User Score
8.4

Generally favorable reviews- based on 2019 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. [ANONYMOUS]
    Oct 25, 2009
    5
    Let me start off by saying i am not a big fan of fps games that are very narrow. Call of Duty 4 is just that, its very narrow, it doesn't bring anything new to the fps genre and left me bored to tears.
  2. Feb 27, 2012
    6
    For it's respective slot in history. This game was still fresh. It modernized the aging world war 2 template with 'just' enough storytelling and presentation upgrades to make the air feel fresh again for a breath or two. It's still not all that memorable, and supremely short. Get it for the multiplayer. Which is hopefully still active.
  3. May 30, 2014
    7
    The gunplay in this game is solid. The missions are interesting, but the plot and characters are boring. Not the greatest of games but it's a fun game that fans of FPS games will enjoy.
  4. Ross
    Jan 25, 2008
    7
    OK this game would be a 9 if it weren't for the 'veteran' difficulty. Game developers still need some help with this ... "Highest difficulty" does NOT MEAN "give every NPC on the map clairvoyance and 100% firing accuracy, and all friendly AI the inability to hit a barn door at 2 paces". I just poked my head around a corner as a horde of enemy ran from cover 400 yards away. OK this game would be a 9 if it weren't for the 'veteran' difficulty. Game developers still need some help with this ... "Highest difficulty" does NOT MEAN "give every NPC on the map clairvoyance and 100% firing accuracy, and all friendly AI the inability to hit a barn door at 2 paces". I just poked my head around a corner as a horde of enemy ran from cover 400 yards away. ON THE RUN (and bear in mind the player cannot fire when running) these 4 guys all hit me with impunity. Later in the same level, I stood behind Griggs, the Automatic Rifleman, and watched over his shoulder as he emptied his M249 (the big, heavy machine gun that deals only in heavy death) at a static target from 10 YARDS AWAY. He missed with EVERY SHOT. Elsewhere in the game I just shrugged my shoulders at the numerous times I died at the hands of an NPC wielding a MAC-10. It would be ok, but he was 500 yards away and I had him in the optic of my sniper rifle. Other times I laughed as I got shot by a guy whose gun was pointed at something else, and chuckled at the amazingly non-realistic arcs the super-accurate barrage of grenades was flying in. Now OK, COD4 is amazing, its a brilliant game - but truthfully - the veteran mode is only for the truly patient. It does not make you feel skilful to beat it, because you know full well that the NPC's are always fully aware of where you are, even when hidden, and have perfect aim. SO the moment you peek round that corner you haven Expand
  5. FrankZ.
    Jan 7, 2008
    7
    It is short and very linear. It if very nicely made, good graphics and presentation, and it feels a lot like you are there. Unfortunately, there isn't really all that much depth. It's just a shooter. A very good shooter, but still just a shooter. It's not like STALKER where you have free roam in an entire world. It's not like HL2 where it adds physics and puzzles and It is short and very linear. It if very nicely made, good graphics and presentation, and it feels a lot like you are there. Unfortunately, there isn't really all that much depth. It's just a shooter. A very good shooter, but still just a shooter. It's not like STALKER where you have free roam in an entire world. It's not like HL2 where it adds physics and puzzles and stuff. It's just an ordinary shooter. One of the best I've played in a while but still... just a shooter. If that is what you want, then this is a good choice. If you are hoping for something new, then this isn't it. It's just like the other COD games. A linear campaign. I preferred Sniper Elite where at least you get missions that you can do in your own way. I would only give this a 5 or 6 for being so short, but the multiplayer makes it worthy of a 7. PC Zone UK - had a review I agree with. Although there score is too high. Expand
  6. EricL.
    Nov 2, 2009
    6
    I only play for the single-player campaigns, and for that I'd say it was surprisingly short. At the end I found myself waiting for the next Chapter to load, and being rather shocked to realize that was actually it. The experience, while it lasted, however, was extremely good and worthwhile.
