User Score
7.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 4297 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 11, 2011
    4
    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
  2. Nov 8, 2011
    4
    I'm sure that this game was made with the best intentions in mind. The singleplayer looks tight and well made, the multiplayer looks to be the best this year, and the graphics are fantastic. Why, then, did I rate this game so badly? It is, simply, unplayable. Due to bugs still left in the game 2 weeks after release and after beta, the game requires over 2GB vram to be playable at all (this is not mentioned in the recommended settings, which ask for a paltry 1GB), and without it, the will play smoothly for a few minutes before utilizing all the ram in the computer at once. Leaving a bug in that makes the game unplayable for so long makes me more than a little mad, and so, I am forced to dock more than a few points. Expand
  3. Oct 27, 2011
    0
    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 other...in 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...
    Expand
  4. Nov 4, 2011
    3
    Battlefield Bad Company 2 was a better game in every respect, that's all you need to know, how can you take such a big step backwards? It's even buggier than BC 2, one can only wonder if it was Dice or EA who's responsible for making this game a mess. The game industry is taking everything that's bad about Hollywood and incorporating it.
  5. Dec 27, 2011
    0
    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.
  6. Nov 14, 2011
    1
    SP is pretty poor. GFX are very nice but gameplay and story is nowhere near as compelling as the MW games.
    I can't play the MP because Origin doesn't want to work for my PC and EA don't seem to do customer support, so I'm left with a game I can't play or trade in because I've used my code. This will be the last EA game I ever buy.
  7. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    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).
  8. Oct 30, 2011
    2
    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
  9. Apr 18, 2012
    0
    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
  10. Nov 7, 2011
    1
    let me start by saying. All of you people crying about ORIGIN please be quiet. I have not had one problem with it, the game on the other hand..
    Single player is in my opinion worse than MOH which next to duke nukem has to be the worst game of recent history.
    Mulitplayer is horrid. The capture points are all too close together. The servers or the game in fact cannot handle 16 players never
    mind 64. The netcode seems very broken or out of sync, you can shoot people until your clip is empty then die from 1 shot. There are lots of links about this, google it. This is the biggest flaw in the shooter that was bf3, I know lots of people do not see the problem, this is mainly because they have no talent and any kill for them is a good kill.

    to recap

    single player ´´the dullest experience ever.

    multiplayer´is so broke you might as well play it on a console.

    I would think about buying this game in a year but then again they never fixed bc2.

    stay away, dont believe the hype
    Expand
  11. Oct 26, 2011
    0
    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
  12. Feb 17, 2012
    2
    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
  13. Mar 18, 2012
    0
    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
    Expand
  14. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    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
  15. Nov 1, 2011
    0
    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!
    Expand
  16. May 17, 2012
    3
    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
  17. Oct 25, 2011
    3
    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
  18. Apr 13, 2013
    2
    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
    everywhere.

