Developer: DICE
Publisher: EA
Release Date: Out Now
Players/Online features: Solo campaign, 2 player co-op, 2-24 online multiplayer.
Words By:
BF3 tells the thrilling story of Sgt. Henry Blackburn, a Recon Marine under secret interrogation in New York. Blackburn recalls most of the missions in flashback as he’s “debriefed” by two CIA agents (one of whom is played by the instantly recognisable been-in-everything Glenn Morshower), and amongst others you play the story from the viewpoint of Russian Spec Ops soldier Dima, US tank crew Sgt. Miller, and not least FA-18 co-pilot Lt. Jennifer Coleby Hawkins in what is possibly the game’s most spectacular and unexpected mission type. Accused of treason, Blackburn tries to convince the CIA that there’s a genuine threat of a nuclear attack on Manhattan by the Iranian PLR terrorist movement led by a man known as Solomon...
As you’d expect in a realistic military shooter the weapons look, feel and sound really good and aiming is quick and precise, with a small amount of aim assist on by default (I recommend you turn it off). Enemies generally look like they’ve been shot with realistic impacts and ragdoll effects, and pleasingly headshots kill 99% of the time (in stark contrast to some other recent games that feature bulletproof enemies). I was disappointed to find that you can’t ‘cook’ a grenade before throwing it, and also can’t ‘return’ grenades that enemies throw at you, which seems like a bit of a blow to the realism department in a game that virtually lives on it.
For a while now (at least since Battlefield Bad Company anyway) EA’s and specifically DiCE’s first person shooters have sounded incredibly lifelike and atmospheric, and following on from last year’s Medal of Honor, BF3 has the same high quality sounds that add immeasurably to the game’s impact. Interiors sound echoey, open outdoor locations have a different, wider sound altogether and the chat and banter between soldiers is remarkably believable, apt and usually relevant, unlike certain other games in the genre.
BF3’s lighting effects are nothing short of amazing, and playing this game through will truly make you realise how basic some recent games are when it comes to lighting, detailing and distance blur effects, and how little importance some developers place on these areas of a game’s visuals. It’s not just the ‘little’ things like the difference between sunlight and artificial light, or shadows looking like they should, but things like spotlights and enemies’ laser sights and flashlights will all dazzle you with startling realism. It’s such a realistic effect that I didn’t even realise it at first-it just annoyed me! A gritty overlaid matt seems to coat a lot of things and sometimes this looks a bit messy, but in general BF3’s visuals more than serve their purpose and make the game look extremely realistic and immersive, at times utterly amazing.
Whether it's vaulting a wall, climbing a ladder or simply getting a bunk up, heck, even getting blown off your feet, the animation of all characters' body movements looks totally realistic and is another area in which BF3 edges ahead of the competition. The Frostbite 2 game engine allows for a huge amount of destructible scenery, and if you play through the game and tell me it didn’t add a huge amount to the experience then you’re either lying, stupid or dead inside.
If it sounds like I loved BF3’s campaign and couldn’t find fault then hold on a sec, I’m just about to lay down some suppressing fire... Here’s a couple of messages you need to get used to if you’re going to buy BF3: “WARNING! return to the combat area... 4...3...2...1...” when you wander too far off the intended track and the even more galling “FRIENDLY FIRE WILL NOT BE TOLERATED!” when the generally stupid and frequently oblivious ‘friendly’ AI squad members get in your way, sometimes even pushing you out of cover into the line of fire! Of course, the way BF3 levels are bordered invisibly is infinitely preferable to say, Call of Duty’s blatantly obvious level borders that frequently make for that hemmed-in feeling and totally linear levels, this strict countdown is just too fast and should you sprint in the wrong direction it can literally be impossible to turn around and return in time, meaning an ignominious return to the last checkpoint!
Add to this some aiming issues such as not being able to shoot through gaps you can clearly see a target through and BF3 can become an extremely annoying experience. This is particularly true if played on “Hard” (as the game itself recommends you to). Like Call of Duty/MW on “Veteran” setting this is, for most of us normal mortals who have other things to do apart from shoot bad guys, more of a torturous grind than a challenging and fun gaming experience. Having said that, I’m still playing the campaign through for a second time and am determined to finish it.
Exploration of the levels reveals some amazing scenery and great deal of extraneous detail but also a lot of glitches where the placement of basic scenery objects has been given little or no care; rocks and other small objects that float above the ground are commonplace and indicate either level designers that don’t give a monkeys or a rushed development time. The fact that BF3 arrived just days before its ‘mortal enemy’ Modern Warfare 3 suggests the latter.
