User Score
2.4

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 5406 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. Mar 27, 2013
    0
    Not only this game has no improvement in either graphic or element from previous installment, it is also a poor console port. Just check for the DirectX error for this game in steam or other forum. It is a random error which causes crash to players, in either single or multiplayer. What a shame, especially for such a price! Will never buy this series anymore!
  2. Nov 15, 2011
    5
    Don't buy Skyrim and CODMW3 together, or you'll wind up playing this for 30 minutes and getting bored as hell, and Skyrim for 8 hours and have a blast.
  3. Nov 12, 2011
    10
    the devs delivered on the promises and mw3 is a great improvement over mw2. mw is a game series so dont expect it to be a completely new game but then again, you dont need to always change things when what you have already works good too. most of the negative reviews come from battlefield players and players who didnt and dont intend to buy mw3 so dont listen to these people. its funny how forums and places like this are full of hatred toward the game but it broke sales records and surpasses bf3s sales as well. theres a reason for that, people who like the game are not here commenting but playing and enjoying the game right now! Expand
  4. Nov 8, 2011
    2
    it's **** horrible that kotick wants to pander to his teenage penisless slow in their minds fanbase with grimdark themes like killing off a kid in front of them, kids should play recettear not this garbage
  5. Nov 14, 2011
    0
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is a piece of s**t made for console kids who want to make a 50 killstreak. In PC is even worse than consoles because you can't change anything, we have no servers, etc. DON'T BUY it Expand
  6. Nov 13, 2011
    2
    This game is an insult to gamers everywhere. It's a repackage of MW2 (a great game) for another 60 dollars. Had Activision charged 30 dollars for MW3 and called it an expansion, I wouldn't be so mad... as it stands? **** Activision.
  7. Feb 18, 2012
    0
    Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!!Ceaters!!!!! Expand
  8. Feb 19, 2012
    0
    there are only about 5 hours of single nice player but this is to less for rating.
    My DownRating is for the Multiplayer, because auf tiny maps and mass of cheating.
  9. Nov 11, 2011
    0
    I bought both BF3 and MW3. The game play didn't change a bit, honestly I am done with Call of Duty series, it was well respected once but now it is just a video game soap opera. MW3 animation on PC with 120hz monitor looks very very outdated.
    BF3 isn't perfect but BF3 feels plays like AAA title and MW3 it is just a poor B title that somehow gets so much attention. If this game (MW3) would
    be called Homefront no critic would give it more then 60% percent. Homefront multiplayer is so much better and more fun compared to MW3 arcade crazy running around in the claustrophobic levels with lots of square rooms in the middle, level design just doesn't make any sense. It the old days it would've been an expansion for the price of the usual call of duty map pack. STOP BUYING GAMES LIKE THIS ONE OTHERWISE THEY WILL MAKE MORE OF THEM LIKE THAT - said hypocrite Expand
  10. MB_
    Feb 18, 2012
    0
    Having enjoyed MW1 back in the day but not trying MW2 I thought I'd jump forward with three to see how far things had come. They really hadn't graphically. This looks terrible, I really can't think of a game that looks this bad in modern times. I've tried repeatedly to fix it, but that shouldn't be hard to do. Little things like not being able to turn down the sound and music separately irritate immensely but when I got online things turned even worse. The game is a first person shooter but its using the geeky XP system which makes games unfair against newbies, purely by giving early adopters weapon and equipment bonuses. This is just morally bankrupt. The game looks bad, plays worse. I feel ripped off! Avoid!! Expand
  11. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    First to start of to say this, how in gods name can a PC version get a lover critics review that the console version they both suck the same...Activision i truly hope that u go under in utter shame..

    On the game front OMFG this one is even more idiotic then MW2, i just can t get it how the hell could they make a worse story line then mw2. How can u make a worse level that the one in mw2
    airport when u kill 1000 ppl no cameras in the airport to see that it is actually Makarov killing them and to make things even worse u chase a F... bullet to Brazil. On that idiocy of a premise the story line just picks up in mw3 "find Makarov and u will en the war" what stupidity what idiocy this is only i mean only u can call me a biggit here mean for over stupid fat retarded Americans, Europeans can not eat this crap. As for the game play itself this goes to AC CHANGE THE F... ENGINE ALREADY THIS ONE SUCKSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS, it is outdated buggy and makes so much **** on crossfire and sli platforms.The maps are so poorly made that i on the hardest difficulty just started to run forward just to passed them so i can finish the game which in the end i did in a day and i was happy for once in my loong loong gaming career over 15 years, that it is a short campaign. The games storyline as i sad only for stupid retarded Americans (not all). It makes no sense it has no potency no memorable characters to which u can relate in fact just don t listen to it. DON T BUY THIS GAME IT IS NOT WORTH 60 DOLLARS OR EUROS i was and idiot who bought it thinking that this game will fix mw2 idiocy IT DOES NOT. Expand
  12. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    MW3 goes backwards in terms of MP Maps, they are simply horrible, they are claustrophobic, any MP map from previous games is superior, we end up spawning in middle of enemies, and i believe that some nice maps are coming in form of DLC of course, which is absolutely ridiculous, not a single decently designed map in base game.
    This game feels completly "recycled"., thanks god i only paid
    10$ for it, or i would feel a even bigger regret than i already feel at moment.
    No graphic evolution at all, horrible FoV in PC (at least BO's had the option to adjust it), ost is inferior at all levels to previous title MW2...it all feels recycled and not fun at all.
    People call this a MW2.5, I call it a MW1.5..
    Expand
  13. Nov 14, 2011
    0
    Why anyone would like to play this? Nothing has changed and I don't think it ever will. Sorry but every 9-10 score is a lie in honest customer face. For example game engine is so old, that i want to cry. When i bought MW3 all i saw was fact that budget for this game was like 5% to making product and 95% for commercial noise. Sorry guys, this was definately last time with this crap.
  14. Feb 18, 2012
    3
    Copy and paste.
    Copy and paste.
    See, I can do it too Infinity Ward/Activision! Call of Duty 4 was an innovative, very addictive and fun game, and so are all of the call of duties after it up to Modern Warfare 3, because essentially they are all the same game, especially in multiplayer where new maps and a few new guns are the only difference. Also, with this being a new game, I'm surprised
    by the muddy visuals and drab textures/colors, even compared to past games in the series. Expand
  15. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    It's MW2.5. That means is a mediocre game from a mediocre series, one that hasn't even changed in the past four years. I would give it a 3/10, but I'm giving it a 0 because they decided to charge $60 for a four hour campaign and rehashed game-play.
  16. Feb 18, 2012
    0
    MW3 MULTIPLAYER ONLY REVIEW. Wow, what a shame. When MW2 hit in 2009, it came just at the right time and felt completely fresh. It had nearly the same effect as CoD4, bringing innovation and excitingly fast-paced multiplayer to the fore. Did Activision seriously think that, giving IW only a year, they could work the same magic? By the time Black Ops had been announced, MW2 was almost dead when people discovered how unbalanced it was. Now, we have this. The traversty known as Modern Warfare 2.5. Where do I begin? Well, there's the maps. What was admirable about Black Ops was how every match was EXACTLY the same because the spawns and maps were logical. Here, every match is the same as well, but by that I mean it's just you spawn, get killed by hacker, spawn get killed by killstreak, spawn get killed again. Quite simply, the maps and spawn have no logic or consistency. Granted neither did MW2, but on MW2.5 the maps and spawns are game breaking. It appears that they were purely designed to look good on trailers. Speaking of which, isn't it embrassing that a GT 430 1GB can run the game on highest graphics and texture settings at 1920x1080 resolution and still get 50+ FPS? As far as weapons go, they're all the same. Sniper rifles have still not been fixed. Equip Sleight of Hand and Quickdraw combined with a bolt action and you're guranteed to win every firefight at anything above knifing range. Well, there goes the aim assist arguement. Quick scoping on PC MW3 is even easier than MW2 on console. Further still, every hit is 90% chance of being one hit kill regardless, or so it seems that way. The game is very fast, but not organized. It's a mess. All MW3 is is MW2 with more quantity. And more quantity of what? All the things that were wrong with it. What killed CoD for me was killstreaks, but at least Black Ops had the decency of 1) making the balanced and 2) leetting you play Barebones Pure right from the start, with no perks, equipment, killstreaks, deathstreaks etc. Gun on gun, you're done. In MW3, it's an "Advanced" game mode which is unlocked at Level 20. What were they thinking? Black Ops was a masterpiece in every sense and even if it was boring to many people, I'd rather play a game that's boring but functional than one that's fast-paced but broken. Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer really messed up big time. Not a single map in MW3 is thought out proper.y. Every single one is exactly the same- too small and chaotic. Yes, MW2 was a fantastic game but IW should have realised that although they did a great job in MW2, MW3 should have aimed to give a refined, balanced multip[layer experience. Instead, all they've done is make the game even more broken. I only give zeroes to games like Minecraft just to hate on them, but in this instance, MW3's multiplayer truly deserves it for the simple reason that it is not functional. It doesn't work. Not a single thing about the game is logical. And that makes it the most dissapointing tragedy in FPS history. Call of Duty built its title on intense gameplay, fun matches, great campaign and most of all, the multiplayer. In all aspects, CoD has always been an innovator (ever since CoD4 anyway) so for them to add nothing new or even improve upon established foundations is what really makes MW3's multiplayer a failure. All Robert Bowling had to say for himself is that Commando, Last Stand and One Man Army have been taken out of the game. In that case, why didn't you just patch MW2 in the first place? MW3 had potential to be another solid masterpiece to join the ranks of CoD4 and Black Ops. As far as I can work out, the multiplayer is the biggest step backwards in Call of Duty's history. Expand
  17. Nov 11, 2011
    0
    More and more each year, the publisher start to care less about the hardcore gamer (who got them here in the first place) & more about $ signs. This is Modern Warfare 1.9, everything is the same as Modern Warfare 2 apart from weapons , which still kinda feel the same but just look different. The maps are new but worse in my opinion.
  18. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    Same old crap... They could have just made it a DLC for MW2... Which was also crap. I seriously don't understand people that are willing to pay more than 15$ for this.
  19. Nov 8, 2011
    4
    Ok, so based off the game as if it were the first time we've ever seen this... 3 single player 3 multiplayer 3 graphics 1 yes it's replayable Overall = 10 Now, lets break it down some The single player, while giving twists and turns and some iconic visuals, doesn't expand on what the series has already created. The campaign is shorter, and it seems to feel even more linear than the rest of the COD series.
    -2

