Difficulty:

Just Right

Time Spent:

10 to 20 Hours

The Bottom Line:

"Amazing"

It's undeniable that Battlefield 3 has been one of the most highly anticipated, if not highest, first person shooters of 2011. The main question, however, is whether or not it lives up to the hype. To put it simply: it does. DICE's latest installment in the Battlefield series, released on October 25, 2011, has given FPS fans a new fresh taste on the first person shooter genre, straying from the guidelines that Call of Duty has been determining since the release of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare in 2007. To some, (most notably Battlefield 2 veterans), this is a huge relief. For others, it might be deviating from your comfort zone. In the end, it just comes down to personal preference, but Battlefield 3's gameplay elements do a good job of appealing to a variety of different audiences. If you were turned away from the Battlefield series because Bad Company 2 didn't appeal to your tastes, be willing to give this game another chance. It most certainly deserves one.

Single Player
As any Battlefield veteran will tell you, the story is only a secondary component of the game, with the competitive multiplayer being the game's main focus. While this point is definitely true, it cannot excuse the single player campaign from being mentioned. Unfortunately, the single player may have been the one thing that didn't live up to the game's hype. While it does have its moments, the campaign feels generic, and has a sense of "been there, done that". In fact, there are some story elements that seem to be an out-of-franchise copy of the Call of Duty campaign -- more specifically, Black Ops. For example, the story plays out as a series of flashbacks from a US Marine Corps soldier named Henry Blackburn, as he is questioned by superiors. In Black Ops, the story was also told as a series of flashbacks. Other examples include similar action sequences, such as rappelling down a building side to shoot and enter a window, while killing any soldiers inside.

Unlike Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3's campaign has a higher emphasis placed on realism. Battlefield: Bad Company 2 campaign's characters were known for their jovial banter and humor, but Battlefield 3 has a much more mature feeling to it. The game is serious, so you probably won't feel the same way towards the characters as you did in Bad Company 2. The story itself is set in the year 2014, where US forces are fighting against a hostile enemy militia, known as the People's Liberation and Resistance, (commonly referred to as the PLR). It starts with Sergeant Blackburn leading a small squad through hostile territory, in an attempt to investigate the possibility of a chemical weapons site being located there. The story manages to incorporate several cinematic moments. For example, seeing your fellow soldier get sniped right in front of you as their blood splatters onto your screen, or as an office building begins to collapse, and you quickly realize that you're in range of it. However, these moments don't deliver the same type of adrenaline rush that you get when you watch an action movie. If you're a real action fanatic, it's likely that movies will have "desensitized" you to the action in this game, and you won't find the campaign as exciting as you might have hoped. Some scenes, such as a dramatic fist fight scene at the beginning of the game, will require you to press buttons occasionally as the scene plays out. For example, pressing the space bar once, or the left mouse button once, to make your character throw a punch (and continue the cutscene). These controls are meant to provide some interactivity to the scenes, but they're definitely unnecessary. In fact, they somewhat take away from the dramatic effect, when you may want to just watch the scene play out. Anybody can press the space bar -- there's really no challenge to it. These controls just feel as though they're tacked on to the scenes, for no reason whatsoever.

Overall, the campaign feels somewhat generic. Granted, all FPS games are similar in the sense that it's one army fighting against another, with fairly linear "shoot everything" missions, but I feel that Battlefield 3 could have done more to set itself apart from other shooters, especially given all the hype that it has been getting. It would be wrong to say that all of the missions are generic, though. One of the most unique (and probably most anticipated) missions has been a jet mission, where you get to sit in a jet and shoot other jets in a fast-paced aerial warfare setting. While I believe the mission would have been more interactive (and more fun) if you had the opportunity to fly the jet yourself, the position in the gunner seat is still quite satisfying and is definitely a notably enjoyable experience, both from the game itself, and from the FPS genre as a whole.

In conclusion, the story is on par with most other military first person shooters. It's not terrible, but it's nothing amazing either. It's also really short -- possibly even shorter than the current Call of Duty campaigns. I'd estimate that depending on what difficulty you're playing on, you could complete this game within three to six hours, and there's little to no incentive to replay it again once you're through.

