User Score
4.4

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 678 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. Nov 3, 2014
    0
    First of all, I want to remind everyone that this game still runs on that 10 year old engine, seriously. OK and now onto the game itself, while I haven't ecountered any lag issues for now I'll like to remind everyone that this game DOESN'T HAVE DEDICATED SERVERS OR MOD TOOLS. With the new jumping mechanics, there will be potential for great mods but yep, they're not here. Also, all of this new Exo-suit and whatever **** really is just a rip-off of Crysis and Titanfall. Expand
  2. Nov 3, 2014
    1
    Short campaign. We beat it in 4 hours. Mediocre multiplayer. Seems like the creator of these games has stopped caring or something. Please put more effort into the next game. This isn't worth $60. Give to charity instead.
  3. Nov 3, 2014
    0
    More aim-assist casual no-skill, no brains, garbage... A game that plays itself for you like every COD before it. Nothing has changed. It's the same COD as always, and not worth a cent.
  4. Nov 3, 2014
    0
    Where do i start this? Same game, different year and differet paintjob but nothing new. Yes, not even this time around anything new, it's just the same old same old. This game is still even running on the infamous id tech III/quake 3 engine which is from 1999! Is it possible to get AAA games that are 16 years old? Well, apparently it is :( These ppl just will continue to milk on clueless ppl and obviously the clueless ppl will continue on throwing cash at these greedy publishers.

    Here is something you can do though. Instead of going out and buying the new call of duty, how about you do differently this year? You don't go out and buy the same **** so that games will start to get better, because they don't try to mimic this cashcow anymore and therefore don't get ruined and we get rid from this stagnation that is bugging games thesedays. Yes, call of duty is the biggest responsible for us having nowadays stagnation in our gaming community. We don't get varied games because they all try to mimic call of duty. Now i know we don't like that, so therefore you could just be and not go out and get the new call of duty this year. I promise you, it will pay off, because then we will get some totally new game, nothing to do with call of duty, that is gonna blow us out from the water. Totally innovative, totally crazy fun.

    Don't buy this.
    Expand
  5. Nov 3, 2014
    1
    It's better than ghosts but then again, that wasn't hard to begin with. Same old engine (it is still the ancient id tech engine) still the shallow SP campaign, still the narrow corridor. dumb AI and "you are leaving the mission area if you take 5 steps in direction game doesn't want you to go in.

    COD and Activision do not deserve the money they will make on this.
    1/10, still has ways
    to go, would not buy. Expand
  6. Nov 3, 2014
    0
    Graphic evolution XD maybe for a super nintendo game but this game looks and feels like a 70 dollar piece of **** ... PLS save your money and dont buy this game its so poor in gameplay and the singleplayer is useless and the story never starts going somewhere its the same story every military shooter has no point of playing this story. Also the multiplayer is less fun even with high kdr you can kill 5 people the you get kill with an easy 1 shot from behind and well its just like **** this game i quit there are many better shooter games to play Expand
  7. Nov 4, 2014
    0
    Not supporting dedicated servers is an insult to the superiority that is the PC master race. Maybe console gamers can handle the variable latency issues, but I won't.
  8. Nov 4, 2014
    0
    It already has hackers in it. Only good thing about this game is that it is not a browser game like bf games and it does not have nurse class so you will not be revived in front of the enemy all the time. And resawns are fast so you can acctualy play the game nad not wait. But everything else is really bad. Instead of improving the game and making it more gun vs gun they add even more broken stuff, some parkur broken movement, ugly guns, ugly animations, pathetic sounds, terible PC optimization, knfing is still not removed from the game. the sniper scope looks like a joke. no more dual render scopes or scopes like in mw2. now we have these pathetic looking scopes.
    everything about this game sucks. and of course huge amount of cheaters and hackers is to be expected since they do nothing about it
    Expand
  9. Nov 4, 2014
    1
    At first I thought that there was something wrong with the game settings since I have been hearing how great the graphics were. I had everything cranked, even with supersampling and I could still see muddy textures and terrible aliasing. I couldn't help but wonder if this is a AAA title or a FTP MP game.
    Graphics aside, this is a corridor shooter that isn't worth the money. I feel cheated
    :(
    Last time I buy a CoD game.....ever.
    Expand
  10. Nov 3, 2014
    3
    This game has no changes in the visual components, the graphics are very horrible, the characters are a plastic dolls. Not to mention that the game engine does not support tessellation. For 2 years of Development SS the game has small changes.....
  11. Nov 3, 2014
    0
    bad ping, lags, FPS drops. Overall a bad running game, I think!
    But consoles people play quietly, and PC as usual in hand, the game as you want to receive.
  12. Nov 3, 2014
    10
    This is probably the best Call of Duty since MW2. I know it's early to make such a sweeping statement but the game just oozes brilliance on a number of levels. It is streets ahead of Ghosts in every aspect and really puts Infinity Ward to absolute shame. Even Treyarch need to raise their game for next year. Sledgehammer have essentially taken the best aspects of past games and fused them into their very own interpretation along with delivering their own brand of unique ideas.

    The gameplay is fast, the guns are incredible fun, the matches flow superbly and every second is really enjoyable. The maps are simply stunning to look at and their designs & layouts make way for some frantic action.

    The optimisation for PC which has been heavily questioned after Ghosts and Sledgehammer's silence in the media; is actually riddled with depth and all the key elements to compliment your rig. I really did not expect much but they really have hit the nail on the head from a technical standpoint.

    I've not enjoyed COD since the Black Ops days but this is a game that really rejuvenates my desire for the franchise. After the pitiful Ghosts last year; this game simply had to deliver and it truly has. SHG took a risk for their first outing and it really paid off in what could be a genre-defining title.
    Expand
  13. Nov 4, 2014
    0
    There is something about it that is badly aged. On a modern rig, it just looks a bit flat. Anyway, BAM, unskippable cut scenes starts this review off at 5/10 for commiting acts of development crime. Forcing me to watch this garbage with my precious time instead of playing anything. Then when I actually get to the game, it plays it for me. I was lining up a face shot and my team blew him away, so I selected a new target, and he was blown away. So I figured there is no point in actually playing the game. It is like a cutscene where I control the camera. Then I seen people prancing around on jet packs, and I thought man this game sucks. It will just be a spray fest. It is one true stinker of a game and even if it was free, the bandwidth would still be too much to pay. Expand
  14. Nov 3, 2014
    9
    Count me as surprised, every COD launch since Black Ops as been a disaster. Poorly optimized pieces of garbage pretty much. I've been playing AW for a few hours now and suffered from 0 frame lag. The game runs fluidly and feels well balanced. The hitboxes seem to be spot on and honestly I was a bit concerned the new jumping mechanism would be OP but its not it honestly just adds a new dimension to the gameplay. The character customization is pretty awesome and overall I can see myself putting hundreds of hours into the multiplayer. Expand
  15. Nov 3, 2014
    5
    Not horrible... but not that good either. If you liked Ghosts then you will ignore the bad map design, lagging, and monotony of this new title. The only word that keeps coming to mind is "meh." A lot of the new mechanics seem fun at first, until you realize they are almost more of a liability than not. Nothing has changed to drove people away from the corner hugging circle camping that dominates so many other COD titles. I may consider changing my score as weapon unlocks either reiconfroce this monotony (lowering my score) or overcomes it (raising my score). Expand
  16. Nov 3, 2014
    8
    Never been more ashamed to be a PC gamer. Call of Duty finally gives us what we want with an extremely robust amount of settings, dedicated servers, a new engine, etc etc. People aren't even giving it a chance, and are instead voting 0 based on what they hear or what they think they know. Half the 0 reviews think that the game runs on the same engine.. do your research, it's a new engine by a new studio. These reviews are the epitome of what's wrong with Metacritic, where everyone who voted 0 on games either has a 0 or a 10 for all their games. Pathetic, broken system. As someone who's actually played the game, I can tell you that the game is fresh, fun, and definitely the Call of Duty experience that's translated well over onto PC, especially with a movement system that adds enough variety that will have PC players feeling at home. It's not GOTY material, and the story isn't as great as I was hoping, but I'd be lying if I said this wasn't a good game, and I'm going to give it the review it deserves. Not a 10 or a 0 to pad the whole user score to what I personally think it deserves to be at. Grow up people. Expand
  17. Nov 4, 2014
    0
    No dedicated servers. Same terrible netcode. Avoid at all costs. Until they reinstate dedicated server support for this series the online competitive multiplayer is officially dead due to horrible lag. 0/10.
  18. Nov 3, 2014
    8
    I find it so funny how the haters are desperately trying to bump this game down, and looking at all the arguments makes me smile :)

    Please Metacritic, do something about these spammers.

