User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 4479 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. 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
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. Oct 30, 2011
    SP only review. Worst single player campaign I've played in ages. Homefront was more enjoyable... For starters, the auto-save system saves at the totally wrong times. Say you've got to climb four flights of stairs then kill enemies...instead of auto-saving before the enemies it saves at the bottom so you have to repeat the boring stair climbing. This happens everywhere. Next, say you have to kill one RPG enemy...the game will spawn infinite hordes of enemies until you kill that one guy. Totally unrealistic. And like everyone else said, the game won't let you even open a door without some idiot NPC doing it for you. Horrible. This is a textbook example of how to ruin a SP campaign. Expand
  6. 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
  7. 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.
  8. Nov 11, 2011
    Not better than Call of duty at all. In ways the game is a rip off from previous titles like MAG. People are always so quickly to bash COD, but realisticly COD has much more maps, content and fun factor than any BattleField game. Don't waste your money on this game.
  9. Nov 16, 2011
    Realism just doesn't seem to work for a game. It ruins all the fun, which is why I chose MW3 over BF3. MW3 is fun and fast-paced, and you'll play it a lot longer than you think. As for Battlefield 3, there's nothing to unlock. Basically the game remains on the same level from start to end. You start to feel frustrated along the game, because it feels like you're stuck and you're not reaching anything. You're not being rewarded. No titles, no emblems, nothing. It's boring. Expand
  10. Nov 29, 2011
    Game itself is an great looking and typical multiplayer, so don't expect any epic storyline in singleplayer - it's rather lazy tutorial. CoD's influence isn't the worst thing in this game, however it's absolutely not my taste. The annoyance is Battlelog, which makes me run internet browser to log in. What an brilliant idea... Seriously., whats next ? Will we have to run Windows Media Player in background to hear the sound and music in game ? Thats why i was so "generous" and gave it 4. Expand
  11. 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
  12. 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?
  13. Nov 2, 2011
    Even the best food is no good if it is served poisoned. It is the same with Battlefield 3, served with Origin, one of the most devious, impudent and malignant pieces of spy-ware the game industry had the spite to come up with. Where I live, most of what they put into the EULA is not even anywhere near legal.
  14. 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.
  15. Oct 26, 2011
    I might give the game another chance some day if it ever goes on steam, but the fact you HAVE to use EA's Origin is simply not worth it, I've had nothing but bad experiences with it since its launch day, how are EA doing digital distribution so wrong? I'd give the game a 6 or 7 out of 10 if it didn't require Origin, being honest I think the game is over-hyped and is an incredibly average shooter.
  16. 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.
  17. 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
  18. 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.
  19. 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
  20. Nov 1, 2011
    This game requires you to have an EA Origins account to play, if you previously registered a game with EA then you already have one of these accounts. Then you must download a 10gig install for the digital version, install Origins and a webbrowser plugin before you can even play the game. Then you have to wait for the updates, after downloading the files, the setting up of the game and its requirements took me 90 minutes last night the first time around, in what has to be described as a complete nightmare.

    By the end of it I was already extremely frustrated and annoyed with EA and this game. Not a good first impression.

    To get to this point I had to agree to no less than 3 different Eulas, one of which, the one for origins required me to give EA permission to collect data about me. No opt out option, if you want to play battlefield 3, you have to agree to this.

    Once everything was installed, I was presented with a webpage that is Battlefields main menu. That is right, Battlefield 3 has no standard in game menu. It is the ultimate in "you must have an internet connection to play" system, because without one, your not even going to get to the options screen to set things up. Even multiplayer games need the player to set up the game so it works best on their system and gives them a smooth frame rate. Unfortunately the best EAs auto system could do was Auto everything and set the screenmode to max, which is generally not good for a brand new shooter on my computer. Btw max res here is 2048 x 1152, that was the res it choose for my 3 year old Quadcore computer. I meat the requirements easily enough but I think you have to agree, that is a little extreme. Next I set up the server filter to give me a list of games that should have a good ping and tried to join one. 20 minutes later, I was still waiting for it to load the server. And that should have been a warning for me to give up and go and play Mount and Blade Warbands but I failed to take the hint and kept trying until 4 am by which time I gave up and went to bed. Just like the old gamespy system that added a few minutes to the join server process and often leads you to being disconnected because a server has filled up before you even get your game loaded, this has the same problem. Only this time its much much worse. The login process is basically downloading a list of players in the game. Only players join and quit so fast, it is out dated before you get a full list or even see the server.