    The only positive thing i have to say about this game is the engine, graphics and sound. The rest is utter
    Expand
  19. Nov 11, 2012
    0
    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.
    Expand
  20. Nov 5, 2011
    3
    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
  21. Oct 29, 2011
    3
    What could have been an otherwise great FPS has been utterly marred by the road to its release and the marketing wrapper that it has been smothered with. The game itself looks/sounds fantastic and is fun, if not a bit samey (though the single player may as well not have been there as its more of a movie/tutorial than anything). That being said, what users were forced to endure because of EA's bullheadedness is unacceptable. Between the privacy concerns and the the fact that EA has decided to use their publisher clout to strongarm their failed and rebranded EA Store into relevancy by forcing it on everyone by making big name titles like this require it, is just short of a direct attack on the sensibilities of the gaming community. I only wish the gaming community was united enough to send a message to these people and let them know this is not competition, this is leveraging power to remove choice, and that between removing our options and not having the decency to ask us to opt in, rather opting to invade our privacy, this whole scenario has been egregiously NOT OK. Expand
  22. Oct 25, 2011
    2
    There was so much hype abt this game, I thought it was going to blow me away watching all the videos. Am not much into MP, prefer campaign mode. giving it a 2 for not being even half as good as I was expecting it to be.
  23. Nov 29, 2011
    2
    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.
    Expand
  24. Nov 2, 2011
    4
    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
  25. Nov 29, 2011
    4
    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
  26. JLF
    Oct 28, 2011
    1
    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
  27. Nov 11, 2011
    0
    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.
  28. Oct 26, 2011
    3
    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
  29. Feb 17, 2012
    0
    Game simply doesn't work. Punkbuster kept kicking me until the game became unplayable. Lots of people have been experiencing the same thing and DICE refuse to/don't know how to fix it. It recently attempted to make me redownload 4GB of the game files for no reason, there hadn't even been an update released. After weeks of trying to get it to work I uninstalled the game and the terrible Origin DRM that it came with. What an absolute waste of time and money. Also the online community is plagued by rude teenage fanboys who'll attack you at the very suggestion that the game isn't working, possibly on EA's payroll /shrug Expand
  30. Nov 11, 2011
    2
    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.
  31. Oct 26, 2011
    0
    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.
  32. Nov 11, 2011
    0
    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
  33. Oct 28, 2011
    0
    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
    Expand
  34. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    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
  35. Oct 25, 2011
    2
    It's a team based, squad focused, tactical shooter. The year of its release is 2011. It's on the platform that invented online multiplayer and pioneered real time voice chat. And you can't talk to your squad.

    How are you supposed to work as a team when you can't communicate?

