Why we missed the Battlefield 3 review embargo

By Tom Bramwell Published 25 October, 2011

Code delivered late, huge day-one patch.

As some of you may know, the general embargo for publishing Battlefield 3 reviews online expired at 8.01am UK time this morning.

Eurogamer and many other websites only received finished console copies of the game yesterday morning. Our reviewer signed for his at 7am.

There were a few reviews online yesterday based on the PC version of the game. When it became apparent last week that there might be a distinction between timings for PC and console reviews, we asked for PC code but were told none was available. We still haven't been sent a PC copy of Battlefield 3 despite being told it is the leading version.

Throughout the last seven days we've also been told that a day-one patch would be released early this week that was essential to reviewing the game. In the event it turned out to be 167MB on Xbox 360.

Under the circumstances, our review is not ready for this morning's embargo.

However, our reviewer was able to play the game extensively at pre-release hands-on sessions and has been playing pretty much non-stop for 24 hours with the patch installed, so the review will hopefully be ready later today.

Meanwhile, disks are on their way to Digital Foundry so that Rich Leadbetter can put together our PC, PS3 and Xbox 360 face-off for the end of the week.

We don't know exactly why we've been put in a position where we can't review the game at the same time as other websites, but we have asked politely.

We're obviously disappointed by the circumstances, but we don't harbour any ill feeling towards DICE, for whom we have infinite respect and affection, and we won't let any of this nonsense cloud our analysis of a game we're really excited to finally play.

Picture of Tom.

About Tom Bramwell

Tom is Operations director of Eurogamer Network and Editor-at-Large of Eurogamer.net. He joined the company in February 2000. Follow him on Twitter.

Read more articles from Tom by visiting the Tom Bramwell archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (104) Latest comment 7 months ago

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

  • TheBiGW #1 7 months ago

    Sounds like an 8/10 game to me :)

  • Wempler #2 7 months ago

    Really... WHO cares about the face-offs? I see the point in doing them for PS3 and Xbox, but PC is always streets ahead (see what I did there?) of the consoles in all regards, unless it's a really, really crappy port.

  • Jonny5Alive7 #3 7 months ago

    What a kick in the teeth after you spent so long marketing it for them :-) Joking, pretty poor from EA/Dice.

  • Arsecake_Baker #4 7 months ago

    "We don't know exactly why we've been put in a position where we can't review the game at the same time as other websites, but we have asked politely."

    6/10 then EG! Go on i dares ya! :p

  • Timbercottage #5 7 months ago

    "disks"??? Bitch please, it's discs.

  • NeverEatYellowSnow #6 7 months ago

    Would be nice to be able to read the article

    Will the EG app EVER work correctly.....

    /sighs

  • elephant_stone #7 7 months ago

    Don't rush the review

  • des #8 7 months ago

    It's very clear that EA cherry picked yesterday's reviews.Few big sites,bunch of no name sites,min score=9.

    No PC code available :lol:

  • warlockuk #9 7 months ago

    Ah, no rush. The site's so broken all we'd read is "Aww, snap! 8/10 This website (www.eurogamer.net) is asking to store data on your computer for offline use."

  • Whitster #10 7 months ago

    @NeverEatYellowSnow Just go to the new mobile site, its pretty well optimised for mobiles, more so than the HD site seems to be for most pc/laptop users.

  • UnblestCarpet #11 7 months ago

    :( Would have thought all that advertising would get you a priority :)

    From what I've read the day 1 patch has been up for a few days atleast but I guess you need the game first.

    It's a shame you got it so late as it must be hard to play sp and mp and write a review within a day or two.

  • SpaceMidget75 Verified Senior Software Developer, Minerva Computer Services #12 7 months ago

    I don't want to stick up for the likes of EA but I'm sure no malice was involved in this instance.

    One thing that did come to my attention though was that the reviewer has been playing the game almost solidly for 24 hours. It got me a wondering about how much a reviewer can really enjoy a game and let the experience flow over them when they have review deadlines.