    The game it'self looks much better than any COD as of yet. The gameplay is the good old COD, but different enough to make it a "newer" experience.
  19. Nov 4, 2014
    2
    * LvL 50 Multiplayer review *

    Random? Gun Damage - Two enemies at the same distance, one needs 15 bullets before he dies and the other one dies in 5 bullets, really no clue how this is possible but it happens ALL THE TIME. It really feels like bullets randomly deal between 10%-200% damage

    Netcode? - 90% of my deaths feel like I died instantly with no chance to retaliate, my last
    death I got shot from about 50 meters by a silenced SMG and I died instantly. When I try this, I need to hit a full mag.... Ragequited pretty hard.

    Guns - There are only 4 *meta* guns worth using, the rest is just terrible. All shotguns are really bad ( need 2x more range to work ), sometimes need 5 shots at 5 meters distance while enemy needs 3 bullets with his ak12. Snipers need 2-3 hits to kill someone, and it's already hard enough to hit people when they are jumping around like monkeys.

    Knifing - I removed the knife keybinding.... I tried to knife people 500+ times and maybe got 3 knife kills out of it. Enemy has to be either in kissing range, to your left or BEHIND you.....

    Same Call of Duty, but now with more mobility and lasers for $60...
    Expand
  20. Nov 4, 2014
    4
    Unlike others, I'll explain why this game is bad.

    1) Netcode. It's the same as all previous CoDs, peer-to-peer "servers". Horrible latency causes people to seemingly die in 1 shot, while others get a huge advantage. It's their horrible netcode that tries to balance ping with play. It never works and never will.

    2) Same old stuff, new look. Only now we can call it "CoD:
    Titanfall edition". If you're looking for a skilled team game that takes good aim and situational awareness, this isn't it. People just fly around guns blazing all the time.

    3) "Classic" modes, where they take out the exo suit movement, brings it back down a notch to the skilled play area. If this mode catches on, it could make the experience much better.

    4) Posistional audio is horrible. On multiple tested headsets, including the Logitech G930 and the Psyko Audio 5.1 real sound sets, there is virtually no rear channels. Good luck hearing anyone behind you.

    5) Graphics are ok, but nothing new by any means. I play 4k with 3x GTX 980's in SLI. The game itself runs crisp and smooth but nothing to get excited over.

    So there you have it. Pretty much the same problems that plague older releases.....and why Acitivision / whoever makes it this year make no attempts to fix it is beyond my reasoning. Horrible netcode, monkeys flying around everywhere, same ole' same ole'.

    And for the love of buddah do not bother trying to snipe. It's like trying to swat a fly buzzing around your skull with a postage stamp.
    Expand
  21. Nov 4, 2014
    4
    Let me preface this review by stating I'm in my thirties and losing my reaction time faster than my hair. However I have played every iteration of COD and feel slightly more qualified to comment than a multitude of adolescents who claims this is the "Best COD ever" having only played Ghosts before AW.

    After the utter shambles that was COD Ghosts I wasn't expecting much from Advanced
    Warfare but like a moth to a flame I dutifully purchased AW hoping I wouldn't get burned.

    After merely minutes in single player it was immediately apparent this was a vast improvement on Ghosts. The game actually ran properly - no stuttering in the menu, the mouse actually moved where you wanted it to and it didn't take a fortnight to load each mission. Add to that the fact they've added a multitude of PC specific options in the menu and so far so good!

    Fast forward a couple of hours and I was really enjoying single player. It's a decent storyline, it looks good (as good as this engine can look) and sounds great. Maybe this years COD isn't going to be so bad after all?!?

    Then I tried multiplayer. On dear... Let me use an analogy - Take a room full of young children who suffer from hyperactivity. Sit them down and feed them copious amounts of full fat Coke, chocolate, and sweets with plenty of E numbers. Now let them outside to play nicely... Yeah chaos ensues! Some kids are running around in circles, some are climbing all over boxes, some are in trees, some keep sneaking up on you and kicking you in the shins. It's complete and utter chaos! That's pretty much multiplayer in Advanced Warfare.

    Any sense of strategy or tactics goes out the window the seconds that countdown hits zero. It's very much every man for himself as players bounce round the map in circles. Lining up a shot? Wait he's now bounced super gummy bear style behind you and stuck his first through your skull. Ok so you slowly get used to the fact it's no longer a case of looking in the "usual" spots and instead you spend just as much time looking at the sky as you do around corners but hey it's "different"!

    You should also note that while developers have confirmed dedicated servers are coming, quite why they're coming after release date I'm not sure, until then you're at the mercy of P2P. One minute you'll have four bars, the next one bar, and repeat..

    All in all it's a great single player campaign but, for this reviewer at least, a poor multiplayer game.
    Expand
  22. Nov 4, 2014
    0
    Once again a AAA studio has people in their PR department making Review accounts that spam the same review across the board cross platform and have never reviewed any other game, always giving it a 10. I can rarely trust games on their merits now a days because the reviews are so often falsified.
  23. Nov 7, 2014
    4
    As we all should know by this point, buying any Call of Duty release during it's launch window is a gamble. I decided to plunk down $60 for Advanced Warfare because I was feeling nostalgic for the online play from earlier titles, and the early critic reviews were surprisingly good, so I decided to give it a try. After spending the whole day with the game, I can tell you I found it to have been a very, very disappointing purchase--and I am again bitterly reminded of the collusion and softballing that has become so common between developers and game review publishers.

    The game seems to have the ultimate potential to be as fun and enjoyable as some of the best Call of Cuty titles prior. With a little more work, the Exo-Suit mechanics like super-jumping and dodging might a nice fresh spin to the multiplayer. But after 3 years of working on this title in the 10-year-old Call of Duty engine (which you would think should be fairly well mastered at this point, and less resource-intensive relative to modern engines), developer Sledgehammer Games has somehow managed a complete failure in performance optimization to the point where it's baffling how such a low standard would have been allowed by the publisher for release. The very same computer which allowed me to play Black Ops 2 during it's launch window with all graphical settings maxed out, at a solid 60 fps, experiences poor performance, stuttering, and infuriating input lag--even when playing Advanced Warfare on medium-to-low settings with all advanced graphical features turned off. These performance issues are then compounded with extremely poor network performance with the P2P server system used by the game--again, something that is baffling to me given that it's been mastered several times before in the same engine--the background that several other Call of Duty games using a P2P system should have produced for Sledgehammer to draw upon and improve upon, but somehow they have released with a system that is producing the absolute worst connection lag I have ever experienced in a Call of Duty title on any platform.

    Between the performance issues, input lag on your mouse and controls during play, and the absolutely stark-terrible connection lag, it is nearly impossible to feel at all competitive in a multiplayer match even as a seasoned Call of Duty player. The competitive thrill is really the sole purpose and source of enjoyment for these titles, so without that, the game is just an exercise in futility and frustration. This is really the crux of my poor review for the game. Call of Duty games, to me, are all about the excitement of competitive twitch/tactical shooting--where you give up having the most impressive graphics or the biggest maps in exchange for great performance, low lag, and fantastic, tight controls--the things needed for purity of contest. If you take these few things away, the game becomes utterly worthless.