  7. StevenD.
    Aug 16, 2008
    7
    All thats was wrong I found was that you only had 1 sniper scope. whats up with that.Co52 will come out and be like cod2..by being the same as in world war 2. all you guys need to do is update the game by new maps better wepons and attachments..and another thing is to be able to choos your suit for snipeing...cod4 is a great game but the maps suck besides Pipeline..you need to make maps All thats was wrong I found was that you only had 1 sniper scope. whats up with that.Co52 will come out and be like cod2..by being the same as in world war 2. all you guys need to do is update the game by new maps better wepons and attachments..and another thing is to be able to choos your suit for snipeing...cod4 is a great game but the maps suck besides Pipeline..you need to make maps were you open door close doors and be able to go up to a high point and in rooms to be stealthy not just a run and gun game..hope you make a new and better game like cod4 but updated and how i hope it will be thankxs. Expand
  8. Airiak
    Nov 17, 2007
    5
    Nothing new or innovative. Same gameplay we've seen three times already, just a new setting.
  9. JoeT.
    Nov 19, 2007
    7
    This is a graphically gorgeous game with perfect pacing in the missions and story lines (check out that alliteration). The CoD guys have given us another gorgeous war movie to live through. Unfortunately, if this one was a movie, it would only be fifteen minutes long... and it would have the same plot as the last full length feature WWII movie. It's a great console title, but it just This is a graphically gorgeous game with perfect pacing in the missions and story lines (check out that alliteration). The CoD guys have given us another gorgeous war movie to live through. Unfortunately, if this one was a movie, it would only be fifteen minutes long... and it would have the same plot as the last full length feature WWII movie. It's a great console title, but it just doesn't measure up on PC. It was too short and not original enough to warrant playing through again, no matter how many un-lockable mods they added. So, perfect cinematic, immersive mission pacing, and Wow!!! graphics notwithstanding, I can Expand
  10. notasgoodascrysis
    Nov 19, 2007
    6
    Ok this is a 'good' game with none of the flaws or annoyances that Bioshock had (another of this years highest rated FPS games). The cinematics and some of the graphics aver very well done, it has some immersive moments. As a game it's very short, it's very linear and it's very static. I've been spoiled by games that you actually 'interact with' Ok this is a 'good' game with none of the flaws or annoyances that Bioshock had (another of this years highest rated FPS games). The cinematics and some of the graphics aver very well done, it has some immersive moments. As a game it's very short, it's very linear and it's very static. I've been spoiled by games that you actually 'interact with' (not a new concept) but in COD4 everything is stuck to the ground. The maps look like basic geometry prettied up with decent textures and ok lighting but with static foliage and lack of physics in the details. This removes the believability of the game. However if you like to run and gun on rails this is about the best game for it, if you prefer to think and interact then get Crysis. Expand
  11. EliaM.
    Jun 25, 2008
    5
    i give it a five because there are many very dumb thing the creators put in, "kill Cam" whats the point in being a sniper and being all stealthy when there is a "kill cam" and the enemy can see where there shot was from. another thing, to much bullets to kill someone its like 5 shots, if you want a better game try "Delta Force: Black Hawk Down" love the game still and its not cheap like COD4
  12. NiyaziA.
    Jun 27, 2008
    5
    Not that good, gets boring quickly, too easy for people to hack, repetitive game play, COD 4 is good, but too overrated. TF2 is much better.
  13. NairnB.
    Jan 4, 2008
    7
    The main singleplayer game is just too short for it to be enthralling. Although the graphics and sound design are spot on, the sense of disbelief is ruined through poor voice accents and make belief locations; we are not stupid! I may be wrong but there has been a little bit of a backlash towards WW2. Personally, the real reason the original 2 in the series were so engaging was the player The main singleplayer game is just too short for it to be enthralling. Although the graphics and sound design are spot on, the sense of disbelief is ruined through poor voice accents and make belief locations; we are not stupid! I may be wrong but there has been a little bit of a backlash towards WW2. Personally, the real reason the original 2 in the series were so engaging was the player experienced real locations in a war that really happened. The insignificance of your stature in a war that big really brought it home the ubsurdity and horror of war! The success of the COD (call of duty) line has been from its online multiplayer add-on, and Infinity Ward try their luck here.The online experience is geared towards the console market which makes the pc conversion a little too easy for spray and pray/camper brigade. In addition, the maps are a little too small and confined which makes its a little hectic in bigger servers of 24 man plus. Although the game will most definatley become better as custom maps and modding emerge (spawn protection a must), as it stands from the actual release from Infinity Ward/Activision, its not that good. Could do better IMO. Expand