    The multiplayer, while enjoyable to those who love the run and gun, no holds bared, everyman for himself gameplay aspect of mw3, it lacks any type of change. It feels more like an expansion on mw2 with new weapons, playstyles and perks. Honestly, these 3 things are the only reason why you can even consider it a new game. During mw1 and 2 and even with World At War, the fun and gun play style was rather enjoyable, but it seems that activision decided to narrow their play base to the pure close quarters players because the mutliplayer maps seem to have gotten much smaller than they already were, almost completely eliminating snipping as a viable option. The lack of bullet physics such as drop lead off mean that it's still possible to snip, but you'll have to have very fast reflexes and a close quarters site.
    The aspect of "he with the fastest internet connection, trigger finger, gun, and lowest recoil (which isn't a huge issue this close quartered) reign supreme.
    Unlike BF3, which seems to have ever more influenced players to work as a team, mw3 seems to have pushed players to even work less as a team.
    Even with the newest, and most enjoyable playstyle, kill confirmed, it's still a mad scramble to out do everyone else.
    You'll find yourself letting someone else go first just so he'll get killed and you can make points off retrieving his dog tags, then you'll race to pick up the dog tags that another teammate gunned down, again, so you'll get the points. While it cuts down on the amount of camping, that's only because you're trying to scramble around and collect more dog tags than anyone else. Dog tags equal points, points equal ranks. Once everyone is ranked up, then expect much more camping. While watching the review on game trailers, you'll see that even they have noticed the best way to get kills is to use a set of tags as bait. (I.E. camping). While again, the multiplayer would have been good had it been something new and interesting, it's nothing more than mw3 with a couple new weapons, gadgets, perks, and maps. Not to mention the extremely overpowering kill perks.
    -2

    The graphics of the campaign do seem to stretch the capabilities beyond what other cod's have, it's only because they cram more into the field of view. Take away an explosion here and there(cause there's a lot of them) and you'll begin to realize that the grpahics are exactly the same as they were before, but perhaps with a little better fps. The graphics in the multiplayer seems to have taken a twist similar to what bf bad company 1 and 2 had. While the cod series used to be good at exstending the awesome graphics into the multiplayer, giving it a look and feel that somewhat surpassed the competition of battlefield multiplayer, they seem to have taken a step in the wrong direction. The graphics in multiplayer seem to have been dumbed down compared to the single player, and they seem to have cut back on coloring and gone more with grey coloring and darker tones, perhaps to give it a more gritty feel. Well, it is more gritty just not in a good way. It actually takes away from the serealism that you got from other cods. Overall, while the graphics are pretty, they're either nothing new, or a step back.
    -2

    For those of you wondering. Is it still replayable? Yes it is, but it would have been a lot easier to enjoy had they just placed it as a stand alone expansion to mw2 and perhaps sold it for around 30 bucks or less as compared to the 60 they're getting just for putting a 3 on it.

    Little more in depth, while I personally am a battlefield fan, it's only because I've been with battlefield since 1942.(pun for those bf fans). However, I enjoyed the cod series quite a bit, and even more so than the battlefield series until the release of black ops(which i traded in my copy cause i broke my copy of bad company 2).
    I figured I would give mw3 a try. While It's not a bad game and can be somewhat enjoyable if you're 100% into that "one man on top" gameplay style, then you'll enjoy it, however, I don't feel you'll think it's worth 60 bucks either. Personally, I'm trading it in and putting the money down on Skyrim, but until then, I'll grind out as much Battlefield 3 as possible.
    Sorry it didn't work out for you Activision.