    Sledgehammer Games was working on a 3-year development cycle with access to some of the best budgets, talent, resources, and background knowledge to make a game using a 10-year old engine that was completely unambitious on it's face. And in spite of all this, all they could managed to push out when their release date rolled around was a glorified open beta with more issues than can be suffered to have fun playing. The only Call of Duty title that was released in a worse state was the infamous 'Ghosts,' which released to a chorus of bad reviews and was thoroughly called out as the poor effort it was by gamers and critics alike. Somehow, Advanced Warfare, a game similarly devoid of standards, seems to have been given a near-unanimous pass on everything that's wrong with it by all the mainstream critics--and even has a surprisingly (and perhaps even suspiciously) high level of positive player reviews on Steam.
    Expand
  24. Nov 10, 2014
    3
    Better than COD's from last 3-4 years but that doesn't mean game is good. Didn't have problems with performance but graphics is still pretty bad even in ultra settings, specially trees which looks like in games 10 years ago (watch trees etc. when you descend from the cliff). They did a lot of effort to change gameplay from standard COD which improve game a little. Most annoying thing in campaign are long story sequences which are impossible to skip. Probably feature which is there just to make more "playing" hours. Expand
  25. Nov 6, 2014
    2
    While this is an 'Okay' game, its not worth the 60€ they are asking.
    The amount of bugs in the multiplayer system is insane, and the P2P connection (no dedicated servers) is one big **** up on their side. It's laggy and the game crashes, the server are so unstable right now it's just to laugh at.
    Gameplay is just about the same as all other CoD games out there, with a few improvements..
  26. Nov 5, 2014
    0
    All these people who give this game 10/10 must be either stupid or be activision employee...
    How can you say that this game the best cos since mw2?! I have spend hundreds of hours in mw2 and bo1 and i have to say that aw sucks!!! Once again this game is nothing more then chaotic bullet spiter crap...
  27. Nov 5, 2014
    0
    This is the worst CoD ever released yet. Actually every single CoD been absolutely garbage. Don't waste your money or time on this trash and play something that superior like Battlefield. No Dedicated servers, aim assist, decade old engine... wtf.
  28. Nov 3, 2014
    5
    Technically, the game is well optimized but the multiplayer does suffer from some occasional network stuttering. It's in a far better state than Ghosts though, that's for sure. Single player is as short as always and pretty meh. Gameplay is CoD but slightly faster with some mobility and exosuit techniques, and with a lot of weapons and customization. I think it's appropriate to compare it to Titanfall now, since that's the direction they are moving in, and I'd say that Titanfall is definitely more fun. CoD:AW does not have as good and memorable map design as Titanfall, movement is much slower, graphics are worse and of course there are no Titans. Also the "parkour" in CoD is quite a bit clunkier than Titanfall's, you will smash into walls constantly while boosting and overall it doesn't feel as cool and organic as Titanfall's. Yes, it has a ton of weapons, but most of them are bad and nobody ever uses them. In conclusion, CoD:AW is a step in the right direction and an improvement in some areas, but I don't expect it will hold my interest any longer than Titanfall since it's overall weaker, and they're essentially charging 100$ for this. It's definitely not worth that amount of money in my opinion. Expand
  29. Nov 3, 2014
    5
    The multiplayer brings nothing new to Call of Duty apart from quicker movement and slightly more verticality. Every other mechanic is the same, there STILL aren't any dedicated servers so your connection will never be optimal. The game is basically what Titanfall would have been if it was an unfinished release where you wouldn't be able to run on walls, and titans didn't exist. All of that being said... its call of duty. Its still fun. Somehow. Expand
  30. Nov 3, 2014
    10
    Excellent title on the PC. Best COD imo since MW2 - maps are brilliant, new mechanics feel fresh, and the whole game runs like a charm. Highly recommended.
  31. Nov 3, 2014
    9
    Hello everyone, first of all I'd like to say that it's the first time I ever write a review. I usually don't but now I just had to, why? because it amaze me how many people rate this game 0/10 without having it, or even seeing any gameplay or anything. So here's my review! (and sorry for my bad english).

    I played a few hours, both a bit of multiplayer and singleplayer so my experience
    in this game isn't very big. I don't usually like call of duty but I had hope in this one because it doesn't seem to be a lame other copy of older cods. I saw some gameplays and trailers and I found the idea of exo skeletons and futuristic theme in call of duty quite promising.
    Of course I was not very confident, it is still a call of duty and it's Activision blabla.... you know the story...
    BUT! It's sledgehammer who did the developpement, a new studio that never did a whole game themselve, so maybe it will be innovative? Here's what my first impressions were:

    Singleplayer: I did not play much and therefor doesn't know much about the campain, i must admit. But the graphics were quite a surprise for me. First I was watching some screenshots of the game and I was like "Damn it must be a bit photoshopped or something" then on my computer I launched the game, near to max settings 1440p and the only things I can say: Amazing, some says that the engine is old and stuff, but really it doesn't seem so. I played the game and I can guarantee that the graphics of this game is really more than acceptable, okay textures, great lightings, really nice animations and good modelisation. The sounds of weapons may still not beat the quality of the latest battlefield but talking about environment sounds, there's a good job done here.
    I'll talk about the gameplay in the multiplayer section. For the plot of the story, I don't know much about it at the moment so I can't really talk about it.

    Multiplayer: I guess that's what you guys want more in this game, multiplayer. So I played a bit, against players and bots (yes there are bots and private game options).
    I'll start with the gameplay: One of the most nervous fps around, of course I can understand it is not the taste of everyone but I quite enjoyed it, maps are well designed, you can jump high and get to some points of the map to gain some visibility or just snipe some people, you can dash down and smash someone, slide, side dashes, etc. Many people say it's a titanfall ripoff, I played titanfall and trust me, it does not feel the same as titanfall at all ( and advanced warfare was already in developpement when titanfall came out so...). It's really fun, but a bit hard to manoevre. For the weapons I haven't tested them all, there are a lot of funny gadgets and weapons, that's all I can say, oh and the melee attack is a huge punch that sends your victim to the skies, if this is not cool, I don't know what is.

    game modes: This game has casual modes and competitive modes (esport) so everyone should be pleased, an accessible game for anybody and a good game to master and play competitively for the veterans.

    Didn't want to read all my review? no problem, here's the good and cons:

    Goods:
    - Good graphics
    - Solid and fast gameplay
    - Maps are a bit more open than in other call of duties (due to mobility)
    - Innovation compared to other call of duties
    Cons:
    - Expensive (ofc)
    - Too fast for some people I guess

    That's all, I initially put 8/10 because it's not an absolute perfect game but it's really good and I'll add a point to make cry all the haters that rates this game so bad without knowing anything so 9/10. (sorry again for my english).
    Expand
  32. Nov 4, 2014
    4
    The campaign is good but I have to say the graphics are terrible for a next gen title. The multiplayer is again just repackaged with a few different game modes. The jumping around is cool at first but gets old. There are sniper weapons but I have yet to find a spot to use one. Multiplayer is geared towards run and gunners only in my opinion
  33. Nov 8, 2014
    3
    They copied so much, from other franchises, that the game is not unique. It is very clear that this game is a quick cash in. Very short list of other games they copied, HAWX (story line with one or two minor changes), Ghost Recon Future Soldier (every gadget, in the game), battlefield 2142 (hover tank and battle linked ui), Frontlines fuel of war (first example of drones in games)... All of the listed games are better than this one! Just not worth 60 dollars. Expand
  34. Nov 7, 2014
    0
    No anti-cheat (WTF they use brains?) =>
    every can download ESP or Aim 4 free =>
    Hackers everywhere in every game =>
    Multiplayer is DEAD, really DEAD
    u can hack everything in this game, like weapons, cloth, lvl etc
    too bad 4 multiplayer shooter
  35. Nov 3, 2014
    10
    Lots of hate here, as usual. :)

    I used to dislike COD, but I have definitely enjoyed my time with this one, at least with regards to the single player. Have not tried the multiplayer yet but cannot imagine it to be decidedly "crap", probably not worth it to grab the season pass (@ 40€) though.

    Graphics and aesthetics are great, not top, but great. Gunplay is very good and set pieces
    and pacing is very good. Thumbs up. Would probably rate it 7 or 8/10 if it wasnt for the vast amount of ridiculous 0's on here. Expand
  36. Nov 6, 2014
    4
    to make it short: it is the best CoD in years, those new mechanics are interesting, though nothing new or special... overall it is a slightly better CoD than the last dozen, BUT, IT REMAINS A MEDIOCRE SHOOTER! graphics are slightly more pleasing to the eye than CoD 4 (MW1)...which is a 10 year old game, mind you. "new" mechanics are nothing but copies of mechanics seen first in "Crysis" and "Titanfall" - they are fun and breath new life in MP games, nevertheless, it remains a CoD ...I'll probably NEVER understand why they even bother to implement "different" guns... they ALL shoot the same!

