User Score

Generally unfavorable reviews- based on 5484 Ratings

User score distribution:

Review this game

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Nov 8, 2011
    I pre-ordered both BF3 and MW3, trying not to be a fanboy to either in this comparison.

    BF3 isn't perfect but MW3 is a complete joke, especially on PC. If you are even thinking about MW3 on PC, forget it, just buy MW1 or Black Ops and have at least a 10x better experience. No ranked dedicated servers? Check. No adjustable FOV? Check. No real innovation from MW2? Check.

    I'm not really
    one to care about graphics, but MW3's graphics are just laughable considering this is 2011. Comparing MW3 graphics to BF3 graphics is like comparing speed between a 1990 Neon and a 2012 Bugatti Veyron. BF3 gets huge props for their innovation in this department.

    Audio is even worse than graphics. As another poster pointed out, the guns literally sound like paintball or BB gun. Again, a joke when compared with BF3 which makes huge innovations here again.

    MW3 does have a much better campaign than BF3 though, and BF3's SP was disappointing considering what they could have done with all the new tech. Not sure how long MW3's campaign is though as I haven't finished it yet.

    Post-launch support from DICE has already been fantastic, and they do truly listen to the community on changes. I remember in BFBC2 Beta, I had an issue specific to my PC relating to low CPU usage, and I got an email from a dev who personally worked with me to resolve it. This fix was including with the final game. I don't have a lot of experience with Activision, but from what I've heard the only post-launch support they give is in paid DLC's.

    Overall, BF3 is definitely worth $60 where MW3 is definitely not worth $60.
  2. Nov 8, 2011
    Just another cash in of a tired old franchise. Re-releasing a video game every year and making millions is just a slap in the face to real developers who actually take the time to make a decent video game, with a good engine, great online, and a good story.
  3. Nov 8, 2011
    I have bought every copy of COD since COD 4 - after playing MW2, i stopped playing cod all togther. When black ops came out, i thought eh, ill give it was 2nd try. I played the game maybe for 2 weeks. Never even thought of looking up this game. tested it out at my buddies place and saw that game has not changed since MW2. Same old run and gun. The skillcap is so low that anyone can get the highest kill streaks. Guns sound like a hammer hitting wood. 1/10. Sorry that so many ppl will buy this though. Sorry, Activision but you won't get my money this time around. Expand
  4. Nov 8, 2011
    LOL. Lets see. This game has No battlelog. CHECK. No Origins. Check. A GOOD single player campaign. NO. And a multiplayer game, copying from the last Call of Dutys, which actually also looks and plays good on consoles (which it is purely designed for, and is poorly ported to the pc yet again), AND this game does have bugs and all of the server problems of some other (un-named) games. Its another below average shooter, unlike the other amazing shooter that came out recently. And here come the fan boys to convince you that this game is well optimised, not made purely for console, offers completely different gameplay from the last 4 games and graphics have been greatly approved. With a user score of 1.4 we have a classic case of the people who know what a good game is and isnt. How.....mature! LOL. Too bad this is a bad game. Too bad, this one is the WORSE gaming product. (review correct from orctowngrot's fanyboy review) gaming product. Expand
  5. Nov 8, 2011
    The campaign of the game is not as innovative as it has been in the past, this is a big let down. The multiplayer of the game seems like a re-release of MW:2 with a few tweaks and the game feels generally unsatisfying.
  6. Nov 8, 2011
    After playing this game for a good 4 hours, I noticed that this game felt very familiar, A little bit TOO familiar. Then it hit me that everything in this game from the graphics, the sound effects, the art, is from Modern Warfare 2. It sickens me that Activision thinks that they can get away with just copying everything that the original IW team has worked for and just paste into a new package and call it Modern Warfare 3. Contrary to all the "VIDEO GAME JOURNALISTS" that give this game a 80% or higher this game is nothing new and they should have just called it Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 2011 edition, you are basically paying $60 on a expansion pack, A very poorly made expansion pack. Expand
  7. Nov 8, 2011
    The story is shorter than any MW game before. It's also more dull and VERY linear. MP is pretty much MW2 with new maps and maybe 1-2 extra guns and 1-2 twisted perks. This game does not deserve your 60 dollars, use it to buy map packs for mw2.
  8. Nov 8, 2011
    After playing through the game (yes already), I can honestly say it is short, uninspiring and quite frankly, dull. The story line is unimaginative, the customisation of the graphics options is poor, and the engine the game runs on is years old, giving a sub 2011 (or even sub 2008) standard graphical experience. The multiplayer is repetitive and mainly plays on small maps where spawnkilling is rampant. As another user posted, the experience is very "dry", and does not build, or expand upon previous MW games. Expand
  9. Nov 10, 2011
    The campaign was short. Its story was so generic that even a retarded child can make it. The graphics is worse than CoD4. The sounds are just recycled junk from old CoD all guns sounds like a toy gun. Its streak system become from worst to worstser(i know there's no such word). To make it simple. This game is a joke. Its a CoD4 DLC.. And Cod4 is much better. Save your money and buy other games.
  10. Nov 14, 2011
    As a Avid fan of the Call of duty franchise i must say i am fairly let down with the latest release of MW3. You say you listened to the fan base and on some fronts yes i would say you did but on others you did not. And those area's you didn't really can make and break the game. First and foremost I am a PC gamer i started playing the franchise on PC and i always will. But i feel you are pushing us aside and not doing us justice. WE are the players that have the best hardware etc and the graphics are well as they say so yesterday. You have little to no abilities to edit the PC graphics to a point where if you have a high end system that you can get the best out of the game. everything is locked. Max frames ( max fps ) etc. i believe this is due to the fact that now instead of building for pc first then porting to 360 etc you build it for the lesser hardware system in this case consoles then try to port it to the PC at the last minute. Ill give it to you in the fact you did break the pc version like black ops did when they ported the game to PC. But at least we had the ability to adjust things like FOV, Max fps, Max packets ETC. These things i can overlook but the single most important thing i cannot.

