[QUOTE="skrat_01"]It's a bad shooter with pretty visuals and some of the most offensive scripting in any game to date. A poor Call of Duty imitation. Just let that sink in.[/QUOTE]

Yeah that's what I'd say. Its pretty, but that's about it when every other thing just plain sucks. Hopefully Battlefield 4 is either skips the single player, or gives us one worth playing, I don't understand why EA doesn't just have Crytek or Respawn help. Clearly they aren't against splitting teams up on the workload (like they did with Medal of Honor with DICE on multiplayer and Danger Close on single player), and it would easily improve their scores and sales (if only marginally) from the single player audience if they could get even a half-decent single player campaign out.

[QUOTE="Lach0121"]

[QUOTE="Wasdie"]

Some missions were fun, but most of it was 100% forgettable. The real problem with the campaign is now it completely ignored it was a Battlefield game. Everything was way too linear, you only controlled a tank once, didn't get to fly a plane, and every battle was small.

BC1 remains the best single player in a Battlefield game. It felt like Battlefield while you played. It had a slight sandbox approach and let you use vehicles quite often despite being a mostly linear affiar. They should have greatly expanded upon that instead of making it a blatent CoD copy.

[/QUOTE]

Wait was BC1 on pc?!? Did I miss this? I was unable to play it because by the time it came out, my 360 died on me (for the last time)

[/QUOTE]

Console only, which is a shame since it went a bit unnnoticed (as far as Battlefield games go anyways). It was fun, and the campaign was an absolute joy, its like $5 now at Gamestop last I saw so if you have a console its totally worth it (if you can get past some of the rather dated design issues and controls).

I think the second game kind of went for a good mix, and it was on PC. It had some humor with some watercooler moments, but unfortunately I think DICE figured to completely ignore open battlefields. I mean come on DICE, not EVERY military shooter has to be a damn linear affair, CoD does it because CoD is GOOD at it, you guys are good at open battlefields (hence your title of choice).

Honestly, Crysis? Borderlands? Far Cry? Those are FPS games with a massive scope Battlefield could learn from in making a single player. Even Half-Life 2 and Call of Duty 4 were more open and varied then Battlefield 3's lackluster campaign.

[QUOTE="Lach0121"]

Thats what I was thinking^^.

We are getting a ps3 soon for its exclusives and other console exclusives. Was there anything wrong with the ps3 version of BFBC1? Cause I could always rent it on there with gamefly.

[/QUOTE]

Nope, it works just fine on PS3 and has trophies too (and considering it came out in 2008 when games were only starting to accept that idea, that's a nice addition). Its super goofy and open, its not polished too much (you need to keep L3 held to sprint and destruction is only partial, though you can destroy the terrain nicely enough), but it is very fun and the best Battlefield single player yet.

I hope with Battlefield 4, instead of splitting the co-op and single player, they give us a nice open, Bad Company style campaign with 4 players. I honestly don't know why Bad Company never had it since you have 4 established characters in the series who are ALWAYS together and who never die in the story, which would make it perfect for 4 player co-op.