Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 PC

User Score
2.7

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 5233 Ratings

User score distribution:
Buy On

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 9, 2011
    0
    This is by far the biggest pile of trash I have installed on my PC. The graphics actually look worse than MW2 because Activision decided that console ports will make them richer. I believe they pay critics big $$ to give good reviews. The joke of a campaign can be completed with hardly any effort since it is a roller-coaster on rails, and mulitplayer deserves no mention at all.This is by far the biggest pile of trash I have installed on my PC. The graphics actually look worse than MW2 because Activision decided that console ports will make them richer. I believe they pay critics big $$ to give good reviews. The joke of a campaign can be completed with hardly any effort since it is a roller-coaster on rails, and mulitplayer deserves no mention at all. Unfortunately once you have seen this game, you cannot unsee it and will have to live with the bitter taste that cost $60. Expand
  2. 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
  3. Nov 9, 2011
    5
    I will be calling my credit card company today because for some reason I was charged $60 for this DLC. Must be an accounting error, I am sure of it, because no sane company will charge a full-game price for what appears to be a quickie expansion, right?

    Don't get me wrong - the game is good, it is just not $60-good. Amount of work that was put into this game is a fraction of what it
    I will be calling my credit card company today because for some reason I was charged $60 for this DLC. Must be an accounting error, I am sure of it, because no sane company will charge a full-game price for what appears to be a quickie expansion, right?

    Don't get me wrong - the game is good, it is just not $60-good. Amount of work that was put into this game is a fraction of what it typically takes to release a AAA title. So, why should Activision/IW/Sledgehammer be paid 3x more for 75% less work when compared to competition? Why is it ok to keep ripping off loyal fans year after year while delivering marginal content and minimal post-release support?

    I would have given this game a 9 if it cost around $20-25, but a quick expansion selling for $60 will only get a 5 from me. I will try to sell my copy of MW3 and will not touch another COD in the future.
    Expand
  4. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Modern Warfare 3 are u kidding me this engine makes the game look like cod 2, its not nearly as good as modern warfare 2. I am sick of cod fan boys that are lying to everybody that the game looks like mw2, game looks worse , much worse. It looks like u are playing on 800*600 resolution and aspect ratio of 4:3
    on max settings on my new rig (i72600k@4,6ghz, 8gb dd3, 5870 soc).
    To say that i
    Modern Warfare 3 are u kidding me this engine makes the game look like cod 2, its not nearly as good as modern warfare 2. I am sick of cod fan boys that are lying to everybody that the game looks like mw2, game looks worse , much worse. It looks like u are playing on 800*600 resolution and aspect ratio of 4:3
    on max settings on my new rig (i72600k@4,6ghz, 8gb dd3, 5870 soc).
    To say that i am dissapointed is an understatment. Looks like infinity ward, Treyarch left Activision cause of their greed for money. What else can drive them to put out such a bad game with video settings like ur playing on pc from 10 years ago.
    Battlefield 3 is a gamers heaven vs to this ****
    Any game has better graphics than this, like supermariofare3
    Expand
  5. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Appalled by review scores. Battlefield gets ripped on the fact that they added a singleplayer mode to what is essentially a multiplayer only game, just as an addition to add value to the game, yet Activision gets away with this crap every year. It's all about the money, and they're making a lot of it.
  6. Nov 9, 2011
    10
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha..............i can't stop laughing......user rating is 1.4....ha ha ha.........ALL the ****ing bf3 fans(506) are trying to make the game nonsense.......ha ha ha ha ha ha ha........These guys are really bf3 fans(original???or i doubt that EA has gave them bucks to fight against MW3....).I am sure at least 1 guy of these horrible 506 has already purchased MW3 andHa ha ha ha ha ha..............i can't stop laughing......user rating is 1.4....ha ha ha.........ALL the ****ing bf3 fans(506) are trying to make the game nonsense.......ha ha ha ha ha ha ha........These guys are really bf3 fans(original???or i doubt that EA has gave them bucks to fight against MW3....).I am sure at least 1 guy of these horrible 506 has already purchased MW3 and playing....but they gave the game a rating of 1.4 just because of jealous('cause mw3 is going to break all the record).Remember bf3(BIG ****ED 3) fans....mw series is the best shooter of all time......... Expand
  7. Nov 9, 2011
    2
    Modern Warfare 3 Impressions.

    I recently purchased the new game from the call of duty franchise in high hopes that the latest instalment will be everything I enjoyed greatly about the 1st, and 2nd modern warfare game. The 1st modern warfare game was amazing, which created the success for the 2nd modern warfare game. The 3rd one is based around the setup of the 2nd modern warfare. This
    Modern Warfare 3 Impressions.

    I recently purchased the new game from the call of duty franchise in high hopes that the latest instalment will be everything I enjoyed greatly about the 1st, and 2nd modern warfare game. The 1st modern warfare game was amazing, which created the success for the 2nd modern warfare game. The 3rd one is based around the setup of the 2nd modern warfare. This leads me to the things I dislike in comparison to modern warfare 2.

    Bullet Damage: Modern warfare 2 had very high bullet damage and was consistent for all ranges in the maps 3-4 hits was standard, careful shooting allowed you to kill from a decent distance of 100m + with almost any gun. Modern warfare 3 how ever does not allow for correct range correlation. When I'm firing at targets 10-20-30 metres away from me which is nothing in the real world, with a sub machine gun it is taking 4-8 bullets just to kill someone. This unrealistic frustrating over dramatic affect of bullet range in submachine guns makes them unusable in standard combat and puts them at a great disadvantage to assault rifles.

    Sprinting: Modern warfare 2 had a decent time for sprinting of lets say around 10 seconds (I'm not sure of the exact sprinting times) which was a good amount if you weren't focused on rushing as a main goal, and if you were focused on rushing you had a perfect perk for that sort of game play marathon gave unlimited sprint which was dire for map coverage and aggressive game play. In modern warfare 3 no such perk is available yes extreme conditioning slightly helps the problem but it only increases the initial sprinting time, nothing to do with sprinting recovery so when you get to a certain point it becomes a useless perk. Not giving decent sprinting perks, just decreases the potential of sub machine guns further because doesn't allow proper potential to get into close quarters. Explosives: Okay I will admit modern warfare 2 was quite generous with the explosions and explosive damage but many of them were completely balanced, the grenades had good throwing distance and 100% reasonable damage, you could avoid them if you played carefully. I agree that grenade launcher attachment was quite overpowered and well placed grenades could kill 5-6 people at the start of the game but how often did that really happen? RPG's were rarely used because you had to be the max level to use them and the thumper did decent damage but had little area affect which balanced it perfectly. I agree that the danger close perk did cause imbalances in using most of the explosives, but it gave up the most important perk slot, yes high power explosions were frustrating at times but you never did as much damage as proper run and gunning. Modern warfare 3 has disgustingly pitiful explosion damage, when I throw a semtex in about 10 metres it goes straight to the ground no matter how high I throw it and it never kills ever unless you stand right on top of it, it's damage is a complete joke the only kills I literally have gotten on the semtex were people on incredibly low health and stick kills. Grenade launchers only kill right on there feet or direct hits, secondary rocket launchers are unusable because they are completely underpowered and trying to aim directly at a person to get a kill defeats the purpose of a rocket launcher.



    Title and emblem unlocks: One of my personal favourite things about modern warfare 2 the title and emblem unlocks and the customisations of your "profile" you went through specific challenges some varying in difficulty and you would receive experience, an emblem and/or title. For example kill 1000 people with the stopping power perk, you would receive a title "bite the bullet" and a emblem which has a picture of the stopping power pro icon. This was a nice way to reward the user for continued use of a specific perk and could boast/show these to other players who look at your profile. Modern warfare 3 how ever has displayed no such difficulty in unlocking the emblems or titles for example, I started using the perk assassin and within a couple of minutes I have unlocked the pro version of the perk, and the emblem which displays the perk icon. This is a disgustingly quick form of unlocking something which in modern warfare took hundreds of games to unlock. This causes no form of pride or boast to your profile as in most titles are unlocked in minutes.

    The matchmaking and g
    Expand
  8. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Modern Warfare 3 is a reskin of MW2 which rehashes the same gameplay yet again with the bare minimum of innovation the developer can get away with, though really should be 'developers' as three developers, the dreggs of Infinity Ward, Sledgehammer Games and Raven Software, were needed to knock out this sequel in their less than 18 month development period.

    The campaign took me 4 hours and
    Modern Warfare 3 is a reskin of MW2 which rehashes the same gameplay yet again with the bare minimum of innovation the developer can get away with, though really should be 'developers' as three developers, the dreggs of Infinity Ward, Sledgehammer Games and Raven Software, were needed to knock out this sequel in their less than 18 month development period.

    The campaign took me 4 hours and 40 minutes on Regular difficulty, I took my time loking for hidden intel of which I collected 22 of the 46 pieces, it's the shortest Call of Duty campaign yet and the shortest FPS campaign I've certainly ever played. It's full of impressive set pieces with buildings falling down around the player's linear path, but these superficial big budget set pieces barely hide to anyone with experience with MW or MW2 that so much content from them is recycled with just a few minor edits made to the textures to fool the player into thinking what they're seeing is new (case in point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5dsOn06w1s - an entire building from CoD4), this goes for character models, animations, weapons, vehicles, gameplay sequences (for example the boat secion in MW2), a huge amount of content is reused and the game seems to be built around what they could recycle more than what they could create from scratch. The lack of originality or even intention to be original is present throughout the entire game. The story itself is actually quite enjoyable and feels as much a sequel to CoD4 and MW2, making it tie together nicely as a trilogy, though some sections make it feel more like a fanfic than a true sequel (considering that most of the people who worked on MW2 left and had nothing to do with MW3), the last mission was more of a QTE filled joke than a satisfying conclusion. I wonder how different it would've turned out had 40 of the key staff from IW, the original and only true CoD developer, due to Activision's disgusting treatment of the series, the staff and their creation. I won't even go to the clunkily added controversial scene involving the death of a random child that felt tacked on or the fact that everyone the player kills in the campaign is either African or Russian.

    Spec Ops is a mixed bag, the missions are a mix of fun and terrible, and the Veteran difficulty is like that of the campaign, a very lazily added hard difficulty where the player dies to psychic enemies in around 3 bullets, usually within a second of peeking out from cover (and by peeking I mean moving, as there is still no lean function). The survival mode however is a lot of fun, it works well as two player co-op and a lot of the tedium from the other survival mode in the series, Zombies, is removed by taking out the luck factor with the amount of ammo the player can get and which weapons they acquire. There's a lot of fun to be had here with a friend and it runs smoothly online, the same can't be said for the multiplayer though.

    In the previous Call of Duty, Black Ops, quickscoping was removed on the basis it's a cheap exploit of the game's aim assist, and that was a good call, though it annoyed many kids who like to do it in MW2. They brought this back in MW3 to please those kids and without regard for the quality of their game's online, this sums up their approach to the multiplayer. As a reskin of MW2 it of course plays quite similarly, they've made attempts to better balance the game with how effective the knife, grenade launchers and killstreak rewards are (which amongst quickscoping ranked as the biggest complaints of MW2's multiplayer) and the new point streak system is a nice addition, but all of the technical problems with this peer hosted, laggy mess with poor hit detection and terrible matchmaking still remain, taking a lot of the fun out of playing it, along of course with the huge focus on player's stats (made worse by in-depth stat tracking) that has most players approaching the game in as cheap a way as possible to camp themselves to a high kill/death ratio. The new game modes aren't actually to original either, some of them may as well credit other older and more recent games considering they're so close to them in design. The map design itself is a campfest, designed by Raven Software as after the majority of IW including all its creative and technical talent it took the few left at IW and other Activision developer Slegehammer Games to design the bulk of the game and they needed help fitting map design into their tight schedule, as of course a Call of Duty has to be out every single Novemeber in order to monopolise on the Christmas sales.