    Servers. in reality you guys have none. Sure you say you do and they are there and you can join them But whats the point of a server if it is non ranked. The point of servers is to essentially provide a medium for players to where they can go and play the game with other people in a non or little lag environment. i do like the party system but it isn't a big deal honestly. day 2 there were already hackers playing the game and without servers you cannot ban them from your server. all you can do is simply report them and wait for them to get banned if they ever do. in the mean time they wreck your experience for days if not weeks on end. With ranked servers players can join game modes ( tdm,dom,ffa) etc with subsets of rules or none at all and know that 1 they are joining a server close to them thus reducing the chance of lag 2 joining a relativity hackless environment because the server admins who run those servers just ban hackers when they see them thus neutralizing the issue and 3 they are joining a server / game mode within the game mode that they wish to play.

    Instead of just porting the game from 360/ps3 to PC look at the past games and take the good build on that and take the bad remove it and build on it as well. The lack of non ranked dedicated servers is probably one of the main reason PC players are unhappy. Next to that it is the graphics or lack of them. We as PC players Demand a higher Caliber of game standards that YOU as a company lacked to give us. Most PC players think this is just mw2.5 with less graphics and more lag issues. If you say you really listen to the people Listen to some of the core points i am posting about they are essentially what is bringing your game down. ill review perhaps the key points
    1) No servers or lack of Primary Ranked Servers ( such as the ones that are loved in black ops )
    2) Lack there of graphics and graphical tweaking
    3)Lack of a way to deal with hackers.
    4)The feeling we are getting the metaphorical shaft when it comes to a PC game. Stop porting you games from console to PC instead design it from ground floor up with PC as the key factor then port it down to the lesser hardware systems aka CONSOLES. You will make more money in the end that way as more PC players will buy the game and if the game is as good as the rest in the good respects the Console players won't even know the difference. Sincerely Angry but happy gamer MrNuck
  11. Nov 8, 2011
    They just want to develop new engine...Graphics look the same and same old story. Same Multiplayer with new features and its not even interesting....Please IW u have ability to create a nice game..just invest on new engine
  12. Nov 10, 2011
    this game is such a piece of trash what a waste of $60. I basically paid for the exact same iteration minus a crappy 6 hour campaign last year Plus an even crappier 4 hour campaign. I don't know why I got suckered into buying this game (trash media hype) but can guarantee I'm not falling for this scam again.
  13. Nov 8, 2011
    Horrible game, lackluster multi-player that doesn't feel fresh or fun, short single player campaign and very dated graphics. Not worth the money. Steer clear.
  14. Nov 8, 2011
    This game was a huge waste of money. Do yourself a favour and save your $60 for Bethesda's Skyrim. That game is actually worth the money, and won't let you down like this one. As of November 8th, the first day of release, this game has a 1.4 User Score. 14%, people. The critics haven't reviewed it yet, but I'm betting that because they're all over the COD series dick, it'll get at least an 80%. That's a damn shame, because then people will actually go and buy it. I'm hoping most people just pirate this game. It's not worth buying. It's garbage. Expand