    Once you get beyond the login and connecting messages, it starts to load the map, it is at this point you either see a black screen, or a loading map screen or a flashing white dot in the corner. If this works you can be connected in around 4 minutes. That was the time it took to let me join a server for the only 10 minute laggy game I managed to get in too since buying this game. I have literally only managed to play this for 10 minutes and then the map changed and I was disconnected and have not been able to join any more servers since then. The single player is joke, most of it a movie with parts where you have to hit space bar like crazy. Not the battlefield experience we buy the game for, thats for sure.

    The web interface plugin needed to join the game crashes out, Battlefield 3 crashes out, being able to join games at all seems to be a luxury reserved for the chosen ones, the lucky players that manage to play Battefield 3 without issue.

    After spending a total of 4 hours over 2 days to get in to the game, and only managing that one 10 minute game. I went searching the net for solutions and found this issue is pretty common. There are lots of people with this issue. The internet is literally full of reports of people who paid £40 for a game that does not let them join any servers. And none of the solutions posted actually work. Now I hate giving 10 scores or 0 scores but if a game does not work at all, then a zero score is all I can give it. So a zero score is what this is getting. If you buy this game, you may find it is a cause of frustration and anger more than fun, never has a system been such a nightmare to setup and install, so invasion in what it demands from YOU, and never has a game that needed all that been so unforgiving buggy and unplayable. Take my advice, do not throw £40 away, do not wait for the bugs to fixed, just write this one off as a bad job and cheer Ubi for their excellent online copy protection system that everybody hates because compared to this, that is pure joy!
  21. Nov 29, 2011
    The game tried to hard to be realistic and gameplay should always come first. There's flashlights that blind your screen from across the map in broad daylight. The particle effects went so overboard the game is one big dust cloud most the time. The muzzle flash from enemies and infared both blind you, If you look face the direction where the sun is overhead you get blinded, and i thought they were wearing helmets and goggles.....

    The maps are too big and too much time is spent wandering around doing nothing, the maps are poorly designed and if they were designed better it would force ppl into conflict more often.

    The knife never works unless you press up against the player, it's like the guy has no arms.

