I swear this guy used to be funny.

Reviewing single player in a battlefield game is kinda missing the point. Spent a week trying to get this to run on PC, then played multiplayer for a bit before realising that its actually a bit crap.

Ha great stuff, particularly the last line.

>> ^moodonia:

Reviewing single player in a battlefield game is kinda missing the point. Spent a week trying to get this to run on PC, then played multiplayer for a bit before realising that its actually a bit crap.


Personally I disagree. Single-player is very important to me with only a very few exceptions. I think he's on record as saying he's concerned with reviewing the core game that is actually available to everyone on the disc. This makes sense. Believe it or not, not everyone is going to play online. That constitutes a large number of the overall sales.

Finally it's interesting that commenters get upset by this when clearly his reviews are more tongue-in-cheek and not really intended to be a fully comprehensive breakdown. Those people have probably worked out whether they're buying or not and mostly read the reviews to debate the number it gets. This is something that Yahtzee doesn't do so they complain about his single-player focus, all the while ignoring the core reason for his reviews - entertainment.

>> ^Deano:

Personally I disagree. Single-player is very important to me with only a very few exceptions.


Given that the BF series was founded on multiplayer, and has always been about multiplayer, I think it might qualify as one of those exceptions.

Now, don't get me wrong, if you release an SP campaign and market it as heavily as EA has, it's fair game for criticism. But it's kinda like going to a steak house, having a fantastic steak, a great bottle of win and then complaining about the garlic bread. The bread shoulda been better, but it's not why you went out in the first place.

Anyway, Yahtzee has a well-known dislike for online multiplayer, given that he is a "jaded, friendless misanthrope" (his words).

I honestly expected a harsher review. Battlefield 3's single player can really only be described as "obligatory".

>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^Deano:
Personally I disagree. Single-player is very important to me with only a very few exceptions.

Given that the BF series was founded on multiplayer, and has always been about multiplayer, I think it might qualify as one of those exceptions.
Now, don't get me wrong, if you release an SP campaign and market it as heavily as EA has, it's fair game for criticism. But it's kinda like going to a steak house, having a fantastic steak, a great bottle of win and then complaining about the garlic bread. The bread shoulda been better, but it's not why you went out in the first place.
Anyway, Yahtzee has a well-known dislike for online multiplayer, given that he is a "jaded, friendless misanthrope" (his words).


If it's fair game then I don't think the steak house analogy really applies. If on the other hand it was heavily hyped as MP with far less emphasis on SP then I can see where one might have cause for concern.
The thing is no publisher is ever going to market a game that just has multiplayer, even if for many dedicated fans that is what the game is really about. They still have to sell a game to everyone which includes people like me who will play the SP, maybe flirt with the MP for a short while then stop playing.

The reason the SP was hyped up and marketed so much was that it was EA's forced, ridiculous and damaging attempt to have Battlefield 3 compete with Modern Warfare 3. Anyone who knows anything about the series is aware that this is a multiplayer franchise, offering vast battlefields, large playercounts and strategic openness not seen anywhere else in shooters. Except maybe Tribes.

I can't fault anyone for paying undue attention to Battlefield 3's singleplayer, considering how the game's marketing has been handled. But it shouldn't be the reason for investigating BF3. Your reason should be being able to bail out of a jet and top speed, parachute down onto the turret of a tank, plaster it with C4 and blow yourself to oblivion.

>> ^Gallowflak:

The reason the SP was hyped up and marketed so much was that it was EA's forced, ridiculous and damaging attempt to have Battlefield 3 compete with Modern Warfare 3. Anyone who knows anything about the series is aware that this is a multiplayer franchise, offering vast battlefields, large playercounts and strategic openness not seen anywhere else in shooters. Except maybe Tribes.
I can't fault anyone for paying undue attention to Battlefield 3's singleplayer, considering how the game's marketing has been handled. But it shouldn't be the reason for investigating BF3. Your reason should be being able to bail out of a jet and top speed, parachute down onto the turret of a tank, plaster it with C4 and blow yourself to oblivion.


That sounds a bit odd since Call of Duty is also heavy on MP emphasis is it not? The problem is that realistically, Battlefield does simply not have the same pull over consumers that CoD does.

That kind of plays into my thinking that what most people want, and indeed buy in their millions, is an explosive, viscerally exciting rollercoaster ride.

Thus I'm not at all surprised that BF3's SP seems to be as shallow as anything Infinity Ward has offered.

Both the single player and the multiplayer are wonderful. I enjoyed the single player campaign in BF3 FAR more than the last two Modern Warfare games. (Didn't even finish Black Ops and I have no plans on buying MW3...)

Zero Punctuation is hate packaged as comedy. It's not actually a place to go for objective game reviews. The truth is, yes, BF3 has some flaws, but overall, there's a shitload of fun to be had and I feel sad for anyone who is so jaded and cynical that they couldn't find that fun.

>> ^braindonut:
Zero Punctuation is hate packaged as comedy.


I'm sorry mate but that's complete rubbish. The guy loves games and is expressing an opinion blended with comedy. How much you get out of that is one thing but it's certainly not "hate".