    CoD isn't really a FPS - it's a reflex test ... basically, whoever shoots first, kills. aiming is optional, something like "skill" pretty much too, IMHO.

    I pirated the game for testing purposes - I am NOT going to buy it and after playing about 50% of the campaign, I deleted it (as I do with ALL games I pirate - either I buy, or I delete and in the case of CoD AW, it was latter).

    as I said in the beginning of my review: it is the_best CoD of 10 years ... and it still is ****
    Expand
  37. Nov 3, 2014
    10
    I have tried the multiplayer, outstanding graphics and performance. As I thought the graphics are similar to Black Ops series and I like it. Ghosts was disaster, this changes everything, realy.
  38. Nov 6, 2014
    2
    mw4 rehash we have here same terrible online lag same graphics issues same old **** different year no support no anything poor effort from sledgehammer
  39. Nov 7, 2014
    4
    A simple re-skin of the previous CODs. I cannot fathom how critics give this game almost perfect scores. Its not a bad game for sure, but its just the same as before with a double-jump. The campaign is OK but really predictable. MP is the same as before, and you might like that if it's your cup of tea.
  40. Nov 7, 2014
    4
    I bought this only for multiplayer, completely don't care about the campaign. After 10 hours I can say multiplayer would be quite good with these new movement/exo features, new weapons like some laser gun, single shot sniper rifle, customizable kill streaks (for example killstreak can last longer or be more powerfull, but it requires more points to earn it), but it's ruined by unstable online service - have difficulties connecting to it since launch and keep getting disconnected while playing.
    The P2P hosting is back (lovely host migration pause), so every game I see people with high pings and most of the time lag compensation puts me on huge disadvantage resulting in losing each confrontation. I shot enemy 2-3 times and killcams shows me not even shooting once.
    I find it frustrating that these people can spend millions on Kevin Spacey and advertising, but don't want to spend anything on server infrastructure. What this game really needs is lobby system that matches people based on their location and then assigns lobby to the closest free server.
    To sum it up, it's just another COD that will last one season (with PC version that might actually be one winter) and will be forgotten quickly.
    Expand
  41. Nov 8, 2014
    0
    Activision lied to their customers by saying there would be dedicated servers and released the game without them. When asked for comment about ti they basically told their customers to **** themselves.
  42. Nov 3, 2014
    9
    Metacritic needs to check the reviews, take note that the only negative review at the time of this review is lowering the score by a long shot and it is completely unjustified.It is giving people a false indication of the games actual would be score without people joking around. THIS IS A REVIEW SITE for people to know if products are worth their money or not. Personally I find that COD has caught up to the modern age of FPS and has finally added something to spice up their much loved but very much repeated gameplay. Expand
  43. Nov 7, 2014
    4
    6 hours of campaign, the PC version it's all crashed, CGIs with lag, sound and image desynchronized, poor history, multiplayer with HUGE lag. More of the same, but worst... I would be more happy if I had burned my money than buying this!
  44. Nov 6, 2014
    3
    This review is for Multiplayer part only. The game isn't too bad, its fun to play, weapons seem more-or less balanced but its not all good. First, host-peer system, where your host may end up being very slow and your game being bad because of them. Second, everyone moves at an insane speed, its hard to aim at people now, especially when they dolpin dive under you or simply jump in your face. Its new experience, and its interesting, but not perfect. Next: cheaters are obvious like never since SECOND DAY AFTER RELEASE! If not cheaters, this game would be quite interesting to me, although I ended up not using any killstreaks other than UAV - they just get in the way or require too many points.
    My main issue was and remains not willing to play with cheaters, if this was cheat-free, I'd give this game 6 points (weapons are so "balanced" they all feel the same, like, there's no difference between them, and these exo moves, I don't like them too much considering how limiting the maps are - out of bounds warnings everywhere, or you simply die by getting out of the map). This isn't how Call of Duty was, or how it should be, in my opinion.
    Expand
  45. Nov 6, 2014
    0
    Call of Duty 4 was the last GOOD call of duty game. I would definitely not recommend this game to my friends. This is call of duty with jetpacks. Jetpacks were added on very late into game development (due to titanfall).
  46. Nov 6, 2014
    2
    How much skill does a player need to rage in COD:Advanced Warfare? Not much apparently. This game is like Unreal Tournament 2000 with all cheats enabled for everyone.

    I've never experienced a game, where the developers main focus is to allow players to use "cheats" that would get you banned in other games. Those being:

    I can see through walls with my gun sight (wall hack). I can
    shoot through walls (another wall hack). Another gun site lights up all players in front of you in bright red (Skinning Hack). Another gun will track onto lit up targets (Aimbot). Now if that isn't enough to make you an uber player... let's bring in the toys..... shall we? We now have "Homing Grenades" yes, the hand grenades can be tossed in the general direction of the enemy and they will home in onto them, no defense. You have hand grenades that light up every player camping in a building. So I pull out my no skill, shoot through a wall gun, and casually kill everyone. - Homing drones. Yes, boys and girls, you can take this paper airplane looking thing... toss it into the air without a care in the world, and it will fly over the battlefield and when it sees someone, homes in on them. Now, we have drones, that allow everyone to see everyone on the battlefield. A player tosses one of these no brainers into the air, and other players on the team, can join in on the fun, and rain hell down on everybody. And since it sees everyone on the field. You can kill everyone pretty easy. Lightning strikes obliterate anyone in it's path. Cover or no cover. If it flys over, you're dead.

    Oh the nifty new dodge feature/gimmick. It allows you to glitch your movement. It's not fluid, and it looks stupid, because the animation is stuck while you do it. And it lights you up on the minimap instantly when you bolt a few feet in a direction. Then you're dead because since the maps are so small, everyone can shoot everyone as long as you can see them. Since everyone can pretty much see everyone, what's the point? You may as well avoid all that, remove the buildings. Put everyone on a flat surface and give them all uzi's.

    Sound is horrid. Simply horrid. My surround sound headphones that are normally filled battle sounds and positional sound mapping, is confusing, because sounds just go in and out at random. Very quiet battles. Nobody yelling, nobody saying anything.

    Oh a shotgun can be silenced. Shoots like a full automatic rifle, and sounds like a small handgun. The positional 3D should be disabled, because where the footsteps seem to be coming from one direction, they are actually someplace else, because the sound processing is so weak, it's confusing. Turn off your surround sound gear because it makes things worse.

    Graphics.... ON a high end graphics card, it is pretty bad. No shading, I don't see any benefit for having shadows on, because you really can't see them, but they do appear to have a negative impact on performance,.... shut them off, because they aren't needed and will make things worse.

    Maps are tiny. Tiny tiny. If you play Battlefield, Imagine taking a server of 24 people. Cram them all between A and B objectives on Metro. You get the idea. That's what ALL the maps are like. A smaller, crammed full small Rush Metro map. That's their "Conquest" size map. I get claustrophobic just loading into the map. If you want a quality, fast shooter, that requires some skill... Go play Titanfall. It's much more of everything COD:AW wants to be and more.

    I wasn't a COD hateboy before buying this, but I am now. This is a joke. If you like it...good for you, but you must be seriously, easily amused or on a console. This is not PC gaming material. It's nearly an insult.
    Expand
  47. Nov 4, 2014
    0
    This is the first COD I've bought since COD 2 in 2005. I've played Battlefield for the past few years, from Battlefield Bad Company 2 to Battlefield 4, which I got sick of, because DICE are a bunch of incompetent morons that can't write the networking part of a game properly to save their lives.

    Earlier this year, I uninstalled BF 4 because it is a completely frustrating piece of ****
    and installed Planetside 2, which I've been playing since.

    Yesterday, I bought COD:AW, played the single player campaign and loved it.

    Today, I attempted to play multiplayer, IT WAS **** HORRIBLE, AND STILL IS, the **** lag is WORSE than Battlefield 4 because of the lack of **** dedicated servers.

    Sad state of affairs when COD 2 in **** 2005 had better netcode and dedicated servers, and when a huge game like Planetside 2 feels better and more responsive to play with 200 other players around you.