  14. AdamC.
    Nov 10, 2007
    6
    Ported from the 360, this game has small playing areas and no quick save. The game is short and the higher difficulty levels just make the game very frustrating rather than honing your skill. The storyline is very drab. The whole game is slick, with excellent cutscnenes, but the effort would have been much better spent elsewhere. Comparable to the first two releases in name only. Ported from the 360, this game has small playing areas and no quick save. The game is short and the higher difficulty levels just make the game very frustrating rather than honing your skill. The storyline is very drab. The whole game is slick, with excellent cutscnenes, but the effort would have been much better spent elsewhere. Comparable to the first two releases in name only. DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE. Expand
  15. Sep 22, 2011
    6
    This game actually blows ass. I tried it on the hardest difficulty setting and it wasn't bad, until I got to the TV station. WTF? Infinite respawning enemies, who spam grenades at you every 3 seconds. Why should I try and play it realistically when you give me no cover system and infinite enemies magically coming out of a door. The enemies just stream out of that door and never stopThis game actually blows ass. I tried it on the hardest difficulty setting and it wasn't bad, until I got to the TV station. WTF? Infinite respawning enemies, who spam grenades at you every 3 seconds. Why should I try and play it realistically when you give me no cover system and infinite enemies magically coming out of a door. The enemies just stream out of that door and never stop coming. I can sit back and snipe them and snipe them and kill again and again and they'll never lessen. Apparently, this TV station is inhabited by the world's population, and they've all turned to a life of terrorism apparently. There's no sense to this scenario. Why are terrorists infinite? Remember back to the good old Rainbow Six days, when a mission would have 6 or 7 tangos, max? The difficulty was in saving the hostage or killing them all without incurring a single casualty on your team. That was what was rewarding, not this nonsense of slaughtering hoards of faceless drones spawning out of a closet. **** you Infinity Ward and the half-track you rode in on. I changed it to normal difficulty and now I can play it without getting the urge to punch my monitor.

    And for a game that's supposed to be about modern warfare, there's no rate of fire selector or any ability to customize your weapon accessories. Crysis had those, and that's a game with ****ing giant robot squids. Why wouldn't you allow us to change our rate of fire? Assault rifles and submachine guns all have this feature, and you're trying to portray many of these weapons in the game. Sometimes a situation might call for semi auto mode, like sniping at long range, while another might require full auto mode. Giving players choices is a good thing, it's not something to be afraid of. But no, Infinity Ward doesn't believe in giving the player any power. That's why every door has to be opened by an AI companion, instead of by the player. Remember the good ol days of Wolfenstein 3D and Doom, when you could actually open doors yourself? COD4 also introduces new weapon accessories, like red dot and ACOG sights, as well as laser sights and silencers. The only problem is... you can't select which accessories to equip on your weapon. The game just sticks you with whatever random assortment it wants. You have no say in how your personal firearm will be customized. Customization of weapons is not difficult to implement in video games these days. Rainbow Six has done it on multiple iterations, as has Crysis. Customizing your gun generates a feeling of empowerment and individualization, and I simply don't understand why the developer felt that they should keep that away from the player. It's a baffling misstep and a shame, particularly because the weapon accessories themselves are quite well-designed and realized. The red dot sight looks great and feels authentic. The campaign is one tightly scripted sequence after another. While this allows for intense and dramatic moments like watching a helicopter crash and barely avoid killing Captain McMillan, it also leads to severely limited replayability. You know exactly what's going to happen every time because it's all scripted to happen at a certain time and place. So really, there's no reason to go back and replay the experience, as it'll be the same as the first time. While I enjoyed scripted events when they first arrived on the FPS in the form of Half-Life... it's gotten incredibly old. Half-Life came out in 1998. Then we had Medal of Honor Allied Assault, which was made by the team that later formed IW. I thought MoHAA was a great WW2 experience. Then they made Call of Duty, which was also a great scripted game. Then Call of Duty 2, which was more of the same. I figured CoD2 was where it probably needed to end, they'd done all they could. But now they're back, and once again we're treated to linear scripted missions. I've simply had enough. It's time to play in more dynamic combat environments, with more freedom and tactical options and intelligence. The campaign is also amazingly short, clocking in at around 7 to 8 hours. So yea, I'm not sure why everyone called it the best game ever. The presentation looks nice at first, but there's a lot that's retarded, and you'd think they'd have fixed their **** since this is the FOURTH game in the series.
