Battlefield 3

Collector Freaks Forum

Help Support Collector Freaks Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Been playing the campaign for the past half & hour. Mostly all the videos that you saw in their trailers, the sniper section & running on the street.

As usual sound is awesome & graphics are amazing! Gonna try multiplayer now.
 
IGN blows at reviewing. They just proved it once again.

Couldnt have said it better myself. Every time I check out a game they say is a 9.5 or 10 I can't stand the thing.

Every time I buy a game which I love and check out reviews afterwards, IGN seems to give it a 6 or below.

With BF3 it's a pretty sure thing so they'd sound stupid for getting it wrong. If anything I buy the games I want and enjoy, not because some cubicle nerds reviewing things can act like their ____ don't smell.
 
Couldnt have said it better myself. Every time I check out a game they say is a 9.5 or 10 I can't stand the thing.

Every time I buy a game which I love and check out reviews afterwards, IGN seems to give it a 6 or below.

With BF3 it's a pretty sure thing so they'd sound stupid for getting it wrong. If anything I buy the games I want and enjoy, not because some cubicle nerds reviewing things can act like their ____ don't smell.

That and they cannot be unbiased and not sow their undying devotion for COD. "The campaign takes itself too seriously." When with a military shooter (outside of BC) has a campaign not taken itself seriously? COD takes their campaigns seriously. Have they ever said "Once again, Modern Warfare is taking itself too seriously." Doubtful.

"While the multiplayer is awesome, the story is cliched and a mash up of years of military fiction (exactly like MW1-BlOps and countless others.) You'll encounter WMDs (just like COD and almost EVERY other military shooter, but was that aspect brought up in their reviews?) Plots against New York (oh, I believe COD is doing this also, lets wait and see if they fault them for it) and of course Russians (I'm pretty sure COD wasn't the first to use Russian's as an enemy but it sure does sound like IGN wants you to believe they did.)
The tale is familiar ground . . .(a hint of their love of COD perhaps? Cause COD is sooooooooooooo original guys, come on) . . . that we've seen in films and in Battlefields competitors already (YES!! and there we have it. I knew they couldn't review it without bringing COD into it. And yes in MW2s review they said the campaign was "inspired" by films. But I guess thats ok)"

I mean the only thing at the time they could fault MW2 story for is being short and having presentation issues.

A war game is a war game. That usually entails guns, explosions, bombs, good vs. evil with evil usually being foreign and most of the time Russians, a plot that has been used a thousand times in movies all the while taking itself two seriously (Tom Clancy games, COD, Battlefield, MOH etc). But in any of their reviews were they criticized for it?

Then again you can't spell ignorant without IGN.
 
I never bothered with IGN's review for most games, always preferred gamespot as they seem to be fairer most of the time.

But I do agree on the flashback style mission which is almost exactly the same as Black Ops, except in Black Ops you were a prisoner retelling your tale. In BF3, you are more like an informer retelling your tale.
 
That and they cannot be unbiased and not sow their undying devotion for COD. "The campaign takes itself too seriously." When with a military shooter (outside of BC) has a campaign not taken itself seriously? COD takes their campaigns seriously. Have they ever said "Once again, Modern Warfare is taking itself too seriously." Doubtful.

"While the multiplayer is awesome, the story is cliched and a mash up of years of military fiction (exactly like MW1-BlOps and countless others.) You'll encounter WMDs (just like COD and almost EVERY other military shooter, but was that aspect brought up in their reviews?) Plots against New York (oh, I believe COD is doing this also, lets wait and see if they fault them for it) and of course Russians (I'm pretty sure COD wasn't the first to use Russian's as an enemy but it sure does sound like IGN wants you to believe they did.)
The tale is familiar ground . . .(a hint of their love of COD perhaps? Cause COD is sooooooooooooo original guys, come on) . . . that we've seen in films and in Battlefields competitors already (YES!! and there we have it. I knew they couldn't review it without bringing COD into it. And yes in MW2s review they said the campaign was "inspired" by films. But I guess thats ok)"

I mean the only thing at the time they could fault MW2 story for is being short and having presentation issues.

A war game is a war game. That usually entails guns, explosions, bombs, good vs. evil with evil usually being foreign and most of the time Russians, a plot that has been used a thousand times in movies all the while taking itself two seriously (Tom Clancy games, COD, Battlefield, MOH etc). But in any of their reviews were they criticized for it?

Then again you can't spell ignorant without IGN.

:rotfl:rotfl:rotfl
 

Wow, night and day. What's the consensus, PS3 or 360? Dino, Karma, (and I'm assuming Josh) on the 360? Not sure if I want this or COD. Tough choice.

Also, hilarious.
avatar4207_12.gif
 
Love the PS3 controller...but not for shooters. Add me sucka, Nickto on PS3 and Deak Starkilla (I know, I know not gangsta just my only option :() on the 360. :wave
 
In the 360 vs. PS3 beta comparisons on youtube the 360 version looks significantly better. I'm assuming that won't change when both have the HD textures running.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4y6bsBO2CQ[/ame]
 
That and they cannot be unbiased and not sow their undying devotion for COD. "The campaign takes itself too seriously." When with a military shooter (outside of BC) has a campaign not taken itself seriously? COD takes their campaigns seriously. Have they ever said "Once again, Modern Warfare is taking itself too seriously." Doubtful.

"While the multiplayer is awesome, the story is cliched and a mash up of years of military fiction (exactly like MW1-BlOps and countless others.) You'll encounter WMDs (just like COD and almost EVERY other military shooter, but was that aspect brought up in their reviews?) Plots against New York (oh, I believe COD is doing this also, lets wait and see if they fault them for it) and of course Russians (I'm pretty sure COD wasn't the first to use Russian's as an enemy but it sure does sound like IGN wants you to believe they did.)
The tale is familiar ground . . .(a hint of their love of COD perhaps? Cause COD is sooooooooooooo original guys, come on) . . . that we've seen in films and in Battlefields competitors already (YES!! and there we have it. I knew they couldn't review it without bringing COD into it. And yes in MW2s review they said the campaign was "inspired" by films. But I guess thats ok)"

I mean the only thing at the time they could fault MW2 story for is being short and having presentation issues.

A war game is a war game. That usually entails guns, explosions, bombs, good vs. evil with evil usually being foreign and most of the time Russians, a plot that has been used a thousand times in movies all the while taking itself two seriously (Tom Clancy games, COD, Battlefield, MOH etc). But in any of their reviews were they criticized for it?

Then again you can't spell ignorant without IGN.

I've never really played the campaigns for bad company and battlefield 2. I've been playing them more for the multiplayer aspect. So I'm not sure what I'm missing out on. On that note: my friend who has downloaded the game to play on his 360; tells me the campaign is alright; with cinematic cut-scenes very similar to MW2.

I like WW3 and modern warfare themes (not Activision) in general, so this BF3 single player campaign is an added bonus. I'll be playing BF3 for the multiplayer and MW3 for the campaign.

Anyway, when he gets his PC copy, we'll be ranking in multiplayer. We're very excited for that.
 
And I'm not too surprised that they complained about the campaign from a game that's SOLELY meant for multiplayer.
 
In the 360 vs. PS3 beta comparisons on youtube the 360 version looks significantly better. I'm assuming that won't change when both have the HD textures running.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4y6bsBO2CQ

Strange that it looks better on the Xbox as most ads for the game promote the PS3. Also PS3 owners are getting the DLC earlier if I am not mistaken? Glad I stuck with XBOX, although I am really going to miss Uncharted 3 :monkey2
 
Back
Top