Battlefield: Hardline defied my expectations; delivering neither the story I expected nor anything half as tone-deaf as many gamers/critics/onlookers feared given the current political climate surrounding law enforcement in the United States. Now I just wish I had other positive things to say about the first Battlefield from Visceral Games.
The events of the Hardline campaign failed to leave a significant impression on me and the game's plot fails to separate itself from the equally-flat stories found in comparable FPS titles. Visceral also toned down the hyper militarized gameplay seen throughout last year but failed to rebalance what little artillery remained.
From a multiplayer perspective, Battlefield: Hardline fails to meet a standard of quality that was already pretty low – following the launch of Battlefield 4– and attempts to branch out from the core formula prove to be equally disappointing. Maps feel too cramped and the various environments might be the least-destructible we’ve seen since Battlefield 2.
In Battlefield: Hardline you're Miami cop Nick Mendoza, a relatively young addition to the MPD. Early on, you play the role of junior cop; tagging along with your partner on existing investigations and doing what you can to maintain order in the city. It’s not exactly a fresh take on the stereotypical cop show. The Miami police department has crooked cops on the payroll and (shocker!) Mendoza gets set up.
Missions are episodic and attempt to emulate the standard “cop show” (think Law & Order, CSI, etc). Each stage includes one or more criminals (with warrants) who fill the role of the B-tier plot line. And, to really drive home the TV presentation, each trip to/from the Battlefield: Hardline campaign includes a brief “Next/Last time, on Hardline…” segment with a quick refresher on the events from your last play session.
Battlefield: Hardline shepherds you from one fight to the next in a manner so linear it makes previous Battlefield campaigns feel like Skyrim by comparison. At times, it almost feels like Hardline should have been called Battlefield: Season One - A Telltale Games Adventure.
Cutscenes shuttle Mendoza and his allies from one Miami locale to the next and players’ only real decision in the Hardline campaign is whether to shoot the bad guys or taser them for a few more points. Either way, you're likely to hit the level cap long before you finish the Hardline campaign.
The only truly interesting mechanic in Battlefield: Hardline is the new badge-flash maneuver that leaves Mendoza’s enemies stunned for a few seconds. Any time you manage to get the drop on one or more enemies, pressing the L1/LB Button makes Mendoza flash his badge to the suspect(s), giving you a brief window to arrest your foe(s) without resistance.
The mechanic seems to be at odds with the Battlefield: Hardline campaign’s (admittedly strange) pivot towards stealth-oriented gameplay. Virtually every level of the game is designed with stealth in mind but our protagonist just walks up to gun-toting criminals and makes his presence known?
Most first-person shooters tend to use their campaigns to prepare players for online competition, by gradually introducing weapons and vehicles, but Hardline asks players to approach the game in a way that just isn’t feasible against other humans.
The Battlefield: Hardline multiplayer will feel vaguely familiar to anyone that’s spent time with a recent entry in the franchise; however, I suspect many longtime Battlefield fans will be every bit as disappointed as I am.
It's like déjà vu. You’ll begin to feel like you did everything there is to do in Battlefield: Hardline before you picked up the controller. Worse, the handful of new additions to the Battlefield formula are so bland that I’m left wondering who in their right mind actually thought this game was ready for public consumption.
We’re not talking about minor tweaks, either.
Maps feel smaller than ever before, despite the fact that new game hardware could support sophisticated battlefields. Those who do decide to brave the Battlefield servers will encounter the same two or three guns, inexplicable headshots, kill shots from players whose avatars haven't loaded, grenades that seem to have different damage radii every time you throw one and more dead-on-spawn situations than anyone should find acceptable.
Even when Battlefield: Hardline manages not to suck, there are so many other gameplay issues that I never fluctuated between anything other than pissed off and bored. There are a handful of unfamiliar (but exciting sounding) game types, like Blood Money and Heist, but a few rounds of each reveal rather lackluster additions to the Battlefield franchise.
Outside of traditional match types, like Team Deathmatch or Conquest, the majority of the new game modes involve one side guarding an item and the other trying to take it.
In Heist, the police guard two briefcases while the criminals try to steal them. In Rescue, the criminals guard hostages while the police try to save them. And, to keep things fresh(?), both Blood Money and Hotwire see both sides racing to claim the same item. Basically, everything is either an attrition or capture-the-flag variant of some kind
As someone who’s been playing Battlefield for about a decade now, it’s hard not to lay most of the blame for the series’ continued downfall squarely at the feet of certain types of gamers. Specifically, the kind who can't be bothered to leave their brains running when playing a first-person shooter.
Years ago, when Battlefield 2 first hit the market, the franchise’s appeal was rooted in the many ways it set itself apart from the competition; particularly its devotion to the idea that lone wolves don’t come out on top in real wars.