    In AW, I constantly get killed in one **** hit from EVERYTHING AND ANYTHING, by laggy ****

    If they do not add dedicated servers like EVERY **** PC multiplayer game should have, this is the last **** COD game I am buying AND I will ask for a refund. This is bull****, 110 dollars for a broken piece of **** that makes me want to punch a hole through my **** monitor EVERY TIME I get killed in a complete bull**** way.

    And it's not like I am some scrub, either, when I played a test match to get used to the gameplay in that simulation thing they have, my score was 40-3 at the end of the match. I've been playing shooters since 1995 and usually my KDR in multiplayer games never goes under 2.5.

    In this **** my first match was KDR 9, and every single **** one afterwards was under 0.6 and I've finished either last on the scoreboard or third to last. Absolute unplayable CRAP at this point, people will leave in DROVES if they keep this **** as broken as it is. I am still **** struggling to get my KDR to 1, because every **** thing kills me in one hit and 5 meters behind cover, and it takes my entire mag to kill anyone. Melee is also broken as complete **** last death I had today before I just **** rage quit, I went up to a guy, fired half a mag into his face and then meleed him, yet when the **** killcam showed, it just looked like I was running up to him, staring like a moron while he emptied his mag in my face.

    Absolutely **** shameful.

    I am surprised this **** is not illegal, in ANY OTHER **** industry, if you buy something and it's broken as **** or does not work as advertised, you have the right to get your god damn money back, but in gaming you get ****ED out of your money and can absolutely **** NOTHING to do about it. Bull**** theft, that's what it is.

    The game would be awesome if it had **** dedicated servers, so I could choose to play on servers with other people that have the same ping as I do, so we have a level playing field, and I'd be able to vote kick people with high ping or the server would autokick. With this **** you get ****ed by lag switching **** or some **** from China with ping of **** 600. BULL****.
    Expand
  48. Nov 11, 2014
    2
    Another COD **** like i said with cod ghosts, this is another garbage, ps2 graphics, same gameplay and mechanics than the previous cod games, nothing new nothing fresh, but of course the stupid reviewers will put this **** a good score because they all receive the money from Activision. This franchise is getting worst and it's only alive because those idiots 10 year old kids who keep playing it. This game is a disaster in every aspect, outdated graphics, repetitive combat as hell, too fantasy to be a war game, but a disgrace this garbage is.
    Stay away from cod franchise.
    Expand
  49. Nov 3, 2014
    10
    People tend to dismiss this game due to having a new type of play style needed. Actually, this play style is quite unique in its own way thanks to the exo suit. Multiplayer for CoD will always be the same in terms of beating the other team, but AW decided to take the classic play style and amp it up a good notch. Also, classic multiplayer is there for those who do not enjoy the new multiplayer, although this new change does add in some fun qualities you can't find in other shooters. Expand
  50. Nov 3, 2014
    10
    COD:AW is by far one of the best COD game I`ve played. All 3 game modes are fun to play (with a bit of zombies at the end of COOP).

    Like it or not but if game is crashing for you then your PC/Laptop is not good enough to play it and Yes you might get 100 fps on CS:GO but that`s CS:GO not COD. I had no issues with it, getting 60+fps on ultra/max with BETA AMD drivers. If your texture are
    appearing washed out then you need to turn off 2 settings in advance video which makes rendering faster then texture should appear well. Much better PC port then most of the FPS games on release (e.g COD: Ghosts and BF4). This game is worth its price and zombies are coming in DLC because of the trailer at the end of coop. Expand
  51. Nov 11, 2014
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Ok, here we go again. I don't get how, according to the fans, "this one is better". I also really don't get how even if the game is set 40 years later, they still use the same guns. And the same uniforms. And the same techs. WHY? Why do these games have to be so bland and boring? I don't give a s#!t that a new Call of Duty game is released every year. It could be released every month for all I care. The things that annoy me are the lack of new content, the stupid design choices and the bland story mode, which has become some sort of training stages for new players, rather than a story mode. The story is the most lazy and predictable thing ever. Basicly country X attacks 'Murica and 'Murica fights back with a team of idiot soldiers. Basicly you are freedom fighter A and, with the help of freedom fighter B you kill anyone who isn't american. However freedom fighter B is killed and you escape. Then you join company Y and fight......................................wait for it......................Terrorists! Then you realise something and blah blah blah....

    I would review the multiplayer, but I think the next sentence summarizes it better:
    Lag, Lag and more lag. ALL THE LAG!
    Expand
  52. Nov 9, 2014
    0
    The same boring game 7th time in a row now. Almost 0 changes (they added double jump and exoskeleton like in Titanfall or Crysis- how original), the same bad (made over 10 years ago) fugly engine. The same corridor gameplay, the same retarded enemy ai, the same rehashed "sniper" missions. Single player campaign is 5h short and as bad as always, multi is full of raging kids and cheaters. No thanks.
    Oh and Activision- where are dedicated servers on pc? You liars.
    Expand
  53. Nov 6, 2014
    0
    So another CoD game... Where do I begin. It is just another CoD game in the end with a few little added details, jumping higher, gliding, guns, the sounding !!! What else is new. Campaign, Good! Multiplayer, Bad (as always). Just another CoD game at the end of the day.
  54. Nov 5, 2014
    0
    **** graphics, gun damage is still way too high, same old circular maps, immense lag due to p2p matchmaking. It's just a **** game, cheated out of my money based on positive reviews...
  55. Nov 6, 2014
    0
    All I can say is that this game is frustrating as hell - for real, even Ghosts multiplayer was more satisfying.
    Double Jump - it looks good, but the truth is that when you jump you will die in a few next seconds, because everybody on the map have seen you in the air. I bought it in the day when it have been released and it was a huge mistake.

    Thanks Sledgehammer - I'm comingback to Bad
    Company 2 - no more CoD. Expand
  56. Nov 7, 2014
    0
    bull game not worth it/..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
  57. Nov 8, 2014
    0
    Like Ghosts this is not optimised for the PC at all. I have i7 3930K @4.3ghz in a watercooling loop along with two GTX780s all running at 35°C and 32gb RAM - and still this game won't play smoothly at 1080p! I don't expect much from CoD anymore but this is utterly worthless. If you enjoy PC gaming for the enhanced visual quality it offers - Don't buy this game.
  58. Nov 11, 2014
    0
    Best in Campaign Mode, worst multiplayer mode with lag , spawn, killstreak , everthing yuck. Better than Ghost but still falls under worse category.Recommends not to try.
  59. Nov 12, 2014
    0
    AW started off good the first week. It ran much better than Ghost did and seemed to have a lot less issues.
    I'm not a big fan of all the jumping around, but was liking the game. As the week went on though I became more suspicious of hackers. I almost always watch kill cams and could easily see them following me through the walls etc. (I almost always have all the camo perks: low
    profile, blind-eye, cold-blooded, etc. and a silencer to keep me off the radar. Starting Friday the hacked XP lobbies started. The hacked XP lobbies on PC are very frequent (every 5 or 6 lobbies I'm put into). If you did like I did and make a kill before you know the lobby is hacked.... your stats will be reset. This has happened to me twice now. The last time I was 'lucky' to get the "First Blood" kill... and was given 65000 points and about 15 levels. I immediately left the game.... but was still reset the next day.

    BO2 with its dedicated servers was much better. If you like single player this game is good on PC. If you want to play Multiplayer be aware there is no anti-cheat and if you get into a hacked XP lobby you will be reset!
    Expand
  60. Nov 9, 2014
    0
    Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare is (in my opinion) a frustrated idea of Titanfall. Respawn Entertainment launched Titanfall in March. When Activision announced Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare back in May, comparisons to Titanfall were immediately made, with claims flying that Advanced Warfare was an imitation of Titanfall.

    Now is November and i played a lot of hours in Call of Duty:
    Advanced Warfare... ... ...

    TITANFALL IS BETTER.

    No need more comments.
    Expand
  61. Nov 8, 2014
    0
    What an absolute joke of a game! Changing anything in the menus closes and reopens the program making you wait at least a full minute before you can re-enter the game. The graphics are woeful compared to what they were showing in the pre-release gameplay trailers. Never again will I buy from this sh*thouse developer!
  62. Nov 11, 2014
    0
    This game is worse than a nasty case of ebola-aids, and Aliens: Colonial Marines put together.

