The last thing I hear as, infuriatingly, my dogtags are taken and my killstreak is ended: "Look at that guy there. No, him. Nah, he's not on my side. Check it out, though, he's going to stab that soldier in the back. Yeah, that means you get his dogtags".
I'm playing Battlefield 3 in the first week of release, and although many claim to have sunk hours into Bad Company 2, few seem to know how to actually play.
So far, this mini-commentary on the game (which, thanks to voice chat, everyone on the team has heard) has included how to ignore squad-spawn, how to drive a vehicle, how to get out of a vehicle when you tip it over a cliff, and how to change your load-out as you wait to respawn after your unfortunate vehicle / cliff-based suicide.
ARE YOU BEING SERVED?
To be honest, I'm just happy to be in a game. Early on, BF3's servers were erratic at best, broken at worst. They're more stable now, but during week one finding a game took several attempts at barging into a session via the server browser.
Worse still, joining a game with friends often meant being placed on separate teams with no hope of transferring across. It's less of a problem now, and at its core - when everyone plays properly - Battlefield 3 is untouchable online.
Sadly, I'm not getting much of that right now - something exacerbated by my selfish, constantly nattering squad mate. Usually a lack of communication is a problem on PSN and Xbox Live; now I just wish this guy would shut up.
"I'm going to pick the Recon class now. Yeah, that's the one with the sniper rifle. Nah, I'll probably just sit back near the base and shoot people," I hear over my headset as I push towards point A on the Tehran Highway Conquest map. I swear lightly under my breath.
Dead again. And again. I'm glad when the session finishes in crushing defeat for our team.
I hate to lose, but like to think the opposition's coordinated teamwork (balanced squads, communication, good use of support and vehicles) serves as an example of what our clueless team could have achieved.
WAR CORRESPONDENT
The next map is Damavand Peak, one of the best in both Conquest and Rush (by far the most satisfying modes in the game). After being treated to a detailed explanation of the post-game lobby by my chatty 'friend', I spawn onto the mag and use the 30 seconds of pre-action grace (a great addition usually reserved for tinkering with kit) to see if I can escape to a new squad. No luck.
The game begins, and we're soon behind again. I've gone Engineer and picked the Stinger to shoot down the Little Bird that starts camping our spawn near A. Then a tank rolls in. "Yeah, that's a tank. No, I'll probably die. I'm just going to stay up here until someone else blows it up," I hear.
Battlefield 3 is a brilliant playground of war, but one that relies on players working together to realise its true potential. Come on guys, shape up.
Order Xbox World magazine here and have it delivered straight to your door
Comments
20 comments so far...
phate666 on 24 Dec '11 said:
This, this and this again! It's nice that people new to battlefield are playing and everything but I do wish they'd get on board with the whole "team" thing!
Joe90_Remy700 on 24 Dec '11 said:
a perfect example of 2 things:
1) party chat
2) playing with 3 other friends who have a clue
i swear, the new assignments are a very good addition, except the l85 (sa80) where you need to win 5 squad deatmatch games. the most fekking annoying game mode especially when you are lumped into a squad of chocolate teapots against a squad of (admittadley good) players with matching letters at the front of their gamertags
one tip: jump in and out of a load of matches until you are in a winning squad near the end. saves sore throats/broken controllers/bald spots on your head
TheLastDodo on 24 Dec '11 said:
Too many Rambo wannabes in BF3, if I want teamwork in BF3 then I've got to hope friends are online, randoms in BFBC2 worked as a team in my experience, this doesn't happen in BF3, no-one gives out ammo or health, they don't give you a lift in vehicle's, if they're capturing flags in conquest and see you run up to help capture it faster they'll run off leaving you to capture it solo, randoms don't join squads..
BF3 is full of selfish players, if someone is new to the game and doesn't understand how it works thats acceptable but people that are in level 20's should know better.
I'm sure some will get p**sy at this next statement but I think it could partly be down to targeting the CoD playing demographic, CoD is a game that encourages selfishness, it encourages you to run and gun, that's not "the BF way". Some people can only play shooters "the CoD way",
FlimFlam on 24 Dec '11 said:
Oh Dodo, you really wound up and cracked that nail square on the bonce didn't you!
Nothing, NOTHING is more rage inducing than an MCOM being armed and whilst you try and defuse it, the rest of your squad/team run around like headless chickens looking for something to shoot... DISARM THE FECKING MCOM YOU TOOLS! Sadly, this is a very regular occurance. I was in a team the other day with a few mates in my squad, and the team got totally dicked. Checking the stats afterward, our squad was ranked 1 - 4, and there were 6 players above rank 15 with no kills in the round.
How is that even possible? Surely a stray shot should have killed someone by accident! The mind boggles.
Aside from that... Best. Multiplayer. Ever.
dicky1993 on 24 Dec '11 said:
To be honest, I'm just happy to be in a game. Early on, BF3's servers were erratic at best, broken at worst. They're more stable now, but during week one finding a game took several attempts at barging into a session via the server browser.
strangeeee, you guys never said this in the review hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
jezza... on 24 Dec '11 said:
I've been on Skyrim...