    Single player 1
    Multiplayer 1
    Graphics 1
    replayable 1

    OVERALL = 4
    Expand
  20. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    Can't even tell the difference between this and original modern warfare. There's a reason they come out with so many games and so many map packs...its because they want one thing, and it looks like an "S" with a vertical line through it.
  21. Nov 8, 2011
    1
    I give it a one for being a good game...several years ago!! Somehow they managed to make the graphics worse than Black Ops, AND MW2!!!! What the heck happened?!? Had they made the graphics impressive, that alone would have at least eased my pain. But no...we simply have a couple old tricks such as an aa12 shotgun, CounterStrike riot shield, and an EMP grenade as if it was some big freakin' deal...IT WAS IN 2142! They didn't even bother to change the majority of in-game sounds, effects, voices, etc... They down-sized just about every map to dinky little squares.... BF3 looks 10x better than this and it handles 64 players! I shouldn't even have to compare this to another game...this should not have happened! Now I WILL NOT purchase the next generation Activision game. Not until hell freezes over and they fix the 14GB mess they had me put onto my computer. Expand
  22. Nov 8, 2011
    1
    The game offers little innovation overall, both the singleplayer and multiplayer dont offer anything new. The overall balance of multiplayer matches did not hit the spot, like mw 1. I regret ever spending 60 dollars on this game. Although unlikely i hope activition offers a ****ton FREE maps or atleast some interesting multiplayer modes.
  23. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    Hi, CALL OF DUTY has lost its meaning, its no longer about the game-play and innovation, now its just about money after piling "bunch" of **** to keep people paying for this addiction called "MW", since "cod 4" nothing is getting better, its just getting WORST!!!
    don't waste your money...
  24. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    I'm not gunna lie, this game is highly disappointing. Also, I've noticed a trend in all the cod reviews. It's basically paid critics vs user reviewers. Obviously the paid ones are going to give the game a much higher score even though it's **** and the users are going to give the game the score it deserves.
  25. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    The worst version of one of the worst games ever made. Congrats IW. You've managed to fail even harder somehow. Big Rigs=Black Ops> Justin Bieber>MW2>MW3
  26. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    I played mw3 for about 6 hours already and I can say only this - epic same **** fail of the year. Game itself is not bad it's horrible pretty much look like mw2 and black **** boring maps gameplay feels like joke no realism at all more like arcade for kids to milk hard even more rip off than any game I can imagine so please dont waste ur money
  27. Nov 8, 2011
    1
    Most people will say "Just like every other game" but in fact I say "take a backwards step". This game does in fact look, feel and play like a console port, Even down to the broken server search (or lack there off), multiplayer level design is small, uninspiring and will do little to emerse you. the multi seems to try and play out like a bad version of UT or Quake in a MW Skin and what they havent taken from every other COD title feels cheap and not thought out. The graphics are substandard at best in the current generation, They do nothing to inspire ore captivate the player. It's a shame the Activision have not used this opportunity to move forward a deliver a game that innovates and captivates, Intsead they choose throw big parties and port the game driect from 360 to PC, this game may deliver on all your expectations if you are playing it on console, But as a PC owner/player you will be left not with a feeling of satisfaction but great dissapointment. If you are after an experience the is upto date with the times choose BF3 if fast pased multiplayer is your thing stick with COD Black Op's. Expand
  28. Nov 8, 2011
    1
    Very disappointing game. The SP is bland, linear, and boring. The story is also very confusing, and it's obvious they paid no attention to the campaign portion of the game. The graphics are horrible for a AAA title in 2011, they look exactly the same as in MW2. The Multi-player, although with new content, offers nothing new or refreshing. They even reuse architecture from COD4 and MW2 in some of the maps. Expand
  29. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    Pathetic, is a fraud game that have four years old. I never buy a game but more than cod. . Online is laggy and the campaign is tedious. reasons can not remove the music. the graphics are for the spectrum. I am very angry and disappointed.
  30. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    Please Activision, don't let Infinity Ward make another Call of Duty, stick to Treyarch and ditch those Infinity Ward losers. I'm serious, this game is aweful - I want my money back, I regret every dollar.
  31. Nov 8, 2011
    0
    I've always thought that every game has something new to offer. I was mistaken. I never thought a game could possibly not bring anything new to the table. Seriously, this is the exact same game as Modern Warfare 2, and the first Modern Warfare. I would consider it DLC. The audio is the same, the graphics are the same, the gameplay is the same. There is literally no innovation in this game. The worst part is, a lot of critics are saying that this may be a good thing. I'm starting to think these critics are paid off by big gaming companies... If there were no innovation in video games, we may as well be playing pong still.

    Each part of a game is unique though, there are graphics, gameplay, storyline, multiplayer, and an underlying feel to the game that is created by how much work a developer put into it, and how the engine runs.

    The graphics in Modern Warfare 3 are astounding.... For a game based on an engine written at around 2005. Nothing new here. The graphics are about the same as CoD4, from 2007. Infinity Ward needs to write a new engine already. Compared to the brand new Frostbite 2 engine, the iw5 is just way too outdated to be useful anymore. The textures are blurry and the scenery looks flat. It's just not good looking enough to be considered modern looking in 2011. Plus, to be quite frank, the audio sucks. All the guns sound like paintball guns and the reload sounds sound pretty crappy. This is even on my 100$ turtle beach headset. It was also lazily done, as a lot of the sounds seemed like they were from previous CoD games.

    The gameplay is okay. Although, it's the same gameplay we've been getting since CoD4. Again with the innovation issue here. As I ran around with my UMP45 it felt just like Modern Warfare 2. Had I wanted to play Modern Warfare 2, I would have. There is literally nothing new.

    The storyline in this game is similar to those of Michael Bay movies, which gross millions of dollars at the box office because of hot women, big explosions, and epic battles. Modern Warfare 3 only delivers on two of these promises. The storyline is infested with plotholes, and generally it is unexciting as Infinity Ward tried to get us to care about the characters. The needless explosions are overdone too. If you try to play any singleplayer, it's like the whole level is ridden with explosions and shotguns. Overall, CoD's storyline is to gaming as Michael Bay's movies are to television. Neither offer any compelling storylines or genuinely well done scenes, and both just throw in what Amerians like to see. It's the same crap they throw at us every year.

    The multiplayer in CoD was fun. In CoD4. At this point I just see more of the same, just like with everything else in this game. The multiplayer is a rage inducing, 12 year old populated nightmare. In every CoD game, there is something that people find that ruins the whole game. For example, quickscoping and noobtubing. The one thing that CoD did get right was replay ability. Although now I think everyone's gotten tired of the franchise, and the replay ability has died.

    Although CoD has a decent underlying feel, I think that it's easy to tell that the developers did not put much work into this. Now i'm not sure if this is because Activision likes to rush one game a year, just to milk the cash cow more, or if the developers are truly lazy... But it definitely has an impact on the game. It just feels wrong. All in all this game offers nothing new, and fails to deliver on all aspects. To be honest I've seen DLC, or title updates with more new content than Modern Warfare 3. I hope the average gaming consumer brightens up, and realizes what they're buying into, so that this detriment to gaming culture will just die already. I feel like the regime of CoD as the top player is about to topple, as their games get worse and worse. It's just like the Star Wars prequels. There is no innovation. There should be no real reason for anyone to buy Modern Warfare.

    I mean 3.

    Also for credibility's sake, i've been a fan of CoD since CoD2, and enjoyed it up until WaW. I've played A LOT of games, and am pretty sure i'm not a fanboy, for I enjoy many games.
    Expand
  32. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    The fact they reused models/animations/sound, and even forgot to change the game title from MW2 in the error messages is the reason this game deserves every negative review it gets.
    There is no excuse for the abomination this once great game series has become
  33. Feb 17, 2012
    0
    Been playing CoD since number 1, and honestly have to say, the series is dead now.