    You'd think I learn after last years failure known as Ghosts, that Call of Duty games on PC were finished, and were never going to improve. Obviously not. I feel like I have sinned against humanity buying this game after buying Ghosts.

    To put it simply. DO NOT BUY THIS GAME. It is Ghosts
    MK2.
    -Short, Bad story? Check!
    -Medicore graphics? Check!
    -id Tech 3 engine used in all previous CoD games, modified as "IW engine?" Check!
    -Lack of dedicated servers? Check!
    -Decent sounds? Okay, it does have good sounds.
    -Poor PC Port? Check!
    -Exact same gameplay as all previous cods except with a gimmicky "exo suit"? Check!
    -AIm assist in Multiplayer? Check. Seriously.

    They lied to us again. So much for the three year development cycle which would refresh Call of Duty and actually change and improve things. Only buy Treyarch Call of Duty games, they are the only ones who seem to somewhat care. Avoid Sledgehammer & Infinity Ward.
    Expand
  63. Nov 10, 2014
    1
    Extremely rotten cod fish is how I would describe my experience regarding this game.........................................................That's all
  64. Nov 9, 2014
    0
    Garbage. Play Battlefield 2142.. still leagues ahead of this game. This is garbage. Just a money sink. Activision just wants your money again.. it's that time of the year to harvest the cash from the dummies.. for something you'll just end up dropping in a couple weeks, once you discover there isn't really much else to the game... thank god for gamefly. not worth an investment. Look at IGN's review.. These guys can't be trusted anymore.. All of these big sites getting paid big bucks to pad their reviews.. They gave this game 9.1.. and if you think that's credible.. Look back to their review of ghosts.... which we all can admit was complete utter garbage... especially the squads mode. Ghosts got an 8.8? Serious? .3 difference between crap and a supposedly perfect game? i liked black ops 2 better.. and even it was not without fault.. just not as **** as ghosts. it's just hype to sucker you in because once you pay, you ain't gettin yer money back.. Time to do that thing people forgot how to do.. boycott.. The all-mighty dollar speaks volumes.. settle for crap and they'll keep u satisfied.. Time to say no.. Make a statement and they might actually listen. we need to make a law that allows returns for garbage.. 2 weeks is plenty.. if you can't enjoy a game for more than 2 weeks.. send that **** back for a full refund.. it would change the industry. fyi, not condoning battlefield.. their games are becoming garbage, too.. just a shame they didn't take 2142 further... enough of my rant.. do what u want.. but only you will have to regret it. Expand
  65. Nov 8, 2014
    3
    I think that this has to be the worst COD yet. The dialog, acting, and CGI graphics are great but that's about all the good I can say about it. For the bad, a predictable, overdone plot with loads of button trigger prompts. After 3 of the 6 hours of the campaign I was just playing to be done with it. Multiplayer has been turned into a game of chance where you're in a constant state of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. You're in an almost constant state of being exposed to enemy fire whether it's behind, above, below ,or flank. After being spawned 5 times in a row in someone crosshairs in the second round that I've played, I'm already trading this garbage in today. Seeing as how Activision and their devs have completely lost any ability to develop a decent COD game, I say they'd be better off just remaking MW2. I'd like to throw out a hearty FU to IGN for being instrumental in me wasting $60 of my hard earned money. Expand
  66. Nov 12, 2014
    0
    Although exo bring a new dimension to the game, all is blurred by the huge amount of bugs that presents.
    It is hard to believe, but COD AW has done it, an engine with more than 10 years, this very poor graphics with very high requirements for the system, being totally unplayable in many, and with a totally unacceptable fps in most of them.
    I am really disappointed and angry, even
    assuming that these instabilities are corrected, I paid for a complete product, not a beta. Expand
  67. Nov 3, 2014
    10
    Those idiots who rated this game 0/10 are idiots who can't afford good internet and a decent computer.
    This game is new, not a copy and paste. I bet half of the people who rated this game bad don't even have this game. The maps are sized of cod ghost maps but it feels like i am playing mw2 !
  68. Nov 3, 2014
    9
    This is call of duty. If you are hoping they completely redefined the previous games, you will be disappointed. This plays quite similar to previous call of duty games, but I personally believe that is a good thing. It definitely has some new twists as well, mainly the exosuit, which makes combat even more fast and exciting. This gives players the ability to quickly bail out of a tough spot, but it really makes the gameplay more frantic in my opinion. I've had no lag or stuttering without touching any of the settings (although max ping by default is 800 like previous CoD games, so you can change that in an ini, which I have not done yet either). I have a i5 4670k and radeon 7870 2g. Game doesn't really LOOK impressive, but it doesn't look any different than ghosts did either. I'd recommend it to fans of the Call of Duty series, or someone looking for a new FPS to play for a little. PC population tends to die out quickly, and I don't doubt it will happen in the next few months for this game as well, but until then it's a pretty enjoyable time waster. Expand
  69. Nov 7, 2014
    0
    I thought that this COD will be at least good like old times COD, in terms of the gameplay, this game definetively sucks compared to Battlefield series, how people prefer this piece of **** instead of Battlefield? The graphics all maxed out sucks too, and I'm not even a graphic whore, I care more about the gameplay, the game has no ballistics, it's damn too easy to play even in veteran difficulty, the game definetively sucks, the only good thing about it it's the plot.

    Uninstalled.
    Expand
  70. Nov 10, 2014
    3
    How many reviews start with "it's better than Ghosts, but.."

    This game sucks. Ghosts sucked. Stay far away unless you have absolutely NOTHING better to play or you somehow enjoyed Ghosts.
  71. Nov 3, 2014
    10
    well call of duty advanced warfare is in my books one super badass game, The singleplayer is as expected from a call of duty the voice acting is amazing, sounds/music is mediocre but overall the campaing is really fun! Multiplayer is one of the best if not the best multiplayer experience that i have had in a cod. the exo suit enhances the fast pace shooter what just is really fun to play and due to all the customisation this multiplayer experience won't get boring after a while! Yea the co-op is a bit off but there are not many people playing the co-op. and if you want some cool co-op stuff in one DLC there will be zombies at least that's what i have heard....

    Best cod in Years

    and if you don't like the exo suits there is a classic playlist s well with exo suits disabled!
    Expand
  72. Nov 17, 2014
    2
    While I was playing I wondered if it was a real AAA game!!
    I really don't know how and why this game was been released on pc: it's bad optimized whereas graphisms are pretty ugly, any dedicated servers, unstable connection, ...
    If the game was free or at least not expensive, it would be understandable, but it's sooo expensive and it's done by one of the biggest video games company.
    That
    game is just ashamed... Expand
  73. Nov 5, 2014
    0
    Same money grab, peer to peer matchamking, and general unpleasantness of the last few CoDs.
    Look at user reviews and comments, not the review companies that get paid to say it's great.
  74. Nov 12, 2014
    2
    LAAAAAAAAG....LAAAAAAAAG....LAAAAAAAAGGGGS thas what this multiplayer as new(or just worst then all the others),for the rest expect the same cod as always!
  75. Nov 3, 2014
    8
    Haven't played CoD since MW2. Advanced Warfare is enough of the same to feel comfortable, but systems like "Pick 13" and the ExoSuit make the experience feel fresh, provide tons of customization, and gives a stupidly fun game to kill time. Obvious inspiration from TItanfall, but where Respawn failed in delivering a fully loaded Multiplayer and Single player experience, AW succeed.
  76. Nov 3, 2014
    10
    Much better than Ghosts in every possible way. The game performs well usually getting 90fps constant on my PC. (i7 3770k, GTX680, 16GB ram.) The game has 24 different graphics options and allows you to change fov up to 90. This game is probably the most fast paced in the franchise and I like it. I haven't played a CoD game frequently since MW2 but this looks like it could be the one. It has taked the best elements from games Crysis and Titanfall creating the Exo Suit. The game looks like it has depth in areas such as character customization, weapons, killstreaks and maps. I have only played the multiplayer and Co-Op. Co-Op involves 4 people fighting waves of soldiers, mechs, drones, etc. Allowing you to get new weapons, upgrade weapons, random killstreak drops and bonus abilities (max ammo etc.) Overall the multiplayer feels great and plays well. Expand
  77. Nov 5, 2014
    0
    tried to run game - fail, my cpu is too old
    @
    installed fix i found in the web
    @
    game runs smooth and well, even better than ghosts
    @
    fix is only for SP, MP is the reason i bought that pile of crap