    Lazily made rehash that might as well urinate on the grave of the original Infinity Ward, Activision's approach to this franchise is a good representation of everything that's wrong with the game industry right now.

    JM
    Expand
  9. Feb 13, 2012
    2
    Could not say much more then what have alrdy been said, Grafic feel old so as the game. All the positives seems to think that all Negatives are "Fanboys" I would say around 20% is fanboys maby. and lets say 5%of them have played the game.. if they liked it.. they would not give it a bad rewive right?and i would say that 20% of the posetives are "Fanboys" also so it evens up. The criticsCould not say much more then what have alrdy been said, Grafic feel old so as the game. All the positives seems to think that all Negatives are "Fanboys" I would say around 20% is fanboys maby. and lets say 5%of them have played the game.. if they liked it.. they would not give it a bad rewive right?and i would say that 20% of the posetives are "Fanboys" also so it evens up. The critics are the same rubbish also.. giving MW3 higher graphic then BF3. that dosnt make any seens? But if they want the same grafic and the same game over and over again.. yeah.,. give them 10s and let the keep dropping the same game for 5 years more.. or give then Negatives if u like them to make a new enegine or something. But i know im giving this a 2 cuz im tierd of this now. if they would have droped this right after mw2 , they could have goten a 7.. Call me fanboy or whatever u all want... but that gives this game a 10 and QQ about Fanboys here... thats a real fanboys. Sry my english tho. but hope my point got past here Expand
  10. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Shame on Activision for blatant copy paste. I am sure this game will still get record sales. Even for free, I doubt I would play it.

    Single player - they even copy pasted objects and textures from previous installments. There is a youtube video showing how buildings were copy pasted into MW3.

    The story is ridiculous. Multi player - boring and hasn't changed since mw2.
  11. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    This game blows. They've just taken the old game(s) and revamped the UI and added new weapons and such. Really low of them, just so that they may cash in more millions.
  12. Nov 9, 2011
    3
    This franchise is a total disgrace from it's roots. After COD 4 it has gone straight down hill. This use to be the best modable game for FPS shooters.. it's now no skills needed run and gun and die on the smallest maps you ever seen.. terrible DLC looking games being released as FULL over priced games on a yearly basis. They need to fire the whole lot and get back to what made the seriesThis franchise is a total disgrace from it's roots. After COD 4 it has gone straight down hill. This use to be the best modable game for FPS shooters.. it's now no skills needed run and gun and die on the smallest maps you ever seen.. terrible DLC looking games being released as FULL over priced games on a yearly basis. They need to fire the whole lot and get back to what made the series popular.. community mods and servers with actual content and cutting edge additions. You can sell ferilizer all day at the flower shop markets..looks like fertilizer is now sold daily in the video game market as well. Wait a few years and see if they return to their senses. Expand
  13. Nov 9, 2011
    4
    Ok to some this game up, just play that two or so games in the series. For starters lets look at the campaign, I would much rather play the first chapter in the original Crysis. Even in a game thats almost 4 years old, Mw3 gets its $!*# rocked as far as graphics go. As a lot of people have said the campaign is like walking down a hallway shooting pop up bad guys with explosions every fewOk to some this game up, just play that two or so games in the series. For starters lets look at the campaign, I would much rather play the first chapter in the original Crysis. Even in a game thats almost 4 years old, Mw3 gets its $!*# rocked as far as graphics go. As a lot of people have said the campaign is like walking down a hallway shooting pop up bad guys with explosions every few minutes. The only reason Im giving this game a four is the online play. A lot of people are comparing it to the last few fames and saying that it sucks but, the modern warfare games are almost a hands down winner. The fun in a lot of games now is the online play and Infinity Ward (or what's left of it), Sledgehammer Games and Raven Software have recognized that and capitalized on that. But like i said before, the graphics, your ability to interact with everything, and any thing else left such. To some this whole review up in a few word, everything sucks besides the shooting online. Expand
  14. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Modern Warfare 3 is the same old crap that has been spoon fed to us with a re-branded title, some new maps, modes, and guns. At the very least you could have put some new weapon sounds instead of re-using the same old **** Old engine is old, nuff said. Infinity Ward thinks they can give us dedicated servers back instead of that god awful IWNET **** and think we will be happy, but PCModern Warfare 3 is the same old crap that has been spoon fed to us with a re-branded title, some new maps, modes, and guns. At the very least you could have put some new weapon sounds instead of re-using the same old **** Old engine is old, nuff said. Infinity Ward thinks they can give us dedicated servers back instead of that god awful IWNET **** and think we will be happy, but PC players hold grudges, forever. /fail game #BF3WINS Expand
  15. Nov 9, 2011
    1
    So I've literally played COD to death... from the first release.. UO expansion, up to black ops. I've had little quibbles with all the releases but after a day of playing it I've loved all of them, except for this one. One thing that stayed decently constant with COD was the maps... They were all big, and you could tell they spent time thinking them out when they made them. In this newestSo I've literally played COD to death... from the first release.. UO expansion, up to black ops. I've had little quibbles with all the releases but after a day of playing it I've loved all of them, except for this one. One thing that stayed decently constant with COD was the maps... They were all big, and you could tell they spent time thinking them out when they made them. In this newest edition of COD the maps are so small and awful it makes me think I'm playing a totally different game... If you're going to basically re-release your last game, at least give it just as good, if not better, maps... Expand
  16. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Same boring game as MW2 was. It doesn't look like anything has happened since then - No extra features, or thought has gone into it. Black Ops had more features, dedicated servers, lean, a console, diving, flyable killstreaks, max fps alterations, fov.

    The game has gone backwards - and with P2P game play in multi player, this makes it one of the worst games to date.
  17. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    I really hope the amount of negative feedback this game has recieved so far, will put pressure on the developers to do something about this franchise for the better. The time has now come for this ship to sail and move onto something more rewarding and revolutionary, an imrpoved up to date engine would be a positive start, it's odd to see that COD are one of the fewer games out there toI really hope the amount of negative feedback this game has recieved so far, will put pressure on the developers to do something about this franchise for the better. The time has now come for this ship to sail and move onto something more rewarding and revolutionary, an imrpoved up to date engine would be a positive start, it's odd to see that COD are one of the fewer games out there to have such an outdated engine considering the time of age we are in now. I can understand that the devs wanted to keep the same formula and style of game because they may have not wanted to take the risk of producing something so new. Therefore potentially this would have pushed away a lot of the fans. However as ironic as it seems a lot of users have complained because of how much this game is the same as it's predecessor and for this reason I am not willing to spend £40 on something that is basically a replica/expansion map pack for MW2. Lets hope the devs learn something from this and satisfy their customers for the next installment in the COD franchise, maybe a whole new conecpt all together? Who knows. Expand
  18. Nov 9, 2011
    2
    This game gets a 2 out of 10. Same Game, same graphics, same sounds, nothing is new but a few lame play styles, No dedicated servers, it lags all the time or loses game connectivity. Its the last time I will be buying a COD game! IF you agree connect to the site I posted and Help the movement to open their eyes!

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/COD-Ripped-US-OFF/314273318589267
  19. Nov 9, 2011
    10
    this game is really good and i am good at this game and the campaign is really good and i love the guns but the AK 47 it is really not that good.i would love to have them to make a mw4 and all my friends play this game and idk y everybody is calling this game so bad like are u bad?
  20. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    I'm sorry but I had to register to relay my thoughts on this pice of **** game.

    I have a 2560 x 1440 resolution on my display. I fired up the game and it was like I was playing at 640 x 480 resolution. All setting were maxxed out in the game too. The developers of this game should be shot. Its an extremely lazy Xbox port. Absolutely shocking. I am going to try and get a refund for this
    I'm sorry but I had to register to relay my thoughts on this pice of **** game.

    I have a 2560 x 1440 resolution on my display. I fired up the game and it was like I was playing at 640 x 480 resolution. All setting were maxxed out in the game too. The developers of this game should be shot. Its an extremely lazy Xbox port. Absolutely shocking. I am going to try and get a refund for this piece of ****.

    AVOID AVOID AVOID
    Expand
  21. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Terrible graphics and old gameplay lead one to wonder why this was supposed to be worth buying. Battlefield 3 just set the benchmark for 64 player online massive FPS multiplayer. I guess that benchmark was just set to high for COD. It's not surprising as COD has lagged behind in quality and gameplay since 2003. I would say the grafix in Battlefield 2142 from 2008 look better then CODTerrible graphics and old gameplay lead one to wonder why this was supposed to be worth buying. Battlefield 3 just set the benchmark for 64 player online massive FPS multiplayer. I guess that benchmark was just set to high for COD. It's not surprising as COD has lagged behind in quality and gameplay since 2003. I would say the grafix in Battlefield 2142 from 2008 look better then COD MW3. The movement is terrible. The campaign was such a let down next to BF3 and the gameplay is terrible. The broken class system really stands out next to the revamped BF3 class's. Expand
  22. Nov 9, 2011
    2
    I play CoD for the multiplayer and it was a huge let down. I basically loaded up the game expecting something more than a re-skin and new maps. If you are not just determined to own this I would save yourself some money and play a different game. Or go back to mw2 and get the map packs. From what I can tell the graphics are only slightly better and since its back to iwnet the lag getsI play CoD for the multiplayer and it was a huge let down. I basically loaded up the game expecting something more than a re-skin and new maps. If you are not just determined to own this I would save yourself some money and play a different game. Or go back to mw2 and get the map packs. From what I can tell the graphics are only slightly better and since its back to iwnet the lag gets ridiculous at times. I regret buying it. Expand
  23. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    This game is just awful, best DLC I've ever played but defiantly not worth your £40/$60. For a started the campaign is predictable and boring, as per usual, and does not do anything new what so ever. The multiplayer is the same with some added game modes, this is not innovative, you can get new game modes like these in Call of Duty 4 mods. The engine is the same so theThis game is just awful, best DLC I've ever played but defiantly not worth your £40/$60. For a started the campaign is predictable and boring, as per usual, and does not do anything new what so ever. The multiplayer is the same with some added game modes, this is not innovative, you can get new game modes like these in Call of Duty 4 mods. The engine is the same so the graphics are 2 years old, its just lazy. Last but not least you cannot edit your FOV so your stuck with a FOV of 55 or something which can cause head aches and aching eyes. Not worth a buy, maybe if they priced it the same as DLC it would be worth your cash. For players that played Battlefield Bad Company 2 it's basically like the Vietnam DLC. Expand
  24. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Well, at least I'm not the only IDIOT that got duped into buying a $60 game that should have been released in 2001. Same sh!t different toilet if you ask me. MW3 makes Black Ops look like a great game. The story in SP is average. MP is just horrible and the graphics are just so poor that i feel i can run this game on my tablet. BORING BORING BORING. I played every COD/MW game that has beenWell, at least I'm not the only IDIOT that got duped into buying a $60 game that should have been released in 2001. Same sh!t different toilet if you ask me. MW3 makes Black Ops look like a great game. The story in SP is average. MP is just horrible and the graphics are just so poor that i feel i can run this game on my tablet. BORING BORING BORING. I played every COD/MW game that has been release and I dont think I have ever been disappointed over any of their games WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THIS GAME. Back to playing BF3!! Expand
  25. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    I was a big cod fan... I was desperate about but gave them another chance. and activision ruined it...If it was released in ... ok, nice game with very good graphics and new gameplay etc. but now almost 7 years later.. it's crap, if you compare it to other games and you should, cause that's concuration. But the biggest fail of them is to say it's a new game, instead of just a **** DLC. 60I was a big cod fan... I was desperate about but gave them another chance. and activision ruined it...If it was released in ... ok, nice game with very good graphics and new gameplay etc. but now almost 7 years later.. it's crap, if you compare it to other games and you should, cause that's concuration. But the biggest fail of them is to say it's a new game, instead of just a **** DLC. 60 euroms and 5 for every month to use elite-.-.. It's the same game as mw2 with new maps. Even the new maps have recycled buildings comming straight from cod4. They are so lazy. I will never fall in this again. All my friends told me but i would them another chance and they ruined it. My friends are right. These people don't deserve the money. F*CK activision. Look for example to DICE and Valve. They care for their comunity and LISTEN to the feedback. Not like this cheepy ass developers which earn milions and do nothing with it. Expand
  26. Nov 9, 2011
    9
    Guys you made me smile with all those 0/10 ratings. I think most of the comments were written by BF3 fans ("... I'm going back to BF3..." or "When such a amazing multiplayer game like BF3 exists") or some random haters ("...But i havent played it yet..."). Seriously?!... Lets see.
    It uses the same engine as the previous episodes. Yes, the graphic getting old, BF3 and Rage is beautiful, i
    Guys you made me smile with all those 0/10 ratings. I think most of the comments were written by BF3 fans ("... I'm going back to BF3..." or "When such a amazing multiplayer game like BF3 exists") or some random haters ("...But i havent played it yet..."). Seriously?!... Lets see.
    It uses the same engine as the previous episodes. Yes, the graphic getting old, BF3 and Rage is beautiful, i admit, but their optimalisation sucks. The single-player is the same as we seen before, whats the problem with that? They were fast, exciting full of EPIC moments, (and unfortunately too short, yes thats a bad point). The coop part is still fun with a new mode (in the mw series). And finally the multiplayer is still the same intensive fps experience as before(+dedicated servers returned) with many new features and some fixes what we missed from the prev episodes. I'm still smiling and don't get what your problem is:) A bit old and it isn't cheap, but still the best choice if you want some adrenalin-pumping fast action.
    So the conclusion is: Haters gonna hate. Who liked the previous MW episodes (and still don't get bored of them) will love this too.