    It's quite a shame really. The graphics are amazing, the gunplay feels good, the maps and objectives seem like
    they could be fun. I'd probably rate the game an 8 or higher if it had this absolutely essential feature. But without communication, I might as well be playing a single player game with bots. I'm deeply disappointed. Expand
  36. Oct 26, 2011
    4
    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.
    Expand
  37. May 8, 2012
    2
    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
  38. Oct 25, 2011
    0
    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!
  39. Jan 13, 2012
    4
    I regret buying this game. First off you should know that this game launches on a 3rd party website. A website not a game, a website that keeps track of all your progress. I bought this game, expecting to play a Battlefield game, yeah didn't happen. All you get is a sad singleplayer experience with a completely unfair, unbalance multiplayer. Where 90% you are outmatch simply because the opposite player has more equipment than you. There is so much customization that it completely destroys balance. Out of all the Battlefield games I've played, no, out of all the FPS multiplayers I've played this has to be the biggest pile of ridiculous I've been on. Where with previous Battlefield games destruction was a staple in the Battlefield diet it's now just a simple appetizer offering barely any destruction. With the ridiculous amount of customization, limited destruction, and huge maps where it would take hours to actually find any action you are left with just the spawn screen due to the incisive problem of camping. You thought it was bad in *insert game* you have no idea how bad it is in this game. You're expected to find someone prone on the ground in a bush on a map the size of Texas and only after you had to run 3 mile to a place just to get killed, sent back to GO, do not collect $200. Some people may argue "Oh you're not playing it right, be patient, don't leave your base", I bought this game for the action element in a First Person Shooter not a First Person Hide and Seek in a bush for 2 hours. Players on other FPS don't nearly camp this hard, not even in Modern Warfare! Save yourself the trouble and DO NOT waste your money on this game! There are plenty other brand new games coming out and if you were thinking about getting rid of Bad Company 2, DON'T!!! Bad Company 2's multiplayer game-play is 100x better than Battlefield 3. Expand
  40. Nov 16, 2011
    0
    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.
  41. Nov 11, 2011
    0
    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
  42. Feb 15, 2012
    1
    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.
  43. sYs
    Oct 27, 2011
    1
    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.
  44. Feb 15, 2014
    0
    This game is too buggy. There are still many people like me can't even start the game or crash pretty easily after some updates. We are not buying a game to "fix" it or keep finding solutions on the Internet.
  45. Mar 19, 2013
    4
    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
  46. Apr 11, 2012
    4
    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
  47. Nov 2, 2011
    0
    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.
  48. Nov 19, 2011
    0
    game is crap , engine is like MOH from dice and with great browser game choosing fail. also you live 1 sec if youi r not using sniper. graphic is crap also .MW3 is bad also so better pass both games if you can.
  49. wr2
    Nov 5, 2011
    0
    The game's SP campaign clearly represents the rare case when you hate your comrades more than your enemies. Oh, wait, you hate not your comrades, you hate the stupid programmers who scripted them to become unstoppable bulldozers pushing you out of cover and right under enemy gunfire. Seeing a good firing position behind a reliable cover? Wait, don't rush to it yet, there is a very good chance that bot scripting guy saw it too. Because, you know, his bots are more valuable than your stupid character, and he hadn't bothered to think about your natural moves, so you will be squeezed out indefinitely. The real problem is quite simple: there is no advanced AI for NPCs. Or, rather, there is no AI at all. Bots from both sides follow predestined routes, kill each other at predestined times, your actions don't affect anything at all, and playing at hard difficulty means that in tight spots you have to memorize bots' moves, then carefully maneuver among them. If you break the script somehow, say, by staying behind your squad, you will eventually find out that enemy stops moving. They are out of scripted moves and have no idea what to do next. I know this is a multiplayer game, all right. But what's the point of adding a single player campaign if its only accomplishment is total frustration among gamers? Expand
  50. Nov 11, 2011
    4
    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.
  51. Oct 25, 2011
    4
    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
  52. Sep 15, 2013
    3
    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.
    Expand
  53. Oct 27, 2011
    0
    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.
  54. Nov 4, 2013
    1
    Disappointing and falsely advertised. Typical EA.
    Most features which DICE talked about aren't even in the game.
    A huge step backwards from Battlefield 2 in every way.
  55. Oct 30, 2011
    4
    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.
  56. Nov 1, 2011
    0
    You know you have a winner of a game when the single player version is so heavily scripted it's unforgiving to the point of insanity and your multiplayer aspect has the tactical flashlight as being the best item ever (as it blinds everyone even in broad daylight). Some of the maps are horribly designed and not balanced for team play. Advancement is the epitome of carrot dangling to the extreme. Sure, it makes you feel great when you get a ribbon, but this is nothing more than a grind to keep players coming back for more of the same garbage served on EA's Origin (which has issues as well). The game looks fantastic and sounds equally fantastic, but core game design and levels are not well thought out and only exist to keep you grinding away. Expand
  57. Oct 28, 2011
    0
    Origin even spies your return of tax or cellphone backup, battlelog is the biggest crap ever. The game is full of bugs, the Singplayer is watching most of the time (without being able to do anything) boring - stolen from other FPS - scripted scenes and missions. The MP offers nothing new compared to BC2 and MoH - besides Maps, Perks for every crap, Textures and some (ok they are good) animations. Overall the game would be O.K, but Origin and Battlelog let the score crash into the negative (if it would be possible). 0/10 Expand
  58. Feb 13, 2012
    0
    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
  59. Oct 28, 2011
    0
    multiplayer lacks skill and teamplay, russian announcer speaks english, and battlelog is a satan's gift. ....................................................................................................
  60. Oct 31, 2011
    0
    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
  61. Jun 28, 2012
    0
    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
  62. Dec 12, 2011
    0
    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
  63. Oct 30, 2011
    4
    Firstly, let me tell you that this game is awesome. The graphics, animations and sound are top notch.
    The campaign is mediocre but then if you bought BF3 for the SP, there's something wrong with you.
    Now the reason for the low score is that the game is totally unplayable. Sure there are some people who haven't had a single problem , you are the lucky ones and I envy you but there are 10
    more people for 1 of you who are not able to play the game for more than 5 minutes. The game crashes with a stuttering sound after 5 mins into a MP session. The stuttering on this game is unimaginable on certain high end cards as well. When i pay $60 to play a game i don't expect to spend 10 hours finding a solution to a problem running the game. Kudos to DIce and EA for not porting this from the consoles but your ignorance to customer grievances on Battlelog has to be brought to the forefront.
    You had an amazing game in your hands and you messed it up. Stay away from this title , atleast on the PC until these issues are rectified.
    Expand
  64. Nov 3, 2011
    2
    This is the biggest dissapointment of the year so far. What could have been an amazing game turned out to be a crappy first person shooter that we've all seen before. I know battlefield is all about the multiplayer, but even that dissapoints. DICE has failed to deliver what they pronmised. But the graphics are good and all.
  65. Oct 25, 2011
    0
    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
  66. Oct 29, 2011
    3
    The 3 points go to the amazing singleplayer and multiplayer combined with stunning graphics. The -7 points go to EA's invasive Origin where it scans, mines absolutely every data possible.