    I'm pretty sure if I had to play a game over 2-3 days, I wouldn't appreciate it in the way I do when I play my games casually, for entertainment reasons.

    Just thinking out loud.

  • Creasy #13 7 months ago

    there are still people caring for reviews and/or useless scores, aren't there?

  • johnson81 #14 7 months ago

    "Throughout the last seven days we've also been told that a day-one patch would be released early this week that was essential to reviewing the game."

    This game should be reviewed without the patch. If the developers can't be arsed to get it fixed before it's in the shops then it should be reviewed in that state. What about the people that don't have the internet (not many I know, but still)?

  • misterdoctor #15 7 months ago

    Sigh. Okay. Here goes:

    *Introductory paragraph with misspelled thesis statement about Battlefield 3 being all over Eurogamer.*

    *Second paragraph explaining the growing disillusionment with the website, with the UC3 review used as a metaphor for how cold Eurogamer is slowly becoming.*

    *Concluding paragraph about Webster's definition of irony with the abbreviated form of laugh out loud appearing several times in lieu of Eurogamer, of all sites, not having the BF3 review out on time.*

  • schnide #16 7 months ago

    A full review in two days?

  • GamesConnoisseur #17 7 months ago

    I think Face Offs between consoles AND PC are still useful, as a growing benchmarks of the divide and what to expect in the next generation of the consoles.

    To highlights new techs, effects that PC are breaking in and even so, the six years plus of the current consoles techs are still reasonably fun to play. Should Uncharted 4 be running on PS4 and we can imagine that it's wouldn't need to use as much smokes and mirrors or even maybe be as tightly corralled due to hardware limitations rather than the narrative devices.

    I fully anticipate that I would love Uncharted 3 all the way through, but the PC inclusion heightened my expectations.

  • Toothball #18 7 months ago

    Relax, I'm sure no one will die from a delayed review. If I were Tom, I'd be too busy berating the dudes in the engine room. Took me about half an hour of broken links to read this article, and I'm not even that interested in FPS games.

  • Maturin #19 7 months ago

    Post deleted at 09:51:54 12-12-2011

  • arcam #20 7 months ago

    Sounds like you were only interested in the console version and that isn't ready yet. You've been hyping this for 6 months and only this week you thought maybe you'd ask for a PC version to review?

    Now you're going to release a console review after playing it for less than a day? This post reads like you feel hard done by but honestly it just seems like those other websites made smarter decisions than you.

  • jablonski #21 7 months ago

    You honestly feel you can review a game in 24 hours?

    That's mental. You need to walk away and stew on the experience, then come back for second, third, fourth impressions.

    I also find it hard to believe you would have some sort of communication problem with EA, as you must have been working very very closely with them for all of your assorted BF3 Microsites/ads/previews.

    I don't want to say that the advertising spend has made the score for this a foregone conclusion, but I'll be amazed if this doesn't score 9/10.

  • tompagenet #22 7 months ago

    I'd much rather you played through the game at a reasonable pace. The review doesn't need to be rushed. I get to play games in short bursts after work, not hours non-stop. I'd rather it was a comprehensive review than a quick one.

  • Bennyjj81 #23 7 months ago

    Is it just me or are people on here already trying to defend the game before the reviews even gone live? It's all a bit fishy the way EA have handled this and from other reviews starting to creep out it seems BF3 on consoles is good but perhaps not the mind blowing definitive FPS that many many people on this site were expecting and happy to criticise anybody who didn't agree. Time will tell I suppose. . . .

  • Ranger101 #24 7 months ago

    There's a lot of reading between the lines to be done on this post by Tom... Are we going to have a 2K Games type situation going on here?

    Funny that IGN and GameSpy got their PC review copies on time - 2 sites known for their 7 - 10 rating scale. Oh not to mention Gametrailers as well, who, to be fair, have a 6 - 9.8 rating scale.
    Edited by Ranger101 at 25/10/11 @ 09:49

  • Lunatic4ever #25 7 months ago

    No need to hurry. Just wirte a cohesive review which tells me bit more about the SP campaign than other reviews out there did until now. Saying "its lackluster" isnt enough. We all know the MP is going to be awesome so I'm even more interested in the SP since it could provide additional value for those who are still undecisive.

