Released: 2011
So I got a PS3 recently (only about 6 years after it was released) and have been using it a fair amount as you might expect.
One of the games I was most eager to play was 'Battlefield 3', partly to see how good it is, partly also to compare it to 'Call of Duty' games. Battlefield players/fans, it seems to me at least, make a point of dissing Call of Duty games online more regularly than the other way around; common arguments (that Battlefield fans make) are that Battlefield games are more realistic and more team-based, whereas Call of Duty are games where people run around shooting aimlessly; or that Call of Duty is played by 12-year-olds while Battlefield has a mature fanbase; you get the idea.
I'll start off with the single player campaign; the story follows a fairly standard (in my experience) structure for first person shooters where the protaganist (Blackburn) is being questioned, and relates the story in flashback about how/why he got to where he is now. You get to play as Blackburn in some of the missions, and some other characters along the way as well.
One of the USPs of Battlefield games is that you get to use tanks, aircraft, vehicles etc; this seemed exciting in principal, but in the game itself, you only get one mission in a tank, one in a plane, and that's about it.
Another feature is that the game features dynamic maps, i.e. the environment is destructible and breaks up when shot/blown up etc. This feature works well in the game and adds an extra level of strategy to some sections as you can't just hide behind the same thing for too long as it might get destroyed; as I may have hinted there, this is fairly limited though, you can noticeably shoot lots of stuff in the game (like signs etc) and they don't destroy at all, they just show bullet marks.
As for the story itself, it's fairly standard, and I found most of the characters rather bland; certainly compared to the two 'Call of Duty: Black Ops' games, which featured several memorable characters, it was below par. The best character is a Russion agent called Dima; the two missions where you get to play as him are the most exciting in the game.
I should mention the controls here as they affect the campaign and multiplayer; I find it strange that the PS3 controller features two trigger buttons (L2 and R2) but the games makers have chosen instead to utilise the L1 and R1 buttons as the ADS and trigger buttons. Added to the low PS3 analogue sticks, I found this quite uncomfortable at times as it cramps your fingers a bit.
As for the multiplayer, I found this to be quite good fun, though in comparison to COD, seems very limited. For starters, there's far fewer game modes than COD, and most of the ones here are just different forms of Team Deathmatch, which, in my opinion is always the most boring game mode in FPS games.
There's also far less customisation than on COD. There's only four classes available, and it takes quite a while to level any of the classes up, leaving you with essentially the same four choices of loadout for a considerable period of playing time.
There's noticeably fewer maps to; there's only nine, compared to COD which has anywhere from fourteen to eighteen. This isn't too much of a problem in the short-term, but can get a bit boring after you've played on the same few maps quite a few times. That said, the maps are much bigger than on COD games, so it does give them a little more life. (You can of course pay over the odds for some more maps.) The bigger maps do pose some problems; while they are needed to enable the use of aircraft and vehicles, it also means you often spawn miles from the action, leading to a frustrating few minutes while you run across the map to get back into the game.
One feature of the multiplayer is that it allows players to rent (and control) their own servers. This is very expensive (at $30 per month), though if people can afford it, it's their choice I suppose. The problem with this is that the server-owners have complete control over the game, meaning they can (and do) kick players, switch teams around and generally do what they want. I've been kicked three times from games, even though I've always abided by the "rules" set out at the start of those matches. On each occasion, the team I was on was winning; take from that what you will.
Overall, Battlefield 3 is a good game, no doubt, let down slightly by a rather mundane campaign, occasionally awkward controls and a lack of customisation options in the multiplayer section. I don't find it to be as enjoyable as any COD games I've played, though that's not to say it's without merit. For players who want slower-paced games on larger maps, with aircraft/vehicles etc, it's the better choice. For me, I prefer the faster pace and greater variation of COD. I would still be interested in playing future Battlefield games, though I will be getting the new COD game ('Ghosts') as a priority.
Rating: 3/5
One feature of the multiplayer is that it allows players to rent (and control) their own servers. This is very expensive (at $30 per month), though if people can afford it, it's their choice I suppose. The problem with this is that the server-owners have complete control over the game, meaning they can (and do) kick players, switch teams around and generally do what they want. I've been kicked three times from games, even though I've always abided by the "rules" set out at the start of those matches. On each occasion, the team I was on was winning; take from that what you will.
Overall, Battlefield 3 is a good game, no doubt, let down slightly by a rather mundane campaign, occasionally awkward controls and a lack of customisation options in the multiplayer section. I don't find it to be as enjoyable as any COD games I've played, though that's not to say it's without merit. For players who want slower-paced games on larger maps, with aircraft/vehicles etc, it's the better choice. For me, I prefer the faster pace and greater variation of COD. I would still be interested in playing future Battlefield games, though I will be getting the new COD game ('Ghosts') as a priority.
Rating: 3/5
No comments:
Post a Comment