    NO, EA, this is not how you **** with the gamers!
  67. Oct 30, 2011
    1
    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...
  68. Oct 25, 2011
    0
    This is not a Battlefield game. This is COD on a nicer engine, with better maps. If you like COD, you'll love this, but all die hard BF fans will get bored quickly as the lack of gameplay and focus on personal gain and unlocks clowds your vision.
  69. Sep 20, 2012
    2
    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.
  70. Oct 25, 2011
    4
    What could have been a great game seriously let down by the developers. Multiple issues that were reported from the alpha through the beta by many still exist. With bugs and glitches that were also not present previously. It honestly feels like a half finished game. Things that they should have known people hated from bf:bc2 completely ignored.
    The lack of basic things, no team balance, no
    option to select the squad you want. half complete features, for example commorose, missing simple things like requesting ammo or health, but even the options there can't be heard by your team so it is pointless.
    Game isn't built to be a battlefield any more, took too many ideas from cod. Now its suck in the middle doing a worse job then both and nothing better then either.
    That's just the MP, the SP is linear, boring and so heavily scripted, you can't do anything the game doesn't want.
    A hefty patch is the only thing that will fix this, thoroughly underwhelming and a massive disappointment.
    Expand
  71. Oct 25, 2011
    0
    After a few hours of playing it is really obvious that this is a bad company game.

    large maps, killed by small boundries clustered flag positions poor vehicle balance no public server files no mod tools more focus on graphics and unlocks, not core gameplay.
  72. Oct 25, 2011
    3
    great graphics but its NOT what i excepted from a FROSTBITE 2 engine. single player is failure all the way. in my opinion game was developed too fast to fit just before next call of duty...
  73. Nov 5, 2011
    0
    Callofdutyfield: Bad Company. Dumbed down in every respect. CoD style gameplay (CoD is a bad word for any serious pc gamer, and deservedly). Might be considered a successor for Bad Company but certainly not for bf2. Hardcore mode feels like easy/normal.
    Singleplayer total joke.
    Killing of medic class worst idea ever. Now everyone has either medpack or paddles. They boast they promote
    teamplay by killing off medic class, the only dedicated team player???!!!!??
    Destruction worse than bc2. Building collapse still heavily scripted and debris is not persistent or interactive. Can't destroy a fcking chair with tank shoot.
    Jets fly at speeds you never know if pilot isn't doing a free fall kamikaze suicide run.
    Sound is realistic. So realistic it hurts the game. Explosions sound a lot worse than bc2 and most guns sound similar or downright same.

    ...and many many many more flaws...

