[Game] Battlefield 3
- Thread starter Ralfst3r
- Start date
![[-project.rattus-]](/data/avatars/s/0/161.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
Well, finished the SP campaign on Hard in about 5 hours. Including the numerous reloads due to me dying, as hard is refreshingly hard. So the Sp campaign is very short. CoDBlOps feels really lengthy compared to it.
And god, the writing is aweful. While the general premise is actually interesting, both plot relevant events and "side flavour" are so stupid tha you want to slap the writers, like the rat QTE. Now I can't talk about all the stupid things on top of my head, as I haven't taken notes, but behind the followign spoiler tags are those I can think of spontanously:
Also, the "jet" level is atrociously bad and tedious. You don't even get to fly the plane, you're just a passenger, quicktiming out of attacks and clicking enemies dead. Boring. And you don't get to practice flying jets for MP.
But the facial animations are great, both in the cutscenes and gameplay. Almost at the level of the Uncharted series.
And god, the writing is aweful. While the general premise is actually interesting, both plot relevant events and "side flavour" are so stupid tha you want to slap the writers, like the rat QTE. Now I can't talk about all the stupid things on top of my head, as I haven't taken notes, but behind the followign spoiler tags are those I can think of spontanously:
Spoiler!
Also, the "jet" level is atrociously bad and tedious. You don't even get to fly the plane, you're just a passenger, quicktiming out of attacks and clicking enemies dead. Boring. And you don't get to practice flying jets for MP.
But the facial animations are great, both in the cutscenes and gameplay. Almost at the level of the Uncharted series.
Last edited:
8.5 from Gamespot, fanboys are really butthurt now
The question: is it good, when gamespot gave 7.5 RO2
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/action/red-orchestra-2-heroes-of-stalingrad/review.html
and RO2 have had 100 times smaller budged.
Crab... err, Rat Battle?
Jet section being a rail shooter sequence and QTEs don't exactly flare my interest, the game's biggest flaw however is that it still hasn't been delivered to me. Digital Illusions not delivering a great SP wouldn't be unheard of, certainly didn't stop previous Battlefield titles or even Mirror's Edge from being fantastic games.
That review scale pic looks outdated, crap-tier should take up the entire lower half. Really is mind-boggling how important those are to consumers and the industry, probably because skimming a few scores takes less effort than actually reading reviews.
Jet section being a rail shooter sequence and QTEs don't exactly flare my interest, the game's biggest flaw however is that it still hasn't been delivered to me. Digital Illusions not delivering a great SP wouldn't be unheard of, certainly didn't stop previous Battlefield titles or even Mirror's Edge from being fantastic games.
That review scale pic looks outdated, crap-tier should take up the entire lower half. Really is mind-boggling how important those are to consumers and the industry, probably because skimming a few scores takes less effort than actually reading reviews.
It actually used to be lower, but I guess over time ratings were effected by inflation.
More likely 'blockbuster' games are much much more expensive to produce since then. It's logical to go the safe route if making a game that an entire company depends on. If a game is slightly better then last years 9/10 cod shouldnt it be rated 9.2/10? I'm sure they do an extra bit to make sure the larger reviewers understand that logic too. I've never seen a large review site rate based on similarities or saturation of the market, meaning you can get an older better game for cheaper so this new games score suffers.
I hate internet joke pandering especially if it's an unavoidable part of a story or scene. With development time the joke is always 4 months after the people who found it funny stopped laughing so it's just the most cringeworthy ****.
Last edited:
Battlefield 3 probably got a 9+ if it had a good singleplayer, which is really the bottleneck of this game.
The funny thing is though that they pulled the internet pandering off surprisingly well.
Spoiler!
I know of a fanboy who is butthurt because they gave it 9.5 in graphics and not 10.
Also:
Having played MP a tad today, I have to say it's fun. Weapons feel nice and do enough damage to down an enemy with 2-3 hits or a headshot, so not that much different than RO.
All in all, it's surprising how "RO2-like" the whole experience is, minus weapon sway, plus crosshair:
Relatively slow runs peed, yet still the game is quickly paced
Abundance of Automatic weapons
Difficult to spot enemies, even with the spotting feature.
All weapons have it's use and there hasn't been a single one I felt outgunned with. Even the sidearms are dangerous.
I am pleasantly surprised by it, and I do whish that RO2's features were only half as fleshed out as BF3's are.
But it's also slightly frustrating: the game crashed while I was top dog on the leaderboard on a lengthy SeineCrossing session, losing me about 9000 experience points.
But hey, at least the RO2 SP isn't as ridiculous in writing, and due to lack of scripting, more unique than BF3's...
And here's my Profile, if anyone want's to join in:
http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/user/coleusrattus/
All in all, it's surprising how "RO2-like" the whole experience is, minus weapon sway, plus crosshair:
Relatively slow runs peed, yet still the game is quickly paced
Abundance of Automatic weapons
Difficult to spot enemies, even with the spotting feature.
All weapons have it's use and there hasn't been a single one I felt outgunned with. Even the sidearms are dangerous.
I am pleasantly surprised by it, and I do whish that RO2's features were only half as fleshed out as BF3's are.
But it's also slightly frustrating: the game crashed while I was top dog on the leaderboard on a lengthy SeineCrossing session, losing me about 9000 experience points.
But hey, at least the RO2 SP isn't as ridiculous in writing, and due to lack of scripting, more unique than BF3's...
And here's my Profile, if anyone want's to join in:
http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf3/user/coleusrattus/
Last edited:
Why?
8.5 is good.
also
At least the AI was considerate enough to come back for the player.
Enough with the "ambient occlusion" that creates stupid shadow-glows around things! How come no one sees this, figures apparently it wasn't worth it and takes the feature back out?
Look at the black shadow-glow-stuff around the weapon in that ghost-soldier gif! That's not what "ambient occlusion" is supposed to simulate, is it? But that's pretty much the only thing you notice it do 80% of the time.
Look at the black shadow-glow-stuff around the weapon in that ghost-soldier gif! That's not what "ambient occlusion" is supposed to simulate, is it? But that's pretty much the only thing you notice it do 80% of the time.
Man that Tehran highway is balls. Every server lags when that map comes on.
Metro and Seine crossing(they even managed to squeeze tanks on that one) are both very tiny maps and full of choke points. Not very good gameplay. While BF2 had some narrow maps those usually offered many routes and flanking to last flags, these are impossible to do anything but spam everything and hope enemy team is much worse. Like on Metro, why can't the metro tunnels be open, so you could spread out the firefights a little.
Metro and Seine crossing(they even managed to squeeze tanks on that one) are both very tiny maps and full of choke points. Not very good gameplay. While BF2 had some narrow maps those usually offered many routes and flanking to last flags, these are impossible to do anything but spam everything and hope enemy team is much worse. Like on Metro, why can't the metro tunnels be open, so you could spread out the firefights a little.
I'm sticking to the larger conquest maps for the moment. Loving Operation Firestorm and Noshahr.
I challenge you to find a map in the history of gaming that is as badly designed as 64 player conquest on metro. Seriously.
