything from you in the future and good luck. Expand
  5. Jun 1, 2014
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. My Rectum was bleeding after playing solid 70000000000000000 hours of BlattleFlied 3 and then my pengois got hard and i came,TITIES TITIES TITIES ASS ADD **** Expand
  6. May 22, 2014
    Delete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my reviewDelete my review
  7. Feb 22, 2014
    One of the most over hyped and over liked games ever made! People are so blind to see how many problems this games has TDM spawns are almost 100% broken Story is short and horrible There are so so many glitch's that have not been fixed since the game was in BETA! Maps like metro and canals are beyond broken and about the guns? well just use the m16 it is the MOST OVER POWERED gun in the game and on top of that ITS THE MOST OVER USED gun in the game even people that are level 100 are using this gun with it being the number one gun they use! It takes zero skill to use!
    also claymores are almost 100% useless because they don't go off when people run over them
    and hit detection was fine for some time but if you try to play now LOL good luck
    and don't forget those times where you die in cover almost 5 seconds after you hear gun fire oh and spawning in the enemy spawns (Like 2 feet away from 30 enemy's mostly happens in tdm)
    Only a fanboy would defend a game like this or some one whos never played a battlefield game before bf3 and if you want a EVEN WORSE GAME BY LIKE 30% go play battlefield 4!
  8. Feb 15, 2014
    This game is too buggy. There are still many people like me can't even start the game or crash pretty easily after some updates. We are not buying a game to "fix" it or keep finding solutions on the Internet.
  9. Feb 9, 2014
    This is a review of the singleplayer and co-op only. Both modes are absolutely terrible. Coop is short and none of the missions are fun at all, to add to the pain they completely lack checkpoints and, like the main campaign, have quick time events. So, if you miss a quick time event at the end of a level, you have to start it all over again. The sniper mission is particularly bad. The singleplayer story is contrived and nonsensical. I had no idea what was going on and honestly I didn't give a damn. None of the missions were any fun. Even the tank mission was quite boring. It's filled up scripted events and other CoD bull crap. I didn't bother playing the multiplayer since it's yet another modern themed shooter and I have way too many of those to begin with. Pass on this garbage. Expand
  10. Feb 9, 2014
    Why so people are confident that Battlefield 3 is the best multiplayer shooter?Why?

    From all other multiplayer projects it is largely different, I do not argue, but to call it the best multiplayer shooter is overkill.What does it do this? Battlelog terrible,balance commands zero,terrible suppression system.Behavior terrible weapons, particularly no damage,graphics oiled soap.Why this
    game is a game to be the best? I'm not understanding.

    As well there is the single player campaign, which has a good sense of presence, but that its pros zakanchivayutsya.Syuzhet Pressed again Russian bad, Americans are saving again all gameplay zero-shooting stupid stupid bots, diluted scripted scenes

    Conclusion: Do not buy because you do not get fun playing it, it's better to leave something useful.
  11. Jan 25, 2014
    Launching a game from a browser with special plugins is beyond ridiculous. First EA makes you install Origin because they refuse to use the way superior Steam, but then their own DRM doesn't seem enough so they have to add yet another DRM? Can't play when EA's servers act up again.

    Sabotaging your own modding community to sell more absurdly expensive and content-lacking DLCs is in poor

    Everything needs to be unlocked, casual gaming is incredibly boring.

    The campaign is mediocre at best. The storyline is absurd, the quick time events misplaced and annoying, the close combat is staged and the enemy doesn't seem to do anything else than run wave after wave in my sights. The dogfighting was repetitive and not exciting at all.

    Only good thing I can name are the sound effects, they are absolutely incredible. Most realistic gunshots I've heard in a game.

    All in all, they should have stopped at 2.
  12. Nov 18, 2013
    Nothing of this game is good. The story is written so poorly, with a cut scene every five minutes. This game is filled with Quick Time events, and even if you fail the quick time event your buddy will come and save you. The game is so easy, I died only once, due to unfair enemies just to make the game seem harder. The voice acting is poor. I feel like I am playing a dumbed down version of Call of Duty Modern Warfare, yeah, I said it! The story is the same as all First Person hand Holders, bad people kill people so we have to kill them. I feel as if I am controlling a robot, this game feels like I am incapable of doing anything myself and has to hold my hand. This game is so short, it is sad. I could spend more time in the first level of Deus Ex than playing this entire game. They pad this just to make it longer. AI characters have to follow you everywhere, treating you like a child! They have to open doors for you! The enemy AI is even worse, walking into your gun fire.
    There is a mission that makes you think you are going to fly a jet, but it is just on rails shooter! Not a good one either. I got so board after five seconds of this piece of crap! I am so offended by this game, why did I spend money on? I want to destroy this game.
    I feel like my computer is about to shoot itself for me just playing this game.
    The shooting just sucks, there is no power to the weapons. All of the weapons are the same, they all fire the same, take the same time to reload, the same amount of ammo to kill an enemy. They all sound as if a cat is sneezing.
    There is regenerating health, are you a star fish x10000 or something?
    Your AI partners are so incapable of killing anyone, I don't even want them there! All they are doing there is just to further the story.
    This game has none of the wakey over-the-top stuff from Call of Duty. Most of the time in this game you are ducked behind cover because the enemy AI shoot a never ending stream of bullets at you. Not that it matters because you are a starfish x10000.
    I feel this game is a step back in human evolution. Yeah the reverse of the Theory of Evolution.

    I know a bunch of fan boys will say "Oh this game is for the multiplayer that is what it is the multiplayer is good it is good play the multiplayer it is good"
    I played the multiplayer, it sucks. It is the normal multiplayer of this generation of First Person Hand Holders. You start with a load out. One thing I can say is load outs suck! Play Half Life's multiplayer where you have to pick up weapons on the map, and if you die you start with a pistol. Load outs make it so you don't have to look around the map. It also gives higher level players an advantage over others because the have better equipment. The whole leveling system sucks anyway I wish games would take it out. They should take a Que from Halo which had a good multiplayer (For this gen)with no load outs!
    It is the same thing over and over, you die, respawn, you kill someone, die, respawn, die, respawn, you kill someone, die, respawn, kill someone, die, respawn, die, respawn, die.

    I think this game should be renamed 3"
  13. Nov 4, 2013
    Disappointing and falsely advertised. Typical EA.
    Most features which DICE talked about aren't even in the game.
    A huge step backwards from Battlefield 2 in every way.
  14. Oct 27, 2013
    If you enjoy playing with 63 snipers per game, you should buy this game.

    Snipers are extremely overpowered, and no one plays anything else than sniper.
  15. atd
    Oct 11, 2013
    Well DICE is on the wrong horse: called EA The Winner of the worst company trophy in the past 4 years in the row! The game is all about milking the customers! DICE wants your money or the game, but not your feedback's or criticism! On ''Battlelog froum'' DICE continuously censorship`s most of the negative comments just pathetic! - the worse hit detection ever - poor net-code
    - Visual glitches
    - Poor Map designs
    - Cheaters
    - Hackers
    - nubs
  16. Oct 2, 2013
    Finally decided to play the game to see if its any good, well its not. I got a game breaking bug and had to download a savegame to get past it. (airfield bug, you can find it on youtube easy). The game also has audio problems. Missions are annoying at best, you get bounced around different characters and in the end don't know who you are or what's going on any more. If it weren't for the bug that breaks the game I would of given it an average score instead of 0. (there are far worse games out there). Expand
  17. Sep 15, 2013
    Making a lengthy comment about what exactly sucks in this game would be a pure waste of time so I will make it short. Battlefield 3 is all about visuals and forgetting the most important thing in an FPS game netcode and hit detection. Sure, other online FPS games have their share of problems when it comes to hit detection but never in my twenty five years of gaming have I seen such poor implementation of it. You will get one-shotted by a shotgun from 100+ meters away which is a huge stretch even for buck ammo and loose a chest to chest fire fight with an MG against a 9mm gun. You will also experience sudden deaths even a second or two after you've reached safe cover because the client-side hit detection system does a poor job of synchronizing what happens on both players sides the one that is shooting and the one that takes cover. How can anyone expect to play a fast action game like an FPS when what I am seeing is not what the other guy sees?

    If it wasn't for this huge problem Battlefield 3 would probably get a score around 8/10 or even 9/10 but when you screw up such an important thing like hit detection in a game that is primarily meant to be played in multiplayer... Well.. 3/10 for me.
  18. Sep 8, 2013
    I have BOUGHT Battlefield 3, and have possibly been able to play it for a few hours in the last few months, entirely due to the utterly frustrating and completely useless "Origin" program that controls it. For those that don't know, Origin is the equivalent to Steam, except, instead of managing your playing stats and launching the game for you, it keeps opening a website which requires you to log in, in order to play the game. However, only twice in the possibly 2 dozen times I've tried to play the game that I BOUGHT, has Origin actually allowed me to play the game. Otherwise, it either tells me I need to install the game, or simply farms me to another login window, despite me ticking the box to remember me. The only thing that I am guaranteed to see every time I TRY to play the game, is advertising for Battlefield 4, which I will clearly never buy since I have not been able to get any reasonable time in for Battlefield 3 that I PAID for. Which is why I am writing this review, to warn everyone that this is most likely going to be a frustrating experience. If you don't believe me, read many thousands of other reviews in Google about Origin. Expand
  19. Aug 23, 2013
    Probably the most unplayable game EVER. Origin is the biggest pain in the az I have ever seen experienced. Everything bugs out. Why would they use a browser for matchmaking? The browser is something personalized, you can't be a sane programmer and expect to write a matchmaking system that runs inside a browser and works on every browser when you require external plugins!!! Either make a plain HTML5 matchmaker that runs in a custom browser (something like steam's browser) or stay away from my own browser. I'm not going to change the configuration of MY BROWSER to play a effing game.

