You must mean single player.

But indeed, different strokes. There are still people who don't want prone. At its core (stuff like movement, gun mechanics) BF3 is so, so much better than Bad Company (or even BF2!). There are plenty of other things that are a little less satisfactory. Level design is a valid argument. Kit design and level design (and maybe vehicle combat) were much better in BF2 versus either of these other games.

At this point however, I think the amount of variety in what BF3 offers should please mostly everyone. The game has one pure infantry fighting map (Metro), a handful of BC2-style infantry focused light vehicle maps (Bazaar), and a few (of hit-or-miss quality) sandboxes.

And that's out of the box. Karkand adds a lot more value to that mix.

I don't agree with some of the game design (also inspired by Bad Company 2), like regenerative health (extended to armor), etc.. but I still think the game offers deep options and deep gameplay that you won't find in any other shooter this generation. It's a mixed bag. Karkand helps. I hope there are more expansions of similar quality.

But don't worry.. I'm sure if they make a Bad Company 3 the guns will still be laser beams and the level design will be as ZOMG awesome as you remember it. Every map in both of the original games was a winner after all.

One thing I don't like very much is 64 player conquest. Most of the vanilla levels don't scale to 64 players very well (lol.. metro) and the game doesn't manage the chaos as well as BF2 did. 32 (or less!) is much more fun imo. B2K also scales better.

On the Xbox, post patch, can I get on an empty server and play with the helo, jets, etc? Or do you still need 8 players?

I love that they included the 16 player layouts from BF2 in the Karkand maps too.. a nice touch. Karkand and Sharqi on 16 are amazing small infantry maps. Sharqi 16 has one of the best flag layouts I've played period.

Now that there's some good SOFLAM use I think they may need to rexamine air balance. That's (one) of the problems with unlocks. You can't really judge much of anything based the first month or so of the game.

Metro is extremely boring. It's a meat grinder for stat padding and grinding xp. Which ya know.. I guess can be mindless fun if you just want points and kills. The map only really works with a really cut player count.

Have fun playing with the twelve other people who haven't realized how much better BF3 is :D

I do hate the amount of unlocks in this game. I'm playing primarily with the M16A3 lately--it's not like I'm in desperate need of additional gear, but lately I've felt like I need to get the rest of my unlocks anyway. Having played several service stars with of medic and engi, I finally knocked out support this week, and I'm working on recon now. I'm just doing recon with the VAL (which is pretty fun), but I actually really dug the MG36 on support. I'm not really sure why, but I really don't like the M249. I was running with a grip and a suppressor on the MG36 and it felt great.

I hope they don't mess with the weapon balance too much more in the next patch. Not that they would mess with the M16A3, but I really don't think the FAMAS is as big of a problem as some seem to.. it's sorta meh down range.

Bullet laser? It still has a helluva lot more recoil than the M16. M16 with a silencer and a grip is far more effective for me down range. For me, that's reason enough to sacrifice the insane TTK on the FAMAS. I'm sure they'll nerf the FAMAS attachments big time though, and then we'll have a weapon that no body uses instead. Maybe it's different on the consoles where people can't actually aim. Guess spray weapons will be more predominant there.

And please.. how is the USAS-12 ridiculous at range? Slugs are awful in this game and frag rounds do awful damage (especially compared to bullets).

ps. the AEK has range and a quick TTK too.LOL.. okay drama queen. If anything DICE listens to their fans too much.

Eh? What's that got to do with anything? Firstly, that's not true. 99% of the people who cry hacks just suck at the game and can't cope with their own skill level. Secondly, aiming with a pad is slow, laborious stuff. I can see people drifting to the FAMAS and USAS12 because they don't have to worry about accuracy as much--the M249 is a good choice too. These are all relatively good "spray" guns. The lack of precision that the FAMAS has can actually benefit people who can't aim and react as quickly. In a relative manner.. that is everyone on the console ports. The FAMAS and USAS12 and can kill extremely quickly both from the hip and in ADS in close quarters.

Thankfully, a lot of combat in BF3 isn't done in close quarters. That's not to say that a weapon like the M16A3 can't perform in CQC--you just need to be faster than your enemy. The benefit I get down range more than makes up for anything the FAMAS can offer me. I don't think it needs any serious tweaking. It will get nerfed, but I'm not concerned with it at all.

I only encounter a lot of USAS12 and M320 abusers on 24/7 Metro servers (PC), and plenty of other rifles (M16A3, AEK, etc) are commonly featured throughout the field. I prefer the M16A3 to the FAMAS because I'm a fucking surgeon with it. This isn't a difficult task--It has nearly no recoil and people play dumb.

PS. I bet there are just as many morons on PSN--they just don't have headsets.

Here's your "bullet laser":



Same attachments on the M16:



Note: it says A4, but the only difference is the full auto mode (which is being accounted for here). Both heat maps represent the guns fired in four shot bursts over a period of 5000 rounds.

I'm not desputing that the FAMAS is a beastly gun, even down range, in the right hands. The M16 and AEK are both more flexible weapons. Also, the F2000 is still very effective, even if it's not nearly as dominant as in previous versions.

Because as you've pointed out, they care too much what you think :P

You're playing on hardcore. You have 60 hp. Vanilla gun balance is thrown straight out the fucking window anyway. How can any of the guns be underpowered in hardcore? Hardcore sorta sucks.

They added the FAMAS to the game with the B2K patch, which is the quickest TTK AR in the game. Sure, they ruined the dominance of the F2000, but it actually returned the AEK to its place (as seen in the beta). I'm not crazy about frequent changes to game balance either, but I don't think it's been super bad relative to other games. In fact, I don't think it's super bad compared to BF2. BF2 went through game changing patches. We got things like shoehorned stance delays. And sure.. they've even tweaked movement in BF3, but not to the extent that it's a completely different game post patch (as in BF2's case).

I'm mostly playing devil's advocate here. I'm not crazy about frequent changes to weapon balance at all.. I just don't really think they've made any major mistakes (in patches) here yet. The M16 is still my scalpel, so I'm happy.

You know what really pisses me off about this game? Points. The importance placed on scoring and earning experience points to unlock gear has completely ruined the way people play this game. The vast majority of players all pool together on servers with extremely high tickets, mostly on metro. People don't play for the fun of Battlefield 3's core game, people don't even care if they win that game. They are playing the meta game and I think that sucks. Demize said that Metro was fine, because Metro is popular. The reality is that Metro is that popular because he designed a metagame that's more attractive to scrubs than the actual game.

You can't please everyone.. and I think that's important for them to recognize. I've seen people complain about them nerfing AT mines--AT mines! They were a mess in 1.0! I do wish they showed more backbone, and a bit more of a personal philosophy on game design.