A worthy successor to the legendary Battlefield 2?
Battlefield is the long-running franchise created by DICE and Electronic Arts that started in 2002 with Battlefield 1942 taking place in World War II, the game was unique in it's design with massive maps and multiplayer focus. Succeeded by Battlefield Vietnam, the Vietnam War adaptation of Battlefield 1942, then came a legendary release. The official sequel to Battlefield 1942.
Battlefield 2 improved upon the formula that was introduced in 1942 and Vietnam. Making maps bigger, moving forward to the modern era and adding new features such as online profiles with dynamic ranks, weapon unlocks and rewards. The game is considered legendary by many including myself being one of the only games I ever gave a 10/10 to.
The fanbase that Battlefield 2 created were please and anxiously awaited the sequel to Battlefield 2, well shortly after Battlefield 2's release, EA and DICE announced Battlefield 2142, much like Battlefield Vietnam did not change anything from 1942, Battlefield 2142 was a futuristic adaptation of Battlefield 2 that did little other than improve on the graphics, add new weapons and a new game mode.
Still the fans of the Battlefield franchise were quite happy with 2142 and Battlefield 2 and were willing to wait for the next game.
Now I first heard a rumor of a sequel to Battlefield 2 in 2007 where a leaked document from DICE revealed what appeared to be information regarding a new game, "Battlefield 3" set for release the next year. The document claimed the game would be set in modern times like Battlefield 2 and claimed 40 v 40 matches would occur. The document also claimed that the game would be developed for Windows Vista only. (And we all know how well THAT would have turned out, right? *looks at Halo 2 PC*)
...But it never came to be...
Instead we got an announcement from EA and DICE...A new Battlefield game...But not Battlefield 3, this was a completely different game called Battlefield: Bad Company and it would not be released for Vista, not even for PC, it was only being developed for console release.
Battlefield: Bad Company would introduce new "Destruction Physics" which would, as EA claimed, Allow us to destroy everything in the game, knock down walls and destroy buildings and such...
Now, upon the release of Bad Company console gamers were thrilled to see the first real Battlefield release for consoles, the destruction physics were nice to see even though they were limited. However Bad Company had many shortcomings that left console gamers feeling a bit robbed...First off there were no jets which had been a staple of Battlefield games since Vietnam's release, there was no way to go prone which has been a staple of SHOOTER games since...Um, FOREVER?!?, The classic Battlefield game mode, "Conquest" was nowhere to be found in favor of the new game mode "Rush" however Conquest was eventually added to the game, And finally there were no parachutes so if you bailed out of a crashing helicopter you would still die.
Bad Company also introduced a story-based campaign for the first time in Battlefield history, whereas previous releases only had basically offline multiplayer with AI. The story felt like a modern adaptation of the movie "Kelly's Heroes". And was a pretty good first attempt for a campaign by DICE and EA.
In 2009 a sequel to Bad Company was announced, this game would supposedly improve upon the destruction physics introduced in Bad Company among other things, oh and this release held good news for PC players, for the first time in 2 years they would get a new Battlefield game.
The game was...Well kind of a big step sideways, first off, the destruction physics were not grandly improved and not much was changed from Bad Company other than a new campaign, improved graphics and new guns. The parachute was re-added to the game but going prone was still not possible in Bad Company 2. (Seriously, WTF DICE?!?) For PC players it was equally disappointing as Bad Company 2 was simply a console game ported to PC and as such was not optimized for PC play. Also it wasn't as well designed for modification like the previous Battlefield releases.
So on we waited...
(END OF THE HISTORY SECTION OF MY REVIEW)
Well we got what we wanted...In 2010 EA and DICE announced the official sequel to the legendary Battlefield 2. The game rumored way back in 2007...Battlefield 3.
So is Battlefield 3 a worthy successor to it's legendary predecessor?
Well to start off, EA and DICE announced the game would include improved destruction physics, a new co-op campaign and a variety of other things.
Let's start with the graphics. The graphics in Battlefield 3 are without a doubt some of the most stunning visuals ever seen in a video game to date, these graphics rival even Crysis with realistic physics, smoke effects and realistic weapon functions. Lighting effects are photo-realistic and the people look as true to life as ever.
Destruction physics are indeed improved as DICE and EA promised, most cover can be destroyed now and many more objects are capable of being destroyed. It still has it's limitations but at the moment I don't think even modern computers could handle 100% true-to-life destruction physics and keep 30 FPS. But most things are destructible, from cars to cover to walls of buildings can now be completely destroyed.
Battlefield 3 reintroduces the ability to go prone (A first for a console Battlefield release) and FINALLY reintroduces jets. And for the first time on a console release of Battlefield has a PC-Style server browser.