  • GaryStew1980 #26 7 months ago

    at Wempler i think face-offs are handy sometimes but they got silly a while back where they were just reviewing the games again rather than actually telling us which performed better, but is there really a need for a PC, 360 and PS3 face-off, I think we all know the PC is going to perform quite dramatically better than the console versions, Crysis looks very well on consoles but even 4 years later it looks better on PC.

  • ISmoke #27 7 months ago

    Please sort the App out, guys. I can't read anything in bed!

  • Apostle #28 7 months ago

    That's not on. Poor EG. Also feel for the reviewer who has to force himself to play through a game, can't be all that enjoyable.

    With all due respect though, the review was going to make no difference to me. Day one purchase, as they say. :)

  • octavedoctor #29 7 months ago

    @Timbercottage computer speak - I'm pretty sure disks are disks on PC's etc... discs are a flat round object in general :)

  • hiscore #30 7 months ago

    ..maybe dissection of BF3 will reveal too much weaknesses?
    ..maybe it's fear of a near future "8/10"-stigma?
    ..maybe it's because they thought EG already had copies (due to busy marketing schedule, they just plainly forgot) ?
    ..maybe they're assembling a new Ultra Hires texture bluray for PS3?

  • Dark_Era #31 7 months ago

    seems like just a hand full of sites are getting it pre release, which is a shame really.

  • arcam #32 7 months ago

    Maybe you could ask Eurogamer Spain for their copy? http://www.eurogamer.es/articles/2011-10-24-battlefield-3-analisis

  • Sildur #33 7 months ago

    Whenever these kinds of delays happen, it should be an absolutely clear indicator that the developer hasn't completed the game in time and the publisher isn't happy with the bugs, and so they delay the review copies going out long enough so hopefully reviewers don't spot many of their bugs while writing their slap-dash reviews.

    BF3 has won so many show awards for BF3, I seriously get the impression that they've been arrogantly resting on their laurels, lapping up the praise rather than completing the game. It's so clear that more work has been done on BF3 in the last two months than has been done on it in the previous six.

    Either EAs original release date was unrealistic, or DICE are unable to schedule work properly.

  • TheEarlOfZinger #34 7 months ago

    "we don't harbour any ill feeling towards DICE, for whom we have infinite respect and affection, and we won't let any of this nonsense cloud our analysis of a game we're really excited to finally play."

    What an arse licker. :rolleyes:

  • ThrowingTuba #35 7 months ago

    What's really frustrating for me isn't the fact that the reviews aren't in, I'm buying the game based on the beta, rather the fact that there is no clear indication which format I should get it on.

    Unfortunatly PC isn't an option, so some guidance on which console version is the 2nd / 3rd would be really useful.

  • OllyJ #36 7 months ago

    and what I take in to consideration is that he's now doing the equivilent of wolfing down his dinner rather than enjoying it....

  • ubergine #37 7 months ago

    @johnson81 Dude, find me an idiot who is going to buy Battlefield 3, with no Internet connection. Don't be daft.

    Gist of all the reviews I've read is "Single player and coop campaign are mediocre shit with great graphics, multiplayer is the best Battlefield yet."

    Also, I don't see what all the mystery is. EA set a date. DICE were not ready. They chose not to delay the game because they want a lead on CoD8Part3. The console public Beta presented a game that was not ready for public beta. We can reasonable assume that DICE are Indiana Jones, running and sliding under a collapsing deadline and their Indiana Jones Hat is the extra point between 8/10 and 9/10. We won't know if they succesfully reached back and grabbed their hat until the day one patch. That one point is worth millions. Hopefully they didn't lose their hand.
    Edited by ubergine at 25/10/11 @ 10:20

  • figgis #38 7 months ago

    At least they are endeavouring to fix the game. Bodes well for future support (as BC2 had).