    Bugs in the keybinding setup, random crashes, doesn't run fullscreen because you are running teamviewer in the background, bugs in the CO-OP matchmaking, friend's list in origin and inside the website doesn't sync properly. TERRIBLE IN EVERY POSSIBLE WAY.
  20. Aug 11, 2013
    I've already posted a review, but I'll get more in depth.
    Battlefield 3 multiplayer... Everybody that likes it, has never played Bad Company 2. The big maps, the destruction, the good community, the INCREDIBLE good expension pack are all gone in BF3. DICE did not include these things in their new game. Battlefield is known for the big maps, destruction and all those things, but since it's
    not included in BF3, it's changes the gameplay in a negative way.

    Single player... Most boring experience ever. I have NOTHING goods to say about it. The campaign was way too scripted, you can't even use a vehicle besides a tank in the most boring mission of the whole campaign, and a jet that you can't fully control.

    Graphics... How do people say that this is the best looking game ever? It's NOT. There are much better looking games out there, even more underrated once, even released in 2011.

    Co-op... The sniping mission was the only one I enjoyed. The other once were just running and shooting with scripted events.

    Origin & Battlelog.. Origin is the worst copy of Steam EVER. EA is talking about how popular Origin is, but they are just forcing us to use it, since their games are not on steam anymore.
    Battlelog is just stupid and annoying.

    DLC's... B2K were just old maps, so nothing to talk about. CQ shows how Close Quarters should be, to transfer CoD players to Battlefield. Which destroys the community. Battleflield 3 was released with Close Quarter maps, so everyone who expected the same kind of maps like OP Metro, Grand Bazaar, Seine Crossing, will be disappointed. Armored kill has large maps, but the Gunships just kills the fun in Rush and Conquest, that's why it's almost never played so it's a ghost town. Aftermath is fun with a fun new game mode, but it's not a real expansion like Vietnam. But it's acceptable anyway. End Game has an unoriginal game mode called Capture the Flag. Because there are ALWAYS people with helis killing people from the other team from their base, it's just kills the fun again. The only good expension was Aftermath.

    When the game was first released, it was just a bad game. Aftermath doesn't change that. Aftermath was good, but not good enough to give a whole new experience, unlike Vietnam did with BC2. Aftermath is basicly the only positive thing I can say about Battlefield 3. The gun sounds are good, but that's a little thing that don't change anything about the gameplay. A nice 0/10 for Battlefield 3. Biggest fail of 2011.
  21. Jul 28, 2013
    Requires to run through browser which uses up RAM and CPU power. This could have been avoided, but they wanted all the security. It is very glitchy, laggy, and single player is does not exist (I don't know what that thing they call single player is). This game also contains nothing new compared to the previous ones, instead it removes things that were great such as a commander. Stay away from this game it is not worth the cost. Expand
  22. Jun 30, 2013
    Getting Stuck on Rocks: The Game
    Tanks Slowed Down By Hills: The Game

    No single player
    Childish server admins
    3rd world trash hackers ruining your experience
    Hyper Stacked servers with no balance
    ZERO new-player friendly servers.
  23. Jun 30, 2013
    It makes me cry. Such a good franchise, just milked by EA. BFBC2 was already something different from the BF series, well that was ok, because it was a spin off.
    But BF3, which is the original sequel to BF2, is just rubbish. Well ok, you can have fun like in Call of Duty, shooting people mindlessly.
    So the good facts: Graphics, yes, those graphics are good, which makes a 8/10, why?
    Because of those unnatural effects.
    Destruction, It is scripted and nothing new, but anyways it is one plus point.
    Sounds, they are the best in the game.
    But all that "atmosphere" doesn't count as much as gameplay.
    Bad things: Gameplay: Compared to the other Battlefields in the series, its gameplay is the worst. It is really like Call of Duty, just with recoil and vehicles. But well. Far too dynamic, HP regeneration. Only positive thing is the destruction.
    Marketing: Yes, I count the marketing, sell price etc. as something important, so it will get a score of 0 out of 10, because of these DLCs, and the Ripoff Premium Version. (110€)

    I know many will hate me, but I wanted to give this game a chance, give it a 3 at least. But nope. DLCs is one minus, the another minus is just for the balance here, because everyone is rating it 10, without real reason.
    1/10 from me.
  24. Jun 23, 2013
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. After being disgusted with Bad Company 2. I was very dissapointed with Battlefield 3 and the way the Battlefield franchise is going. Just so you fanboys can flag this and leave here's a summary:

    +Good Graphics and Sounds
    -Bad SP storyline
    -dull gameplay
    -Rent a Server
    -MP not staying true to the series
    -Overall Fanbase

    Let me say that the graphics are at it's best, though I had a problem running it on high, I was still immensly satisfied with the looks of the game. But good graphics don't make or break a game. The single player campaign is a bland storyline where you play as a marine in custody in New York as your main character. The story is flashbacks of his recent career as a marine with every generic thing we've seen in a Modern Military FPS: Nukes and Russians. The story of blackburn is really taken from Call of Duty: Black Ops and every major moment in the game is inspired from a Call of Duty Game.

    The Co-op was very enjoyable with a friend, though very short. Each mission requires much teamwork and strategy. You play through a series of 6 missions each requiring you do different things from different milliaries.

    The multiplayer was very dissapointing, many glitches and hackers can be found. Teamkillers and trollers are often always present. And when they aren't, you can often be expected to be spawn-killed and quickscoped. The health system is terrible. If you stand 100m away, you can spray a full clip into your enemy and he will survive. If you stand 50m from your enemy, we will die with 2 bullets to the legs. Very unrealistic and just flat out bad hit detection. Though weapon balancing is okay, many players will hide in front of walls so their legs can be hidden in the walls, very easy to solve but DICE doesn't have any attention to solve it.

    In conclusion, if you're a long time fan of the Battlefield Franchise, you will be very dissapointed with this game. DICE has made the game to attract casual audiences to attempt to make a "Call of Duty Killer" which is very dissapointing considering Battlefield was very good in it's own way before BC2.
  25. Jun 22, 2013
    Absolutely pathetic, bought the game and it literally took a whole week to download from origin. Their content servers are insanely slow. By the time it was finished, I couldn't launch the game. Verify download and it downloaded and extra 2 gb that took another day. It was finally finished, I ran the game and it was initializing forever. It didn't work. It took ages until I found a fix where I had to manually edit registry and remove the TM from file name (wtf right?). The game finally worked. What's worse than origin is the 'battlelog' interface which is nothing more than a website half covered with ads. To launch the game you have to go through a web interface (pathetic). It doesn't even show server pings for me (known issue for a lot of people). Most of the time I try to play coop with my friend it says no friends found online. Overall, the actual game is good but I can't get past the terrible interface and the glitches. Expand
  26. Jun 4, 2013
    Terribly linear single player, multiplayer horribly optimized and quick match making is awful, I would rather play the older BF series than this hunk of crap.
  27. May 27, 2013
    The game itself is decent, but the online servers that they use to run the game is very poor. A lot of times, you try to log in to play and you get all kinds of errors, and there is never any information or help. Until they fix these problems, buyer beware. Expect to be frustrated.
  28. May 19, 2013
    Save money, this game is a disgrace to battlefield. You will spend half the time wondering how the hell did that drop you in 3 rounds when you literally just spent half a mag on some retard only to find out you did 42 damage on an assist because of client side lag. Look at user score, and critic score, it is obvious the critics got paid.
  29. Ndi
    May 6, 2013
    When I first picked up BF3, I was pretty amazed. Dynamic campaign, starts off strong, with a few linear stuff to show off, the throws you into jet, tank, on foot, plenty of weapons, and with a decent framerate. Wow, I thought, where have you been all my life?

    But then it started to show how much they really put into it. It's a bad port. Controls revert to defaults mid game, in
    cutscenes, in quick time events. I HATE quick events. HATE!!! When I mapped my keys to arrows, right shift, right control and mouse and you ask me to quickly press "E", I am going to miss it. Again. And again, And again.

    Here's the thing. If you make me mash the keyboard in anger, you are not a fun game. Period. I don't care you threw in a SP just to make a dent. If you wouldn't have, I would never have picked it up. I want single player to see the game, then, if all is right, I go on multiplayer. And SP is a disappointment. Unfinished story, annoying characters, tons of names, what is this? I died 4 times in the story. Who am I? Why am I fighting? Am I Miller? Jim? Bob? Jim-Bob? I'm Jim-Bob, aren't I? Dear God, I'm Jim-Bob.

    The Russian guy said to shoot the other guy and all I thought was "Ok. Who's he?" Then other people start screaming. "Go left". Who are they? Seriously, I need a notepad to keep up. Also, they give bad advice. I died doing what they said. Also, what is this "left mission area" stuff? You sent me to flank and the side of the road is off-limits? What am I, 7 again? I'm not allowed to the end of the driveway?

