BF3 Singplayer Campaign - Not That Bad

  • 90 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by Gamesterpheonix (3522 posts) -

So, if you're like me you bought BF3 and jumped straight into the multiplayer. I love the game and have spent many, many hours playing the MP but never touched the SP until a few days ago after talking to a friend about it. Ive played through a good bit of it (I think) and it isnt that bad. The gunplay is satsifying - however quickly the enemies die - and the pace is nice. Sure theres nothing spectacular about the story but the story isnt bad either. Its something out of a movie. I also liked that it was coherent for the most part. I was able to follow the story and all the missions related to main problem as opposed to just being a random explosion of action. I havent liked a CoD campaign, for example, since probably MW1 or World at War or maybe MW2 but even MW2 wasnt that great.

Anyway, that said - why all the hate for the SP? I feel like they did a good job and the visuals were great. Whats your take?

#2 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

I found some missions of the campaign to be alright. It looked very cool and some parts really sold the first person perspective like the jet mission, and the tank mission. People are annoyed with it because of many reasons. The enemies respawn constantly, if you do something the game doesn't want you to it kills you, very stupid story and story structure, very poorly written characters with very bad dialogue (The guy with the hair interrogating you) and the fact that it was all pretty standard fare.

I don't hate it as such, I got a bit of enjoyment out of it and I sometimes go back to it. But I can definitely see why it was dragged down by the campaign and a lot of people hate it

#3 Posted by Sweetbackhair (1926 posts) -
I just bought the game 2 days ago and the first thing I did was play single player, and it was a quick campaign I finished it in one day.
#4 Posted by NightmareP3 (256 posts) -

I didn't find a single mission to be entertaining or fun at all, same thing goes for the MP.

BF3 just simply doesn't offer anything new or fun to the BF franchise.

And when it comes to SP in military shooters, BF3 has by far the worst SP iv'e played in a long time.

#5 Posted by biggest_loser (24043 posts) -
Its atrocious. It has so little to do with BF, particular in terms of its scale (or lack of) and linearity. It shameless apes COD's gruff gun-ho speak, which personally I'm getting very tired of. Its just a straight boring shooter, compounded by its need to be over the top (the earthquake) and its repetition. They actually make you replay a whole sequence, possibly one of the dumbest levels in gaming, where you win by killing a guy through a quick time event involving a brick...Just think about that.
#6 Posted by BrunoBRS (73260 posts) -
nope, i finished the campaign before touching MP because if i didn't, i knew i'd never go back to it. it's serviceable and a nice visual showcase, but nothing "whoa".
#7 Posted by SKaREO (3161 posts) -
BF3 had a single player? Wow, I never noticed before I uninstalled it.
#8 Posted by kris9031998 (7554 posts) -
It's a benchmark, as far as i'm concerned
#9 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

It's a benchmark, as far as i'm concernedkris9031998

But it runs smoother than the Multiplayer so it can't be a benchmark

#10 Posted by achilles614 (4851 posts) -
It's a benchmark, as far as i'm concernedkris9031998
Not even a good one at that :P Who cares what their fps is in the SP?
#11 Posted by skrat_01 (33767 posts) -
Still haven't touched it. Everything that I have seen reeks a COD clone in the worst possible manner, which is just sad considering the potential for something Battelfiedlish in singleplayer. Hell even BF2: Modern Combat on the consoles had a more Battlefield singleplayer. Let that sink in.
#12 Posted by Jebus213 (8770 posts) -
You enjoyed a 5 hour quick time event? It was one of the worst SP campaigns I ever played. The game was cheap interactive movie.
#13 Posted by The_Capitalist (10838 posts) -

Not only was a Call of Duty ripoff, the writing was atrocious, too.

#14 Posted by Qixote (10694 posts) -

Never played BF3 at all, but if the SP is as similar to CoD as everyone says it is, then I am inclined to think that I will never play it, at least if not for free or dirt cheap. I am tired of the CoD formula (in both SP and MP). Console gamers seem to be flocking to it more than ever. Whereas the pc gamers I think are finally coming to realize its overdue for an overhaul.

#15 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

You enjoyed a 5 hour quick time event? It was one of the worst SP campaigns I ever played. The game was cheap interactive movie.Jebus213

yeah yeah yeah we all know how you feel about BF3

#16 Posted by AR-15 (261 posts) -

The single player in this game is a joke, in my opinion. The fact that it came from such a big developer just makes it that much worse.

I didn't like the multiplayer all that much, either, so it goes without saying that I will think long and hard about giving DICE any of my money in the future.

#17 Posted by Jebus213 (8770 posts) -

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]You enjoyed a 5 hour quick time event? It was one of the worst SP campaigns I ever played. The game was cheap interactive movie.seanmcloughlin

yeah yeah yeah we all know how you feel about BF3

Deal with it.
#18 Posted by Papadrach (1965 posts) -
I actually liked it compared to how nearly all shooting games have generic stories. This one made good use of the frostbite 2 engine and I found te experience pleasurable. Sure it wasn't a top of the line story, but it was still decent and had nice moments.
#19 Posted by Baranga (14217 posts) -

You haven't played any Call of Duty campaign if you say BF3's is better. Fact.