    First I played the campaign, and the standout points are none. The graphics looks the same as MW2, the story is very boring and feels like they have just tried to compete with the epic moments of MW1, but instead, they just put in the exact same cliched moments we have seen in every CoD game since MW1.
    The
    campaign was very short, generic, familiar and the AI are SOOOOOO stupid. Your AI Team Mates will always look like they are shooting the enemy, but are really just shooting the wall next to them.
    and they bought back quick scoping, and its a bad choice. Just because Infinity Ward made bad Maps, doesn't mean that it has to support the people who are to stupid to realise that it's a bad idead to run around the map with a sniper.

    So far I have played about 4 hours of Multiplayer and can't play a game without thinking about how much Infinity Ward just ruined this game. The guns all feel familiar with the same recycled sound effects and design, and not many new or interesting weapons have been introduced. Weapons are very, very unbalanced to the point where it actually ruins the whole online experience. For example, Sub Machine Guns are far more superior then assault rifles, regardless of the distance. Heavy Machine Guns are just a waste of time using cause they have no advantage, shotguns are a guaranteed kill when in close quarters combat, and I don't see the point of the Sniper Rifle with these Map Designs.

    The Perks were all in MW2 or Black Ops, leveling up doesn't really have any excitement anymore since every time I level up, I unlock a perk that I've used for the past 2 CoD games, and if you know which perks to use, you can become undestructable from using a combination of perks.

    The Killsteaks are just plain and simply unorganized and unbalanced again. They bring back the AC130, which from what I can remember in MW2, would single handily win the game for the team using it.
    On top of that they added about 5 new killstreaks that just are crap or aren't fun or usefull.

    The Attachments are all the same, nothing interesting, and less customization then Black Ops. Again, more mad news, Infinityward brought back the heartbeat sensor. Now that attachment ruined alot of games in MW2 because people using it would just camp and camp waiting for the enemy, plus its like having the UAV Radar 24/7.

    I have to say, the one thing I hate more then anything is the Weapomns leveling up, now that did sound awsome before you play the game, but it actually turns out bad. It leaves loads of guns unused throughout your playthrough because you cannot be stuffed having to unlock all the attachments again. So really you only use a few weapons from each class of weapons before you prestige, and honestly prestige isn't as fun as what it used to be.

    Now the Map designs are very, very bad and familiar again. It doesn't feel like a single map in this game is designed for Snipers at all, leaving the whole Sniper Class useless, and camping is a bigger problem then ever because of the bad map designs.
    Plus the game is very buggy. All up the game is very, very, very bad. You can't make up your mind about which killstreaks or perks to use cause they have been overused from previous games, or they are just crap. The Weapons are seriously unbalance and everything and I mean everything in this game has been re-used from the previous games. Its become obvious that Activision and Infinity Ward care more about making there 1 Billion dollars in 16 days then they do about Customer Satisfaction.

    WARNING! If you buy this game you will be very unhappy about spending that money. Don't complain about it when you buy it, cause you read all these negetive comments and still buy it.

    Can't wait for them to fail again when they release the Rumored Black Ops 2 this year. Can't wait to see that. lol
    Expand
  34. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Didn't buy because once again they treated us like xbox for not adding dedicated servers.
    I have no idea why the hell they keep doing thing but **** them for doing so.
  35. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Im sure im not the only one who's disappointed in spending $60 to play a game i bought 2 years ago.
    there's even evidence of the developers reusing multiple building models throughout the game from earlier versions which just reeks of plain laziness

    the campaign mode is entertaining in its own right but its been done before. i cant help feeling that the developers purposely put in the
    london level to create controversy and gain "free publicity" by relying on the media as they always do. it's a cheap shot at stirring up the community

    the multiplayer is just overdone. black ops was bad enough at milking the franchise and providing MORE OF THE SAME but this game absolutely stinks of familarity. hardly any innovations and yet charging the full price as other games (such as uncharted 3, bf2) which took years of innovative thought and collaorative efforts to produce a fresh new approach to gaming.
    recycling overdone gameplay modes is NOT refreshing and forcing the players to buy new maps every few months is certainly a disgusting act at leeching the fanbase

    overall i understand why this game DESERVES such a low score. its not a game, its a recycling project targeted at the gullible masses who were tricked into believing the hype and seeing how much profit they can generate. activision doesnt make games, they make money, that's it. they dont have the interest of the gaming community at heart and this despicable act needs to stop
    Expand
  36. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    The game, and im sad to say this is stale, its that type of game that has been regurgitated from the deep bowls of mass consumer marketing, it is still linear, the game play is exactly the same, and we are still paying for another entire game even though its on the same engine, i think there would have been much more support if each instalment was an expansion pack that adds the extra content to cod4, as it is still the same engine, same game, same controls etc. Expand
  37. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    To be honest, I wasn't expecting good things at first. But... yeah I was about right. Same game engine since Call of Duty 4. However, this was made even worse when they added the glow effect in Modern Warfare 2 which made everything look like it was covered in an oddly rigid water. Do not buy. Let the poor guy die. He's had enough. Call of Duty had potential, but it was quickly sapped by the greedy publishers. Do not blame the devs. It's all on Activision. Expand
  38. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    It's funny how Activision get away with murder. It's blatantly obvious they've changed nothing but single player, a few multiplayer maps and the box art yet it gets amazing reviews. Viewing this title on its own merit, its clear that it has absolutely no originality despite its high production quality.
  39. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    Just another cash in of a tired old franchise. Re-releasing a video game every year and making millions is just a slap in the face to real developers who actually take the time to make a decent video game, with a good engine, great online, and a good story.
  40. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Played this, this morning and its just a desaturated mess of a game, the whole thing needs to be updated to make it good, the textures are low, the shadows are to dark, the lighting is terrible, the only colour seems to be shades of gray and the sounds are just annoying, bad show IW, Sledgehammer and Activition, bad show.
    yes exactly the right !
  41. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    how can be a game with this graphics a 2011 pc game??!!! activision, have to use a new graphic engine, call of duty have to evolved, and this game does´t do that....
  42. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    A shameless update to the already stale CoD series. It really should have been named MW2.1. Nothing new here. Still, millions will buy it... I guess that's why huh.
  43. Nov 20, 2011
    7
    The game in and of it's self is solid, but there is still an apparent lack of innovation, the campaign as always, pretty epic, but the multiplayer really doesn't add anything new, if anything it takes features that were established in Black Ops, a currency based staggered unlock system meant you could unlock what ever you felt fit your play style straight away, rather than waiting for it. The PC release is rather sloppy, bugs plague it, we get stuck with IWnet if we want to earn those shiny unlocks, it's pretty poor. While these things can be added down the track, I'm not entirely sure it will happen if only because in 12 months time a new Call of Duty will hit store shelves and they will want us to fork out another $100 minus cost of DLC. If pricing wasn't so terrible in Australia I wouldn't complain, but I would like to get my moneys worth out of a game not feel ripped off. Expand
  44. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Horrible game, so boring, so uncreative. Really makes you think why did you spend 60$ on such horrible product. Activision should never fire the people from Infinity Ward, because whats left of IW is not able to even do tetris. Tbh Activision should just leave games alone, they are destroying Blizzard alredy. 2 mil people stopped playing WoW and more will come cause Activision is greedy company thinking only about money and how to milk more cash from gamers. Expand
  45. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    Infinity wards remnants release the second expansion to COD4. I say that because it only qualifies as an expansion pack, ultimately the gameplay and even the visuals are nigh on identical to its predecessors. The mp maps have been designed seemingly so that you will never live longer than 24 seconds. One of the most tragic nails in MW3s coffin is the departure of any remnants of a mature audience. CoD has never been known for a particularly mature community, but now it seems rare to find a player over 12 willing to speak out online. Childish comments and arrogant bragging is seemingly all that comes through my speakers.
    I can in no way recommend this game, If you want the gameplay, buy MW2 for half the price.
    Expand
  46. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    After being an active member of this series since release, I can say this literally the worst out of all of them. It's not so much the production and gameplay, but it's the SAME STUFF. Over and over. "I'm not paying $60 for a weapon and map pack" puts it best. 1 for coming out with the game. I can't believe the hype and glory this game was given when there are so many other titles out of the market for LESS THAN $60 that beat this redundant game. I'm sorry, but this was a big ol' swing, and a big ol' miss. Expand
  47. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    What a joke this is, you've already released this game before.. Nothing diffrent from mw2, this could had been a bad map pack for mw2 instead.. Time to wake up and actually release a new game..
  48. May 31, 2012
    7
    When it comes to competative multiplayer, I'm much more of a Battlefield guy. But when it comes to singleplayer, MW3 wins. I also enjoy the Spec Ops and survival mode, but nothing beats zombies. So I still play Black Ops for that.
  49. Nov 10, 2011
    2
    worst cod so far, do i have to tell you more?
    -locked fov for pc
    -small maps that sucks
    -graphics
    -nearly nothing new at all
    -models from cod 4