    By the last mission, I died 3 times. In the last mission, I died maybe 20 times. Poor scripting, poor controls, someone simply could not be bothered to finish it.

    And I don't agree that you are a multiplayer game so I should eat the SP and shut up. You used that as a selling point and now it sucks. If you serve me a nice steak with moldy potatoes, I'm sending it back. I don't care the steak is the selling point.

    I guess multiplayer is OK,which is why it gets a "barely" score. 8 for the MP, 5 for the SP, and a big fat zero for not taking the time to make sure CONTROLS WORK in a game.

    Seriously, game has been out a year and a half. I STILL have to go to the forums to find a way to pass a 4 hour campaign. Can anything be any more of a middle finger to me giving you my money?
  30. Apr 22, 2013
    Horrible singleplayer and coming to the game at this stage the dlc and additional "catch up" packs that have to be paid for mean that to stand any chance at all in current multiplayer games you have to spend at least another 30 F(*&ing way i'm paying extra just to play on a level playing field, GJ EA...FU
  31. Apr 19, 2013
    Terrible game. horrible balence of kits, assualt is op, engineer sucks, "support" is for metro camping and recon is underpowered. Game stutters and runs choppy on my gtx 660ti on ultra. Even with over 60fps, not optimised very good. Every time i play this game i just get angry, the people who play this game also make me sick, total fanboys. And half of them cheat. Your better off buying arma if you want a "teamwork based game" there is no teamwork in this game, the pc version has no in game voice chat, and you have to play on servers that ban you if you speak bad langauge, use a certain gun, or just find a glitch in the map or just be good at the game, admins will ban you at will becuase its "their server" childish game. Dont buy into the whole "its better than cod" cod is better and funner, this game is bland and will get you bored after just a couple of weeks like i did. Expand
  32. Apr 13, 2013
    At the moment this game has tons of cheaters everywhere. But this is not as big problems as the game itself. This game is imagine Call of Duty with vehicles.... Yes... This game is nothing more then that.
    Maps are total They are way too small. Bunnyhoppers everywhere. THis is NOT BATTLEFIELD.
    NO TACTICAL FIGHTING NOT TEAMWORK. Just like COD, brainless spraying and jumping

    The only positive thing i have to say about this game is the engine, graphics and sound. The rest is utter
  33. Mar 27, 2013
    Multiplayer is boring and rife with wallhacks and aimbots. Single player is basically a movie you get to participate in occasionally. I got it for free as a bonus for another purchase, so I guess I didn't waste anything but my time. I might play the upcoming BF for free!
  34. Mar 19, 2013
    Looks beautiful, but gameplay is not very well thought trough. It allows teams with squads supported by voice communication and superior unlocks simply steamroll the team with random players. No effective autobalancing, no voice chat for the random team... simply turns them into sheep for slaughter for the sake of several people's fun. Also cheap fun... cause winning against team who struggle to do even smallest of cooperation is hardly fun... its as fun as winning tennis match against blindfolded opponent. Also the overnerfs of stuff in this game making it only cosmetic (like the new plane AC130 or something like that... overnerfed main gun is as strong as throwing pebbles from very far on the vertical move on moving targets instead of making the plance a monster above battlefield even if only for a while now and then; or the snipers halogens mounted on scopes). But the poor autobalancing is the main thing that kills the game for any non-hardcore player that is playing with "clan". Expand
  35. Mar 7, 2013
    This game can deliver some great moments particularly in multiplayer. Graphics are fantastic also. The thing that lets it down is the client side collision detection, which makes things a lot more of a lottery than they should be. Ducking behind a wall only to die afterwards just creates a sense of dissatisfaction that is hard to work with.
  36. Mar 6, 2013
    Should be renamed to call of field bad company 3.
    Plays nothing like the pre- bad company battlefields.
    Trying too hard to make itself look serious by attracting casual audience from call of duty.
  37. Feb 27, 2013
    The single player is so bad its a disgrace, some of scenarios are just so poorly scripted that you want to cry. I deeply regret buying this game and supporting such a miserable piece of work.
  38. Feb 19, 2013
    That is not game at all, that's a trademark, a beautifully wrapped piece of s**t, a game with zero fun. There is no difference between beta version and finished game over year after release. Same bugs, same little glitches. Feels like developers only cares about sellings. Players? F**k them they are just wallets, they already bought game and will buy all 5 stupid dlc's for price of full game. Total destruction? Hell no, only holes in some walls. No campers? Lol, this game is about camping, campers are everywhere. Disgusting SP and Co-op. "LOOK! THERE IS WAVE OF ENEMIES! KILL THEM ALL FROM YOUR CAMPING PLACE!" or "SHOOT BY CLICKING ONE BUTTON FROM THE HELICOPTER/JET As always on metacritic, rating was bought and only user score is almost correct. It must be 5 or 6. P.S. Fu*k EA for stupid buggy battlelog and origin. i would never buy EA games again and will distribute pirated version of EA games Expand
  39. Feb 16, 2013
    Great graphics. However, this game isn't as great as its the earlier battlefield series. The game was changed many ways to attract COD players. Teamwork is missing. Simply a huge letdown for battllefield fans.
  40. Jan 31, 2013
    What"going casual" means: to refocus from enjoying the challenge and competition of a game to unlocking items and gaining [redundant] levels in the form of "ranks"; neither are tangible, but only one brings me back, again and again.

    I don't even know why you'd change a game so, did they think it'd be capable of competing with Call of Duty? Terrible.
  41. Jan 21, 2013
    EA last purchase for me. They've completely killed the team play, cooperation and epic battles for which the battlefield series are known, and put great graphics for all the COD kids to be happy with. No commander? No general orders? No voice in-game? Cya EA.
  42. Jan 13, 2013
    I want to like this game, I really do, but there is ONE thing that keeps that from happening: I can not play it on my computer because I use an Intel HD graphics card. It says it can run at around a medium-high setting, but it lags horribly, even with the graphics settings as low as they can be. Sure, most games don't recognize the card, but they still run very well when I adjust the settings to what the card can do. The last time a game lagged like this it was because of dust getting on the card. You could have a card+processor that can run Total War: Shogun 2, but if it's Intel, you will have 3 FPS on low settings. While looking at the ground. Expand
  43. Jan 13, 2013
    One year+ after release, ZERO true bugs have been fixed. This is one "AAA" game that hasn't provided any true support. They only provide "balance adjustments" which means, they play with numbers on a .txt file for half an hour with their coffee. Since the release, the entire team moved onto BF4 and fast-made DLCs. As a result, many people paid over 100$ on average. DICE's PR guy said, "this is business" but he meant between DICE and investors. He mentioned nothing about the customers who don't receive any support, but they do receive an unpolished product. Haven't the gamers had enough already? This is how gamers lost the "right" for a properly released game, long time ago. Now, we're gonna lose the right even for after-sale support. They just release games with hundreds of bugs and glitches, and nothing is going on! I won't even mention about the horrible Single Player part of the game. Generally unacceptable and hence the negative rating. I'm trying to objective and wish the best for us, the gamers. I didn't pay for "premium" cause I thought, that way I'd support their model. Expand
  44. Jan 4, 2013
    This game is terrible,one of the most regretted purchase i've ever made in my life,let's start with pros:Beautiful graphic,gun attachments,many guns and that's all. Cons:Unplayable bugs,memory leak,laggers. BF3 is just pure unplayable,its gameplay is bad as call of duty,campers are everywhere camping the base with a barrett,a very frustrating bug would be another bullets never registering laggers,yet 2 bullets could kill you. And worst of the all is that the game is unplayable itself because of the random CTDs,not only it has extremely high CPU,it lag spikes really bad and even CTD. Save your money on that game. Expand
  45. Dec 28, 2012
    For the amount of money you spend on the game, one would expect it to work. I have spent more time figuring out bugs rather than playing it. They should advertise it as an online multiplayer game because it certainly isn't a singleplayer game. My experience with BF3 leaves me only to say, this game sucks.
  46. Dec 24, 2012
    Эта игра явно показывает,что современным игрокам кроме графики ничего не нужно,никакого сюжета и геймплея,просто очередной распиаренный продукт,каких много. Expand
  47. Dec 17, 2012
    I preordered this game hoping to get teamwork. It felt balanced to me and I played this happily with my friends. Then DICE started patching this game and it has gotten worse ever since. They claim that they fix stuff that they dont fix. Sometimes Í fall from 2 meters and die, other times I can jump from the third story and survive. Then they did the complete overhaul making every weapon behave differently than I had gotten used to. The release of Premium made me quit playing all together after playing about 400 hours. DICE screwed me over by telling me it was developed for the PC first, even though it was not. It does not have ingame VOIP, no dedicated servers, and no moddability. Last I heard they where going to release a patch to remove the blue tint, but they canceled it. If the game would have been developed for the PC it would have been the best BF to date, and I would probably still play it. Expand
  48. Dec 5, 2012
    Battlefield 3, for me was a huge waste of time. Sure the graphics were pretty, but the single player was an utter bore and a shadow of a familiar plot line. The plot line reeks of "we couldn't really be bothered". As for the multiplayer, I purchased the Limited Edition and found I could not activate back to Karkland. When I tried to get it activated they never bothered to do anything about it despite contacting them about the issue. Furthermore, the comments about how great the multiplayer is are a fantasy cooked up in the minds of those craving another battlefield title. Battlefield 1942 was amazing and innovative on release, Battlefield 3 is another same old, same old with the added ability to fly planes and drive tanks. While entertaining at times, I'd hardly call it 'original'. It really was nothing special for me and has further disinterested me in the first person shooters that are spewing out of the publishers these days. Expand
  49. Nov 25, 2012
    The ones giving this game anything above a 5 are most likely call of duty converts and finally see the light. Sadly for them they realized it one game too late. B3 is a horrible hybrid of call of duty and what used to be battlefield. Battleild 2, 2142, bad company, and especially bad company 2 where some of the most amazing and fun games Ive ever played and each one had the traditional battlefield signatures such as huge maps, great class variety and importance, a large focus on TEAMWORK and STRATEGY and WORKING TOGETHER, but not in this one! Nope, instead what you get is a free for all slayer match every round despite what the objective is. They made health realstic like COD and the gameplay very "twitch" like. Strategy is meaningless in this game. If you like COD get this youll feel at home, if you hate COD like I do dont waste your money like I did on this crap and just wait for bad company 3 playing BC2 while you wait. Expand
  50. Nov 11, 2012
    Hello, my first time to rate a game I didnt play, because I refuse to buy it. Battlefield is my favourite title and I played the BF2BC like 490 hours... So I was a pretty big fan, but then when the EA started it's massive media massage I lost the interest completely. There were two messages: 1. Battlefield 3 is flat-out superior to COD - which speaks about some very serious complex out there in EA studios. 2. It's the best game and you have to own it. Personally, I don't believe that the best people are those, who say they are best. BF got raped massively, and the result is unbelievably expensive game, which no one of my first-person shooter friends actually plays. It's not on steam. So sure about themselves. Damn EA.