    Thanks for reading this, that was MY opinion, no offense, Have a nice day.
    Expand
  27. Nov 9, 2011
    6
    Pro's Set pieces are enjoyable Multiplayer is balanced Con's Very poor graphics considering technology now at developers disposal Dated engine which has not had any changes since 2008 (Frostbite 2 is practically a generation ahead)
    Nothing groundbreaking or innovative Feels more like an expansion pack than a full game Having played through a large chunk of the SP game and starting my
    Pro's Set pieces are enjoyable Multiplayer is balanced Con's Very poor graphics considering technology now at developers disposal Dated engine which has not had any changes since 2008 (Frostbite 2 is practically a generation ahead)
    Nothing groundbreaking or innovative Feels more like an expansion pack than a full game Having played through a large chunk of the SP game and starting my multiplayer experience tonight (will feedback on that another time but initial thoughts are same game different colour log in screens) I must say I am a little underwhelmed by what is on offer for a game which retails much higher than most other titles on the market. It seems that IW totally forgot that technology has come on leaps and bounds since their last release, I am shocked how bad the graphics are in comparison to other titles released this year (Crysis 2, Battlefield 3). Yes, i know that graphics are not everything but some sort of effort to make it look like that actually have actually bothered to move things forward in the last few years would of been nice. Direct X 11 wold of been nice, destructible environments maybe?

    As for the campaign at times it felt like a chore which just involved running / shooting / dying and no WOW factor whatsoever. Most the time I would just end up getting killed from some random enemy who appeared out of nowhere. Some parts were OK and showed a bit of quality (the plane crash) but some were just so boring. Getting a Steam achievement at the end of each level was more like a thank you for not getting bored and turning the game off in frustration. I would love to expand a little more but don't want to add any spoilers. I have played through BF3 and thought that was more engaging, maybe this was down the the better more advanced engine that took advantage of my graphics card (A GTX 570). BF3 had it's flaws but it felt like a new game in comparison to BFBC2 which made it feel like money well spent. It also felt like EA treated PC gamers with a little more respect by giving us something extra and make us feel a little bit special (64 player multiplayer). Though I must admit the leveling on BF3 is a little slow and I am cannot fly any of the helicopters / planes no matter how many tutorials I watch :) I really do feel short changed (I got really hyped up and geeked out over the COD launch stream on IGN) but now wish I would of saved my money in reflection, I am not sure if all the reviews on here are from trolls (1.4 is a little low) but it certainly does not feel like it deserves the 90% (I feel 6 is a more realistic score) it has scored through professional review sources (are Activision really nice to reviewers or something, I baffled to how it gets such a high score). COD has a huge market share at present and this release feels like Activision take this for granted. This is a Medal of Honour waiting to happen (can you remember when Cod was the underdog). I really hope that the next release pushes the boundaries, is a little more daring, brings us something new and gives back that value for money feeling earlier titles brought. Otherwise I can see that market share diminishing and another title entering the market and becoming the new king of the FPS genre. I don't think that this would be Battlefield as it will always have the COD vs BF fan's that will stay loyal. I think it will be a new IP that attracts gamers from both camps. Also a good idea at this point is not to piss off PC gamers as it is a growing market (once again) with consoles starting to show their age and a good few years before anything next gen is on the shelves. We are not all pirates (in fact I have over 160 Steam games, check my profile) but If PC gamers do not feel value for money then future releases will just get downloaded off Pirate Bay for free! Activision, please change or see this much loved game die!
    Expand
  28. Nov 13, 2011
    9
    Nové Modern Warfare je vlastne stará klasika. Vývojári nehodili puÅ¡ku do žita a nezľakli sa konkurencie. Tretí diel vlastne neprináša niÄ
  29. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    As it says right in the games description, "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is a direct sequel to the previous game in the series, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2." It really is a direct sequel, and that is putting it lightly. This game is all about staying tried and true with popular belief. If you own Modern Warfare 2, then you should feel like your picking up right where you left off asAs it says right in the games description, "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 is a direct sequel to the previous game in the series, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2." It really is a direct sequel, and that is putting it lightly. This game is all about staying tried and true with popular belief. If you own Modern Warfare 2, then you should feel like your picking up right where you left off as this is basically an over the top DLC, with no innovative content to be seen. If you like playing the same game since 2007, be my guest. Expand
  30. Nov 9, 2011
    8
    First things first, I noticed alot of bad comments and reviews on this game. The funny thing is it looks all the same talking about the engine and gameplay and boring story. I highly doubt those people who reviewed the game did actually bought the game. Graphics: They haven't build a new engine for this game, instead they twitched the one they had on MW2. In my opinion its still dated andFirst things first, I noticed alot of bad comments and reviews on this game. The funny thing is it looks all the same talking about the engine and gameplay and boring story. I highly doubt those people who reviewed the game did actually bought the game. Graphics: They haven't build a new engine for this game, instead they twitched the one they had on MW2. In my opinion its still dated and look pretty good and maps are well designed. Ofcourse, I dont expect Infinity Ward to use it again in the future and build a new one.

    Soundtracks: Brian Tyler did a great job here, nothing more special to say.

    Single player: Still very entertaining and never made me get bored, also the time for completing the story took me a good 7 hours which is very good. However, as most people know the story is pretty much build with the same structure as MW2 and highly predictible.

    The new survival mode has a similar gameplay as Killing Floor. You complete a wave, buy upgrades or weapons and start the next wave. I had alot of fun here so far on my own. I haven't tried multiplayer yet on survival mode.

    Spec Ops, pretty much the same as MW2, it still does its job as expected.

    Multiplayer: Very simular compared to MW2, new killstreaks that looks very cool, slightly changed UI, and more ballanced compared the its predecessors. Perks and weapon leveling are working very well together. Somehow the spawning system still keeps spawning you in front of an enemie sometimes, but much less than MW2.
    Alot of those unfair or really annoying killstreaks and perks are removed, which is good.
    Theater mode like the one from Black Ops does its job for me, I can finally review things I did in a game I played.

    Conclusion: MW3 is absolutely not a bad game, but because of the lack of improvement of its predecessors its getting an 8 instead of a 10. Things to note if they make a new Call of Duty, a new engine is a MUST and a brand new story wouldn't harm the francise. Be creative Infinity Ward!

    That concludes the review,
    warriorjan
    Expand
  31. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    What I expected from this game was a complete update of graphics that actually tested the high end components. I expect a game that improved upon the previous installment of the same developer. I expected to get $60 worth of gameplay.

    What did I get? Regurgitated vomit that smells exactly of the same wretched garbage that still lingers with a bad taste in my mouth. Graphics are piss poor.
    What I expected from this game was a complete update of graphics that actually tested the high end components. I expect a game that improved upon the previous installment of the same developer. I expected to get $60 worth of gameplay.

    What did I get? Regurgitated vomit that smells exactly of the same wretched garbage that still lingers with a bad taste in my mouth. Graphics are piss poor. It lacks zero ingenuity. The interface is the same tired trash that they put out before and even the in-game icons are cheesy and are of the same skill that a high school graphic designer would churn out. I'm sorry, that's inappropriate, I apologize to high school students across the USA, you're work far exceeds this.

    This game is merely a greedy attempt to capitalize upon the Call of Duty franchise name. It feels more like some $14.99 DLC off of steam than an actual standalone game. I would have been happy just moving my profile from MW2 to MW3 and calling it a day. Apparently Black OPS is the true winner of this fiasco. After everyone realizes what this game is and how they just had the wool pulled over their eyes, there will be a surge back to all the Black Ops servers.

    To be fair, I gave this product a 1.0. My reasoning behind this is, the only people that won are the ones that took my money and provided be with one of the worst games I have ever bought to date. Battlefield 3 comes into a close second to the trash that's been churned out this year. Both games are garbage and maybe this is the end of First Person Shooters. Anyhow, thanks DICE or EA or Activision, or whoever screwed me over. I appreciate it. Hope you go bankrupt.
    Expand
  32. Nov 9, 2011
    1
    The linear storyline with its complete lack of dynamic player-interaction is a derison to all gamers.
    Activision pulls of its oh-so-well known marketing scheme, trying selling an unoriginal old turd in an original wrapping. With that being said there is one positive aspect: I must now bestow a minimum of effort in order to play through the entire freaking game in a day.
  33. Nov 9, 2011
    1
    As a DLC for MW2 this would get a decent mark. As a flagship 2011 stand alone release it's far short of the 40 quid asking price.

    I would recommend people to seriously consider only renting this game, as you can complete the single player in a few hours/one evening. The multiplayer is still terrible as it was back in MW2, the spec ops missions and co-op are ok in small doses. Biggest
    As a DLC for MW2 this would get a decent mark. As a flagship 2011 stand alone release it's far short of the 40 quid asking price.

    I would recommend people to seriously consider only renting this game, as you can complete the single player in a few hours/one evening.

    The multiplayer is still terrible as it was back in MW2, the spec ops missions and co-op are ok in small doses.

    Biggest mistake by any video gaming company in 2011?? Releasing a blatant re-hash previous version make over in the wake of the boundary pushing visuals in BF3 (I'm not wildly over excited with the multiplayer gameplay in that either).

