User Score

Mixed or average reviews- based on 4295 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. 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
  2. Oct 25, 2011
    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.
  3. 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
  4. Oct 25, 2011
    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.
  5. 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
  6. Oct 25, 2011
    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.
  7. Jul 7, 2012
    This is a perfect example of a good franchise made casual. I was a big fan of the battlefield series. starting from battlefield 1942. It is clear EA has a tight grip on DICE. A month after release I might had given this a 8/10. Fanboyism makes blind. But after a while I started realizing they have made the franchise utter sh*t by simplifying the game they obviously attracted a new user base. and by that I mean a bunch of casual COD kiddies. This doesn't Make anything better. I DICE even still had some of it's PC fanbase after battlefield: Bad Company. they have certainly lost it now. Also with EA's glorious DLC plan they have certainly stept in COD's footsteps. $15 for a couple of maps. With BC2 vietnam DLC they actually gave us a whole new experience. But the (upcomming) DLC's from BF3 are just ridiculous... It could have been in the original game. But no the allmighty EA had decided otherwise. DICE has literally sold their soul to EA. Lastly the Premium. as if the franchise hadn't copied enough of COD allready, EA wanted their own "Elite" service. It contains all the DLC that's going to be available, Ok that's pretty nice. But then they also have queue jumping. premiums get priority in queues over non premiums. So many knives in our backs, I can't keep track of it. I've literally waited a half hour in a queue to get on my favorite server because I got pushed back the whole time by premiums. This is just so mean to everybody who bought the game. And wait there is more! double xp weeks!! (have I said casual allready?) . everything that Battlefield once was, is now lost. the franchise might have 2 more succesfull titles with their new fanbase. But then it's over. EA will throw DICE in the garbage bin, just like they did with Pandemic. Expand
  8. 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.
  9. 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
  10. Oct 25, 2011
    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
  11. 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!
  12. 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
  13. Oct 25, 2011
    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.
  14. Oct 26, 2011
    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
  15. Oct 26, 2011
    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...
  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. Oct 26, 2011
    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
  18. Oct 26, 2011
    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
  19. Oct 26, 2011
    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.
  20. Oct 25, 2011
    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.
  21. 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
  22. Oct 27, 2011
    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".
  23. 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.]]] Collapse
  24. 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.
  25. Oct 25, 2011
    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
  26. Oct 26, 2011
    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
  27. Nov 3, 2011
    Battlefield 3 looks great and the infantry combat is solid, but it lacks key gameplay elements that set the franchise apart and contributed to its success.

    Gone are the huge, wide-open maps and replaced with more condensed combat zones. It's clear that the hardware restrictions of consoles have stunted map size of BF3, despite the PC being the "lead platform".

    BF3 will be loved by
    player who enjoy chaotic infantry combat with non-stop hail of gunfire, but disappoint those who enjoyed the aircraft and enormous maps of BF1942 and BF2. Expand
  28. Oct 25, 2011
    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...
  29. Oct 28, 2011
    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
  30. Oct 30, 2011
    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
  31. 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.]]] 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]