    It was just the dummiest most stupid kind of mass marketing I've ever seen. And behind it a game full of bugs, half-finished at the release, for astounding 50 euros... C'mon, you can't be serious.
  51. Nov 9, 2012
    After loading it 3x and spending hours on the phone trying to get to play and researching stuff, it finally played, and I was very impressed
  52. Nov 4, 2012
    If this game was called Bad Company 3 I would give is an ok rating.. Unfortunately as it is meant to be a sequel to Battlefield 2, it got everything wrong.. I cannot think of anything in this game that I truly like, so much so I stopped playing it after about 60hrs of forcing myself to like it.. This from someone who racked up thousands of hours on BF2 over the years.. Bad Job EA..
  53. Oct 2, 2012
    Battlefield 3 was supposed to be the game of the century. It was supposed to bring with it the best graphics and the best story of any first person shooter in recent history, but it didn't. Electronic Art's Digital Illusions CE (EA- DICE) has long led the sector in realism, drawing you into the war, evoking emotions previously reserved for games scripted almost as much as movies. In Battlefield 3's campaign mode, however, the gameplay is slow, predictable and doesn't make you feel as though you are making a difference. The multiplayer game is sculpted so carefully that it would be concievable to forget that it was pre-made at all.
    The multiplayer game is incredibly chaotic, often trancending the constraints of a traditional video game, with small actions radically changing the simulated world and rendering some strategies and equipment useless, while simultaneously granting opportunities people using others. Many items in the maps are destructible, so a well placed RPG can destroy almost any sniper nest, an accutate pistol shot can destroy a helicopter, and a exellently piloted helicopter can take on a small army. Boats, Planes, Anti-Aircraft Guns, Helicopters, Tanks, JAVELIN missiles, and hundreds of guns are ready for use, a well put together social interface (BattleLog) allow for infinite combinations, and the scoring system favors teamwork over kamikaze raids.
    Battlefield 3 brings with it many annoyances, and thousands of quirks. The beautiful graphics and chaotic multiplayer almost outweigh the lack of a decent campaign mode, but alas this game fits into the category filled with thousands of games made for quick and easy fun, lacking challenge, and full of cliched elements. Battlefield 3 was expected to be the next iteration of the interesting and innovative game-play of the previous Battlefield games, not the repetitive and annoying habits of cheap action books, movies and games. The wow factor of the graphics can almost overcome the problems, but DICE has grown weary of the fight, and has decided that one botched campaign cannot possibly cause them to lose their grip on the gaming battlefield.
  54. Sep 21, 2012
    This game is a Great online Multiplayer game. But i gave it a one because i am unable to play online because of me being in afghanistan. I loved BF2 and still play it today, But BF3 took away alot of the core things that made the BF2 so great. Things like Offline multiplayer- I loved to go and practice flying jets and helicopters offline in BF2 but Offline multiplayer has been taken away and replaced with a crappy singleplayer. Also when i finally played it online, Voice chat within squads has been taken away. I believe you have to go download a program for teamspeak. I dont believe you should have to do that, You should just join a squad and be able to talk to them or mute them. Last, the Commander Position has been taken away. That was my favorite position because you could really help out your team. Give squad orders, drop ammo to a squad so they can resupply, Give that lone wolf a vehicle drop when he's stuck out in middle of nowhere. I did those things and whenever i did it, it was a great feeling whenever i heard "Thanks Champ" from the squad leader. That has been taken away. The Graphics, Sound, and Gameplay are great, but Some things shouldnt be taken away. ((Also, I believe EA pressured Dice with this product for competing with COD. DICE should break all ties With EA)) Expand
  55. Sep 20, 2012
    Too many bugs, cheating is rampant, weapons and vehicles are unrealistic. Most of the DLC is worthless, or content that should have been provided with the original version.
  56. Sep 14, 2012
    Another bad game made by EA With useless support, The game is almost unplayable and even if you can get to play, the game soon crashes along with origin half the time, another useless idea by EA, Origin doesnt work, and their game doesnt work.. It's constantly crashing and bluescreening my system and a few of my other friends systems,
  57. Aug 24, 2012
    Screwed over by EA/Dice, changed in game content drop to pure content drop and gave us PICTURES.
    Obviously could not be bothered and have made their money - now just going through the motions and delivering any old tarp in an effort to meet their commitments. Glad I found out now about to pre order MOH, special editions not worth anything anymore.

    Never again.
  58. Gar
    Jul 14, 2012
    So I waited nearly 9 months to buy this game, finally I would get to play a Battlefield game that has been balanced with patches. Well, thats what I tought. Reality is this is my worst battlefield expirience ever. First of all, it took me 3 days to actually get the game started. Since Origin is a worthless piece of junk, my account registeration failed 2 times in a row. I made an account, no error messages. I couldn't login so I tought they must have sent me a confirmation email of something and waited a day for that. Nothing happened so I made another account. Same thing. I decided to disable my firewall and try again. Magically a new screen appeared after registeration and it worked. How incompetant do you have to be to write a piece of software that doesnt work with a firewall and doesn't give an error message when it fails to connecto to EAs servers? Fine EA, I wont ever use Origin again. Steam FTW.

    Now to the game. You would think that after months of patching the game would be pretty balanced and good. NOPE. Battlefield players always complain if their precious tank/helicopter can actually be destroyed. DICE has once again folded and made jets/helicopters impossible to hit with an RPG. Maybe the balance would be ok IF the pilots were newbies playing with a keyboard and mouse. Guess what DICE. After 9 months only hardcore players are left and pilots are using joysticks and know every trick in the book after playing the game for 100-300 hours. If you are like me and want to play battlefield as infantry, STAY AWAY from this game. To make matters worse, EA/DICE dont run official servers anymore so most servers are fan run servers with rules that make the balance even worse. Rounds that last for hours, faster vehicle spaws, ban if you use and RPG and so on.

    But perhaps the worst offender in this game are the maps. They are so large that you cant do anything without vehicles. There are also so few maps that you cant arrord not liking a map. A map can be used with 3 different names for different modes, but the level is the same. Metro for example is just a camp fest, because of poor design. The game always stops in the same hallway, because there arent proper flanking possibilities. EA did the same as Activision did with COD. Start the series by shipping with tons of maps and only sell a few as DLC. Now both have started shipping the game with less and less maps and ripping you off by selling overprice map packs. I'm not going to buy back to karkand, close quarters or BF premium, because I hate the game. Give me more free maps and I might actually like the game if they are any good. Then I might buy DLC. I wont however support you ripping me off, EA.

    Coming in as newbie is made even more frustrating by the awful unlock system. Not only am I playing an unbalanced game, I'm playing it against players with hundreds of hours of expirience and way better equipment. NO anti-air RPG is really nice when the enemy has air dominance. Need to play for hours to unlock even the most basic equipment. Reflex sight for example is a weapon specific unlock.