    I'm giving it a 1 for the briefly entertaining single player story but in the face of overwhelming pish that is the rest of the game.
    Expand
  34. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    What a **** !!!! Seriously do they're is a way to have my money back !!! This game sucks like no one does.
    Have you guys from activision played it ? You don't imo ...
    Instead of paying "people" to come to your shows, just pay another graphic motor FFS !!! I don't give a ****** of watching trailer with actors when the game is a complete joke !! We wanna game who makes or graphic card
    What a **** !!!! Seriously do they're is a way to have my money back !!! This game sucks like no one does.
    Have you guys from activision played it ? You don't imo ...
    Instead of paying "people" to come to your shows, just pay another graphic motor FFS !!!
    I don't give a ****** of watching trailer with actors when the game is a complete joke !!
    We wanna game who makes or graphic card crying, we want a game that needs a loan to buy 2x GTX590 to play in LOW graphics modes!!!
    You got two years to bring us a new PGM Game, and you serve us all that ****... so lame
    Expand
  35. Nov 9, 2011
    1
    Hm what to say...I havent played bf3 yet, and i probably wont do so in the future, so a comparison would be crap. So well....activision and IW have once again done it...theyll earn millions of dollars with crap that hasnt innovated since mw...mw was a great shooter,the story was just thrilling,even if short, and the multyplayer was plain awesome...to everyone new to cod ill suggest you toHm what to say...I havent played bf3 yet, and i probably wont do so in the future, so a comparison would be crap. So well....activision and IW have once again done it...theyll earn millions of dollars with crap that hasnt innovated since mw...mw was a great shooter,the story was just thrilling,even if short, and the multyplayer was plain awesome...to everyone new to cod ill suggest you to get either modern warfare or CoD2...cod2 is just a good game, and with mw youll get the same stuff you would get with mw 3 for about a third of the price (its even better balanced)...its a shame that people keep buying this trash...the single player lacks the intense of previous games, it seems even shorter...and then again the lame try on producing some controversy, just like the airport mission in mw2...just shows that the only thing those **** are aiming for is money....no new graphics, no new aspects,not even improved ones...the multyplayer is exactly in the same state as the singleplayer,the only improvements taken are some additions to kill streaks...which seem to be stolen from either homefront or other fps...LONG STORY SHORT COMPARISON: its ridiculous that they keep on making money with the same crap as before, but because morons buy this trash they will produce the same crap on and on...Im just waiting for the massive whining when they again release dlcs usually worth 3 dollars and sell them for 20 dollars...but then again people will buy it...cod history should have ended after mw Expand
  36. Nov 16, 2011
    5
    Call of duty is a franchise that has always been close to my heart. And within the franchise I have always enjoyed the infinity ward games, modern warfare was fresh, fun and overall a new experience given the many world war themed games we were used to playing. The multiplayer was quick paced and competitive. Then came along modern warfare 2 which used the formula of the first game , butCall of duty is a franchise that has always been close to my heart. And within the franchise I have always enjoyed the infinity ward games, modern warfare was fresh, fun and overall a new experience given the many world war themed games we were used to playing. The multiplayer was quick paced and competitive. Then came along modern warfare 2 which used the formula of the first game , but made it better, the story was gripping and the developers used the engine to its potential by making a creative campaign gameplay be it climbing cliffs, driving snowmobiles of them, or throwing knives. The game did extremely well because it was a worthy sequel to a great game. When modern warfare 3 was announced I was thinking what would they do next? To be honest, they didn't do anything new, same engine, same characters , aging physics and predictable plot. The story continues where mw2 left off and the makers did a good job of making the campaign exciting. But like many have pointed out, it feels like a dlc. Missing were the creative mode of gameplay, it left me with a stale feeling considering the trailer looked so good. But all the epic parts of the game were included in the trailer, the collapsing buildings, the underwater level the train sequence, other than those cut scenes it was basically going through rooms and shooting people dead. This happens till the very end. I don't think infintiyward's heart and soul were in this game. Knowing they fired 2 senior members of the team, it has taken its toll. Battlefield 3 is superior when it comes to graphics, physics and the fact that the listen to the gamers in further tweaking the game to make it enjoyable. Activision does not do this. They have assumed that the franchise's history will be the selling point of the game. But battlefield 3 has made sure that doesn't happen. The cod fans are not in for a treat with this one but they will not be entirely disappointed.my final verdict is buy the game only if you are itching to know how the story ends or you feel like playing some new cod maps. If you are looking for the next-gen platform in multiplayer war gaming just go with battlefield 3 Expand
  37. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Single player is ok, i had no problem with it. But the multiplayer is so **** pathetic/retarded. Terrible maps, terrible map size, terrible graphic, terrible gameplay, terrible guns, terrible gun animation, terrible web interface (seriously, get the **** out of steam and develop a web interface for multiplayer), and so on. I want a refund on my money from buying this piece of **** I shouldSingle player is ok, i had no problem with it. But the multiplayer is so **** pathetic/retarded. Terrible maps, terrible map size, terrible graphic, terrible gameplay, terrible guns, terrible gun animation, terrible web interface (seriously, get the **** out of steam and develop a web interface for multiplayer), and so on. I want a refund on my money from buying this piece of **** I should have downloaded it from Torrent instead of buying. Expand
  38. Nov 9, 2011
    5
    There were a couple things I was actually excited about for the PC version: 1) Dedicated servers, 2) Specialist play style, and 3) Support play style. However, I tried it on my friends Steam account and all three were a let down. Dedicated server lag was definitely better, however there's no incentive to play on those servers because of no ranking...therefore barely anyone to play with. IThere were a couple things I was actually excited about for the PC version: 1) Dedicated servers, 2) Specialist play style, and 3) Support play style. However, I tried it on my friends Steam account and all three were a let down. Dedicated server lag was definitely better, however there's no incentive to play on those servers because of no ranking...therefore barely anyone to play with. I did join a fun gun game server (reminds me of Black Ops), kept me entertained for about an hour.

    Specialist package was fun for a bit in FFA...trying to stay alive then getting all the perks you can't decide on...but in the end I still didn't feel wowed or anything.

    Support package didn't seemed as overpowered as it was lol. Killstreaks have slightly higher requirements but still, play style didn't feel innovative.

    Same Sh!t, Different Title. Keep your money and ignore the super biased "critic" reviews; they're probably paid to give 100% scores. CoD 4 was the only true "Game of the Year."
    Expand
  39. Nov 9, 2011
    8
    I don't get what people were expecting when they rushed out and bought this, but I got what i wanted. Single player campaign is great and continues the story from the first two games. Multiplayer has a ton of new perks and level up options. It runs great on my laptop: Phenom II N970 Quad-Core, 8gb DDR3-1066, 1gb AMD Radeon 6650m.

    There are some gripes I have about the game (no lean, no
    I don't get what people were expecting when they rushed out and bought this, but I got what i wanted. Single player campaign is great and continues the story from the first two games. Multiplayer has a ton of new perks and level up options. It runs great on my laptop: Phenom II N970 Quad-Core, 8gb DDR3-1066, 1gb AMD Radeon 6650m.

    There are some gripes I have about the game (no lean, no FOV adjustment, no prestige tokens from previous games, no Dew XP promotion, etc.) but seriously these are minor issues and overall the game is pretty damn good. Personally I don't care that the graphics haven't changed much, I always thought they were fine to begin with.

    IDK, I guess I'm supposed to hate it but I haven't run into anything that makes me hate it. All the people complaining just seem like elitists who are getting mad that their beloved series now has mass appeal, just like what happened to punk rock in the late 80s and early 90s. Whatever, deal with it guys.

    Docked 2 points for IW/Sledgehammer/Activision basically skimping out on Elite/Promotional deals for the PC version.
    Expand
  40. Nov 9, 2011
    1
    It's not terrible by any means, however, it is frustrating to see a once great series that contains two of my favourite games of all time (CoD 2 & 4) fail to change. Yes, it's the same moderate quality textures, same unrealistic and pathetic gun sounds, same single player thats as linear as the line y=x., and that's a real shame. Activision's desire for a yearly release gives theIt's not terrible by any means, however, it is frustrating to see a once great series that contains two of my favourite games of all time (CoD 2 & 4) fail to change. Yes, it's the same moderate quality textures, same unrealistic and pathetic gun sounds, same single player thats as linear as the line y=x., and that's a real shame. Activision's desire for a yearly release gives the developers no time for any real innovation or enough time for a new engine, this is what lets down this game. It's no longer fun to pay for a brand new game, along with 3 compulsory map packs or the elite subscription if you wish to avoid being 'kicked' from MP games, its becoming greedy. The included maps are tacky, small and repedative from my experience on them, and alas, it is clear that IW haven't listened to fans as the dreaded 'Noob Tube' returns as an early unlock which is perhaps my least favourite thing about call of duty. Graphics (7.5/10): Perhaps not as good as MW2, but a clear step up from Black Ops, the engine however doesn't allow for the dynamic lighting that some rivals to this franchise and the textures are clearly copy and pasted from earlier games. As usual, the guns look great themselves, the few high quality textures are devoted to firearms which look much better than anything else, albeit, not quite as good as BF3. One thing I really like is the 60fps, it leaves the game play smooth at all times, and never seems to dip.

    Sound (1/10): Pathetic is the only way to describe them, unrealistic and completely wrong gun sounds return. There are also no dynamic sounds, so a sniper rifle on the other side of a map, 3 blocks away, sounds the same as if it were 5 metres away. Very, very dissappointing.

    Multiplayer (4/10): A quote from MW2: "Same stuff, different day", which is a perfect description of the multiplayer aspect of MW3....its nearly IDENTICAL! Some different guns, some not, same sounds, slightly redesigned maps, same game modes practically. There is a huge hype behind "Kill Confirmed" mode, which would be great for a communicating team, however, I'm told that this has been taken from Crysis 2 (not 100% sure on that) plus a slightly different version of CTF. These add little to the game. The same stupid killsteaks, including the annoying Juggernaught that appeared in spec ops last time. Again, in a few months time, be prepared to shell out the MS point equivilent of US$15/$AU23 for the first of 3 map packs that if avoided will see you kicked from every server (or $50 for the elite service). The maps too, all seem identical bar the NYC map, which, combined with the tiny size ( 6 players per team max usually and the playing area is tiny) leaves one bored VERY quickly. Ah yes, to allow for new and unskilled players, noob tube returns from its nerfing in Black Ops to again leave me wanting to tear my hair out in frustration. "Quickscoping", another frustrating 'innovation' has returned to haunt me, an exploit of the over-helpful aim assist. The P2P servers are a clear step down from dedicated ones, they limit the number of players and lag like hell in Australia, I hate it, it's not as fun as past games.

    Offline (3/10): Meh, another over the top, unoriginal story. Unbelievably short, finished on easy in 4 and half hours, contrary to most "professional" critics who say it takes 8. However, at least IW tried to do something new with a rip off of zombies along with some more co-op spec ops, however, no co-op will ever compare to Treyarch's Zombies. As a whole, the offline component appears half baked and tired.