    Expand
  16. Jul 5, 2011
    7
    This is my one of my favorite Modern Warfare games it has a good story great mechanics new guns though multiplayer is kind of a toss up its real fun and competitive and then there's hackers server transfers and tubers i don't mind campers the make the game more interesting/easier all in all good game and multiplayer could have been great but turned out to be a nightmare.
  17. Feb 22, 2012
    7
    Unlike its sequels this one is actually good, in the sense its not really realistic, but that's why they said just "Photo-realistic", not real life realistic...... the story i liked and it wasn't completely repetitive, and the maps were just fun to play, still i prefer Counter strike, and those games.....
    story-8, fun-7, upgrading, nothin just dlc's or extra maps they release for 15$, i
    Unlike its sequels this one is actually good, in the sense its not really realistic, but that's why they said just "Photo-realistic", not real life realistic...... the story i liked and it wasn't completely repetitive, and the maps were just fun to play, still i prefer Counter strike, and those games.....
    story-8, fun-7, upgrading, nothin just dlc's or extra maps they release for 15$, i hate DLC's just a way to get more money, creativity- isnt really their
    Expand
  18. Dec 10, 2011
    7
    THE highlight of the single player was the last mission, Mile High Club, which when played on the veteran difficulty turned out to be one of the most enjoyable single player level I have played in recent years. Apart from that, the single player missions are just copy-paste from older CoDs with new graphics and fancy weapons. Maybe that AC-130 shooting game is something new, but I didn'tTHE highlight of the single player was the last mission, Mile High Club, which when played on the veteran difficulty turned out to be one of the most enjoyable single player level I have played in recent years. Apart from that, the single player missions are just copy-paste from older CoDs with new graphics and fancy weapons. Maybe that AC-130 shooting game is something new, but I didn't like it that much. Multiplayer is definitely worth playing as it can be fun at times, but be ready to be kicked quite a few times if you're remotely good at this game as you can get kills through the wall quite easily and immature admins kick you for wallhacking. But that's just the community so I'm not taking any scores off because of that. I wish they fixed the killstreak system as you will spend ages sitting in the corner trying to get rid of that helicopter call you have, or you could just waste it.
    If you have played previous CoD games, the single player will probably disappoint you, but multiplayer has some fun elements to it. For someone who has never played CoD or FPS games, this game could provide you with a lot of fun.
    Expand
  19. Mar 7, 2012
    7
    Very solid game. The single player is fun but short.

    The multiplayer is also pretty fun. However, considering the high player count on servers on the PC version, it feels too congested sometimes, and the game play degenerates into an absolute spamfest. Regardless, it has its moments and is one of the better Call of Duty games out there. It has a lot of good maps and weapon selections.
  20. Mar 7, 2012
    7
    A very good multi player game, but highly overrated by the media and the fan boys that clog up the servers. If I had to play any FPS at all, this wouldn't be my first choice, but it is not a bad title by any means.
  21. May 28, 2013
    6
    The last good Call of Duty. The Campaign is good, if a little short. The multiplayer is fantastic, just a shame about the fanboys. And the graphics are good quality and nice to look at. It's all downhill from here.