    I cannot see this game be played for more than 2 years from now. Compare that to bf2 which is still actively played today (6 years after release). Mark my words in 2 years time there's bf4, and then 5,6,7,8,9.....lack of mod tools is meant to deny the community to prolong the lifespan of this game by correcting fundamental flaws so that EA can dish out new battlefield every 1/2 years (CoD). The excuse they made for not releasing the mod tools is a total insult....I could go on like that forever. Not touching any other EA game, only through torrents.
    Expand
  74. Oct 25, 2011
    4
    The overall experience with this game is average, it could have been FANTASTIC, if DICE had not copied other shooters in the market, to me this game is just a mix of Bad Company 2, Medal Of Honor, Call Of Dutty and Battlefield 2, all together in a nicer engine, that looks great butt not as great as they made you believe in all those nice trailers...
    The annoying battlelog combined with the
    unnecessary origin spyware app do not help either. Expand
  75. Jun 4, 2013
    3
    Terribly linear single player, multiplayer horribly optimized and quick match making is awful, I would rather play the older BF series than this hunk of crap.
  76. Oct 25, 2011
    4
    If you were expecting a classic great menu system for the game good luck because there isn't one and the real disappointing thing about BF3 is you are forced to run the game through EA's Origin - Not standalone and not through STEAM - EA really dropped the ball on forcing all of its customers to run this through a beta version of a E-Game hosting service... Not to mention the menu-system for the game is all based online which makes you feel like you really got ripped off because it looks cheap trust me the only thing nice about it is Battlelog which is kinda cool but it's EA's way of saying here run Origin or Don't play the game.

    This is an OK game as it sits for the time being but yet it deserves a 40% rating due to several issues right now - First being that EA has released a game that has many graphical, gameplay, multiplayer, map, vehicle issues for instance green-flickers and being able to glitch through maps on multiplayer its nowhere near as smooth as it was shown in the previews that im sure everyone has seen. Granted it is a new game but the vehicle issues and the unrealistic nature of Battlefield 3 due to vehicles not producing realistic amounts of destruction and damage really hurt this titles reputation.

    To best describe Battlefield 3 would be a cross between Homefront and Modern Warfare 2 - Homefront being due to the graphical and sketchy gameplay and Modern Warfare 2 due to BF3 trying to cut in on some profits from MW3 which currently sits at a total loss to people who have bought this game (and yes I bought the limited edition BF3). I bought 2x EVGA GTX-580 SC cards specifically for this game and yet the texture draws and polished look this game should have isn't there and not to mention the annoying lag on multiplayer games that are supposedly low-ping.

    It has potential to be an awesome game but as it sits currently I wouldn't invest in it until it at least drops $20-30 or they fix hundreds of bugs and errors. Well that's all I have to say hope you found this somewhat useful.
    Expand
  77. Oct 25, 2011
    0
    The single players, really contains crappy missions. Nothing really, no interesting story, no time and value put into it. I would have way more recommended it if the developers really forgot about the single player and just focused on the multiplayer part, and now they didn't it filled with bugs and glitches which then you get excuses that it's a beta or an alpha.
  78. Oct 26, 2011
    1
    Poor game and not anything like BF2, on PC it's a console port in gameplay terms, no in game ping, no in game VOIP, crap aircraft mechanics, crap squad management where you can't create a squad without going through some **** commo-rose is a joke, maps are a joke with clustered flags, it's like playing COD on a big map. Aircraft/ vehicle controls are shockingly bad and feel like they just imported the xbox 360 system. On top of that there are way to many bugs to list, poor hit reg because of the broken ass netcode that lets cheats rule the server because of the client side hit detection. In summary BF3 is nothing more than Bad Company 2.5 but not as fun as even BC2 and not a patch on BF2. Fans of BF2/2142 stay away, find something enjoyable to play, leave this **** to the COD generation, those that appreciate teamplay and proper vehicle combat on proper big maps will have to look elsewhere. Expand
  79. Oct 26, 2011
    0
    This is not a true sequel to bf2 at all Lack of teamwork Small map Squad management broken Common rose is garbage and broken No VoIP Battle log is **** Origin is **** Vehicles were underpowered Jets are slow and always die by stingers Stingers weapon is overpowered and stupid Motar is overpowered and seriously ???? Unlimited weapons Horrible net code Scope glint Contrast are way to high....