  • Daeltaja #39 7 months ago

    This sounds encouraging... EA seem really confident in their product.....

  • MattRobson #40 7 months ago

    I always figured with a review you played the game for a considerable amount of time not just one day? First impressions can be significantly different to a few days later.

    Dont Rush your review to keep up with the crowd, stick the review up on Thursday when you've had more time... for gods sake dont do an IGN 'review' told me absolutely nothing i didn't know already! was two pages of utter waffle.
    Edited by MattRobson at 25/10/11 @ 10:17

  • metalangel #41 7 months ago

    @ThrowingTuba: you're buying BASED ON the beta?

  • alithebull #42 7 months ago

    who cares?

  • DirectAim #43 7 months ago

    The game isn't out til Friday, you got plenty of time yet!

    I'd rather wait for a decent EG review than some lame review by IGN!

  • spekkeh #44 7 months ago

    We're obviously disappointed by the circumstances, but we don't harbour any ill feeling towards DICE, for whom we have infinite respect and affection, and we won't let any of this nonsense cloud our analysis of a game we're really excited to finally play.

    Too bad, I like EG reviews when the critic has sand kicked into his mangina the most.

  • Lymmusic #45 7 months ago

    I imagine its something to do with ea's perfectly reasonable agenda to increase ps3 disc copies through timed dlc and increased marketing, which conflicts with eurogamer's consistent 360 bias.
    Even when faced with cold hard facts from digital foundry a tangible bias is made towards 360.

    I personally have no preference between consoles, own both, enjoy both. Minor differences are meaningless...

    Just a thought

  • joelstinton #46 7 months ago

    I guess with all the games comign out, all reviews are pretty much limited to 24-72 hour playthroughs. I know film critics all attend weekly film showings, where they pretty much watch films back to back and form opinions on that.

  • The-Jack-Burton #47 7 months ago

    Everyone missed the embargo, EA and Dice have, to a degree, successfully manipulated the system. They wanted the PC scores to be the initial impression, something that their marketing and research department told them was important. Dice is under the impression that gamers are morons and that they can't differentiate between PC and console. They even stated something very close to that in a recent interview with EG.

    The 1up review states that the game suffers from a lot of screen tearing, bad draw distance and an annoying amount of texture loading. All of these things were present in the NFS: The Run demo. I'm thinkin that Dice may be somewhat full of shit, which is an epidemic that seems to have spread to all of the studios creating shooters.

  • spekkeh #48 7 months ago

    And I echo the other sentiments. Don't rush reviews. I actually came to this site six/seven years ago because EG reviews were so much more nuanced and critical. Back then I believe it was not uncommon for EG to be more than a week behind other major websites with their review, but because of that had the benefit to burn an overhyped game to the ground. I'd much rather go back to that than have EG be one of the first reviews, but based on a rushed playthrough where the reviewer probably didn't like the game that much, but bases his opinion on conjecturing how the game would be if you didn't have to rush it for your job. I.e. base the opinion on how he estimates other people perceive it. I.e. follow the hype.

  • Seb_NZ #49 7 months ago

    Better if the reviews are a bit spread out anyway. I thought Eurogamer delayed its reviews purposely to separate itself from the masses?

  • BillPoon #50 7 months ago

    @ubergine I read that Indiana Jones bit with a Partridge voice. Worked wonderfully.

  • phAge #51 7 months ago

    EUROGAMER SLAMS DICE.

  • -cerberus- #52 7 months ago

    A 167mb patch?! Sounds like an unfinished game to me...

  • smirny #53 7 months ago

    Do people know how advertising works?? To everyone going on about how EG are doing all this publicity, and have sold out... you do realise that EA will have paid, quite possibly a large sum of money to have all this publicity on the site... and if they didn't someone else would be doing with a different game.

    EG don't chose to put the ads up for the fun of it. They are piad to. And that payment helps to keep the site free for us all to read.