  15. Nov 8, 2011
    To be honest, it's not *bad*, but it's just repetition and regurgitation of the previous incarnations. Terrible and cliched campaign, same old multiplayer with one of the worst online communities and bland maps, same old weapons made to appeal to tacti-cool geardo kids, over-the-top and unnecessary scenes done probably just for publicity, buggy, unoptimized, and overmilked. The campaign itself is predictable. Captain Price dies. Soap lives. Yuri dies. Price kills Makarov. Being predictable won't be so bad if it was executed well, but it was not. Cliched. Over-the-top. Like it was done with a rejected B-grade movie script. Multiplayer offers nothing different either. To boot, this game has what could contend to be one of the worst communities ever. Nothing new. Recycled and regurgitated content. Expand
  16. Nov 8, 2011
    COD:MW3 is pretty much the same game as MW2, and quite similar to MW1. The graphics are similar to MW2, the gameplay is essentially unchanged, and there's nothing else to speak of that is different. That doesn't mean the game is unplayable. To the contrary, its a smooth FPS, but entirely mechanistic: you might as well be shooting pop-up targets in between cutscenes.

    The graphics are
    pretty bad. I don't know why its so hard to simply produce high quality textures and graphic components and then downscale for the obsolete consoles, but it seems that this game takes the opposite approach: which is why a graphics card that you could buy for $50 four years ago (the Nvidia 8600) is still the required card. Despite what the "recommended" stats might suggest, there's no more eye candy for those with a better system- just higher framerates for those who see 60 frames per second and up. This wouldn't be such an issue if the gameplay or story was involving, but its not.

    Overall, a mediocre if competent clone.
  17. Nov 8, 2011
    I thought COD4 was a great game and MW2 was ok, however this one fails miserably. I got told in an article the game is not "copied and pasted". Indeed its not, its trying to be COD4 with new multiplayer modes, yet it fails to even get close to the greatness of COD4. The maps are horrible, COD: Elite is a total waste of money, it feels rushed, there's a greyish tint on everything in the game, textures etc. And for the singleplayer, linear, boring, and incredibly stupid. I liked the story, but the way it concluded in the end was horrible. Stay away from this PoS. The creators has really outdone themselves in screwing people this time. Perhaps they should try to create a new franchise instead of ripping people off. Thank you IW, sledgehammer and activision for letting me down yet again. Expand
  18. Nov 8, 2011
    Incredibly mundane and boring. Do not buy this. Torrent if you want to spend 3 hours playing a shooter with red jelly on your screen for 2.5 of those hours.
  19. Nov 8, 2011
    Disappointing on all fronts. It's a reskin of a 2 year old game with a multiplayer map pack and different singleplayer that's riddled with stupidity and cliches in bulk while still being insanely short

    I don't understand how Activision gets away with doing this to people. I understand it's fun to some gamers and they like the series and that's fine, but just throwing money at something
    because it's fun is selfish and they need to tell Activision with their wallets they're tired of getting ripped off every year. Expand
  20. Nov 8, 2011
    Awful game.