    Horrible game and should not name "battlefield 3" because it's not a true sequel to bf2

    Largest map my ass...
    Expand
  80. Oct 26, 2011
    0
    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 26, 2011
    0
    EA ruined another great franchise. I hope they go bankrupt ASAP. After they trolled Activision so hard... they release this unfinished game. The singleplayer is so lame, you have no idea. The multiplayer has more bugs than the open-beta phase.

    No squads, origin stupid system, battlelog instead of an in-game menu, lag, bugs and stupid design decisions have ruined this game. :(

    I miss BF2
  82. Oct 26, 2011
    0
    Potentially great game, completely hamstrung by the epic fail that is Origin and Battlelog. I wish I could get a refund. Hell, battlelog doesn't even recognize the install if you have BF3 Limited Edition instead of BF3 standard.
  83. Oct 26, 2011
    3
    Lets just begin by stating that i joined metacritic just for this review. I have been waiting for this game for awhile and have been stoked just to play it. After playing the beta, i was severly disappointed. The glitches galoore made it insane and more frustrating then fun to play. I figured since it was a beta they would fix it, well they did fix some of the beta glitches, just not near enough for a final copy. The multiplayer feels rushed at best and hardly seems to work. The game is fun when its not glitching and the servers aren't crashing (which happen about every hour for the xbox). I give this game such a low rating because of the hype and expectations that the critics and trailers it gave, it hardly lives up to expectations. I love battlefield more then call of duty, but i will definently be picking up CoD now and probably tossing this game off until they fix the issues, which with EA's poor community service skills, will take quite awhile. Expand
  84. Oct 26, 2011
    1
    Just a below average shooter. Yes it's very pretty, but the graphics add nothing to the gameplay (and in some cases actually get in the way). Gunplay simply isn't visceral or fun, detached is a term I'd associate with it. Single player is a travesty, there's no flow you just wait all the time for your squad to catch up (and for you to find the exact right place to stand to trigger the script) and the next quicktime event to take place. Coop is just a very generic horde-rush/nazi zombie like mode. MP is simply dull, generic and not much fun. Maps are either chokepoint based or desolate empty spaces designed for vehicle only gameplay (even the sniper rifles have been gimped). It's the very definition of all polish and no substance. And that's before you get into the hell hole of the Origin/Battlelog/additional VOIP client system, slow loading times, annoying "music". Not worth buying, massively overhyped in the press. Save your money, send a message to EA and don't buy this (also bug ridden) rubbish. I'm giving it 1 for the graphics at least. Expand
  85. Oct 27, 2011
    0
    Huge experience of mine with so called magic-engine frostbite began with bad company 2, where I had impossibly high ping (over 500) no matter what, all downloads are off, every program is shut down, but still, bad company 2 is lagging. I'm not telling that because of punkbuster I couldn't play it for a year, it just crashed and crashed. Now, I seen alpha and beta. It just shocked me. They managed to turn frostbite 1.0 into frostbite 0,75 in alpha, then frostbite 0,5 in beta, and now its just a bunch of buggy code within the released product. Even good physics, they've managed to destroy it all. I'm really shocked of DICE and will boycott all of their products since this day. Worst game I have ever tried to play, as its just bugs and bugs, nothing else. It doesn't deserve anything higher than 0. Expand
  86. Oct 27, 2011
    1
    a checkmark next to everything fps communites have not asked for, including the BF community and not all maps are avail. for 60+ usd. EA's stock price is more important than you and they have shown it with this "game".
  87. Nov 7, 2011
    3
    Hide in the bushes and snipe. Or leave the bushes and get sniped. Or maybe you can get blinded by a flashlight in broad daylight from 100ft away. Awesome.
  88. Oct 28, 2011
    0
    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.
  89. Oct 28, 2011
    1
    Preorderd this game expecting to play a few days after shipped from release on the 25th. Unbeknownst to me, Pacific region customers are restricted from the game until November 2nd. This in itself was bad. What made it worse was when querying EA's customer service via live chat, the first agent more than once ignored questions I posed and instead kept saying "May I help you" (this was after a 40 min wait to speak to them and 5-10 min wait between each response that was written to them which dragged out the conversation.) When I asked the last to answer the question I posed, they actually hung up on me and I spent another 40 minutes waiting to talk to another agent who took over an hour and a half (due to the 5 to 10 minute delays in their responses) to eventually escalate a complaint to a supervisor.... who wouldnt be addressing the issues until next week(28th of October was the date of the conversation). Completely have no interest in the game now because of this experience and wish I'd never bothered with it. Expand
  90. Oct 28, 2011
    0
    Summary: Battelfield 3 + Origin = Fail! This game is really the last. I was really looking forward to it such a long time but realizing what EA is trying to do with me and my PC is more than bold. I couldn't even install it as I don't agree with Origin. At least, i could send it back to Amazon. Sometimes I really wonder what the publisher think about us, theirs costumers ...
  91. Oct 28, 2011
    0
    1.origin,spying,scanning you pc and not even working,yes steam does the same but at least it works
    2.nehhative mouse acceleration,cant bind some jeys,no difrent sensitivity for vehicles,keyborad left key problems etc.
    3.pathetic visual effects that will damage your eyes and give you a headache
    blinding lights,glare,bloom,high contrast,blue filter,headbob and other constant screen shakes