Also a fact: BF3's singleplayer is the worst ever.

#20 Posted by yellosnolvr (19302 posts) -
i played campaign day one and beat it. i will admit that there are a few points that i thought the campaign was neat, but overall it wasn't that good. i do like how each mission related to the story. i guess what really irked me was the fact that it felt like it was trying to be something else at points, even though it was actually better than most fps campaigns in the recent years. regardless of quality, i was still expecting something a bit more 'battlefield-ish'
#21 Posted by Zubinen (2856 posts) -

You haven't played any Call of Duty campaign if you say BF3's is better. Fact.

Also a fact: BF3's singleplayer is the worst ever.

Baranga
I wouldn't say it's the worst ever but the only thing consistently improving from sequel to sequel seems to be the SP for COD games(although technically MW2 is the only COD game out of the 8 released so far with a logically consistent campaign), I'd dare say almost no franchise can challenge the production values of COD SP. But the thing is with Battlefield, you have consistently improving multiplayer(even with the BC series which is when DICE was just shifting over to a new engine) rather than COD which has COD 2 and COD 6 which are the only playable vanilla CODs. All this being said, there isn't really much of an excuse for why the campaign turned out to be lackluster in its content(although the campaign is -surprisingly- logically consistent), the team for single player did not do the BF IP justice but for a first attempt I suppose it's -alright-, but just that: -alright-.
#22 Posted by realguitarhero5 (3900 posts) -

The thing about the Battlefield 3 campaign it that it had cool moments and looked nice. Like the jet part. But that got old quickly. The campaign was terribly inconsistent. The awesome moments lasted about a minute and a half and then you are stuck doing the same shooter staples over and over.

But the jet part? Cool until you realized that its just an on-rails section.

The tank part? It was nice for the first few minutes.

The Paris level? It was awesome until you realize that you've seen it all before.

#23 Posted by Legendaryscmt (12532 posts) -

Some missions were enjoyable while some weren't. Very inconsistent pacing with a horribly put together story.

#24 Posted by gameofthering (10191 posts) -

First thing I did was finish the single player story so as to get it out the way.

#25 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -
I still haven't finished the campaign. I have like one part left I think..
#26 Posted by RoccoHout (984 posts) -

The singleplayer was okay. The first mission was boring, with all the scripted events and such. But missions like the one with the jet and tanks were amazing. I also loved the last missions.

I bought the game for the multiplayer anyway

#27 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

It's pretty damn pointless!

#28 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

It's pretty damn pointless!

mitu123

I wouldn't say it's pointless. Sure the game could get along perfectly fine and probably better score wise without it but I thought there were some cool stand out moments in it and it really showed off the power of the engine, seen as MP has to be toned down a little.

BF3s SP looks incredible

#29 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

It's pretty damn pointless!

seanmcloughlin

I wouldn't say it's pointless. Sure the game could get along perfectly fine and probably better score wise without it but I thought there were some cool stand out moments in it and it really showed off the power of the engine, seen as MP has to be toned down a little.

BF3s SP looks incredible

The ending is what made it pointless.=p

#30 Posted by Ragingbear505 (819 posts) -

I think it has some of the most awful writing ever seen in a first person shooter and the standards are already terribly low for the genre. There is no plot. There is no exposition, no climax, no rising action, no real conflict, no motivation. At least in a Call of Duty game you can identify the bad guy and know what he's about, even if it is written by a 4 year old in crayon. Battlefield 3 is just one incoherent graphics showcase linked to the next ending with "Hurr I stopped the nuke hurray!"

#31 Posted by way2funny (4569 posts) -

Buying a battlefield game for singleplayer is like going to mcdonalds for salad

#32 Posted by with_teeth26 (6115 posts) -

Its worth playing if you have the game due to some of the levels looking absolutely incredible. It has one or two decent missions but its pretty dull for the most part.

#33 Posted by ferret-gamer (17310 posts) -
Its not bad, it is just bland, and everything it does has been done before and done better.
#34 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

It's pretty damn pointless!

mitu123

I wouldn't say it's pointless. Sure the game could get along perfectly fine and probably better score wise without it but I thought there were some cool stand out moments in it and it really showed off the power of the engine, seen as MP has to be toned down a little.

BF3s SP looks incredible

The ending is what made it pointless.=p

Yeah that's true :P

#35 Posted by Elann2008 (32953 posts) -

[QUOTE="mitu123"]

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

I wouldn't say it's pointless. Sure the game could get along perfectly fine and probably better score wise without it but I thought there were some cool stand out moments in it and it really showed off the power of the engine, seen as MP has to be toned down a little.

BF3s SP looks incredible

seanmcloughlin

The ending is what made it pointless.=p

Yeah that's true :P

The interrogation cutscenes were cringe-worthy... I'm like the last guy to skip cutscenes... I appreciate the work put into it, but those were "skippable."
#36 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"] The ending is what made it pointless.=p

Elann2008

Yeah that's true :P

The interrogation cutscenes were cringe-worthy... I'm like the last guy to skip cutscenes... I appreciate the work put into it, but those were "skippable."