  22. AlS.
    Dec 3, 2007
    5
    (PC version) Single player so-so. Still the same linear work around with same-o "solider pick up that grenade launcher..." , but fun nevertheless. MP absolutely stinks. The game is chaotic, and mostly mindless jumping around in 2- by-2 meters maps
  23. RobL
    Nov 15, 2008
    6
    Very... VERY shallow and repetative. Poorly designed weapons and character models, tiny maps, sketchy physics engine. The single player was short and depressingly linear. AI wasnt dumb, it was so bad that one could call it "pre-intelligence". Multiplayer was also short and shallow, no real tactics used. gameplay was laggy and glitchy. This game is a port. A complete disappointment for me.
  24. NM
    Dec 3, 2008
    6
    Very hyped game, and it does not deserve it! The CoD series where great from CoD 1 (CoD UO) to CoD 2. Better gameplay back then, more fun, easier, and more balaced gameplay. It's too bad they only focus on the graphics now days, and dont give a damn about the gameplay feeling.
  25. JamesL.
    Feb 13, 2008
    6
    This game has the juiciness and thrill of Gears Of War: Just a pretty-looking generic FPS. And just like Gears Of War, it's well over hyped, as Oliver D. states. Sure, they got the cut scenes and such down, but this is a game, not a movie.
  26. Damien
    Nov 14, 2007
    5
    The game feels like a professional mod for Call of Duty 2. The lack of a cover system makes the game feel incredibly out of date (it's also an insult as you can CLEARLY see the enemy taking cover). the amount of enemies you face is utterly ridiculous. and the painfully short length of the singleplayer tops it all off.
  27. JohnH.
    Dec 23, 2007
    6
    Rating the single player mode. The graphics and cinematic effects are awesome but I knew that was to expect from the previous games. Also what I suspected from the previous games and the very same thing I don't like about this game is that the game demands you to advance all time. If you don't advance, camp for a few seconds, more enemies will just take the places of the ones Rating the single player mode. The graphics and cinematic effects are awesome but I knew that was to expect from the previous games. Also what I suspected from the previous games and the very same thing I don't like about this game is that the game demands you to advance all time. If you don't advance, camp for a few seconds, more enemies will just take the places of the ones you just killed. You can and should more or less rush through this game, only shoot the enemies in front of you and in that way prevent respawns. The game is very fun, cinematic but not a good repressentation if realistic modern warfare. Expand
  28. ShawnL.
    Feb 23, 2008
    7
    The single play sucks pretty bad. The NPC are just plain dumb they keep saying area cleared when it
  29. TomV.
    Feb 25, 2008
    6
    An average shooter, though I've yet to play multiplayer. Singleplayer was an often frustrating experience, something just didn't flow like the other games did. I enjoyed 2 a lot more. Another gripe is that a lot of keys I like to use in FPS games were not recognised by the game, and being left-handed, WASD was a little awkward to use. On the positive side, it looks quite pretty An average shooter, though I've yet to play multiplayer. Singleplayer was an often frustrating experience, something just didn't flow like the other games did. I enjoyed 2 a lot more. Another gripe is that a lot of keys I like to use in FPS games were not recognised by the game, and being left-handed, WASD was a little awkward to use. On the positive side, it looks quite pretty (though it's hard to be impressed after playing Crysis), and the weapons have a good kick to them. Expand
  30. Warmonger
    Nov 13, 2007
    6
    Nice game but it's very disapointing to see that the rifles and small arms haven't really changed that much in 60+years (small clips and slow to reload) these are modern weapons??good but not great!