Battlefield 3 continues the trend started in Bad Company by having a single-player, story based campaign. This time however the campaign is much more improved, the campaign moves like real life and really gives you the feel that you are in the Battlefield, the AI is one of the most improved I've ever seen in a modern-day FPS, the AI will actually kill enemies and actually function as part of the battle instead of shooting randomly and maybe getting the occasional random kill and doing jack ****
The story is your typical modern warfare story "blah blah blah iraq, blah blah blah nukes, blah blah blah Russia, blah blah blah..."
The campaign attempts to allow you to experience every aspect of the game, infantry combat, Jet combat and Tank combat. The jet mission is epic but somewhat of a disappointment as you have no actual control of the jet, instead you are the gunner and must simply aim and fire at targets while the jet flies about. The game features a lot of quick-time events as well which give the game a somewhat cinematic feel. Overall the campaign is surprisingly good and can be beaten in around 5-6 hours by the average gamer.
Now, a new feature introduced in Battlefield 3 is the Co-Op campaign..."How is it?" you may ask yourself...Well it's a miserable failure. I went to try a public Co-Op game for the first mission, selected the first mission and the difficulty and 3 times it disconnects me from the session before even loading the map...Finally the 4th time I get into a match, the map starts to load...Then..."The client has disconnected" WTF?!? I try one more time and FINALLY get into the game...And it's here I realize how poor this is, you have one objective at the start of this mission, to defend the Humvees, simple, right? Well not really, it's a giant endurance round with wave after wave of enemies coming at you with the occasional tank that you have to take out with your Javelin.
At one point my Co-Op partner allowed a tank to get BEHIND us and was running around like an idiot...Suddenly I felt like I was playing Left-4-Dead with randoms. (Trust me if you've ever played left-4-dead you would understand how miserable that can be) Halfway through the mission the game disconnected again...Joy. Well in any case I decided to try the second mission.
I looked at the second mission "Oh cool, a Helicopter mission" I thought to myself...It was cool indeed...For about 3 minutes. In this mission one person is the pilot and one is the gunner. I was the pilot and my gunner was actually pretty competent. At the beginning of this mission you are told to take out two vehicles, simple...Well it gets tedious after that. Next you must take out a bunch of foot-soldiers on the ground...Once you've buzzed by them for the 40th time you realize just how boring this mission really is. 20 minutes I spent buzzing around foot-soldiers and occasional vehicles IN THE SAME DAMN AREA, I finally got so bored I had to disconnect. So Battlefield's first attempt at Co-Op is an absolute fail.
Now, on to the meat of any Battlefield game, the competitive multiplayer, as I stated previously, Battlefield 3 features a PC-Style server browser for console which is a nice feature allowing you to find the best server to suit your needs. However this does have problems, when me and my friend attempted to play together I invited him into my "Squad" which is Battlefield 3's personal party system, half the time his game wouldn't allow him to connect or even freeze his console so that is a bug that needs to be addressed, once you get into a game it's fantastic.
The "Rush" game mode introduced in Bad Company returns as well as Battlefield's classic "Conquest" game mode. Now PC players get full 32 v 32 game modes while us on the 360 are limited to 12 v 12 which is okay I guess since it allowed us to have the stunning visuals and physics we have in the game along with the smooth framerate, now other than that disconnect bug there isn't much problem with Battlefield 3's multiplayer that I can find, other than your usual FPS multiplayer game grips such as campers, snipers and the like.
One annoying bug that occurs in the game is a weird screen flash that, for a split second flashes a random color on the screen, it's annoying to say the least but it's not hindering in any way. Probably the only gripe I have about Battlefield 3's multiplayer is the jets, now, Battlefield 3 has a dynamic ranking and unlock system that is pretty nice, the more you use a weapon, the more stuff you unlock for that weapon, you can unlock better scopes, laser sights, etc. Just by using that gun consistently. The same goes for vehicles, the more you use a vehicle the more stuff you unlock for it such as better missiles, LMGs, etc. One problem...THE JETS DON'T START OUT WITH MISSILES, WTF?!? You are limited to ONLY your machine gun until you use the jet enough to unlock the missiles...Problem is it's hard as **** to hit anything with the machine gun...Why DICE? Why? Regardless it's nice to finally have jet combat in a console release of Battlefield. Other than that, the game is your standard Battlefield multiplayer that we have all come to know and love.
In conclusion, Battlefield certainly has evolved over the years, but is Battlefield 3 really a worthy successor to the legendary Battlefield 2? Sadly I do not think so. But to be honest I don't think anything will quite live up to Battlefield 2. As it is, Battlefield 3 is definitely a good game for the modern era and certainly improves upon the Bad Company series. I honestly think this will be my choice for Game of the Year 2011.
Overall I give Battlefield 3 a 9/10.