    Overall, I was going to give this game 6 or 7 out of 10, however seeing as its part of a series, it is a rediculous copy of the last one, hence its low rating. The "professional" critics who raved so highly need to get a grip and loose their bias, as a once CoD fanboy myself, I am very disappointed and will be trying out BF3 in the near future as I return this 'new' game. A pathetic money grab, if you enjoy CoD, play MW2 or MW1, they're by far better than this.
    Expand
  41. Nov 9, 2011
    2
    this is sad for me the game came as a hope for something that is not there, Dedicated servers are unranked, the MP is the same as MW2 in truth this fell like an update to MW2 but it see to be worse then MW2, I'm just so freaking frustrated why the F*** i payed for this?????
    I wanted an improved MP for PC no another bad port from a console!!! I want ranked Dedicated servers and i want a
    this is sad for me the game came as a hope for something that is not there, Dedicated servers are unranked, the MP is the same as MW2 in truth this fell like an update to MW2 but it see to be worse then MW2, I'm just so freaking frustrated why the F*** i payed for this?????
    I wanted an improved MP for PC no another bad port from a console!!! I want ranked Dedicated servers and i want a lot more then i got offered here.
    Expand
  42. Nov 9, 2011
    8
    All the fed up of BF3 players here writing ofc.. Go and play ur GAME like the MW3 players are doing instead of flaming in here. Actually the game ain't that bad. What I've meet there is lots o similar things in earlier CoDs but no it doesn't make the game non-playable. I totally skipped blackops and MW2 eventhough I played CoD1-4 as a active clan player. Well if we compare this to BF3: IAll the fed up of BF3 players here writing ofc.. Go and play ur GAME like the MW3 players are doing instead of flaming in here. Actually the game ain't that bad. What I've meet there is lots o similar things in earlier CoDs but no it doesn't make the game non-playable. I totally skipped blackops and MW2 eventhough I played CoD1-4 as a active clan player. Well if we compare this to BF3: I did play it on beta (ofc alot of bugs etc.), but nothing wins the game when its PLAYABLE even with high graphics when ur PC ain't very up to date. I agree BF3 has lots better graphics but in my opinion they shouldn't make games to tell people "Hello! Wanna play me? PUT 600 euros to get new hardware first, then buy the game for 50 euros." As a hardcore player I give my points for a game that people can play as a "team" (and no, not public "teams") and without getting in risk of low FPS.

    This is mostly for Multiplayer:
    +8 for the game, working client(steam), system, different game mods, playable with even more worse computers (Low graphics ARE playable)
    -1 for the graphics (maybe would've deserve -2 as '11 game)
    -1 Servers are sometimes **** up as the players host the servers(at least some of the servers, fix me if I'm totally wrong)
    Expand
  43. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    First off, I am absolutely OUTRAGED that EA have decided to sell this MW2 Map Pack for $59.99! This release clearly demonstrates that NO progress has been made since the release of COD4: Modern Warfare. The same recycled gameplay for both Single & Multiplayer, the usual cliche story line and the same exhausted game engine. This game is bland to say the least, it lacks any flavor at allFirst off, I am absolutely OUTRAGED that EA have decided to sell this MW2 Map Pack for $59.99! This release clearly demonstrates that NO progress has been made since the release of COD4: Modern Warfare. The same recycled gameplay for both Single & Multiplayer, the usual cliche story line and the same exhausted game engine. This game is bland to say the least, it lacks any flavor at all and this just proves that FPS gameplay has collectively hit a great and impenetrable wall. Expand
  44. Nov 9, 2011
    7
    As far as FPS games go I've played the CoD series almost exclusively over the years logging in literally thousands of hours. Anyone should know before buying this game that you aren't paying $60 USD for a single player game. That being said, it is still frusturating to see them using the same engine with the same outdated graphics over and over. But, as a wise man once said, "if it ain'tAs far as FPS games go I've played the CoD series almost exclusively over the years logging in literally thousands of hours. Anyone should know before buying this game that you aren't paying $60 USD for a single player game. That being said, it is still frusturating to see them using the same engine with the same outdated graphics over and over. But, as a wise man once said, "if it ain't broke don't fix it." Or something like that. There is a reason this is the most popular shooting game in history. There is a reason that 90% of the reviewers who gave this game a score of zero are probably online right now trying to get the next unlock for their weapons. It is a quick, simple, fun to play game that will bring me hours of enjoyment over the next year. So here it is:
    7/10
    -1 for crap singleplayer mode THAT WE ALL KNEW WAS GOING TO HAPPEN.
    -1 for seriously outdated game engine. (Mark my words they will have a new engine next year)
    -1 for no ranked dedicated servers on the PC. (Lobbies? Intermissions? WTF that's lame.)
    Expand
  45. Nov 9, 2011
    5
    You cant give the game a 0.....but you cant give the game anything more than a 5 either. I question the "professional" reviewers and their integrity by awarding this game so highly. At its best its a map pack for MW2. Only buy this game if you after the exact experience you have had for entire MW series. I actually look back and think that MW1 was superior to this entry. It was excitingYou cant give the game a 0.....but you cant give the game anything more than a 5 either. I question the "professional" reviewers and their integrity by awarding this game so highly. At its best its a map pack for MW2. Only buy this game if you after the exact experience you have had for entire MW series. I actually look back and think that MW1 was superior to this entry. It was exciting and fresh. The maps on this are poorly designed and small. It encourages sub machine gun run and shoot play only. The spawn points are just awful. The only people giving this game high reviews are fan boys who dont understand gaming. I will say its a prefessional package and put together with quality.....but the developers should be good at this by now.....they have done it three times in a row. Expand
  46. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    This is a re-release of the game before. It offers absolutely nothing new or ingenious at all. The sad part is that I can't even blame the publishers for doing this. The fans demonstrated that they will buy anything, and this is what they got. Hopefully by the next release cycle people will realize that there is no reason that they cannot have games like Quake, and Ocarina of Time, andThis is a re-release of the game before. It offers absolutely nothing new or ingenious at all. The sad part is that I can't even blame the publishers for doing this. The fans demonstrated that they will buy anything, and this is what they got. Hopefully by the next release cycle people will realize that there is no reason that they cannot have games like Quake, and Ocarina of Time, and Duke Nukem 3D every year. Expand
  47. Nov 9, 2011
    1
    Another rehash of the same game, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, except that Sledgehammer implemented IWnet again which means the multiplayer is rampant with lag, hackers, and hacked lobbies. They state that they are listening to gamers but their actions say otherwise as they are clearly in this for the money. Their financial plan may to be release copy paste games for as long as theyAnother rehash of the same game, which isn't necessarily a bad thing, except that Sledgehammer implemented IWnet again which means the multiplayer is rampant with lag, hackers, and hacked lobbies. They state that they are listening to gamers but their actions say otherwise as they are clearly in this for the money. Their financial plan may to be release copy paste games for as long as they can before actually attempting to develop something new. We may see this 'new' game in 2013 after the dust from this trash has settled and people come to terms with what they've bought. Expand
  48. Nov 9, 2011
    1
    I have played all previous Moder warfare titles including black ops and world at war (in between cod4 and modern warfare 2). I knew from that start the multiplayer looked the same but to my surprise they changed almost nothing. Even the sound effects are the same! are you kidding me!? Still running the quake III engine from 1999! All the texture models are the same expect shiner. However iI have played all previous Moder warfare titles including black ops and world at war (in between cod4 and modern warfare 2). I knew from that start the multiplayer looked the same but to my surprise they changed almost nothing. Even the sound effects are the same! are you kidding me!? Still running the quake III engine from 1999! All the texture models are the same expect shiner. However i dident fret i figured the campian is always epic right! NO! They basically held my hand down a straight path and then spoon fed me explosions. Sadly disappointed. If your a fan id wait for the bargain bin. Expand
  49. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    No lean. Second citizen pc gamer. As you can see you have lost the pc gamer. First cod I have not bought going back to the beginning. Reminds me of the automakers before they failed. Hubris and arogance.
  50. Nov 9, 2011
    8
    I dare you to check the recent reviews of just about anyone on this site who rated this game poorly. Almost all of them rated battlefield 3 with 10 and MW3 0. Do you honestly think any BF3 fanboys actually purchased and played MW3? Probably not. And there are fanboys on both sides, and all of them are just as stupid and ignorant.

    That being said, I'm honestly having fun with this game.
    I dare you to check the recent reviews of just about anyone on this site who rated this game poorly. Almost all of them rated battlefield 3 with 10 and MW3 0. Do you honestly think any BF3 fanboys actually purchased and played MW3? Probably not. And there are fanboys on both sides, and all of them are just as stupid and ignorant.

    That being said, I'm honestly having fun with this game. The controls feel tighter than MW2 did, the maps have more flanking routes, the textures look better (Not nearly close to BF3 though, I might add), and the guns feel more balanced. Saying this is simply a 60$ map pack is nothing short of ignorant, because the last time I checked, map packs didn't add new perks, guns, killstreaks, and gamemodes. Though, I'm not saying this isn't VERY similar to MW2. But is that really a bad thing? Not really. It worked well in the past, and it works well now. If it ain't broke, why fix it?

    Now, I'm not a CoD fanboy. I've played my share of BC2 and enjoyed it, so I picked up BF3 a few days after launch and have enjoyed it. But comparing the two games is retarded, because they're both very different. Do you ever hear people comparing halo and call of duty? No? Well, that's because it makes no sense. Just **** listen to yourselves, you're bashing a game that you haven't even played, which makes no sense. If you have played it enough to know you honestly didn't enjoy it, that's fine, as least you're not one of the ignorant fanboys. I really do like this game, but I also like battlefield 3. And I'm going to be playing both, because both are fun. In their own SEPARATE ways. (BF3 for graphics and realism, MW3 for fast-paced exciting gameplay)
    Expand
  51. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Single Player is short and mediocre. Multiplayer just fells different in a very bad way. In every other CoD when I would die in Multiplayer I would feel like I made my own mistake, but in this game, it just feels like the game rips you off at least 75% of the time. Spawning blows too.
  52. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Terrible Terrible Terrible Terrible. Need I say more? This is a 59.99 map pack for MW2 with some bonus campaign content, an over hyped online add on, and garbage multiplayer maps.
  53. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    This game is the same thig has COD MW2, if you already have it, there is no need to buy this one.If you played one, you've played them all. Same thing. Its really sad actually. I had no expectations and i was disappointed
  54. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Every year, same thing. Activision spits out another one of these. It's frustrating, but they know they can do it because millions of 12 year olds the world over are going to buy it.

    It really just feels like a glorified map pack at this point. I feel like I've played this 3 times and this is just an expansion pack for Modern Warfare 1 and 2. I'm pretty disappointed. The campaign
    Every year, same thing. Activision spits out another one of these. It's frustrating, but they know they can do it because millions of 12 year olds the world over are going to buy it.