>> ^braindonut:

Both the single player and the multiplayer are wonderful. I enjoyed the single player campaign in BF3 FAR more than the last two Modern Warfare games. (Didn't even finish Black Ops and I have no plans on buying MW3...)
Zero Punctuation is hate packaged as comedy. It's not actually a place to go for objective game reviews. The truth is, yes, BF3 has some flaws, but overall, there's a shitload of fun to be had and I feel sad for anyone who is so jaded and cynical that they couldn't find that fun.


Objective Game Reviews? How would you even do that?
Also: IMO Battlefield is BY FAR the best multiplayer-online-shooter out there. For me it's like a combination of CoD 1, Counter-Strike and Battlefield 1942. And this is the holy trinity of online-gaming - again if you ask me.

Hey, don't get me wrong. I enjoy Zero Punctuation quite a bit. For the same reason I enjoy Triumph the Insult Comic Dog. It's witty and amusing. [EDIT: Right there was I referring to Zero Punctuation, not the dog puppet...] But there are plenty of games which are actually a ton of fun, despite getting torn up by Zero Punctuation. Hate was prolly the wrong word - but he definitely ratchets up the flames to a exaggerated level. Claiming otherwise is disingenuous.


>> ^Deano:

>> ^braindonut:
Zero Punctuation is hate packaged as comedy.

I'm sorry mate but that's complete rubbish. The guy loves games and is expressing an opinion blended with comedy. How much you get out of that is one thing but it's certainly not "hate".

There are many, many multiplayer only games, and I'm not even talking about MMOs. Console games have lagged behind PC in terms of online connectivity, but with the success of PSN and Xbox Live, multiplayer has become much more prominent in the console-space, and will be even more relevant with the next generation. When you are playing the sequel to one of the historically greatest PC multiplayer only franchises, yes complaining about the singleplayer is like complaining about the salad at the steak restaurant.

And when 95% of your "reviews" focuses on why a game sucks, you are a "hater". It's hard to take someone's "opinions" seriously when their idea of game of the year is Saints Row 2.


>> ^Deano:

>> ^ChaosEngine:
>> ^Deano:
Personally I disagree. Single-player is very important to me with only a very few exceptions.

Given that the BF series was founded on multiplayer, and has always been about multiplayer, I think it might qualify as one of those exceptions.
Now, don't get me wrong, if you release an SP campaign and market it as heavily as EA has, it's fair game for criticism. But it's kinda like going to a steak house, having a fantastic steak, a great bottle of win and then complaining about the garlic bread. The bread shoulda been better, but it's not why you went out in the first place.
Anyway, Yahtzee has a well-known dislike for online multiplayer, given that he is a "jaded, friendless misanthrope" (his words).

If it's fair game then I don't think the steak house analogy really applies. If on the other hand it was heavily hyped as MP with far less emphasis on SP then I can see where one might have cause for concern.
The thing is no publisher is ever going to market a game that just has multiplayer, even if for many dedicated fans that is what the game is really about. They still have to sell a game to everyone which includes people like me who will play the SP, maybe flirt with the MP for a short while then stop playing.

I'm surprised he didn't make mention of the number 3 in this review.

After all, 2011 is the season of shooter number three:

Gears of War 3
Modern Warfare 3
Battlefield 3
Resistance 3

We even have Uncharted 3, though technically that's action/adventure despite it being largely a 3rd person shooter...

You guys calling him a hater are missing the point big time. He makes fun of the haters, who are people that hate his reviews because he's too harsh, i.e. that's you! So in effect you're playing right into his hands.

>> ^ghark:

You guys calling him a hater are missing the point big time. He makes fun of the haters, who are people that hate his reviews because he's too harsh, i.e. that's you! So in effect you're playing right into his hands.


No one's hating on Yahtzee here. He's pretty funny sometimes, especially when he rips apart a truly bad game. The point is that his videos aren't really reviews, more like "creative bitching", and his criticism isn't too harsh, it's irrelevant. A vegetarian can write a funny and true review of how bad the salad is at the steak restaurant, but what's the point?

I couldn't get an hour into MW3's campaign without spontaneously starting to make an involuntary gagging motion so I can't imagine how terrible BF3's must be ...

I must go to this steak house where they serve bottles of win.

Great indeed.>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^Deano:
Personally I disagree. Single-player is very important to me with only a very few exceptions.

Given that the BF series was founded on multiplayer, and has always been about multiplayer, I think it might qualify as one of those exceptions.
Now, don't get me wrong, if you release an SP campaign and market it as heavily as EA has, it's fair game for criticism. But it's kinda like going to a steak house, having a fantastic steak, a great bottle of win and then complaining about the garlic bread. The bread shoulda been better, but it's not why you went out in the first place.
Anyway, Yahtzee has a well-known dislike for online multiplayer, given that he is a "jaded, friendless misanthrope" (his words).

"You must reach a sufficient level of suck-my-cock, Battlefield 3." Class.

>> ^Smugglarn:

I must go to this steak house where they serve bottles of win.
Great indeed.
Indeed, there's nothing like a nice bottle of win to complement a good steak

>> ^Deano:


The thing is no publisher is ever going to market a game that just has multiplayer, even if for many dedicated fans that is what the game is really about.

Really? Ok, off the top of my head and just FPS's...
TF2, BF 1942, Tribes, Monday Night Combat, Left 4 Dead, Quake 3, Counter Strike.
Do I need to go on?