    pls die activision, pls die sledgehammer, rest in piss call of duty series
  78. Nov 11, 2014
    2
    Honestly, this game is fun. It's like call of duty, with a little more mobility. But it is a call of duty game. Don't expect counter strike physics or anything. HOWEVER, this game is also upsetting .The graphics are bad. Just, awful. I'm running SLI GTX 780's. On ultra settings. At 1440p resolution. And the game still looks like I'm playing it on the Xbox One. Stupid. OH. And NO DEDICATED SERVERS.... This makes the game laggy as all heck about 50% of the time. If these are fixed, the game will be okay. But I still wasted 60 bucks. Expand
  79. Nov 3, 2014
    8
    I am enjoying this game immensely. The exoskeleton mobility adds a new dynamic to firefights in MP and the co-op mode. Game runs VERY well on pc. On a 780ti, 3820 i7 and 16gb of ram I am getting close to 100fps at 2560 * 1600. One of my only gripes would be matchmaking and that's because I'm spoiled from dedicated server browsing but nonetheless a fun game that I will be sinking a lot of hours into. Expand
  80. Nov 3, 2014
    8
    I've played every COD since the original and this rates up there amongst the best. Yes it is still using an old engine and lacks dedicated servers at the moment but apart from that it is a great game. The graphics good even on my 4 year old machine. The cut scenes from the campaign look great. It doesn't have glare, smoke and snow like BF but given the scale of the combat this makes sense. The weapons feel like weapons (10 year infantry veteran here) unlike BF and some recent COD iterations. It reminds me a little of Titanfall which was a really fun game. Speed is about MW2/3 and maps similar in size to those. It's been ages since I played COD as the last few were garbage but I may be hanging around for this one. It's fun and that's really all that matters. Expand
  81. Nov 9, 2014
    0
    Ghost was so bad i was thinking is not humanly possible to create and publish such a bad game again.
    boy i was wrong. Is not just bad on PC and not because of the cheaters on day 1, is also bad on every console! ps3 and xbox 360 suffers more then xbox one and ps4. Even do i dont see why? Is old game, a decade old engine...GTA V looks amazing and works amazing on those consoles. High
    end PC like mine run out of memory. mmm OK. internet wired 100/50mbps i lag and stutter every single match. Thank god Far cry 4 coming out in 10 days, and this BS of a game will be forgotten.

    Dedicated servers coming? from where Oompa Loompa land?
    Expand
  82. Nov 9, 2014
    0
    Nah this is not an example of paid critics. Most of the users here are morons and don't see the beauty of this game. Please buy this game and support really bad games made by huge companies. Otherwise they will start making really good games and do not only care about making a lot of money. Maybe someone at Sledgehammer Games needs a new yacht and I could not sleep well if he cant afford it because people don't buy the game. And i feel really bad i only paid about 13 euros for a Russian key. I think its a good thing Russians have to pay much less because those bad Russian's wouldn't pay as much as we do and would rather buy a cheap copy instead. I also really like getting discriminated by steam because i want to play with a Russian key. I should feel honored being forced to pay much more.
    Best review is from IGN and GRYOnline.pl. They say its the best CoD of all time or since MW. They must be really well paid for promoting such nonsense.
    Expand
  83. Nov 4, 2014
    0
    so many **** butthurt people whining and **** probably did not even play or try the game at all and are blowing their opinion around, when they are really void of any empirial experience.

    this one is the best cod i have played so far, absolutely lovely game. 10/10.
    When all the butthurt tards vote this with 0 and pretend they even tried this game, I give this a 10 even though i would
    usually only rate it a solid 8.

    to all the people voting this review down which will probablybe at the same time the people who give this game a 0:

    umad breh.
    Expand
  84. Nov 3, 2014
    8
    I am not a hardcore CoD fan but this is by far the best one i have plated uo to date. Awesome graphics on nextgen and PC, Fast fluent game play. Only bad thing is that i completed the Campaign and all Achievment/Trophies in about 13-15 hours. Have played much MP yet so dont know if its good or bad, I usually buy these games because of the single player/COOP. 8/10 easy.
  85. Nov 9, 2014
    0
    Once again the same game, people, please stop buying the same game every year!!! what do you think this will have? This is a Crysis copy!!!!!

    DON'T BUY IT!
  86. Nov 9, 2014
    1
    I liked the single player albeit very short. If I rated it based on just single player, I'd give it a 9/10. But CoD is all about multiplayer, and currently I can't give it any points. The lag is crippling. I've tried giving it time playing for almost 20 hours. I have 100/30 internet speeds and it is useless. I will review again if they ever implement dedi servers but that probably is not likely to happen. Expand
  87. Nov 10, 2014
    3
    To begin, I wanted to like this game. I haven't played the multiplayer, so I'll leave that out of the review. Personally, I feel that one can judge the quality of any FPS game by playing the story/campaign mode. Technically, this is just one big demo for the game itself, and the developers have to please customer as much as possible.

    In some ways, I felt that Ghosts was the correct
    approach for the Call of Duty campaign. There were some really cool parts, some neat guns, and some down right awesome levels like the space mission.

    When I noticed that the game was going to focus around special abilities being used in combat, I again felt like the Call of Duty franchise was taking another large leap forward. However, I was so, so so so so wrong.

    You have all these super OP abilities, and half the time in the campaign you can't even use them. I feel so chained by the will of the programmer in the game that it honestly stopped the intense action packed fun. There were again, like Ghosts, some supremely bada** moments in the game, but they only lasted for a very short period of time. It seemed that each time I was having fun, Sledgehammer would rip that fun right from my hands.

    As far as graphics concerned, they were pretty allright. However, the graphics on characters and faces are absolutely astounding. This, in and of itself, is probably the only thing I like about the game.

    However, especially the way that this game progressed through the "story" mode ( the writing was absolutely tired and predictable) , all in all it felt like I was watching a very droll action film with bad direction. It was a good looking film, but it still just f***ing sucked.
    Expand
  88. Nov 15, 2014
    0
    At first glance Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare seems to be a solid game with everything you might expect from the franchise, but dig a little deeper and some very big cracks begin to show.

    The campaign: Predictable, very short, confusing with terrible AI

    The online multiplayer: Unplayable... FPS drops, hitching, lag, texture popping, small maps, underwhelming and pointless "dynamic"
    events, non destructible enviroment, poorly optimised "exo abilities", player game states out of sync, no dedicated servers, glitch exploits on some maps, camo and prestige bugs, tacked on Zombies mode only available through purchasing DLC, overpowered guns, awful spawn allocation, boring camos, constant connection and sign in problems and you die so easily it makes playing the objective frustrating and completely unrewarding! Expand
  89. Nov 16, 2014
    1
    New year, new cod..... Same **** This is starting to feel like an abusive relationship. You know like the one you hear next-door every night. you keep wondering to yourself why that **** keeps coming back to him... cod is starting to turn into that relationship every year we shell out fist fulls of cash to get bent over and slapped around by activision. Is it rape if we paid for it? Only positive I found was that it looked good... campaign lasted about 4 hours. Multiplayer is near un playable....

    See you next year activasion for another round of why do I bother.
    Expand
  90. Nov 16, 2014
    0
    To be honest I wasn't expecting much from this game, however after the artificial system spec inflation that plagued the last title in the series, I'm giving it a 0 it wont run on an older system without some serious workarounds and quite frankly there are better game out there that don't require that. so in summary, avoid this title, it earned it's zero for its **** production values and **** development practices. Expand
  91. Nov 17, 2014
    0
    First off. DEDICATED SERVERS WERE A LIE. If they plan on releasing them later. wtf why? should have done it at game release. yea, we bought it but the multiplier is dying now cause on p2p. There are no dedicated servers in multilayer. Its P2P so you get stuck with some kid in his moms basement on a 56k dial up as the host. Lag Lag Lag. If you do fine a game with no lag its cause you are the host and everyone else is suffering. Also, have seen a couple hackers trolling and admitting to it. Nothing you or i can do about it. They cant be kicked in p2p.