    /rant

  • metalangel #54 7 months ago

    @SebNZ: Not any more. The Forza 4 review was so early that by the time the game actually came out in Europe the review itself had scrolled completely off the front page.

  • Hindle #55 7 months ago

    Post deleted at 23:04:43 04-04-2012

  • Vortextk #56 7 months ago

    We're obviously disappointed by the circumstances, but we don't harbour any ill feeling towards DICE,
    Just for EA right? Yup nasty a bit of business all around the gaming world on this subject. I figure EA doesn't care about the negative press as they seem to think the majority of people buying modern military shooters care as much about gaming websites as the average farmville player does. We'll see how right they are.

  • marmaduke #57 7 months ago

    Feel the battle!

  • killuminati2911 #58 7 months ago

    Well I've read at least 10+ review of the PC version, that's the one I'm getting and that's the one everybody should be focusing on. I do not care either for the PS3 or the 360 version, even if I own both consoles BUT Battlefield MUST be played on a PC even if your rig is so old you can play just Mario Bros on a N64 emulator :p

  • mukki #59 7 months ago

    well getting this anyways
    but looking forward to the Digital Foundry report as always!

  • shadowdogg #60 7 months ago

    Part of the game is part of the service

  • BOFH_UK #61 7 months ago

    I'll admit, I'm surprised how badly EA seem to have messed up this launch. For a title that's been hyped up non-stop for months now and that has the PC front-and-centre in its development cycle it strikes me as odd that review copies are so difficult to come by and that crucial day one patches are being deployed so late that it's almost impossible to hit the embargo date.

    Have to say that based on the initial PC reviews I quickly cancelled my pre-order. Multiplayer might well be the best yet but it was the single player that had caught my interest from the initial promotional materials and that appears to be somewhat ropey. Shame but there's just so many potentialy good games coming out at the moment it doesn't take much to bump something from my must-buy list.

  • Cypher_2011 #62 7 months ago

    I don't understand why this wasn't a Global release? This week is going to drag!!

  • coolbritannia #63 7 months ago

    Classy move. This gets you credibility in my eyes.

  • Stickman #64 7 months ago

    Bet you're glad you didn't devote a fucktonne of advertising space and articles to it, eh?

  • Progguitarist #65 7 months ago

    They probably remembered hte Brink review and thought, "shit, these guys haven't got a fucking clue...delay sending the code!".

  • Capa26 #66 7 months ago

    Hang on, so the reviewer has played it for 24 hours and is then expected to write a review after that marathon? Jesus... fuck the embargo, is getting the review up necessary only for website hits? Give the guy a week or a couple of days at least...

  • FortysixterUK #67 7 months ago

    It's battlefield, it's gonna do well, they haven't released a duff PC version of the franchise since launch.
    Plus it doesn't matter that Eg didn't get a review out on time, they still got all the money from EA from making their website "Eurobattlefield3gamer" for 6 months.

  • Beano #68 7 months ago

    Don't worry, EG... nobody cares about COD/BF games anymore. Take your time with the review.

  • Rajin #69 7 months ago

    @spekkeh

    Agreed, that's why i came to Eurogamer as well. But their policy since then has changed to ''day 2'' review releases. I's still not as bad as IGN(that review reeks of actual expirience)imagination instead od a

  • Uncompetative #70 7 months ago

    This game will be bugged up the ass.

    Hopefully there will be multiple patches as time goes on.

    Sad though for Xbox Arcade owners. They can't even install the optional hi-res texture pack.

  • FuzzyDuck #71 7 months ago

    'We don't know exactly why we've been put in a position where we can't review the game at the same time as other websites, but we have asked politely.'

    maybe EA/DICE couldn't get the new site to load and are peeved off? :)

    Being serious though, the fact that there's been so little console footage in the wild and that it's being evidentially being pushed out the door barely on time reeks of an unpolished product.
    Edited by FuzzyDuck at 25/10/11 @ 13:48

  • ThrowingTuba #72 7 months ago

    @Metalangal

    Yeah, I'm buying based on the beta.