They were atrocious and the interrogators asked some questions or reacted completely unnaturally to what was going on. LIke when Blackburn was talking about his comrades dying and the other guy suddenly goes off on him and doesn't sympathise even though he said he had been through something similar.

It was trying to add tension where there shouldn't have been any. Whoever wrote it watched one too many crappy action movies

#37 Posted by topgunmv (10205 posts) -

It's better than cod's singleplayer.

But that's like saying drowning is better than being burned alive.

#38 Posted by realguitarhero5 (3900 posts) -

It's better than cod's singleplayer.

But that's like saying drowning is better than being burned alive.

topgunmv
Hey hey hey I would MUCH rather drown than burn alive.
#39 Posted by NuclearFlower (575 posts) -

It was so dull and boring that I didn't even make it past the second level.

#40 Posted by damann22 (7655 posts) -

the tank and jet fighter missions made it worth playing, everything else was meh. Still I didnt think it was any worse than some console FPS ive played

#41 Posted by GamingVengeance (1854 posts) -
i enjoyed the campaign, it was a fun 5 hour distraction. ill never play it again tho, well unless some friends come over and wanna see what my pc is capable of. thatll be the only reason i ever boot it up again altho when i think about it. id probably just show em the multiplayer lol it looks almost as good as the campaign
#42 Posted by Bikouchu35 (7384 posts) -

Moar like a playable tech demo but I got so bored of it at the first level or two that I stopped playing.

I actually liked the cod series sp because the thing actually had a story worthy enough for sequels which it did. Nothing deep, short, but good enough to see it through imo and the endings are always pretty grand. However I hated mw3 online which is why I didnt bother buying after trying this is where bf3 excels.

#43 Posted by mitu123 (153911 posts) -
[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"] The ending is what made it pointless.=p

Elann2008

Yeah that's true :P

The interrogation cutscenes were cringe-worthy... I'm like the last guy to skip cutscenes... I appreciate the work put into it, but those were "skippable."

I skipped all of them!
#44 Posted by donalbane (16246 posts) -
I enjoyed it too, but damn it if there weren't a few too many quick time events. It felt like a series of QTEs was required every 15 minutes. And as much as people hated the on-rails part of the flying level, I really enjoyed that part of the game. The eye-candy made up for the lack of freedom imo.
#45 Posted by topgunmv (10205 posts) -

I enjoyed it too, but damn it if there weren't a few too many quick time events. It felt like a series of QTEs was required every 15 minutes. And as much as people hated the on-rails part of the flying level, I really enjoyed that part of the game. The eye-candy made up for the lack of freedom imo. donalbane

I agree, it was actually pretty fun imo.

#46 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

[QUOTE="Elann2008"][QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

Yeah that's true :P

mitu123

The interrogation cutscenes were cringe-worthy... I'm like the last guy to skip cutscenes... I appreciate the work put into it, but those were "skippable."

I skipped all of them!

You made a very good choice. The bald guy was ok but man the other one was a fvcking idiot

#47 Posted by realguitarhero5 (3900 posts) -

[QUOTE="mitu123"][QUOTE="Elann2008"] The interrogation cutscenes were cringe-worthy... I'm like the last guy to skip cutscenes... I appreciate the work put into it, but those were "skippable."seanmcloughlin

I skipped all of them!

You made a very good choice. The bald guy was ok but man the other one was a fvcking idiot

He only existed to be the "bad cop". Soooo lazy.
#48 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38216 posts) -

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="mitu123"] I skipped all of them!realguitarhero5

You made a very good choice. The bald guy was ok but man the other one was a fvcking idiot

He only existed to be the "bad cop". Soooo lazy.

Exactly and the stuff he came out with was completely out of left field. He suddenly started accusing you and attacking you for nothing. Like I said before he said he lost his team because of his commander before but instead of sympathise with Blackburn, he got incredibly hostile with him. It was retarded

#49 Posted by SPYDER0416 (16736 posts) -

Compared to what? The bubonic plague?

Ok I guess its not the worst campaign ever, but compared to Medal of Honor, Call of Duty, Bad Company, Rainbow Six: Vegas and even Homefront, all multiplayer focused military shooters, its somehow worse then those. It has nothing new to offer, is MORE linear then even the most linear Call of Duty title, its short, the story is dumb and cliched, and I feel like I've done everything in it a million times with much better production values and polish.

THe multiplayer is easily some of the best multiplayer I've ever played, but the single player is a tacked on attempt to go for the CoD audience that goes too far into the handholding and linear aspect. They really should have stuck with Bad Company's formula, offering open fields of destruction with a few set pieces sprinkled in and characters we actually care about, instead its another in a line of "serious" military shooters.

But if you liked it that's great, I know some people that liked it and had fun with it, but the best momenets where I had even a tiny bit of freedom or control happened sparingly.

#50 Posted by realguitarhero5 (3900 posts) -

Reminds me, the Bad Company 1 capaign is the best Battlefield singleplayer IMO.