Battlefield 3 campaign 12 hours long

By Wesley Yin-Poole Published 30 March, 2011

DICE explains its inclusion.

Hotly anticipated shooter Battlefield 3 features a 12-hour campaign, according to a report.

Chatting with DICE general manager Karl Troedsson, a reporter from Games.on.net mentioned the 12-hour figure.

"Naturally we want to introduce more people to our franchise," Troedsson replied, explaining its inclusion. "A lot of people don't want to jump straight into multiplayer. They want to feel around a bit and they're ready to move over to online."

He added: "The hardcore online people, they don't care, they're just straight in. Maybe they don't even touch the campaign. But we want to get more people in, invite more people into the franchise. That's one of the main reasons why we have this different part of the game."

The length of first-person shooter campaigns was a topic brought to the fore recently with the launch of THQ's Homefront, which drew complaints for its five-hour campaign.

Many believe Battlefield 3 will offer Activision's Call of Duty its most serious challenge yet atop the first-person shooter mountain.

Picture of Wesley.

About Wesley Yin-Poole

Wesley is Eurogamer's news editor. He likes news, interviews, and more news. He also likes Street Fighter more than anyone can get him to shut up about it.

Read more articles from Wesley by visiting the Wesley Yin-Poole archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (54) Latest comment 1 year ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Vlad27145 #1 1 year ago

    We, shall see Dice. You have my money anyway for this, but if it turns out to be true, you will assure you get it in many instances in the future as well!

  • Osahi #2 1 year ago

    It's hard to put a figure on the length of a game as a developer. Is it what they aim for? And for what kind of gamer? On what difficulty? I do hope it's this long, because although I rather have a solid 6 hours then 12 with ups and downs, I'm kind of fed up with the relentless action and faster faster faster mentality of shooters these days.

    Killzone 3 had a nice 8 hours campaign (I finished it in about 7 and three quarters or so on normal) and was quite nice in terms of balance between awesome action and set pieces and quieter 'cool down' moments), but Crysis 2 does it all right for me. Playing on veteran I've got about 6 hours on the official clock and I'm in the eleventh mission of nineteen, but I'm sure I've played more like 8 to 9 hours with retries and all. It makes me remember that shooters can be long, fun, open en spectacular at the same time.

    I've got my hopes up for Battlefield 3. It looks stunning and if thay can make the 12 hours claims hard without failing to deliver constant quality, they'll have my money. I'm skipping CoD this year anyway, totally fed up with the series which is in decline since Modern Warfare 1...

  • username84 #3 1 year ago

    I'm in.

  • Anciegher #4 1 year ago

    Sounds good, can't wait!

  • JahB #5 1 year ago

    nice to have, but really, who cares? BF games have probably the best multi player in the FPS genre, so i see myself skipping the campaign altogether and going straight to shooting other people

  • Fab4 #6 1 year ago

    I quite liked the BFBC2 campaign....at least it didn't have infinite enemy respawn sites on each level.

  • MojoDex #7 1 year ago

    credit too dice for this

  • adofessex #8 1 year ago

    DICE have nailed multiplayer already and considering the BFBC2 campaign, they are finally getting to grips with singleplayer. All this really means is that come the day of purchase is that you are getting a lot more quality for your money.

  • TheEarlOfZinger #9 1 year ago

    Fine by me. 2 games for the price of one.

    Can't understand the moaning, the multiplayer will be good regardless. This is just icing.

  • telboy007 #10 1 year ago

    Bad Company 2 was a lot of fun, single and multiplayer. Looking forward to this.

  • CzR #11 1 year ago

    http://fantastibad.com/images/shutupmone...

  • nuanimal #12 1 year ago

    "DICE explains its inclusion"

    You make it sound like it shouldn't be there? I for one always try to get through half the campaign before playing any multiplayer game.

  • kar #13 1 year ago

    12 hours? So that's 3x recent CODs then.

  • PixelPirate #14 1 year ago

    BF3 is the only online shooter i actually care about this year tbh.

    Its the only one (in the trailers and interviews) that at least seems to be trying to do new and different things rather than endlessly releasing the same game....

  • matrim83 #15 1 year ago

    ^^Kinda makes sense since graphically it looks about 3x better than CoD as well. :p

  • randompanda #16 1 year ago

    12 hours longer than Demons Souls then? ;)

  • Ranger101 #17 1 year ago

    @nuanimal... Battlefield has always been a multiplayer title.