    4.pathetic sounds,sniper sounds like a toy gun and it has that damage also
    ugly guns and animations
    5.they cut a part of the game and then sell it as an expansion
    crashing,bad optimization,lag and a ton of other problems
    Expand
  92. Oct 28, 2011
    3
    I have been looking forward to this game for months, really excited as i am a big battlefield fan. Got the game this morning, took it home and then proceeded to spend nearly 3 hours trying to install it!!!!! I had heard Origin was a pile of steaming **** from countless other users but nothing prepared me for this. Cut a lony story short, i ended up downloading a crack which bypasses origin and battlelog compleatly. Only problem with that is i cant frickin go online, only single player is availible.
    Single player is a total joke to, my rig runs 2 GTX570s graphics cards in SLI (with new Nvidia driver) but the graphics are frickin awful, what is with that water droplet/dirt effect on screen during game play?? Another bug bear i have as well is the poor gamepad support, i have by PC rigged upto my 55" TV so i use a wireless 360 controller, now the game recognises that i have the controller attached and lets me play with it in game, however there are some parts in the game which i have to press a certain button at certain time, only problem is these buttons arent on the gamepad but rather on the mouse or keyboard!! What is the point of that?? After speninding 15 mins remapping the keys, i carry on playing the game only to be prompted with a instruction to press Z to go into the prone postion, having gone into prone by pressing a remapped button on the gamepad the message stayes on screen, during this time i am unable to pick up a RPG to blow up the hotel in the first level, only when i press Z on the keyboard am i allowed to pick up the RPG!!! Sloppy Dice sloppy. i am giving this game a low score purely because of origin and a very poor single player plus the points mentioned above. I refuse to have origin on my PC and am sure i will miss other EA games because of it, there loss not mine. If the game ever makes it's way to Steam i will be happy to reload it and give multiplayer a go. Rockstar tried a similar thing with GTA5 and Social Club and we all know how that eneded. For now the game has been uninstalled and will be heading back to the store for a refund. Cmon EA i love some of your stuff, but for the love of god, get rid of the mandatory use of origin and battlelog please!!!!
    Expand
  93. Oct 29, 2011
    2
    2 points for the anticipated game I have yet to get a taste of. Minus every other point for how broken Origin is. Releasing a game that is locked to a third party software like Origin, and then have the application so broken and unfinished is just unacceptable. Not to mention one of the worst and most useless support chatlines in the history of gaming.
  94. Oct 30, 2011
    4
    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
  95. Oct 30, 2011
    4
    What an utterly disappointing campaign. Total rip off of CoD, and after that huge marketing campaign to lead us to believe that it would be awesome. Take the plane mission for example - it looks fantastic, I've got a GTX570 and settings on high+, but the gameplay? Push either 1, 2, 3 or x when told to and that's it. It's like a smartphone app for toddlers. The whole thing is an utter embarrassment for Dice. In the word of Jonny Rotten: "Every get the feeling you've been cheated?" Expand
  96. Oct 30, 2011
    0
    Great game! BUT Origin is the worst thing that ever happened to pc gaming! Dont need an ingame backdoor!
    STOP scanning our privacy!
    JUST let us play!