    All they have done is reskinned blackops and added a few gimmicks. Blackops was a reskin of mw2. They publish half arsed games every year just to capitalise on sales. Only sheep would buy such a game. Awful campaign, again. All they have done is port the game over. No console, lean, configs, etc.
  21. Nov 8, 2011
    Multiplayer: It feels a bit broken, then again it was Sledge Hammer that made the multiplayer aspect of the game. The servers are laggy. The hit detection is still the same old Modern Warfare you'd expect. Knifing the air gets a kill. Shooting bullets onto an invincible hit box gets a kill, whilst the player is way out of harms way. Hit detection is way off in general. Bullets still do not penetrate thin walls or wooden crates but can penetrate 12 inch thick titanium steel. Character control in general feels a clumsy. Weapons are awkward to work with. Maps are the typical MW maps you'd expect if not worse. Unimaginative, bland, and with bad spawn points. Kills do not feel as rewarding as before and kill streaks are not as amusing. It's a great fast paced game but in general most of it feels like a rehash of MW2 with a blend of terrible Black Ops maps. Single Player: Same old cliche story suitable for people/children who need explosions and chaos to obtain an orgasm and deem it a good game or movie. I was in pain trying to finish this game, instead of enjoying it. I just wanted to get this garbage story to end and to my surprise; the expected MW ending. The AI of this game like always, using the same bad programing can cause some what of a humor. Small scaled linear pathway maps like usual. In conclusions, this game is nothing but a rehash of the old game (including Treyarch's Black Ops) with the number 3 stamped in front. Save your self $60 and keep on enjoying MW2. Expand
  22. Nov 8, 2011
    I see that Activision have bought out the media...What a joke. This game brings nothing new to the table and the critics are praising it. The critics also do a wonderful job of dodging criticising the games flaws (something they have no problem doing to their competitors games) so they can justify their inflated, down-right misleading scores. When the user score is this low, you really have to wonder what is wrong with this industry. Activision are just cashing in on the success of MW1 and have milked this franchise to death. Expand
  23. Nov 10, 2011
    MW3..cod4 graphics..maps worst then MW 1+2..same guns..same engin..same crappy game MW3 = FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIL...SHAME ON U ACTIVATION ...REALLY BIG SHAME..we were waiting for this crapy game since last year..THINK AGAIN
  24. Nov 8, 2011
    I was willing to give IW the benefit of the doubt in their claims that the game was vastly improved, and the new features breathed new life into the game.. Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be the case. I can't help but feel like the game I'm playing would be better labeled an expansion pack for MW2, or just MW2.5 at best. IW seems to content now to rehash the same thing year after year without really aiming to do anything new. Such a shame to see this happen to a once great series. Expand
  25. Nov 8, 2011
    i give this game a 10/10 for quicky yearly releases and a 0/10 for being totally uncreative and boring. its a cut and paste version of another COD MW.
  26. Nov 8, 2011
    Overhyped and repetitious It lives up to its hype somewhat in certain areas of the single player, but the moment you hit multiplayer you realize the developers have just copy/pasted the good aspects of modern warfare 2 and filled the bad ones with even worse. Great campaign presentation filled with huge set pieces that are sure to keep you going that only just make up for its modern warfare 2 look. The story picks straight from where the previous game ended and starts of promising all the way to the end. All loose ends are dealt with, theirs a few small twists and fast paced moments that make up for the dumb AI and problems you know and hate from modern warfare 2, their are still those moments where you feel like your playing follow the leader but theirs no doubt you have more control and as I stated the set pieces are undeniably impressive. That is for the single player at least.