    The biggest issue and what makes this the worst campfest around is you get killed in 2 shots by any gun and the red flash you get when being shot blinds your entire screen so reacting is taking out of the equation.
  22. 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.
  23. Oct 30, 2011
    The first thing this game is doing well, it's the multiplayers mode. No doubt about that, that's an incredible experience, a satisfying one, especially in a squad with well known friends! And the good part of the review ends here. The rest of the game is a big letdown compared to Bad Company 2... EA is here to make money, offering a game that improve nothing, as they do with the sports franchises. The campaign is a non inspired copy of COD Black Ops, with bad writing and bad acting. As fas as I'm concerned, the Vietnam expansion of the second game on the row was the pinnacle of the BF experience. Don't lose money and time on Battlefield 3, persist with BC2 and/or wait for MW3. BC3 is a frustrating experience. Expand
  24. 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?
  25. 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.
  26. Oct 25, 2011
    Look, I know this is a multiplayer game. I do. I understand that the singleplayer is little more than an extended tutorial. Did an hour of multiplayer and it was really great. But you put the crappy singleplayer in there as well, so I'm damn well going to address it. It sucks. I mean really, the lack of effort is glaring. Let's start with story. Ok, so we all know the story this entire genre of games has. Story. Singular. The only thing that ever changes is if it's nazis, russians or terrorists. What's even worse is, it's told as a flashback within a retrospective. This method is not avanguard. It's not clever. It's not artistic. It's a bad idea, and it always was. Now, remember how in Bad Company 2 you usually had multiple avenues of approach? You could take the buildings on either side of the street just go for a frontal assault or clear that sawmill in any sequence you wanted, or in the desert mission pick which part to do first? Yeah, Bad Company 2 was linear. But it made an effort to pretend it wasn't. This game? Corridor shooter. I mean quite literally. I tried flanking constantly, every single time I was told "Leaving battlefield" and given a timer. Every time. The game is a sequence of corridors leading to slightly larger shooting galleries in which you're given no option how to approach the situation. You do it exactly in the one place the designer meant you to and that's. Then, enemies. Oh God this part is terrible. The enemies are inexcusable. First of all, all the terrorists are one guy. No, seriously. Every last one of them. The same model. Exactly the same. No difference. In two shooting galleries one after the other I stood crouched next to their spawn point and for a full minute each it went like this: Two identical clones enter. I shoot them both. Reload. Two identical clones enter. Repeat. This for a full minute each time. And most of the game is like this. So yeah, I'm sorry but if you didn't want people to judge this game on the singleplayer you should have stuck with the multiplayer, which is actually really good btw. Expand
  27. 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
  28. Nov 2, 2011
    Rush maps make bad conquest maps and conquest maps make bad rush maps, sums the game up. There are no real stand out great maps, and the maps designed for other game mods are down right horrible. The destruction and general atmosphere of combat feel like a downgrade from BC2, with bullets to shells not penetrating obstacles that should be trivial and the lighting is just down right ugly. Infantry combat is well done, vehicles and aircraft are an embarrassment to Dice. All in all a waste of £40. Expand
  29. 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
  30. Nov 6, 2011
    Graphic is astonishing despite moderate system requirement. All other aspects of SP are plain, boring and inexcusably worthless. MP at a first glance is good, but not excellent.
  31. 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
  32. 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
  33. Oct 26, 2011
    This game is sadly very terrible, despite all the hype it had been receiving. The campaign is short and unsatisfying, but then, the campaign have never been an important part of Battlefield. This might have been okay if the multiplayer was any good. The multiplayer is unbalanced and already there are several hacks for the PC version. Before unlocking flares or missiles, your jet has to be shot down again and again. Defenders in Rush have a massive advantage. UMP overpowered still. In close-quarters snipers are also overpowered. RPGs also OP. Massive glitches and server problems despite beta testing. The destruction was barely improved. Graphics difference from BC2 was about from Halo 3 to ODST. It felt like the game could have been like Vietnam (an expansion pack for BC2), had it not have had a single player and co-op. The teamwork is horrible. I'm not sure if it is right to blame DICE, though, because teamwork is based on the players instead of the game. The developer can only encourage/discourage it. And I feel like it was discouraged (from BC2 anyway). Battlelog a massive annoyance. It has many problems (for example half the time I can't even join a game). The game crashes/freezes once in 15 minutes. Be advised that I have an all-purpose entertainment computer that should be able to run the game without any problems according to the minimum requirements. Being a Battlefield fan all the way back from 1942, I am massively disappointed. Expand
  34. Oct 25, 2011
    Let me preface this by saying that the multiplayer (which is why people buy battlefield games) is amazing. It's better in every way than it's predecessors. The graphics are phenomenal and it runs quite well on a modern PC. The controls are tight, responsive, and make sense. Granted the singleplayer leaves a lot to be desired but, then again, this is a battlefield game. You have to expect sub-par single-player experiences in battlefield games. Why did I give this game a 3 after praising it so highly? Origin. Origin is probably the worst idea to ever come out of the cesspool of bad ideas called EA. It's laggy. It's buggy. It's slow. It crashes more than RAGE did on an ATI card at launch. It's in no way, shape, or form user friendly. It records and sends entirely too much personal information to EA. Worst of all: all EA games released on the PC from this point will only be available on this utter pile of garbage. Sorry DICE, you've lost a long time customer by agreeing to use this sorry excuse for an "online platform." Expand
  35. Nov 11, 2011
    This is not BF3 in any real sense of the title. It is a lousy rendition of bad company 2 or as its come to be known in the interwebs, bad company 2.5. It's CLEARLY a console port with weak and very limited controls. Origin is a nightmare and battle log is terribad. No main menu, no squad voip built in so multiplayer is chaos.