Sound and Graphics
In favour of the game's campaign (and multiplayer) is the sound and graphics. The sound effects are amazing, with gunfire being done quite well, and explosions sounding fantastic. The game also takes details such as being indoors into account; while inside, all sounds will have a realistic echo to them. The echo of a grenade going off near you or a tank shell destroying the wall you were hiding behind have a very deep rumble to them, which provide a strong sense of realism. I highly recommend playing the game with a good pair of headphones to get the full effect, because it cannot be said that the sound doesn't contribute to the game. Vehicles sound great as well, with what sounds like a powerful, whirring engine. Nothing sounds feeble or powerless. In fact, this is probably the best sounding first person shooter that I've ever played.

The graphics are also a major asset to the game. Prompting millions of dollars' worth of PC hardware upgrades prior to launch, the graphical quality of the game was one of the most anticipated contributors to the game's realism. On ultra settings with DirectX 11, the game looks gorgeous. The open environments that Battlefield is so well known for fully take advantage of what high end rigs can provide in terms of performance, thanks to DICE's new Frostbite 2 game engine. Even elements such as fire or smoke, which are usually the biggest weaknesses when it comes to visuals, have been done well. If you're disappointed because your current computer isn't top-of-the-line, don't be. DICE has managed to cater towards players with a variety of hardware capabilities, from new (even unreleased) technology, to more outdated hardware. Low settings require far less [computer] resources than ultra settings do, yet low settings still look great. It's impressive how well optimized this game is, as opposed to other PC games that have been poorly ported over from consoles. As of launch, there are some graphical errors such as being able to see through the ground in some places, but the majority of these glitches have been fixed since the game's beta stage, so it can be assumed that DICE will continue to fix glitches with future patches. Either way, these occurrences are quite rare, and in the grand scheme of things, don't affect gameplay.

Cooperative Play
Unlike Battlefield: Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3 features a small co-op mode consisting of 6 missions, which can be played on different difficulties, similar to the system of the single player campaign. Unfortunately, also similar to the campaign, it's not the most exciting. In fact, some of the missions seem almost identical to the campaign. For example, the first cooperative mission has you defending a bridge from waves of enemies coming from different directions. This same scenario occurred in the first mission of the single player campaign, with the exact same bridge. The only difference is that you're playing with a partner. And that really feels like the only difference throughout most of the cooperative missions. In most scenarios, you could complete the same objective with only one player – much unlike the cooperative missions featured in Portal 2, where missions were designed specifically to be completed with two players, and would be impossible otherwise. In Battlefield 3, the cooperative missions stray more towards two players shooting enemies independently, with less emphasis on teamwork and cooperation that Battlefield is so well known for in its multiplayer modes. An exception to this would be the second cooperative mission, "Fire from the Sky". In this mission, both partners work together in a helicopter: one player takes the pilot's seat, and the other takes the gunner's. While it's not as exciting as the jet mission from the campaign, this mission still provides enjoyment and an actual feeling of cooperation as you play through it. It's also the only way to practice flying outside of multiplayer, where vehicles (especially of the aerial variety) are always in high demand.

Cooperative mode takes on the same style as Spec Ops from Modern Warfare 2, where when one player is shot to the point of death, they fall to a prone-like position on the ground, needing to be revived. If both players fall into this stance, the game ends. Cooperative mode itself will last you (at most) three hours to play through at least once, with a very small incentive to play again. As you play, your cooperative score increases (by killing enemies), and as you reach certain milestones, you unlock weapons for use in the game's multiplayer modes. This seems like a poor and uncreative way to increase replay value for coop, but if you really want all the multiplayer unlocks, you'll like have to play through the missions more than once.

Multiplayer
The multiplayer has always been the real meat and potatoes of the Battlefield series, and the same standard certainly applies to Battlefield 3. The addictive multiplayer has a very competitive atmosphere to it, especially with the introduction of 64 player capabilities on PC as opposed to 24 players on consoles. The game has also become a bit more accommodative for the casual players who are newer to the FPS genre, and may not have the same experience as someone who has played all eleven installments in the Battlefield series. For someone who is just starting, or is considering making the leap from Call of Duty to Battlefield, there are several things that you may need to know that will influence your decision.

