Battlefield 3 – One year on

Last year, DICE released a game that was planned to be the biggest competition that the Call of Duty series had yet faced.   I took the opportunity to take part in the public beta test of Battlefield 3, and when it was over I made the bold statement that Modern Warfare 3 would get the sales numbers but Battlefield 3 would get the critical acclaim. 

12 months down the line and I think I can say I was correct.  The reviews for both games were favourable but Battlefield 3 seemed to come out on top.  When the awards were being handed out, again Battlefield 3 was reaping the rewards including ones chosen by the fans.

With the next Call of Duty game now out and gaining more sales records, Battlefield 3 still plows on with the fans still playing it as fervently as ever.  Why has Battlefield 3 kept going so strongly when others have tried and failed?

The main, neigh sole, reason being the multiplayer aspect being so very strong.  While Call of Duty is also known for its multiplayer gameplay, it is often referred to as ‘Lone Wolf run and gun’ due to its fast paced frantic gameplay style.  Even with the varied game types, they all feel very samey. 

With Battlefield 3, the same can’t be said.  Yes there is the close quartered Team Deathmatch games that are just like Call of Duty but when it comes to Conquest (capture the flag) or Rush (destroy checkpoints), there is a whole new ballpark to play in.  The maps are huge compared to Call of Duty.  So much so, that you need vehicles to traverse them in a timely manner.  You’ll see tank, jets, helicopters and jeeps all moving around you fighting for supremacy. 

This is the first thing that stands Battlefield 3 out against Call of Duty.  And it creates the second point that stands the multiplayer out, which is teamwork.  When playing Battlefield 3 multiplayer, you will be placed into a squad of up to 4 members.  You can try being a lone wolf out in the open but chances are you will fail.  Playing within that squad has advantages.  Healing or resupplying your squad mates gives you extra points than if you healed random people.   And if you get yourself connected to a mic and headset, communicating with your squad makes the play even better.

I will never claim to be fantastic at this game.  I am just a middle of the road decent player.  But the first time I was fully squaded up with mics and headsets, the team I was on were totally dominant for the 2 hours we stayed together.  And these were strangers from all around Europe, not friends I knew.  We stayed together at all times, spotting and generally looking after each other.  If I got shot, the medic in the team would revive me. I would drop my ammo packs so the team were fully stocked at all times.  Our sniper would have motion sensors out and the engineer taking out oncoming vehicles with his RPG.

There have been other times when this has happened, and each time it has been the same, unless facing an equally set up team on the opposition, and then it comes down to skill. 

I have played many games of Call of Duty with friends and have never had the same feeling as when teamed up on Battlefield 3.  Although I liked some of the maps on offer in Call of Duty, I never really embraced them like I did the Battlefield 3 ones.

For the launch of Modern Warfare 3, Activision produced the Elite service for players to track scores, and gain exclusive early access to new DLC maps.  It came at a cost though of £50, but that did include all the future DLC maps.  As good as the Elite system was, Battlefield 3 had its own Battlelog system that was free to use.  But there was nothing in place for the future DLC.  Watching from the shadows, DICE saw the success that Elite was getting and saw sense in a similar system. 

DICE released the Premium service for Battlefield 3 players that would be approximately £35 to buy and would guarantee all future DLC maps plus access to special monthly content like double XP weeks; non-premium would get double XP weekends.  This came as a huge success also and the last figures I saw written about confirmed over 2 million Premium subscribers.  That figure will also have been swelled by the released Premium version of Battlefield 3 that included the Premium subscription with the game.

But how do the DLC’s on offer compare?  With Call of Duty you are looking at 4 maps and maybe a different game mode for each offering.  With Battlefield 3 you get maps, guns, vehicles, game modes and much more.   With each DLC on Battlefield you don’t get the feeling of same shit different map.  There is a sense or freshness about them, or re-freshness as is the case with the first DLC Back to Karkand, which returned to old maps from previous Battlefield maps.   And with each DLC, there is an underlying theme with what you will get. 

Back to Karkand, as mentioned was a return to old maps.  Close Quarters was full of new maps that were more akin to those found on Call of Duty with the tight maps and fast paced action.  Armoured Kills introduced the largest maps ever on Battlefield with all out vehicular combat and Aftermath placing you in a warzone following a severe earthquake.  What the final DLC, titled End Game, will hold is anyone’s guess, but as it’ll be the last piece before Battlefield 4 is released, I am sure DICE will want to go out with a bang.

As mentioned, with these DLC packs, you get new weapons that are relevant to the new maps and need to be unlocked to get them.  Some of the weapons might get over looked but some will be sought after.  In the latest DLC, Aftermath, players have the chance of using a Crossbow, which is an amazing piece of kit, if you can get it and use it.

Throughout the last 12 months, many games have been bought and played, and most have been great.  But, I just keep coming back to Battlefield 3 all the time.  There is just a drawing power to it.

And if I get an comments on this saying I am a Battlefield 3 fan boy, I would like to mention, I do own Modern Warfare 2 and 3 plus Black Ops and Black Ops 2.  I do like Call of Duty games, I just prefer Battlefield.