    Additionally, this was promised to be a BF2, not a BFBC2 sequel
    yet, there is no commander mode at all or for that matter even a squad leader. No more air drops or artillery. No orders so its basically become an every man for himself boom headshot fest of lame wanna be CoD players. I would give this game a 6 if it was actually named bad company 3, as it stands, its a BF3 and it disgraces the namesake of one of the best FPS games in history. 0/10. Expand
  36. 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
  37. 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
  38. 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.
  39. 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.
  40. 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.
  41. 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.
  42. 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
  43. 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.
  44. Oct 25, 2011
    After installing Origin and waiting for 1st day patches to fiinish downloading then updating my nVidea drivers I was already fairly negative, but I thought hey, all that hype, all those pretty trailers, should be worth it in the end. right? Single Player is mixture between dull and tedious, Multiplayer is buggy and some essential features missing. I'd like to say I'd try it again in a few months after 2 gig's worth of patches has been released, but I'm uninstalling it till then just to get rid of this spyware know as Origin. Expand
  45. Oct 30, 2011
    Great game for multiplayer (as expected) but Orign is awfull : you need to start the game from a browser, the interface is slow, ugly and if you don't have a 1080P screen you7 have to scroll to launch the game. Origin is heavier than steam, without game, without content and promotion, ... What's the point of doing another steam if there is nothing better in Origin...
  46. 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
  47. 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"
  48. Nov 11, 2011
    I have had this game since release, and have spent easily over 45 hours in forums and tweaking my brand new BEAST of a pc, and I still get a RANDOM CRASH FREEZE every 2-10mins, that needs a HARD reset! When this game is patched and 99% of the bugs are crushed, this will be a 10/10 game. At present it's way to buggy and not yet worth the price of admission, it's a massive disappointment to not be able to play this properly on release with an amazing machine (and yes I have updated the drivers thanks EA/DICE...!! Expand
  49. Nov 8, 2011
    Battlefield series fans were promised a sequel to battlefield 2. What we got was a sequel to bad company 2, with its lack of vehicle combat, small maps, non existent in game voice communication, modding tools and horrible user interface for PC. On top of that, the game requires battlelog to be able to be played, setup (controls, graphics).
  50. sYs
    Oct 27, 2011
    The actually vote for the game would be 4 . I brought the game and played SP, ok it was dull - lake any other shooter story and bla bla. The multiplayer - seems little bit to chaotic. Lack of server browser and so on. biggest downfall was the "ORIGIN" - the game gets 1 from me purely cause "origin" violates almost all my privacy.
  51. 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.
  52. Oct 30, 2011
    BF3 created so much frustration for me that I just had Origin give me a refund. The online battlelog and server browser is beyond annoying. One simple rule of "keep it simple" was completely ignored to force this new platform on customers. The game itself isn't horrible but in my opinion it's not the best Battle Field. I don't expect a new game to play completely like another version but the mechanics feel dumbed down and the air vehicles are lackluster. The recon class was changed for the worse, and over all I'm not a fan of a lot of the map designs or load outs. I'm not a Modern Warfare fan boy trying to write a bad review, I just think this game has implemented some very poor choices. Expand
  53. 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.
  54. Nov 9, 2011