  • Olemak #18 1 year ago

    I like both campaigns and online, so that will be brilliant. Can't understand why anybody who knows how good the Battlefield games are even bother with the CoD shite.

    MW2 did split-screen co-op quite well, tho, had some fun hours with it. That would be a perfect fit for BF3. Just normal online maps with lots of bots and objectives. Please make this happen!

  • carlitoswagon #19 1 year ago

    Is it just me or can Dice do no wrong. It's times like these that the other shitty shooters stare in envy.

  • Lord_BeeJee #20 1 year ago

    Great! I really enjoyed the bad company 2 campaign and i don't think I'll easily buy a game without an offline campaign.

  • Triggerhappytel #21 1 year ago

    So, will this equate to about 5 or 6 hours without marketing bullshit then?

    (NB - I am looking forward to BF3, but you can rarely believe developers when they talk about the length of a campaign).

  • SpookyGhost #22 1 year ago

    I never understood people who think long games are bad. The more game you get for your money, the better. It's the reason I bought Crysis 2, if it had a short single player I wouldn't have bothered.

  • DavoTheDiv #23 1 year ago

    "I quite liked the BFBC2 campaign....at least it didn't have infinite enemy respawn sites on each level."

    Infinite enemy respawns make me cry

  • TitusCrow #24 1 year ago

    I don't give a rats ass about single player usually in BF games, but if it is 12 hours and its good its a great bonus. I will definitely play through it, I think there might be some spectacular set pieces in it using the new engine to its fullest potential. I for one would like to see that.

    And then we get a real BF game into the bargain as well - COD is toast. You know when the time comes; it happened when I played the beta for cod4 ( on 360 which was before the pc one ) I was raving about it to my friends I play PC with, using definitive words usually reserved for Blizzard and Valve titles of yore. I knew it would be massive I just didn't know it would be a cultural zeitgeist.

    Instead of truly re-iterating they have done what they always do; ran the title into the ground, cosmetic changes and little else. Yes its time for BF to come back to the top of the hill - this is the chance! the rare one that comes during a perfect storm of conditions, to take back all you lost.

    If Dice and EA fail this time due to some strange event or hideous port to consoles etc... they will know what an opportunity they have let slide. Me,I'm getting it on PC and I want to play it maxed like it deserves - this and Red Orchestra 2 in the next 6 months :) good times!

  • MKorkia #25 1 year ago

    "A lot of people don't want to jump straight into multiplayer. They want to feel around a bit and they're ready to move over to online."

    Some people buy shooters just for the campaign.

    After finishing campaign they try multiplayer, get killed 25 times in death match and accidentally manage to kill one enemy.

    Some people suck at multiplayer...

  • RoaringPanda #26 1 year ago

    It's the cynical dicks doomsaying about this game because there's a singleplayer that just need to shut the hell up. They see one fact about the game and deduct that it's going to fail because they feel intelligent being contrarian, not realising their views are pure guess work and that on the internet- unfortunately- they're a dime a dozen.

  • tobsen #27 1 year ago

    The BF2BC single player was amazing even though I expected it to be shit. These guys can pull it off for BF3 too.

  • Soton4084 #28 1 year ago

    @Fab4

    I couldn't agree more with your comment. Respawning enemies is essentially the game cheating and I detest any games which use it as a cheap tactic to up the difficulty. I was going to play through Black Ops on veteran difficulty, but didn't bother because of it.

    Battlefield 3 looks as though it is going to be amazing and I cannot wait to play it. I think it says a lot that I still regularly play on BFBC:2 and yet traded in my copies of MW2 and Black Ops long ago.

  • Tryhard #29 1 year ago

    If it has Battlefield on the box I am sold.

  • mashk #30 1 year ago

    Homefront had a 5 hour campaign? Slightly exaggerating the length there, methinks. It was more like 3 hours. Or 2 1/2 if you blasted through it.

  • DugBriderider #31 1 year ago

    Like many I have faith that the multi-player will be fine, better than fine even. Single player is a bonus for me but this and all the promotion so far is not aimed at me. Like Titus said its aimed at taking the FPS Crown, I hope by the end of the year we have a new and gracious king.

    PS. According to that video we should have a new trailer today.