    - Looks nice

    - Origin...
    - Unbalanced (air vehicles are overpowered)
    - Frustrating, because of ridiculously slow unlocks
    - Not nearly enough maps and vanilla version maps are bad (be prepared to pay for back to karkand if you want any content)

    So my advice is, buy all the content you can for Battlefield Bad Company 2 instead of buying this awful sequel. I put in over 100 hours into BC2 and loved every minute of it. BF3 at its best struggles to match BC2 at its worst. Bad Company is the proper refined version of the BF formula. BF3 goes back to a broken BF formula. Pretty graphics don't make up for a broken game.
  59. Jul 12, 2012
    This game is not very good. I found it disappointing after bad company 2. Multiplayer maps are not interesting. As a newbie having to play against 500+ hour veterans is very frustrating.
  60. Jul 7, 2012
    This is a perfect example of a good franchise made casual. I was a big fan of the battlefield series. starting from battlefield 1942. It is clear EA has a tight grip on DICE. A month after release I might had given this a 8/10. Fanboyism makes blind. But after a while I started realizing they have made the franchise utter sh*t by simplifying the game they obviously attracted a new user base. and by that I mean a bunch of casual COD kiddies. This doesn't Make anything better. I DICE even still had some of it's PC fanbase after battlefield: Bad Company. they have certainly lost it now. Also with EA's glorious DLC plan they have certainly stept in COD's footsteps. $15 for a couple of maps. With BC2 vietnam DLC they actually gave us a whole new experience. But the (upcomming) DLC's from BF3 are just ridiculous... It could have been in the original game. But no the allmighty EA had decided otherwise. DICE has literally sold their soul to EA. Lastly the Premium. as if the franchise hadn't copied enough of COD allready, EA wanted their own "Elite" service. It contains all the DLC that's going to be available, Ok that's pretty nice. But then they also have queue jumping. premiums get priority in queues over non premiums. So many knives in our backs, I can't keep track of it. I've literally waited a half hour in a queue to get on my favorite server because I got pushed back the whole time by premiums. This is just so mean to everybody who bought the game. And wait there is more! double xp weeks!! (have I said casual allready?) . everything that Battlefield once was, is now lost. the franchise might have 2 more succesfull titles with their new fanbase. But then it's over. EA will throw DICE in the garbage bin, just like they did with Pandemic. Expand
  61. Jun 29, 2012
    This game is 10 times better then COD thats why im giving it a score 3. The biggest thing in this game that bothers me is too much bloom in multiplayer and graphics arent really that good if you look very closely. There are no numbers for mouse sensitivity so i have to guess. No battlerecorder, battlelog is pain in the a**. Also hit detection is broken in multiplayer.
  62. Jun 28, 2012
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. In this review im going to talk about Battlefield 3 and the other 2 "expansions". This game is suppose to be a competitor of CoD, although i havent played that game ( apart from world at war ) so i cant judge that. Battlefield 3 however i can judge after spending more hours then most "professional" reviewers from websites like IGN or whatever they call them. Frostbite 2 Battlefield 3 introduces the new Frostbite 2 engine which is nothing more then a updated version of the frostbite version we seen in Bad Company 2. This engine had serious hitbox issues in multiplayer making multiplayer not worth the effort for a esports community. Frostbite 2 has fixed this issue as much as they can, however since its a update they will never fix this completely. Frostbite 2 did help alot with updating the graphics while keeping the game run smooth, you can run this game on a average pc and still make it look pretty good while having a stable fps. On consoles the fps might be a bit lower and the graphics a bit less, however consoles are pretty much outdated now. So its not really a suprise the graphics are that far behind, this is just one of the big disadvantages console users have. Gameplay This is where a multiplayer focused game like BF3 has to shine, since we all know one of the major rules in online gaming: Graphics last for a week, gameplay lasts forever. It seems EA has never heard of this rule though, since the gameplay is where this game is absolute pathetic. First of all they went with the failed concept in the new so called "FPS" games and that is putting vehicles in the game. Something not a single professional esports game ever had, ( seen any vehicles in counterstrike ? ) Also the so called "normal" mode the game is just pathetic aswell, health points on players is way to large basicly making the game "he who sprays first sprays best" game. Taking about 15 bullets to 1 clip for 1 kill on normal isnt really helping. On hardcore however the game is pretty decent for this and the gameplay pretty much fixes this, making the normal mode more of a "newbie" setting and hardcore the "pro" setting. The 1st "expansion" is nothing more then a DLC with a few maps and guns so no point in going into detail there. The 2nd "expansion" is basicly the same, however this is where they want to directly compete with CoD by making a cqb focused game. EA however have never heard of gameplay it seems, CQB expansion is the biggest load of **** and even worse then the orginal BF3 game. A huge amount of "lucky spawn" happening in the game also not disabling certain weapons. What you can see in the expansion in SC2 they learned one other lesson which is "less is more", they remove a unit because its overpowered combined with a other unit. This is something EA should have done aswell with the latest expansion, by removing weapons like shotguns in the CQB mode/maps you would have created a bit more balanced game. The biggest problem in that expansion however though is the spawning in the maps, its simply pathetic that something like that passed the beta. Clearly shows that EA has put 0% effort into testing that "expansion" with regards to gameplay, they basicly pulled of the same trick activision. Which is release a new "expansion" with just a few maps and weapons and cash in. Community support What makes or breaks a multiplayer focused game also depends on the community support the developer gives. This however is a bit lacking in this game, they could have introduced a bit more support on their website for clans and tournaments. At least something like a ranking system, which basicly every serious multiplayer game has. A game that doesnt isnt a serious game for a esports community. Recap: Graphics : 8 Sound : 7 Gameplay : 4 Community support : 4 Expand
  63. May 20, 2012
    Cowboys-Rednecks-Evil Russians-Evil Muslims-Good Guys American Army-Hollywood story is so bad image that this game radiates is just sickening you can see this in movies in music Mtv... where is the art?
  64. May 19, 2012
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It is always saddening when a game over-hypes itself. Not only will it be impossible to live up to the expectations, but the workforce will also have to try to create this "perfect" game. This is exactly the life style of Battlefield 3. Between the flame wars they started with Activision, and EA quickly becoming more and more greedy, the idea of a perfect game was much more fantasy than reality. Now, with that said: the gameplay is mildly solid, the maps are fairly good, and the weapons are far more diverse than ever. However, the game's multiplayer itself is not at all solid. The game boasts several animation glitches, very poor servers, and the same amount of overpowered weapons as the Call of Duty series. In addition, the destructibility of the maps are nowhere near the usual amount for a Battlefield game. Bad co. 2, the prequel if you do not know, had the ability to obliterate entire buildings with explosives, crush walls with tanks, and destroy several walls with vehicle guns. In this game, all buildings will remain standing magically. While I can understand this from some perspectives, this adds more problems then it solves. Campers are now a problem in Battlefield, the battlefield becomes stoic and unchanging, and hiding from vehicles is easily possible. Now, when it comes to story, as interestingly told as it is, it's still the same thing as every single modern game just rehashed and labeled "Battlefield 3." Here it is: Soldier goes to some war-torn place, gets evacuated, enemies steal a nuke, there's a betrayal, one nuke goes off, other is sent to NYC, you chase it, defeat the person who stole it, and walk away as the only survivor... The end. See? The same story as almost every single FPS game. It gets boring.

    While the game is fun for a while, on PC, that is, it gets boring, stoic, and less than fun. Unless the price goes down immensely soon, or it comes to steam, I would highly not recommend it.
  65. May 17, 2012
    I Played it and enjoyed it for a while. the patches made it difficult to master and now it has gotten to the point where the patches have made the game... suck. i know it sounds dumb but it seems wall glitches and all sorts of fun things plague the game since the patches. it is basically a glorified MW3. i dont like COD either. it use to be fun and rewarded good players but i cant do anything. some guns are awfully OPand stupid. the game is very unrealistic as well. i dont care if you can blow things up it is not realistic. now many light machine guns and assault rifles can out shoot a sniper at great distance so sniping is **** dumb to do. I cant get anywhere with people with light machine guns shooting through walls if i am moving. so i dont play anymore. **** THIS GAME. it was fun but still i hate it now. Expand
  66. May 16, 2012
    Battlefield games used to be about using your skills, the vehicles and the environment to play a strategic way to finish of a round so that your team will get the victory. Now with Battlefield 3 that is thrown in the dumpster. Now Battlefield is about as strategic as a fish bowl animation. Bought the game at launch and it took almost 2 week before the game was playable during to the fact that you must have a online connection to play the game, Even the singleplayer mode yes. The multiplayer is almost Modern Warfareish with bigger maps and not that fun to play actually. +Graphics

    -No commander mode
    -Server issues from hell
    -No strategic gameplay elements
    -Horrible game balance between vehicles and infantery, yes it's more real but less fun because it takes a billion rockets to blow up a tank.
    -No battlerecorder even thou it's announced
    -Non interesting singleplayer.
  67. May 8, 2012
    I feel somewhat like a cry baby, but this is the third EA game I bought in the last month and they ALL SUCK! This crashes regularly on my 3.16 GB Intel Duo w/ 4 GB ram and dual Nvidia Gforce 9800 GT. When it doesn't crash the single player campaign leaves you trapped in a hallway with no doors to open. It starts out great, don't get me wrong, but the crashing and bugs make the single player a class A turd. Friendlys drop dead for no reason. The sound cuts in and out. Save points are poorly designed. The person in charge of QA should be eviscerated. I'm done with EA. When is Valve coming out with something new? Expand
  68. Apr 27, 2012
    More of the same, nothing but FPS garbage. This genre has single handedly destroyed gaming and turned the entire industry into one that favors "safe" shallow gameplay with good graphics instead of games that are actually enjoyable.
  69. Apr 24, 2012
    After 400+ hours playing this is my 3rd and final review. I have 1200+ hours playing the excellent BFBC2, but this game does not compare. If you are looking for mindless multiplayer fun, then by all means pick this up. If you have a single competitive bone in your body skip it. Clans and hackers do very well. Casual players are simply ignored by the developers. They don't ban hackers. Many server admins are just plain ignorant on what a hacker looks like, and DICE doesn't give them any tools to catch them. If you want to play this title, wait another 18 months. New games will be out, hackers will leave due to boredom, and the patches might make it balanced in some regard. Expand
  70. Apr 18, 2012
    The beta was fun even with no destruction and the occasional floor-glitching but once it hit release, it was unplayable with a dozen different kinds of connectivity issues hitting you at the same time along with overall huge amounts of lag and delay.

