Although released about a year-and-a-half ago, Bad Company was a game that slipped under my radar. That changed due to the amount of fun I was having with Battlefield: 1943 and the fact that my son found it for $15, causing it to be a stocking stuffer this Christmas.On the surface, Bad Company can get lost in the glut of all the other war based shooters, but there are a number of things that separate it from the pack, the biggest being the strength of its multiplayer. Twenty-four players on huge maps, great weapon variety, and wonderful vehicle fun. Bad Company sets the standard for destructible environments. Besides just looking really good, destruction is incorporated well into gameplay without overwhelming it. Some folks might feel only two game types - conquest (territories) & gold rush (siege) - but I would rather play these objective based games, polished and balanced to a tee, than endless varieties of slayer, populated by trash talking thirteen year-olds.
I was also pleasantly surprised by the single player experience. The plot is a simple one: the four team B-company fall upon a trail that appears to be leading them to a fortune in gold bullion - think of the film Three Kings without the political or moral overtones. In an age where every game is determined to be as epic and convoluted as possible, playing Bad Company was surprisingly refreshing. Instead of a silly plot, you get very well constructed levels and well paced gaming. Refreshing indeed.