Now, thanks to an influx of players who can’t be asked to do much more than ensure their opponent is on the screen, we’re looking at a Battlefield experience that feels entirely disconnected from its predecessors.
No more lining up your shots based on the current trajectory of your target. No more realistic firearms that don’t fire in a straight line 100 percent of the time. No more squad-focused gameplay that rewards those willing to take a few seconds to think before they act.
And (in my experience) no communication between teammates, instantly killing any chance for return visits from the real meat and potatoes of the Battlefield experience: Kamikaze ATVs/helicopters/vans.
By stripping so much of the game’s militarized content out of Hardline ultimately left it incapable of generating the high-octane action that fans have come to expect. And why can't anyone be bothered to replace the XP-based progression mechanic that usurped the original Battlefield unlock system in the wake of Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare?
Don’t get me wrong, unlocking your way through a gun-filled skill tree surrogate was entertaining the first, second and fifteenth time it was crammed into an FPS. But, nearly a decade later, it would be nice to see someone in the triple-A space devote even a fraction of their developmental budget to creating a worthwhile replacement.
I don’t want to spend hours trying to get kills with weapons I don’t like while continuing to provide cannon fodder for players who’ve already grinded out the game’s best gear. And don't even get me started on the decision to split cop/robber progression into separate trees.
Keeping fans entertained (without forcing them to grind for equipment) is an issue that Valve addressed years ago, (mostly) abandoning weapon unlocks in favor of an ever-growing selection of cosmetic items, and one that EA needs to fix if they insist on having their studios churn out new Battlefield games every 12 months.
Visceral didn't even design enough weaponry for a decent progression ramp, leaving just 4 primary weapon unlocks for each class. As a result, it generally takes multiple hours for players to unlock their first alternate, and that’s only if they don’t buy any other gear – like a second gadget – along the way.
By the time players actually manage to unlock one or more of the top-tier firearms, community members who can’t be bothered to do anything with their lives (other than play more Battlefield) have already mastered the weapon(s) in question. It’s a never-ending cycle of frustration that can seemingly only be avoided by skipping out on the multiplayer portion of Hardline.
Progression aside, there are plenty of other ways that Hardline feels regressive when compared to previous Battlefield titles. I’ve been amazed/disappointed by just how many walls on the Hardline maps were apparently built with indestructible materials, making it impossible to reach enemies if/when they crouch behind certain barriers.
A general lack of communication also makes it rather difficult to approach Battlefield: Hardline with anything resembling tactical thought. Especially now that the spotting system doesn’t feel as reliable as it has in previous games.
Maybe the lack of communication is just the natural result of consoles offering their own chat clients, allowing PSN/XBL friends to bypass the in-game offerings. Whatever the cause, the end result is that teams scatter around the map, running around like intoxicated college students fleeing a house party after the police show up.
Players pick a direction, run for a few seconds/minutes and then generally fail to reach their objective. From what I’ve seen thus far, that process tends to repeat itself over and over until one team runs out of tickets.
And it’s exactly as fun as it sounds.
Battlefield: Hardline Review – Final Verdict
Battlefield: Hardline was every bit as disappointing as I expected, just not for the reasons I anticipated. Its semi-police-friendly narrative wasn’t anywhere as offensive as many gamers feared but the Hardline campaign was still dreadfully uninteresting and hardly the sort of thing I’d recommend to someone looking for a new shooter.
Rather than tackle a difficult subject with class or nuance, Visceral elected to strip out anything that might remind players that those on the other side of the badge might not be the inhuman monsters that they’re made out to be in popular culture. As a result, Hardline is both incredibly boring and entirely predictable; a combination that gives players little incentive to finish the whole campaign.
Buying a Battlefield game used to come with the knowledge that it would be challenging and free of the mindless violence of other modern military shooters. Sure, there was plenty of gunfire (and other acts of war) but the winning team needed to have both method and madness.
That isn't the case with Battlefield: Hardline. There's just enough familiar content for EA to justify slapping the series' name and logo across what I'd argue is an unrelated product. Everything has been altered and, with the lone exception of the Hotwire game type, not necessarily in a way that longtime Battlefield fans are going to enjoy.
If you prefer the sort of fast-paced gameplay that Visceral seems to be going for, Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare did a much better job of delivering on that vision.
Score – 2/5
Be sure to check back with iDigitalTimes.com and follow Scott on Twitter for more Battlefield: Hardline coverage throughout the remainder of 2015 and for however long Visceral continues to support Battlefield: Hardline in the months following launch.
What did you think of Battlefield: Hardline? Completely disagree with our analysis of the single- and/or multiplayer experience? Have you own ideas for what would make Battlefield: Hardline a more enjoyable video game?
Let us know in the comments section!