    Something that Is not welcome in a FPS so I asked for a refund on the same day I bought it. That was 6 months ago. I've now been ignored by
    their support over 4 separate times with no hope of seeing my money. Thanks EA. Expand
  71. Apr 15, 2012
    Downgraded Battlefield 2. This game was to be continued where Battlefield 2 ended. However, this game was truly great in the alpha. There was no blue layer, it was more yellow/brownish saturation which everyone loved, but DICE thought it was a good idea to make it more consolized than it already is.
    The suppression was balanced and most of the guns were close in terms of balance. Now when
    this new patch released, the entire game went to a horrible direction. It makes no sense whatsoever to introduce bullet spread during suppression.

    To Summarize: DICE really went to hell.
  72. Apr 11, 2012
    A game with great potential, but clearly done in a hurry just to be launched before CoD:MW3. To be honest, this is the best shooting experience I've ever had in a computer game, BUT... the game is haunted by bad decisions, bugs/glitches, balance problems and other rushed stuff. Maps are simply horrible; they decided to abandon the huge maps we've seen in previous Battlefield titles, and now we have close-quarters levels with a terrible design, worse than the ones seen in the Call of Duty series (see Operation Metro if you don't believe me). There is no VoIP, destruction is worse than in Bad Company 2, hit detection fails (you get shot even after entering cover), patches are rare and, until now, have only made the game's balance worse, specially for the vehicles, which have been nerfed to oblivion. And, of course, your character will suicide many times for absolutely no reason. I can't tell you to stay away from this game because it is, indeed, a really nice experience (if you have the Back to Karkand expansion, because the original maps are terrible and the next DLCs will take months to be launched), but seeing what Battlefield 3 is, and the huge potential it has, I must say it's a complete fail, and the developers don't seem to care about fixing the game. As for the Singleplayer/Co-op game modes, well... they're just horrible. Campaign is totally linear and the story isn't good at all. Co-op levels are few, short, and you can't communicate with your teammate; yes that's right, there's absolutely no chat system on the Co-op mode, you can't communicate by VoIP, nor by typing. Expand
  73. Apr 9, 2012
    I played this game trought in singleplayer. I also tested out Multiplayer. Let´s go over basics. This game has awesome graphics and overall layout over. It´s pure eye candy and lovely in that. Why such low rating? Well singleplayer started out amazing...Sick start that caught attention...Sadly that´s it. Another "terrorists has the nuke" game. I choose normal difficulty and most of the time i got myself killed. Quess that is the reality of war, you are stupid and die...It was boring. Overall campaing left me bored and i quited it couple of times before finishing. Like bad company 2, most of it just repeated itself over and over. Multiplayer wise game is awesome, sadly i dont enjoy that type of gameplay. It´s awesome, but not for me. Was some solid action for couple of hours, but that´s it. Expand
  74. Mar 27, 2012
    Untill you bring us back the previous way to play the game is COMPLETELY useless!!! Guys don't let you be blackmailed by the game dev. Simply because the wake-up one day and thought:"Oh, lets make some more money, from the gamers!!!" Great game, ruined by its creators!!! TRAGIC!!!
  75. Mar 27, 2012
    This should have been the best FPS ever. Single player is average, but I only bought this game for the multiplayer. And at first it met expectations, plenty of unlockables the steep learning curve I love it gives a real sense of satisfaction, rare in games today. HOWEVER this game was far from finished before release and full of bugs. Where to start issues range from niggly-not being able to join a online game as a squad with friends, crashes plenty too, Annoying-lag and hit detection.. To damn RAGING the game became unplayable due to glitching - spawning WITHOUT a gun. This is the worst experience of gaming in my life. I am not alone, the battlelog forums are crammed with complaints and can only advise not to touch this game. Shame. one word review-BROKEN I personally feel DICE have taken a big dump on their customers heads and an apology/explanation is long over due. Expand
  76. Mar 24, 2012
    I was always a heavy DICE fan, right since the early days and before with Codename Eagle. But I've been saddened to see them let themselves go, and turn away from creating new, exciting, original and inspired content, and instead have got on the "if it sells, then milk it" bandwagon. Yes, Battlefield 3 will sell, and BF4 and BF5~ will sell, but this game lacks all the love and soul of its predecessors, and if I were a DICE developer, I would try to remember why I started making games in the first place.

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

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

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

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

    I know that the multiplayer is where this game is supposed to shine but it just doesn't do it for me. I am annoyed that they still use a health bar that doesn't regenerate. I understand the need to be different but that sure seems like an outdated way to do things. Especially for a top of the line game like Battlefield. There are not enough people out there with team spirit to allow me to believe that when I"m hurt a medic is going to come along and heal me. I played this game for like 3 days and don't think I was once healed by a medic when I was close to death. I found that it was just easier to run off and die and just try to respawn closer to the objective. Played the campaign once and played the online for like 3 days. Now the game is on a shelf collecting dust and it will stay there for a long long time.
  78. Mar 18, 2012
    Everything that Kislen said +1, apart from i think after this event i WILL be boycotting EA and DICE games, this was their last chance to redeem themselves.

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

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

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

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

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

    The 'game' gets a zero from me, and i usually believe that no game in the world deserves 0 points, however this is an exception for me, because of the false promises that EA and DICE fed the pc community; (the very people that funded their earlier games, and put them where they are today)
    EA announced that the pc version would recieve special attention vs it's console counter parts, that was complete BS! yeah, we get 64 player servers..... that's all... and it's a shame we can't even enjoy those 64 player matches with such bad netcode..... The truth is that EA are just a money hungry corporation, and really don't care about your experience in their games, they have my money now for bf3.. and they don't give a damn about my (or any other customer's) problems, i would give this game a minus figure if i could, and for the experience i've had playing this POS, I don't think i'd even play it if i was getting paid to.... it's just not worth risking my mental health
  79. Mar 15, 2012
    If you've played Battlefield 2 and/or 2142, and not just the Bad Company spinoff series, you will be dissapointed with the way the franchise is headed with Battlefield 3. The game is by no means made for the fanbase that helped DICE get big as a company, rather it has become a generic shooter without any teamplay features or depth. Singleplayer: ------------- The singleplayer campaign is one big ripoff of all earlier CoD campaigns, and even so it's lacking immersion.
    It's simply too linear and too restricted in it's gameplay, and you'll find yourself being a spectator while the game plays itself before you. At some point you'll complete an entire mission just by pressing space...

    I found the difficulty to scale alright, although the AI seemed quite clumsy, a fact that DICE has tried to correct by giving them aimbot. - They'll basically oneshot you from across the map with shotguns...


    Is fun during the first playthrough, but get bland very quickly, as there is very few missions, and the ones that you get are very little creative, not to mention the fact that you'll have to grind them in order to unlock some weapons. - All in all this gamemode seems unfinished and should probably not have been in the game at all, coop can by no means be compared to the "specops" of CoD.


    This is where DICE/EA really went wrong, in my oppinion.
    Instead of taking the features that made the Battlefield series great, they've thrown 80% of the features out of the window and simplyfied the rest to uselessness. I'll list a few of the things that made the game fail, as far as I'm concerned:

    - Only way to play the game is to start it through Origin, EA's alternative to Steam, no biggie you might think, but you'll actually have to allow said program to scan not only the game folder, but your entire computer for who knows what reason. Also if you want to get the game listed in Steam, you'd end up having to start Steam which would then start Origin, which again would start Battlelog and only then you'd be able to start the game, that is if both Origin and Battlelog decides to work that is.

    - With the Commander position out of the game, only the Squadleader would able to organise the team, but all that the role is given is giant bullseye on it's back; tools for giving orders and even a useable map are nonexistant in the game.

    - The game of course has vehicles, but they have been weakened to the extent that they are now little more than a quick "killstreak", and no longer an important tool that might help a team win.

    - The game is all about the fast paced closequarter action, and this would be fine had they finally gotten the hang of getting hit recognition to work, but alas this works as bad as in all earlier installments. - No VO-IP and an unfinished Commo-rose makes it next to impossible to communicate with your team, at least to the extent of making a tactical difference.

    - If you plan on playing with buddies you're in tough luck, as it is next to impossible to get all on the same team, let alone in the same squad.

    As mentioned the battlefield series is no longer for people who wants a casual war simulator, but is now more and more becoming a generic CoD clone. A fact that becomes more apparent with each DLC. If you're part of the Call of Duty fanbase this game is actually made for you, and as such you could very well consider this game, though in my oppinion youd probably still be better off with CoD, as they simply are better at what they do. And this pains me very much, the fact that had DICE continued to improve on the features that made them great, they could probably have made the best shooter of all time, but instead they decided to go for the casual crowd, and through them some easy money. The result of this is at best a mediocre game, that attempts too much but accomplishes too little.
  80. Feb 20, 2012
    Where to start? How about, don't waste your money? That will do.