    not much to say about this peice of junk, if u want to pay 60 bucks for a bad copy of mw2 go ahead
  50. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Awful campaign. They literally took the same game and milked it's money again. Multiplayer is nothing new, and the maps are boring. If you want the same game, stick to MW2 and just buy the damn DLC.
  51. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Terrible game, this is a slap in the face to pc players, giving them a garbage port with a terrible engine from the days of quake 3.. This was obviously make only consoles with a pc version as afterbirth and it shows.. Do not waste a dollar on this trash.
  52. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Lets see.. same graphic, same models, none progress than Black Ops, MW2. It's just a DLC mappack. Singleplayer script + script, Multiplayer using a P2P connection like MW2.
    Get back my money. Don't buy it.
  53. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    The reason we all hate this game is because it's 4 hour campaign and like 12 new maps. There is no way you can charge 60 dollars for that. It's annoying how well this game is going to sell when so little effort was put into it. We as gamers support developers that bring us NEW and INNOVATIVE products. Sure, it's fine when companies release sequels to games that refine the previous formula, but not when they literally do it 3 times in a row. Modern Warfare, Modern Warfare 2, Black Ops, and Modern Warfare 3 literally look identical. It's like they want to be the new madden of first person shooters. We are tired of these pointless rehashed games. So basically deal with it Activision. Expand
  54. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Oh look, it's the Madden of shooters. Why do people keep giving Kotick $60 for exactly the same shooter every year? Can't you people just like, i dunno, play CoD4? Or do they shut down the servers for games on consoles ala: Chromehounds? Pirated it to see the campaign, same old "WOOOOOAAAAH ACTION MOVIE EXPLOSHUNS!", beat it in 3 hours, then promptly deleted its disgusting code off my HD. The multiplayer is exactly the same as the others with the same call-in fueled infini kill streaks from the two guys camping in a corner of the map. The sound design is still absolutely disgusting, all the guns sound like airsoft guns in first person, there's no distant effects, and they're still recycling voice clips from CoD4. The graphics are still living back in 2005, running on the same engine since CoD2, nothing else to say there... Enjoy paying $60 for your map-pack and "new perk" DLC guys. Expand
  55. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    The campaign of this game is terrible. Its linear, has bad writing, generic gameplay, and the graphics are showing its age. The whole game is you going trough narrow paths and shooting bad guys. One good thing about it is that the campaign lasts only 3 hours. They try to distract you from how bad it is with big explosions every two seconds but the engine is so old that they look just lame. Scene where a child is killed tries to generate controversy like the airport mission in MW2 but it fails miserably. The multiplayer is the same thing you already played several times before. Almost nothing is changed from the previous games. The new maps are bland and not worth it. The new modes are nothing special. If you are buying the game for its multiplayer, buy MW instead, its cheaper and better balanced. Also the game suffers from numerous bugs on the PC version. My advice is to stick with the first MW or just play a better FPS like RO2 or BF3. BF33333333333333333333 IS VERY GOOOOOOOD Expand
  56. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    resumo do meu status

    RazielDe

    The campaign of this game is terrible. Its linear, has bad writing, generic gameplay, and the graphics are showing its age. The whole game is you going trough narrow paths and shooting bad guys. One good thing about it is that the campaign lasts only 3 hours. They try to distract you from how bad it is with big explosions every two seconds but the engine is
    so old that they look just lame. Scene where a child is killed tries to generate controversy like the airport mission in MW2 but it fails miserably. The multiplayer is the same thing you already played several times before. Almost nothing is changed from the previous games. The new maps are bland and not worth it. The new modes are nothing special. If you are buying the game for its multiplayer, buy MW instead, its cheaper and better balanced. Also the game suffers from numerous bugs on the PC version. My advice is to stick with the first MW or just play a better FPS like RO2 or BF3 Expand
  57. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Absolutely terrible. It's just a moneymaking attempt, churning out the same game every year. Not having ranked dedicated servers is absurd; you're forced into more laggy p2p play where the host is favoured
  58. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    If you like to play games that are just repacked versions of previous titles, then by all means by this crap.
    This game is so much like MW2 it should have been called MW2.5 or something, you are being charged full price for a game that is a damn map pack with a few new weapons from MW2.

    If you haven't already seen, there a numerous occasions during multi-player/single-player where
    buildings from MW2 have actually been copied over, without changing, its a joke!

    I am honestly surprised at Activision and Infinity Ward for destroying this franchise with such a cheap rip-off. I have been a fan of the series since CoD 1 (you know, the one that was based in WWII) but I would actually go back and play that, than this!

    My recommendation is to buy it when it's cheaper, if I had known prior, I wouldn't have bought it until it was at least half what it is now!
    Expand
  59. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    They just took Modern Warfare 2 and changed the maps. Modern Warfare 3 is essentially a map pack that costs $49.99. Now even the devs are begging people to rate it higher. Can you get more desperate than this, Infinity Ward? Modern Warfare was the last good Call of Duty game.
  60. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    The PC edition of this game is completely worthless, and I regret ever purchasing it. Black Ops had way more options in the settings for actually setting the game up properly, so you don't get motion sick as fast, a better unlock system and proper dedicated servers, and that was considered one of the worst CoD's in a while.

    Instead I got a version I can't play because I get physically ill
    after playing it because of the PoV, where I can not play ranked on the dedicated servers they bragged about before release, and which in most ways is exactly the same game as MW2. Visuals haven't improved, textures and models are extremely unappealing, balance is still off-key and we're back to stacking kill-streaks again. How fun that was as a semi-casual player, right? To summarize, the campaign is still linear, the story is terrible, and the multiplayer experience hasn't been altered in any positive way since MW2. If you like that, get it on consoles. The PC version is broken, possibly beyond repair.