  • DugBriderider #32 1 year ago

    Oh there it is <a href= "http://www.ea.com/battlefield3/videos/faultline-episode-3" > BF3 Episode 3 </a>
    Edited by DugBriderider at 30/03/11 @ 12:21

  • Tryhard #33 1 year ago

    Part 3 SP trailer

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kDBH-OrlX...

  • trooperdx3117 #34 1 year ago

    @DugBriderider
    and we do.......http://www.ea.com/battlefield3/videos/fa...

  • ISeeEverything #35 1 year ago

    Cheers DICE this is excellent , although this is mainly multiplayer game , I always enjoy AI more than dirty cheating human opponents , no offence off course.

  • metalangel #36 1 year ago

    So a botmatch on each level, with a cutscene in between levels?

    I would much prefer the option to go and play around offline. Practice flying, enjoy the maps, with nobody attacking.

  • arcam #37 1 year ago

    I would much prefer the option to go and play around offline. Practice flying, enjoy the maps, with nobody attacking.

    I'm sure you can do that too.

  • dsmx #38 1 year ago

    I would point out that dice have never released a battlefield game where the mulitplayer isn't riddled with bugs, exploits and actually works at launch. So having the single player in there means you'll actually have something to play while they make it so the multiplayer works properly.

  • TruWari3r #39 1 year ago

    I just want to know when the bloody beta included in MoH starts, already preordered the bf3 le for my beloved karkand.

  • dsmx #40 1 year ago

    Can't stand karkland I had enough of it in bf2 it's why I'm not pre ordering it I don't want to play that map ever again.

  • TruWari3r #41 1 year ago

    Really? I loved Strike at Karkand and Warlord, always the 64players servers.

  • Xeopuppy #42 1 year ago

    12 hours ehh! Might just make this the first Battlefield I want to get, just maybe...

  • dsmx #43 1 year ago

    For me Karkland magnified all that was awful about BF2. In the end I just couldn't stand the map any more I couldn't look past the numerous things that pissed me off in it. I'm not going to rant about it on here though.

    I would say though that it also did magnify all that was good about bf2 as well but I couldn't look past all the things that pissed me off about bf2 on that map.

  • RedSparrows #44 1 year ago

    BFBC2 SP was well constructed and about as much fun as a paint convention.

  • WeirdbeardUK #45 1 year ago

    I expect this to take the throne and knock that pile of shit COD out..

  • potiwilm #46 1 year ago

    something's not right when a developer feels the need to justify the inclusion of a single player element to a video game

  • stoopidgreg #47 1 year ago

    I'll take this news with a pinch of salt. I read several reviews claiming Crysis 2 was a good 10-14 hours but it was more like 6-8.

  • duckmouth #48 1 year ago

    If I had to chose between this and the new CoD, I'd definitely pick this. The trailers have been breathtaking. I hope it lives up to my expectations, and that at least a few CoD players make the move over to BF.

  • RedSparrows #49 1 year ago

    I'm really not sure why the 'king of FPS' is between these two. Half Life and Halo have that covered already.

  • DAN.E.B #50 1 year ago

    Im constantly telling my cod loving friends and family about BF but to no avail I guess some people dont like change which is a real shame.
    Im wondering if a bigger campain means less MP maps?
    Well if space is an issue on the xbox DICE feel free to release one disc for MP and one disc for SP
    We really wouldnt mind!!!

  • TheGuvernor #51 1 year ago

    This is going to be a monster.

    And why do so many of my fellow gamers have things the wrong way around?
    The transition to multi component in fps being the main fare on the menu is a relatively recent phenomenon.
    FPS genre was built on single player campaigns with a few honorable exceptions, UT, Quake Arena..
    We deserve quality lengthy single player campaigns & solid multi - nothing less.

  • earobus #52 1 year ago

    I am the sort of gamer he is talking about and have not got any of the latest cod games for this reason but i will buy this now and will most likely get into the online side of things. Hats off to them.

  • metalangel #53 1 year ago

    @arcam: well, I couldn't in Bad Company 2.

  • Sir_STRESSHEaD #54 1 year ago

    I for one treat multiplayer as a bonus and in many cases won't touch it until I'm done milking the single player. Nice to know that gamers like myself are still being catered for! Cheers Dice.

    Also, what's wrong with enjoying both COD and Battlefield? I love to play most military shooters. They all have their individual merits. I can't stand COD haters. IMO thay have been a benchmark in quality for a long time!
    Edited by Sir_STRESSHEaD at 31/03/11 @ 10:11