    It really just feels like a glorified map pack at this point. I feel like I've played this 3 times and this is just an expansion pack for Modern Warfare 1 and 2. I'm pretty disappointed. The campaign doesn't feel like it's done anything new, and the multiplayer is the same old thing. Oh well, at least I've been playing my brother's game and I didn't end up spending any money on it :)
    Expand
  55. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    I feel like I've played this game before. Oh wait, I have...twice. The graphics are pathetically outdated, having changed little since the first modern warfare. Why even play this game on PC? The hardware advantage (or lack thereof in this case, as nothing about this game really justifies beefy rigs) does not justify the inconvenience of installation and other BS that can be skipped onI feel like I've played this game before. Oh wait, I have...twice. The graphics are pathetically outdated, having changed little since the first modern warfare. Why even play this game on PC? The hardware advantage (or lack thereof in this case, as nothing about this game really justifies beefy rigs) does not justify the inconvenience of installation and other BS that can be skipped on consoles. The physics feel cheap and flimsy, as the guns do not actually recoil realistically and animations look unnaturally robotic. Being able to go full auto at someone with a machine gun while having the reticule barely budge makes the gunplay feel unrealistic and cheap. Sound effects are equally messy; gunfire sounds more like a fruitblender than anything else. Firing the weapons has no weight behind them due to the muffled, unrealistic sound effects and the robotic physics, giving little to no satisfaction in landing hits. At 60 bucks, IW is robbing us of our money. This is almost the same game, with the same engine, the same graphics, and same gameplay as the previous two. I feel like there is an immense lack of effort and dedication put in by the design team; in its third iteration, i expect a game to at the very least have technological improvements over its predecessors. But even there I am disappointed. I find it hilarious that the Glen Schofield has the balls to ask for higher user ratings on Metacritic after pumping out this product on so much hype. So here I am, voicing my opinion to spite him when I otherwise would have stayed silent. Do yourself a favor and go play skyrim or something Expand
  56. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    $60 for a map pack. Every single thing added in this game from the last one could have been downloadable content. I think all of the call of duty games suck (excluding the first) but I understand if you just enjoy the multiplayer. However, I don't understand why millions of people go out every single year to buy the same game. Do not tell me they added new stuff and changed it; it's the$60 for a map pack. Every single thing added in this game from the last one could have been downloadable content. I think all of the call of duty games suck (excluding the first) but I understand if you just enjoy the multiplayer. However, I don't understand why millions of people go out every single year to buy the same game. Do not tell me they added new stuff and changed it; it's the same exact game. I thought PC gamers were smarter than this. It's sad that this is the most successful video game in the world. How far the game industry has fallen. Expand
  57. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Copy pasta console portage. No thanks. I think it's time this franchise moves on and evolves into something more than a vehicle for map packs. it's sad to see such a storied franchise be run into the ground by greed.
  58. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    this is supposed to be a game in late 2011. technically outdated, conceptually outdated and just a repackaging of an old game , yet charges 60 bucks for it. wow man, wow
  59. Nov 9, 2011
    9
    People really need to stop being a blind haters, saying lies about the games that they don't have, or haven't played. I am not a fanboy, i have my own view about games. About the engine, i must said it is not actually the same, but basically the same about the result on the screen. PC version does have SSAO option, which help the graphic turn out to be a little bit better in imagePeople really need to stop being a blind haters, saying lies about the games that they don't have, or haven't played. I am not a fanboy, i have my own view about games. About the engine, i must said it is not actually the same, but basically the same about the result on the screen. PC version does have SSAO option, which help the graphic turn out to be a little bit better in image rendering. But if you have played Modern Warfare 2, the IW 5.0 of MW3 gives you kinda the same experience in video quality of the game. But listen carefully, i do understand the background story of IW, why they don't have a new engine this year. If you remember the day that 2 old boss of IW went on court with Activision, IW was freezed, they dont have the right to continue the game, and they just started to develop the game like by the end of 2010, with Sledhammer. You need to know, they have exactly one year, and now we have fresh campaign, fresh Multiplayer, new models, new sound system, now lightning effect... Many people fail to realize that IW tried really hard to bring Soap and Price back for you without delaying. They all know - us - PC Gamers, hate Treyard for not giving a **** for PC community for **** optimitzing Black Ops, that's why they work their butt off for you to have something to entertain for the whole year. But excuses are excuses, they recycle so many stuffs that would turn out to be a little BS. They defenitaly need a new engine for the next game. Personally, i am not pre-ordering for the next CoD from Treyard. The Singleplayer took you no less than 7 hours in Veteran mode, fast-packed, Holywood Action Style. Personally, i think this is the end of the storyline Modern Warfare, i am not gonna spoil anything, i will let you experience it by yourself and try to count how many times you actually said Holy **** during the campaign. The Multiplayer is redesigned, i have experienced 8 hours of Team Deathmatch and Killconfirmed. I must said the game have been balanced a lot, still have several BS spots but overall, it is good. If you are laughing about COD that they have Noob Tubes and BS Killstreak, i would like to tell them that they arent gonna like tubing in MW3 and all killstreak can be taken down easily. The game turn out to be really focus on gun-gun gameplay. I haven;t seen myself a game that a single player can dominate the whole game unless the other team don't give a **** about playing. Afraid of being killed by AC130? get Sam Turret and don't even worry about them. Jug perk? One SMAW and they are gone... Everything has been calculated quite well, except the BS Submachine Gun system need to be redone, i never think Akimbo is a good idea for fast-firing SMG, IW need to make the Akimbo a massive recoil when firing to balance this thing out. Co-op + Survival Mode are fun as hell, get yourself a bud and have fun. You gonna drink less and eat less because Survival Mode make you focus in the game more than making a crawler in Zombies mode and you have all the time in the world. That's is my word. I am not any fanboy. I play FPS, America's Army 3, ARMA II, Battlefield also and Call of Duty. But i just want to say one thing, be a real gamer, don't be such a kid to lie about the experience that you guys never had. Expand
  60. Nov 9, 2011
    3
    It is quite absurd frankly how much has not changed since 2009. Same menu, same screens, same multiplayer, same sounds , same graphics. What i intend to point here is there are many annually launching games out there more in the sports genre like FIFA and NBA which fell different even after a year but nothing much has changed for Modern warfare 3 from MW2 ( unless we look at the contrastIt is quite absurd frankly how much has not changed since 2009. Same menu, same screens, same multiplayer, same sounds , same graphics. What i intend to point here is there are many annually launching games out there more in the sports genre like FIFA and NBA which fell different even after a year but nothing much has changed for Modern warfare 3 from MW2 ( unless we look at the contrast and brightness).

    Just because a formula works it doesn't mean u use it all the time. The menu's could have easily been changed to at least give the a feeling that the game is different and not a mod created by some awesome community, The single player although good has lost its lustre from MW2. The excitement from MW2 has just died down. Events are more predictable now and the 9/11 reference was just badly used. Same hordes of enemies and same sounding guns, dialogues do not help much. I could even say Black Ops had a better campaign. Seeing familiar characters does bring back some memories from past titles but that just reduces the effect of the current game. Also i don't see many people coming for a replay to the campaign. The solution to that is Spec-Ops , if you find a friend who is willing to join you ( not that difficult online) but again this gets repetitive quickly and one or more deaths is easy to get you agitated to start all over again.

    The Multiplayer is quite frankly the strongest and the weakest link of the game. The game is selling for its multiplayer but is going to lose many players slowly as people realize they might as well stick to MW2 and Black Ops. The biggest problem problem of MW3 multiplayer is its familiarity. After 3 games of the same type of multiplayer , we need a change. Changeable scopes, new killstreaks and Dog-tag pick up (Kill - confirmed) mode does not count as change but only as minor add ons.

    It is quite clear many are disappointed with the game and if they gave me a refund for dissatisfaction i would take it, but just to show my faith in COD, i won't and hopefully next year they do change some things and win back their fans.
    Expand
  61. Nov 9, 2011
    10
    Call of Duty is a franchise that gamers love to hate. Regardless, even though I am NOT a Call of Duty fan, developer Sledgehammer Games has created a worthy game for a franchise that annoys me entirely. Even though Activision may be money hungry, the studio who created this game deserves way better respect than this.
  62. Nov 9, 2011
    10
    The campaign for this game is truly the same old story, but that doesn't mean it isn't a blast to play. The war zones are amazing and there are a whole bunch of WTF moments with incredible explosions. But the real reason I picked this game up was for multiplayer, spec ops and survival and I 100% assure you they are well worth your money even if you don't play the story at all you willThe campaign for this game is truly the same old story, but that doesn't mean it isn't a blast to play. The war zones are amazing and there are a whole bunch of WTF moments with incredible explosions. But the real reason I picked this game up was for multiplayer, spec ops and survival and I 100% assure you they are well worth your money even if you don't play the story at all you will still get 50 hours at least out of this game Expand
  63. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    This game is just more of the same. I couldn't stand the singleplayer. It's like I had already played everything in there before and they ran out of ideas (shocking right?) and they even took the idea of the no gravity section from Killzone 3. Go buy Uncharted 3 instead of this steaming pile of dog dump.
  64. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    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.Mordern Warfare 3 is the exact same game with a different name, terrible Campaign that you finish in 3 and half hours, with the mostThe 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.Mordern Warfare 3 is the exact same game with a different name, terrible Campaign that you finish in 3 and half hours, with the most irregular irritating little maps that you literally spawn on your enemy's shoulders. The lack of vehical's and broken class system creates a very very dry and plain expirence. Expand
  65. Nov 11, 2011
    9
    Everyone who has left a negative metascore either never liked Call of Duty/not a CoD fan or came from a huge Battlefield 3 hate crowd to destroy MW3 for some odd reason this always confused me because these 2 games of 2 different publishers/developers have only 1 thing in common they have guns thats it. Call of Duty is great for its own style of shooter. Modern Warfare 3 takes the seriesEveryone who has left a negative metascore either never liked Call of Duty/not a CoD fan or came from a huge Battlefield 3 hate crowd to destroy MW3 for some odd reason this always confused me because these 2 games of 2 different publishers/developers have only 1 thing in common they have guns thats it. Call of Duty is great for its own style of shooter. Modern Warfare 3 takes the series over the edge with its new levels and gametypes. The Singleplayer is just as good, but with only 1 minor flaw, it's 3 hours. 2 things about the game I dont entirely dislike more as wish it was different is the graphics engine and the field of view is locked at 60. Other than its minor flaws the game is perfect third installment of a great series of modern warfare games! :) Expand
  66. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    The only positive thing I have to say about this game is that it runs smoothly. Beyond that I feel as if I just paid 60 dollars for an expansion pack of rehashed content on new maps. The campaign is exactly what you'd expect from a cod game, completely linear with something crazy happening every 5 minutes to keep this ADD generations attention. Multiplayer removes wager matches and bringsThe only positive thing I have to say about this game is that it runs smoothly. Beyond that I feel as if I just paid 60 dollars for an expansion pack of rehashed content on new maps. The campaign is exactly what you'd expect from a cod game, completely linear with something crazy happening every 5 minutes to keep this ADD generations attention. Multiplayer removes wager matches and brings nothing new to the table. I think people need to avoid the next COD entry as a way of telling them it's time to innovate. I was a huge fan of the original COD and COD2 but am finally losing interest as they're going downhill due to their belief that they can sell the same rehashed game ever year and no one will ever get bored. Expand
  67. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    I came into MW3 with a clean slate. I decided to see if Sledgehammer, Infinity Ward 2.0, and Raven Software could make this game, feel new and refreshing... Graphic's are recycled, game play is the same as it's been, nothing feels new. The Campaign is boring from the start, I couldn't even stomach it. Multilayer is a recycled joke. Sorry but I can't even give this game a 1 based on myI came into MW3 with a clean slate. I decided to see if Sledgehammer, Infinity Ward 2.0, and Raven Software could make this game, feel new and refreshing... Graphic's are recycled, game play is the same as it's been, nothing feels new. The Campaign is boring from the start, I couldn't even stomach it. Multilayer is a recycled joke. Sorry but I can't even give this game a 1 based on my experience with the game. Expand
  68. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    another year another cod.

    No dedicated server support as usual. Everything is the same as mw2 besides campaign and new maps.

