TotalRoundTable: Battlefield 3 Cometh

We sit down and talk about our time with the Battlefield 3 Beta as well as our hopes and fears for the final game.
Author: TPS Staff
Published: October 24, 2011
page 1 page 2 page 3   next
Whenever a beta hits public access, there is often a lot of talk that is generated about it. When it is a beta for a series with an established and (sometimes) rabid fanbase like Battlefield, every single piece of the beta test is examined by fans and detractors alike. The Battlefield 3 beta seems to be taking a lot of fire, in part to its release, relative to the actual game going gold, and to its (dare I say) peculiar map choice on console.


Operation Metro isn't like traditional Battlefield maps. The standard would be a conquest mode and a less-than-linear map. Metro, however, is a Rush map that, while having a few branching paths, is extremely linear in design (as the mode intends to provide players with) and thus may not be the best indicator of how a proper 3rd installment in the series has progressed.

Now that you guys have gotten a chance to play the beta a bit, what are your thoughts on Operation Metro thus far? Have you gotten any time on 360 or PC?

Ryan Green, Managing Editor

I haven't been playing the Battlefield series that long, but I've come to enjoy it fondly. But I've gotta warn you that I'm no Battlefield PC player; my experiences have been restricted to Battlefield 1943 and the Bad Company series. That isn't to say that I don't "get" Battlefield.

That said, Metro was a bit disappointing to me. I played it at E3, so it wasn't some brand new experience. I guess it is to be expected, because so often the trade show material ends up a demo or beta fodder on XBL and the PSN. But playing the same map as before was a bit of a downer.

I think the map plays just fine and despite how it wasn't a massive vehicle conquest map (with jets), the subway section made up for it. But when people think Battlefield, they don't think of a map like this, for better or worse.

Aram Lecis, Senior Editor

I started with the Battlefield series playing Battlefield 1942 on the LAN in the college computer lab, and since then I've at least touched on most entries in the series with the exception of Battlefield 2142. I've definitely spent the most time with Bad Company 2 for sure, and had a lot of great times teaming up with buddies and rolling around in a tank.

However, I may have hit a wall with the series, and in fact competitive FPS's altogether. I wasn't all that excited for BF3 before the beta, and I'm certainly no more excited after playing it. I can't even say it was the map... I actually thought for a non-vehicle map it was pretty good with a nice progression through open, outdoor battles leading into narrow corridors. Yeah, it was a Rush map with no vehicles, not the best representation, but I'm sort of OK with that. I liked a few of the new features like being able to fall prone (FINALLY) and having opponents sights reflecting back at you when they are aiming at you.

But the fact is I might be burned out on the FPS. Things change a little too slowly, and with hundreds of hours already invested in Bad Company 2 and Modern Warfare 2/Black Ops (not to mention countless smaller downloadable FPS's), without some revolutions in gameplay they might not be able to engage me with just fancier graphics (which I haven't seen) or a few new vehicles (jets do sound intriguing though). There wasn't anything wrong with Metro as a map in my mind, except that it contained the same old gameplay that's gotten a bit stale for me.
page 1 page 2 page 3   next