    All in all, I'm extremely disappointed with this game, and I most likely will not play it again. Basically wasted a bunch of money I could have spent on a better game, had the game reviewers done their jobs and actually been honest instead of thinking about continued profits from game publishers.

    They even have the sheer audacity and arrogance to beg for better user reviews, as seen here: http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/121/1212113p1.html

    If not for that quote, this would have gotten a 3 or maybe a weak 4 from me, so they shot themselves in the foot.
    Expand
  61. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Crappy rehash. They keep releasing this stuff year after year, and we just keep buying it. No more, this was the last time I ever purchased a Call of Duty game, at least until they decide to innovate instead of using the same game with a few new maps.
  62. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Horrible Game! I hate it! it's not innovative. Shame on the developers. Nothing new. Nothing using. Old graphics. Terrible single player plot. A complete FAIL.
  63. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    This game is a rehash and its pretty much solidifying the fact that gaming is dying. Every year expect more and more of these things to come out, receive inflated scores by paid off reviewers, and for them to break all sorts of retail records. COD is the new Madden of our time, only difference is it changes even less between installments.
  64. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Its like buying a fake rolex! You know its going to break and will be left in a drawer a week later, but you buy it anyway! Thats what i did with this game. Its MW2.1, what a waste of money! Campaign was okay, but the oh so controversial part is just lame. It didnt help knowing that soap died the whole way through too, i felt like a right mug carrying his injured body when i knew he was only going to die. Christ! Its like a bad movie. Expand
  65. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Mordern Warfare 3 is the exact same game with MW2 MW1 . Of course! Graphics was more...... worse! cracked texture .. (sigh) how can u make it with Dat cost of making = 150,000,000 U.S. dollars ????? R U Insane? Gimme back my 60$.
  66. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    I am a FAN BOY..... of RANKED DEDICATED SERVERS on any game!

    Seriously, this is the PC version. You need to allow ranked dedicated servers.
    No one wants to play with hackers and lag/Host Migration. We are NOT Console! Don't give me a green bar, give me a ping!
    Black OPS had dedicated servers with EXP. Why did Infinity Ward screw us over? Please Fix it or at least say you will
    never do it, so I can uninstall this game forever. Expand
  67. Nov 10, 2011
    3
    Well I jumped right on the band wagon and bought this game without reading any user reviews I wish I had. Overall I am very disappointed. Maybe the developers felt if it ain't broke don't fix it, but I think they have ended up with a stale game, same stuff repeated. It is not a new MW game its a map pack for MW2 and no more. I can't understand why the dedicated servers are un-ranked. I'm in Ireland and don't have a great net connection but at least with dedicated servers I could find one with good ping but what's the point if you cant rank up on them, so I am forced to go the P2P option, which is, for me at least, a very inferior way of playing. You are at the mercy of lag, whom ever is the host has the advantage. Also with the p2p games it just feels like I am spending more time in game lobbies waiting for players to join than in game and when in game you get the always annoying mitigating host message. I'll stick with Black Ops for my COD kicks, enjoying BF3 at the mo and I'm looking forward to Skyrim tomorrow. Expand
  68. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Why am I supposed to buy this game? For a number? For an higher price? For the ridiculous longevity? Why people should buy a game that already has?
    That's no reason.
  69. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    I think there's a typo on the cover art -- that "3" should be a "2". It's a great game and all, I just wish it was something I hadn't played before. Too bad people will get suckered into buying the same game twice. I wonder what we can look forward to in Modern Warfare 4.
  70. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    After playing (and loving) battlefield 3, this game desperately needs some drastic changes. As a fan of call of duty since the very first game (released on PC, which IW has seemingly forgotten...but that is another issue), It is not easy to speak ill of this franchise. But releasing essentially the same game since COD4 is inexcusable. I hope pc players around the world send a message to IW and activision. You can do this by keeping your wallets closed to the greedy and lazy folk who repeatedly ask you for more money and in return give you the same product. As for the pc side of things, no dedicated servers for ranked play? Give me a break. 9v9? Come on. The same old engine and graphics? How about answering us on mod/map tools? You repeatedly piss in the face of pc players, and then insist this is what we want. You continue to alienate fans, while making the game more accessible to the general masses. I understand you want to make money, but your integrity is all but gone. This is made perfectly clear by your pathetic plea for the fans to vote here on metacritic. Well, here ya go. Expand
  71. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Really this game is Moder Warfere "3"; I cant believe its another game. It feels too much like MW2 DLC. The gameplay is equal, the history is very "cliche" and predictable, and the multiplayer is the same of the last 4 games... really? I think this "Call of Duty" will die like "Guitar Hero". I will save in my memory CoD 2 and 4. The others are only DLCs with a full-game cost.
  72. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    You **** up!
    WTH can't we have rank on dedis? That is the only reason I got the game.

