Facebookfield 3

Social Networks are all the rage. There’s hardly a purpose or activity which doesn’t have a corresponding Social Network.

Twitter for microblogging, FourSquare for locations, GetGlue for activities, Facebook and Google+ for everything else – and that’s just scratching the surface.

Amid all the hype specifically about social gaming, it comes as little surprise that there now is a Social Network for Battlefield 3 players – aptly named Battlelog.

This cross platform service connects players and is very much Facebook for Battlefield. Players can ‘friend’ other players, create groups (aka platoons), comment on each other’s activities (e.g. Battle reports, rewards) or ‘like’ (aka ‘Hooah!’) them. The service also offers real-time text and voice chat, as well as stats tracking. On the more functional side, it serves as server browser and, on the PC, as game launcher.

The idea of combining games with social networking features is not new. Bioware did this with the Dragon Age and Mass Effect franchises; the Steam community features are widely congruent with those expected of a social network.

The difference is that in all those cases, the use of the social features is fairly optional. With Battlelog, you don’t get much of a choice. You automatically become a Battlelog user when you install the game and register it on your EA account. The social component is shoved in your face every time you log in, even if you’re just planning on launching the campaign.

From a marketing standpoint this is an almost ingenious move by EA. Everything is about social networking and connectivity. And just like that, a company has created a new social network, with eight million users worldwide. Not bad for starters – analysts, shareholders and investors are going to love it. Other companies are bound to learn from this example.

Which would all be good and well, if the service didn’t fail to deliver on what it promises. It’s not a good social tool.

Most of the players on your contact list will probably be people that you know already. That also keeps the social interaction via Battlelog to a minimum, since you most likely have other means of communicating with those people, and they are probably superior to what Battlelog has to offer.

The most important social component is missing on the PC at this time. Battlefield 2 and, to a degree, Battlefield 2142, could become great social and networking experiences because of their integrated squad VoIP.

More often than not, I would jump into a game, join a squad full of random strangers, and end the day with new acquaintances, some of which turned into very good friends.

On Battlefield 3, if you play on the PC, you’re out of luck. While the feature has been promised for a later patch, right now only console players have squad-based voice chat. (And it might very well go the way of Bad Company 2, where in-game VoIP was defunct for a very long time. When it finally worked, most people had gotten used to alternative comm tools such as Teamspeak.)

Even the stats tracking features are not quite up to scratch. How Battlelog got away offering clan functionality without a proper leaderboard is beyond my comprehension.

To get a good view of your stats, several clicks across a number of pages are needed. A feature to compare yourself against another player is missing entirely. Already there are third-party sites which offer a more comprehensive and manageable look at your player statistics.

The question is; is it really necessary to Facebook-ify everything?

At this point in time, Battlelog offers very little in terms of added value. Its features are rudimentary, with important ones missing entirely.

I’d rather they gave me a proper way to network and socialize with other players, instead of a social network that seems to be there mainly to float with all the other bubbles.