Me7axas
76,607
TA Score for this game: 2,137
Posted on 20 December 11 at 05:51, Edited on 22 December 11 at 07:12 |
This review has 15 positive votes and 4 negative votes. Please log in to vote. |
Saturation is a word that gets thrown around a lot in reference to the gaming industry, especially in regards to shooters. It’s hard to ignore big names like Halo and Gears of War, especially when the Xbox360 built its brand with these types of hard-hitting platform exclusives. Now, turn the clock back about four years. The Call of Duty franchise had always been a player in the shooter market, but not always the inexorable and prolific one that they have come to be known as today. Ever since the success of Call of Duty 4 and it’s subsequent sequels (for lack of a better word), shooters have tried to emulate aspects of the game in one-way or another. Reach had pre-loaded classes before spawning, as did Gears of War 3. Almost all shooters have adopted the progressive style of in-game ranks that COD4 championed (Halo 3 and Gears of War 2 even altered theirs weeks after launch). Unless you live under a rock, it’s hard to escape the influence of Call of Duty. Mothers have been neglected, girlfriends ignored, papers turned in late or not at all and many a nights wasted in the pursuit of ‘one more game’. It is this pervasive quality that demands I talk about Call of Duty, even though this is a review of Battlefield 3.
‘Shit-storm’ couldn’t have been a more appropriate word for the events of this past summer in the shooter community. The upcoming release of Gears 3, despite coming out before Modern Warfare 3 and Battlefield 3, was almost completely overshadowed. The communities of the 2 respective combatants were relentless, BF3 being revered for its attention to technical details and MW3 still riding the COD brand like a surfer atop a tsunami. The Montague/Capulet style standoff resulted in domain name pranks and huge long lasting arguments (but /v/ never could agree on anything). When it was confirmed that the launch of the two games would coincide, it began to look like a bit of a horse race.
Battlefield 3, published by EA and developed by DICE is a first-person shooter available on X360, PS3 and PC. You play as Sergeant Blackburn who is being interrogated by a man strongly resembling Phillip Seymour Hoffman, flashing back to past events and replaying the missions ODST style. Save a few choice missions, the campaign was pretty unremarkable. The ‘Generic FPS: Modern Military’ pictures floating around on the ‘net, jamming the ‘shooter culture’ by combining a bunch of different FPS box arts sums up the campaign nicely. You shoot people (usually of a different ethnicity), a couple of ‘role reversal’ missions and are given a neatly wrapped conclusion; you’ve heard this story before.
In the third mission however, you are led to the deck of a large navy carrier somewhere in the ocean. At first I thought I would have to Metal Gear my way around the deck of the ship, kicking ass and taking names, but instead I was led to a jet. I flew around in the sky, performed sweeping runs and got engaged in very intense dogfights. Thinking back to how cool and refreshing that level was, I began to think of what permitted such a mission. Along with Call of Duty’s other aspects, a sense of ‘realism’ has been adopted by a number of high profile shooters. Call of Duty still has ridiculous ‘perks’, Gears of War still has muscle men running around chain sawing bugs in half, Halo still has you saving the world from aliens and Battlefield still lets you revive allies that just got the shit blown out of them by an RPG. But having said this, Halo and Gears have taken a more stoic and solemn attitude ‘story-wise’; Modern Warfare and Battlefield continue to sport this ‘modern military’ bravado, all of which attempts to convey a sense of realism. In terms of technical realism, BF3 excels, and this is what allows you to truly immerse yourself in the multiplayer.
The game is in its dying seconds and your team’s spawn tickets are dwindling. You check your sights as you crest over the hill. Yelling into your headset for air support as you work your way to the bombsite, cappin’ bitches as you go. While you cover your squad mates who are planting the bomb, you can hear the cry of the FROGFOOT overhead, followed closely by the boom of the bombing run that just took place. The charge has been armed; you and your squad take up strategic positions overlooking the bomb while your man in the jet doubles back to mark advancing tangos. You’re calling out and firing at the impending forces, the jet is screaming overhead, explosions are going off, your friends are yelling for health and the in-game music is getting louder, deeper and more intense. Then the bomb explodes and you hear two rapid high-pitched clicks. You lean back into the couch and relax, the team’s spawn tickets have been replenished and you get to do it all over again.
