It's hard to rate a game down if it copies the previous game in the series that got high marks. You're playing the same game so technically, it should get the same score.
great review, but he didn't really make the bad parts about the game clear, other than the single player was bad.
If anything the lower scores are the ones fans should be listening and paying attention too, even if they don't agree with every point. It's important to find out what people didn't like rather than listen to countless others praise the game by saying things that you already know over and over again.
For BF3, there were countless 9/10s, but I didn't read any of them. As a longtime fan I looked at the 7/10s to 8s. I wanted to know exactly what to look out for ...
Did you forget which pedal the brakes were?
Yea, I didn't get that either. The whole time in my head, I would think: Press B, or O/Triangle (Whatever it is on PS3)
this was hilarious! lol "I unlocked a gun by running through a shopping mall". I'm surprised they didn't talk about the flashlights.
agreed, COD 4 amazing. then they got stale. I might consider picking COD4 back up this week lol. If the price goes down.
Robbing banks is overrated now I guess.
the only thing recon is good for is the spawn beacon. the assault and engineer are the best classes.
all we can do now is complain about the things we want changed in the current game. Trust me, they will change what we don't like:
1. Tactical lights: lower the brightness, or remove them.
2. infinite mortar rounds: Don't give the mortar to the support class because he can resupply himself and just camp with it.
3. Lower the damage in normal mode!!!!: I am so SICK and tired of trying to kill people and they won't die!
No i'm no...
At 1:26 the guy exploded from awesomeness.
The single player lacked polish, but I agree, it was original and a refreshing take on a modern war shooter.
The link redirects you to a mw3 live action trailer, don't give this site hits; reported.
No offense, your writing is good, but the content really isn't interesting. Sorry to put it so harshly.
I dont know what to think of this article: lame or boring. Both.
What. I have a 2 year old laptop wih windows 7 and it cant even run arma 2 without dipping in framrate on lowest setting.
I don't buy just any battlefield DLC. I buy it if its worth it. Onslaught i didn't buy because it was overpriced. I didn't get suckered in with the weapon skins; there was a workaround code i used. But the expansion DLC is worth every penny. the detail they put into them sucks you in and becomes a whole new experience. I bought bfbc2 Vietnam and the expansions for bf2. They are work every penny and back to karkand looks to be no exception.
Dice needs to see this. He's so right. The game plays amazing, but there are so many gripes. One, the bullets do next to no damage. Yeah they want to give people time to react but its frustrating to kill people especially when they are right in front of you. It usually comes down to which gun is more powerful rather than who got hit first.
Right now i only play hardcore. Im sick of shooting clips into people and they wont go down.
Make no mistake i love ...
I've played every single one. But not in any particular order.
So the multiplayer in U3 is TECHNICALLY better than BF3? BF3 offers Co-Op, what about U3? U3 beats BF3 in campaign, but in staying power BF3 lasts longer. 100 hours to max out EACH class. That's 400 hours just to complete the unlocks, not counting the unlocks in Co-Op or the Karkand expansion.
In no way am I saying BF3 is better, or U3 is worse. It's all personal opinion between us. But on a technical side, there has to be a winner.