    I was really looking forward to this game. I had hopes that it would be as good as CODMW but no. Single player story is good but game it glitched and sound does not sync up in the cinematic events. Which one could over look. Then they tried to fix it and there is no sound now in the cinematic events so you have no idea whats doing on in the story. Single player graphics look good. THEY DO NOT carry over to the multilayer. Maps are glitched. I constantly got my player stuck in the map literally between a rock and a hard place. Bodies float in the air after they are dead. Just laying there on some invisible platform. Just play on, we should be use to half built games by now right. all these years of pos mgnt shoving a game out before its ready.

    Multiplayer. Texture and the relative good graphics of the single player do not come over into the multiplier. You can seriously tell you had two teams making this game. team 1 did the single player and team 2 made the MP. Team 2 i think were interns actually cause its horrible. The environment textures and map layout are pretty bad. Most of this could have been over looked if the game ran. But the multilayer is on p2p networking so it runs like junk. Lag movement, lag shots, lag hits. lag. If you finally get paired into a game after 45 min and it runs well DONT LEAVE you will not find another one all day. save your money. i wish i did. I so wanted this game to be good.
    Expand
  92. Nov 19, 2014
    0
    The game has no dedicated servers which makes the game laggy as hell. Plus this is the worst Call of Duty I have ever played (didn't play ghosts). Jump like a chaotic madman simulator 2014. Spawns are also terrible. I mis black ops 2 and modern warfare 2. Games like that were perfectly made. This **** is just frustrating.
  93. Nov 15, 2014
    0
    What is this! Played by a friends pc, it is so poor!!! A cheap Remake of Titanfall, with jumping Kids!!! omfg! This is the badest CoD i ever seen, Ghost was bad, but this...very bad!!! The graphic and engine is so cheap! CoD MW2 was better! Don´t buy this, my friend buy´s a key for 35.- Euro but this isn´t it worth!
    All in all: bad game!
  94. Nov 6, 2014
    5
    I just don't get why people like these games. I haven't played one since Modern Warfare 1- and it really seems like nothing has improved. In fact it feels worse than I remember those games. Slammer maps, less depth in gameplay, story / progression mechanics that lack depth, and laughable tactics / strategy.

    If you enjoy running from set piece to set piece, hiding behind cars as you pick
    off wave after wave of enemies, then this game is for you. If you love pre-scripted quick time events, this game is for you. If you have a hard on for drones, this game is for you. If you have been a COD lover for the last 10 years, this game is for you. Otherwise, there are way better offerings; it's the golden age of PC gaming and we don't have to support this garbage. Expand
  95. Nov 9, 2014
    3
    Hello dear Gamers, first of all, I would like to take a view on the system requirements for this game. Lag free, with all graphical features enabled costs roughly 2k up to 3k Dollars invest into your hardware, plus the 60$ for the game. What do you get for this amount: Skilled players need 3 hrs for single campaign. Mostly you need that time for the long loading times, even when you have installed CODAW onto your SSD-drive. After that done you realize that you bought a laggy, peer-to-peer multiplayer network game with a seriously bad collision query responses. Is it 2060$ up to 3060$ worth it? Well, this game has its amazing graphical moments, it has its new shield armory, jump around moments, a tiny skill system plus they lent from Batman the grappling hook, but unfortunately, no its not worth 60$ plus the massive amount of hardware invest, because the only reason for buying this game was the dedicated server feature and they messed it up by just using a peer-to-peer client network - what a big big mistake. Expand
  96. Nov 18, 2014
    1
    As usual another copy/paste annual CoD hits the shelves, short singleplayer, same old multiplayer with small maps and zero tactics. Not sure why this series is still so popular, must be the 10 year olds drooling for perks and unlocks. If you're 18 years or older avoid this crap.
  97. Nov 14, 2014
    4
    Whoo hoo! Another COD game, because god knows we don't get enough of these, do we?
    If you've played a COD game before then you've played them all. This is no exception except that now you some high tech toys that the game lets you play with when it feel generous. They almost feel like quick time events. Press "F" to use AMAZING TECHNOLOGY. You can't just start climbing walls or punching
    through walls whenever you want. Oh no, that's reserved for special occasions, like when the you need to escape a tricky situation or simply break the monotony of shooting people or drones.

    Now everyone repeat after me, THEY ARE GOING TO INVADE AMERICA!. At least we know that Activision is committed to recycling because they keep reusing the same plot line over and over...
    Perhaps their fan base is made up entirely of American survivalists. I don't know.

    One thing that amuses me about these games is that you shoot, stab and kill everyone in the usual emotionless manner because it's ALL ABOUT REVENGE, YAAAAARRRR! But the second that a "good guy" dies, it gets all emotional and sentimental. It's all ridiculous and childish. By now I'm truly over this thumping 'Murican propaganda machine.
    Expand
  98. Nov 10, 2014
    0
    Advanced warfare? How about advanced **** 3 years of development Sledgehammer? GFY! A game like this is actually a development of few months. After making the worst CoD of all time(Ghosts), Activision intended to make at least a slightly better game next year. So they chose Sledgehammer to develop. Then, they compiled a bunch of ripoffs from other games(including the story, tech, weapons and etc) hired one of the greatest actors of our time for a cheesy, worthless, forgettable villain. Then some clumsy, incomplete development, and finally some heavy advertising, and ta-dah! Now you have the latest, revolutionary, groundbreaking installment in Call of Duty series! Special Edition exclusively for AMD Radeon R9 295X2, which includes following features. Massive FPS drops(ranges from 60-18 on a 4K display), massive stuttering, de-synced audio and many more! FU Activision! FU Sledgehammer! Expand
  99. Nov 13, 2014
    0
    I'll keep this succinct:

    DO NOT, EVER, make the same mistake I made by giving this game a try. This game is a ****ing joke. This is the same repackaged neutered **** descendant from the greats (MW and MW2). So I'm going to compare it based on its predecessors. This game is actually WORSE than every call of duty before it, with the exception of Ghosts. There are hardly any guns, less
    perks than any other game, you'll get bored with it in a matter of minutes. Worse still: the maps are ****ing horrible. Literally same layout on every single one, that is all close quarters, no chokes, nothing interesting.

    So as you can imagine gameplay is the same run and gun **** as usual, in fact its a necessity if you want to perform well givin the small homogeneous selection of maps, and idiodic movement mechanics. All weapons from the already pitifully small pool are obselete except the SMG's.

    Whoever was the brains coming up with the features in this game is literally a joke, and should be fired from any project lead ever. The missing features are just completely ridiculous. For instance there's no lobby chat, something that a second year programmer could implement. Like what the **** were they thinking?

    Avoid this poison at all costs. Like I said any of the preceding COD's except Ghosts are more interesting than this not only repackaged but dumbed down horse ****. Please don't make the same mistake as I did.
    Expand
  100. Nov 3, 2014
    9
    I really wish you had to link your steam account, or xbox live/psn account to your metacritic review to prove whether or not you've actually played the game. I stopped playing COD after MW 2, due to it just not being fun anymore. The multiplayer takes some getting used to in this, but overall it's pretty cool. Lots of customization, nice looking graphics (it's not Crysis 3, but it's way better than previous games). I'm glad to see Kevin Spacey and Troy Baker in this, I haven't gotten too far in SP yet, but I'm liking what I see so far. Expand
Metascore
77

Generally favorable reviews - based on 13 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 10 out of 13
  2. Negative: 1 out of 13
  1. Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare’s multiplayer is a vivid example of how just one element of classical shooter mechanics is able to tear off many years’ worth of “realistic shooter” deposits and reveal all the primal fury of Quake. [Dec 2014, p.56]
  2. Nov 23, 2014
    80
    Sledgehammer delivered a solid PC port, with great audiovisuals and good performances, but the community seems already narrow, so think twice if you are searching for a multiplayer experience with long legs.
  3. Nov 12, 2014
    79
    The story is nothing to write home about, but the multiplayer is great fun as long as the servers are working.