    It's not even a rent just play mw2 if you still have it.
  69. Nov 9, 2011
    10
    First off, those of you giving the game a zero are pathetic. This is my first experience with a COD game and I've enjoyed my expeirience so far. The action is quick and fun and the graphics are really great. I'm not going to say this is the best game that I've ever played but I definitely think it's amoung the best FPS that I've ever played. I don't take a lot of stake in User Reviews onFirst off, those of you giving the game a zero are pathetic. This is my first experience with a COD game and I've enjoyed my expeirience so far. The action is quick and fun and the graphics are really great. I'm not going to say this is the best game that I've ever played but I definitely think it's amoung the best FPS that I've ever played. I don't take a lot of stake in User Reviews on here but I feel like if someone is going to review this game... be fair... be honest. Even if you think this game doesn't add much new... does that warrant a "zero" because obviously you liked MW2 enough to buy this sequel, right? I suspect that mots of these people are Battlefield fan boys who are trying to destroy the positive energy this game is providing. Shame on you. Expand
  70. Nov 9, 2011
    9
    From start to finish, Modern Warfare 3 seeks to bring you on a ridiculously explosive and action packed ride. It's campaign brings more of what is loved by fans of the series to the table, including vehicle sections, a great sense of spectacle and ultimately takes you on a non stop thrill ride around the globe in a variety of (mostly), beautiful environments and locations. I would beFrom start to finish, Modern Warfare 3 seeks to bring you on a ridiculously explosive and action packed ride. It's campaign brings more of what is loved by fans of the series to the table, including vehicle sections, a great sense of spectacle and ultimately takes you on a non stop thrill ride around the globe in a variety of (mostly), beautiful environments and locations. I would be lying if I said that the graphics weren't showing their age, but ultimately the fantastically well developed and polished game-play outshines any sense of age. The sound design has received a bit more attention here then in previous iterations of the game, resulting in a more immersive experience then ever before. Spec Ops is back from Modern Warfare 2 and is bigger and better then ever before, it retains the old short, timed missions from last time but also features a new survival mode, reminiscent of Halo's Firefight or Gears Of War's Horde Mode. This mode is really addictive and many will find it competing for their multiplayer time. As you defeat the waves of enemies spawned upon you, you gain resources to spend on air strikes, new weapons, grenades and so on. On top of all this, Modern Warfare 3 sports a multiplayer suite that you can sink literally hundreds of hours into. It's the same as the previous games: you gain experience points to level up and gain new weapons, perks and Killstreaks. Besides being more polished then ever before, there are only a few minor additions here such as weapon leveling and new weapons etc. Overall, this is a really sleek action packed package and absolutely worthy of your money, particularly if you haven't played any of the previous games in the series. No ones calling really innovative but that does not mean it is undeserving of the score I'm giving it. Easily the best arcade shooter to come out this year. Expand
  71. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    The only way this franchise will be saved is a remake of COD4. There has not been a good game in it since. This game is piss poor and craps right on the faces of PC gamers. The damage is completely unreliable, the maps are atrocious, and the kill streaks still as stupid as MW2. Infinity ward and Activision have not released anything of worth since COD4 and never will again. I give up onThe only way this franchise will be saved is a remake of COD4. There has not been a good game in it since. This game is piss poor and craps right on the faces of PC gamers. The damage is completely unreliable, the maps are atrocious, and the kill streaks still as stupid as MW2. Infinity ward and Activision have not released anything of worth since COD4 and never will again. I give up on 90% of developers now days that pay 0 attention to what their customers want. Congratulations on selling enough copies to pay for the game because it flopped and I highly doubt you will keep a community in the future. Just stop making call of duty. STOP!!! Expand
  72. Nov 9, 2011
    10
    Another home run from Activision. The single player missions are fun and challenging enough for what's to come in the even more fun Co-Op and famous Multiplayer action. All the guns are really good unlike in the previous versions or other games out. There isn't the go-to build in this game, it seems to be very diverse to everyone's play style. The new Kill Confirm game type is a real goodAnother home run from Activision. The single player missions are fun and challenging enough for what's to come in the even more fun Co-Op and famous Multiplayer action. All the guns are really good unlike in the previous versions or other games out. There isn't the go-to build in this game, it seems to be very diverse to everyone's play style. The new Kill Confirm game type is a real good idea, whoever thought of that should get a raise. Kill Confirm is basically team deathmatch but with a catch. After you kill someone, you have to collect their dog tags for the kill to actually count towards the team. You can also deny the other teams kills by picking up friendly dog tags. The game looks great, runs super smooth at all times even though it appears to use an older engine. Activision doesn't fix what isn't broken, it uses the same extremely successful model and builds a bit on it to make the best game in the series yet. Expand
  73. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Poopy. sp is short, it's a mix of shooting gallery scenes and uncontrollable in-game cinematics that took me the short side of an afternoon to play ALL the way through 1st time. Graphics are on par with cod4. And that's maxed out on a PC. MP is ruined by IWNET again. I hope activision doesn't pay you again. Your fault for developing that crappy game. LOVING all the zeros on this board. aPoopy. sp is short, it's a mix of shooting gallery scenes and uncontrollable in-game cinematics that took me the short side of an afternoon to play ALL the way through 1st time. Graphics are on par with cod4. And that's maxed out on a PC. MP is ruined by IWNET again. I hope activision doesn't pay you again. Your fault for developing that crappy game. LOVING all the zeros on this board. a 1.5/10 is too high though. They've made their money though sadly. I'm all about mw and usually a bf hater. But everyone go get bf3 instead. and if you want mw, get the 1st one cause it's the best. pretty soon i'm gonna immerse myself in a REAL game for months and not have to think about this crap anymore. Bring on skyrim! Expand
  74. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Terrible Terrible rehash of the same game they've released over and over again. Bad graphics, bad gameplay (well, bad now because there's nothing new or exciting, if I wanted this I would have played MW1), bad sound (in comparison to current new releases). Just bad all around. Plus the fact that it costs more than other A list titles... I'm sorry but stay well away from this one.
  75. Nov 9, 2011
    9
    If you liked the previous two games then you will pretty much be getting a very similar title with this game as well. PC of course plays it best, but then again, the same engine is being used from the previous titles also, so it shouldn't even stress consoles, even with the ludicrous amount of explosions happening around you. Campaign is pretty much the same as it has been, but thenIf you liked the previous two games then you will pretty much be getting a very similar title with this game as well. PC of course plays it best, but then again, the same engine is being used from the previous titles also, so it shouldn't even stress consoles, even with the ludicrous amount of explosions happening around you. Campaign is pretty much the same as it has been, but then again, anyone who expected anything else is kind of looking for the wrong thing, considering this says directly on the box that it's the third installment in a series.......go figure. Sorry to those of you out there that bought this game thinking there was going to be mind blowing innovation, did you not watch videos and check screen-shots and reviews in order to find this out before you "blew your $60 on the same game." I can't honestly rate this as low as alot of the ignorant people out there. It IS polished in terms of gameplay and with patches the multiplayer will be fun. Expand
  76. Nov 9, 2011
    7
    I think we should all leave out the SP in modern FPS. Devs decided that having internet means we don't want SP or even Co-op for some reason. I guess i belong to the few that i wasn'r expecting anything more,i am pleased with the game but as a PC gamer i really can't understand the fact that the in-game server browser has only unranked games. -1 for this. Aesthetically nothings changed,allI think we should all leave out the SP in modern FPS. Devs decided that having internet means we don't want SP or even Co-op for some reason. I guess i belong to the few that i wasn'r expecting anything more,i am pleased with the game but as a PC gamer i really can't understand the fact that the in-game server browser has only unranked games. -1 for this. Aesthetically nothings changed,all icons flags/arrows w/e are the same as before. Yes,i would love even the illusion that somethings different from previous games. -1 All maps are small.Good cause it gives little room for camping (even if i think the term is invalid...) and makes game more high paced but still,a couple bigger maps would add variety and thats always good i think. Still there are many maps so... +1 New additions like "Kill confirmed" are great,new perks etc.All good there. Still it feels more like an upgrade,nothing more. I'm not demanding so this is ok for me,not in that price tag though. -1 for what the game offers in that price Expand
  77. Nov 10, 2011
    10
    First off, I generally only play RPG or simulation games. However, I tried my hand at MW1 a couple years ago and fell in love with it (and the same can be said of WM2). I've never dabbed with the multiplayer, because that generally doesn't interest me - in any game. The single player part of MW3 though is superlative. As was the case with MW1 & 2, I was completely blown away by theFirst off, I generally only play RPG or simulation games. However, I tried my hand at MW1 a couple years ago and fell in love with it (and the same can be said of WM2). I've never dabbed with the multiplayer, because that generally doesn't interest me - in any game. The single player part of MW3 though is superlative. As was the case with MW1 & 2, I was completely blown away by the production values of the game, the story, the insight into a world rarely talked about, the graphics, sound effects...well, as I said; the production on this series is phenomenal. There are those who speak of there being very little in the way of innovation, but this is sorely mistaken. From MW1 to MW3, it simply gets better with each new title and the fact that the standard of quality is so high is remarkable.

    The reviews that are offering a '0' are clearly a bi-product of this trend on the internet that convinces people to be abhorrent, in the hope that they too might feel special and important. Go ahead and check out their other ratings. You'll see them rating Battlefield with a 10 and COD (on all 3 platforms) with a 0. It is inane. Irrational, and it is a pathetic attempt to feel entitled.

    Modern Warfare 3 is a fantastic game. I know it. They know it. And when you play it, you'll know it too.
    Expand
  78. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Same, same, same..... i think it would be better that you did the mw2 expansion set... too short campaign and same graphics, same maps for multiplayer... you could do this 2 years ago... infinity ward, you did fire the wrong persons 2 years ago... do something new pls...
  79. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    change the campaign, add some perks, and add some maps to MW 2 and you get MW 3. Stop selling the same crap back to us and start investing in ideas that are fresh, innovative and redefining.
  80. 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
    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
  81. Nov 9, 2011
    6
    So, tis the season for another Call of Duty game. Last years Black Ops was a hit, i enjoyed it thoroughly, the multiplayer levels had space, and were entertaining. Although Black Ops was good in its own ways, Modern Warfare 2 was the company's best hit. I rushed out at 11:45pm on November 7th, spilling my change on the counter, drooling over the package itself. After i pop it in, thatSo, tis the season for another Call of Duty game. Last years Black Ops was a hit, i enjoyed it thoroughly, the multiplayer levels had space, and were entertaining. Although Black Ops was good in its own ways, Modern Warfare 2 was the company's best hit. I rushed out at 11:45pm on November 7th, spilling my change on the counter, drooling over the package itself. After i pop it in, that drool puddle seemed to turn into sweat, being so nervous that this was a flop. Don't get me wrong, the campaign had its high-points after the jumbled ala-carte 30% mark, it just did not leave a lasting impression. I beat the campaign in four hours give or take. The multiplayer i was hoping would rescue this title from the growing shadow of its older brother MW2. The level design on is cramped. I find no creativity in the levels, or even depth the levels should add to the basic gameplay. No, i was fully let down by this game. Decent Campaign, Not enough creativity, or new additions to please me. Sorry Infinity ward, but you guys let me down. Expand
  82. Nov 9, 2011
    0
    Modern Warfare 2.5 Yes that's how I felt when I wasted my $60 USD on this video game.

    Lets start, The story is linear, more linear than black ops, were they afraid that we were too stupid to get a story like MW2? Without spoiling anything, the game has a "no russian" scene and it's in bad taste. Actually, it's purposely put in there, it serves no other purpose than trying to jerk a bad
    Modern Warfare 2.5 Yes that's how I felt when I wasted my $60 USD on this video game.

    Lets start,
    The story is linear, more linear than black ops, were they afraid that we were too stupid to get a story like MW2? Without spoiling anything, the game has a "no russian" scene and it's in bad taste. Actually, it's purposely put in there, it serves no other purpose than trying to jerk a bad emotion out of you.
    The rest of the campaign is mediocre and nothing special.

    Onto the multiplayer,
    They bragged alot about the Call of duty elite service, but it doesn't even work - yet they expect me to PAY for this? Hilarious! Tons of recycled assets. The strike package is a move in the right direction, same with the revamped points system....but death streaks are back...ugh....
    Honestly there's not much different, the graphics are the same, dedicated servers DO EXIST - BUT THEY ARE UNRANKED ONLY.

    Priestieges DO NOT carry on if you were a PC player - Thanks you jerks.