  31. PhilH.
    Nov 16, 2007
    6
    My main problem with this game is not so much the engine or the visuals, I mean it lacks a cover button but that's not the end of the world. No my problem is that, a couple of levels notwithstanding, it's so incredibly stupid. Most of the battles are conducted at a range of about six inches and the enemy for much of the game just spawns out of sight and runs at you, so My main problem with this game is not so much the engine or the visuals, I mean it lacks a cover button but that's not the end of the world. No my problem is that, a couple of levels notwithstanding, it's so incredibly stupid. Most of the battles are conducted at a range of about six inches and the enemy for much of the game just spawns out of sight and runs at you, so essentially most of the set piece battles are just like a game of whack-a-mole. Any sense of realism to the plot or story goes right out the window because the fights are just silly, at one point I was sent to rescue a tank, during which mission I blew up four enemy tanks and gunned down about a million people. How can I give a rat's arse about a plot to save the crew of one tank when I've just wasted enough people to fill a football stadium? Honestly I can't see how this game is rating so highly because in terms of gameplay it's a step down in evolution from Rainbow Six: Vegas, in fact I'd say R6: Vegas has more going for it. Finally I'd also just say I resent the fact this is the most expensive PC game I've ever bought, with an RRP much higher than usual, and it's also one of the shortest single player games, and it's not even like it took much effort to make considering it's not even using a new engine. Expand
  32. Jun 26, 2014
    6
    Honestly I couldn't even pick this one out of the billion entries of this series if they were in a line-up, and I only played 2 of the series. Smooth controls.... it's a shooter with a bunch of pricks playing online and some kind of ridiculous story for the 40 minute, linear campaign. I guess it was fun enough.
  33. Apr 14, 2013
    7
    Bueno, la verdad es que este juego disfrute mucho la campaña single player, pero en serio? 92? creo que exageraron, no hay mucha variedad de armas, las pantallas son muy poco originales, y el voice acting te duerme. Este juego esta muy bueno pero no creo que meresca ni mas de 85, 7 esta bien para este juego, la verdad este no se porque esta muy over rated...pero se los recomiendo, loBueno, la verdad es que este juego disfrute mucho la campaña single player, pero en serio? 92? creo que exageraron, no hay mucha variedad de armas, las pantallas son muy poco originales, y el voice acting te duerme. Este juego esta muy bueno pero no creo que meresca ni mas de 85, 7 esta bien para este juego, la verdad este no se porque esta muy over rated...pero se los recomiendo, lo unicoque la verdad odie de este el alto nivel de linealidad de este juego, la muy, pero muy, extremadamente muy poca libertad que posees en este juego. Si les gusta los juegos de guerra, FPS pero en la actualidad, este juego es para ustedes! Expand
  34. Dec 17, 2014
    7
    This is an alright game

    IF killing people is your thing, only buy this...

    Overall, bad gameplay and one type of enemy with interactive movie action
  35. May 27, 2015
    6
    I assume this is all about the multi player since the single player campaign sucks. Enemies keep coming in bunches; their AI is dumb as hell and most missions are quite easy unless for this Chernobyl mission which was too hard. Only positive aspect are the weapons. Somehow I never liked the CoD franchise (CoD 1, CoD 2, and this Cod 4).
  36. Feb 3, 2015
    7
    Decent military styled shooter that came after Countrer-Strike's success. Unfortunately the multiplayer experience is imbalanced and can't hold a candle to the Counter-Strike eSports scene.
  37. Apr 15, 2011
    0
    This is a great game I never get Tired of playing it. I also enjoy the single player mode it seems the people putting out games now are trying to take that single player mode away. We as gamers should not let that happen. Call of Duty 4 gets a solid 10.0 for being a good multiplayer and SINGLE PLAYER game. Keep talking about the single player mode people if you don't it will be gone and noThis is a great game I never get Tired of playing it. I also enjoy the single player mode it seems the people putting out games now are trying to take that single player mode away. We as gamers should not let that happen. Call of Duty 4 gets a solid 10.0 for being a good multiplayer and SINGLE PLAYER game. Keep talking about the single player mode people if you don't it will be gone and no good gamer worth there salt wants that to happen. I know I am old school I miss those arcades from back in the day. Good fun and friends then! Collapse
Metascore
92

Universal acclaim - based on 40 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 40 out of 40
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 40
  3. Negative: 0 out of 40
  1. A beautifully crafted first-person shooter, but without a compelling context. How much does that matter? To me, a little. Not a lot, but it nags. [Dec 2007, p.73]
  2. 94
    Though the single-player lacks length, the multiplayer should keep you invested in COD4 for the long winter. This is a truly fantastic multiplayer offering that's as deep as any other online game available.
  3. It’s absolutely relentless in its assault on the senses and never lets up until the last trigger has been squeezed. The multiplayer is even better, with the perks and weapon upgrades acting as a balance to the lack of vehicles.