Support NeoGAF

[Dr. Samuel Hayden]

Lower than I expected tbh

 

[DeepEnigma]

Remember when EA announced they had built an entire new team purely dedicated to Battlefield singleplayer modes?

Yep.

The campaign is bad. Serviceable at best.

Thanks for saving me day 1 money EA. You did try to hype people up like they were going to get another BC2 single player or the like, and not the typical throwaway you claimed you wanted to get away from.

 

[L*][*N*K]

Damn IGN with a 5!!!!

 

[Luipadre]

Surprisingly harsh reviews, is this because of the weak campaign dragging the overall image down? Also how is this being called while call of duty gets a free pass time and time again, this is a much more ambitious multiplayer in comparison especially with portal.

84 are harsh reviews? What? Some of the comments here acting like 84 is a bad score lol

 

[MatrixReloaded101]

They purposefully only put their campaign review up(5/10) so it would drive traffic there in a sea of higher marks from people who reviewed both. Even the other IGN outlets combined MP and SP in their reviews and gave it 8.

Don't think so the reveiwer actually has a decent track record just looking at his past reviews.

IGN. A COD shill. There has to always be that one immature dude who has to stand out from the rest. That's IGN.

Nope, he give Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III a 4/10 lol.

 

[Arsic]

I respect that IGN 5 lmao.

 

[GudOlRub]

Read the IGN review people, it's only for the campaign https://www.ign.com/articles/battlefield-6-campaign-review.
It sucks that it brings the game's score down so much but reviewing the campaign and multiplayer modes separately makes complete sense imo. The problem here lies more with how websites like opencritic aggregate scores.

 

[Darsxx82]

Disappointed with everything about the campaign. I thought there was more interest in a good campaign, but it's just a small add-on and a typical wargame campaign.

 

[clarky]

Don't think so the reveiwer actually has a decent track record just looking at his past reviews.

Nope, he give Call of Duty: Modern Warfare III a 4/10 lol.

3 too many.

 

[Luipadre]

Read the IGN review people, it's only for the campaign https://www.ign.com/articles/battlefield-6-campaign-review.
It sucks that it brings the game's score down so much but reviewing the campaign and multiplayer modes separately makes complete sense imo. The problem here lies more with how websites like opencritic aggregate scores.

Most people cant read. Some of them still think 5 is the overall game score lmao

 

[clarky]

Read the IGN review people, it's only for the campaign https://www.ign.com/articles/battlefield-6-campaign-review.
It sucks that it brings the game's score down so much but reviewing the campaign and multiplayer modes separately makes complete sense imo. The problem here lies more with how websites like opencritic aggregate scores.

How does it make sense? You can't buy one without the other. If you are spending £70 to play a 6 hour campaign then you are doing it wrong, regardless of quality.

An actual review should be of the whole product noting in the review text that the campaign is gash. IGN just doing it for the clicks.

 

[ChoosableOne]

5/10 from IGN (campaign) ?

Surely it can't be that bad. They say it is 5 hours so even if it's just decent it should be better than a 5.

Cod BO6 review by the same guy.

 

[Lokaum D+]

Cod BO6 review by the same guy.

 

[BigLee74]

5/10 from IGN?

Edge lord cunts

 

[soulbait]

[missing the quote. Did a repost. How do I delete this?]

 

[soulbait]

Are they reviewing the campaign or multiplayer?

The IGN review, which stood out to me due to how low it is, is marked as the campaign review.

 

[DeepEnigma]

The IGN review, which stood out to me due to how low it is, is marked as the campaign review.

 

[GudOlRub]

How does it make sense? You can't buy one without the other. If you are spending £70 to play a 6 hour campaign then you are doing it wrong, regardless of quality.

An actual review should be of the whole product noting in the review text that the campaign is gash. IGN just doing it for the clicks.

Just read this thread, bunch of people literally do no care about the campaign and will only buy the game for the multiplayer. For games like this it makes sense, having an overall score of 6 or 7 because you give the campaign a 3 and the multiplayer a 9 would be silly.
Reviewing the modes separately informs people better about what they're interested in and helps making a decision on whether to actually spend money on the game.

 

[Roufianos]

Thought it would be higher, though maybe that heavily weighted IGN review is weighing it down a lot.

 

[clarky]

Just read this thread, bunch of people literally do no care about the campaign and will only buy the game for the multiplayer. For games like this it makes sense, having an overall score of 6 or 7 because you give the campaign a 3 and the multiplayer a 9 would be silly.
Reviewing the modes separately informs people better about what they're interested in and helps making a decision on whether to actually spend money on the game.

Like I was saying 99% of people don't buy Battlefield games just for the campaign.

Those 99% of people dont really care about it. Its a nice bonus if its actually better than shit.

Lowering the score because one part of the product sucks makes perfect sense. You can review the whole product and inform people why in the review.

 

[DirtInUrEye]

Considering IGN 's track record with reviewers not getting past tutorials properly, this reviewer probably couldn't get past the main menu.

Except the summary seems fair if they're reviewing the single player campaign, which looks absolutely shit.

 

[bender]

I respect that IGN 5 lmao.

You know what they say about a broken clock.

 

[Negotiator101]

Looks like this ain't the COD killer it was made out to be.

 

[Luipadre]

Looks like this ain't the COD killer it was made out to be.

lol. Expected 95 meta or what?

