I'm starting to think that there's something about controversial game releases that fascinates me a little. I often remember the titles that get a bad reception and then somehow manage to keep existing in the world, even spawning sequels and spinoffs despite their lack of success. I suppose one way to ensure your game will sell no matter how good or bad it is, would be to use one of the biggest intellectual properties in the world. Surely nothing can go wrong when you're in a galaxy far, far away.
Every now and then a game is released to mediocre reviews and practically non-existent hype, but I enjoy it all the same. The first Mirror's Edge was criticised for its empty world and bland story, while offering unique and compelling gameplay. It was short and sweet, but I loved everything about it, so the sequel must be right up my alley… right?
Okay, it's fair to start off with a statement: the last Battlefield game I actually enjoyed was the first Bad Company. I even spent many hours playing the Bad Company multiplayer, thanks to the novelty of its destruction system that seemed incredibly "next-gen" for me at the time. I'm not about to say that Battlefield 1 is better than Bad Company, but at this point it probably gets the silver medal.
What's that saying? Fool me once… fool me twice… blah blah blah… being fooled repeatedly is equal to foolishness. I'll admit, I've been a fool with the Battlefield series, and with EA in general, but I'm consistently amazed at how one series can be so terrible and beautiful at the same time.