    Terrible game. The single player is nearly nonexistent the multiplayer is trash the mechanics are terrible and unrealistic. Looks like MW3 wins again! Terrible game. The single player is nearly nonexistent the multiplayer is trash the mechanics are terrible and unrealistic. Looks like MW3 wins again!Terrible game. The single player is nearly nonexistent the multiplayer is trash the mechanics are terrible and unrealistic. Looks like MW3 wins again!Terrible game. The single player is nearly nonexistent the multiplayer is trash the mechanics are terrible and unrealistic. Looks like MW3 wins again!Terrible game. The single player is nearly nonexistent the multiplayer is trash the mechanics are terrible and unrealistic. Looks like MW3 wins again!Terrible game. The single player is nearly nonexistent the multiplayer is trash the mechanics are terrible and unrealistic. Looks like MW3 wins again!Terrible game. The single player is nearly nonexistent the multiplayer is trash the mechanics are terrible and unrealistic. Looks like MW3 wins again!Terrible game. The single player is nearly nonexistent the multiplayer is trash the mechanics are terrible and unrealistic. Looks like MW3 wins again! Expand
  55. Oct 26, 2011
    Visually this game is a 10 but the game play is a step backwards. 99% of people buy Battlefield for the multi-player so I won't even bother with the fail that is single player. Commander? Gone
    Squads remain in the game but are limited to 4 players and all the functionality from before is simply gone. Want to play with 1 or multiple other friends, on the same team, in the same squad?
    Good luck with that. You can't join the squad of your choice. You can't join a friends squad and they can't join you. You must rely on luck to get in the same squad. In its current state BF3 seems to be designed for the MW2 crowd and they lost their identity in the process.
    To top it off you have to launch the game through a 3rd party web browser. Whiskey Tango Foxtrot is that all about?
    BF3 has potential but they need to fix the teamwork features of the game. Every previous battlefield title surpasses BF3 in the team play department.
  56. 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
  57. 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.
  58. 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.
  59. 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!
  60. JLF
    Oct 28, 2011
    As always, EA doesn't impress. The singleplayer plot was boring. More boring than black ops. But it's alright, the game is supposed to shine in multiplayer, right? It doesn't. While the game IS a step up from BC2 and CoD, it's pretty much the same garbage as it was before. Except this time it has "new engine" slapped on it. I'm giving it one above minimum, because I'm sure it's concurrent is going to be even worse Expand
  61. Nov 11, 2011
    For those who only play solo, save your money. It is not worth more than $7.00. I'm sure the multiplayer rocks, but the single is quick and boring. Both this and the new COD are not worth purchasing for solo.
  62. Nov 9, 2011
    This game has the most awful balancing ever. Sniper rifles rule, vehicles feel really poor (at least on the pc) and the community itself is really awful. This makes the game very hard to get into. On top of the singleplayer being probably the worst I've ever played. Multiplayer is just as bad and just as boring. It's been done before in other games. The game doesn't really have the identity the original franchise had. A lot of hype and not much else. The game does absolutely nothing evolutionary and definitely not revolutionary, it's just stagnant in terms of moving the "realism" shooter forward. Expand
  63. Nov 9, 2011
    I like the self- affirming idiots who haven't actually played this marketing scam but give it 0's anyway. It is brain dead button mashers like these reviewer's who are so "awed" by trailers, special effects, "perks", ranks, ladders, etc. who sway the game developers to market this drivel. No squad voip? Who else remembers getting in the zone, in a good squad on a weekend and sneaking behind enemy lines, while talking to the commander about spotting in the back of 64 player Karkand on your favorite server where you recognize everyone? You can't do any of that in bf3. The interface is complete trash. Don't buy this game until they patch the crap out of it. Expand
  64. Nov 10, 2011
    Unfortunately EA DICE is not able to deliver all of the many promises made by marketing. From a technical perspective this look like an unfinished game. The singleplayer campaign suffers from basic technical issues where story progression is impossible as certain criteria has not been fulfilled. In multiplayer, that is supposed to be the games one strength, the pervasive technical deficiencies is even more obvious. Mainly clipping is a issue where you can be shoot because from you point of view you are in cover, while you opponent has an unobstructed view for a kill. If you are new to the first person military shooters there are other more balanced games available. Expand
  65. Nov 10, 2011
    Ea sux