    Sure, it wasn't perfect, but I'm confident that they've used it to iron things out.

    I'm sticking with my PS3 pre-order, if anyone fancies a game on Friday, my ID is ThrowingTuba.

  • Belnini #73 7 months ago

    @johnson81 "What about the people that don't have the internet (not many I know, but still)?"

    Well I imagine they won't be reading many online reviews.

  • blicko #74 7 months ago

    Maybe you didn't give them enough advertising space? Perhaps an extra one or two "news" articles a day would have greased the wheels?

    Jokes aside, I see this as a positive. They're going to favour the less-critical reviewers at launch to protect against any buzz-kill. Take it as a compliment and give them an 8 ;-)

  • Pickster #75 7 months ago

    I have just been listening to Invisible Walls and the way the review copies for Battlefield 3 have been issued is a Joke

    This may have already been mentioned in the comments but basicly a questionnair went out to potential reviewers and the ones that came back suggesting the rewview would be favourable got the copy of the game.

    It looks like only 3 or 4 reviewers got a copy of the game with a half decent time to hit the embargo.

    My best guess for the reason for this is the day one patch. Those who got the game early would most likely either forgive the problems, or take EA at their would that the problems would be fixed in the patch.

    It will be interesting to see what difference the patch makes and how broken the game is prepatch.

    I hope Eurogamer looks at the game both pre and post patch.

  • DiamondIce #76 7 months ago

    Why is Wempler (post 2) being negged so heavily. He has a fair point in that a console faceoff is worthwhile but the PC will outperform and anyone with an ounce of sense should realise this.

    A PC spec faceoff, so you can find out how low/ mid / high range machines, would be more interesting.

    The late arrival of the game to your offices is also a worrying sign.

  • Golgo #77 7 months ago

    I call shenanigans...SHEANIGANS, I TELL THEE!!!

  • darth_paul #78 7 months ago

    so, EUROGAMER didnt bend over and kiss EA's ass... thats what you get for such INSOLENCE!!! next time, you shall play BALL!!!!!

  • TelexStar #79 7 months ago

    I'm fully expecting this to be very under whelming on the 360, although I'll be happy if it's not. The lack of footage and general info on console performance relating to this game has me very worried. I know that the PC is the leading platform and I have no problem with that but it just irks me when a publisher/developer purposefully neglects releasing info on 2 very important console platforms commercially. This whole reviews business is just another straw on the back of a hype/marketing machine with an agenda that believes gamers are fundamentally stupid idiots.

    *edited for typos*
    Edited by TelexStar at 25/10/11 @ 13:32

  • iamnosuperman #80 7 months ago

    "non-stop for 24 hours with the patch installed, so the review will hopefully be ready later today" no offence but you have just discredit your review already. You want to know why? You should play it without the patch. How many consoles are connected. Apparently last year the PS3 had the largest with around 70odd percent (last year). You should review what's on the disc and not some day one patch that 30% of people cannot play. Its ok mentioning a patch is coming but the core game should be reviewed.

  • danidrums #81 7 months ago

    "we asked for PC code but were told none was available."

    After months of ads, sorry to hear that. :/

  • axman303 #82 7 months ago

    re: Disks/Discs. Disks are magnetic and Discs are optical.

  • mowgli #83 7 months ago

    They probably saw the site and thought "oh, wait, we've already sent a copy to IGN". ;)

  • AndyBeans #84 7 months ago

    I think a DF faceoff between ALL versions is a good idea considering the PC-centric marketing strategy followed by EA/DICE, the complete absence of console footage and the poor beta have definitely cooled off the anticipation I felt 6 months back... too many definite AAA's out or incoming to bother with a [comment blocked as it could be blasphemous against DICE]!

  • obihobson #85 7 months ago

    Lets get that review done, I hope the review doesnt use the PC as the standard theres no way the consoles can compete with the likes of 64 players and super duper graphics cards. I hope the console review is based on its console peers such as MW and BC2 and not how much short of the mark it is in comparison to the PC version..