Rush is the most popular online multiplayer mode in BF3, the offense blowing up pairs of M-COM stations in order to advance while the defense attempts to deplete the opposing team’s spawn tickets. Nothing is more intense than a tight game of Rush, what makes it intense is both the realistic technicalities and the focus on teamwork. In Battlefield, a player who goes 2-10 can still rack up a nice point total despite their poor KpD. This can be performed through spotting and marking enemy soldiers, repairing vehicles, healing teammates and doling out ammunition. Within each team are smaller squads of up to four players. Squads allow players to: communicate, coordinate, support and spawn amongst each other with ease. If I see someone blinking ‘low ammo’, I can choose to spawn as a medic class and help them out, allowing them to die another day and earning more points for myself. With everyone doing this in his or her squads, the whole team aspect gets even more pronounced. One new addition to BF3 is the ‘suppression bonus’, allowing players to earn points by simply shooting in the direction of an enemy who soon after gets killed by a teammate. Additionally, while being suppressed your screen gets fuzzy and indiscernible, making it difficult for you to react.
The technical aspects of BF3 shine in the multiplayer, adding to the aforementioned realism and turning the game into a challenging and entertaining experience. Unlike other shooters, bullets won’t always go where you want them to in BF3. After recently unlocking the 12x scope for a sniper rifle, I found myself missing almost all my long-range shots after equipping it. After a lot of head scratching, it dawned on me that I had to now compensate my shots for even more distance. In BF3 the bullets will drop depending how far they travel, this aspect becomes especially critical in long range rifle fights, or sniping. With bullet drop sniping becomes a fine art; players able to earn headshot bonuses equivalent to whatever their total distance from target is while sniping. Normally a kill nets you anywhere from 100 to 150 points. But with a headshot from over 700m away, you’re looking at some serious bullet economy. From detailed weapon customization to bullet drop, it’s the little things that come together to craft a great experience. It’s these same technical details that turn BF3 into a game of inches, making online play truly intense. One meter too far or too close and the shot won’t quite make it. One step too soon and you’ll get blown to bits by a mortar, or one second too late and the M-COM will blow.
Quite possibly the most entertaining ‘little thing’ is the dog tags. With hundreds of combinations to choose from, and the awesome assassination animation involved with obtaining them from an enemy, they quickly become a sought after prize. I have ‘appeared offline’, snuck into my friends’ games, skulked around and slit their throats just to embarrass them and collect their dog tags. Correspondingly, I have dived to shut off my 360 to try and avoid letting my friends give me a Sicilian-Necktie.
My personal feelings aside, MW3 beat the shit out of BF3 in terms of hours logged and total sales, proving that COD is king. Deep down, even back in the summer, I knew it was going to win, and I’m sure everyone did in some respect. But if that’s the case, how did the huge feud even begin? The devil is in the details, and in this case we are referring to the technical proficiency of Battlefield. The game comes across as clean, crisp, well-cut and intricate, where as MW3 is that drunken but awesome life of the party keg-standing douche that we all love to hate but still love at the end of the night. Modern Warfare’s draw comes in the highs; the hills always outweighing the valleys and the end always justify the means. Battlefield’s appeal lies in small victories; that warm feeling of satisfaction when you snipe the shit out of that annoying motherfucker who keeps peeking his face over the tip of the hill. The heart pumping intensity of arming the bomb and defending it single-handedly, or that slow grind with your team for half and hour with all the right moves in all the right places, leading your team to victory. It’s these little hit or miss, do or die moments that make Battlefield an incredible online experience, and one of this year’s best shooters. Would I say that Battlefield 3 is better than Modern Warfare 3? Absolutely.
I’ve scored it high, but I didn’t blather on about all the other shooters for no reason. I stand by my earlier statement that the market has become increasingly over saturated with shooters that all begin the feel like ‘more of the same’. Usually with shooters I make a point to beat the campaign before I go try the online multiplayer, but I haven’t done so since Reach. Maybe that says something about shooters today and the contrived story that gets retold over and over again. These days it seems that a medium that used to be dedicated to forging fantasy and wonder is bent on taking us to places we have been before. Because of this, I have included both a score for the multiplayer, and the game as a whole.
7.6/10 Overall
9.5/10 Multiplayer
 |