    The Good: I may be able to sell it. The Bad: Where to start yet again?

    I get a feeling that many who had to pay for this game will brag it up as the loss of money due to owning a digital booger may drive them mad. I feel that's the case with BF3 and the only way I can see anyone thinking this game is great. I play paid for
    and free games, I would not play BF3 even if it was free. Install the game, (plan on coffee) then download another 3.4 gigs? That's just to get the game up and running. When I saw the graphics, I nearly fell over. Looking back at Wolfenstein Enemy Territory, I do believe the graphics were comparable. This game is being run on great gaming computers, the graphics cards alone cost near 500 bucks, all quad cores, DDR3, etc... so it's not a performance lack, the graphics were simply laughable to me. When a player jumps over a wall, what's with the floppy legs?? Are they all Jeff Dunham recruits? It takes more time to get into battle than the time you get actually battling. The weapon effects are near zero, the blood looks like Jello forming, absolutely absurd. I've been gaming for a long time, longer than I care to admit, I was shocked to see anyone give this game a 10 but to each his own and hopefully some truly do get some enjoyment from this purchase. BTW, I tried to run over a stop sign, seems the stop signs are built better than the tanks in this game. Ah yes, the propane tanks, they won't burn leaves or paper but they will shatter cement. Shoot a launcher, watch the projectile disappear into oblivion, perhaps to start it's own life elsewhere far from this game. Aiming? A thing of the past, just point, shoot and hope, you will likely be better off for your troubles. COD MW2 was 10x this game and seems COD 3 will be as well. Enemy Territory Quake Wars was 10X better as well, but my list could go on for some time. Again, I could not play this game without laughing in bewilderment, thinking ridiculous thoughts of brainwashing conspiracies to explain the BF3 fanatical attention. That said, does anyone want to buy a very slightly and never again used BF3? No, I'm not kidding. Expand
  81. Feb 20, 2012
    The player drop off on this game is saying something. I hadn't played in a month until today. EA sent out a questionnaire asking people why they quit playing. Their questions didn't have the option for 1. The game wasn't what I expected 2. Lack of communication with the player community and patches to fix bugs 3. Bad netcode. Instead, they had 1. The game is too easy 2. The game is too hard
    3. I want more DLC

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

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

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

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

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

    But it's really just been one huge let down. I can't say I'll be buying BF4 or BC3 or anything. I've learned my lesson that PR likes to make false promises and do anything to drum up hype. They flat out lie sometimes. I just don't know what to expect when I buy a game from EA. There's no assurance of quality. They don't realize that many are already boycotting them. I wouldn't say I'm boycotting them, it's more like someone who has burned their hand on a hot stove being cautious about touching it again.
  82. Feb 17, 2012
    the singleplayer have good graphics and gameplay.
    but the multiypalyer are just awful with full bugs and feel like World War 2 combat.
    vehicles and tanks not gives realism feeling and the physics are very not real...
    totally spend of 50 bucks
  83. Feb 17, 2012
    Game simply doesn't work. Punkbuster kept kicking me until the game became unplayable. Lots of people have been experiencing the same thing and DICE refuse to/don't know how to fix it. It recently attempted to make me redownload 4GB of the game files for no reason, there hadn't even been an update released. After weeks of trying to get it to work I uninstalled the game and the terrible Origin DRM that it came with. What an absolute waste of time and money. Also the online community is plagued by rude teenage fanboys who'll attack you at the very suggestion that the game isn't working, possibly on EA's payroll /shrug Expand
  84. Feb 16, 2012
    I'm sad by this game, huge battlefield 2 fan, and reading the glow, I get the feeling allot of people have not played BF2. The graphics are great. the single player is scripted CoD stuffs. and multiplayer is basic. and here is the issue I have, Battlefield 2 MP was GREAT, and Battlefield 1942 MP was GREAT! Where's commander mode? or being spec opps putting sack charges on enemy artilaryand sacoms etc. I won't even go into the awesomeness of driving aircraft carriers in 1942, will DICE ever be able to return to those days? looking like a strong no. I hope one day someone will bring a proper battlefield to those of us that started with the franchise. perhaps a mod? Expand
  85. Feb 15, 2012
    Graphics are great, sound fx are great. But the game have a lot of bugs and crash all the time. It is hard to find a good server with people playing and the battlelog system sucks. I paid 50% of the price and still dont worth the money.
    EA and DICE made a good scam with this game.
  86. Feb 13, 2012
    To me, as a Battlefield veteran, this isn't even a video game. If you look at any past game and compare it to BF3, you keep discovering the same statement over and over; there's nothing new. All BF3 does is remove features from older titles. BF3 doesn't have commanders, commander assets, large maps with more than 7 cap points, a more intricate squad command structure, more diversified classes, decent server tools, objective based gameplay, fucntional commorose, and options for veterans to play as we have been since 2002. As this is an objective review, opinions on decisions such as health regeneration, sound spotting, 4 player squads, etc are all irrelevant. What has BF3 contributed to Battlefield as a whole? There is nothing new about this game, just stripped down gameplay to appeal to console players and casuals alike. Expand
  87. Feb 5, 2012
    This game is nonsensical. Spawn, run, gun, die. Repeat ad nauseam. What is the point of having a "game" when there is no actual game - only interaction with an environment? An environment which is pretty cutting-edge with superb sound-effects, graphics and all, but surely you need more than that to make a game?

    I was foolish enough to buy this game because of the hype, and it's really sad
    to see the direction FPS-games are going these days. 20 years from now we'll be playing shooters with built in aimbots and pre-scriptet behaviour making it more like a movie - no game, skills or thinking, just mindless clicking and even more mindless players. Expand
  88. Feb 3, 2012
    Awesome game, untrustworthy mechanics. I love the realism, options, progression and over all feel of the mechanics and delivery are spot on. I won't play the game again. I don't trust the servers or developers to offer fair gameplay. Hackers, cheaters and severely unbalanced gameplay make this game a fairly self defeating experience. If EA delivered trustable hack proof servers, which they never will.

    I could definitely be coaxed back to playing.
  89. Jan 31, 2012
    I play a lot of FPS on Xbox 360. I gave this a very low score; here is why:
    1) I bought this to play multiplayer with friends. The servers put us on different teams 100% of the time... there's a "switch team" option, but it typically says "you can't" do it. 2) Big learning curve, no tutorial, rotten interface, no instructions except random online wikis players have written.

    That pretty much sums up why I sold my copy...
  90. Jan 13, 2012
    I regret buying this game. First off you should know that this game launches on a 3rd party website. A website not a game, a website that keeps track of all your progress. I bought this game, expecting to play a Battlefield game, yeah didn't happen. All you get is a sad singleplayer experience with a completely unfair, unbalance multiplayer. Where 90% you are outmatch simply because the opposite player has more equipment than you. There is so much customization that it completely destroys balance. Out of all the Battlefield games I've played, no, out of all the FPS multiplayers I've played this has to be the biggest pile of ridiculous I've been on. Where with previous Battlefield games destruction was a staple in the Battlefield diet it's now just a simple appetizer offering barely any destruction. With the ridiculous amount of customization, limited destruction, and huge maps where it would take hours to actually find any action you are left with just the spawn screen due to the incisive problem of camping. You thought it was bad in *insert game* you have no idea how bad it is in this game. You're expected to find someone prone on the ground in a bush on a map the size of Texas and only after you had to run 3 mile to a place just to get killed, sent back to GO, do not collect $200. Some people may argue "Oh you're not playing it right, be patient, don't leave your base", I bought this game for the action element in a First Person Shooter not a First Person Hide and Seek in a bush for 2 hours. Players on other FPS don't nearly camp this hard, not even in Modern Warfare! Save yourself the trouble and DO NOT waste your money on this game! There are plenty other brand new games coming out and if you were thinking about getting rid of Bad Company 2, DON'T!!! Bad Company 2's multiplayer game-play is 100x better than Battlefield 3. Expand
  91. Jan 9, 2012
    Only one Word: Horrible!
    lack of taste, lack of effort, all of the scenes are played at night or at least in very dark atmospheres so with a cheap trick you add more dramatic flavor and a (doubtful) sense of reality. Is just like filming a movie in black & white to increase the dramatics. Horrible. The game is not more than a shooting corridor. I believe PackMan had more options in the
    way to play. The so talked engine... where is it? The enemies are always the same guy and do always the same thing over and over. So much for AI. Ugly, the graphics felt so much better, but so much better in Battlefield Bad Company. The campaign in Call of dutty 2 Modern warfare is a hundred times better and a million times more entretaining. This campaign looks like a game from 1996. How could this happen? O M G what a terrible way to ruin a reputation. Total fiasco. I'm not even gonna try the game on line after this.
  92. Jan 3, 2012
    Beware. Battlefield 3 isn't a bad game, it can be enjoyable (great graphics/audio, a balanced combination between realism and fun, and the best shooting experience ever seen on this franchise), but it was clearly done in a hurry. The game has huge flaws and is haunted by bad decisions. There is no voice communaction at all on the PC version; they have abandoned the VoIP system, which worked great on Battlefield 2, and all you can do now is talk to people who are on your friend's list. So teamwork = zero. Maps (with the exception of the Back To Karkand DLC) are disappointing: they are few, small, have few vehicles and get boring really fast. The destruction system, which was great in Bad Company 2, is ridiculous; there are way too many walls/buildings that fail to break/go down, and it's nothing like what was shown on the pre-launch videos. Sniper class? Dead. They added a sun beam to the rifle scopes so that anyone can quickly find and kill them. Vehicle collision is horrible; there's no collision damage for land vehicles, and when you hit something, it feels like you're teleporting (that also applies to soldiers on foot, when another player is close to you). Aircraft gameplay is really nice in my opinion, but, again, there's the collision problem. Sometimes they just bounce instead of exploding when you hit the floor/trees/etc at high speed. And the netcode is a joke. I could go on, there are many other bugs/glitches/flaws and, from what we've seen so far, I don't expect DICE to fix them; but that's enough. Some people may not care about these problems. I, however, am not satisfied whith a game that COULD be great but instead was released like a beta (well maybe aplha would be more appropriate) product. If you can't release a decent product in time, postpone it, I don't care, just don't give us crap. Expand
  93. Dec 27, 2011
    This game is extremely high quality. The graphics are amazing, the physics are nice and the combat is just incredible. Everything about this game is absolutely perfect.