 

[clarky]

Looks like this ain't the COD killer it was made out to be.

Well its better than MWIII according to ign.

 

[GudOlRub]

Like I was saying 99% of people don't buy Battlefield games just for the campaign.

Those 99% of people dont really care about it. Its a nice bonus if its actually better than shit.

Lowering the score because one part of the product sucks makes perfect sense. You can review the whole product and inform people why in the review.

Again, read the thread, people do not read these reviews, they look at the scores and start blasting because it doesn't match their expectations.

 

[Negotiator101]

Well its better than MWIII according to ign.

Yeah but to usurp COD it's gonna take something better than this and I've pre-ordered this by the way.

 

[M1987]

Yeah but to usurp COD it's gonna take something better than this and I've pre-ordered this by the way.

It's easily better than BO6 and 7,but it's COD so it's going to sell millions no matter what

 

[clarky]

Yeah but to usurp COD it's gonna take something better than this and I've pre-ordered this by the way.

Getting both. COD scratches a different itch.

 

[clarky]

Again, read the thread, people do not read these reviews, they look at the scores and start blasting because it doesn't match their expectations.

which is why is dumb to review separate parts. Its got an 84 MC inline with expectations. Would have been more if they didn't count the single player only review.

Reviews are fairly useless anyways. Most people played the Beta and know exactly what to expect.

 

[Gilgalaad]

 

[adamsapple]

Cod BO6 review by the same guy.

Black Ops 6 campaign is actually pretty good tho.

 

[Avid Reading Horse]

I don't understand how you can review a primary multiplayer online game a day before it comes out.

Hey man if you had to fight over the leftover scraps of adsense dollars so you could get enough scratch to buy a can of beans from the dollar store, I bet you'd figure out a way to get your Game Journalist Review out pre-launch, now wouldn't you?

 

[Twinblade]

Well thank God it's good because I just spent 70$ on this bs yesterday.

$70? For some reason I spent $100. :-/

 

[ChoosableOne]

Black Ops 6 campaign is actually pretty good tho.

9 out of 10 good?

 

[adamsapple]

9 out of 10 good?

In a vacuum, I guess. My favorite recent CoD campaign is still Infinite Warfare.

But as far as 'return to forms' go, Black ops 6 was basically a 100% improvement over the last couple of years Modern Warfare campaigns and Vanguard.

 

[hinch7]

Already preordered and preloaded but glad its getting decent reception.

Seems like the singleplayer is forgettable/mid but I was kinda expecting that. Bring on the full release tomorrow!

 

[Twinblade]

Already preordered and preloaded but glad its getting decent reception.

Seems like the singleplayer is forgettable/mid but I was kinda expecting that. Bring on the full release tomorrow!

Nobody really buys battlefield, just to play single player.

 

[Hero_Select]

I was never going to play the campaign anyway. If you want a good story go play Spec Ops: The Line

 

[hinch7]

Nobody really buys battlefield, just to play single player.

Yeah true which is why some of these reviews are pretty irreverent for most people (me included). Won't even bother with SP in these types of games, unless they're REALLY good.

It does add some value though in that aspect. But if not, meh lol. No loss.

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

 

[DeepEnigma]

 

[mitch1971]

I'm debating this or CoD but luckily the universe gifted me with needing all 4 new tires on my car instead so I'll just stick with Absolum lmao.

Nah. Cut a hole in the bottom of your car and run with it like the flintstones, then download BF6.

 

[Killer8]

Cod BO6 review by the same guy.

Does not surprise me at all that a COD campaign scored better. COD campaigns have on average been much much better than Battlefield's. I only enjoyed Bad Company 2. Whereas COD has some absolute banger classics.

 

[Loomy]

Don't think so the reveiwer actually has a decent track record just looking at his past reviews.

Read the IGN review people, it's only for the campaign https://www.ign.com/articles/battlefield-6-campaign-review.
It sucks that it brings the game's score down so much but reviewing the campaign and multiplayer modes separately makes complete sense imo. The problem here lies more with how websites like opencritic aggregate scores.

Except outlets have had access to the MP for weeks now. Review the product as a whole since you can't buy one part and not the other.

 

[rkofan87]

dam the good games keep on coming.

 

[Sethbacca]

Is it just me or is it a little weird for DF to do the HD pack vs non HD pack comparison without noting if there would be any substantive difference in the performance between the modes. The difference is so minimal visually that I think I'd rather have the extra FPS and storage space if it's any kind of meaningful difference. Granted I could have missed it, I was half paying attention while watching trying to knock some contracts out.

 

[adamsapple]

MW2 and 3 campaigns kinda sucked but Black Ops 6 was legit good and as someone whose probably only touching BF for the campaign, this is poor showing as far as I'm concerned too.

 

[DeepEnigma]

MW2 and 3 campaigns kinda sucked but Black Ops 6 was legit good and as someone whose probably only touching BF for the campaign, this is poor showing as far as I'm concerned too.

I will take your word for it and try it out in the free week then.

I was hoping they were going to return to the BC2 form, especially how they hyped "dedicated single player narrative studio teams" for this one.

 

[Mr. PlayStation]

Black Ops 6 campaign is actually pretty good tho.

Played BO6 campaign for a few hours, disliked it as much as CoD: Ghosts. BO Cold War was much better.