    bf3 sux

    origin sux

    battlelog sux

    bf3 fanboys sux

    0 for u mr bf3! thats what u deserve! why spend time making a single player that sux with a multiplayer that is worse than bad company 2?
  66. 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!!!
  67. Nov 10, 2011
    This game has the worst fanbase... resorting to review bombing an undeserving game (MW3).... Shame on you. Every one of you that resorting to the shameful tactic of review-bombing MW3 should be ashamed of yourself!
  68. Nov 10, 2011
    This game is more of a prototype than a fully finished FPS. The frostbite 2 engine needs to work out some major kinks. If you're on the fence about which military shooter to pick up this year, do yourself a favor and get MW3. Maybe next time around battlefield will be the better online shooter, but for now there are far too many glitches to enjoy. Truly a shame, game had tons of potential. Little bit of a disappointment, but hoping for a better game next time. Expand
  69. 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.
  70. Nov 29, 2011
    Let me start by saying that EA is one of the worst companies out there mostly because of their incredibly bad customer support. I downloaded the game when it was half of and was excited as hell since I just purchased a $1000 rig to pay this game and was sorely disappointed when after updating all my drivers and making sure my PC was up to date with the latest software, The game cam up with a "Battlefield 3 has stopped working" error. After over 3+ hours of EA "support" they finally told me that my realtek onboard audio was prohibiting the game from running. In an attempt to call Bull I uninstalled my realtek audio drivers and disabled my onboard audio and it still wouldn't work. I have also tried all the "fixes" out there on the internet but still no dice. Until EA/DICE fixes this, this game gets a 0.

    P.S. I have a 6870 and a Phenom II X4 and 8GB Ram, should run fine.
  71. 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
  72. 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.
  73. 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
  74. Nov 11, 2011
    With the inclusion of the crapware Origin, this game deserves the ZERO it gets. Boycott EA has worked! Already, after 2 weeks of sales, BF3 has sold less than a million. This spells out an absolute disaster for EA games. Good. Its not the game that sucks by itself. No... Its probably a 9 otherwise. Combine the game with EA's poor relations to gamers, (treating gamers like crap) putting out Alpha's riddled with bugs so they can make money now, and fix problems way into the future, makes for a poor gaming company. MW3 has nothing innovative, but has sold 9.3 million on launch. Is MW3 better than BF3? No, not really. Its not about who's game is better designed. Its all about who treats their customers better. BF3 should have sales in the 5 million figure by now. But its just not going to happen. EA didn't listen to their customers, and now they are going to find out how much people hate EA, not BF3 in particular. With absolute dismal sales for BF3 and a word record on MW3.... The numbers tell the story. Not the reviews, but sales numbers. EA, here is a suggestion. Fire all the bigwigs, turn EA back into a gaming company instead of trying to monopolize on the gaming industry. Its not going to work. Steam is still the king of hill, and Origin is hated by most gamers. Listen to the numbers... Or you will find yourselves out of business, just like you destroyed so many independent gaming companies. Expand
  75. Oct 28, 2011
    The lag is unbearable, The non-existent hit-reg they claimed to have fixed is not fixed, The graphics suck, The game is less optimized than it was in beta, The Comma-rose is useless, The game constantly crashes for A Lot of players, There is no way to play co-op with friends, There has been 0 ZERO 0 communication from Dice on when how or even if they are fixing the issues
    The game is
    currently kicking players from servers that do not have the latest version of Punk Buster, But PB does not automatically update, The Campaign is all but 30 minutes of pure cut scenes,
    The Guns do ZERO damage, The game has become a sit and stare and mortar game, The maps all suck, they are just bc2 ports, This game is not a sequel to bf2 its a sequel to bc2 and should therefore be renamed Battlefield: Bad Company 3, Sniping is pointless because they added this stupid scope glare that lets everyone know your position, I don't understand why the game was working fine in beta then they went ahead and broke so much stuff
  76. Nov 16, 2011
    There are no in game menus and it makes you do everything in a web browser. If you can get the game to connect to a server there are tons of cheats and exploits. It has good graphics but the single player story is so bad it made me throw up.
  77. 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
  78. Oct 30, 2011
    Pretty much disappointed in all the nonsense of tossing silly medikits around, sniper scope glares and brighter-than-sun flashlights. Also, the game is ugly. It's hiding it all behind a mass of light effects and bloom and hdr. Gameplay is nothing to write home about - it's BFBC2.5. Single player sucked balls, that's enough said.
  79. Dec 12, 2011
    cannot be patched unless you use EA. Also, this is a port to the PC rather than a true build... I don't game on the PC to get the poor quality of a console. FAIL
  80. Oct 26, 2011
    sp is pathetic mp with high contrast,constant screen shakes,headbob,blue filter etc. you cant even play without a headache animations are ugly guns look bad sound is bad bolt snipers feel like toy guns there is glare even inside the scope small fov when scoping gliches,bugs game crashing all the time no in game menu no ping in the game no blood and gore etc. do your self a favor and save your money Expand
  81. Oct 28, 2011
    This game has a lot of potential, but it feels like it was rushed and the network code is terrible, even with super low latency and minimal packet loss you tend to experience glitches throughout the game.
  82. Nov 1, 2011
    I signed on to Metacritic only to rate BF3 because I feel so violated by both EA and Dice - by their sheer ignorance and hostility towards a paying customer. If you value your time (endless list of technical problems starting from Origin to Battlelog to the PC port itself), privacy (multiple shady EULAs and file scanning) or simply want to enjoy good games built by honest and respectful developers - do not spend your money on Battlefield 3. Collapse
  83. Nov 10, 2011
    pros: nice visuals. vehicles in mp are good