    Honestly I will never buy another Call of Duty game ever so long as Activision holds publishing rights to it. It's obvious why most of Infinity Ward left or tried to move boat. You may as well call it Call of Duty 2011 , because that's what it's become - an annualized game that has minor tweaks - for better or worse, that's for you to decide ultimately. But I feel the series and the developers have hit a wall.
    Expand
  83. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    If you play any Call of Duty titles you've played this game as well. Ill start with the single player which seems to be the only "new" part added to the game. Unfortunately its the same as other fps games. It took me less than three hours to finish the campaign which is nothing more than a run of the mill story that was somewhat hard for me to follow at times. You have the sameIf you play any Call of Duty titles you've played this game as well. Ill start with the single player which seems to be the only "new" part added to the game. Unfortunately its the same as other fps games. It took me less than three hours to finish the campaign which is nothing more than a run of the mill story that was somewhat hard for me to follow at times. You have the same infinitely spawning enemies that try to kill you before you and your team reaches the objective which just leads to a somewhat dull story telling experience. But in the end 98% of people don't buy the game for the story they buy it for the countless hours of multilayer enjoyment that we all come to love with modern games. Sadly I just don't feel they delivered what we all were expecting when this game was being hyped up. Its the same graphics same sound and unfortunately the same feel as the past two games just with a new name and a brand new game price tag slapped on a box. But it is a structurally solid game and I haven't encountered may bugs that cant be attributed to release day bugs but I just cant get past it having the EXACT same feel as the past two games had. For me this feels like nothing more than a glorified map pack that has been polished a bit and I for one refuse to give a developer credit for what I consider lazy and unoriginal work. Expand
  84. Nov 9, 2011
    10
    This game offers everything cod gamers wanted, it runs smoove the campaign was awsome, the spec ops is so fun. the mp is balanced and fast paced, im enjoying this game its great.
  85. Nov 10, 2011
    1
    My NON PAID REVIEW NOW.The Same Game You've Been Playing For Years, Lack of Innovation, horrible graphics for 2011 and the fact that it ruins the gaming industry(cause everyone is trying to copy it cause it sells like hotcakes ruining some of the best franchises in the process ) makes me want to punch the developers of the last 5 cod games in the face.
  86. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Selling this game for anything more than $20 should be a federal crime. The people in charge at Sledgehammer, IW, and Activision should all be placed under citizens arrest for releasing this recycled piece of garbage and labeling it as a new title.
  87. Nov 10, 2011
    0
    Only thing good I can say about MW3 is it is was on Steam with free CoD4! Other than that this game is a spoof. Low res textures everywhere, worst AI and same game without a feeling!

    I liked MW. It was a great game. Played MW2, it still was somewhat good but lost the feel a bit. For MW3, all that is totally gone and game is nothing but a recycled trash. Finished it in 3 hours! Basically
    Only thing good I can say about MW3 is it is was on Steam with free CoD4! Other than that this game is a spoof. Low res textures everywhere, worst AI and same game without a feeling!

    I liked MW. It was a great game. Played MW2, it still was somewhat good but lost the feel a bit. For MW3, all that is totally gone and game is nothing but a recycled trash.

    Finished it in 3 hours! Basically a DLC with a big big price tag on it.

    And surprise! There is another one coming in 2012! Wow!

    Do not spend your hard earned money on a garbage like that.
    Expand
  88. 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.
  89. 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
    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
  90. Nov 9, 2011
    10
    awesome game i ever played .no battlefield 3,4,5,even 6 will comapred with game .single player story is awesome i love call of duty series.love u activision thanksssssssssssssssssssssssss. i give it 100 % no
  91. Nov 9, 2011
    2
    It's just an over-hyped update for an old game, not a new game you would expect. It looks and feels more or less the same as CoD: Black Ops, and is more an arcade point-and-shoot game rather than a tactical shooter. It is a very entertaining game, though... for the first half an hour.
  92. Nov 13, 2011
    0
    Es horrible el juego! campaña pobre y multiplayer repetitivo! No hicieron nada por innovar algo dentro del juego, es pesimo , las texturas son un asco para la epoca, parece que fue creado para chiquitos el juego.
  93. Nov 10, 2011
    10
    I've only put in about 2.5 hours into the campaign, and multiplayer each, and maybe 30-45 minutes in spec ops, and I must say that I'm beyond impressed with each one. The campaign by itself is beautiful. Even if the engine is the same (which I feel like I remember hearing Robert Bowling saying it isn't the same engine, but I digress) it feels like it pushes the limitations of the engine toI've only put in about 2.5 hours into the campaign, and multiplayer each, and maybe 30-45 minutes in spec ops, and I must say that I'm beyond impressed with each one. The campaign by itself is beautiful. Even if the engine is the same (which I feel like I remember hearing Robert Bowling saying it isn't the same engine, but I digress) it feels like it pushes the limitations of the engine to the max. This game runs at the same 91 FPS I got when playing MW2, but it looks so much better, so beautiful and different from MW2, and the sounds and animations, and story by itself feels immersive to me. There have been moments during the campaign where I've said "this feels familiar" but, every single time something new and awesome shows up to throw me a surprise. The sounds of jet flying by, buildings crumbling, missiles soaring and exploding, soldiers shouting, guns firing, just sounds in the first level show the true scale of what is now labeled as World War III in-game. New factions (such as Delta Force), and all the voice acting increase the depth of the game, and the objectives of the mission. The storyline itself gives off the feeling of linearity, but the environment helps reinforce that by offering up barricades, or cross-fire, or something in the distance that makes you not want to go that way, which gives off the illusion of a lack of linearity. Why would you go through this street filled with crossfire, barbed-wire barricades, and the ever-present danger of jets, when you can duck into this building to get away from all of that, and cut across a later street?
    Spec ops offers missions like the kind that were available in MW2 with capability to play with a coop partner, but there's a new section within spec-ops that I love after playing it only once, and that's modern warfares version of a horde mode. During the series of waves you gain access to new panels which are spread out across one of the multiplayer-friendly maps, and they give you goodies. New weapons, new explosives, new "killstreaks" and perks. But, you've got to level up in Spec-ops to unlock the higher level stuff, and even then you need the money to buy it in-game. I haven't tried the actual missions yet, because I'm waiting to finish the campaign before I tackle those, but from what I've seen they sound new, fun, and still reasonable challenging early on.
    Multiplayer however, is a whole new beast. I have to admit I jumped right in without even starting up the singleplayer campaign, and I don't regret it! It starts off just like MW2, you have access to three classes meant to give you a bit of a jump, and show you what you can get later. You unlock two more classes at I believe level 2, and you can create your own custom classes at level 4, just as in MW2. With 10 prestiges and 80 levels each, it sounds daunting, until you actually play a game. I think I had a match at level 21 where I received 23k experience from doing a whole slew of challenges in one game. Perks are seemingly easier to unlock pro version now, and once you do you get challenges for the pro version of each perk. Weapon attachments are no longer unlocked by challenges, and neither are camo, or the new "addition" to weapons called weapon proficiency. Everything is unlocked by just using your gun. The more you use it, the more levels it gets and the more stuff you unlock for it. Killstreaks have also been revamped to help support the different play styles of different people. Assault is for the straight-forward high k/d focused player, operating as killstreaks always have, then there's support which don't lose killstreak progress upon death and get things that aid them and their teammates in a usual fairly non-lethal way, and lastly there is the specialist killstreak which allows you to pick a total of 6 perks to have on your character, but the 4th, 5th, and 6th perk are earned at 2, 4, and 6 kills respectively, and once you have 8 kills you unlock every perk to use, even if you aren't high enough to custom class it.
    While there are frustrating moments in each of the game modes, there's nothing that causes it that wouldn't be in another online multiplayer game, or a game with a difficulty selector. All in all, I'd say this game definitely deserves a chance, and offers something for everyone. Immersive campaign, quick-paced multiplayer, horde mode, challenge missions, I'm very happy with this game, and can't imagine those $60 a waste of money ever.
    Expand
  94. Nov 10, 2011
    10
    It's a shame that MW3 does not offer an option to change the Field of View. Apart from that, this game is another rock solid FPS in the Call of Duty franchise. Most of the maps are very well laid out and offer a good 'flow' when going around the map. The graphics aren't stunningly good, but definitely good enough. But graphics doesn't define a game, gameplay does. Thanks to IW andIt's a shame that MW3 does not offer an option to change the Field of View. Apart from that, this game is another rock solid FPS in the Call of Duty franchise. Most of the maps are very well laid out and offer a good 'flow' when going around the map. The graphics aren't stunningly good, but definitely good enough. But graphics doesn't define a game, gameplay does. Thanks to IW and Sledgehammer for bringing us the best first person shooter to date!! Expand
  95. Nov 10, 2011
    8
    I don't care what other people say about this game-"its the same" "its no different" "its just and expensive map pack"-there is a particular reason why this game has (almost) the same visuals as the previous titles, that's because this game runs at a solid 60 fps on both consoles and the PC, what is the big deal with 60 fps you say?..well 60 Frames Per Second allows smooth game play andI don't care what other people say about this game-"its the same" "its no different" "its just and expensive map pack"-there is a particular reason why this game has (almost) the same visuals as the previous titles, that's because this game runs at a solid 60 fps on both consoles and the PC, what is the big deal with 60 fps you say?..well 60 Frames Per Second allows smooth game play and better fast paced experience, and more over no other fisrt person shooter allows you to easily play with your friends and have a fun time..so what if this game looks and feels like the previous tiles..if it can achieve what other titles in the series coudn't-balanced gameplay-then its worth every penny. Expand
  96. 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 extraThe 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
  97. 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 byTo 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
  98. Nov 10, 2011
    10
    It is stunning to see how much kids are being used as a marketing tool by game developers nowadays while having the idea that they are actually voicing their own opinion. When you have been gaming for a few decenia like I have this is a very troubling development to observe and I hope it is one that will end soon, however I am fearful the opposite might actually be true and this is justIt is stunning to see how much kids are being used as a marketing tool by game developers nowadays while having the idea that they are actually voicing their own opinion. When you have been gaming for a few decenia like I have this is a very troubling development to observe and I hope it is one that will end soon, however I am fearful the opposite might actually be true and this is just the beginning of an actual movement of marketeers influencing kids into thinking they have but one choice when it comes to a certain type of game. Every big release seems to be positioned opposite a different game of the same genre and even before they have been released a battle of words ensues on the internet as to whose game is better, more advanced or prettier and of course the ever present used-so-often-it-lost-all-its-meaning "fanboy" crops up in every other sentence. What you guys need to realize is that you are not fighting your own battle, you are actively involved in the marketing of a product and are willfully doing the job someone normally gets paid to do. You are not living in world where you need to chose between drinks, books, games, etc. You do not live in an either/or world. You can drink Coke AND Pepsi, you can wear Levis AND Dockers, you can eat Big Macs AND Whoppers, you can read Harry Potter AND War and Peace, watch The Shield AND The Wire, you can play Dark Souls AND Skyrim, CoD AND BF, etc. It is baffling to read 'reviews' on this site and at the same time be 100% certain the persons who wrote them did not play the game they're reviewing for 1 second but are actively repeating the same lines that have been said over and over again for hundreds of such 'reviews' in a row. The actual lines put into their mouths by the "other company" trying to outshine their competitors. I want metacritic to reflect the opinion of people playing a game and providing me with insight into their experience again, just as it used to be. What I do not want is to read hundreds of nerd-rage fuelled marketing stooges supporting one developer or another not being aware that their fueling of the fire is actualy equivelant to putting money in their pockets. Stop it, now! Expand
  99. Nov 10, 2011
    9
    the campaign was good nothing great, multi player is where its at i really enjoy kill confirmed mode, we all heard it b4 its mw2.5 so if you enjoyed mw2 multi player you should enjoy mw3.
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. LEVEL (Czech Republic)
    Jan 20, 2012
    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. PC PowerPlay
    Jan 9, 2012
    50
    If you own any previous COD, there's little reason to buy MW3. [Jan 2012, p.50]