{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
7/30/2014 3:02:32 PM
20
Your thoughts on BF3's campaign
I was watching a few commentators on YouTube discuss how the recent battlefield games have had bad campaigns and I've not played bf4 but I personally enjoyed bf3 and wanted to know what the community thought
English
#Gaming
-
Awful, one of very few campaigns I haven't finished, it's amongst the ranks of Duke Nukem Forever in that regard. The characters were bland, boring and completely forgettable, the story was basically CoD4 with less Hollywood pizzazz, the gun-play was simply not suited to such a play style, the levels were more restricted than Guantanamo bay, the whole thing felt like a tech demo for an engine that wasn't that great and overall there was little to no reason to play it considering it was on a different disk to the multiplayer, the much better component.
-
Way better than beetlefield lag 4: the 2 hour campaign.
-
It wasn't THAT bad. The game is pretty. The graphics are not realistic, but they consistently convey a visual quality that I'd call very cinematic, and it offers about the same experience as one would get from any other shooter campaign. It's a lot of military hardware porn and linear gameplay. But I've played worse. Homefront comes to mind. So does Call of Duty Ghosts, which did an absolutely terrible job with gameplay, graphics, and making me care about anything that was happening. I've also heard bad things about the last few Medal of Honor games and then there's the awful games like Duke Nukem Forever. Not that my lone opinion is going to sway anyone's mind or anything, but I think people give this game's campaign way too hard of a time just because it's Battlefield. It's definitely not fantastic by any stretch of the imagination (the level when you fly in the jet was pretty cool though, even though you unfortunately don't get to control it) but it's not THAT bad.
-
-
Dont remember much of it. So it was most likely shit.
-
1 RespuestaPlay any bad company campaign and you'll understand
-
Garbage.
-
Never played it. Only multiplayer.
-
3 was ok 4 was garbage
-
Editado por DeathBurrito24: 7/30/2014 7:57:21 PMI barely remember the BF3 campaign. I think it took me an hour or two then I forgot it. BF4 I had to play twice because my unlocks didn't transfer from ps3 to ps4. But it wasn't that memorable either.
-
2 RespuestasBF3 was fun. 4 was shit.
-
I remember nothing from it other than not completing it for like a year after some crap level and then beating it a month ago.
-
1 Respuesta[i] [/i]
-
Meh. The final level ended on a QTE... The only real standout parts were Thunder Run, Going Hunting, and the Paris mission. The first couple of levels were also OK, but the campaign ran out of steam towards the end. The Co-op campaign was a lot more fun, especially the chopper and sniper missions.
-
Beating that guy's head in was satisfying but overall it was okay.
-
Mediocre
-
meh i played some of it, i hate military shooters that have multiple story lines and generic tunnel vision lvl design. that said its more gritty and better than any CoD story by far.
-
Twas meh.
-
1 RespuestaNever bother playing dude bro shooters anymore
-
I liked the part with the Spesnaz guys