SuperMike861 on 24 Dec '11 said:
I will only play in a squad of at least 3 players. If I get in the jet and 2 guys in our squad get in the chopper our team will lose ALL the flags even though we are providing great support from the air they just refuse to go to flags. Once we're on the ground, between the 4 of us we've turned the game completely on it's head, and all we've done is kill a small amount of people and capture flags.
Whenever a blueberry arms an objective/captures a flag it always surprises us and we're thankful we actually found 1 or 2 players who want to play the objective with us. We're decent players who play the game in the way it's intended to be played, but we're by no means amazing. We constantly win 10-15 games in a row in a night. It shouldn't be like that.
The most fun games are the games where both teams are playing the game the way it was intended, in games like that it's the best multiplayer game I've ever played. The main complaint against BF has been that it's too slow paced, it's only that slow paced because 90% of players are useless snipers/campers and people who refuse to go within 100 feet of MCOM stations/flags.
billysastard on 24 Dec '11 said:
just wait until tomorrow as both bf3 and cod8 get flooded with idiots who got their games from santa (no doubt some will really think it was santa on mw3).
that said even though i buy most of them i must be honest and say none of my friends will play shooters with me, not because i'm a dick but because my ability at all these marketplace / shooters is something slightly less than a tree, well that and the fact that i can NEVER get my headset to do anything beyond make a "ping sound" when i connect, thousands of pounds worth of equipment, decades of game playing experience and its come down to having to play in silence with (what i assume are) children in n00bs lobbies, if only i could get chat working (on 360, it works fine on wii with both headbanger and wiispeak) and it used to work fine on my ps3 although of course it doesnt do games anymore but i've always had issues getting it working on the 360, god knows if i have a setting wrong somewhere.
jm3811 on 24 Dec '11 said:
I'm not too surprised to read that BF3 is frustrating. I'm not for or against EA, I don't care - I don't do politics. But the fact that BF has become more popular means that chances are that you won't enjoy much team play anymore. Because the publicity made for BF3 has dragged there many players who had no idea of what is at stake and who have no talent to read a game strategically speaking.
Bad Company was an excellent game, only spoiled by the occasional cretins who were only here for the team killing. This is why Bad Company 2 is the best game of the series (no team kill apart from the 2.0).
When I play (and still very regularly) BC2 I don't waste much time when I find myself in very bad company; read the players who camp, or don't give a toss about their team or the objectives. I can be killed and killed, that's the name of the game. I am a bad shooter anyway so I've lost sight of my K/D ratio a while ago. So I leave the game and I look for an other field. It was a but frustrating when BF3 was released because BC2 had been deserted. Only for a while since the players are now back it seems.
In the meantime I have played MW3. I've played it more than any CoD game, and I have discovered the potential of the Spec Ops - somehow the equivalent of Onslaught, only more spectacular and more polished - and much more hardcore. Onslaught was a nice mode since players are more inclined to gather their forces when they play against the AI. Or perhaps because the leaderboard never worked, if it ever meant anything.
My advice would be to stick to squad modes with BF3. I guess that such modes exist, I did not keep the game long enough to check that by myself. Personally I prefer to play BC2 or the MW3 coop simply because online gaming is my favorite thrill.
360_Fan on 25 Dec '11 said:
I often seem to get stuck in a squad of people who like to sit in the chopper for the entire game. Just wish sometimes I could spawn in the chopper and lay some C4, parachute out and blow it away.
gypsygib on 25 Dec '11 said:
Don't play rush in BF3, your team ever goes for the objective.
Dimpee on 25 Dec '11 said:
I love my little squad, i have about 6 irl friends, and usually a couple of us are on every night to squad up with. xD
You shlaaaag on 25 Dec '11 said:
I may well get some flak for this comment but there is something I've noticed. I play on PC having saved up for months and built a rig for the game despite owning a 360. Those of you who play BF3 on the PC are probably already aware that the game is incredible and the level of teamwork is generally very high. Having then played BF3 on my brothers 360 it is very noticeable just how much more gung-ho players tend to be. I cannot comment on the PS3 version (as is being written about in the article) as I have not played it. On 360 however the aforementioned MCOM situation happens so often that I just ended up quitting (much to my brother's displeasure as it would have affected his stats).
This is not meant as a trolling comment or bait of any sort, but it seems as if EA's attempts to attract players of other FPS franchises (not just CoD) is beginning to affect regular player's enjoyment of the game, due to these folk not fully understanding the mechanics of BF3's gameplay. It is a real shame because everyone deserves to enjoy what is undoubtedy one of the best games released this year, regardless of format. My advice, however, would be to save up and invest in a rig. It not only changes the obvious and more trivial things like visuals, player count etc., but the mentality of nearly all players on PC is that of working together to achieve victory. As was pointed out in the article, when everyone plays the game properly, Battlefield 3 is simply untouchable. On PC this happens on a much more regular basis, though that isn't to say that the occasional twonk doesn't show up because they do. It's very satisfying, however, after telling all 31 of my teammates that I'm using a SOFLAM and then watching through the viewfinder as about 4-5 Javelins rocket into the sky and home in their target, as well as seeing the helicopters turn to face the designated victim and dish out some extra pain. The resulting ownage is very satisfying to say the least!