When asked if BF3’s solo campaign was longer than Modern Warfare 2's disappointing 5-6 hours, lead designer of the excellent story David Goldfarb said “based on our play-times it's probably more than that, but it's not twice as long. But, again, we'll see. When you play it on hard difficulty, it'll take a lot more time. It's all about making sure the experience is as awesome as possible. I'd rather have six hours of awesome than 12 hours of 'meh'." Well I don’t think there’s six hours of ‘awesome’ in here but it certainly isn’t ‘meh’ either. And claiming a something will last longer if you make it harder is the sort of feeble-minded justification I’d expect from a politician, not a games designer. On the other hand, if Goldfarb thinks people enjoy games lasting longer just because every time you pop your flippin’ head up you get it blown off, maybe he should run for public office. I don’t think BF3’s campaign will last you much over 5 hours on ‘Normal’, but there’s definitely more “awesome” than “meh” in it.
BF3’s multiplayer is, in my humble opinion, the best around at the moment when it works as it should. With a speedier, more logical online mode than the Halos and a more satisfying, comprehensible, varied and realistic wargame experience than the any of the recent Calls of Duty. BF3 builds on the success of Bad Company 2 with 9 new maps (Operation Métro (which was the Beta test map), Caspian Border, Damavand Peak, Grand Bazaar, Kharg Island, Noshahr Canals, Seine Crossing, Tehran Highway, Operation Firestorm and the soon-to-be-released re-imagined BF2 maps in the Back to Karkand DLC map pack; Gulf of Oman, Sharqi Peninsula, Strike at Karkand and Wake Island 2014).
As well as Team Deathmatches there are new game modes (Rush, Squad Rush, Squad Deathmatch and Conquest from Bad Company 2), vehicles, weapons and upgrades and 2-24 players, with most games packed full. The game has a similar progression system to Bad Company 2 so as you get kills, complete in-game objectives (such as capturing, defending or a certain number of kills with a particular weapon) you earn Ribbons and Medals, which equate to XP which levels up both you and whichever class and weapons you’re using. Advanced sights, bigger clips and other attachments, gadgets and accessories can be unlocked for weapons and vehicles just by using them with some success. There’s a selection of challenging 2 player co-op missions based in both new unique locations and sections of the campaign maps as well, and upgrades and XP earned in these contribute to your main multiplayer tally.
Vehicles play as big a part as ever in a Battlefield game and this is what sets it apart from the Call of Duty-type experience. After playing BF3 (or either Bad Company game for that matter) CoD/Black Ops/MW2/3 etc multiplayer maps feel like you’re running around your living room playing Cowboys and Indians. Several of BF3’s maps are big enough to allow the use of jet aircraft (F/A-18E Super Hornet, A-10 Thunderbolt, B-1 Lancer, Su-35BM Flanker-E, Su-25TM Frogfoot amongst others) and you’ll be amazed how effective some pilots can be. There also is also of course a range of Light Armoured vehicles, IFVs (Infantry Fighting Vehicles), Anti Aircraft Vehicles, Main Battle Tanks and Helicopters (thankfully they’re easier to fly than in Battlefield 2 Modern Combat). As well as having maps that stretch as far as the eye can see, BF3’s combat will, depending on your individual approach, just as often be up-close and personal, emphasised by a very dramatic personal view of your enemy killing you when you get sneaked up on and killed with a knife! If you don’t like vehicles then Team Deathmatch cuts the size of the maps down and makes for a much more intense, focused experience.
Despite some gripes, mostly concerning the online mode's issues that remain unfixed despite a 2Gb update (difficulty in joining friend's games, inexplicable missing graphics in menus, session drops and lock-ups), the final verdict on Battlefield 3 has to be a positive one. A scarily believable story makes for a brief but exciting solo campaign, and the benchmark multiplayer mode is likely to keep you busy for months. Modern Warfare 3 has a genuine rival.
- Intense yet varied battle action. - Amazing lighting and sound FX. - Frostbite 2 allows for masses of destruction. - Easy to get into multiplayer mode with varied classes, tons of vehicles and a logical progression system that is now the benchmark for other games to aim for.
Worst Bits
- Some of the friendly AI needs to return to basic training. - A few graphical glitches and aiming issues.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