    **** idiots it is just about the money. I am going to make my own game and have it the way people want to play it! Can't wait for them to crack the MP. Suck on that IW!
  73. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Terrible game, a complete and utter copy of MW2, when setting the detail to max it looks like my gamecube. That's how terrible this game really is, just a recycled game as per usual. The game is rendered at 720p and upscaled or downscaled to whatever resolution you use (obvious console port). Call of Duty's twitter also asked me to write a review because their score was so low, I figured I'd just lower it even more because it's such a terrible game. Expand
  74. Nov 10, 2011
    9
    I registered on Metacritic just so I could write this review. I'm an adult gamer and not a fanboy of any franchise. First off, if you are looking to buy this game, use the professional review score and not the reviewer average as it is more accurate. This really is a great game. So far I've been blown away by the campaign which is far better than Battlefield 3. In terms of multiplayer, I can't really judge it yet but it feels like more of the same, but that isn't really a bad thing. Expand
  75. Nov 11, 2011
    8
    This is crazy, I can't believe all the disappointed BF3 Fan Boys that came on here to trash MW3. I heard about the incredibly unbalanced user score that MW3 has received on Metacritic from IGN, and decided to create a Metacritic account just to give an unbiased and objective review and score. And to help even out this Very low score for an obviously above average game, I mean sure MW3 is not perfect but 3.1 out of ten is bull***t. First off I would like to state that I am not a COD Fan Boy and not a little kid, I'm a hardcore gamer that has been playing games since the early nineties. I play all manner of games on PC and PS3 and have also bought MW3's main competitor BF3. I have played about 30 hours on BF3's Multiplayer and have a 3.30 Kill/Death Ratio so am no noob when it comes to FPS. Even so I was disappointed with the overall products of both Battlefied 3 (which got boring faster than expected) and MW3. In the end I scored MW3 8 out of 10. It is very similar to MW2 but that's not necessarily a bad thing. The Singleplayer was OK, similar to the last two Modern Warfare's (overall uneventfull and boring with only some good bits) Spec Ops Missions are fun and exciting, especially if you have a friend to play them with and Spec Ops New Survival Mode is great addictive fun and a good addition to the series, I would say, and this is just my opinion that this is better than Zombies (playing with a mic is essential). Than you have Multiplayer which love it or hate it is pretty much the same as MW2 but with Strike Pakages, different killstreaks and different variations on old perks, some new guns and some new maps and game modes. Noob tubing, Nuke Killstreak and One Man Army Perk are gone but Quikscoping and Drop Shoting are still the order of the day. Also Spawn Deaths, Hit Detaction and Lag Issues can become a bit annoying. But with a half Decent Connection, a bit of skill and a touch of class you should be able to overcome these shotcomings to have one of the sweetest FPS Online Gaming experiences you can have at this time. I won't lie somtimes the multiplayer can have you screaming at the TV about the injustice of the last 5 Cheap deaths that made no sense whatsoever. But with a bit of patience even without the Elite Functions you get to know the layout of the maps, the spawn points, choke points, best class layouts for specific situations and maps. You will receive better weapons and figure out which strike package work best for you, and then your experience will start getting better. And to everyone saying COD is unbalanced that's BS, because there is a strategy and counter for everything your adversaries can throw at you. So after everything is said and done what it really comes down to is skill (and who has more of it). Overall, taken all the features packed into this one game and the weeks and possibly months of enjoyment that can be had, it's impossible for me to see how this game can receive a score below an 8 let alone a 5. If your a fan of FPS or games in general this a great addition to your game collection. Definately not MW2 DLC, and for only $50 to $100 are you that poor/cheap to complain about purchasing a great game and depriving yourself of fun just because a bunch of pathetic PC BF3 Fanboy Sheep/Followers decided to flood this site with negative reviews. It's Up To You.â Expand
  76. Nov 11, 2011
    2
    I've been a loyal fan of Call of Duty for more than 10 years. I've played every game in the series and must simply conclude the following about MW3: The biggest disappointment ever in terms of Call of Duty! I enjoyed the singleplayer somewhat (hence I score the game a 2, not a 1), but the multiplayer is simply devastatingly poor on PC. Graphics look at least 5 - 6 years old. Servers are sluggish. Scaled down Elite feature on PC. The multiplayer plays practically identically to MW2 and BlackOps. Why fix something that is not broken you say? Well, somehow I expected more. Much more. Buy Battlefield 3. Expand
  77. Nov 11, 2011
    0
    Horrible game, do not buy it! Its much worse than mw2, IWFail lags like crazy and camping is so present. The maps are very camper friendly. Together with the long zoom in time and the lag, its impossible to beat campers that are waiting and already zoomed in.
  78. Nov 11, 2011
    4
    The reason i wont rate this higher then a 4 is that its not a game, its like alot of ppl say an overpriced mappack. One thing that realy anoys me with mw3 is all the junk and stuff lying around everywhere to "prevent camping" when it does the oposite thing, it gives campers even more spots to hide. All i can do now is hope that the next game in the series gets a new engine and more focus on the PC version. Expand
  79. Nov 13, 2011
    1
    You can't compare BF3 with MW3, it's not apples and apples. BF3 is a next-gen game with so much to offer and so much promise for expansion and longevity for playing with mates in the future. MW3 is a shocking, terrible cash grab expansion pack for MW2 and has 'wonderful' features like: No Hardcore Mode till Level 19 (WTF?), Dedicated Servers....somewhere....if you can find them, Match Making....putting level 5's and below with 40's and 50's......welcome to the game... NOT. EPIC fail. Save your money for another game, Craptivision don't deserve your hard earned dollars. Expand
  80. Nov 13, 2011
    0
    Garbage game... dont be an idiot and waste 60 **** euros on this heap of **** graphics are worse than mw2 AND cod 4!!!. all maps are small and the colouring of the game is blurry and i play on a high end PC. yes the PC version is a joke just a console port with no options to change anything. i wouldnt even pay 10 euros for this ****
  81. Nov 14, 2011
    0
    This game looks terrible (2x580s SLI + i7, so yes, it's maxed out). The previous 3 CoD games had better graphics by far. While I can live with the poor quality graphics for the sake of a fun game, the player 'head bob' nauseating. Then there's IWNet In short, it would have been better to sell another map pack for MW2 for both MP and Spec Ops. Then mod it for dedicated servers.

    I won't say
    never again to buying a CoD title but it's unlikely I'll buy anything developed by Infinity Ward again. Bring it on Treyarch Expand
  82. Nov 14, 2011
    0
    I've been a fan of the COD series since the first one. I liked the original games and COD4 so much, but its trying my patience. I still bought BO and MW3, because I like the single player campaigns. I liked the story, up until MW3. Its just too linear, there isn't even the illusion of controlling your own player besides shooting the endless spawns of baddies. Bottom line, in my opinion, not worth full price, not by a long shot. If you buy this at all, pick it up on sale sometime in the distant future. Expand
  83. Nov 14, 2011
    0
    This is like buying MW2 again. Crappy linear multiplayer that is played out how they wanna play. The campaign is drawn out in a crappy predictable line. The game play is basically a line shooter that you play at an arcade. The engine is freaking 13 years old...no dedicated pc servers, have to PAY for cod elite..activision is just here raping everyones wallets.
  84. Nov 14, 2011
    1
    Forget the stuff about lack of scoring on dedicated servers, a lack of Punkbuster or similar, what REALLY pisses me off about this 'game' is the fact that some rounds last a minute or maybe less, then you get an 'enforced' break of a minute, followed by 'waiting', followed by - if you're lucky - game starts in and a countdown. Great, you think. But once the countdown has reached zero, does the game start? Nope, it doesn't. Instead you get the map to load followed by ANOTHER countdown.... WHAT THE F***? TWO countdowns??? Somebody is obviously taking the P*** at Activision. Do ONE countdown then start the damned game.