Anyway, sorry for the BF3 love-in. I just f**king love it! Great article by the way.
swisspez on 25 Dec '11 said:
I seem to find myself almost 90% of the time on a s**t side, often trying to take out/defend an mcom or flag on my own with no one else to be seen! Played a game of rush the other day which must have lasted 5 minutes at best, our side being completely annihilated. My k/d ratio leaves a lot to be desired, but the beauty of bf is that it doesn't matter, IF you play the game properly.
jm3811 on 25 Dec '11 said:
Nice story and pleased to see that your investment paid off. I installed BC2 on my laptop (I5 CPU, average graphics) and it looks beautiful I must say. I know nothing about PC gaming so apart from FSX once in a while I don't go there much.
The one thing I wonder about BF3 on PC is whether the controls are as frustrating as they can be on console; i.e dying without knowing why or shooting a target a dozen times before you eventually get shot yourself.
Finally the one thing that is definitely gone with BF3 is the funny bits - the reason why GTA was so enjoyable online despite being quite bland overall.
You shlaaaag on 26 Dec '11 said:
It's a FPS on PC so naturally the keyboard and mouse is utterly faultless. Obviously flying choppers and in particular jets using a keyboard and mouse is a real challenge. Choppers are not as hard to fly as many make out. Just make sure you have your mouse settings just right. However, I just use a 360 pad as it makes it a lot easier. As for the rest of the game I've changed the odd button command to fit my large hands (prone being changed from the default z to c for example) and it plays like a dream. I also use a Sidewinder mouse (it only cost me £5 off eBay) and the two extra buttons make a huge difference.
For over 20 years as a console gamer I was skeptical about the benefits of PC gaming until those first trailers for BF3. When games are tailored to it the results are dazzling. It is not as expensive as you might think either, it's actually surprisingly fun building it (and that's coming from a former PC-phobe) and when it comes to Battlefield, it leaves every other online game trailing in its wake. My setup (assuming you already have an HDTV/Monitor) cost me about £550. That's with a Phenom II x4 965, a 2Gb 6950 and 8gb Ram. By no means top-of-the-range but pretty high end stuff. I can run the game on Max settings at 1080p with full AA (on the campaign at least) and for multiplayer I just turn the AA off (given the size of the maps) and get frame rates of about 35-55fps. Perfectly adequate, and proof that you don't need to spend thousands. Plus, with Steam you get games at ridiculous cheap prices. Just the other day, picked up Portal 2 for £4.99. Yes, you read that correctly...
I still love my 360 and PS3 though...
Sleepaphobic on 27 Dec '11 said:
This game is still a mess IMO. Destruction is pretty much kept to a minimum and I think taking out aerial vehicles is the most annoying thing ever. I don't know what goes in to making a game but if you can't put 2 people on the same team (3 or more is just impossible) then it looks like the makers don't know what's going on either.
This leads to teamwork problems as all these strangers basically do whatever they want. How many times have you guys defended and attacked flags all by yourself? It's way better on PC where most people actually do smthg but none of my friends play on PC and nobody has a mic for some reason so I'm pretty much playing the 360 version exclusively.
Tbh it's infinitely better post-patch when it comes to balancing but anything would be better than the launch code. I really do think it was up there with MW2 when it comes to completely unbalanced games.
jm3811 on 27 Dec '11 said:
@ You shlaaaag
For different reasons I never seriously started gaming on PC. I guess that one of them was the horrible Windows 98 which required to be reinstalled every months. Drivers management was always an issue as well.
I agree with the fact that PC gaming is much cheaper than it is on consoles.I did have a look on Steam a few days ago and that was really obvious.
Today I prefer to do with a laptop. Since I'm a noob at computing I can hardly consider installing games on my bespoke laptop although it has a decent CPU and the graphics run smoothly at 1920x1080. If one day I know better about its limits and in particular as far as the cooling of the hardware is not an issue, who knows...
It seems to me that PC gamers are usually allergic to pads. Personally I could hardly do without the PS Shockwave but then again it is to be thought about. My main regret today is that I have been unable to make Vice City or San Andreas run with Windows 7. Would have been nice to have fun with the mods.
However I still doubt that I would play BF3 on a PC. I might wait to see what Bad Company 3 looks like.
The Bossman on 29 Dec '11 said:
You get idiots in every online game, that can't be helped. The reason I quit BF3 is because everyone just camped in corners, and this was in every lobby in Conquest, Rush, and TDM. I can't think I'm that unlucky in terms of lobbies, that's just the mentality and mindset of BF3 players unfortunately. NICUPs, as ELPRESADOR calls them, non confrontational players, sitting in corners to get their kills, thinking they're doing something valuable for the team. That's fine, just get the f**k out of my lobby and go camp somewhere else. BITCHBLOOD.
jm3811 on 29 Dec '11 said:
It's also because BF3 only exists as a multiplayer game. The campaign is terrible and it's far from the tutorial such a mode should be. Imagine BF3 with decent Spec Ops and a few patches: it would have been a gem despite the irritable players.
All in all BF3 suffers from a balance disaster.