    check this:
    http://www.amazon.de/product-reviews/B004M17DVM/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

    theorigin.de
  97. Oct 30, 2011
    4
    I'm really disappointed from Battlefield 3. I'ts too CoD like. The MP is unbalanced, the Game **** up every 10 Minutes, on my High End Gaming Rig btw. The Single-player is too Short, and the AI is stupid. The Gameplay is not BF anymore, its not balanced. Where is the Commander? Where are all the great things from BF2 !? And the Sniper is useless in BF3, because after a time the scope is reflecting the Sun to the Enemys, so the Sniper is easy to spot. A Crappy Game..... The CoD Hype has won, and killed BF... Expand
  98. Oct 30, 2011
    4
    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
  99. Oct 31, 2011
    3
    Amazing possibilities, but horribly let down by the poor execution. It appears they simply wanted to beat MW3 to market and pushed out a game much too early. The bugs that exist in the retail product mirror those of the beta. Save you money and wait for a few weeks. This experience has seriously tainted my love for the battlefield series. I will now try MW3 in the hopes that I won't have to deal with this nonsense again. Expand
  100. Oct 31, 2011
    3
    My biggest problem with the game is that the map design is really bad, it's obvious none of the maps were designed for 64 players, because every map packs players into a tiny area with 3-5 capture points and then funnels every player through unavoidable chokepoints filled with snipers and tanks and men running around with knives. They've removed all the tactical gameplay that made Battlefields 1942/2/2142 so great, the game turns into a mindless grind with no balance or thought. Some of the maps are better than others, but there are 4 or 5 out of the 9 that come with the game that are up with the worst from Bad Company 2, which was a sort of mini-console-Battlefield that Battlefield 3 wasn't supposed to be emulating. Like, two of the nine Battlefield 3 maps are literally linear underground tunnels. I was extremely disappointed that there isn't a single large-scale map up there with even the mid-sized maps from the old Battlefield games. If you look at the promo videos which pretty much all involve flying jets (which have no effect on the rest of the game by the way, they're in the game mostly for looks and bullet points I think) the maps look pretty large but all of the capture points are clustered in one tiny area which turns the game into another Call of Duty. They seem to have focused much more on adding a bunch of annoying leveling features, you start out with nothing and then have to grind your way up to get more gear, eventually you'll unlock weapons like an IR Scope that's basically a dev-endorsed wall-hack or gun addons that remove all of your recoil. There are some really huge oversights like air vehicles not starting out with countermeasures, which means as soon as you take off you'll be shot down by one of the 12 players on the other team wielding missile launchers, until you grind enough to unlock something to defend yourself. Nothing in this game is about being "fun", it's about being addictive and fulfilling a lot of soulless corporate metrics. Who cares if the game plays like crap, if you can compel players to grind out a bunch of silly awards? If you're reading this review 3 months from now, you should probably just avoid, because I suspect it will be really miserable to start out in this game once you're going up against teams of experienced players with leveled upped gear. I only tried single player for about 2 minutes, within that time I shot a few AK-47 wielding masked terrists and QTE'd a man to death and then QTE jumped from an exploding train, which is way too many QTE's for me. If you like games that try to look like action movies I think you'll really enjoy this one though. The only positives I can think of are that the graphics and sound are very nice. I'm still holding out hope there will be some sort of additional maps or expansion or something that fixes some of the problems, but I really doubt it based on what I've seen so far, Battlefield 3 has already sold like a hojillion copies so I do not think Electronic Arts gives a **** Expand
Metascore
89

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
    90
    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]