    cons: singleplayer is lifted almost directly form the mw series, mp battles are slow and only 5 maps? really?
  84. Nov 12, 2011
    For a game that's has amazing graphics, DICE has sure made it in a way that it affects playing the game negatively. There is such a thing as too much glare and lightning, there is such a thing as too much screen shaking from a grenade exploding across the map. Campaign was boring, drawn out, more linear than Final Fantasy 13 and it was just utter pointless. MP is alright when it works but with rampant day 1 cheaters and DICE's choice to use PUNKBUSTER the situation wont get better anytime soon. PC port has it's problems, especially for a FPS that's suppose to be played using a mouse and keyboard but the console versions of BF3 are superior without a doubt. I feel as if I paid more than I should have for a game that I know I was only going to play for MP, especially since DICE made it so obvious that they slacked off on the PC port and the single player. Disappointed greatly Expand
  85. 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.
  86. 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
  87. Dec 5, 2011
    Firstly, single player. In one word: BORING. Lots of scenes, fluid movements, lots of talking but it doesn't want you to play any further. Been there, seen it.
    Next, multiplayer. Firstly, the main problem. Client-side hit register. If your enemy hits you on their screen, you die regardless of your actual position on your screen. This, basically, defeats the whole purpose of having
    dedicated servers - your ping doesn't matter, if they killed you a while ago but you only saw it now because of THEIR large ping, its your problem. Its the reason I stopped playing COD:MW2 (p2p multiplayer, client-side hit register), its the reason I didn't buy COD:MW3 (same p2p). Its the reason I'm trying to get a refund on BF3 now.
    Other things to mention about MP: huge but empty maps, multi-layered buildings that prevent you from seeing the outside (its too bright), tanks that are nearly indestructible to infantry (3 rockets to kill it in hardcore - you'll just die), planes that have no purpose other than fighting other planes (they can't capture points, can't deliver more than 1 player to a point).
    Hardcore is no longer hardcore. You don't get infinite health, but the minimap is ALWAYS on, minimap spotting lights you up as soon as you fire a gun, killcam (which reveals your position) is almost always shown, sniper scope glare makes it easy to find the sniper no matter how good their cover is. And best of all - the most powerful sniper rifle still doesn't kill with 1 bullet. Even assault rifle HEADSHOT won't kill them with 1 hit. What kind of hardcore mode is this?
    Class balance is simply awful. Medic gets it all: infinite health with medkit, 100 points per revive (same as a kill), grenade launcher (replaces medkit), assault rifles (!). Support now has only light machine guns and... ammo packs! And thats it! As a result support is now least popular class, in many cases there is no one to ask for ammo. Recon is same good old sniper, engineer is same good old rocket launcher guy.
    Weapon balancing is simple: the more you progress, the better the gun. Surely you can hit and even kill with anything, but F2000+IRNV = undefeated. Add ability to put a silenver and 3rd attachment to it and you'll know it simply defeats the purpose of tactical gameplay. You can just rambo it all. In BFBC2 we couldn't rambo 24/7 because best gun was in the hands of support and medkit was in the hands of medic, and you could only find cover when being shot at by a sniper - hard to tell where they were. But at least they didn't kill you with client-side hit register (you could run into cover and it did prevent you from being hit).
    I am amused at people who are able to play this game for 100s of hours. I'm trying to get a refund to buy something else.
  88. Dec 6, 2011
    I feel this game was quite a disappointment on many levels... I think you should just stick with Bad Company 2. Might be worth a $20 buy later down the road.
  89. 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
  90. 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.
  91. 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
  92. Oct 27, 2011
    Horrible, horrible. First let me say, that I have always been a console gamer. Although this time I built a PC specifically because of this game. All I have to say is that the performance is pretty impressive, the graphics are good and the gameplay is decent. They managed to fix a good amount of bugs during the beta, but one huge issue remains.. And that is the LAG. The lag in this game is like no EVERY server, there is constant rubberbanding lag that makes every multiplayer match near impossible to play. This is an absolute joke and I cannot believe they did not fix this most important issue in the beta.