    Too bad there are so many millions of errors involved in installing the game few people actually get to play. **** you, EA.
  94. Dec 23, 2011
    There are very few FPS games I hate. This is #1 of that 1 game list. I can't say that I don't love the concept, but when applied to the glitchy, craptastic software we're given, I'm left disappointed and severely disgusted. Campaign: I began by trying to set up my keys to how I usually bind them. I've always been able to bind mouse keys, until BF3. So now my knife attack is somewhere else on the keyboard, leaving it useless in a melee situation. A bigger problem with the campaign was that I couldn't even play to the ending! For some reason, I have a glitch that kills me on the subway on the last level every time. I played that damn subway about 60 times before saying F-it, I give up. At which point I picked up the multiplayer, which is why I bought the game in the first place.

    Multiplayer: Here's where I lost my shyte. First off, the graphics on a map this large are completely lacking. In fact, I felt the graphics brought me back to 2001 Ghost Recon type stuff. I wasn't happy, but figured it was due to the epic size of the map, so I overlooked it. Then the game play fail started. Let me begin by saying that I'm a good first person shooter on multiplayer. I'm usually a top 3 team player on whatever game I pick up. This game left me with a negative kill/death ratio all the time. I understand there's a learning curve, but the slower I go and stop from "runnin n gunnin" the more I got picked off. The vehicle controls plain out suck, so I stopped using them. Must take a crackhead to figure that crap out and it's totally counter intuitive. I pick up a sniper rifle, take aim, BANG, a bloody hit! But wait, the guy's still running, BANG BANG, two more hits! Wait, still running? WTF? 3 second later, I'm running to cut him off and take one sniper bullet and I'm dead. Really? REALLY???

    Sorry, I will never buy another BF game. Origin can take the money and stuff it, I'm uninstalling and I'm giving the game and my account to someone I hate.
  95. Dec 23, 2011
    First let me say that I'm a huge fan of the Battlefield series. I didn't buy BF3 to stomp it. I'm also not giving up on the game just yet. But there are some gameplay dynamics that really have me frustrated.

    1.) Weapon upgrades make it a frustrating grind for new players. The weapons for new players are so inferior that they don't really stand a chance against the better
    weaponry/accessories... let alone better weaponry/accessories wielded by someone with 100 hrs more playing time than you. BF2 BC had it right. There should be an incremental jump between default and unlocked weapons... better weapons should help you go from 10 -12 to 12-10. Not 4-14 to 14-4.

    It makes tactics worthless because it takes 2-3 times longer to kill players with better weaponry. So even when you shoot them from the side or back, they have time to turn around and waste you no problem.

    2.) Terrain physics. At first I was all for how it's difficult to see enemy players on the terrain compared to BF2 BC. Seemed way more realistic and tactical. Unfortunately, the ability to hide encourages lots of camping. Players are invisible in shadows and completely disappear in foliage. For a lot of players it means bush league tactics. Maybe this is my video card setup but I don't think so.

    3.) Maps. The maps are super detailed. But the abundance of nooks encourage camping. The unbalanced weapons for new players compounds this like crazy.

    4.) Mini map on hard core. This is also another killer of tactical game play. Why should you be smart about out tactical positioning when you can just look at the minimap and see where opponents pop up? Granted, I have access to the mini map too. I could use it. But I don't want to because it takes me out of the gameplay experience. In the past BFs I liked the fact that I could rank high because I played a smart game. Now the game just feels like a dumbed down run around like a chicken with your head cut off spray fest.

    5.) Net code. I'm tired of shooting others 4 or 5 times and then dying when it seems like they shot me once. Or dying when I'm on the other side of an impenetrable barrier.

    6.) At medium or long distance, BF2 BC rewards controlled bursts of fire. It really made the game play feel tight/smart. BF3 rewards going full auto all the time... especially with the upgraded weaponry where there is little to no recoil. This makes the game (namely HC mode) feel way less tactical. It cheapens it.

    6.) Overall, the gameplay feels out of control compared to BF2 BC. It doesn't feel like a team mounting an attack on another team. Its a bunch of individuals running around on full auto killing other individuals with inferior weaponry. I know BF2 BC had it's flaws, but what it did as a whole was to create a sense of narrative in a battle. You could feel the eb an flow of the battles and because of that it often encouraged players to fight strategically even if they weren't intending to play as a team.

    I would go back to BF2 BC if there new maps released on a semi-regular basis. As it is, the same old maps are growing old. Maybe it's time to pull some old FPS's out of the bin and see what they offer as far as smart tactical game play.
  96. Dec 22, 2011
    Graphics are good,love campaign and location, but bf3 on console is a flopp, and no matter what platform the sound is horrible it is the worst sounding fps i have ever played i felt like i was at the carnival trying to shoot out the entire red star they all sound like pellet guns WTF!!environment destruction seemed to be turned down and all the hype ea (not dice) and the bf die hard try hard fanboys and trolls shoved down everyones throat was all for nothing...movement is horrible at least for console and the overall fun factor( being in gunfights which is the whole point of a FPS) is completely lacking with the majority of my time running to the action just to be sniped or laid out by a 9 yr old prone just camping away or trying to get teammates to actual help complete objectives so unless they are friends it is every man for himself 95% of the time..this was a complete waste of money i def expected more this is EXACTLY just a newer MEDAL OF HONOR 1.5!!!! same sound same movement same look down to the T... Expand
  97. Dec 18, 2011
    One of the worst game I ve ever player. Too much bugs !!! It's shame ... Most of the time the characters disaspear. I had to start again each mission because of scripts that didn't launch ...
    What a very bad experience. DICE shows us how they can do very dirty job. Don't buy this game if you don't want to waste your money ...
  98. Dec 16, 2011
    DICE disappointed me with this new version of Battlefield full of bugs.
    It's just unbelievable... How can they sell a game with a huge number of bugs. I've updated my graphic card and sound card drivers. I've updated Battlefield but it still does not work after almost 1 month. Follow my advice : Don't by this game ... As far as I am concerned, my next action in the next hour will be to
    unsinstall this application. Expand
  99. Dec 13, 2011
    This game is pretty, and has good sound. when you are in a squad of your friends it can be really fun online. The problems is the games story mode is really subpar. When you are alone online the multiplayer feels cold and isolating. Other then everyone running around the world feels lifeless. It feels like you are in a cold computer render world, instead of feeling like you are in a real world.
    The environments don't feel like places people ever functioned in.
    If you love online shooters, don't care about the story, and have a lot of friends online all the time to play with it can be great.
    But that is a HUGE "if"...
  100. Nov 21, 2011
    Where are the bots? Where is the 4+player coop?

    I feel I need to write this view as a big group of gamers are being ignored in relation to this game and many other FPS games. COOP gamers that want to play as a team against the computer.

    I greatly enjoyed playing the other games in the franchise, particularly 1942 and Vietnam as I would play the vs bot modes with my friends for many
    hours. This latest version has a pretty dreadful 2 player only coop mode and no bot mode like the other games had. I find this disappointing. I admit I am not the best player in the world, nor the worst but I find the player vs player modes too frustrating on this game and get fed up of being killed without even seeing where the shot came from.

    EA if you want to see what consumer base you are missing out on having as customers, look at world of warcraft for example. It is a game with both player vs computer and player vs player modes. Which is more popular? Player vs computer.

    This is made all the more frustrating by the fact this game looks incredible, sounds incredible, has great vehicles and weapons. Unless I am willing to partake in the steepest learning curve ever and get repeatedly destroyed by some 'uber' 13 year old I am basically unable to take advantage of this.

    This makes this game the most frustrating currently in existence.

Generally favorable reviews - based on 61 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 60 out of 61
  2. Negative: 0 out of 61
  1. 86
    It's all a matter of taste, after all. They each provide a certain type of entertainment – when talking about Battlefield 3, it involves a bigger game, more open in its possibilities and more spectacular. But on a longer timeline, less frantic and with fewer Bruce Willis scenes than the mass appeal beast it set itself to dethrone.
  2. 80
    No, Battlefield 3 is not the best game of today. But good looking – definitely. It also has an absolutely addictive multiplayer. Who needs more? [Dec 2011]
  3. Dec 4, 2011
    Both a triumphant leap forward and a return to form for the Battlefield series. This is the best multiplayer shooter on PC. [Christmas 2011, p.58]