  • tafkap #86 7 months ago

    Please don't rush to be the first...strive to be the best.

  • metalangel #87 7 months ago

    @ThrowingTuba: I hope your confidence isn't misplaced. Enjoy the game!

  • shamblemonkee #88 7 months ago

    i'd rather have an accurate review than a rushed impressions peice review, so non-issue for me.

  • kupocake #89 7 months ago

    When it became apparent last week that there might be a distinction between timings for PC and console reviews [...] We still haven't been sent a PC copy of Battlefield 3 despite being told it is the leading version.
    This is all unfortunate, but I'm still puzzled why, considering that we've known that the PC version is the 'leading version' for as long as the game has been in the pipeline, Eurogamer put in for the console version in the first place.

    Not saying this would mean that you would get the game on time anyway, but it seems strange to condemn the response of EA over their 'leading version' a sentence after you've just admitted that your intention was originally to review some other version anyway?

  • coolbritannia #90 7 months ago

    Why does it say there are no comments? Why can't I see anything? Is this even being posted?!

  • Whatascoop #91 7 months ago

    Surprised you haven't interviewed the lead programmer's mother yet...

  • greenthumb #92 7 months ago

    Can you check if you can install this on an x360 arcade? There's a few folks on somethingawful with an arcade with HDD and Flash drives but aren't able to install the HD textures

  • greekgoddj #93 7 months ago

    Should be reviewed without the patch. The standards for games are dropping, shipping rushed products and patching them later.

  • P1GEONPOO #94 7 months ago

    @coolbritannia yip I can see it. Unfortunately. Joking aside this site has more bugs than crysis 2.

  • Tyronne #95 7 months ago

    I have bf3 on preorder, I will no doubt play it to death but come EG that last paragraph is cringe worthy. If you are going to suck that much cock at least get a dinner out of it first!

  • blarty #96 7 months ago

    Is it because you were too busy plugging Battlefield 3 adverts into the website at every opportunity, seriously it's like you've contracted 'Advertisers Tourettes'

  • P1GEONPOO #97 7 months ago

    :redface:=dice :mad:=EG :rolleyes:=me

  • aidey6 #98 7 months ago

    "huge day-one patch" Tom that's nothing. Resistance 3 day one patch is nearly four times the size of that!!!

    http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2011/09/03/resistance-3-day-one-patch-is-big-and-early/

    Let's just hope that DICE/EA deliver game wise

  • priesty_lfc #99 7 months ago

    COD MW3 FTW :)

    At least we know what were getting, BF3 on Console is a waste of time!

  • Bluetooth #100 7 months ago

    this would never have happened with Modern Warfare 3

  • theonlyix #101 7 months ago

    Youre the only site i thrust! And im glad you´re checking the console versions out aswell as they probably are the versions that will matter to most people!

  • dfunked #102 7 months ago

    I don't really understand using the day 1 patch as an excuse for this lateness (which is already perfectly excusable given the circumstances!!)
    Even on a crappy 3mb connection like mine, that should only take 10 minutes to download...

  • ubergine #103 7 months ago

    @BillPoon Inspired my avatar

  • 32768Colours #104 7 months ago

    I hadn't seen this article until after reading the review, and I have to say its a bit daft. This is an internal administrative cock up, not a news story.

    If you're apologising to us for missing the embargo then I can only say that I personally couldn't care less. Its only one game! Or is the importance of a review based on how many advertisements and hype we're bombarded with at every opportunity? Evidently it is.

    We still haven't had a review for Skylanders for example. Are we going to get a lengthy article about why that hasn't appeared too? What's that? The game hasn't been hyped to hell and back so you'll review it if and when you can be arsed? Well well, that is a surprise!

    Why not save the excessive evangelising of one or two blockbuster games to the non-gaming sites and magazines and make more of an effort to cover the other games that come out at the same time as these rinse repeat sequels. I know you have to cover them but its utterly ridiculous how much coverage has been given over to just one game.