    Needless to say I am done with PC gaming and will be moving to Xbox. Selling my PC and playing on a console that doesn't have issues. PC gaming is not like the old days nore more, it is now trash...
  93. 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
  94. Nov 5, 2011
    The Good: Gun Customization, Vehicles, Graphics, Soldier Camo, Individual/Squad Perks, Suppression System (decreases your accuracy/vision when being shot at), Squad System (minor bugs in it)

    The Bad: Hit Detection (major game breaker, no fix yet), Weapon balancing (example: assault rifles beat sniper rifles), Random Game Crashes (no fix yet), Destruction System is decent, but not fully
    implemented yet (wtf, beta part 2?), Map redesigning required (alot of "meat grinder" areas on maps), bad community, user-interface needs a redesign, Vehicle Perk/Unlock rebalance, Server stability needs improvement, more co-op missions needed (only 6 right now) Expand
  95. Nov 11, 2011
    Bad copypaste from CoD in single player and from BF:BC2 in mulitplayer. But single sooo boooring... So many bugs, stupid Origin, but much much PR. Not true.
  96. Oct 26, 2011
    The game's single-player is more linear, glitcher and worse than any CoD game, which is saying ALOT. Being a hardcore fan of BF2, BF2142, and BFP4F, I found the multi-player extremely unsatisfying with less UI features than 5-6 year old videogames, EA Origin, missing classes, really mediocre MoH 2010 gunplay, and glitched vehicle combat. I uninstalled it after 10 hours in Open Beta and the full game is just as disappointing. [[[Whats sad is EA forced reviewers not to release negative reviews until after the game's release week.]]] Expand
  97. Oct 25, 2011
    The single player is HORRIBLE! It is like they didn't even work on it. Graphics don't look good at all even when set at ULTRA and the polygon counts are really low. The "scriptedness" couldn't be worse. And I thought MW2 was bad!
  98. 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.
  99. Oct 27, 2011
    I'd write a lengthy review but I already wasted enough time playing it. I'll just sum it up: Boring single player with a **** load of cut scenes and listening to people talk. Co-op is nothing more than what mw2 did with theirs, a complete bore. Multiplayer is a joke, as per usual with BF games. New Title: Crawl of duty. Don't waste your money.
  100. Oct 31, 2011
    The game itself may be a 9 when it is patched, to run on GeForce 8/9/200-Series without jerky mouse jitter stutter problem and corrupted shadows and without crashing after a few minutes. But Origin is a absolute no-go, because it searches your whole hard drives and collect and sends personal information. It e.g. even scans directories of tax or bookkeeping software. It is plain and simple spyware, which is violating most western countries laws, e.g. consumer and data safety laws in Germany. If you don't mind about privacy and your personal data at all or using a second PC solely for gaming, where no personal data is stored, you may still buy and install Origin to play it. Expand
  101. Nov 1, 2011
    I signed on to Metacritic only to rate BF3 because I feel so violated by both EA and Dice - by their sheer ignorance and hostility towards a paying customer. If you value your time (endless list of technical problems starting from Origin to Battlelog to the PC port itself), privacy (multiple shady EULAs and file scanning) or simply want to enjoy good games built by honest and respectful developers - do not spend your money on Battlefield 3. Collapse

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]