    The moment I hit multiplayer I was to a point horrified at how it actually looked worse than modern warfare 2. And this is running the game max settings@ 90+fps, after playing 5 out of the 15 available maps you can easily tell it has a horrible presentation. The colours are very bland and the textures are almost identical to modern warfare 2. Everything from explosions to smoke effects look the same. The animations have been ripped(literally) from modern warfare 2 (same slip on a banana peel death). The weapon sounds are the same as they were in modern warfare 2 which is no surprise but I don't need to get into that. I never really expect nice visuals from a game such as this but it still doesn't make up for its core aspects. Killstreaks are back and are unbalanced as ever, you now have strike packages that could have worked well but fail miserably due to unbalancing issues. For example the specialist pack gives you a perk for every two kills you get (your a super soldier once you hit 9 kills). The assault pack gives you things such as a Juggernaut killstreak that would take literally a whole M60 clip to kill. If you want zero recoil just throw on a suppressor. Their are so many gimmicks in this game I would need more pages than the bible to write out my essay but I think you get the point. The core COD experience that we love is still their but it simply doesn't make up for its negatives. Their are some aspects that I love that improve further on modern warfare 2s positives but once again are overtaken by all the crap in the game. It also feels very console ported and this is just another big issue I could raise. In the end a game that had potential falls short for the third second time, yes its better than black ops but if you want a true cod experience stick with modern warfare.
  27. Nov 8, 2011
    A new November, a new Modern Warfare. The game, being a 2011 game does not looks good, at all, compared to other games like Battlefield 3, RAGE or the upcoming Skyrim. The gameplay, the shooting mechanics are nearly the same as in Modern Warfare 2. The campaign is pretty interesting, it connects the first MW with the second, and expands the story. It has interesting twists, and it motivates you to play through the single player campaign, especially if you have played thorugh MW1 and MW2. The enemy AI isn't the best, there are a lot of times when their act is just stupid. They don't care about their lives, they just run through your allies and want to kill you. As I have said, not every and each time, but it happens a lot. The multiplayer is nothing, it is an expanded MW2 multiplayer, with some new maps, new perks, new weapons, kill confirming and with a database sort of thing named CoD Elite, which basically collects information about your play style, your achievements etc etc.... The SP part of the game is interesting, but I hope that I won't see a new Call of Duty game based on the same engine as Modern Warfare. Expand
  28. Nov 8, 2011
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. As much as die hardcore fan of CoD i consider myself, this time i decided to step back after learning my lesson with Black Ops and its pathetic ammounts of DLCs.
    I'm sick of Activision's moneygrub, i'm sick of the overpriced DLC's that offer little almost nothing and i won't support ELITE!.
    That being said, its time to put a stop to this madness. Their greediness has to stop. I can only hope for this franchise to end up like games such as THPS or Guitar Hero.
  29. Nov 8, 2011
    To be honest there is no difference between mw2 and mw3, I just cant believe why all magazines are giving this high rating... maybe Activision paid them to do so... everything is same from menus, scenes, set pieces, missions are same like, plant c4, kill endless waves of enemies who spawn at same everything else, So much hype for a campaign that can be finished in as little as 4 hours, we cant improvise video settings on PC (which is I think one of key advantages of playing on a PC over console). Total waste of £40, only good thing is better graphics.. but repetitive and tedious gameplay. Expand
  30. Nov 8, 2011
    Played this, this morning and its just a desaturated mess of a game, the whole thing needs to be updated to make it good, the textures are low, the shadows are to dark, the lighting is terrible, the only colour seems to be shades of gray and the sounds are just annoying, bad show IW, Sledgehammer and Activition, bad show

Generally favorable reviews - based on 26 Critics

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