To start, the multiplayer in Battlefield 3 is not as arcade-like as Call of Duty. In Call of Duty, you could start up the game, jump straight into a game of Team Deathmatch, and finish the game in five to ten minutes. In Battlefield, the games take a lot longer. Instead of being kill based, Battlefield is almost entirely objective based, with a low to moderate emphasis on getting kills. For example, one of the main classic modes of Battlefield is conquest. In this mode, both teams start with a specified number of tickets. As you kill enemy soldiers, the opposing team's tickets will begin to deplete. The team whose tickets deplete to zero first, loses. However, the amount of tickets that the opposing team loses per death depends on your progress with the objective. In order to make your team's kills count more effectively, you need to capture flags located around the map (usually four or five depending on the map) by being positioned within a certain radius of the flags (much like the domination game type in Call of Duty). This style of play discourages players from solely killing and disregarding the objective, because without a balanced focus on the flags, the kills will not be as effective as you'll need to win the game. As a result, teamwork is a necessity, even more than being able to aim well. You can still help out your team immensely by capturing flags, while hardly ever needing to shoot enemies. Other multiplayer modes include Team Deathmatch, a classic multiplayer mode, and Rush, which was first introduced in Battlefield: Bad Company.

When you play multiplayer in Battlefield, you play in squads of 4. In a game with 64 players, (32 vs. 32), each team would have 8 separate squads, labeled Alpha Squad, Bravo Squad, Charlie Squad, etc. Your squadmates on the battlefield have green names above them, as opposed to the standard blue for teammates, or red for enemies. When you die, you have the ability to choose where you want to spawn, and if any of your squadmates are alive, you'll have the ability to spawn on them if you choose to. This allows you to jump right into the action and support or assist your squad in completing whatever objective that they're trying to do. This system greatly contributes to the teamwork in the game, especially when used effectively to keep a strong push going against the enemy.

In addition to the squad system, Battlefield uses a soldier class system, somewhat similar to the idea of classes in Team Fortress 2. When you spawn, you have the option to pick what class you would like to spawn as. From there, you can choose what weapon you want to use (as long as it fits the class), and what specializations you would like (again, as long as they fit the class). There are four classes in total, each with a different general specialization: Assault, Engineer, Support, and Recon. Assault soldiers are the medics of the battlefield. They wield assault rifles and can throw down health kits which heal soldiers in their proximity, and can use defibrillators to revive fallen soldiers in battle, as long as they have not yet respawned. Engineers specialize in vehicle operation and vehicle destruction. They often wield submachine guns or medium range assault rifles. They can also carry rocket launchers, to destroy either enemy aircraft or enemy vehicles. To assist their own teammates, they have repair tools that can repair any vehicles, as long as they're on the ground. Support soldiers wield machine guns or light machine guns, and can throw down ammo packs to resupply teammates. They can also use machinery such as mortars, which can be devastating to enemies at the front lines, while you fire them from behind your own front lines. Lastly, recon soldiers wield sniper rifles or other long range rifles, and specialize in reconnaissance. They have the ability to operate MAVs, which can fly in the air and spot enemies so that teammates can easily see them. Ideally, a squad would have one of each type of soldier per squad, to give an even balance for a tactical advantage. However, multiplayer usually does not turn out like this, as random teammates might not be as competitive as you. For regular play, the class system allows you to pick a specific play-style that you enjoy, and specialize in it to help teammates.

The unlock system ties in closely with the class system and can promote using a variety of different classes. As you use a class more and more, you'll unlock more abilities for the class, such as new weapons that are specific to the class, or new specializations. For example, the MAV that recon players may use can only be unlocked by getting a specific score in the recon category. The more effectively you use your class to complete objectives, get kills, and assist your teammates, the faster your score for a class will increase, allowing you to unlock more things. You also obtain general weapons that can be used for any class as you increase in overall rank. As you use a specific gun more and more, you can obtain additional attachments for the gun, such as a bipod, 12x scope, suppressor, etc. There's a lot more variety when it comes to attachments than there is with the class systems in Call of Duty, and this system of constantly getting new things encourages players to keep on playing. The large variety also prevents the game from getting stale, greatly increasing the replay value of multiplayer.

The multiplayer maps are also very different from the style used by Call of Duty, or any other first person shooter for that matter. Battlefield tends to use a system of very wide, open maps that can promote either very large scale battles, or several small battles. For example, Caspian Border is a wide open map that can take several minutes to run across. Throughout a game, you and your squad could spend the entire match in only a small quadrant of the entire map, and still feel as though you contributed greatly. With a potential 64 players on the map, there are battles going on everywhere, no matter where you choose to focus your attention. Another major feature of the multiplayer maps is that the Frostbite 2 engine allows for destruction of the environment, one of the most amazing features of Battlefield. Say you had an enemy hiding behind a concrete wall. How would you get to them? Well, with Battlefield 3, the answer is obvious: Blow. Up. Everything. The destruction of environments leads to an incredibly unique type of gameplay, which simply cannot be achieved in Call of Duty. When something is destroyed in Battlefield, it stays destroyed for the rest of the match. For example, when a match starts, everything looks nice and clean. By the time it ends, you can clearly see the absolute destruction of the battle that occurred throughout the course of the game. It's a fantastic feature that the game engine allows, and provides a whole new layer to the game.