    Does it then start? Nope, then comes: waiting for player, server synchronisation or something else - sometimes- quite frequently - followed by a server timeout.... You land back in the Lobby. This is just frustration pure and this is what makes me give this game a 1, it's not really bad in itself, just the online game play SUXX big time, you will spend MORE TIME WAITING than actually playing. As for enforced breaks - since when can Activision tell me what I can and can't do with my PC? I don't come round and tell you what you can do in your spare time so stop ordering a minute long break between each round. 15 seconds was more than sufficient in Black Ops. PATHETIC.....
    Expand
  85. Nov 14, 2011
    1
    I'm not going to comment on the SP, I mainly play online. I would say MW3 is much less fluid the cod4 possibly because the only ranked servers are p2p, the unranked dedicated servers may be better. I think it's realy a shame that 4-5 year old games like Crysis look way better graphics wise. I suspect hackers will become rampant like they are on MW2(I have experienced them already), at least on the undedicated ranked servers. If IW/Activion alowed dedicated ranked servers I think the game could improve immensely. Overall I would have much prefered a reskinned/new maps cod4, and I wouldn't have minded paying $60 for that. Expand
  86. Nov 14, 2011
    0
    This is a map pack for MW2 being sold as a full priced game. This has become an utter disgrace as Activision release the same garbage year after year - please do not buy it, let this blight on gaming die!
  87. Nov 14, 2011
    0
    Don't do it...it's just a copy and paste of the past two games. Same engine, same graphics, same everything with some new perks, skins, maps, and one-time-thrill single player. Not worth your money. Dang it Activision...highway robbery again.
  88. Nov 14, 2011
    0
    This series is a joke among the PC community. They can only compete based off of people's ignorance. It's the same game every time with a different skin. Excuse me while I go play Battlefield 3.
  89. Nov 15, 2011
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This game has a very nice campaign ,and despite it's old graphics ,the multiplayer is getting even better than the previous cods...well balanced and praticaly no bugs/glitches ...
    This game is almost perfect if you want to have a good time ,if not...then do not rate it
    Expand
  90. Nov 15, 2011
    9
    When it comes to graphics, MW3 is not most beautiful, but certainly balanced (runs well on PC, which fulfills minimum requirements). Music is also very nice (but not as good as in MW2). Single player campaign is short and dynamic (action movie style), which is ideal for MW-fans and players, who don't have much time. Besides, special ops mode, in which you can carry out tasks and compare your score to other players, or find someone on the Internet and play co-op. Multiplayer is fine as well, despite similar system to IWNet (from MW2). Expand
  91. Nov 28, 2011
    0
    I registered on here just to say this. I can't understand why people compare this to MW2 & COD4. I loved COD4, & MW2 even more & this is nothing like either of them. This is not a rehash of either of those great games, this is a rehash of the turd that was Black Ops. The maps feel the same & the gameplay feels exactly the same. This is not an Infinity Ward game, I dont care what it says on the box. Infiity ward never wanted to make MW3 so most of them got the boot. With them went the mapping skills that brought the real COD games to life. This is Activisions greed feeding off a once great series & next year they'll do it again. Expand
  92. Feb 24, 2012
    0
    This is a $100 map pack. It really is. Value for money wise you are getting absolutely shafted. I also wonder why professional reviewers (wouldn't call em critics) are so out of touch with the public. The very first multiplayer game I joined had an aimbotter in it. The second multiplayer game I joined also had an aimbotter. They've fixed absolutely nothing!
  93. Jan 17, 2012
    0
    Okay this game sucks. Ive played about 50 hours of multiplayer now and I think I can give a fair review of this game. First there is no controller support lovely. Second there is no elite which everyone but pc gets. Third there are so many aimbot modders that it makes the game almost impossible to play thanks for caring about the consumer. Fourth steady aim is retarded no one aims down the sights anymore and the fng I think there called are way overpowered. Fifth im not paying 15 dollars for more dlc. Sixth the game lags so bad its not even funny. Seventh there are no dedicated servers for ranked again thanks. Eighth The single player campaign took me 4 hours to finish. ninth the looks are exactly the same as the past call of duty's way to go for innovation. Tenth and finally support for three monitors is s*** not all of us are poor and only have one monitor thank you very much. I just want to say activision you got me again I buy each and every call of duty like an ignorant fool NEVER AGAIN next time I go around a corner and get killed by a player with an aimbot I will picture your face being blown off. Collapse
  94. Jan 18, 2012
    3
    I loved all call of duty games, but enough is enough, if you are bored of the MW2, don't buy this one, it's roughly the same game, you'll be bored after few hours. Would have been a decent DLC for MW2. Maps sucks. I feel like the following features went less and less good from MW1 to MW2 to MV3 : Graphics, weapons sounds effect, Weapons, Maps.
  95. Feb 16, 2012
    0
    Just downloaded this via Steam due to their free weekend for the multiplayer, and it has to be said that this is not a new game. Instead, it is a re-skinned version of modern warfare 2, which was good at the time. However, times change, and shooters get BETTER, they usually dont work well when they go backwards like this one did. Graphics are nothing to write home about. Probably the worst thing about these games is the community that surrounds these games. The only people who seem to play these games, or at least the only people that are yelling, are the lame frat boys and overall losers who think that being good at this game actually means something. Additionally, they get upset when someone does well with a gun that the developers put into the game, deciding that it is cheap or something. In short, if you want to play a GOOD shooter, you would be wise to pick up a copy of Battlefield 3. This game is a waste of money. End of story Expand
  96. Feb 17, 2012
    0
    "I played on MW3 free weekend on steam and within 5 minutes of gameplay I quit, my reasoning is that it is worse than MW2 and they make it easier for **** to be ****. I mean at least make it fair. I suggest buying Battlefield 3 and supporting a developer who actually cares. I turned into a Battlefield fanboy after playing MW3. That should say something, I will still buy it when it drops down to 5 to 10 dollars, because playing **** games helps me enjoy the amazing ones even more." By TheeDefiler.

    I had the exact same experience. Well I'm off to play some Battlefield 3.
    Expand
  97. Aug 4, 2012
    0
    The PC version of my review for this game received a 0. This gets a 2. The game works but the game deisgn barely functions well and is unstable at times and the graphics look like crap as well as hackers and bad multiplayer matchmaking. This is really MW 2.5. As many have said dlc is overexpensive and all the content is rehashed. It receives better support than PC but that's still no excuse for why the game looks like crap on PC!

    Mass Effect 3 changed their game and listened to fans, why can't MW 3 - and they're wondering why their getting low ratings and want people to boost their game back up - we're being honest, I am at least. You can't call all of us neg. reviewers trolls though and even if we all are a low score is something to be concerned about in the least and maybe action to fix/remedy the situation should be considered.
    Expand
  98. Feb 24, 2012
    0
    This game is just C&P of MW2. It's the same. You can buy CoD 1,2 and 4 those are better CoD's...
    Much DLC's. 2-4 Maps cost 15â
  99. Aug 23, 2012
    10
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I rate 10 because I got paid $60 to buy the game. Never played it, but I'm "sure" it's a great game. Whatever you think, you can "trust" me.. =) DON'T BUY IT.... Expand
  100. Nov 20, 2011
    7
    MW1 was great, MW 2 a bit less great, and MW3 a bit less great. Still a nice game if you've never played MW before. This is more of a nice expansion to MW2 really. Not worth the full game's price or title.
  101. Jan 17, 2012
    0
    Okay this game sucks. Ive played about 50 hours of multiplayer now and I think I can give a fair review of this game. First there is no controller support lovely. Second there is no elite which everyone but pc gets. Third there are so many aimbot modders that it makes the game almost impossible to play thanks for caring about the consumer. Fourth steady aim is retarded no one aims down the sights anymore and the fng I think there called are way overpowered. Fifth im not paying 15 dollars for more dlc. Sixth the game lags so bad its not even funny. Seventh there are no dedicated servers for ranked again thanks. Eighth The single player campaign took me 4 hours to finish. ninth the looks are exactly the same as the past call of duty's way to go for innovation. Tenth and finally support for three monitors is s*** not all of us are poor and only have one monitor thank you very much. I just want to say activision you got me again I buy each and every call of duty like an ignorant fool NEVER AGAIN next time I go around a corner and get killed by a player with an aimbot I will picture your face being blown off. Collapse
Metascore
78

Generally favorable reviews - based on 26 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 19 out of 26
  2. Negative: 0 out of 26
  1. 82
    Thus, I can't recommend buying this unless you (still) like the fast pace, the customizable weaponry and the short matches, of about 10 minutes each. With the very important mention that, essentially, nothing has changed.
  2. 80
    Stunning campaign with epic moments makes this third installment of Modern Warfare a great show with the best approach to players. No need to mention an excellent multiplayer. [Dec 2011]
  3. Jan 9, 2012
    50
    If you own any previous COD, there's little reason to buy MW3. [Jan 2012, p.50]