Also returning to the game are vehicles, such as tanks, boats, helicopters, Humvees, and for the first time since Battlefield 2, the highly anticipated jets. Vehicles are integrated into the game almost seamlessly, and add a new experience to the multiplayer, when compared to other shooters. In many cases, vehicles can turn the tide of the battle, and when used effectively, can almost ensure a victory. Vehicles such as boats or Humvees are armed with machine guns, but aren't very effective for combat. Instead, they can be used to quickly transport troops to and from objectives, when walking would take too long. On the other hand, tanks are often right in the middle of the battles and their menacing presence can easily take an objective if the enemy isn't prepared to defend with any counter-measures. Jets and helicopters can be used for both transportation and combat. Their ability to fire from the air to ground is a good way to spot and kill ground troops, mark and take out tanks, or engage in air-to-air combat. While vehicles may seem overpowered at first, DICE did a great job at balancing them out by ensuring that with proper teamwork, vehicles could be no more than a minor nuisance – easily disposed of with rocket launchers, anti-tank mines, and more. Overall, vehicles are very fun to use, and when combined with destructible environments, can have a definite impact on the way that the game plays out.

Battlefield 3 manages to take the best components of prior installments in the series, and combine them to provide a full, exciting and addicting multiplayer experience that is sure to last gamers for a long time. The emphasis on teamwork is clear, and gives the game a much different way to play out compared to other first person shooters. The destructible environments and vehicles provide a level of depth that isn't achieved by any other game, giving Battlefield 3 a unique feel to it that gamers are sure to enjoy.

Battlelog
One of the most controversial choices regarding Battlefield 3 is the system by which it's all strung together. Developers decided to use a system known as Battlelog to launch the game, which is all run from a web browser. Clicking on the game will open your default web browser, and will direct you to the Battlelog website. There, you can either launch single player, co-op, or multiplayer. The downside to this is that you always need an internet connection – even to launch single player.

To start up a multiplayer match, you can use a server browser located within Battlelog. While it accomplishes the same thing as using a server browser in-game, it seems unnecessary, and more complicated. It also likely slows down the game loading time, since every time you leave and rejoin a server, the game needs to be reloaded off of your hard-drive. Unless you install the entire game to a solid state drive, the Battlelog system is probably slower than it could potentially be with an in-game server browser, leaving many people to question or criticize the developers for setting it up this way in the first place. In addition, Battlelog seems to have trouble joining games with friends. It has a party system built in, but often times, when you join a game with a party, you won't be placed in the same squad. Sometimes, you won't even be on the same team! This can prove to be incredibly frustrating when playing with more than two people.

On the plus side, Battlelog has an extensive statistics screen, showing all of your past history in games. It will show you your statistics with specific guns, such as your kills per minute. It'll also show your progress with unlocking new attachments for the guns, or new guns entirely. It's very easy to compare statistics between your friends, and it has a feed of your past performance in recent games, very clearly inspired by Facebook. You have the ability to comment on or "Hooah!" (Like) your friend's status updates or game updates, giving the sense that everything is tied together on the social aspect of the game. There's also the ability to join platoons, which are basically groups of other players that share the same interests as you – either in the real world, or in the game. For example, you could join a platoon titled "Rushers", and you would find that its members like the playstyle of rushing. The social aspect behind Battlelog (which is free) is very similar to what Activision is doing with Call of Duty Elite.

Final Conclusion
Despite its generic and mostly forgettable campaign, Battlefield 3's spectacular multiplayer modes manage to make this a great game overall, well worth the money that it costs. Whether or not it's a Call of Duty killer is just up to how you like to play, but for any FPS fans who might want a break from Call of Duty, or for any fans of the Battlefield series, Battlefield 3 is guaranteed not to disappoint. But if you're not much of a multiplayer person, you likely won't find much in this game. If you really just want to play the campaign, try and find a way to rent it for consoles. The short experience doesn't warrant spending a full sixty dollars.

Great:
- Amazing sound
- Beautiful graphics
- Strong, addictive multiplayer (64 players)
- Battlelog statistics
- Vehicles and destruction are really fun

Meh:
- Short, generic campaign
- Very few cooperative missions
- Battlelog seems inefficient